bady

The question is why the term "Open Source" was coined when "Free Software" was already there. You can refer https://opensource.org/history for the answer.

The conferees believed the pragmatic, business-case grounds that had motivated Netscape to release their code illustrated a valuable way to engage with potential software users and developers, and convince them to create and improve source code by participating in an engaged community. The conferees also believed that it would be useful to have a single label that identified this approach and distinguished it from the philosophically- and politically-focused label “free software.” Brainstorming for this new label eventually converged on the term “open source”, originally suggested by Christine Peterson.

In short, Open Source is more about business than user's freedom. They didn't want the philosophical and political baggage that comes with the term Free Software but at the same time want all practical benefits that comes with it.

Apart from this, people also confuse Free Software as "copyleft" licensed software and Open Source as software with "permissive" license which aren't true. Almost all Open Source software are also Free Software, there are only a few exceptions.

Similar to the political differnece between the terms Free Software vs Open Source, I also see a political issue in using the term "permissive license" instead of "non-protective license". Non-protective licenses don't protect what "protective" (copyleft) licenses protect, user freedom.

As an ending note, I want to emphasise that I don't encourage splitting the communities in the name of political and philosophical differences. While I believe it's good to understand the hidden meanings and motivations behind using different terms, it's more important to work together for the common good. Whether you prefer Open Source over Free Software or Permissive over Non-protective, if you value people and freedom over profit, we should stand together.

"Freedom-respecting software" is another less ambiguous term.

Commenting from Infinity for Lemmy, it's dope! ❤

There are many, but right now it's definitely "Infinity for Lemmy" ❤ (Available from IzzyOnDroid F-Droid repo).

Whether many of the answers here count as a blunder or not, I'd like to say that I got way more replies than I expected and came to know about a lot of stuff I would have never heard otherwise. Thanks for sharing.

But... but we wouldn't be having this conversation if our ancestors hadn't done that! 🤷‍♀️

Thanks for sharing. This is exactly the kind of blunder I had in my mind when asking the question, a seemingly silly mistake like forgetting to do something causing way too much trouble!

At least something we can all cheer about :)

This also reminds me of Yahoo turning down the offer to buy Google in their early stage! https://finance.yahoo.com/news/remember-yahoo-turned-down-1-132805083.html

Thanks for sharing, I remember this from a documentary on Steve Jobs.

33,000 km, woah!

One of the best examples of unintended consequences, aiding in one of the largest human caused disasters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine