Finished history, did culture and started professionals + fixes

content/free-software-to-save-the-world.md

@@ -16,6 +16,12 @@ currently working at [CozyCloud](https://cozy.io), after a quick (but intense)
 internship at [Matrix.org](https://matrix.org) (as you might have guessed, both
 work on free software projects). And this world doesn't cease to amaze me.
 
+**Disclaimer**: In this post, I'll share my opinion and experience on free
+software. I'm not stating it as an absolute truth, and you're absolutely free
+to disagree with it. I'd even be glad to discuss it if that's the case, either
+on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/BrenAbolivier) or by email at
+<blog@brendanabolivier.com>.
+
 Now I guess some readers don't know what free software is, or might not understand
 some expressions I'll be using in this post (plus I'm really stubborn in my way
 to use them, ask my flatmate). So here's a quick recap. Please note that I'll be
@@ -27,13 +33,11 @@ free software.
 
 * **Free software**: The "free" in "free software" is the same one as in "freedom".
 Free software is software distributed under a *free license*, which is a license
-allowing the 4 freedoms of free software: the freedom to run the program for any
-purpose, the freedom to study how it works and adapt it to your needs, the freedom
-to redistribute it, and the freedom to improve it and publicly release your
-improvements.
+allowing the software's user to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve
+it.
 * **Open-source software**: There's a lot of discussion on the meaning of this
 expression. For some it's the same as free software, for others it's not. I call "open-source software" all software that isn't distributed a free license but
-allows the public access to its source code.
+allows the public access to its source code. Also called "OSS".
 * **FOSS**: An acronym meaning "Free and Open-Source Software".
 * **Proprietary software**: Usually refers to software that isn't free.
 <!-- Maybe add some stuff here as writing the post goes -->
@@ -45,8 +49,8 @@ researchers and curious people, were all living and working in harmony (kind of)
 Everyone was discovering the powers of a computer and sharing their discoveries
 and source codes with the others.
 
-In the early 80s, however, this
-[hacker culture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture) was in decline, as
+In the early 80s, however, this [hacker
+culture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_culture) was in decline, as
 programmers and manufacturers progressively stopped distributing the source code of
 their programs and started using copyright and restrictive software licenses.
 
@@ -73,3 +77,105 @@ free licenses, and by creating the GNU/Linux operating system (which is often
 [abbreviated](https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#why) as only "Linux"),
 built on top of the Linux kernel, and which is currently the most used operating
 system in the world.
+
+Back to the present, free software are widely used all around the world, both by
+individuals and big corporations. For instance, I'm currently writing this post
+using [Atom](https://github.com/atom/atom), while listening to some music in
+[Rhythmbox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhythmbox) or
+[VLC](https://www.videolan.org/vlc/) and browsing the Web using
+[Firefox](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/) and chatting with friends over
+[Riot](https://github.com/vector-im/riot-web). On the other side of the screen,
+most websites I usually browse are using free software as their Web server,
+operating system, sometimes even as their [content
+manager](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki). Even this blog is [powered by
+free software](https://github.com/gohugoio/hugo).
+
+## The culture of freedom
+
+"But what exactly is free software", you might ask. As I mentioned above, a
+software is free when it gives freedom to its user. More precisely, it refers
+to four kind of freedom, as stated on [the FSF website](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html.en):
+
+* The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
+* The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your
+computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition
+for this.
+* The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
+* The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3).
+By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes.
+Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
+
+On top of framing a legal setting for free software by being enforced by the
+software's license, these four freedoms also set the ethical dimension of the
+free software culture. Really close to the hacker culture, it promotes both
+transparency and respect of the software's user.
+
+And that's where free software differs from proprietary software: instead of
+forcing the user to only be a passive party to the software's life, it allows
+them to take an active part in it. The user can now know exactly what the software
+does and hack it, instead of enduring it as a closed and opaque box that only
+partly fits their needs.
+
+This ethical dimension is really important to free software communities. Most
+even use them in their project's design and management. That's how you usually
+end up using free software when looking for avoiding [mass
+surveillance](https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger) or
+[censorship](https://github.com/NInfolab/website-mirror-by-proxy), or why discussion
+around most of free software projects can be found on public mailing lists or
+IRC/Matrix/XMPP/etc. channels.
+
+This second point also creates a unique relationship between the developer of a
+free software and its users. Instead of having to go through multiple layers of
+support/management/communication, a user can get in touch directly with the
+software's developer, which usually makes the software fit better with the people
+using it.
+
+Another benefit of such a relationship is the feedback you get from your work.
+You're not getting congratulations from managers happy because you helped make
+some money come in, but you're getting thanks from users because your hard work
+allowed them access to service they didn't have before, or with better conditions.
+And both when I'm working on free software as my paid job and when I'm doing it
+on my free time, reading this kind of messages always warm my heart at a point
+I can't describe:
+
+![](/matrix-dendrite-feeback.png)
+
+And while this culture of freedom, respect and transparency towards the user can
+be a constraint to some projects, some others are built from it. Having these
+obligations towards the product's end user is essential in projects orbiting
+around privacy or security: users don't **have to** trust the developpers because
+they are told to, but users **can** trust the developpers because they see exactly
+what the software does. "We are not evil" is replaced with "We can't be evil".
+Because if the developpers drift away from their promises, users will be able to
+notice it and use something else instead, which would kill the project.
+
+## The professionals of free software
+
+One very common idea about free software is that it's a somehow unstable thing
+developed by some hippies in a basement during their free time. But although this
+might have been true at some point of history, things have changed a bit since
+then.
+
+As I mentioned earlier, free software is getting a bigger and bigger place on our
+computers or servers. This also means that the allocated ressources to the
+development of such software has also gone bigger and bigger, because the people
+doing it usually want to turn it into a paid job, and because the companies using
+it usually want to ensure the software will keep getting updates.
+
+However, this goal can seem hard to achieve. How would you make money out of
+something anyone can access and use for free?
+
+Several kind of structures and scenarios of people turning free software
+development into a paid job already exists. The most obvious case is using a
+non-profit foundation structure, which will employ people to work on free software.
+This is the case, for example, of the [Mozilla
+Foundation](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/), which develops
+[Firefox](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/) and
+[Thunderbird](https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/), or the [Wikimedia
+Foundation](https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home), developping the software
+behind [Wikipedia](https://www.wikipedia.org/). These foundation usually live off
+donations from users or corporations, and promote their software as a solution
+to an ethical issue. To continue with the previous examples Firefox is introduced
+as a solution to mass surveillance and respectful browsing on the Web, and
+the Wikimedia Foundation works, (partly) by developping their software, towards
+providing free and reliable knowledge to the world.