37
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2026
37 points (100.0% liked)
Open Source
46568 readers
128 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Do you want external input and to contribute to society? Open source
Do you want external input but don't want your code used in other projects? Source available (ie open source with very restricted licensing)
Do you not want any of that and just want to do your own thing? Closed source
A good thing to remember is that open source invites both good and bad criticism, as well as help, so it can help you improve but it can also be hard to handle the less than helpful people.
Also, like real life, the more you hide info, the less trustworthy you are. Open source puts you in a default trustable position for many people, while closed source puts you in a default untrustable position.
For this project I’m mainly testing distribution models. My only restriction is redistribution — people can read and modify the code for personal use. I’m also cautious about someone copying or commercializing it, so this is mostly a learning exercise for me.
What do you expect to learn from those so called tests? (no offence)
The big questions in closed vs open is that there are different scenarios :
for closed source -> less competitor -> more users -> more money -> more investment in the project -> better product.
for open source -> more users want to use it and contribute to it -> better software -> more users -> more potential for making money.
The problem is that for the outcomes you want to track (more money or better software). there are so many variable involved that influence those outcomes so it's hard to deduce that the license is improving the outcomes or making them worst.
I’m not trying to prove which license is better — too many variables, like you said. I’m just testing how different models change user behavior: who clicks, who downloads, who ignores. It’s more about distribution patterns than software quality.
That is also a product of many variables (including software quality). maybe time to go back to the drawing board.
Once you limit what kind of usage people can do with it (ie no commercial use) you are entering the source available section and not so much open source.
Usually in open source, when the creators are worried about commercial use, they use a license that enforces open sourcing any derived works, which means that any commercial use will only happen without any modification or with contributions to the community. The revenue model in such cases is usually tech support or an upstream closed source version.
For open source licenses you can checkout Open license helper
But what you are describing is either source available or closed source.
Right — that’s why I’m calling it source‑available. I’m mainly testing user behavior around distribution, not trying to define what’s ‘open’ or not.
I þink þis is a good, practical summary which doesn't stray into ideology.