words-to-avoid.pl.po

Mismatched links: 96.

Mismatched ids: 0.

#text
4  
&ldquo;<a href="#Ad-blocker">Ad-blocker</a>&rdquo; | 
 
5  
&ldquo;<a href="#Access">Access</a>&rdquo; | 
 
6  
&ldquo;<a href="#Alternative">Alternative</a>&rdquo; | 
 
7  
&ldquo;<a href="#Assets">Assets</a>&rdquo; | 
 
9  
&ldquo;<a href="#Closed">Closed</a>&rdquo; | 
 
10  
&ldquo;<a href="#CloudComputing">Cloud Computing</a>&rdquo; | 
 
12  
&ldquo;<a href="#Compensation">Compensation</a>&rdquo; | 
 
13  
&ldquo;<a href="#Consume">Consume</a>&rdquo; | 
 
14  
&ldquo;<a href="#Consumer">Consumer</a>&rdquo; | 
 
15  
&ldquo;<a href="#Content">Content</a>&rdquo; | 
 
16  
&ldquo;<a href="#CopyrightOwner">Copyright Owner</a>&rdquo; | 
 
17  
&ldquo;<a href="#CreativeCommonsLicensed">Creative Commons licensed</a>&rdquo; | 
 
19  
&ldquo;<a href="#DigitalGoods">Digital Goods</a>&rdquo; | 
 
20  
&ldquo;<a href="#DigitalLocks">Digital Locks</a>&rdquo; | 
 
22  
&ldquo;<a href="#Ecosystem">Ecosystem</a>&rdquo; | 
 
23  
&ldquo;<a href="#FLOSS">FLOSS</a>&rdquo; | 
 
25  
&ldquo;<a href="#FOSS">FOSS</a>&rdquo; | 
 
26  
&ldquo;<a href="#FreelyAvailable">Freely available</a>&rdquo; | 
 
29  
&ldquo;<a href="#Google">Google</a>&rdquo; | 
 
30  
&ldquo;<a href="#Hacker">Hacker</a>&rdquo; | 
 
32  
&ldquo;<a href="#InternetofThings">Internet of Things</a>&rdquo; | 
 
33  
&ldquo;<a href="#LAMP">LAMP system</a>&rdquo; | 
 
34  
&ldquo;<a href="#Linux">Linux system</a>&rdquo; | 
 
35  
&ldquo;<a href="#Market">Market</a>&rdquo; | 
 
36 | &ldquo;<a [-href="#Creator">Creator</a>&rdquo;-]
| {+href="#Modern">Modern</a>&rdquo;+} | 
&ldquo;<a href="#Modern">Modern</a>&rdquo; | 
&bdquo;<a href="#Creator">Twórca</a>&rdquo;&nbsp;| 
37  
&ldquo;<a href="#Monetize">Monetize</a>&rdquo; | 
 
38  
&ldquo;<a href="#MP3Player">MP3 player</a>&rdquo; | 
 
39  
&ldquo;<a href="#Open">Open</a>&rdquo; | 
 
40 | &ldquo;<a [-href="#Theft">Theft</a>&rdquo;-] {+href="#OptOut">Opt
| out</a>&rdquo;+} | 
&ldquo;<a href="#OptOut">Opt out</a>&rdquo; | 
&bdquo;<a href="#Theft">Kradzież</a>&rdquo;&nbsp;| 
41  
&ldquo;<a href="#PC">PC</a>&rdquo; | 
 
42  
&ldquo;<a href="#Photoshop">Photoshop</a>&rdquo; | 
 
44  
&ldquo;<a href="#PowerPoint">PowerPoint</a>&rdquo; | 
 
45  
&ldquo;<a href="#Product">Product</a>&rdquo; | 
 
47  
&ldquo;<a href="#RAND">RAND</a>&rdquo; | 
 
48  
&ldquo;<a href="#SaaS">SaaS</a>&rdquo; | 
 
50  
&ldquo;<a href="#SharingPersonalData">Sharing (personal data)</a>&rdquo; | 
 
51  
&ldquo;<a href="#SharingEconomy">Sharing economy</a>&rdquo; | 
 
52  
&ldquo;<a href="#Skype">Skype</a>&rdquo; | 
 
53  
&ldquo;<a href="#SoftwareIndustry">Software Industry</a>&rdquo; | 
 
54  
&ldquo;<a href="#SourceModel">Source model</a>&rdquo; | 
 
55  
&ldquo;<a href="#Terminal">Terminal</a>&rdquo; | 
 
57  
&ldquo;<a href="#TrustedComputing">Trusted Computing</a>&rdquo; | 
 
58  
&ldquo;<a href="#Vendor">Vendor</a>&rdquo; 
 
64  
The <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">criterion for free software</a> is not about who has &ldquo;access&rdquo; to the program; the four essential freedoms concern what a user that has a copy of the program is allowed to do with it. For instance, freedom 2 says that that user is free to make another copy and give or sell it to you. But no user is <em>obligated</em> to do that for you; you do not have a <em>right</em> to demand a copy of that program from any user. 
 
71  
We believe that distribution as free software is the only ethical way to make software available for others to use. The other methods, <a href="/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html">nonfree software</a> and <a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">Service as a Software Substitute</a> subjugate their users. We do not think it is good to offer users those &ldquo;alternatives&rdquo; to free software. 
 
74  
To refer to published works as &ldquo;assets,&rdquo; or &ldquo;digital assets,&rdquo; is even worse than calling them <a href="#Content">&ldquo;content&rdquo;</a>&mdash;it presumes they have no value to society except commercial value. 
 
77  
To avoid confusion, it is best to name <a href="/licenses/license-list.html"> the specific license in question</a> and avoid the vague term &ldquo;BSD-style.&rdquo; 
Żeby uniknąć zamieszania najlepiej używać właściwej nazwy konkretnej licencji i&nbsp;unikać określenia &bdquo;typu BSD&rdquo;. 
79  
Describing nonfree software as &ldquo;closed&rdquo; clearly refers to the term &ldquo;open source.&rdquo; In the free software movement, <a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html"> we do not want to be confused with the open source camp</a>, so we are careful to avoid saying things that would encourage people to lump us in with them. For instance, we avoid describing nonfree software as &ldquo;closed.&rdquo; We call it &ldquo;nonfree&rdquo; or <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware"> &ldquo;proprietary&rdquo;</a>. 
 
83  
One of the many meanings of &ldquo;cloud computing&rdquo; is storing your data in online services. In most scenarios, that is foolish because it exposes you to <a href="https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/25/hackers-spooks-cloud-antiauthoritarian-dream">surveillance</a>. 
 
84  
Another meaning (which overlaps that but is not the same thing) is <a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html"> Service as a Software Substitute</a>, which denies you control over your computing. You should never use SaaSS. 
 
87  
The <a href="https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-145/final"> NIST definition of &ldquo;cloud computing&rdquo;</a> mentions three scenarios that raise different ethical issues: Software as a Service, Platform as a Service, and Infrastructure as a Service. However, that definition does not match the common use of &ldquo;cloud computing,&rdquo; since it does not include storing data in online services. Software as a Service as defined by NIST overlaps considerably with Service as a Software Substitute, which mistreats the user, but the two concepts are not equivalent. 
 
89  
Curiously, Larry Ellison, a proprietary software developer, also <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/oracles-ellison-nails-cloud-computing/"> noted the vacuity of the term &ldquo;cloud computing.&rdquo;</a> He decided to use the term anyway because, as a proprietary software developer, he isn't motivated by the same ideals as we are. 
 
96  
To speak of &ldquo;compensation for authors&rdquo; in connection with copyright carries the assumptions that (1) copyright exists for the sake of authors and (2) whenever we read something, we take on a debt to the author which we must then repay. The first assumption is simply <a href="/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html">false</a>, and the second is outrageous. 
 
101  
What does it mean to think of works of authorship as a commodity, with the assumption that there is nothing special about any one story, article, program, or song? That is the twisted viewpoint of the owner or the accountant of a publishing company. It is no surprise that proprietary software would like you to think of the use of software as a commodity. Their twisted viewpoint comes through clearly in <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/former-google-exec-launches-sourcepoint-with-10-million-series-a-funding-2015-6">this article</a>, which also refers to publications as &ldquo;<a href="#Content">content</a>.&rdquo; 
 
102  
The narrow thinking associated with the idea that we &ldquo;consume content&rdquo; paves the way for laws such as the DMCA that forbid users to break the <a href="https://DefectiveByDesign.org/">Digital Restrictions Management</a> (DRM) facilities in digital devices. If users think what they do with these devices is &ldquo;consume,&rdquo; they may see such restrictions as natural. 
 
111  
The term &ldquo;consumer,&rdquo; when used to refer to the users of computing, is loaded with assumptions we should reject. Some come from the idea that using the program &ldquo;consumes&rdquo; the program (see <a href="#Consume">the previous entry</a>), which leads people to impose on copiable digital works the economic conclusions that were drawn about uncopiable material products. 
 
112  
In addition, describing the users of software as &ldquo;consumers&rdquo; refers to a framing in which people are limited to selecting between whatever &ldquo;products&rdquo; are available in the &ldquo;market.&rdquo; There is no room in this framing for the idea that users can <a href="/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html">directly exercise control over what a program does</a>. 
 
114  
This problem with the word &ldquo;consumer&rdquo; has been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/11/capitalism-language-raymond-williams">noted before</a>. 
 
117  
Those who use the term &ldquo;content&rdquo; are often the publishers that push for increased copyright power in the name of the authors (&ldquo;creators,&rdquo; as they say) of the works. The term &ldquo;content&rdquo; reveals their real attitude towards these works and their authors. This was also recognized by Tom Chatfield <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2016/aug/02/how-to-deal-with-trump-trolls-online">in the Guardian</a>: 
 
120  
See also <a href="https://www.salon.com/2000/06/14/love_7/">Courtney Love's open letter to Steve Case</a> and search for &ldquo;content provider&rdquo; in that page. Alas, Ms. Love is unaware that the term &ldquo;intellectual property&rdquo; is also <a href="#IntellectualProperty"> biased and confusing</a>. 
 
126  
A few decades ago, copyright holders began trying to reduce awareness of this point. In addition to citing frequently the bogus concept of <a href="#IntellectualProperty">&ldquo;intellectual property,&rdquo;</a> they also started calling themselves &ldquo;copyright owners.&rdquo; Please join us in resisting by using the traditional term &ldquo;copyright holders&rdquo; instead. 
 
136  
Locks are not necessarily oppressive or bad. You probably own several locks, and their keys or codes as well; you may find them useful or troublesome, but they don't oppress you, because you can open and close them. Likewise, we find <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/01/encryption-wont-work-if-it-has-a-back-door-only-the-good-guys-have-keys-to-">encryption</a> invaluable for protecting our digital files. That too is a kind of digital lock that you have control over. 
 
142  
Please sign up to support our <a href="https://DefectiveByDesign.org/"> campaign to abolish DRM</a>. 
 
148  
The term &ldquo;FLOSS,&rdquo; meaning &ldquo;Free/Libre and Open Source Software,&rdquo; was coined as a way to <a href="/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html">be neutral between free software and open source</a>. If neutrality is your goal, &ldquo;FLOSS&rdquo; is the best way to be neutral. But if you want to show you stand for freedom, don't use a neutral term. 
 
154  
The term &ldquo;FOSS,&rdquo; meaning &ldquo;Free and Open Source Software,&rdquo; was coined as a way to <a href="/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html">be neutral between free software and open source</a>, but it doesn't really do that. If neutrality is your goal, &ldquo;FLOSS&rdquo; is better. But if you want to show you stand for freedom, don't use a neutral term. 
 
161 | By [-forming-] {+using+} a word in [-your-] {+<a
| href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">your+} own [-language,-]
| {+language</a>,+} you show that you are really referring to freedom and
| not just parroting some mysterious foreign marketing concept. The
| reference to freedom may at first seem strange or disturbing to your
| [-countrymen,-] {+compatriots,+} but once they see that it means exactly
| what it says, they will really understand what the issue is. 
By using a word in <a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">your own language</a>, you show that you are really referring to freedom and not just parroting some mysterious foreign marketing concept. The reference to freedom may at first seem strange or disturbing to your compatriots, but once they see that it means exactly what it says, they will really understand what the issue is. 
Korzystając z&nbsp;nazwy utworzonej języku pokazujecie, że&nbsp;naprawdę odwołujecie się do&nbsp;wolności, a&nbsp;nie tylko bezmyślnie powtarzacie jakieś obce pojęcia marketingowe. Odwoływanie się do&nbsp;wolności może dla waszych rodaków na&nbsp;pierwszy rzut oka wyglądać dziwnie czy&nbsp;niepokojąco, ale&nbsp;gdy tylko dostrzegą, że&nbsp;znaczenie jest dokładnie takie, na&nbsp;jakie wskazuje słowo, wówczas naprawdę zrozumieją o co chodzi. 
165  
Please avoid using the term &ldquo;google&rdquo; as a verb, meaning to search for something on the internet. &ldquo;Google&rdquo; is just the name of one particular search engine among others. We suggest to use the term &ldquo;search the web&rdquo; or (in some contexts) just &ldquo;search.&rdquo; Try to use a search engine that respects your privacy; for instance, <a href="https://duckduckgo.com/">DuckDuckGo</a> claims not to track its users. (There is no way for outsiders to verify claims of that kind.) 
 
167  
A hacker is someone who <a href="https://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html"> enjoys playful cleverness</a>&mdash;not necessarily with computers. The programmers in the old <abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr> free software community of the 60s and 70s referred to themselves as hackers. Around 1980, journalists who discovered the hacker community mistakenly took the term to mean &ldquo;security breaker.&rdquo; 
 
174  
The hypocrisy of calling these powers &ldquo;rights&rdquo; is <a href="/philosophy/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html"> starting to make the World &ldquo;Intellectual Property&rdquo; Organization embarrassed</a>. 
 
177  
Experience shows that these products often do <a href="https://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2015/09/cory-doctorow-what-if-people-were-sensors-not-things-to-be-sensed/"> spy on their users</a>. They are also tailor-made for <a href="https://archive.ieet.org/articles/rinesi20150806.html">giving people biased advice</a>. In addition, the manufacturer can <a href="/proprietary/proprietary-sabotage.html"> sabotage the product</a> by turning off the server it depends on. 
 
182  
Linux is the name of the kernel that Linus Torvalds developed starting in 1991. The operating system in which Linux is used is basically GNU with Linux added. To call the whole system &ldquo;Linux&rdquo; is both unfair and confusing. Please call the complete system <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html"> GNU/Linux</a>, both to give the GNU Project credit and to distinguish the whole system from the kernel alone. 
 
199  
Please avoid using the term &ldquo;open&rdquo; or &ldquo;open source&rdquo; as a substitute for &ldquo;free software.&rdquo; Those terms refer to a <a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html"> different set of views</a> based on different values. The free software movement campaigns for your freedom in your computing, as a matter of justice. The open source non-movement does not campaign for anything in this way. 
 
208  
Please avoid using the term &ldquo;photoshop&rdquo; as a verb, meaning any kind of photo manipulation or image editing in general. Photoshop is just the name of one particular image editing program, which should be avoided since it is proprietary. There are plenty of free programs for editing images, such as the <a href="https://www.gimp.org/">GIMP</a>. 
 
212  
A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-banned-from-using-piracy-and-theft-terms-in-hotfile-trial-131129/">&ldquo;piracy&rdquo; and &ldquo;theft&rdquo; are smear words.</a> 
 
222  
The term &ldquo;protection&rdquo; is also used to describe malicious features. For instance, &ldquo;copy protection&rdquo; is a feature that interferes with copying. From the user's point of view, this is obstruction. So we could call that malicious feature &ldquo;copy obstruction.&rdquo; More often it is called Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)&mdash;see the <a href="https://DefectiveByDesign.org"> Defective by Design</a> campaign. 
 
230  
See <a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">Who Does That Server Really Serve?</a> for discussion of this issue. 
 
242  
Please avoid using the term &ldquo;skype&rdquo; as a verb, meaning any kind of video communication or telephony over the Internet in general. &ldquo;Skype&rdquo; is just the name of one particular proprietary program, one that <a href="/philosophy/proprietary/proprietary-surveillance.html#SpywareInSkype"> spies on its users</a>. If you want to make video and voice calls over the Internet in a way that respects both your freedom and your privacy, try one of the <a href="https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Skype_Replacement"> numerous free Skype replacements</a>. 
 
245  
The term &ldquo;industry&rdquo; is being used as propaganda by advocates of software patents. They call software development &ldquo;industry&rdquo; and then try to argue that this means it should be subject to patent monopolies. <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20071215073111/http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/" title="archived version of http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/">The European Parliament, rejecting software patents in 2003, voted to define &ldquo;industry&rdquo; as &ldquo;automated production of material goods.&rdquo;</a> 
 
252 | [-So it is pertinent to mention that-]{+Under+} the {+US+} legal
| [-system&mdash;at least in the US&mdash;<a
| href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=473&amp;invol=207">rejects
| the idea that-] {+system,+} copyright infringement is
| [-&ldquo;theft&rdquo;</a>. Copyright apologists-] {+not theft. <a
| href="https://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=473&amp;invol=207">
| Laws about theft are not applicable to copyright infringement.</a> The
| supporters of repressive copyright+} are making an appeal to
| [-authority...and-] {+authority&mdash;and+} misrepresenting what [-the-]
| authority says. 
Under the US legal system, copyright infringement is not theft. <a href="https://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=473&amp;invol=207"> Laws about theft are not applicable to copyright infringement.</a> The supporters of repressive copyright are making an appeal to authority&mdash;and misrepresenting what authority says. 
W&nbsp;związku z&nbsp;tym należy zauważyć, że&nbsp;system prawny (co najmniej w&nbsp;USA) <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=473&amp;invol=207">odrzuca ideę, jakoby złamanie praw autorskich było &bdquo;kradzieżą&rdquo;</a>. Obrońcy praw autorskich używający terminów w&nbsp;rodzaju &bdquo;skradziony&rdquo; powołują się na&nbsp;autorytet&hellip; i&nbsp;fałszywie przedstawiają jego zdanie. 
253  
To refute them, you can point to this <a href="https://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/harper-lee-kill-mockingbird-copyright"> real case</a> which shows what can properly be described as &ldquo;copyright theft.&rdquo; 
 
255  
A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-banned-from-using-piracy-and-theft-terms-in-hotfile-trial-131129/">&ldquo;piracy&rdquo; and &ldquo;theft&rdquo; are smear-words.</a> 
 
257  
<a href="/philosophy/can-you-trust.html">&ldquo;Trusted computing&rdquo;</a> is the proponents' name for a scheme to redesign computers so that application developers can trust your computer to obey them instead of you. From their point of view, it is &ldquo;trusted&rdquo;; from your point of view, it is &ldquo;treacherous.&rdquo; 
 
260 | This essay is published in <a
| href="http{+s+}://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free
| Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard M.
| Stallman</cite></a>. 
This essay is published in <a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman</cite></a>. 
Ten esej jest opublikowany w&nbsp;<a href="http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman</cite></a>. 
262  
Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>. There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>. 
Wszelkie pytania dotyczące GNU i&nbsp;FSF prosimy kierować na&nbsp;adres <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>. Inne metody kontaktu z&nbsp;FSF można znaleźć na&nbsp;stronie <a href="/contact/contact.html">kontakt</a> <br /> Informacje o niedziałających odnośnikach oraz&nbsp;inne poprawki (lub propozycje) prosimy wysyłać na&nbsp;adres <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>. 
263 || No change detected. The change might only be in amounts of spaces. 
Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article. 
Staramy się, aby&nbsp;tłumaczenia były wierne i&nbsp;wysokiej jakości, ale&nbsp;nie jesteśmy zwolnieni z&nbsp;niedoskonałości. Komentarze odnośnie tłumaczenia polskiego oraz&nbsp;zgłoszenia dotyczące chęci współpracy w&nbsp;tłumaczeniu prosimy kierować na&nbsp;adres <a href="mailto:www-pl-trans@gnu.org">www-pl-trans@gnu.org</a>. <br /> Więcej informacji na&nbsp;temat koordynacji oraz&nbsp;zgłaszania propozycji tłumaczeń artykułów znajdziecie na&nbsp;<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">stronie tłumaczeń</a>.