The most important part of FLOSS is "F", apparently.

2 pane meme image of woman yelling at cat. Woman on left pane is screaming while pointing finger with another woman holding her back. Text on top says "entitled users". Right pane shows a cat sitting on a chair at the table with ridiculous expression on its face which is visible just above the table, with a glass, dish, and cutlery on the table. Text above the pane says "FLOSS maintainers"

all 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 54 points 5 months ago (13 children)

Not to take away from the point but the F in FOSS stands for "Free as in freedom" and not free as in price.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] [S] 21 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    It's FLOSS in the image. Free Libre Open Source Software

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    i wonder, why have i never heard "GLOSS (Gratis Libre Open Source Software)" used

    it would make sense

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Though if it’s truly freedom, then it should also be free as in price. One is a superset of the other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    You can charge for free software, for the binary and/or source code - bandwidth/storage ain't free.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    Yes. But the source code should also be available at no cost, and you should be able to build it yourself right? So freedom should be a superset of free.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago*

    Being able to build it yourself is a must: otherwise you can't make/share changes (and use changes from others).

    I lean towards a "pay want you want" models (including 0) as DRM is pointless. But no, I do not believe binaries or code must cost nothing for it to still be free software.

    4 Essential Freedoms of Software, made by Jeison Yehuda Amihud

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 9 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 17 points 5 months ago
    [–] 5 points 5 months ago (13 children)

    Just a heads up you forgot a word between "you" and "me" I think

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 5 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] [S] 4 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    What are you seeing. This is what I'm seeing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    it seems not to have federated to dbzer0

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Interesting. Maybe a new bug? @UlrikHD@programming.dev is one of our admins. Maybe they can look into it. Dunno who the admin is of dbzer0. Maybe you could ping them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com is the admin of dbzer0

    db0 this ping is about a federation issue, an edit is not federating from programming.dev

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Not much I can do really here. If I can see later replies but not the edit, it must have been lost somewhere in the federation. Typically that means the source instance didn't send it or gave up, but normally lemmy should continue retrying

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago
    [–] 7 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    I'm arguing right now with a user who things that the developer of rsync should either change how they write code or hand over their project to someone that meets their personal standards for how software should be written.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Have you mentioned yet that anyone can do that second one by making their own fork? And that no one is required to give a fuck about how they think it should be done?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    Yes! They don't believe forking is good enough because his version of rsync is mainline. That's why he thinks the rsync developer needs to give up his project to someone else.

    https://feddit.online/comment/8502390

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    What an entitled and dumb twat. I guess he didn't think it through that the guy maintaining it now doesn't have some magical ability to tell who would be a good new owner and "handing over the mainline" to any one person could screw people more than any AI changes because that new person might be malicious or neglectful.

    Forks need to earn trust and it's best that that step isn't skipped by some inheritance. Not that there even is any obligation to hand it off no matter how many people rely on it or complain.

    And the comparison with ms or Google was dumb because I didn't expect them to do it the way I wanted and stopped using what I could to get away from where they were going and any expectation that they hand over their projects to someone else would be ridiculous (and Google open source projects have been forked).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    I mean I understand the reasoning behind the problem with "x is mainline": distros.

    Most software at the utility level rsync sits at, reaches final users (the ones who complain) not by direct download, but by being aggregated by distros. And unfortunately even highly respected distros like Debian have decided to accept AI in rsync even with the resulting data loss.

    I was warned beforehand enough that I pinned rsync in 3.4.1 while it still was in my system, and it will remain so for the short term while I wait for this whole thing to settle down amicably.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    As someone who works with COSS, most folks are fine with us charging for stuff, so long as their specific use case gets to be free.

  • source