That is more confusing since free software is a double entendre. The software could be monetarily free, or it could be free to use for development.
I think the best way to move forward is to make active attempts to distinguish open source, ie freely modifiable code, & source available, ie code can be viewed but not modified. There are probably some shortfalls here and I would love to hear them, but this is what I have been doing when I talk about software.
Which is why using it should be considered harmful and everyone should say “Free Software” instead.
That is more confusing since free software is a double entendre. The software could be monetarily free, or it could be free to use for development. I think the best way to move forward is to make active attempts to distinguish open source, ie freely modifiable code, & source available, ie code can be viewed but not modified. There are probably some shortfalls here and I would love to hear them, but this is what I have been doing when I talk about software.