this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
367 points (83.9% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53843 readers
560 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

No, I absolutely am not. There is no path to any future where someone will be wrong to use the word "free" to describe software that doesn't cost anything.

Meanings fall out of use (which hasn't happened here) They don't become invalidated. They're not capable of becoming invalidated.

[–] magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Whether or not its "invalid" isn't the point. Those are the accepted terms by most people, especially those in the industry. The point of language is to communicate ideas.

When most people say "free software", they're talking about software that's free as in freedom. Using it otherwise just causes unnecessary confusion.

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When most people say "free software", they're talking about software that's free as in freedom. Using it otherwise just causes unnecessary confusion.

If by "most people" you mean the general population, you are absolutely wrong. Hell, even software devs (at least in the US) would fight with you unless they themselves are interested in FOSS.

When the average Joe pays nothing for an item that they want, regardless of whether that item can be modified, they will say that the item is free. To your average Joe, software is yet another item.

[–] magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah that's why I threw "especially those in industry".

Either way if you're not writing software then yeah sorry your input matters less on the language we use to describe it.

I'm not gonna walk over to a doctors office and start arguing that the language they use is wrong because it doesn't line up with what I know as a layperson.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

It's an accepted use.

There's a reason they disambiguate every time, and it's because "free beer" is exactly as correct.

Correcting someone who isn't wrong always make you the asshole.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is no path to any future where someone will be wrong to use the word "free" to describe software that doesn't cost anything.

Setting aside that doing so is already misleading, you clearly lack imagination if you cannot think of any feasible way for that to happen.

For example, consider a future where use of the phrase when advertising your product could result in legal issues. That isn’t too far-fetched.

They don't become invalidated. They're not capable of becoming invalidated.

They certainly can. A given meaning of a word is invalidated if it is no longer acceptable to use it in a given context for that meaning. In a medical context, for example, words become obsolete and unacceptable to use.

Likewise, it isn’t valid to say that your Aunt Edna is “hysterical” because she has epilepsy.

But more importantly, that’s all beside the point. Words don’t just have meaning in isolation - context matters. Phrases can have meanings that are different than just the sum of their parts, and saying a phrase but meaning something different won’t communicate what you meant. If you say something that doesn’t communicate what you meant, then obviously, what you said is incorrect.

“Free software” has an established meaning (try Googling it or looking it up on Wikipedia), and if you use it to mean something different, people will likely misunderstand you and/or correct you. They’re not wrong in this situation - you are.

That, or you’re trying to live life like a character from Airplane!:

This woman has to be gotten to a hospital.

A hospital? What is it?

It's a big building with patients, but that's not important right now.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That future isn't possible, because despite all you people lying to claim otherwise, there has never been any point where software exists and "free software" was not regularly used to refer to software that did not cost money, regardless of license. Every single App Store out there uses "free" to refer to propriety software today, because it's free.

Free software has multiple established meanings. There's a reason many are conceding their war on the English language and starting to refer to such software as "libre", not "free", and it's because there has never been any point where they actually dominated the term "free software" like they're lying and telling you they did.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 2 months ago

Every single App Store out there uses "free" to refer to propriety software today, because it's free.

“Free” as an adjective isn’t the issue. The issue is the phrase “free software” being used to refer to things other than free software. And afaict, no app store uses the term ”free software” to refer to non-free software.

The iOS App Store refers to “Free Apps.”

Google Play doesn’t call it “Free Software,” either; they just use it as a category / filter, e.g., “Top Free.”

There's a reason many are … starting to refer to such software as "libre", not "free"

Your conclusion is incorrect - this is because when used outside of the phrase “free software,” the word is ambiguous. “Software that is free” could mean gratis, libre, or both.