Open source is not an ambiguous term. FOSS stands for "free and open source software".
It extends the word you claim is ambiguous with the word "free". That word actually is ambiguous as in other cases it could mean "gratis" and not "it grants it's users freedom".
How is that better than the more established term with the very clear definition by the OSI? It's okay if you mixed these terms up. I just don't understand what you're trying to do here.
BautAufWasEuchAufbaut
joined 1 year ago
The source is literally not "open". It doesn't make sense to say that without referring to open source.
Saying the source is available to see, that makes sense though.
https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2023/the-full-source-bootstrap-building-from-source-all-the-way-down/
Is a very interesting read on that topic. It's about how to get to "full" compilers without using already existing "full" compilers.
True. I have issues comprehending text and I suck at coding since I can't read documentation well. Being bad at math is the cherry on top.
Likely not as Wikipedia is quite good at picking up stuff like this.
Where's Guix?
You do not recognize the actors in the movie.
Deborah*
Neostore may be a better client for you.
Those are some amazing resources, thank you!
Is there an easy way to check if a drive is CMR? The ones I looked at didn't mention either.
That's like incredibly less than what I have been able to find. Where exactly would they be on sale for that cheap?
Don't want to buy used since you never know when they will go south on you
Well luckily there's no arguments necessary, as we have the definition by the OSI. I actually rarely see any discussion about that, and when I do it's mostly ill-informed comment sections.