this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
23 points (96.0% liked)

Linux

10710 readers
255 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Easily install your favourite browsers on Fedora Atomic Desktops, Silverblue, Kinoite, uBlue, Bazzite, Aurora, Bluefin, Secureblue etc.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lemongrab@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Your comment I was replying to said "I don't know where you are reading that Vivaldi is closed source. The source code is right here: https://vivaldi.com/source/". I was responding to that with Vivaldi's statement about how the browser is closed source.

In your original comment you illude to it being neither open or closed source, which is not true either since it is closed source. Maybe you meant source available? I didnt read anywhere saying that.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Closed source (or proprietary software) means computer programs whose source code is not published.

It's not closed source, since the source is publicly published. It's source available.

[–] Lemongrab@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Source available is closed source by the OSI definition, which is what is widely used and understood. The "closed" in closed source doesnt only refer to source visibility but also the freedoms upheld by open source.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am not aware of any definition of closed source published by OSI.

[–] Lemongrab@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Since it is source available, it isnt open source and therefore closed source.

Edit: we obviously have different definitions. I did not mean to argue over semantics. I would personally never trust a browser with proprietary code, even it is source available.

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fair enough. Yeah, I never thought of open and closed source as two exclusive options, but two of many.

I myself publish an application which isn't open source, but I publish the source code, as I believe my users have the right to know what runs on their computer, and have the freedom to audit, modify, and compile their own builds if they so wish. But I don't want someone to take and resell my application. I have yet to encounter someone calling my app closed source, but I can see how someone could.