X-Git-Url: https://projects.mako.cc/source/freedom_for_users-l10n/blobdiff_plain/9e512d45103fe24fb70cab15352e11d45d654ec1..448f3ab9e20d2c78c9d1ab30d02fa98a9081a02f:/hill-freedom_for_users.es.html diff --git a/hill-freedom_for_users.es.html b/hill-freedom_for_users.es.html index df8395b..caf969f 100644 --- a/hill-freedom_for_users.es.html +++ b/hill-freedom_for_users.es.html @@ -31,24 +31,32 @@ are also available.
Traducido por Laura Arjona (larjona99[at]gmail.com). Original (en Inglés), y otras traducciones disponible en http://mako.cc/writing/hill-freedom_for_users.html.
-
Published in Wealth of the Commons: A World Beyond Market and State. Edited by David Bollier and Silke Helfrich. Levellers Press, 2012. [ISBN:978-1937146146 / Website]
-Also published in German in Commons: Für eine neue Politik Jenseits von Markt und Staat. Edited by Silke Helfrich and David Bollier. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, 2011.
+
Importante: Esta traducción no está completada. Incluso aunque ya se vean párrafos enteros traducidos, probablemente algunas partes se reescriban para mejorar la redacción, en sucesivas revisiones. Si quieres colaborar, contacta con los traductores (ver arriba).
-

In 1985, Richard Stallman founded the free software movement and published a manifesto asking computer users to join him in advocating for, building, and spreading software that would guarantee its users certain liberties.[1] Stallman published a “Free Software Definition” (FSD) that enumerated essential the rights of every user in regards to their software:[2]

+
Publicado en Wealth of the Commons: A World Beyond Market and State. Editado por David Bollier y Silke Helfrich. Levellers Press, 2012. [ISBN:978-1937146146 / Sitio web]
+ +También publicado en alemán en Commons: Für eine neue Politik Jenseits von Markt und Staat. Editado por Silke Helfrich y David Bollier. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, 2011.
+ +

En 1985, Richard Stallman fundó el movimiento del software libre y publicó un manifiesto pidiendo a los usuarios de ordenadores que se unieran a él en la lucha por construir y difundir software que garantizara a sus usuarios ciertas libertades.[1] Stallman publicó una “Definición del Software Libre” (FSD, Free Software Definition) que enumeraba los derechos esenciales de cualquier usuario respecto a su software:[2]

+ +<-- CONTRASTAR CON LA TRADUCCIÓN QUE APARECE EN LA FSF O LA QUE USA EL PROPIO STALLMAN CUANDO HABLA EN ESPAÑOL -->
    -
  1. The freedom to run the program, for any purpose;
    2. -
  2. The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs;
    3. -
  3. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor;
    4. -
  4. The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits;
    5. +
  5. La libertad para usar el programa, para cualquier propósito;
    6. +
  6. La libertad para estudiar cómo funciona el programa, y adaptarlo a sus necesidades;
    7. +
  7. La libertad para redistribuir copias para poder ayudar a su vecino;
    8. +
  8. La libertad para mejorar el programa, y publicar esas mejoras, para beneficio de toda la comunidad;
-

A computer scientist, Stallman understood how programmers shaped software in ways that influenced how users of their code are able to act. Programmers might, for example, design software to spy on, work against, or create dependencies in, their users. As users’ communication, and their lives, are increasingly mediated by computers, their experience is increasingly controlled by their technology and, by extension, those who control it. If software is “free,” users can turn off exploitative features and work together to improve and control their technology. For Stallman, free software is critical to a free society.

+

Como informático, Stallman entendía cómo los programadores daban forma al software de maneras que influenciaban cómo los usuarios de su código podían actuar. Los programadors podrían, por ejemplo, diseñar software para espiar, trabajar en contra, o crear dependencias a sus usuarios. Al estar la comunicación de los usuarios y sus vidas cada vez más mediadas por ordenadores, su experiencia es cada vez más controlada por su tecnología, y por extensión, por aquellos que la controlan. Si el software es libre, los usuarios pueden desactivar las características abusivas y trabajar juntos para mejorarlo y controlar su tecnología. Para Stallman, el software libre es crítico para una sociedad libre.

+ +

Desgraciadamente, mucha gente que oyó el término "free software" (en su original inglés) pensó que la palabra "free" se refería al hecho de que el software se distribuía sin coste – una entendible fuente de confusión pues el software libre puede ser, y normalmente es, distribuido sin permiso o pago. En intentos concienzudos de aclarar esta confusión, el eslogan “free as in ‘free speech’ not as in ‘free beer’,” (libre de libertad, no como barra libre) y referencias a la distinción entre el francés libre y gratis, llegaron a convertirse en clichés en la comunidad del software libre. Una biografía de Stallman se titula "Free as in Freedom", "Libre de Libertad".[3]

+ +

A finales de los 90, un grupo de entusiastas del software libre sugirieron un nuevo término: "open source", "código abierto". Como Stallman, este grupo estaba frustrado por la ambigüedad de la palabra "free". Sin embargo, la principal preocupación del grupo del código abierto -

Unfortunately, many people who heard the term “free software” thought the word “free” referred to the fact that the software was distributed at no cost – an understandable source of confusion because free software can be, and usually is, shared without permission or payment. In concerted attempts to address this confusion, the slogan “free as in ‘free speech’ not as in ‘free beer’,” and references to the distinction between the French libre and gratis, became clichés in the free software community. A biography of Stallman is titled Free as in Freedom.[3]

-

In the late 1990s, a group of free software enthusiasts suggested a new term: open source. Like Stallman, this group was frustrated by the ambiguity of word “free.” However, the open source group’s primary concern was free software’s utility to businesses. Rather than stressing “freedom,” which they felt would be off-putting to for-profit firms, open source advocates described the technical benefits that the “openness” of free software development might bring through collaborations among large networks of users. These calls resonated with high-tech firms at the turn of the millennium when the free software GNU/Linux operating system was surging in popularity and the Apache webserver was dominating a market full of proprietary competitors. The “open source” concept gained a further boost in 1998 as Netscape publicly released the source code to its Navigator browser.

+In the late 1990s, a group of free software enthusiasts suggested a new term: open source. Like Stallman, this group was frustrated by the ambiguity of word “free.” However, the open source group’s primary concern was free software’s utility to businesses. Rather than stressing “freedom,” which they felt would be off-putting to for-profit firms, open source advocates described the technical benefits that the “openness” of free software development might bring through collaborations among large networks of users. These calls resonated with high-tech firms at the turn of the millennium when the free software GNU/Linux operating system was surging in popularity and the Apache webserver was dominating a market full of proprietary competitors. The “open source” concept gained a further boost in 1998 as Netscape publicly released the source code to its Navigator browser.

But despite rhetorical and philosophical differences, free software and open source referred to the same software, the same communities, the same licenses, and the same development practices. The Open Source Definition was a nearly verbatim copy of the Free Software Guidelines issued by the Debian free software community, which themselves were an attempt to restate Stallman’s FSD. Stallman has described the split between free software and open source as the opposite of a schism. In a schism, two religious groups worship separately due to sometimes-minor disagreements about liturgy or doctrine. In free software and open source, the two groups have articulated fundamentally different philosophies, politics, and motivations. Yet both sides continue to work together closely within the same organizations.