• ayam@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      Actually you’re kinda right, their own license doesn’t allow commercial redistribution (kinda similar with CC:NC) which make them not open source. I personally have no problems with that though.

    • isthereanyseal@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      It is open source. But the license is not foss at the moment. They expresed their desire to make something that send revenue to creators

      • chebra@mstdn.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        @isthereanydeal therefore it’s not open source. See for something to be called “open source” it needs a bit more than just for the code to be readable. The only people who define open source as source readable are the people who don’t want to create open source software.

        • n0x0n@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Open source is when the source code is available.

          Free software is when the source is available and the license lets you exercise your 4 freedoms.

          • chebra@mstdn.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            @n0x0n You are wrong though: https://opensource.org/osd

            > Introduction
            > Open source doesn’t just mean access to the source code.

            Literally the first sentence.

            The definition you are using is being spread by the likes of Meta and Amazon.

              • chebra@mstdn.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                @n0x0n Providing an authoritative source which directly contradicts your statement, that does not make any sense to you? I’m sorry then.

        • isthereanyseal@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          There’s a clear difference between open source and free open source software. It is open source but the licence is not “free”. Not entirely at least

          • chebra@mstdn.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            @isthereanydeal Nope. That distinction only appeared when big companies kinda became afraid of open source software, so they wanted to redefine the term, create some confusion, corrupt it…

              • chebra@mstdn.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                @heyoni I’m commenting from mastodon, I don’t even see any upvotes. Someone just started downvoting me because they ran out of arguments 🤷‍♂️

                • heyoni@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That must be why. On lemmy, like reddit you automatically upvote your own comments. Yours was at 0 probably cause mastodon doesn’t do that.