Linux

5362 readers

117 users here now

A community for everything relating to the linux operating system

Also check out !linux_memes@programming.dev

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

Script to install Brave and Vivaldi variants on Fedora Atomic (github.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net to c/linux@programming.dev

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Easily install your favourite browsers on Fedora Atomic Desktops, Silverblue, Kinoite, uBlue, Bazzite, Aurora, Bluefin, Secureblue etc.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I said Vivaldi is not open source a 2 comments ago. I said I recommend Firefox and derivatives, including Librewolf, I said Brave may be more secure, but shouldn't be used for reason that have nothing to do with it. Since you are not reading my comments anyway, I won't spend the time.

[–] Lemongrab@lemmy.one 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Your comment I was replying to said "I don't know where you are reading that Vivaldi is closed source. The source code is right here: https://vivaldi.com/source/". I was responding to that with Vivaldi's statement about how the browser is closed source.

In your original comment you illude to it being neither open or closed source, which is not true either since it is closed source. Maybe you meant source available? I didnt read anywhere saying that.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Closed source (or proprietary software) means computer programs whose source code is not published.

It's not closed source, since the source is publicly published. It's source available.

[–] Lemongrab@lemmy.one 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Source available is closed source by the OSI definition, which is what is widely used and understood. The "closed" in closed source doesnt only refer to source visibility but also the freedoms upheld by open source.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am not aware of any definition of closed source published by OSI.

[–] Lemongrab@lemmy.one 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Since it is source available, it isnt open source and therefore closed source.

Edit: we obviously have different definitions. I did not mean to argue over semantics. I would personally never trust a browser with proprietary code, even it is source available.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Fair enough. Yeah, I never thought of open and closed source as two exclusive options, but two of many.

I myself publish an application which isn't open source, but I publish the source code, as I believe my users have the right to know what runs on their computer, and have the freedom to audit, modify, and compile their own builds if they so wish. But I don't want someone to take and resell my application. I have yet to encounter someone calling my app closed source, but I can see how someone could.