The sourcecode and binaries produced under MIT and BSD ARE Free Software.
The difference is that others have no obligation to publish the source, nor are they prevented from adding any additional restrictions.
As long as the release refrains from doing this, it remains Freesoftware. idk where you got it your information from but its wrong.
Wrong. Since BSD does not require making the source available, you can dump a binary licensed under BSD, which is not free software.
Then those other versions are non-free, the original is still free. Stop 'pretending' to be retarded.
No. Let's say Mr. B develops an application under the MIT license. He then compiles it and adds a download for the binary on his website. Users download what you are calling free software. Since that binary is free software by your logic, how do people use their freedom to modify the software. They don't have the source code for it.
Dashchan does not support Hispachan.
Look, if you're going to be retarded, don't pick something that can be easily googled to sperg about.
Like I said: If his binary is identical to the source version that's publicly available, it's still FreeSoftware. Otherwise it isn't
Vinyl is the best one.
I never said that Mr. B made the code public.
Why is it so hard to mirror the source code together with the binary?
Amaze is a great file browser, but native support for a lot of compression formats is dodgy as fuck