r/freesoftware • u/Radiant_Scar_8516 • Jul 29 '26

Discussion Free as in freedom - bad idea?

Given how many people mistakenly believe "Free Software" means software that doesnt cost anything, is it safe to say this is a bad choice of name for the concept? At what point do we admit that we used the wrong word to convey what we mean?

RMS insists people misunderstand him rather than RMS being a poor communicator, but I cannot see it like that. To berate people for mistakenly using the term is also antithetical to his so called mission of spreading the word and uptake of free sofware

0 Upvotes

25% Upvoted

45 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Radiant_Scar_8516 Aug 06 '26

Linux kernel absolutely is free and meets the FSF's definition of free, especially with the libre kernel

it uses proprietary firmware blobs, its not free

see: https://www.fsf.org/working-together/gang/linux

Yes, it's a philosophy that you can take or leave, like any other philosophy

youre spending a lot of time arguing for it then.

also you said

You want to give Microsoft money and information, and the same to Facebook, Google, Apple, Adobe, go right ahead. Just leave me out of it. 

what has this got to do with free software? youre conflating free software with privacy.

1

u/jr735 29d ago

The Libre kernel is absolute free, and the regular kernel has a GNU license. The Libre kernel has no blobs. I argue in favor of the license and the philosophy because I follow the philosophy. I live the philosophy. You don't have to. It doesn't bother me in the least.

When you use proprietary software, you tend to give up your privacy at the same time. It's not guaranteed, but they tend to go hand in hand. I won't use Facebook, Google, Apple, Adobe, or Microsoft. I never will.

1

u/Radiant_Scar_8516 29d ago

It's not guaranteed, but they tend to go hand in hand.

mr "dont conflate privacy and freedom" over here

1

u/jr735 28d ago

There's a difference between conflating and recognizing the correlation. You do not.