this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
1060 points (96.9% liked)
Technology
60067 readers
5491 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The OSI's definition of open-source software is the de facto definition used by most people, and for most of the remaining people that don't, they (mistakenly, because they define "free" software, not "open-source") defer to the FSF's defintion of free software.
So yes, you should be explicitly noting that what you define as "open" has nothing at all to do with the far-and-away most widely used definition(s) of "open-source".
Yes, and I said I want open-source to be open. As in not just open-source, but also open to all. That is my personal moral value, and I advocate for that. What the OSI supports has nothing to do with that.
I want a lot of things too, but what I want most of all is to live in a society governed by the rule of law. There are no absolute rights - limiting the freedoms of people who are complicit in crimes or enable them is how we protect the rights of everyone else. Simple as.
Limiting the freedoms of innocent people who happen to live in a country doesn't protect the rights of others.
The limitations didn't target a nationality, they targetted sanctioned entities. And you know this because it has been made clear throughout this thread, including in numerous replies to your own comments. So you are demonstrably and obviously disingenious, not engaging in good faith or have yourself been misled. This behavior logically leads people to the conclusion that you are either being deliberately manipulative or you are confused and have been deliberately manipulated. Sadly, the end result is the same in both cases and regardless of your intention.
I wish you the best. We should all be a lot more dedicated to intellectual honesty.
As I said, everyone is basing this on one post on Mastadon, I have no clue where that person got that information, if he is trustworthy, if he speaks for the LF/Kernel team, or what.