On 29/3/2007, "Rob Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> The phrase "Open Source" is a deliberately meaningless term. >> >> Only when it's used by artists/curators to describe the process of >> creating art? > >Whenever it is used. It was created specifically as a replacement for >the phrase "Free Software" to avoid mentioning "Freedom". > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source#History
I see now where you're coming from and I agree in this sense - I tend to lump it all together. It is telling in the wikipedia history article that Free Software is suggested as being "ideological and confrontational" and later "confusing". It brings to mind MP's who disagree with the political status quo getting labelled as Rebels. To me the ideals set out by RMS are good ideals to set out with, even if purported to be unattainable. >> I can't see how it can take a long time to work out. I'll take that back as a symptom of generalising. I remember now I gave up. Generally speaking, OSS is Free Software - before you get down to the distinctions. Take a look at freshmeat.net or sourceforge.net - one of the two - somewhere or other there's a chart of the most popular software licenses. The GNU GPL was at the top last time i looked. >> (Just don't go making automatic >> drawings/writings open source otherwise you've open sourced your >> unconscious). >I like this. :-) But better that than a proprietry unconscious eh? ... uh? James. _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
