@dean Which is also why I license my stuff GPL even tho I do everything on FreeBSD. :P

@devnull But FOSS *is* libre software. The libre was added to the term to communicate more "clearly" that it's not about being free of charge, but about freedom.

@dean

@devnull And probably also because FLOSS is better for puns. :P

@dean

@phryk I know why "Libre" was added. That's my point… What I'm saying is "open source" and Libre software is not the same things or even similar (even if it's the same licences, goals, technical choices are very different (look at how many projects that use "open source" as a marketing argument are full of google or facebook trackers, through proprietary spying libraries, for example). "open source" is far more corporate-BS-friendly and don't give a flying fuck about freedom or ethics.

@dean

@devnull
"it's not "FOSS", just Libre Software" <- your words.

Are we miscommunicating or do you just not understand that FOSS != OSS?

@dean

@phryk No, FOSS includes both OSS and Libre software…

I know what I've said, and I stand by this statement:
Only Libre software is inherently socialist, not "open source".

"open source" has proved a shitload of times that's it's perfectly capitalism-compliant and gives more power to companies at the expenses of individuals, many capitalist companies including google, amazon, even M$ et facebook… to name a few, but there is many others, use or produce " open source" stuff.

@dean

@phryk While libre software is about ethics and freedom, "open source" is just a less-expensive way to produce software… Just perfect to make profit from other's people work by working AND spending less money on the process (e.g discord using opus, WebRTC and a shitload of other's people work in their proprietary for-profit company, without giving anything in return…)

And companies can still use the "open source" argument to gain user trust, even when it's "cloud" + proprietary code

@dean