>Free as in freedom, not free beer

>Free as in freedom, not free beer
What is this supposed to mean? How does having a product make you "free?"

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Don't understand this phrase, not even ESL

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >sharty is moronic
      surprising nobody
      [hide thread]

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It means free as in freedom, as in the freedom to charge for proprietary software.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        no it means that beer have no free wills and if you drink alcohol you're a rapist

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Free = liberty or gratuity depending on the context

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    free as in sex

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you need an explanation then it probably isn't something you'd like, for now.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why not?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You are content with the choices you have. That's why. If you ever find yourself feeling restricted by the choices you have, come back and ask more questions. Until then, no worries.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          This.
          OP is a npc gorilla Black person cattle. Too naive for the truth and reality which surrounds him.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    no one actually free became a redhat troony and wrote a singe line of code. soo it's like gods (not the christcuck god) symbolic symbolism about the unfree times that we live in.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because "free" in English has two different meanings, which in other languages is two different words.
    Libre - has freedom, is not a slave or prisoner.
    Gratis - is available at no financial cost.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You're not forced to use proprietary software.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        But being proprietary limits your range of actions, according to the four software freedoms:

        >Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose.
        >Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and modify it to improve it.
        >Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies, for the benefit of others.
        >Freedom 3: The freedom to distribute copies of your modified version, for the benefit of others.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >forced to use nonfree BIOS
          >forced to use nonfree firmware
          >sometimes forced to use nonfree OS without ways of replacing it (iOS)
          >forced to use nonfree software for work and girls

          You're free to buy other software/hardware. No one is making you do anything. You have freedom of choice, thus you voluntarily choose to use proprietary software.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You're free to sell yourself into slavery. It's the most important freedom.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Are you serious? Selling yourself into slavery is completely different than using software/hardware because you don't have a choice to get out of slavery once you're in it, with software/hardware you always have a choice. No one is forcing you to use anything.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            You're free to buy other software/hardware. No one is making you do anything. You have freedom of choice, thus you voluntarily choose to use proprietary software.

            >no one was forcing you to take the vax.
            you have to go back to r/eddit and stay there.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You chose to use it, but this will limit your future choices more than free software. Because money and time are limited, you are not entirely free to choose anything you want at any given time.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This argument can be used with anything.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            In your tiny world yes very true.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Because it's true. Anything that restricts your future decisions is a limit on your freedom. But some things do this more than others. Example: heroin or meth.

            That means it's your responsibility to make choices that enhance your freedom, not the company's.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            True, but again if you've already made an anti-freedom choice there are significant time/monetary costs to making additional choices. It's like climbing out of a hole and the further down you are the less likely you are to make it out.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Most regular people don't want to spend hours learning about how Linux works and how to use the terminal, the filter can also be seen as "restricting" your freedom.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Well no, in that case your freedom would only be restricted by making you less likely to choose Linux. You just described a barrier to entry. It only applies if you don't enter.
            But there is a potential loss of freedom here: the sunken costs fallacy. If you've already invested dozens of hours learning how to use Linux, or any tool, you start to believe you've invested too much effort to switch to something else (and have to relearn that). So that can be a restriction of your choices.
            But it's much easier to switch away from something when you didn't pay anything for it, and when the hardware you're running on doesn't try to prevent you from switching. And it's easier to switch to something that's free as well, because you don't have to invest any money, only time (as opposed to money+time).

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Why are you twisting this so much? According to you, opportunity cost IS your "restriction of freedom" that you're talking about. Both proprietary and "free" software share this basic economic principle, but for some reason you people are suggesting that it only applies to proprietary stuff, when in fact it also applies to "freedom" stuff. And it's somehow "slavery" when you use proprietary software that you CHOOSE to use instead of open source/free stuff.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Because it's true. Anything that restricts your future decisions is a limit on your freedom. But some things do this more than others. Example: heroin or meth.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >forced to use nonfree BIOS
        >forced to use nonfree firmware
        >sometimes forced to use nonfree OS without ways of replacing it (iOS)
        >forced to use nonfree software for work and girls

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    all products limit your future choices, but some do it more than others

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's a phrase FOSSBlack folk utter as a retort to cope with their a) shitware b) poorgay status

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    cobby on the 'log albeit

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      go back

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        YWNBAW HWABAG

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >How does having a product make you "free"?

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    you pay for windows and get spied on

    turbo cuckholdry.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >If it's free
    >you are the product
    I found out a couple years ago that all NTP servers and package mirrors spy on you

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Of course freedom as a concept misses you so you're gonna post this stupid ragebait here

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it should be
    >Free as a beer in freedom

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    free as a beer works as if someone just bought you a beer in a pub and thats it. Free as in freedom is when someone gives you the beer along with the recipe and permission to brew it for free.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      who cares. GPL is a virus. RMS is an irrelevant moron. FOSS projects are full of trannies, basedjaks and spoiled basement dwellers. Linux became a bloated piece of shit. FOSS movement itself got taken over by ~~*Open Source Initiative*~~ which is an usurper of Open Source world, who decided that license that allows others to do virtually anything with your code while paying small price of attribution "isn't free enough"

      >Free as in freedom is when someone gives you the beer along with the recipe and permission to brew it for free.
      let's say somebody gave me free coke, with recipe for coke, does it have any value for me? not at all since i haven't invested hundred of thousands of dollars in equipment to make said coke syrup, carbonation machines and water filtration with monitoring

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        beer can be brewed at home.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's meaningless and anyone trying to convince you otherwise is a shill for big globohomo.
    Source? The fact that they work for free for globohomosexual but don't get any payment
    You want more source? They deplatform services and programs that are useful but can't be monetized by them like Icecat
    You want even more source? Even if you fail to fall for this scam you won't be hired to get a job if you don't do it.
    Final proof? If the true foss spirit worked this would stop monopolies from forming as people gather around projects instead of products. Instead the company always dominates and wins.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *