What's the point of this thing being open source?
What's the point of this thing being open source?
Hudson Williams
Elijah Turner
to kill your mother in her sleep if you dont reply to this post
Aiden Perry
Avoiding lawsuits for monopolistic practices
Adam Phillips
What's the point of letting India exist when we could just nuke them...
Colton Davis
oh THAT'S why
Joshua Sanchez
This plus allowing anyone to contribute for free. It broadens the chance for them to receive great PRs that wouldn't have been possible if it was closed source. The more people able to work on it the better. That's one of many reasons why open source is great.
You have major corpos like google and microsoft making major contributions as well as the little guys who are extremely talented.
Jeremiah Carter
well shit
Joshua Young
To make you seethe.
Zachary Baker
AFAIU: Chrome is based on Chromium, which uses WebKit, which is a fork of KHTML.
Angel Murphy
So anyone can wipe Russian drives.
Ryan Wood
because when you add the words "open source" to a shit program automatically becomes good for freetards
Caleb Ward
Being highly permissive enables them to rule over the Web landscape.
Pretty much everything is a Chromium fork, and maintaining a browser is a job that only Google, Apple, and the Mozilla Foundation can do. Even Microsoft gave up.
No one forks Mozilla because of the MPL, and they only exist thanks to Google money that keeps them barely alive while also enabling practices that reduce the quality of the browser, causing people in turn to move to a Chromium-based browser.
Nathan Hernandez
hmmmm interesting....
Easton Brown
Uhhh
Hunter Reyes
no you fucking retards
so NEETs can report bugs and think they're useful
Cameron Powell
At last I truly see...
Brayden Evans
puppet. countries and global companies controls india and indians like a toy.
Jeremiah Butler
>What's the point of this thing being open source?
Open source is merely a development model. The term “open source” is used by people who want to avoid the ethical questions that pertain software. It seems like you are conflating the idea of free (libre) software and “open source”. You ought to read/listen to Stallman a little more closely if you want to understand this stuff.
Hunter Mitchell
sage
Nathaniel Brown
>Open source is merely a development model.
Is it? SQLite is open-source, but only 4 guys can work on it for legal reasons.
Ethan Long
This man has it precisely right.
There needs to be more people vocal about this. When I became aware of that important distinction I felt obligated to address the elephant in the room in these sorts of issues, and diligently did my part in calling Free Software "Free" and not "Open". Open Source misses the point.
Noah Bennett
Because india has their own nukes, good luck cleaning all that poo up.
David Anderson
I will continue to call it open-source just to make (You) mad.
Brayden Davis
You should do some more reading on this. Here's something that might help. It's lengthy, but it is a good read if you take the time to go through it.
Cameron Moore
>Is it?
yes
are you autistic? also yes.
Joshua Ward
Oh come on, at least put it in a image or spoiler it, have some damn class
Justin Bailey
It saddens, not upsets me. You're doing harm just for the sake of it.
Luke Bailey
free labor from freetards, just like they post on here, they do it for free!
Leo Foster
I though that the development models of software were the Cathedral (developed solely within a company or a close group of people) and the bazaar (anyone can contribute).
Alexander Hall
I'm doing it for freedom. It's an important distinction.
Zachary Kelly
you thought wrong, and again let reiterate that you are suffering from autism
David Clark
As if those users are vital to Chrome, the most used browser in the world
Isaiah Williams
But Stallman says that the difference between open-source and free software is that GPL'd software in tivoized devices is open-source (given that there is source code given back) but not free software). There is no mention to how they are developed.
gnu.org
Matthew Reyes
>I though that the development models of software were the Cathedral (developed solely within a company or a close group of people) and the bazaar (anyone can contribute).
The term "Open Source" diverged from the orthodox "Free Software" and diverged from the FSF's original goals to appease corporate interests. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with appeasing to corporate interests, especially if they will help the FSF, but corporations tend toward corruption. Stallman and the FSF rejected the new terms because those goals don't exactly align.
See more info here: catb.org
Adam Sanchez
FUCK YOU FAG
and who cares why, use ungoogled-chromium and smile
idk what ur talking to him about but what i do know is that stallman is a fat jealous retard who eats skin off his feet
Christian Barnes
Ok
Jose Phillips
I don't see anything about development models. In any case, what's the difference between the development models of free software and open-source software?