HyperWiki

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
en:philosophy:wording_phrases [2025/05/13 11:47]
throgh 		en:philosophy:wording_phrases [2025/05/13 11:56] (current)
throgh [There are no such description alike "somewhat free" or "mostly free"]
Line 164: Line 164:
 When we use the term "free software" we also clearly mean and state a position for software being clearly released under the terms of free and libre culture / software. So there are **no restrictions** how people act with the software besides surely respecting the rights of authors and creators stated. At most the four freedoms are respected. This relies not only to software but also forward to hardware. When we use the term "free software" we also clearly mean and state a position for software being clearly released under the terms of free and libre culture / software. So there are **no restrictions** how people act with the software besides surely respecting the rights of authors and creators stated. At most the four freedoms are respected. This relies not only to software but also forward to hardware.
  
-Surely hardware is a very complex area, but we await that people acting also with clear facts instead of half-truths or clearly wrong information only stated because of their convinience and imagination. Yes, hardware is not always possible to be fully freedom-oriented but the term here is **as much freedom-oriented as possible** especially. Not as the above terms proposing. Also we reject concepts like **argumentum ad populum**, which is a fallacious argument based on claiming an affirming something is good or correct because many people - the majority - think so. That is clearly wrong as the inverse argument, that something that is unpopular must be flawed, is also a form of this fallacy. Within this there are no facts approved why something is therefore correct or flawed, just the assumption about the approval of the masses.+Surely hardware is a very complex area, but we await that people acting also with clear facts instead of half-truths or clearly wrong information only stated because of their convinience and imagination. Yes, hardware is not always possible to be fully freedom-oriented but the term here is **as much freedom-oriented as possible** especially. Not as the above terms proposing. Also we reject concepts like **argumentum ad populum**, which is a fallacious argument based on claiming an affirmation for something is good or correct because many people - the majority - think so. That is clearly wrong as the inverse argument, that something that is unpopular must be flawed, is also a form of this fallacy. Within this there are no facts approved why something is therefore correct or flawed, just the assumption about the approval of the masses. With this there is also again another approval for problematic relation towards conspiracies becoming clear as the adoption of lies as "facts" is therefore done on that way: The longer lies are repeated and described as "true" the faster it is possible to mark real information and facts as flawed, while democratic positions are also marked at the same time as flawed. Something is not flawed just because people feel or / and imagine for it being that way, there are always facts and information to be named.
  
 ===== Conclusion ===== ===== Conclusion =====
  
 This article is written with the intention of clearing possible misguidance and misinterpretation. Hyperbola was, is and will be always a project oriented on democratic values. But this also means that Hyperbola is not supporting clear marked lies and propaganda resulting from shortened phrases and buzzwords. A democracy needs rules for orientation and not to grant the highest amount of egocentric will. Giving back means also to grant support and help for each other, to empower every member to overview possible risks and never stop learning. If you are same committed to those values and principles, feel welcome here at the project and in our community. If you decline the essentials written down, Hyperbola is not the place you want to engage. This may look like exclusion, but is in fact only the clear statement that anybody is asked to question own perspectives. Rules are not always perfect same way, so if there is a clear point seen we ask always for feedback and criticism. We turn against materialism and the disdain of the imagination, against lies and false weights of freedoms as well as against the devaluation of empathy and solidarity. Do not hesitate to get in touch with us and support in the development of this project. This article is written with the intention of clearing possible misguidance and misinterpretation. Hyperbola was, is and will be always a project oriented on democratic values. But this also means that Hyperbola is not supporting clear marked lies and propaganda resulting from shortened phrases and buzzwords. A democracy needs rules for orientation and not to grant the highest amount of egocentric will. Giving back means also to grant support and help for each other, to empower every member to overview possible risks and never stop learning. If you are same committed to those values and principles, feel welcome here at the project and in our community. If you decline the essentials written down, Hyperbola is not the place you want to engage. This may look like exclusion, but is in fact only the clear statement that anybody is asked to question own perspectives. Rules are not always perfect same way, so if there is a clear point seen we ask always for feedback and criticism. We turn against materialism and the disdain of the imagination, against lies and false weights of freedoms as well as against the devaluation of empathy and solidarity. Do not hesitate to get in touch with us and support in the development of this project.