'Seven These on the #Fediverse and the Becoming of FLOSS':
Some intriguing thoughts (and nice to be referenced), but I found the seventh section very frustrating. The authors seem to *think* they are discussing both "free software" and "open source", but they are actually only talking about #OpenSource discourse and completely missing the critique of it made by #SoftwareFreedom activists:
Got an example of "the communal care motives of the FreeSoftware movement"?
(Or, what did you mean by that phrase?)
@bhaugen look no further than the Free Software Definition, which talks about software freedom being important so people can help others.
* Freedom 2: "The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others"
* Freedom 3: "The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes."
@bhaugen or from the same page:
> The free software movement campaigns to win for the users of computing the freedom that comes from free software
Note that the focus is put on empowering software users - the computer-using members of the general public - not on empowering individual developers (whether humans or companies), which tends to be the pitch of open source discourse, and particularly the advocates of pushover ("permissive") licenses.
I understand all that, and now I understand what you meant, but "communal care" did not seem like an apt description of those campaigns....that's not an argument, I just didn't get it.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!