Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Perfectionism

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

> Nowhere in there is "open source" mentioned alone and carelessly like
> you depict it to be. It's always "Free software" or "Free/Libre and
> Open-Source". There is no issue with that.

May I point out the page where it is:

“Even if they are “part” of an open-source program, blobs are no less 
dangerous. That is why such occurrences are considered “tainted” open-source 
software.

Beyond privacy and security concerns, troubleshooting bugs in proprietary 
binaries (and “tainted” open-source software) is nearly impossible. Prominent 
Linux kernel developers have made an official statement to that effect.”

— http://wayback.archive.org/web/20161111023919/https://puri.sm/learn/blobs/
  (‘20161111023919’ is now, I only links to archive, because I hope that the
  live link would have lost any relevance soon)

One might suggest however, that ‘open source’ here used in the literal sense, 
not as euphemism for ‘free’ — the whole page is about sources that should be 
available to examine and says nothing about rights to use them for any purpose, 
modify and distribute.  But that only raises the question why emphasis was made 
this way.