S/FOSS/FLOSS ; add FLOSS meaning ; fix some typos

This commit is contained in:
OniriCorpe 2024-04-30 18:24:55 +02:00
parent 11604aeb4a
commit 2b2a3f7c3b

View file

@ -1,8 +1,12 @@
# Why am I publishing under a non-FOSS license?
# Why am I publishing under a non-FLOSS license?
> “Abbreviation of free/libre/open source software.”
> “Coordinate terms: FOSS, OSS”
=> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/FLOSS Wiktionary page for FLOSS.
Well... an interesting and highly controversial question, right? Absolutely!
You probably think that a non-free licence is necessarily a bad thing and any good license must respect the 4 golden FOSS freedoms?
You probably think that a non-free licence is necessarily a bad thing and any good license must respect the 4 golden FLOSS freedoms?
Ehhh, on that subject I think not, let me explain my opinion on this.
I hope it will make a lot more sense to you after that!
@ -35,7 +39,7 @@ And even with software released under GPL (and it's derivatives, well know for
### I don't care about the 4 technocratic freedoms
I'm not that committed to the “holy rules of the Free/Libre and open-source software.
I'm not that committed to the “holy rules of the Free/Libre and open-source software.
In fact, I see many things to criticize in them.
@ -81,9 +85,9 @@ This license is simply doing that accordingly to my ideals.
It also tells people like me that they have a place, that they will be protected, that their lives are worthwhile.
And that they can have a little trust in me and in the people who stay around, because the triage is done.
### FOSS licenses are lying
### FLOSS licenses are lying
FOSS licenses are technocratic and libertarian, but it's hidden, thank to a big omission lie.
FLOSS licenses are technocratic and libertarian, but it's hidden, thank to a big omission lie.
And that stinks (in a bad way).
#### The “freedom to use” is already limited
@ -130,14 +134,14 @@ Until all the structures that perpetuate oppression have been dismantled, until
### Why couldn't I add limitations since there are several (but hidden) ones?
People are mad because I'm limiting their choices but they don't care that the actual limitations of the FOSS licenses are already doing that to marginalized people. Or worse: they endorse it.
People are mad because I'm limiting their choices but they don't care that the actual limitations of the FLOSS licenses are already doing that to marginalized people. Or worse: they endorse it.
I acknowledge that FOSS licenses are not perfect and I understand their design when I consciously add limitations. I don't alter their spirit when I add limitations, I use a tool already well designed for that purpose.
I acknowledge that FLOSS licenses are not perfect and I understand their design when I consciously add limitations. I don't alter their spirit when I add limitations, I use a tool already well designed for that purpose.
Maybe the FOSS' hidden limitations suit you: that's fine. As long as you understand what's at stake.
Maybe the FLOSS' hidden limitations suit you: that's fine. As long as you understand what's at stake.
The point is: I don't like their consequences, that's all.
The limitations of the “non-FOSS” licences I'm using suit me, that's fine and I understand what's at stake.
The limitations of the “non-FLOSS” licences I'm using suit me, that's fine and I understand what's at stake.
The point is: if you disagree with me, you don't like their consequences, that's all.
### It will piss off privileged people…
@ -156,14 +160,14 @@ I'm fighting for a better world so that no one has to suffer like this. And if t
### Yes, the licenses I am using are not perfect, but…
1. I don't have to fix the world alone.
2. I still prefer my “non-FOSS” licenses over your FOSS ones.
2. I still prefer my “non-FLOSS” licenses over your FLOSS ones.
### You have a different opinion?
Great. I don't care. Keep it to yourself if you do not apply the points listed in the “The 4 freedoms are politics and are defending a certain worldview that I don't share” section. Thanks.
Xana,
Émy,
published the 30/04/2024