free-software-for-freedom.html - en to zh_CN translation catalogue (65 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: Why &ldquo;Free Software&rdquo; is better than &ldquo;Open Source&rdquo; - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
zh_CN: 为什么&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;好于&ldquo;开源&rdquo; - GNU工程 - 自由软件基金会

note: type: Content of: <div><h2>
en: Why &ldquo;Free Software&rdquo; is better than &ldquo;Open Source&rdquo;
zh_CN: 为什么&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;好于&ldquo;开源&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: This article has been superseded by a major rewrite, <a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">&ldquo;Open Source&rdquo; misses the point of Free Software</a>, which is much better.  We keep this version for historical reasons.
zh_CN: 本文已经被其主要重写版替代，<a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">&ldquo;开源&rdquo;错失了自由软件的重点</a>，重写版要好得多。为了历史原因，我们还把它放在这里。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: While free software by any other name would give you the same freedom, it makes a big difference which name we use: different words <em>convey different ideas</em>.
zh_CN: 虽然自由软件不以自由命名，也能给你同样的自由，但是使用其他的名字会造成重大的不同：不同的词汇<em>传达不同的理念</em>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In 1998, some of the people in the free software community began using the term <a href="https://opensource.org">&ldquo;open source software&rdquo;</a> instead of <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">&ldquo;free software&rdquo;</a> to describe what they do.  The term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; quickly became associated with a different approach, a different philosophy, different values, and even a different criterion for which licenses are acceptable.  The Free Software movement and the Open Source movement are today <a href="#relationship"> separate movements</a> with different views and goals, although we can and do work together on some practical projects.
zh_CN: 1998年，自由软件社区有些人开始使用<a href="https://opensource.org/">&ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;</a>来替代<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;</a>来描述他们的所作所为。&ldquo;开源&rdquo;一词迅速关联到不同的方法、不同的哲学、不同的价值，甚至是接受何种许可证的不同标准。现在，自由软件运动与开源运动，已经是<a href="#relationship">各自独立的运动</a>，它们有不同的观点和目标，虽然两者还能一起从事实际的项目。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The fundamental difference between the two movements is in their values, their ways of looking at the world.  For the Open Source movement, the issue of whether software should be open source is a practical question, not an ethical one.  As one person put it, &ldquo;Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement.&rdquo; For the Open Source movement, nonfree software is a suboptimal solution.  For the Free Software movement, nonfree software is a social problem and free software is the solution.
zh_CN: 两个运动的根本差别在于它们的价值、它们看待世界的方法。就开源运动而言，软件是否应该开源是一个实际的问题，而不是道德诉求。正如有人指出，&ldquo;开源是一种开发的方法；自由软件是一场社会运动。&rdquo;对开源运动来说，非自由软件不是最佳答案。对自由软件运动来说，非自由软件是社会问题，而自由软件是正解。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Relationship between the Free Software movement and Open Source movement
zh_CN: 自由软件运动和开源运动的关系

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The Free Software movement and the Open Source movement are like two political camps within the free software community.
zh_CN: 自由软件运动和开源运动就像自由软件社区里的两个政治阵营。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Radical groups in the 1960s developed a reputation for factionalism: organizations split because of disagreements on details of strategy, and then treated each other as enemies.  Or at least, such is the image people have of them, whether or not it was true.
zh_CN: 20世纪60年代激进团体形成的口碑就是派系主义：组织的割裂起因于对战略细节的分歧，而后异议阵营对峙若敌。或者至少可说，无论这个是否属实，人们的印象就是这样。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The relationship between the Free Software movement and the Open Source movement is just the opposite of that picture.  We disagree on the basic principles, but agree more or less on the practical recommendations.  So we can and do work together on many specific projects.  We don't think of the Open Source movement as an enemy.  The enemy is <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware"> proprietary software</a>.
zh_CN: 自由软件运动与开源运动的关系和上述印象正好相反。我们的基本原则不同，但对实际操作的建议大致相同。所以两者能够共同成就特定的项目。我们不认为开源运动是敌人。敌人是<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">专属软件</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We are not against the Open Source movement, but we don't want to be lumped in with them.  We acknowledge that they have contributed to our community, but we created this community, and we want people to know this.  We want people to associate our achievements with our values and our philosophy, not with theirs.  We want to be heard, not obscured behind a group with different views.  To prevent people from thinking we are part of them, we take pains to avoid using the word &ldquo;open&rdquo; to describe free software, or its contrary, &ldquo;closed,&rdquo; in talking about nonfree software.
zh_CN: 我们不反对开源运动，但是我们不想和他们混为一谈。我们感谢他们对自由软件社区有贡献，但是是我们创建的社区，而我们期望人们认识到这一点。我们期待人们把我们的价值与哲学和我们的成就联系起来，而不是联想到开源的观念。我们要人们听到我们的声音，而不是被遮蔽在持有不同观点的另一群人背后。为了防止被视为是他们的一部分，我们忍痛避用&ldquo;开放的&rdquo;这个词汇来描述自由软件，也不使用&ldquo;封闭的&rdquo;这个字眼来称呼非自由软件。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: So please mention the Free Software movement when you talk about the work we have done, and the software we have developed&mdash;such as the <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a> operating system.
zh_CN: 因此，当您谈论我们的作为，以及谈论我们的软件&mdash;比如<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a>操作系统时，请说自由软件运动。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Comparing the two terms
zh_CN: 两种措辞的比较

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This rest of this article compares the two terms &ldquo;free software&rdquo; and &ldquo;open source.&rdquo; It shows why the term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; does not solve any problems, and in fact creates some.
zh_CN: 本文以下部分比较&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;和&ldquo;开源&rdquo;两种措辞。这会告诉您为何&ldquo;开源&rdquo;一词没有解决任何问题，反而制造了麻烦。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Ambiguity
zh_CN: 歧义

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The term &ldquo;free software&rdquo; has an ambiguity problem: an unintended meaning, &ldquo;Software you can get for zero price,&rdquo; fits the term just as well as the intended meaning, &ldquo;software which gives the user certain freedoms.&rdquo; We address this problem by publishing a <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html"> more precise definition of free software</a>, but this is not a perfect solution; it cannot completely eliminate the problem.  An unambiguously correct term would be better, if it didn't have other problems.
zh_CN: &ldquo;free software&rdquo;一词带有歧义，它有一个不是我们期望的解释：&ldquo;免费可得的软件&rdquo;。而我们的定义是：&ldquo;给予使用者自由的软件&rdquo;。两个解释都刚好符合这个名字。我们发布说明<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">更准确的自由软件定义</a>来澄清这个问题，但这不是一个完美的解决方案；它不能全然消除这个问题。如果能找到没有歧义、也不引起其他问题的措辞当然是比较好的。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Unfortunately, all the alternatives in English have problems of their own.  We've looked at many alternatives that people have suggested, but none is so clearly &ldquo;right&rdquo; that switching to it would be a good idea.  Every proposed replacement for &ldquo;free software&rdquo; has a similar kind of semantic problem, or worse&mdash;and this includes &ldquo;open source software.&rdquo;
zh_CN: 不幸的是，所有可用的替代英文措辞都有各自的问题。我们尝试各方人士建议的措辞，也没有找到一个明显&ldquo;正确&rdquo;的好替代。每个替代&ldquo;free software&rdquo;的提案都有类似的语义问题，甚至更差&mdash;其中包括&ldquo;opensource software（开源）&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The official definition of &ldquo;open source software,&rdquo; as published by the Open Source Initiative, is very close to our definition of free software; however, it is a little looser in some respects, and they have accepted a few licenses that we consider unacceptably restrictive of the users.  However, the obvious meaning for the expression &ldquo;open source software&rdquo; is &ldquo;You can look at the source code.&rdquo; This is a much weaker criterion than free software; it includes free software, but also some <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware"> proprietary</a> programs, including Xv, and Qt under its original license (before the QPL).
zh_CN: 由开源促进会发布的&ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;的官方定义和我们对自由软件的定义非常接近；不过，它某些方面稍显松散，而且它接受的某些许可证给用户带来限制是我们不能接受的。然而，&ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;这一表达的字面意义是&ldquo;你可以查看源代码。&rdquo;这个标准比自由软件弱太多；它包含自由软件，但是也包含一些<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">专属</a>程序，比如Xv和按照原始许可证发布的Qt（在QPL<sup><a href="#TransNote1">1</a></sup>之前的许可证）。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: That obvious meaning for &ldquo;open source&rdquo; is not the meaning that its advocates intend.  The result is that most people misunderstand what those advocates are advocating.  Here is how writer Neal Stephenson defined &ldquo;open source&rdquo;:
zh_CN: &ldquo;开源&rdquo;的字面意思已经不是倡议者原来的诉求。其结果是大多人误解了其倡导者倡导的本意。来看看作家Neal Stephenson如何定义&ldquo;开源&rdquo;：

note: type: Content of: <div><blockquote><p>
en: Linux is &ldquo;open source&rdquo; software meaning, simply, that anyone can get copies of its source code files.
zh_CN: Linux是&ldquo;开源&rdquo;软件意味着，简单说，任何人都可以获得其源代码文件的拷贝。

note: The <a href="http://da.state.ks.us/itec/TechArchPt6ver80.pdf"> state of Kansas</a> published a similar definition: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I don't think he deliberately sought to reject or dispute the &ldquo;official&rdquo; definition.  I think he simply applied the conventions of the English language to come up with a meaning for the term. The state of Kansas published a similar definition:
zh_CN: 我认为Neal Stephenson并非故意拒绝或争论开源的&ldquo;官方&rdquo;定义。我想他只是单纯地从英语文字出发，顾名思义。堪萨斯州政府也发布类似的认知：

note: type: Content of: <div><blockquote><p>
en: Make use of open-source software (OSS). OSS is software for which the source code is freely and publicly available, though the specific licensing agreements vary as to what one is allowed to do with that code.
zh_CN: 请使用开源软件（OSS）。开源软件的源代码免费且公开，尽管其对人们对其源代码可以做什么不可以做什么的许可证有多种变化。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Of course, the open source people have tried to deal with this by publishing a precise definition for the term, just as we have done for &ldquo;free software.&rdquo;
zh_CN: 当然，正如我们对&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;做的一样，开源人士也曾努力通过发布该词语的精确定义来解决问题。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: But the explanation for &ldquo;free software&rdquo; is simple&mdash;a person who has grasped the idea of &ldquo;free speech, not free beer&rdquo; will not get it wrong again.  There is no such succinct way to explain the official meaning of &ldquo;open source&rdquo; and show clearly why the natural definition is the wrong one.
zh_CN: 然而&ldquo;free software&rdquo;的解释是简单的&mdash;人们只要能理解&ldquo;言论自由，而非免费啤酒&rdquo;，就能够不再错解自由软件中&ldquo;free&rdquo;的意味。而&ldquo;开源&rdquo;却没有一个方法能够这般简洁地涵盖其正式定义并明确指出为什么其字面意义是错误的。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Fear of Freedom
zh_CN: 对自由的恐惧

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The main argument for the term &ldquo;open source software&rdquo; is that &ldquo;free software&rdquo; makes some people uneasy.  That's true: talking about freedom, about ethical issues, about responsibilities as well as convenience, is asking people to think about things they might rather ignore.  This can trigger discomfort, and some people may reject the idea for that.  It does not follow that society would be better off if we stop talking about these things.
zh_CN: &ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;的主要论点是&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;会使一些人感到不安。那是真的：谈论有关自由的话题、谈论道德伦理的议题、谈论公众义务以及个人利益，就是在促使人们思考他们宁愿忽视的一些事。这会引发情感的不悦、以及某些人士的抵制。这并不意味着如果人们不关心这些事、社会就会变得更好。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Years ago, free software developers noticed this discomfort reaction, and some started exploring an approach for avoiding it.  They figured that by keeping quiet about ethics and freedom, and talking only about the immediate practical benefits of certain free software, they might be able to &ldquo;sell&rdquo; the software more effectively to certain users, especially business.  The term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; is offered as a way of doing more of this&mdash;a way to be &ldquo;more acceptable to business.&rdquo; The views and values of the Open Source movement stem from this decision.
zh_CN: 几年前，自由软件的开发者们注意到这种不悦的反应，有人开始探究一个能免除困局的方法。他们意识到，如果对道德与自由的理念保持沉默，只讨论能够立即带来实质利益的自由软件，他们或许能更有效率地&ldquo;销售&rdquo;这些软件给客户，特别是企业界的客户。&ldquo;开源&rdquo;一词就是用来更多地朝这个方向努力&mdash;一个&ldquo;让企业界更接受&rdquo;的方式。开源运动的视野与价值就是根植在这个决定之上。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This approach has proved effective, in its own terms.  Today many people are switching to free software for purely practical reasons.  That is good, as far as it goes, but that isn't all we need to do! Attracting users to free software is not the whole job, just the first step.
zh_CN: 用他们自己的话来说，这种方法已被证实有效。今天有许多人就为纯粹实际的理由而转到自由软件。这样下去也很好，但我们谋求的并不到此为止！吸引人们接纳自由软件并不是整个工程，它只是第一步。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Sooner or later these users will be invited to switch back to proprietary software for some practical advantage.  Countless companies seek to offer such temptation, and why would users decline? Only if they have learned to <em>value the freedom</em> free software gives them, for its own sake.  It is up to us to spread this idea&mdash;and in order to do that, we have to talk about freedom.  A certain amount of the &ldquo;keep quiet&rdquo; approach to business can be useful for the community, but we must have plenty of freedom talk too.
zh_CN: 这些用户迟早会因为实用的优势而再转回到专属软件。为数庞大的软件公司正在提供此类利诱，用户为什么要拒绝呢？除非他们懂得去<em>衡量自由的价值</em>，这些自由是自由软件自身就带有的。这种理念有赖于我们的传播&mdash;为了实践它，我们必须谈论自由。有一些人用&ldquo;沉默&rdquo;的方法做生意对社区可能有益，但我们还必须得有足够多的谈论自由的声音。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: At present, we have plenty of &ldquo;keep quiet,&rdquo; but not enough freedom talk.  Most people involved with free software say little about freedom&mdash;usually because they seek to be &ldquo;more acceptable to business.&rdquo; Software distributors especially show this pattern.  Some <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a> operating system distributions add proprietary packages to the basic free system, and they invite users to consider this an advantage, rather than a step backwards from freedom.
zh_CN: 现在，我们有太多的&ldquo;沉默&rdquo;，而对自由的讨论却不够。大多数参与自由软件者很少谈论自由&mdash;通常是因为他们要寻求&ldquo;让企业界更接受&rdquo;。软件销售业者尤其倾向这种姿态。有些<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a>操作系统的发行版将专属软件添加到自由系统之中，他们鼓励用户将之视为优势，而不是告诉他们这是在背离自由。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We are failing to keep up with the influx of free software users, failing to teach people about freedom and our community as fast as they enter it.  This is why nonfree software (which Qt was when it first became popular), and partially nonfree operating system distributions, find such fertile ground.  To stop using the word &ldquo;free&rdquo; now would be a mistake; we need more, not less, talk about freedom.
zh_CN: 人数增长太快，我们没能应对好自由软件用户的涌入，没能教育好人们自由和我们社区的价值。这就是为什么非自由软件（比如最初开始流行的Qt），特别是非自由的操作系统发行版能在这片土地繁荣的原因。现在我们放弃使用&ldquo;自由&rdquo;一词会是一个错误；我们需要更多、而不是更少的关于自由的探讨。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: If those using the term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; draw more users into our community, that is a contribution, but the rest of us will have to work even harder to bring the issue of freedom to those users' attention.  We have to say, &ldquo;It's free software and it gives you freedom!&rdquo;&mdash;more and louder than ever before.
zh_CN: 如果&ldquo;开源&rdquo;一词吸引更多的用户加入我们的社区，那当然是贡献，但我们因此可能得更费力才有办法让他们把自由听入耳中。我们必须说，&ldquo;这是自由软件，它给你自由！&rdquo;&mdash;比以往更多、更大声地说。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Would a Trademark Help?
zh_CN: 商标会有帮助吗？

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The advocates of &ldquo;open source software&rdquo; tried to make it a trademark, saying this would enable them to prevent misuse.  This initiative was later dropped, the term being too descriptive to qualify as a trademark; thus, the legal status of &ldquo;open source&rdquo; is the same as that of &ldquo;free software&rdquo;: there is no <em>legal</em> constraint on using it.  I have heard reports of a number of companies' calling software packages &ldquo;open source&rdquo; even though they did not fit the official definition; I have observed some instances myself.
zh_CN: &ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;的倡议者想要让该理念转化为商标，认为那能避免该字眼遭到滥用。后来放弃初衷，因为它是个描述，不是个名称，难以通过商标的认证规则；结果，在法律上&ldquo;开源&rdquo;与&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;一样：其使用不受<em>法定</em>拘束。我听说许多软件商的产品即使不符开源的正式定义，仍然以&ldquo;开源&rdquo;之名冠称之；我也亲见几个实例。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: But would it have made a big difference to use a term that is a trademark? Not necessarily.
zh_CN: 将寻常使用的措辞转变成商标能改变事态吗？不尽然。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Companies also made announcements that give the impression that a program is &ldquo;open source software&rdquo; without explicitly saying so.  For example, one IBM announcement, about a program that did not fit the official definition, said this:
zh_CN: 厂商也曾发布意义不明确的公开声明，以便使人们对其产品萌生&ldquo;开源&rdquo;的印象。例如IBM对它的一个不符开源官方定义的产品如此声称：

note: type: Content of: <div><blockquote><p>
en: As is common in the open source community, users of the &hellip; technology will also be able to collaborate with IBM&hellip;
zh_CN: 一如开源社群......科技产品的使用者也能参与IBM的合作......

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This did not actually say that the program <em>was</em> &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; but many readers did not notice that detail.  (I should note that IBM was sincerely trying to make this program free software, and later adopted a new license which does make it free software and &ldquo;open source&rdquo;; but when that announcement was made, the program did not qualify as either one.)
zh_CN: 此声明并未明确说该程序<em>是</em>&ldquo;开源&rdquo;程序；但是许多读者却不会注意此细节。（我必须告知读者，后来IBM真诚地试着让它变成自由软件，并引入一个新许可证使它变成自由软件和&ldquo;开源&rdquo;；只不过，上述的声明发表之初，它哪个都不是。）

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: And here is how Cygnus Solutions, which was formed to be a free software company and subsequently branched out (so to speak) into proprietary software, advertised some proprietary software products:
zh_CN: 其次的案例是，Cygnus Solutions如何从原来要成为一家自由软件公司，而结果变成专属软件公司的分支，它为专属软件作如此宣传：

note: type: Content of: <div><blockquote><p>
en: Cygnus Solutions is a leader in the open source market and has just launched two products into the [GNU/]Linux marketplace.
zh_CN: Cygnus Solutions在开源市场居领导地位，并将两项产品投入[GNU/]Linux的市场。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Unlike IBM, Cygnus was not trying to make these packages free software, and the packages did not come close to qualifying.  But Cygnus didn't actually say that these are &ldquo;open source software,&rdquo; they just made use of the term to give careless readers that impression.
zh_CN: 与IBM不同的是，Cygnus Solutions没想要让它的商品变成自由软件，其性质也不倾向自由软件。但是Cygnus Solutions并未确称之为&ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;，他们使用该措辞只是要混淆视听。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: These observations suggest that a trademark would not have truly prevented the confusion that comes with the term &ldquo;open source.&rdquo;
zh_CN: 上面两例表明了商标并不能真正杜绝由&ldquo;开源&rdquo;一词引起的混淆。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Misunderstandings(?) of &ldquo;Open Source&rdquo;
zh_CN: 对&ldquo;开源&rdquo;的误解（？）

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The Open Source Definition is clear enough, and it is quite clear that the typical nonfree program does not qualify.  So you would think that &ldquo;Open Source company&rdquo; would mean one whose products are free software (or close to it), right? Alas, many companies are trying to give it a different meaning.
zh_CN: 其实，开放源码的定义够清楚了，够清楚让人看出典型非自由软件不符开源的精神。那么你是不是认为&ldquo;开放源码公司&rdquo;的产品，当然就是（或很接近是）自由软件？唉，许多公司却想赋予它不同的意思。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: At the &ldquo;Open Source Developers Day&rdquo; meeting in August 1998, several of the commercial developers invited said they intend to make only a part of their work free software (or &ldquo;open source&rdquo;).  The focus of their business is on developing proprietary add-ons (software or <a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">manuals</a>) to sell to the users of this free software.  They ask us to regard this as legitimate, as part of our community, because some of the money is donated to free software development.
zh_CN: 1998年8月，在开放源码开发者日会议上，几个受邀的商业软件商表示他们只愿意让一部分产品变成自由软件（或&ldquo;开源&rdquo;）。他们的事业重心仍在开发其他的专属附加组件（软件或<a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">手册</a>），以销售给他们的自由软件客户。他们希望我们认同此举的正当性，因为部分获利会赞助自由软件的开发。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In effect, these companies seek to gain the favorable cachet of &ldquo;open source&rdquo; for their proprietary software products&mdash;even though those are not &ldquo;open source software&rdquo;&mdash;because they have some relationship to free software or because the same company also maintains some free software.  (One company founder said quite explicitly that they would put, into the free package they support, as little of their work as the community would stand for.)
zh_CN: 实质上，他们想要为他们的专属软件赢得&ldquo;开源&rdquo;的名声&mdash;即使这些产品不是&ldquo;开源软件&rdquo;&mdash;只因为他们与自由软件有点渊源、或者这些公司也在维护一些自由软件。（某家公司的创始人相当直白地说，他们只会尽量少地为他们所支持的自由软件付出，除非社区无法忍受这种行为。）

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Over the years, many companies have contributed to free software development.  Some of these companies primarily developed nonfree software, but the two activities were separate; thus, we could ignore their nonfree products, and work with them on free software projects.  Then we could honestly thank them afterward for their free software contributions, without talking about the rest of what they did.
zh_CN: 多年以来，许多公司为自由软件的开发做出贡献。其中有些公司主要是开发非自由软件，但是两边的工作是独立的；所以，我们可以忽略其非自由的产品，而与他们合作发展自由软件项目。而后我们真诚地感谢他们对自由软件的贡献，并不必谈起他们的非自由软件事业。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We cannot do the same with these new companies, because they won't let us.  These companies actively invite the public to lump all their activities together; they want us to regard their nonfree software as favorably as we would regard a real contribution, although it is not one.  They present themselves as &ldquo;open source companies,&rdquo; hoping that we will get a warm fuzzy feeling about them, and that we will be fuzzy-minded in applying it.
zh_CN: 我们却没法子与前述的新公司采行同样合作方式，事实上是他们不允准。这些公司主动邀请公众来把各种工作混在一起；他们想让我们承认他们那些非自由软件产品也是真正的贡献，虽然实际上它们不是。他们把自己打扮成&ldquo;开源软件公司&rdquo;，以为我们将因此升起好感而在这问题上打迷糊仗。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This manipulative practice would be no less harmful if it were done using the term &ldquo;free software.&rdquo; But companies do not seem to use the term &ldquo;free software&rdquo; that way; perhaps its association with idealism makes it seem unsuitable.  The term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; opened the door for this.
zh_CN: 他们巧妙的文字游戏，如果拿来操弄&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;也一样奏效。但是他们似乎不想取用&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;这个措辞；或许是自由软件这个字眼不免令人联想起理想主义，反而变成商人不欲碰触的对象。正巧&ldquo;开源&rdquo;这个措辞，为他们打开了搬弄文字的大门。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: At a trade show in late 1998, dedicated to the operating system often referred to as &ldquo;<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">Linux</a>,&rdquo; the featured speaker was an executive from a prominent software company.  He was probably invited on account of his company's decision to &ldquo;support&rdquo; that system.  Unfortunately, their form of &ldquo;support&rdquo; consists of releasing nonfree software that works with the system&mdash;in other words, using our community as a market but not contributing to it.
zh_CN: 1998年末的商展，专为通常被称为<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">&ldquo;Linux&rdquo;</a>的操作系统而举办。其精选的演讲嘉宾是来自某著名软件公司的高管。他可能是因为该公司决定&ldquo;支持&rdquo;此操作系统而受邀。不妙的是，他们的&ldquo;支持&rdquo;包括发布支持该系统的非自由软件&mdash;换句话说，他们想来自由社区开辟市场，而不是想要有所贡献。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: He said, &ldquo;There is no way we will make our product open source, but perhaps we will make it &lsquo;internal&rsquo; open source.  If we allow our customer support staff to have access to the source code, they could fix bugs for the customers, and we could provide a better product and better service.&rdquo; (This is not an exact quote, as I did not write his words down, but it gets the gist.)
zh_CN: 他说了，&ldquo;要我们的产品开源是不可能的啦，但我们或许可以同意&ldquo;对内&rdquo;开源。假使我们允许我们的客户支持部门访问源码，他们可以为客户修复问题，我们则可以提供更好的产品与服务。&rdquo;（这不是原话，因为我没有当场笔记，但是这概括了大意。）

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: People in the audience afterward told me, &ldquo;He just doesn't get the point.&rdquo; But is that so? Which point did he not get?
zh_CN: 演说结束后，在座的某听众对我说&ldquo;他根本没提到重点。&rdquo;是吗？他还需要哪个重点？

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: He did not miss the point of the Open Source movement.  That movement does not say users should have freedom, only that allowing more people to look at the source code and help improve it makes for faster and better development.  The executive grasped that point completely; unwilling to carry out that approach in full, users included, he was considering implementing it partially, within the company.
zh_CN: 他的谈话并没有错失开源运动的重点。开源运动并没有说用户应有自由，只是说让更多的人研究源码可以使软件开发得更快更好。这位高管完全领会到这个重点；只是他不愿全盘履行开源的精神，也不想考虑用户，只是想在公司内部部分履行开源精神。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The point that he missed is the point that &ldquo;open source&rdquo; was designed not to raise: the point that users <em>deserve</em> freedom.
zh_CN: 他错失的重点是&ldquo;开源&rdquo;的初衷所要避免的：用户<em>应得的</em>自由。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Spreading the idea of freedom is a big job&mdash;it needs your help.  That's why we stick to the term &ldquo;free software&rdquo; in the GNU Project, so we can help do that job.  If you feel that freedom and community are important for their own sake&mdash;not just for the convenience they bring&mdash;please join us in using the term &ldquo;free software.&rdquo;
zh_CN: 散播自由权益的理念是艰巨的事业&mdash;它需要你的帮助。那也是我们坚持为GNU工程使用&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;这一措辞的缘故，它有助于完成这个事业。如果你感到自由权益与社区本身的重要性&mdash;不只为图它带来的便利&mdash;请加入我们一起使用&ldquo;自由软件&rdquo;这个措辞。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Notes
zh_CN: 注

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Joe Barr wrote an article called <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20010618050431/itworld.com/AppDev/350/LWD010523vcontrol4/pfindex.html"> Live and let license</a> that gives his perspective on this issue.
zh_CN: Joe Barr 曾写了一篇叫 <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20010618050431/itworld.com/AppDev/350/LWD010523vcontrol4/pfindex.html">Live and let license</a> 的文章展示自己对此问题的观点。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Lakhani and Wolf's <a href="https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-352-managing-innovation-emerging-trends-spring-2005/readings/lakhaniwolf.pdf">paper on the motivation of free software developers</a> says that a considerable fraction are motivated by the view that software should be free.  This was despite the fact that they surveyed the developers on SourceForge, a site that does not support the view that this is an ethical issue.
zh_CN: Lakhani和Wolf在<a href="https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-352-managing-innovation-emerging-trends-spring-2005/readings/lakhaniwolf.pdf">关于自由软件开发者之动机的论文</a>中说，相当一部分开发者的动机是认为软件应该是自由的。而这个结果还是基于他们的调查是针对在SourceForge上的开发者，而那是一个并不支持自由软件的道德观点的网站。

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: This essay is published in <a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman</cite></a>.
zh_CN: 本文发表于<a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>自由软件，自由社会：Richard M. Stallman选集</cite></a>。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes. type: Content of: <div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S NOTES*
zh_CN: <h3>译注</h3>
    <ol>
    <li id="TransNote1">QPL，Q Public License的简称。它是一个非copyleft的自由软件许可证，和GNU GPL不兼容。</li>
    </ol>

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
zh_CN: 请将有关自由软件基金会（FSF）&amp;GNU的一般性问题发送到<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>。也可以通过<a href="/contact/">其他联系方法</a>联系自由软件基金会(FSF)。请将无效链接，其他错误或建议发送给<a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, replace it with the translation of these two: We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard to <a hr
en: Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.
zh_CN: 我们尽最大努力来提供精准和高质量的翻译，但难免会存在错误和不足。如果您在这方面有评论或一般性的建议，请发送至 <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p><p>关于进行协调与提交翻译的更多信息参见 <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">《译者指南》</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
zh_CN: 本页面<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>授权。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_CN: <b>翻译</b>: Canyon Tseng <a href="mailto:asprots@ms21.hinet.net">&lt;asprots@ms21.hinet.net&gt;</a><br></br>
    <b>审校</b>: 刘昭宏 <a href="mailto:chliu@gnu.org">&lt;chliu@gnu.org&gt;</a><br></br>
    <b>翻译团队</b>：<a rel="team" href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn/">&lt;CTT&gt;</a>，2018，2020，2021，2023。

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_CN: 最后更新：
