Show Navigation
Conversation
Notices
-
that is kind of backwards. open source attempted to replicate the free software definition, but the attempt is not entirely perfect, so there are rare points of non-overlap both ways
but even if the definitions were entirely equivalent, the philosophies and practices aren't. projects that identify as free software exist for the purpose of respecting users' essential freedoms. projects that identify as open source often care more and live by other values, such as the tolerance rather than rejection for user subjugation, sometimes to the point of interacting with, requiring or even embedding nonfree software in them. linux is unfortunately an example of these unfortunate behaviors: it both contains nonfree software, and requires additional nonfree software distributed separately. that it contains such blobs makes it satisfy neither the free software nor the open source definitions, but somehow open source folks elevated to an iconic status a program that fails to be open source. that's evidence of how different the values are, and how such different values steer programs away from the supposed equivalence