[Arm-netbook] FSF-Endorseable Processor

[luke.leighton]

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Roman Mamedov <rm at romanrm.ru> wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 08:40:47 +0100
> Henrik Nordström <henrik at henriknordstrom.net> wrote:
>
>> ons 2012-12-05 klockan 07:12 +0000 skrev luke.leighton:
>>
>> >  it's not opensource, it's entirely free software.  remember i'm a
>> > free software advocate: i wouldn't seek $10m investment for something
>> > that promotes opensource or proprietary software!
>>
>> Negation error?
>
> I believe Luke meant the distinction between open source and Free Software as
> discussed in https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html

 yes.

> Technically though, programs that conform to the FSF's definition of Free
> Software[1] will also conform to OSI definition of Open Source[2]; so a program
> can't really be free software but not open source.

 true.  i just don't like the blanket phrase "open source" -
especially not in this context - because even the microsoft "pay us
$1m and you can read the source code of NT but if you use it or fart
or sneeze on it we will sue the shit out of you" license is, strictly
speaking "open source", because the source code is "open", right?

 so i really really *can't* say "it's open source" - it's too broad.

l.