Free Open-Source Software.
Basically, an app for which the developers are like “here is the source code, you can check it, change it for yourself, feel free to play around”
The reason why this is important is security and freedom, as every developer can check if the app does anything spooky or just anti-user (like, send your info to Google and Amazon trackers, which Sync does).
Yes, that is the sense of FOSS, freedom and developement of new shared scripts, but not necessarily security or privacy for the normal user, this depends solely on the developer himself and his intentions and on the support of an active community. A simple user does not have the possibility to find out if this software is safe or that it spies on him even if he has the code, which can have millions of lines. More dangerous if it is neglected or even abandoned software, since hackers also have access to the script and it is easy for them to inject malicious code, as has already happened with some FOSS.
FOSS security depends heavily on a strong support from its devs and an active user community, if not, bad business, privacy is also debatable, most of the APIs of Google, Amazon, Meta, MS are FOSS and included by default in a lot of scripts of the other FOSS, GitHub itself, where are the mayor amount of FOSS is proprietary and owned by Microsoft.
FOSS, ever since big corporations got into it, has been quite distorted in its original meaning. Many products rely on the expertise of good devs to gut them out of the crap these corporations have injected, that is if the devs bother. So be careful with the statements about FOSS = Safe and Private, maybe for good devs which can audit it, but not so much for the normal user
“Free software” means software that respects users’ freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, “free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.” We sometimes call it “libre software,” borrowing the French or Spanish word for “free” as in freedom, to show we do not mean the software is gratis.
You may have paid money to get copies of a free program, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
Open source doesn’t just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost, preferably downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
4. Integrity of The Author’s Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the license allows the distribution of “patch files” with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
7. Distribution of License
The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program’s being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the program’s license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.
9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.
10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface.
Freeware - software you do not have to pay for (e.g. Google Chrome)
Open-source software - software whose code you can inspect
Free software - software you can use, modify and share
FOSS - software that satisfies the second and third condition (e.g. lemmy, linux, VLC)
While almost all free software is also open-source, there are a few exceptions like some early versions of Mozilla Firefox. There are quite a few open-source software that are not free software, such as Android.
Can someone lay this to rest for me? What is FOSS? I think I get in some capacity that it’s Lemmy… but?
Free Open-Source Software. Basically, an app for which the developers are like “here is the source code, you can check it, change it for yourself, feel free to play around”
The reason why this is important is security and freedom, as every developer can check if the app does anything spooky or just anti-user (like, send your info to Google and Amazon trackers, which Sync does).
Yes, that is the sense of FOSS, freedom and developement of new shared scripts, but not necessarily security or privacy for the normal user, this depends solely on the developer himself and his intentions and on the support of an active community. A simple user does not have the possibility to find out if this software is safe or that it spies on him even if he has the code, which can have millions of lines. More dangerous if it is neglected or even abandoned software, since hackers also have access to the script and it is easy for them to inject malicious code, as has already happened with some FOSS.
FOSS security depends heavily on a strong support from its devs and an active user community, if not, bad business, privacy is also debatable, most of the APIs of Google, Amazon, Meta, MS are FOSS and included by default in a lot of scripts of the other FOSS, GitHub itself, where are the mayor amount of FOSS is proprietary and owned by Microsoft.
FOSS, ever since big corporations got into it, has been quite distorted in its original meaning. Many products rely on the expertise of good devs to gut them out of the crap these corporations have injected, that is if the devs bother. So be careful with the statements about FOSS = Safe and Private, maybe for good devs which can audit it, but not so much for the normal user
Free and open source software. This post is criticising Sync for not being foss when it never claimed to be
It stands for Free Open-Source software
Two major organizations and their definitions for it:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
https://opensource.org/definition-annotated/
Introduction
Open source doesn’t just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost, preferably downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
4. Integrity of The Author’s Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the license allows the distribution of “patch files” with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
7. Distribution of License
The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program’s being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the program’s license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.
9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.
10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface.
Free Open Source Software.
Open source. As a user you can read, modify, and redistribute the software.
Thanks!
Freeware - software you do not have to pay for (e.g. Google Chrome)
Open-source software - software whose code you can inspect
Free software - software you can use, modify and share
FOSS - software that satisfies the second and third condition (e.g. lemmy, linux, VLC)
While almost all free software is also open-source, there are a few exceptions like some early versions of Mozilla Firefox. There are quite a few open-source software that are not free software, such as Android.
FOSS stands for Free (as freedom) & Open Source Software
Example of FOSS: Linux, Mozilla Firefox, Lemmy, VLC player, Blender, 7Zip etc
Thanks for that info!