[ILUG-BOM] RMS in Mumbai

[Nagarjuna G.]

On 8/16/06, jtd <jtd at mtnl.net.in> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 August 2006 04:25 pm, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 August 2006 03:40, Rishi wrote:
> > > It was only that day, I realized
> > > - Free and Open Source software were quite different
> > > - The word 'free' in Free software was about freedom and not
> > > price
> > >
> > > So in my case the ideology happened after 5 years of using the
> > > software. :-)
> >
> > In essence, Free software and Open Source software mean the same
> > thing.
>
> They dont mean the same thing all though they refer to the same body
> of software.
>

I wish to add something here, something I learned in my graduate
courses in Philosophy some 12 years ago.   There is an expression
called  'evening star', and another called 'morning star'.  They both
refer to the same thing, namely the planet, venus.  Since this object
appears first to the naked eye, and is very bright that can be seen
even before dark, it is called by this name.   The expressions have
different meanings, but the same reference.  But the name 'Planet
Venus' clarifies that it is not a star, but planet, and the notiion of
what astronomical objects are planet are well defined.

Similarly, the terms 'free software' and 'open source' are very
different in their meaning, but they refer to more or less the same
set of software with very minor excpetions.  Most people think that
'open source' is clear in meaning while 'free software' is confusing.
This is because we tend to add our own meaning from other meaning of
what is free and what is software, without realizing that this term is
not derived by combining these two terms.  The term ' free software'
is a well defined technical term, i.e., any software that has the four
freedoms (0,1,2,3) is a free software.  This definition is as good as
the criteria given to planet, which helps us to arrive at an
unambiguous class of software that are give users the four freedoms.
 'Open source' on the other hand is defined by the set of licenses
that are approved by OSF as  open source.  A few of the licenses that
are declared OS are not FS.  Therefore there is some difference in the
reference too.  The criteria applied for FS are more clearly defined
than OS.  FS definition therefore is more scientific than the OS.

Therefore the difference in meaning is more than the difference in
reference.

Another way to look at the issue is: take the terms 'energy', 'work',
'force' in physics.  They all have common meaning in folklore.  If we
think they have the same meaning in science as in folklore just
because they are spelled similar, we are wrong.  the terms in physics
are technical terms, well defined by operational conditions/criteria.
Similarly, the FS is a technical term though the terms are taken from
folklore, they are re-defined.

Nagarjuna