this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
652 points (96.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43948 readers
1177 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] LufyCZ@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[โ€“] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The qeustion would rather be, why shouldn't software be free? Because there is no good reason it shouldn't be.

[โ€“] OrekiWoof@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So people who create it can afford to live?

[โ€“] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I forgot not everyone knows what free software means. Free as in freedom not free as in gratis. The other one has good, even great reasons for existing as you've said people need to pay the bills. The first one does not.

[โ€“] OrekiWoof@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This definition of "free" in the context of software is used only in specific circles. It's confusing for everyone else and another word should be used.

[โ€“] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago

libre is one word that is already popular

[โ€“] duderium@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

Perhaps if we built a world in which no one needed to worry about necessities, it would not be even excusable to charge money for commodities?