Ditchin the flashy chrome for some classier opera

[ninaholic37]

Free has nothing to due with price. It refers to the freedom to use the software as you wish.

Hrmmm... so by your definition, I can't use Opera as I wish, because I don't have the source code, which means it's not "free"? Or must I abide by some law not to modify it (with a hex editor, de-compiler, addons, scripts) or copy any portion/ideas from it for personal use, which means it's not "free"? Also, if some software is "free to use as I wish", does that mean I can use it to kill 100 people and steal their credit card numbers with it?

That's a horrible definition, and open to too much interpretation. What do you call something that doesn't cost money then? You don't find a computer on someone's front yard with words "free" on it and think "oh, it must be running Linux and all open source software!". Nothinman should never use the term "free" this way again to avoid confusion, it is too vague and most of population relate "free" to "price", which makes his post look like he's trying to sound "smarter" by breaking common english-social standards with niche computer-nerd terminology that only a select few would catch on to (after realizing his post makes no sense using the normal/standard interpretation, and getting angry that he didn't choose his words better).

Just my opinion. :whiste:

 

[lxskllr]

Hrmmm... so by your definition, I can't use Opera as I wish, because I don't have the source code, which means it's not "free"? Or must I abide by some law not to modify it (with a hex editor, de-compiler, addons, scripts) or copy any portion/ideas from it for personal use, which means it's not "free"? Also, if some software is "free to use as I wish", does that mean I can use it to kill 100 people and steal their credit card numbers with it?

It has to be free for ANYONE to use as they wish. Whether you personally want to hack code or not is irrelevant. This is the complete definition of free software(note that price is never mentioned)...


The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

That's a horrible definition, and open to too much interpretation. What do you call something that doesn't cost money then?

Gratis. English is deficient with the usage of the word free. The meanings are too broad. If I invented English, I have given different words for gratis and libre, but since I didn't, I work with what I have, or use better words from other languages. Libre and gratis work especially well because most literate English speakers will know exactly what is meant, even though it isn't native.

You don't find a computer on someone's front yard with words "free" on it and think "oh, it must be running Linux and all open source software!". Nothinman should never use the term "free" this way again to avoid confusion, it is too vague and most of population relate "free" to "price", which makes his post look like he's trying to sound "smarter" by breaking common english-social standards with niche computer-nerd terminology that only a select few would catch on to (after realizing his post makes no sense using the normal/standard interpretation, and getting angry that he didn't choose his words better).

Just my opinion. :whiste:

I won't speak for Nothinman, but the definition of free software is clear, and should be known by everyone who's interested in computer science. Unfortunately, like much basic knowledge, it isn't. The use of the word free is unfortunate, and I think RMS should have used libre from the start, but it's too late to change now. The current definition has predated most people even using a computer, so we deal with what we have, and try to educate people whenever possible.

 

[Nothinman]

Hrmmm... so by your definition, I can't use Opera as I wish, because I don't have the source code, which means it's not "free"? Or must I abide by some law not to modify it (with a hex editor, de-compiler, addons, scripts) or copy any portion/ideas from it for personal use, which means it's not "free"? Also, if some software is "free to use as I wish", does that mean I can use it to kill 100 people and steal their credit card numbers with it?

That's a horrible definition, and open to too much interpretation. What do you call something that doesn't cost money then? You don't find a computer on someone's front yard with words "free" on it and think "oh, it must be running Linux and all open source software!". Nothinman should never use the term "free" this way again to avoid confusion, it is too vague and most of population relate "free" to "price", which makes his post look like he's trying to sound "smarter" by breaking common english-social standards with niche computer-nerd terminology that only a select few would catch on to (after realizing his post makes no sense using the normal/standard interpretation, and getting angry that he didn't choose his words better).

Just my opinion. :whiste:

As lxskllr said, the problem is that English conflates free as in money and free as in freedom into a single word. I'll continue to use the word as I have been, which is proper despite your confusion. Perhaps you missed the day in English class where they explained homonyms and using context clues to determine the meaning of them. No one who's primary language is English would genuinely think a "free PC" sign would mean that it runs Linux regardless of how rabid they were about free software.

Without the source code the software is effectively a locked black box into which you have no access meaning it's not free. And yes, most non-free software usage licenses have provisions that say you're not allowed to edit the binary with a hex editor, decompile it, etc.

And emphatically yes, free software can be used to kill people and steal their credit cards. Just like knives can be used to kill people. The tool isn't the problem, how you use it is the problem. Theo de Raadt's most famous example is that "software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all (be they people or companies), for any purpose they wish to use it, including modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby mulching machines or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia."

 

[Mem]

As lxskllr said, the problem is that English conflates free as in money and free as in freedom into a single word. I'll continue to use the word as I have been, which is proper despite your confusion. Perhaps you missed the day in English class where they explained homonyms and using context clues to determine the meaning of them. No one who's primary language is English would genuinely think a "free PC" sign would mean that it runs Linux regardless of how rabid they were about free software.

Without the source code the software is effectively a locked black box into which you have no access meaning it's not free. And yes, most non-free software usage licenses have provisions that say you're not allowed to edit the binary with a hex editor, decompile it, etc.

And emphatically yes, free software can be used to kill people and steal their credit cards. Just like knives can be used to kill people. The tool isn't the problem, how you use it is the problem. Theo de Raadt's most famous example is that "software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all (be they people or companies), for any purpose they wish to use it, including modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby mulching machines or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia."

Depends how you look at it,personally I'm glad its not open source but still free for users,Opera know their own browser better then anybody else so I can live with that,fact is it costs YOU NOTHING,if you don't like Opera keeping their own product a closed system you can't blame them,they are not the first and not the last ,we can all name plenty of good closed software thats available,don't want any Tom/Dick/Harry messing with any free open software,so closed software like Opera has advantages.


End of the day it cost you nothing,oh and I've seen plenty of bad open source free software/mods etc out there.

 

[Nothinman]

Depends how you look at it,personally I'm glad its not open source but still free for users,Opera know their own browser better then anybody else so I can live with that,fact is it costs YOU NOTHING,if you don't like Opera keeping their own product a closed system you can't blame them,they are not the first and not the last ,we can all name plenty of good closed software thats available,don't want any Tom/Dick/Harry messing with any free open software,so closed software like Opera has advantages.


End of the day it cost you nothing,oh and I've seen plenty of bad open source free software/mods etc out there.

Just because something is open and free doesn't mean anyone can mess with it. Every free software project has a person or team that reviews every patch before it's committed. There's nothing stopping Opera from being truly free and Opera still maintaining control over it's development. That's exactly how Android is developed. Sure, bad patches occasionally slip through but the same is true for non-free software, it's just that it's not as transparent.

Obviously there's good and bad software regardless of the amount of freedom that end users are awarded to it. But with truly free software the possibility of someone taking it and fixing it exists, where as with non-free software that isn't possible.

 

[lxskllr]

Depends how you look at it,personally I'm glad its not open source but still free for users,Opera know their own browser better then anybody else so I can live with that,fact is it costs YOU NOTHING,if you don't like Opera keeping their own product a closed system you can't blame them,they are not the first and not the last ,we can all name plenty of good closed software thats available,don't want any Tom/Dick/Harry messing with any free open software,so closed software like Opera has advantages.


End of the day it cost you nothing,oh and I've seen plenty of bad open source free software/mods etc out there.

That's circular logic. Nobody but Opera can see their code, so nobody knows the code as well as Opera. Without open review, their software could be doing anything, including handing everything you type in it to the government. I'm not saying they are, but they could, and you wouldn't know it. If it doesn't have a feature you want, you have to ask them, and hope they implement it for you.

Handcuffs and a jail cell cost me nothing either, but I don't want that kind of free. I've seen garbage software of all kinds. That's license independent. Software that people see as valuable will be improved, and the rest fall away.

 

[Nothinman]

There's a reason that science is peer reviewed and shared among researchers and the fact that the same standards don't apply to software is just plain retarded. There are other ways to protect your IP that don't require you to keep the source closed.

 

[ninaholic37]

Good points all around. I like these "libre" and "gratis" definitions, as with the idea of being able to edit/see/fix software to my liking. The idea of categorizing freedoms into levels 0-3 is interesting too. I always found it neat how Firefox and Linux is able to keep their code open-source without exposing vulnerabilities/hacking tricks. When I read threads with people saying "I'm looking for free software to...", it seems to me that they're usually talking about price (gratis to download and use), but I guess they could be talking about libre. As I'm logging onto Facebook, it says "It's free and always will be". By the freedom definition, I guess "some" things in it can be customized... although I remember getting Timelined without any way to revert back (for example)... maybe it'd be on a freedom level 3 or 1.5 or something. Various levels of "Freedom/Libre" can get kind of complicating it seems - heh.

 

[lxskllr]

I always found it neat how Firefox and Linux is able to keep their code open-source without exposing vulnerabilities/hacking tricks.

They do expose vulnerabilities. That's one of the benefits, with a minor drawback. Someone can look at the code, and find a flaw to exploit, but that also means other people can find flaws to fix. Obscuring code(proprietary software) can lead to people finding flaws, but not reporting it. No one knows any better until the flaw gets utilized, and then you wait for a single entity to fix it. That single entity may not even tell you their software was exploited. You could be running an a flawed old package(bad idea, but people do that for various reasons), and not know you're at risk.

When I read threads with people saying "I'm looking for free software to...", it seems to me that they're usually talking about price (gratis to download and use), but I guess they could be talking about libre.

That's really contextual. Around here I'd assume they mean gratis. On *nix Software, I'd assume they mean libre. I try to satisfy both with my recommendations :^D

As I'm logging onto Facebook, it says "It's free and always will be". By the freedom definition, I guess "some" things in it can be customized... although I remember getting Timelined without any way to revert back (for example)... maybe it'd be on a freedom level 3 or 1.5 or something. Various levels of "Freedom/Libre" can get kind of complicating it seems - heh.

Facebook has other issues. It's free in price, but costly to your privacy. You can also run into the software as a service(SAAS) problem. If you're doing your computing on a foreign server, control is taken away from you, even if that software is libre. You can't control what it does, or where it goes. It's manual spyware you voluntarily transmit data through. GoogleDocs would be a good example of SAAS.

If you have an interest in any of this stuff, check out some of the essays in the link above at the FSF. Even if you decide you're fine with proprietary software, you should make an educated decision. The status quo isn't the only way things can be done.

Here's a couple lengthy, but good presentations...

Richard Stallman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNBMdDaYhZA

Eben Moglen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKOk4Y4inVY

 

[Nothinman]

Good points all around. I like these "libre" and "gratis" definitions, as with the idea of being able to edit/see/fix software to my liking. The idea of categorizing freedoms into levels 0-3 is interesting too. I always found it neat how Firefox and Linux is able to keep their code open-source without exposing vulnerabilities/hacking tricks. When I read threads with people saying "I'm looking for free software to...", it seems to me that they're usually talking about price (gratis to download and use), but I guess they could be talking about libre. As I'm logging onto Facebook, it says "It's free and always will be". By the freedom definition, I guess "some" things in it can be customized... although I remember getting Timelined without any way to revert back (for example)... maybe it'd be on a freedom level 3 or 1.5 or something. Various levels of "Freedom/Libre" can get kind of complicating it seems - heh.

Another popular analogy is free as in beer and free as in speech, that's usually a simple way to explain the difference to people. But you're right that most people coming from the Windows and OS X worlds don't understand the difference and mean gratis when they say free. Just like most people don't care that they can't take their car to a 3rd party mechanic any longer because the computers in the car are closed black boxes that only certain people have the equipment and documentation to analyze. Same thing with electronics, when was the last time you saw a TV repair man? 30 years ago they were everywhere but now people consider them disposable and either get a warranty replacement or just buy new whenever something happens. I'm really hoping that technology as a hobby doesn't go the way of the TV repair man while I'm around.

Facebook is a service, which is a whole other can of worms. Obviously the service itself can't be open source, but the underlying software can be and a huge portion of what Facebook uses is already free, like PHP.

 

[MrColin]

There's a reason that science is peer reviewed and shared among researchers and the fact that the same standards don't apply to software is just plain retarded. There are other ways to protect your IP that don't require you to keep the source closed.

^This

However, I like the Opera browser. I use it for RSS feeds and browsing trusted sites. I like that I can also right-click > open with any other installed browser. I really love the "Opera Link" for syncing bookmarks, etc between computers/OS's and even my portable flashdrive version. The "Developer Tools" features aren't too shabby either.

I heard a rumor that Facebook was looking to buy it, I hope not.

 

[lxskllr]

I heard a rumor that Facebook was looking to buy it, I hope not.

I heard that too. I almost welcome it because it would absolutely remove it from consideration. I wouldn't have the internal debate of proprietary software that I otherwise like using anymore :^D

 

[Raghu]

^ What if facebook opened up the source?

Maybe it should be called Freedom Software instead of free. Libre works too. But then why not just call it open-source. Avoids confusion all around. Maybe this is not the thread for this discussion.

 

[lxskllr]

^ What if facebook opened up the source?

Maybe it should be called Freedom Software instead of free. Libre works too. But then why not just call it open-source. Avoids confusion all around. Maybe this is not the thread for this discussion.

Facebook has the problem of spying on people. If they opened the code, and let others use it, that would be good for those people, but it doesn't fix the underlying issue of your data residing on a foreign server, and being sold to advertisers, or given to the government on a mere request, as opposed to the warrant they'd need to get from your possession.

Freedom software could work... It's too late in the game to change the "official" word, but if some want to use that, it might be better than "free". Personally "freedom" strikes me as being American jingoistic slang, like freedom fries, and that other nonsense :^D It's ok I guess, I just don't find it aesthetically pleasing.

Why not open source? Open source largely refers to free software, and for practical day to day use, they can be used interchangeably. The problem with open source, is it takes a practical stance regarding free software, and doesn't concern itself with ethics. The open source movement says the open development model makes better software, and if that gets used within proprietary software, it isn't a problem. The only goal is better software. The free software movement says restricting users from using computers in any way they like is unethical. Free software is a social, and political movement, with convenience being secondary to freedom.

I personally align more closely with the free software group. I'm not as rigid as some. I'll use proprietary software when I need to, and sometimes for trivialities like games, but I'm with them in spirit. I consider my use of non-free software to be a weakness or failing on my part, rather than my preferred setup.

Here's an essay on the differences between open source and free software. It's kind of long, but it gives a background on the differences, and explains why free software is important, and how it goes farther than open source does...

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html

 

[Nothinman]

^ What if facebook opened up the source?

Maybe it should be called Freedom Software instead of free. Libre works too. But then why not just call it open-source. Avoids confusion all around. Maybe this is not the thread for this discussion.

Open and free aren't the same thing. Software can have it's source open in that others can see it without the rights to make changes and redistribute those changes. The Microsoft Shared Source initiative is a good example, although they avoid using the words open and free.

 

[Raghu]

[OT] ^ Yes, I understand what you are saying, but wasnt my original point. Free has many other meanings that make its use confusing. With so many nuances, being more specific by saying freedom, libre or open-source (depending on what exactly you are looking for) makes a lot of sense.[/OT]

Opera also has nice speed dial extensions, which I dont think other browsers support. I use the gmail, facebook, engadget and gismeteo (weather) speed dial extensions.

 

[ninaholic37]

Here's a couple lengthy, but good presentations...

Richard Stallman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNBMdDaYhZA

Eben Moglen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKOk4Y4inVY

Thanks for the links! I usually spend 2 hours at the local library a day, and just finished watching these there today. The first thought that crossed my mind when watching the first video was "are Richard Stallman and lxskillr the same person?!" :awe: . Very informative and lots of interesting outlooks. I love the idea of "free knowledge" such as Wikipedia and think software/music/etc. that cut out the middle man and instead have a paypal/donation button directly to the creator (if you want) the better option too. I've never bought a smartphone, DVD, ebook reader etc. and probably never will, there's enough free/unrestricted options out there to choose from and it's always fun to find more alternatives that focus on freedom. Do you watch a lot of these types of videos/presentations?

 

[lxskllr]

The first thought that crossed my mind when watching the first video was "are Richard Stallman and lxskillr the same person?!"

:^D My avatar is RMS. I was using Edgar Allan Poe, but I figured RMS was a better fit for a tech forum. A lot of my rhetoric comes from RMS also. I could free form it, but he's spent many years perfecting his pitch, so I just use it. No point reinventing the wheel, and I pretty much completely buy into his vision. I'm not as strict as he is with my computer usage. I make compromises for convenience, but I'm not proud of that. Whether computers, or life, you can compromise yourself into a bad position. Sometimes convenience costs more than you see at first.

Do you watch a lot of these types of videos/presentations?

I try to catch them when I can. Stallman, and especially Moglen are good speakers, but after you've heard a few, they get repetitive. They speak to people who haven't heard them before, so it doesn't change a ton when you're watching online. I'm interested in anything related to free culture, and how computing relates to society, especially from a privacy/security perspective.

Edit:
Eben Moglen: How I discovered Free Software and met RMS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKxzK9xtSXM

Edit2:
I realize this is getting way off topic, but this is a video I saw the other day. I was trying to remember the guys name, but couldn't for the life of me. This is Jacob Appelbaum discussing antisurveillance. It's geared more towards activists, but it should be interesting for anyone interested in computer security.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHoJ9pQ0cn8

 

[sm625]

Opera is really irritating. I just went on gamefily to buy a game really quick. I filled out the registration form but it got stuck telling me that a password must not have any spaces. WTF?? I dont put no feeeereakin spaces in my shizz. I had to open the site in firefox to get me through the registration process. Stuff like that happens all the time with opera. But it is never the same bug...

 

[smce]

I also distched Chrome. Prefer Opera Ver 12.02 Build 1578 64-bit Win 7. Very solid browser.
Anyone know why some Australian govt websites force use of IE, FF, Chrome & Safari only?

 

[lxskllr]

Anyone know why some Australian govt websites force use of IE, FF, Chrome & Safari only?

Bad coding. It's one thing to only support certain browsers(there better be a libre choice in there), but it's another matter entirely to block non-supported browsers, especially when they'd likely work anyway.