03:21 Firefox lincense 03:49 Windows (Nothing is obvious in this system huehue) 04:08 The rumor is true huehue 04:35 Yep, Chrome got me confused 05:31 Vivaldi is worse than Chrome 07:04 It really means: Take a look and get away from my code 10:42 VSCode (Noo way) 14:58 Odysee (haha, not the richest cousin Odysee)

@MyAmazingUsername

Жыл бұрын

Now I don't feel bad anymore for slagging off Vivaldi's developers for their terrible code quality a year ago.

Chromium is open source, Chrome is not, Chromium OS is open source, Chrome OS is not, AOSP is open source, Android is not, get that people

@unicorn_tamer

2 жыл бұрын

Actually android is open-source

@GabrielM01

2 жыл бұрын

@@unicorn_tamerAndroid Open Source Project is, the android that comes with your phone is not

2 жыл бұрын

4:45 are based off of the Chromium's, let me call it, "web rendering engine", not Google Chrome. PS: Typed too soon, DT clarified it later on.

@GabrielM01

2 жыл бұрын

@ blink engine sir

@killertigergaming6762

Жыл бұрын

@@unicorn_tamer no its not

Vivaldi - like politicians answering questions they don't want to directly answer, a word salad!

@dougtilaran3496

2 жыл бұрын

I got Vivaldi once, 10 days of Cephalexin cleared it right up. She was very open but non-free,

I' m glad that someone is touching to the offical binary issues of VS Code! My beloved project VS Codium finally gets more attention!

@fabricio4794

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your project

@texrot9781

2 жыл бұрын

@@fabricio4794 No no from "my beloved" i meant a something i really like passionately. I am not involved with the project

Everyone should just go to the Vivaldi page and mark the "answer" as not helpful. This won't change anything but at least our voices might be heard.

"Is Vivaldi Open Source?" "Yes, Vivaldi is red ,has a big V as its logo."

@ChillaxeMake

4 ай бұрын

They say that Vivaldi is not available under a unified open-source license.

"I don't use proprietary software! ...now let me google the licenses to explain" oof

1:35 Stallman has said before (and I agree) that the Open Source Definition is more relaxed than the Free Software Definition. The reason for this is primarily that the OSD only cares about the _source code_ license. So VSCode, for instance, is Open Source but not free software. Similarly, tivoized software can be Open Source but not free, since freedom 1 requires being able to run the modified version. I also wanted to mention that, if I recall, Stallman has mentioned that binary blob graphics drivers, since they're kernel mode works based on Linux, violate the GNU GPL. Edit: some more comments. 11:05 technically, Microsoft has everyone sign a separate CLA, so they're not shipping proprietary VSCode under the permission of the Expat/MIT License, but under an all-permissive license (maybe a copyright transfer as well? I forgot). 13:14 I'm pretty sure the term "Open Source" was irregular enough to not be in common use, no? At the very least, I'm pretty sure Raymond, Torvalds, et al. came up with the term independently.

@Zephyrus0

2 жыл бұрын

"Open Source Definition" is just renamed Debian Free Software Guidelines.

@NateROCKS112

2 жыл бұрын

@@Zephyrus0 yeah, and the DFSG allows tivoization. (However, maybe the OSD doesn't make VSCode Open Source.)

@dougtilaran3496

2 жыл бұрын

Microsoft boils down to a rental agreement.

@fabricio4794

2 жыл бұрын

GNU/FSF should Focus on FREE Hardware now..to say bogus to proprietary hardware...

@Zephyrus0

2 жыл бұрын

@@fabricio4794 they already do to some extent, check RYF certification

I've used VSCode for 2 years not knowing that I've actually been using a closed source binary. Stopped using it completely after that

@avitld

2 жыл бұрын

There's VSCodium, which is open-sourced no telemetry binaries for VSCode

@overclucker

2 жыл бұрын

I've been holding my tongue this whole time because I don't want to discourage people that are new to open source development. Microsoft pioneered the embrace extend extinguish philosophy in the mid 90's which they then used to hold the internet hostage for ten years. They haven't changed as a company and now they are embracing and extending open source software. They aren't trustworthy and it's been exposed that they were violating the GPL from the very beginning, and still do so today. The scariest thing that no one is upset about is that they bought github.

@fabricio4794

2 жыл бұрын

@@avitld VSCodium is a Bless..

@TheRobbix1206

2 жыл бұрын

Ahhh I hate those calling convention, because for me closed source software is a software without public access to the source code.... But as it was created as an opposition to open source software which doesn't only mean source available it creates a lot of confusion. Even more when free software can be not free (as it cost money.....).... One of the biggest confusion is that open and free license might not be compatible for example GPL are not compatible with open source as it is a copyleft licence making it forbidden to make a fork of a software close source....

love your content man! just switched to endeavouros and im so pleased with the performance. so much quicker and more intuitive than windows. thanks for making information about linux more accessible, as it helps smooth the switch for people like me.

@dictatorship7413

2 жыл бұрын

I use Arch btw

@RealMephres

2 жыл бұрын

@Earthling-Z3R0 I think that pre-configured Artix Linux with KDE Plasma is better, but my wireless adapter driver doesn't want to compile on there, which makes work impossible for me. EndeavourOS is for people that do not like compromises and restriction but also are not too keen on doing everything by themselves, as it usually is a waste of time.

Awesome video, I really liked the format of going with you though the internet and checking things! You should do it frequently not only on this topic but on every topic that you wanted to address to.

Dt said "Odysee owned by Google" and "Odysee is not owned by Google"! So, I concluded "Google owned by Odysee". And now you can't change my mind :)

I've never bothered or managed to understand the nuances in this area. You did a great job covering your points and I definitely learned alot! Thank you!

About VS Code, it's true. The binaries are repackaged in a shitty way. That's why for a few tasks I switched to VS Codium. It's a fork of the code with telemetry stripped and repackaged without a proprietary license. It's awesome. About Odysee: Dunning-Kruger much? As much too often people don't take the extra steps and think about what they're doing.

@MyAmazingUsername

Жыл бұрын

I completely disagree. VS Codium is not awesome. It's a limited version of VS Code. To get extensions you have to use a mirror repo which only has like 5% of the extensions that VS Code has, and are often out of date, because they cannot use MS official extension repo. Furthermore, there is no reason to switch away from VS Code. You can remove ALL telemetry via the config file. I did that. It's easy.

9:50 The first sentence on the "Is Vivaldi Open Source" page states, "Vivaldi is not made available under one unified open source license." That tells me "No", they are not open source. Would it be better if they stated, "No. Vivaldi is not made available... etc."? Or is "no" implied there?

A good essay about all that is called the cathedral and the bazaar … it’s by Raymond even though I don’t support him any longer, but still an important book.

I mean, we do have the source available for various Windows versions, and that is absolutely not open source.

3:20 Ok, I 've seen a lot, but what is this?!? I need that.

@faustipez

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I like it too. Hope someone knows the extension name.

@DistroTube

2 жыл бұрын

Tabliss. I did a video on this extension. Available for Firefox and Chrome.

@faustipez

2 жыл бұрын

@@DistroTube Thank you DT 🙏

hey dt big fan of your videos i was just wondering what is this browser you were using at 3:22 i am really interested in this simplistic browser and are there any things you modified to make it like this?

Referencing to google search engine while talking about FOSS looks ironical =) (I understand that we are used to say "google" instead of "browse" and "search")

Likely a 1 hour ago, me and my friend talked about this subject and this video came as supportive argument. What a coincidence.

One thing I'm wondering about is, How Odysee can sync KZread not only videos but also all metadata of one's channel?

Let us never doubt that stupidity is in fact a psychological dysfunction and it's on the increase.

Spot on. Richard Stallman, God bless his belly. I'm glad you've cleared that up. I honestly didn't know how to respond to the reply I got about Odysee being owned by Google. It still stands that Odysee and other Alt-sites will never be as big as KZread unless people in general learn to stop putting all their eggs in one basket. I like Odysee, but KZread's player still runs faster and does more with a much lower bandwidth. The only OpenSource video streaming I find comparable with KZread is Jellyfin. It works just sweet running off my PC in the shed. I can have several users connected and streaming different things while I'm playing a game, all done over a basic ADSL line. Jellyfin is great, and gives you a personal video library that's like your own filmclub. Private members only. Works like a dream.

Thank you for stating and re-confirming that GPL licensed software does not allow relicensing that software as proprietary software. You can add, change, modify but cannot re-issue those changes, modifications or additions as new propriety software.

hey DT, why don't you put chapters in your videos ?? they enhances the watching experience.

Ever since your previous video about Vivaldi's license, I was hoping you would talk about the differences between Open Source and Source Available software.

This one of your better videos. Very informative.

Chromium Browser (Discolored chrome icon) is open source web browser. It's basically chrome without the proprietary decoders and a few more things. Similarly there is open source chromium OS (open source version of ChromeOS)

Thanks for the clarification!

Firefox has a nice vscodium extension that lets you open vscode extensions in vscodium which is the debranded opensource version.

Less an hour ago i searched the difference between chrome os and chromium os because I wanted to know how they got away with using the linux kernal with chrome os being proprietary

@NateROCKS112

2 жыл бұрын

Linux syscalls can be used with proprietary userland programs, since it has a GPL exception. The collection of proprietary userland and Linux is an aggregate, and so isn't prohibited by the GPL. That is to say, the reason why not all programs running on top of Linux need to be licensed under the GPLv2 is the same reason why ChromeOS can be proprietary. The Linux part is Open Source, but the rest of it isn't. Edit: clarify "syscalls." Linux has a syscall note that exempts normal use of the kernel by userland from the GPL.

@justahumanwithamask4089

2 жыл бұрын

@@NateROCKS112 I get what you're trying to say but Google just found a loophole in the GPL license, correct me if I'm wrong but the GPL license states that if any code under GPL is incorporated into a project the entire project must be opened sourced? Google made chromium os and base android under the MIT license with basically allows you to do whatever you what which is why chrome os exists now

@NateROCKS112

2 жыл бұрын

@@justahumanwithamask4089 Linux has a GPL exception -- that is, it says "the viral GPL provisions don't apply to userland programs using Linux syscalls." This is why _any_ proprietary software, including, for instance, the Steam video game client, can be run on top of Linux. That is, Linux is _not_ just "GPL-licensed." It also contains a special exception for software using the kernel in userland. And I don't get what your supposed "loophole" is. The GPL doesn't just state that modified versions must be free software; it states that they must be licensed under the _GPL itself._

@UteChewb

2 жыл бұрын

@@justahumanwithamask4089 , yeah, I remember when Google was fighting to get their fork of Linux out of GPL so they could relicense it. They had to go to lots of devs and seek permission for the change. Very controversial at the time. Many years ago but I never forgot that. One of the reasons I don't trust google enough to use chrome for anything day to day.

You can check VSCodium and Code-OSS if you're looking a way to remove proprietary parts (such as Microsoft extension store) and telemetry. Both are available through AUR for example Hey, DT! A have a question unrelated to the previous part of the comment: What do you think about Qt dual-license model? Some people think that Qt is trying to confuse potential customers with complicated "open-source" license, so customers buy commercial license to protect themselves from legal risks caused by ambiguity. Can such model even be considered fair and really open-source? Thanks for your videos!

@DanCojocaru2000

2 жыл бұрын

Why wouldn't it be open source?

Im pretty sure you are taught this in Year 1 of any IT related studies. Good refresher for those who get the terms confused though.

@TheDiner50

2 жыл бұрын

Nope. Not back in 2015 or so. But the teacher had a laptop running something called Mint. And had a printer. And that was about the only thing in 2015 or so Linux got in IT school. No printer for you! Really. After 2016 or so there was 3D printers, Gaming rigs, touch screen high end all in one pc's. Even VR running Fallout 4 and stuff. But nothing about Linux or license education. Or really any education really. Now that class is shut down too. Nothing really lost but life on this planet. But was fun to try VR even if I was technically not really allowed there anymore graduated and all. Really not worth the money but was fun to try. And I got to try it in a realistic environment. Dank dark concrete basement. Just like any reputable nerd living at home! Felt dirty playing 1min of Fortnight in the electronic store btw. (due to it being Fortnight crap) Just to awkward to even touch the game in public even if the game was more or less crashing down after it's peak popularity. I would not put on a headset in the electronic store even before 2020 since I do not need a sale rep to sell me on it. So the dank IT VR system was really a highlight from IT school. XD, To think school teach anyone important stuff is just factually wrong. Even in the best EU countries you are not really going to learn stuff unless you really try to learn and not just get the best score/grade. And also importantly having teachers that are not just there to do a robots job. But actual good teacher. Rare unicorns indeed. Really for the most part the stuff NOT part of the lesson in question do I even remember. Like history/religion teacher saying something reasonable but actually not allowed to say as a teacher. Or that mint laptop having problems with the printer. And how there was a alternative to Windows servers and desktops/laptops. Nearly nothing the school wanted us to learn sticks since it is not worth knowing in the real world. More or less. Sadly.

3:53 You could search for the EULA (End-user license agreement)

Oh wow. This was very informative!

1:41 but if this was true, the linux kernel it self would be proprietary because of its proprietary blobs

@FirstnameLastname-we6dh

2 жыл бұрын

It is. That's why the linux-libre kernel exists. It will get rid of the proprietary blobs.

@thepaulcraft957

2 жыл бұрын

@@FirstnameLastname-we6dh OK, i Always thought, that the linux kernel is foss.

@DistroTube

2 жыл бұрын

The Linux kernel does include some binary blobs, which are proprietary and no one can edit the source code or even view the source code of those binary blobs. These are typically drivers. Without these proprietary blobs, Linux won't work on most hardware. Of course, the kernel is modular and you can compile your own kernel without a lot of this stuff. There is a completely "free" kernel called "linux-libre". But again, unless you know for sure that you have a machine that can run it, the standard kernel is probably the one you want.

@thepaulcraft957

2 жыл бұрын

@@DistroTube thank you for your long answer. I have to agree with you(you shouldn't use the libre kernel).

Honestly, I didn't know about the "Definition" of Open source untill I set out to figure out why fedora didn't include certain packages with 100% perfectly auditable code. Until that point, to me, open source meant that the source was open. That is, open to view/audit. Interestingly enough I chose Fedora because of the idea only installing packages with auditable code. Now I can get on board with the extra ideological concepts themselves but I take issue with the (stolen) words. As far as I'm concerned the founders/champions "Opensouce/Free software" have created their own conflict. The word "free" when when used with something inanimate usually means free as in beer. They could have easily called it freedom software and the confusion would be gone. Intuition/context would certainly be enough to convay it's meaning. Instead they chose to use phrasing that goes against peoples natural intuiton in a way such that even context clues can easily fail to set it straight. Same with "open source" . The OG foss people should have been a little better about their marketing. Once again I can get on board with the underlying philosophy, but I think arbitraraly redefining the connotation of phrases and then trying to force it on the rest of the world as denotation is bad form. The fault for the conflict clearly originates with the Free software/ Open source community. P.s. This was not a critique on you. You handled the issue respectfully and with good will. Also I'm glad to hear you're on Odysee!

It would have probably been better to try an explain this by using Android, iOS, and their respective appstore environments. It would have been more relevant. I appreciate your ability to go indepth for us older folks though. :)

lol at 0:38 you can hear the sound of the microphone sound like a robot.. What's up DT, what you really hiding lol

Google owns Gopher as well,i read it online!

I'm glad you covered the differences between licenses. Some people actually believe the Llama2 AI software from the Zuckster is truly open source. It's not.

About middle ground - what about "open core" software, where basic stuff is open source, but a project built around this core is closed source?

I'd say there's a little bit of middle ground, like LGPL which is still free software but definitely not quite as much as GPL, or let's say MIT which is open source but definitely not free software, still not proprietary though ofc.

@DMSBrian24

2 жыл бұрын

Also, just saying "BSD license" makes no sense since there's more than one of those and they actually differ a lot, the original one is not free software, the modified one is and so is the freeBSD one, compatible with GPL.

Reading suggestion: Against Intellectual Property by Kinsella

I'd say Vivaldi is fine, as long as you can read all of the source code (which I don't anyways but other people do), I can have that same peace of mind as using fully open-source software.

@NoEntityHere

2 жыл бұрын

I'd also like to say that I don't use Vivaldi.

DT: "Sometimes you just gotta dig a little deeper." Mama Odie: **enters the chat** Sorry, that's the first thing that popped into my head. 🤣

ayye first time i am this early on a DT video :)

What about dual license? Eg, cryptomator

The creator of Odysee had a pinned tweet for ages supporting printed guns, so he's very much the real thing.

I loved the Vivaldi feature set, and was excited to use tabstacks and tiled web panels like a mofo until I realized how they were trying to pretend they're open-source. They're foolish thinking that having some proprietary code is going to improve their marketshare. It's idiotic. I stopped using it. If they make their software open source I'll use it again, but not until then.

@user-fc8xw4fi5v

2 жыл бұрын

tiled web panels? that sounds sick, rip vivaldi

@bigmikeobama5314

2 жыл бұрын

wait a year and there will be several browsers doing that

@rizkyadiyanto7922

2 жыл бұрын

@@user-fc8xw4fi5v sounds like a job for tiling window manager.

@user-fc8xw4fi5v

2 жыл бұрын

@@rizkyadiyanto7922 ur right actually.. now tht i think about it, idk if that would change anything that existing browser tabbing/XMonad functionality already provides!

@dustanddeath3985

2 жыл бұрын

@@rizkyadiyanto7922 yeah, I use a twm, but fullscreening a single browser and then tiling only web content reduces wasted space and memory overhead. Alas . . .

Worst thing about Vivaldi: it is actually kind of cool. If Firefox dies and i have to pick a Chromium browser it would be either Brave or Vivaldi.

As a programmer I actually prefer MIT license more than GNU 2 and 3 licensed tools when I write code. Then I know I still have pretty much any kind of license options available.

@RedFenceAnime

2 жыл бұрын

Permissive licenses give you the freedom to deny another that freedom. Copyleft licenses don't, they force you to provide the same freedom granted to you.

@christer8964

2 жыл бұрын

@@RedFenceAnime yes, and where do you place MIT license?

@user-he4ef9br7z

2 жыл бұрын

Cuck license.

I use and love Vivaldi, but I agree they should be more transparent about this.

Question, you said there is no middle ground, and any software that has proprietary software in it is considered proprietary, would that make all these Linux distros proprietary? A lot of them ship with all these proprietary drivers. Or is that different.

@Cyanwasserstoff

2 жыл бұрын

Linux is only the kernel, which in itself is open-source. That is the reason why Nvidia drivers are not included in the Linux kernel, but AMD drivers are. The Distros are neither Open-Source nor proprietary, because they are the total package of combined software. This can be a package that is solely based on open-source software, but it might also contain proprietary blobs.

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

@@Cyanwasserstoff same thing for android

@charlescole645

2 жыл бұрын

@@Cyanwasserstoff So, it doesn't matter if a distro has proprietary software, it's still GNU/Linux?

@Cyanwasserstoff

2 жыл бұрын

@@charlescole645 It is still a GNU/Linux Distro, because it is using the GNU utilities on top of a Linux core. On top of that any compatible software package can be installed through the package manager or flat pak/snap/appimage

@UteChewb

2 жыл бұрын

It's like when you install debian. If you want to install 3rd party (proprietary) drivers etc, you are asked, "Do you want to taint the kernel?" As if you are just about to commit a crime. No middle ground.

Take the mesa radeon drivers. These would be considered property under a strict definition because they need a firmware blob to work. Many other projects also exist in this "gray" area where they are mostly open sourced. If you want you can considered all these shades of gray to be black, but that's a subjective choice you have made.

@bigmikeobama5314

2 жыл бұрын

wrong.

@cheako91155

2 жыл бұрын

@@bigmikeobama5314 I'm open to alternative facts, perhaps I misunderstand the nature of the binary firmwares provided by AMD they could be open sourced?

@Zephyrus0

2 жыл бұрын

The drivers the open source but the blobs they need to function aren't. As a combined work it's proprietary and seperate works they're their own licenses.

@cheako91155

2 жыл бұрын

That's the point I was making, if you draw a hard line of only running open sourced software... OpenGL is out of reach and you're forced to run VESA drivers... Actually the VESA bios is proprietary so you just can't have any video.

Well said

Oh snap, I didn't know VSCode was distributed as a non-free licence...

Edge, Opera, Chrome, Comodo, and all the others (except Firefox) are all Chromium based browsers. Chromium is the part that's open source. Once it's given a name, it's proprietary.

Often larger companies buy smaller companies for proprietary source code or a user base.

Good video -- I forgot to watch it on Odysee!

I don't mind Source Available of Vivaldi even though I don't use it. I think it's fine. Way better than closed source at least.

@bigmikeobama5314

2 жыл бұрын

there are other great browsers based on chromium that are free and open source and not dishonest. brave for example

@Don_XII

2 жыл бұрын

@@bigmikeobama5314 I don't find brave that good. I also don't like Vivaldi. I just said that I don't really oppose the Source Available model especially for something like the UI. If there is no telemetery in it I'm cool even if it's not "open source". Brave has too much crypto JUNK. If there is a version of it without the crypto and stuff I'd use it as a main browser.

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

Except it is closed source

Free of charge are some time called Gratis Software. That is Free of Charge, but not free to change.

@Zephyrus0

2 жыл бұрын

Freeware is the usual word

@AndersJackson

2 жыл бұрын

@@Zephyrus0 but to often mixed with Free and Open software. That is why Open Software foundation call it Gratis software. But yes, you are right. It is also called Freeware, Free as in Gratis, not as in Freedom.

The original Odysee seems more like what Picasa was.

FOSS is like democracy, and LDCs with autocracies that adopt democracy tend to increase by 20% in GDP over a 25 year period. Same can be said with free software, contributors and bug testers will continue to improve code under a GPL liscense, and there's no reason to deny access to audit software, except for keeping corporate secrets. I really dislike how companies like Google slip by creating true FOSS because most of the contributors to Chromium are Google employees

I don't use google search engine so didn't know this but now that I think about it I have heard google buying that company...

Tell this also to arcolinux , vivaldi is in all there configurations

Debian is open source, but I run non free contrib because Amd gpu. My phone kernal is open source but about everything else is non free. Even fdroid includes some non free propietary software. Thanks for explaing orange chrome.

I don't know if this is true or even if it's important, but you didn't address the issue of Odyssey not being censorship resistant... Or if this effects the main lbry network.

@Zephyrus0

2 жыл бұрын

Nothing is censorship resistant. Some are just more lax than others.

@DistroTube

2 жыл бұрын

Odysee is a US company. Obviously, they have to follow US laws. So if there is a DMCA request made, they are legally required to act on it. That's not censorship. That's being smart and not getting fined or imprisoned for not obeying the law.

@vaisakhkm783

2 жыл бұрын

I google a lot about Odyssey and and finally 2months ago only I realized it is odysee.... :)

@cheako91155

2 жыл бұрын

@@Zephyrus0 Freenet and Twister are examples or censorship resistant networks.

@cheako91155

2 жыл бұрын

@@DistroTube The capability is the problematic, not how "good" it is when used correctly.

I was really waiting for you to talk about Android and make it clear. As it's a open source project but you said that it's a proprietary software. Why?

@stuartdilts2729

2 жыл бұрын

It's in the same situation that Chrome and VS Code are in: while it's running on top of OSS components, proprietary bits have been added to it, including the customizations that individual phone manufacturers have added.

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

@@stuartdilts2729 still, android itself is open-source. Thats like saying linux is closed source because the kernel includes proprietary blobs

@fahimshahriar2154

2 жыл бұрын

@@stuartdilts2729 Nope. The base Android is open source. Then various flavours of it, which we call "UI" like MiUi or ColorOS - they are proprietary stuffs. But the base Android is open source. You can just pretty much download it, then customize and redistribute it. Like there's many other vanilla Android custom rom, which is completely away from Google.

Hey Dt, Aren’t apps that are only on Linux inherently proprietary?

@dustanddeath3985

2 жыл бұрын

No. Go use a dictionary and learn what things mean.

@CoreyTL

2 жыл бұрын

@@dustanddeath3985 dont just be rude pointlessly, if your not going to answer a question, dont answer it

@YariCodes

2 жыл бұрын

proprietary means nothing to do with platforms it is available for. for example, Notepad++ is open source and written for Windows, most likely included with only free dependencies for it to work.

@user-he4ef9br7z

2 жыл бұрын

Wait what! No. Proprietary has to do with the source code. It doesn't have anything to do with the target platform.

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

@@YariCodes sometimes it has, as on iOS for example

Hey DT, you do know artificial intelligence can make youtube comments that are indistinguishable from actual human comments right? Well, almost. I can tell the difference. Not necessarily from just one post, but when I scan the comments I can see patterns of comments that all say basically the same thing but just change around the sentence structure or use very similar wording but maybe change one or two words but still have the same meaning - that sort of thing. So when you see these "confused" comments, they are most likely coming from companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, that employ AI to try and influence public opinion and to provide cover for their criminal activities. And all this time, did you really think Google was providing free email service for advertising revenue? HA! What they were really doing was reading everyone's emails in order to program their AI.

DT- I do not promote proprietary software on this channel Also DT- Google it

@FaranAiki

2 жыл бұрын

Of course, "google" is not a word.

Awesome videos, man! Would you make a video about how to license things with MIT license or any other free licenses? I'm a game developer and I want to make free and open-source games, so people can play, edit and redistribute. I personally don't believe in Intelectual Property, since everything is an informational pattern contained in the range of possibilities that the universe produced a long time before planet Earth and Human Kind even existed. Therefore, no human, individual or conscience could own a pattern, since it was always there for anyone make use of.

2 жыл бұрын

And the difference between Private Property and Intelectual Property is that the first is a solution for conflicts involving scarce resources. Since informational patterns aren't scarce, there's no way it can become a Private Property. Conflicts involving scarce resources only exists because there's not enough of the resource for everyone to use. Ideas aren't scarce, so there's no conflict. Therefore, there's no reason to apply the solutions for conflicts involving scarce resources on a resource that's not scarce.

Okay, the source code for Vivaldi is right there for me to read and download and even modify, therefore it's Open Source, but I can't repackage it, sell it, whatever, therefore it's not Free Software? Am I understanding that right?

@Winnetou17

2 жыл бұрын

I'm not sure it's the full source code. They mention that the UI is, but is that everything they added on top of Chromium ?

@TheRibbonRed

2 жыл бұрын

7:04 "...for all practical purposes, Vivaldi is Open to Audit" Source Available, but *not Open Source.* Vivaldi doesn't allow you to edit their code & publish it willy-nilly without agreeing to their terms.

@anon_y_mousse

2 жыл бұрын

@@Winnetou17 You can download the full source code, all 1.8GB of it off of an excruciatingly slow server. As I understand it, everything needed to build the final application is in there. My question is on what qualifier should I apply when describing it. The definitions seem pointless to me, for a lot of reasons. Open but Non-Free seems like the terminology I want, but it seems no one can agree on what Open means.

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

@@anon_y_mousse not correct, whats open-source is chromium and their c++ code, which is what you can download. The javascript part, which is the entire interface and a few other things, is proprietary and they dont make it available. Their argument is that javascript is pretty auditable as it is so anyone can see whats its doing and also modify it so it should basically count as it being open source

@anon_y_mousse

2 жыл бұрын

@@fgsaramago Incorrect, the entire interface is source viewable, and it's not just JavaScript that makes up the interface. They also use HTML and CSS. My question was never whether you could see the source code, but on how to define the terms.

What's the significance of the t-shirt? Can see barium, cobalt and nitrogen, chemistry not my strong point so is there any significance?

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

Its just so you get the word bacon out of it

@send2gl

2 жыл бұрын

@@fgsaramago Oh right 👍😎

Hey DT, is chromium OS open source?

That would be reason if oddsy was owned by google as well

Odysee's Android app uses Google Analytics

What browser? And why Google?

Talk about a face palm fml but much appreciated for the clarification.

Just forget the semantics war man... you'll never win. xD Particularly if it's composed of common English words. I mean, I do agree with everything said, but still. Same story of other common language words and expressions being taken with second or commercial intent to mislead people or give an erroneous impression. Gives me headaches thinking about hoverboards, drones and whatnot. xD In the end, companies will have to start using "free and open source as defined by the free software foundation criteria and x licensing agreement" yadda yadda... or stuff like that (see CreativeCommons with all it's CC somethings). But you know, even if you state that free and open source is a specific thing that cannot be used to define others, you see splattered all around the term open source and free used to define licenses that are, in effect, a midway between the definition given by the open source foundation, and commercial proprietary code. And really, in the end, you just can't deny those definitions just because it violates the free software foundation definition of it... no foundation, organization, or authoritative power has the position to strictly define common language words as they see fit, language is always in flow. Heck, not even dictionaries and encyclopedias definitions stick, they are constantly changing and updating it. The confusion about Chrome, Chrome OS and Android often comes from the fact that these draw from "open source" projects such as Chromium, Chromium OS and AOSP. The three of them have a licensing salad that involves BSD licenses, Apache, GPL and GPL-like, plus all sorts of other stuff. They are indeed open source, but not the free and open source license and definition according to free software foundation, they indeed are somewhere in between. And then there is of course the entire separate discussion that if you have code that is free and open source licensed, but majority controlled by a tech giant, is it really conceptually free? Reason why we really don't want Firefox to die and we end up with a scenario that the only browser engines available are Chromium and WebKit (Safari). Good to note that WebKit is also LGPL and BSD licensed, but you know, mostly Safari and other browsers running on iOS, so mostly controlled by Apple in current scenario.

same concept applies to privacy policies. the shorter the better.

Those licenses are nothing compared to Intel ME's.

Vivaldi is a weird case. It has downloads to it's source code tarballs but... no active repo to contribute to?

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

That source code they provide is not the whole thing

Nothing is going to get me to give up Brave as my primary browser, unless they do something terrible that I don't agree with..

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

Actually they did that for me a few days ago, an update reset the entire browser 😂. Not the first time either something like that happens so I stopped using it

One thing you didnt address is how you called android closed source in your hey dt video. Android IS open source, its just most manufacturers make their forks of android closed.

I think this makes the issue even more comfusing. I know the OSI tried to trademark "Open Source" and failed, I assume "Free Software" would have or has failed to be trademarked for similar reasons. You are free to use "free sofware" to mean that thing richard stallman invented, and you are free to say that anyone that does not fall in line and pray to richard stallman is not in your free and open source software movement. But legally you dont own the word, and thier is a whole spectra of freedoms and licences and openness available, for example like you mentioned, the BSD licences is far more free than the gnu/stallman license (the license the literal creator of Linux hates, and goes on rants about), does this make software licences under GNU v3 proprietary? Ubuntu comes with proprietary binarys, is it proprietary software? I think you could argue that the entire engine of Vivaldi being OS and its GUI being closed source is actaully better than Ubuntu's topend being open, and the deep dark working having closed source blobs. If you want to trademark the look and feel, I dont really care too much.

@Zephyrus0

2 жыл бұрын

I will not comment on trademark case because I haven't looked into it. > BSD license is far more free than... First of all, which flavour of BSD license. Secondly, in that sense you mean "more free", if you are talking about taking away user freedom then yes otherwise no. And Ubuntu is open source OS that comes with proprietary software, which is really bad.

@Thaleios

2 жыл бұрын

I agree. This just makes things more confusing. The words "open source" or "free software" should not be trademarked. DT, if you want to call it Free Software AS DEFINED BY RICHARD STALLMAN, then go ahead, but we had free software in the 70s and 80s. That doesn't mean the source was always available. Sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't. I always gave code out to anyone that asked for it but most people couldn't compile it if they wanted to then. I just don't see why we have to live by these particular definitions to call it free software. I'm glad you cleared it up, but I don't agree with the idea that everyone is thinking about these when they use those terms.

[repost from an older video] I'd like to hear you speak more about Lunduke's leaving of the Odysee platform. The concerns he raised seemed (from his explanation text post) extremely valid to me, and heavily weight on my will to setup shop there. Please give us more insight on this if you have it

chrome =/= chromium chrome os =/= chromium os one is proprietary using some open source code the other is fully open source and browsers based on chromium (edge, vivaldi, etc.) can and do have additional proprietary code making them no longer fully foss

Windows 11 is now free and open source software

open source doesn't mean free like redhat you can download the source code and compile it but it's not free

Any software claiming to be free with the name Chrome preceding is misleading about what it is in the free software world.

If Vivaldi markets themselves as FOSS, then they're obviously being disingenuous. The correct way to market it is with "we run a FOSS core". With that said, I see no problem with having a closed source built on top of that open core. This is one of the freedoms of such licenses. Obviously Vivaldi put a lot of thought and work in to that shell, and in a market that means that they risked something in order to make Vivaldi what it is, and thus expect to be paid for their work. I mean, do you think it's wrong to expect to be paid for your work?

The one thing Free Software doesn't have to be is free i.e. available at no monetary cost.

@fgsaramago

2 жыл бұрын

Any non-English speaker knows that ;)

vscodium

realitätsverlust is german for "lost of the sense for reality"

the problem is the name "Free Software" is really confusing. You must explain is "Free" as in "Freedom" an yada yada yada... change for the spanish word "Libre" o something else, what really encapsulated the meaning of "Free Software"

One d vs. two d's xD.

I don't get your Problem with Vivaldi. They chose a licensing model. Their licensing model is not Open Source, which is okay since it's their product, and they license it however they want. And when asked if the software is Open Source, they provide a detailed answer to clarify their licensing model. So I guess my question is, did you talk for 10min about some statement online because it doesn't specifically say "No, this is not Open Source software." or did I miss your actual problem with Vivaldi?

@charlescole645

2 жыл бұрын

Right, people being confused on what open source is or isn't is not Vivaldi's fault nor its problem, it's their problem.