it’s thoose kind of people you want to keep away from important stuff, so you know “open source” is the thing, man! ;-)

it’s thoose kind of people you want to keep away from important stuff, so you know “open source” is the thing, man! ;-)

seems like someone tried to solve a problem by declaring

“open source ≈ freesoftware”

You can compile a binary by using the provided code and it gives you a binary, yes.

you modify the code, compile, sell the binary, because “they provided the code” opensours.org said “it means free software” “free as in freedom” so “I am free to do whatever I want with this software.” "

That is untrue. I can open source my product for a reason, but if anyone try to sell it it’s a crime. I openenly show everyone my source code, but without the right licence it’s nothing. often you can’t even compare it to the software running.

you can do much with free software. depending on the licence, also unfree software. but then it’s no free software anymore

no, open source doesn’t imply anything other than the source code is published.

you mean free software.

free software is relevant

open source is only one point and can also apply to properity software

there are provider offering this. very expensive, but you might find it reasonable if you rent bare metal servers.

free

open source ≠ free

open source ≈ source code published

it’s free software

so it’s a publicly traded commodity. are there texasmegawatts or what? are there less texasmegawatts then before? because if not, this is how it works. they gain capital, can cheaper lend capital, buy efficient texasmegawattsfacilities.

Removed by mod