zlacker

> point of Open Source as compared to Free Software

While what we know now is that Free came first and indeed Open Source was a different "offering" with a different focus, a response to it...

... I must admit I have heard and actually started to love Open Source several years before even hearing of Free Software

>>playin+(OP)
…due to those corporate interests.

I am a big fan of capitalism but it does have a tendency to drive out human discourse, as in this case, when companies think there is money to be made.

>>playin+(OP)
I think open source came first, though it wasn't thought of as such at the time. Sharing the source was just what some folks did. A company locking down the source to a printer was one if the reasons Stallmann decided to make the GPL.

"I noticed this because I had the good fortune in the 1970's to be part of a community of programmers who shared software. Now, this community could trace its ancestry essentially back to the beginning of computing."

[...]

"And then I heard that somebody at Carnegie Mellon University had a copy of that software [for the broken printer]. So I was visiting there later, so I went to his office and I said, "Hi, I'm from MIT. Could I have a copy of the printer source code?" And he said "No, I promised not to give you a copy." [Laughter] I was stunned. I was so -- I was angry, and I had no idea how I could do justice to it. All I could think of was to turn around on my heel and walk out of his room. Maybe I slammed the door. [Laughter] And I thought about it later on, because I realized that I was seeing not just an isolated jerk, but a social phenomenon that was important and affected a lot of people."

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt

>>gumby+w6
> when companies think there is money to be made.

Meaning "always when there's business to make"? Because when there's no money to make it's not business (and not about capitalism) anymore.