Open-source: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Spelling |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
Open Source is a broad term. It often refers to an object, physical or digital, that has | Open Source is a broad term. It often refers to an object, physical or digital, that has its design blueprints/recipe, or software code made freely available to the public to share, modify, and in some permitted cases, sell. This is made possible by giving the object a very lenient copyright license. Open-source as a concept is part of the [[w:copyleft|Copyleft movement]]. | ||
==Why It Matters== | ==Why It Matters== | ||
In todays world, a lot of knowledge is not free. A lot of knowledge is | In todays world, a lot of knowledge is not free. A lot of knowledge is hoarded by the wealthy by abusing copyright patents. It can allow corporations to develop life saving medicines and other beneficial things for our world and put them behind a paywall. The owners of the patents dictate how their licensed "objects" can be used, and to what extent the customer can own them. A significant skill gap can widen between those connected to the owners of patented knowledge and those who are not. The owners of a patented product can also determine it's build quality, and that not only helps enforce [[w:planned_obsolescence|planned obsolescence]] but it greatly contributes to [[w:e-waste|e-waste]]. Proprietary software can also have malicious things hidden in its code. | ||
==For Open-source | ==For Open-source To Thrive== | ||
In the software side of open source, many capitalists have realized how free code can save them on labor costs. As such, they have watered down the concept, and use licenses that only serve their needs. Open-source works best when it's paired with a strong copyright license that ensures that no one can take full ownership of it. | In the software side of open source, many capitalists have realized how free code can save them on labor costs. As such, they have watered down the concept, and use licenses that only serve their needs. Open-source works best when it's paired with a strong copyright license that ensures that no one can take full ownership of it. | ||
Latest revision as of 20:15, 7 July 2025
This article is a stub. You can help it grow by contributing to it!
Open Source is a broad term. It often refers to an object, physical or digital, that has its design blueprints/recipe, or software code made freely available to the public to share, modify, and in some permitted cases, sell. This is made possible by giving the object a very lenient copyright license. Open-source as a concept is part of the Copyleft movement.
Why It Matters[edit | edit source]
In todays world, a lot of knowledge is not free. A lot of knowledge is hoarded by the wealthy by abusing copyright patents. It can allow corporations to develop life saving medicines and other beneficial things for our world and put them behind a paywall. The owners of the patents dictate how their licensed "objects" can be used, and to what extent the customer can own them. A significant skill gap can widen between those connected to the owners of patented knowledge and those who are not. The owners of a patented product can also determine it's build quality, and that not only helps enforce planned obsolescence but it greatly contributes to e-waste. Proprietary software can also have malicious things hidden in its code.
For Open-source To Thrive[edit | edit source]
In the software side of open source, many capitalists have realized how free code can save them on labor costs. As such, they have watered down the concept, and use licenses that only serve their needs. Open-source works best when it's paired with a strong copyright license that ensures that no one can take full ownership of it.