# Non-software applications of open-source concepts
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953
**Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
**Created:** [November 10, 2006, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953 "2006-11-10T23:42:34Z")
**Posts on this page:** 18
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)
#### Post date: [November 10, 2006, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/1 "2006-11-10T23:42:34Z")
I’m interested in exploring places where the concept of GNU/GPL-style open source could be applied to things other than computer software. Maybe it’s already being done out there - I think I’m right in saying it’s been done with fiction writing, but could we have open source music? Graphic art? Movies? How would they work and what else could it apply to?
---
### Author:  [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)
#### Post date: [November 10, 2006, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/2 "2006-11-10T23:55:48Z")
This site claims to have the first “open source” movie, or “open movie”. I’m not sure how many people you would be able to get to collaborate on such a project, but these people succeded.
[http://orange.blender.org/](http://orange.blender.org/)
---
### Author:  [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)
#### Post date: [November 10, 2006, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/3 "2006-11-10T23:57:48Z")
Encyclopedia writing?
Alright, that was kind of obvious.
If you think about it, the entire development of mathematics and science has followed that model.
(Anyone else amused that he used GNU and “Open Source” in the same sentence?)
---
### Author:  [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/4 "2006-11-11T00:23:25Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto]
(Anyone else amused that he used GNU and “Open Source” in the same sentence?)
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps an explanation for the slow-witted (i.e. me)
---
### Author:  [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/5 "2006-11-11T00:53:24Z")
GNU is a project of the **Free** Software Foundation. Now, the difference between “Free Software” and “Open Source Software” is mainly ideological. The terms “Free Software” (as in free from restrictions, like free speech) and “Open Source Software” are synonymous, so I’m going to go with the term “Libre Software” so I can make the point that both sides are talking about the same thing.
Free Software advocates say that software should be libre, because it is immoral to deny users of software their freedom to use and modify it as they see fit.
Open Source Software advocates say that software should be libre, because the Open Source development model produces superior software.
The FSF is particularily [prickly](http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html) about the issue. Most people don’t care too much about the distinction, because the ends are the same, even if the reasoning behind it is different.
---
### Author:  [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/6 "2006-11-11T01:16:17Z")
A few years back, the makers of Dungeons and Dragons introduced their new third edition rule set. It was a radical overhaul of D&D rules, built around what they call the d20 System, a robust rule set that easily adapts to almost any sort of scenario. They made the d20 System “open source,” so that anyone who wants to publish a rule system can use it, within certain guidelines.
---
### Author:  [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/7 "2006-11-11T01:53:53Z")
There’s a pretty good list in [the Wikipedia article on open source](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source).
---
### Author:  [@KP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KP)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/8 "2006-11-11T03:09:15Z")
Back in the Nineties, I advanced an idea of software for conducting rational political debate using a derivative of the then current software debugging tools (like the nascent CVS) developed for collaborative open source programming combined with a GUI interface derived from the concentric commentary seen in some Talmudic commentaries.
At the time I had quite an elaborate system worked out. but I don’t remember much of it now. I still think that it could eliminate a lot of the logical back-and-forth and reraising of already disproven lines of reasoning under other guises routinely seen in political (and other) controversies
I just don’t think that there would necessarily be much demand for it. People like their sometimes irrational arguments more than they like (logically) right and wrong. it’s simply more gratifying. I also think our social conventional wisdom is a lot farther from ANY objective right or wrong than I believed a decade ago. I suppose I’ve “known better” since I was a teenager, but being a philosophically minded idealist at heart, my emotional acceptance of that possibility has waxed and waned over the years. It’s gritty truth to chew
---
### Author:  [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/9 "2006-11-11T23:45:09Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto]
GNU is a project of the **Free** Software Foundation. Now, the difference between “Free Software” and “Open Source Software” is mainly ideological. The terms “Free Software” (as in free from restrictions, like free speech) and “Open Source Software” are synonymous, so I’m going to go with the term “Libre Software” so I can make the point that both sides are talking about the same thing.
Free Software advocates say that software should be libre, because it is immoral to deny users of software their freedom to use and modify it as they see fit.
Open Source Software advocates say that software should be libre, because the Open Source development model produces superior software.
The FSF is particularily [prickly](http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html) about the issue. Most people don’t care too much about the distinction, because the ends are the same, even if the reasoning behind it is different.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks, but since I didn’t even mention the term ‘free’, I’m still scratching my head and getting splinters.
---
### Author:  [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/10 "2006-11-11T23:53:55Z")
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Thanks, but since I didn’t even mention the term ‘free’, I’m still scratching my head and getting splinters.
[/QUOTE]
If I’m not mistaken, the GNU/GPL license applies to free software (in the sense that anyone’s free to modify it), not open source software. As mentioned, the distinction only matters to a very few people, but they care a lot about it.
---
### Author:  [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)
#### Post date: [November 11, 2006, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/11 "2006-11-11T23:55:35Z")
Getting back to the OP…
[QUOTE=Rysto]
If you think about it, the entire development of mathematics and science has followed that model.
[/QUOTE]
This seems to be on the right lines. Any work which is based on that done by another is acknowleged fully, and you are free to advance it provided that acknowledgement is passed on. Sounds pretty much like the GPL to me.
---
### Author:  [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)
#### Post date: [November 12, 2006, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/12 "2006-11-12T00:01:42Z")
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Thanks, but since I didn’t even mention the term ‘free’, I’m still scratching my head and getting splinters.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but you did say GNU-style Open Source. The GNU project advocates Free Software, not Open Source.
---
### Author:  [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)
#### Post date: [November 12, 2006, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/13 "2006-11-12T00:13:32Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto]
Yes, but you did say GNU-style Open Source. The GNU project advocates Free Software, not Open Source.
[/QUOTE]
Not as far as I can tell. [This](http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#TOC1) document seems to have quite a lot to say about open source, for example.
---
### Author:  [@ZipperJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZipperJJ)
#### Post date: [November 12, 2006, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/14 "2006-11-12T04:45:21Z")
Wired magazine is really big on pushing the [Creative Commons](http://creativecommons.org/) licensing scheme (I think one of their editors or writers started it or helped start it).
It’s not the same as GNU, it’s a different type of license, but it’s the same idea - “open source” music, photos and science.
---
### Author:  [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)
#### Post date: [November 12, 2006, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/15 "2006-11-12T18:33:35Z")
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Not as far as I can tell. [This](http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#TOC1) document seems to have quite a lot to say about open source, for example.
[/QUOTE]
I think that you’ve missed the distinction I tried to make earlier. Open Source Software and Free Software are essentially the same thing. It’s the motivations behind the two movements that are different.
---
### Author:  [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)
#### Post date: [November 12, 2006, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/16 "2006-11-12T23:43:27Z")
There is quite a lot of activity in open source hardware. [Open Cores.org](http://www.opencores.org/) has a whole lot of nice open source hardware chunks. Sun Microsystems has opened up the 8 core Niagara processor (offically UltraSparc T1)- you can download the RTL absolutely free. See [here.](http://www.opensparc.net/)
---
### Author:  [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)
#### Post date: [November 13, 2006, 9:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/17 "2006-11-13T09:55:01Z")
Another wikipedia item, not on the above list…["Jenny Everywhere,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Everywhere)" an “open source cartoon character.” Kinda interesting.
---
### Author:  [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)
#### Post date: [November 13, 2006, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-software-applications-of-open-source-concepts/379953/18 "2006-11-13T18:51:51Z")
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Not as far as I can tell. [This](http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#TOC1) document seems to have quite a lot to say about open source, for example.
[/QUOTE]
No, it doesn’t. It has a lot to say about free software. The word “open” doesn’t even appear in the GPL license.
Here’s another page from the [GNU website](http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html) that describes the differences between free & open source software.