words-to-avoid.html - en to zh_TW translation catalogue (256 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
zh_TW: 因為已有他用或易於混淆，所以應該避免（或小心使用）的詞語 - GNU 專案 - 自由軟體基金會

note: type: Content of: <h2>
en: Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing
zh_TW: 因為已有他用或易於混淆，所以應該避免（或小心使用）的詞語

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: There are a number of words and phrases that we recommend avoiding, or avoiding in certain contexts and usages.  Some are ambiguous or misleading; others presuppose a viewpoint that we disagree with, and we hope you disagree with it too.
zh_TW: 這裡有許多我們建議避免使用，或至少是在特定環境或用法使用的詞語。有些是含糊不清或可能造成誤導；其他的則是預設了我們不同意的觀點，而我們希望你也應該不同意。

note: type: Content of: <div><blockquote><p>
en: Also note <a href="/philosophy/categories.html">Categories of Free Software</a>, <a href="/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html">Why Call It The Swindle?</a>
zh_TW: 同時也請看<a href="/philosophy/categories.html">自由與非自由軟體的類別</a>、<a href="/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html">為什麼叫它 Swindle？</a>

note: GNUN-SORT-START type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Ad-blocker">Ad-blocker</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Ad-blocker">廣告阻擋程式</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Access">Access</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Access">存取</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Alternative">Alternative</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Alternative">替代品</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Assets">Assets</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Assets">資產</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#BSD-style">BSD-style</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#BSD-style">BSD 風格</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Closed">Closed</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Closed">封閉的</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#CloudComputing">Cloud Computing</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#CloudComputing">雲端運算</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Commercial">Commercial</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Commercial">商業</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Compensation">Compensation</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Compensation">補償</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Consume">Consume</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Consume">消費</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Consumer">Consumer</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Consumer">消費者</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Content">Content</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Content">內容</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#CopyrightOwner">Copyright Owner</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#CopyrightOwner">著作權所有人</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#CreativeCommonsLicensed">Creative Commons licensed</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#CreativeCommonsLicensed">使用創用 CC 授權</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Creator">Creator</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Creator">創造者</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#DigitalGoods">Digital Goods</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#DigitalGoods">數位商品</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#DigitalLocks">Digital Locks</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#DigitalLocks">數位鎖</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#DigitalRightsManagement">Digital Rights Management</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#DigitalRightsManagement">數位版權管理</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Ecosystem">Ecosystem</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Ecosystem">生態系</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#FLOSS">FLOSS</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#FLOSS">FLOSS</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#ForFree">For free</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#ForFree">免費</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#FOSS">FOSS</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#FOSS">FOSS</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#FreelyAvailable">Freely available</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#FreelyAvailable">免費提供</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Freeware">Freeware</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Freeware">免費軟體</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#GiveAwaySoftware">Give away software</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#GiveAwaySoftware">贈送軟體</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Google">Google</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Google">Google</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Hacker">Hacker</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Hacker">駭客</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#IntellectualProperty">Intellectual property</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#IntellectualProperty">智慧財產權</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#InternetofThings">Internet of Things</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#InternetofThings">IoT</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#LAMP">LAMP system</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#LAMP">LAMP 系統</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Linux">Linux system</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Linux">Linux 系統</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Market">Market</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Market">市場</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Monetize">Monetize</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Monetize">貨幣化</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#MP3Player">MP3 player</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#MP3Player">MP3 播放器</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Open">Open</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Open">開放</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#PC">PC</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#PC">PC</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Photoshop">Photoshop</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Photoshop">Photoshop</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Piracy">Piracy</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Piracy">盜版</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#PowerPoint">PowerPoint</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#PowerPoint">PowerPoint</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Product">Product</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Product">產品</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Protection">Protection</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Protection">保護</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#RAND">RAND</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#RAND">RAND</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#SaaS">SaaS</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#SaaS">SaaS</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#SellSoftware">Sell software</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#SellSoftware">銷售軟體</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#SharingPersonalData">Sharing (personal data)</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#SharingPersonalData">共享（個人資料）</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#SharingEconomy">Sharing economy</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#SharingEconomy">共享經濟</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Skype">Skype</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Skype">Skype</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#SoftwareIndustry">Software Industry</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#SoftwareIndustry">軟體工業</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#SourceModel">Source model</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#SourceModel">原始碼模型</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM #if expr="$LANGUAGE_SUFFIX	= /^.(es)$/" TRANSLATORS: translate if this word is used often in your language to refer to mobile computers; otherwise, fill the translation with a space. GNUN-SORT-BEGIN-KEY type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Terminal">Terminal</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Terminal">終端機</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-END-KEY #endif GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Theft">Theft</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Theft">竊盜</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#TrustedComputing">Trusted Computing</a>&rdquo; |
zh_TW: 「<a href="#TrustedComputing">可信賴運算</a>」|

note: GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;<a href="#Vendor">Vendor</a>&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「<a href="#Vendor">製造商</a>」|

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Ad-blocker&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「廣告阻擋程式」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When the purpose of some program is to block advertisements, &ldquo;ad-blocker&rdquo; is a good term for it.  However, the GNU browser IceCat blocks advertisements that track the user as consequence of broader measures to prevent surveillance by web sites.  This is not an &ldquo;ad-blocker,&rdquo; this is <em>surveillance protection</em>.
zh_TW: 當某些程式的目的是阻擋廣告時，「廣告阻擋程式」就是個好的術語。不過，GNU 的瀏覽器 IceCat 阻擋了追蹤使用者的廣告，使用了更廣泛的措施阻止了網站的監控。這不是「廣告阻擋程式」，這是<em>追蹤保護</em>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Access&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「存取」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It is a common misunderstanding to think free software means that the public has &ldquo;access&rdquo; to a program.  That is not what free software means.
zh_TW: 認為自由軟體代表大眾可以「存取」程式是一種常見的誤解。這不是自由軟體的意義。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">自由軟體的標準</a>並不是誰可以「存取」程式；四大基本自由講的是允許擁有程式副本的人可以如何使用程式。舉例來說，自由之貳表示其他使用者可以自由地製作另一份副本，並將其交給或銷售給你。但是沒有使用者有<em>義務</em>為你做這件事；你沒有<em>權利</em>要求任何使用者提供程式的副本給你。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: In particular, if you write a program yourself and never offer a copy to anyone else, that program is free software albeit in a trivial way, because every user that has a copy has the four essential freedoms (since the only such user is you).
zh_TW: 特別是，如果你自己編寫了一個程式，但從未向任何人提供過副本，這個程式仍然可以是自由軟體，因為每個擁有程式副本的使用者都有四大自由（因為唯一的使用者就是你）。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: In practice, when many users have copies of a program, someone is sure to post it on the internet, giving everyone access to it.  We think people ought to do that, if the program is useful.  But that isn't a requirement of free software.
zh_TW: 實際上，當有許多使用者擁有程式的副本時，一定會有其中一個人將其發佈到網際網路上，讓每個人都有權利存取。如果這份程式有用，我們認為人們應該這麼做。但這並不是自由軟體的必要條件。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: There is one specific point in which a question of having access is directly pertinent to free software: the GNU GPL permits giving a particular user access to download a program's source code as a substitute for physically giving that user a copy of the source.  This applies to the special case in which the user already has a copy of the program in non-source form.
zh_TW: 不過還是有一個存取權利與自由軟體直接相關的問題：GNU GPL 允許特定使用者有下載程式原始碼的權利，用來代替實體提供使用者一份原始碼的副本。這適用於使用者已經有非原始碼形式的程式副本時的特殊狀況。

note: type: Content of: <blockquote><p>
en: Instead of <b>with free software, the public has access to the program</b>, we say, <b>with free software, the users have the essential freedoms</b> and <b>with free software, the users have control of what the program does for them</b>.
zh_TW: 所以並不是<b>只有自由軟體才能讓大眾存取</b>，我們會這麼說，<b>自由軟體的重點在於，使用者有四大基本自由</b>，以及<b>使用自由軟體，使用者才能控制程式要為他們做什麼事情</b>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Alternative&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「替代品」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: We don't describe free software as an &ldquo;alternative&rdquo; to proprietary, because that word presumes all the &ldquo;alternatives&rdquo; are legitimate and each additional one makes users better off.  In effect, it assumes that free software ought to coexist with software that does not respect users' freedom.
zh_TW: 我們不將自由軟體描述為專有軟體的「替代品」，因為這個詞隱含了所有「替代品」都是合法的，而且每個額外的軟體都會讓使用者更有餘裕。實際上，它假設了自由軟體應該與不尊重使用者自由的軟體共存。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 我們相信自由軟體的散佈方式才是讓軟體給其他人使用唯一道德的方式。其他方法，<a href="/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html">非自由軟體</a>與<a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">服務代替軟體</a>讓它們的使用者屈從於其淫威之下。我們並不覺得提供這些自由軟體的「替代品」有多好。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Assets&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「資產」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 將已發佈的作品稱為「資產」或「數位資產」，比叫它們<a href="#Content">「內容」</a>還糟糕，其假定了它們除了商業價值以外，對社會沒有其他價值。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;BSD-style&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「BSD 風格」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The expression &ldquo;BSD-style license&rdquo; leads to confusion because it <a href="/licenses/bsd.html">lumps together licenses that have important differences</a>.  For instance, the original BSD license with the advertising clause is incompatible with the GNU General Public License, but the revised BSD license is compatible with the GPL.
zh_TW: 「BSD 風格的授權條款」有誤導之嫌，因為其<a href="/licenses/bsd.html">將有重大差異的授權條款混為一談</a>。舉例來說，原始的 BSD 授權條款包含了廣告條款，這就與 GNU 公眾授權條款不相容，但是修訂後的 BSD 授權條款是與 GPL 相容的。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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;
zh_TW: 為了避免混淆，最好為<a href="/licenses/license-list.html">相關的特定授權條款命名</a>並避免稱之為「BSD 風格」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Closed&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「封閉的」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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>.
zh_TW: 將非自由軟體描述為「封閉的」明顯是為了與「開放原始碼」比對。在自由軟體運動中，<a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">我們並不希望與開放原始碼陣營</a>混淆，所以我們極力避免會將兩者混為一談的詞語。舉例來說，我們會避免將非自由軟體描述為「封閉的」。我們稱之為「非自由」或<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">「專有」</a>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Cloud Computing&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「雲端運算」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;cloud computing&rdquo; (or just &ldquo;cloud&rdquo;, in the context of computing) is a marketing buzzword with no coherent meaning.  It is used for a range of different activities whose only common characteristic is that they use the Internet for something beyond transmitting files.  Thus, the term spreads confusion.  If you base your thinking on it, your thinking will be confused (or, could we say, &ldquo;cloudy&rdquo;?).
zh_TW: 「雲端運算」（或僅為「雲端」，在運算環境中）是一個意義不連貫的行銷詞語。它被用於一系列不同的活動，其唯一個共同特點是使用網際網路來傳輸檔案以外的東西。因此，這個詞語只是在造成混亂。如果你的想法是以其為基礎，那麼你可能就會被混淆（或著是我們可以說「陰天」？）。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When thinking about or responding to a statement someone else has made using this term, the first step is to clarify the topic.  What scenario is the statement about? What is a good, clear term for that scenario? Once the topic is clearly formulated, coherent thought about it becomes possible.
zh_TW: 在考慮或回應其他人使用這個術語所做的陳述時，第一步是先釐清主題。這份陳述是在什麼情境下？對於那種情境，什麼才是比較好，比較清楚的術語？一旦主題明確，就可以對其進行連貫性的思考。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/25/hackers-spooks-cloud-antiauthoritarian-dream">surveillance</a>.
zh_TW: 「雲端運算」眾多涵義中的其中一個是將你的資料儲存在線上服務中。在大多數的情況下，這麼做是相當愚蠢的，因為這會讓你受到<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/25/hackers-spooks-cloud-antiauthoritarian-dream">監控</a>。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 另一個涵義（與其有重疊之處但並非完全相同）是<a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">服務替代軟體</a>，其讓你無法控制自己的電腦。所以你不應該使用 SaaSS。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Another meaning is renting a remote physical server, or virtual server.  These practices are ok under certain circumstances.
zh_TW: 還有一個涵義是租用遠端實體伺服器或虛擬伺服器。在某些情況下，這種作法是沒問題的。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Another meaning is accessing your own server from your own mobile device.  That raises no particular ethical issues.
zh_TW: 另一個涵義是從你的行動裝置存取你自己的伺服器。這並沒有特別的道德問題。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The <a href="https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-145/final"> NIST definition of "cloud computing"</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.
zh_TW: <a href="https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-145/final">NIST 對「雲端運算」的定義</a>則提到了三種有著不同道德問題的情境：軟體即服務、平臺即服務以及基礎設施即服務。不過，這幾種定義與「雲端運算」的常見意義不符合，因為其並不包含在線上服務儲存資料。NIST 所定義的軟體即服務與服務替代軟體有高度的重疊，這對使用者造成了不利的影響，但這兩個概念並不相同。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: These different computing practices don't even belong in the same discussion.  The best way to avoid the confusion the term &ldquo;cloud computing&rdquo; spreads is not to use the term &ldquo;cloud&rdquo; in connection with computing.  Talk about the scenario you mean, and call it by a specific term.
zh_TW: 這些不同的運算實踐甚至不是同一個討論的範圍。要避免混淆，最好的方式就是不要在這方面的情境下使用「雲端」這個詞。請在你談論的情境下選擇適當的術語。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Curiously, Larry Ellison, a proprietary software developer, also <a href="http://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.
zh_TW: 奇怪的是，專有軟體開發者 Larry Ellison 也<a href="http://www.cnet.com/news/oracles-ellison-nails-cloud-computing/">注意到「雲端運算」這個術語的空洞</a>。但他仍決定繼續使用者這個術語，因為以一個專有軟體開發者來說，他並沒有像我們一樣的理想。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Commercial&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「商業」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Please don't use &ldquo;commercial&rdquo; as a synonym for &ldquo;nonfree.&rdquo; That confuses two entirely different issues.
zh_TW: 請不要使用「商業」做為「非自由」的同義詞。這會混淆兩個完全不同的問題。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity.  A commercial program can be free or nonfree, depending on its manner of distribution.  Likewise, a program developed by a school or an individual can be free or nonfree, depending on its manner of distribution.  The two questions&mdash;what sort of entity developed the program and what freedom its users have&mdash;are independent.
zh_TW: 如個程式是因商業活動而開發的，那麼它就是帶有商業性質的程式。但有商業性質的程式可以是自由或非自由的，取決於其散佈方式。同樣地，學校或是個人所開發的程式也可能是自由或非自由的，同樣取決於其散佈方式。這兩個問題，也就是誰開發了程式，和使用者擁有哪些自由，是獨立的問題。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: In the first decade of the free software movement, free software packages were almost always noncommercial; the components of the GNU/Linux operating system were developed by individuals or by nonprofit organizations such as the FSF and universities.  Later, in the 1990s, free commercial software started to appear.
zh_TW: 在自由軟體運動的第一個十年，自由軟體包幾乎全部都是非商業性的；GNU/Linux 作業系統的組成元件曾由個人或如自由軟體基金會或大學鄧非營利組織所開發。後來，大約1990年代時，自由的商業軟體開始出現。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Free commercial software is a contribution to our community, so we should encourage it.  But people who think that &ldquo;commercial&rdquo; means &ldquo;nonfree&rdquo; will tend to think that the &ldquo;free commercial&rdquo; combination is self-contradictory, and dismiss the possibility.  Let's be careful not to use the word &ldquo;commercial&rdquo; in that way.
zh_TW: 自由的商業軟體是對我們社群的貢獻，所以我們應該鼓勵它。但是那些認為「商業」就是「非自由」會傾向於認定「自由商業」這個組合很荒謬，並且忽略了這種可能。所以請小心，不要以這種方式使用「商業」這個詞。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Compensation&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「補償」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 要談論與著作權相關的「給作者的補償」，會有以下的假設：(1) 著作權是為了作者而存在以及 (2) 每當我們閱讀某些內容時，我們都向作者欠了一筆我們必須償還的債務。第一個假設是<a href="/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html">假的</a>，而第二個則相當無恥。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;Compensating the rights-holders&rdquo; adds a further swindle: you're supposed to imagine that means paying the authors, and occasionally it does, but most of the time it means a subsidy for the same publishing companies that are pushing unjust laws on us.
zh_TW: 「補償權利所有人」則是更進一步的騙局：你覺得這應該是付錢給作者，或至少是偶爾，但大多數時候其代表的意義是對那些推動不公正的法律的出版公司的補貼。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Consume&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「消費」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;Consume&rdquo; refers to what we do with food: we ingest it, after which the food as such no longer exists.  By analogy, we employ the same word for other products whose use <em>uses them up</em>.  Applying it to durable goods, such as clothing or appliances, is a stretch.  Applying it to published works (programs, recordings on a disk or in a file, books on paper or in a file), whose nature is to last indefinitely and which can be run, played or read any number of times, is stretching the word so far that it snaps.  Playing a recording, or running a program, does not consume it.
zh_TW: 「消費」指的是我們對食物所做的事情：我們攝取它，然後食物就不見了。我們也把這個詞類推至<em>使用</em>其他產品。將其套用到非消耗性產品就是一種延伸。將其套用到已發佈的作品（程式、磁碟或檔案上的紀錄，還有紙本或電子書），其本質上是無限延續的，可以執行、播放或讀取任意次數，到目前為止，它是快照。播放錄音或是執行程式並不會消耗它。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Those who use &ldquo;consume&rdquo; in this context will say they don't mean it literally.  What, then, does it mean? It means to regard copies of software and other works from a narrow economistic point of view.  &ldquo;Consume&rdquo; is associated with the economics of material commodities, such as the fuel or electricity that a car uses up.  Gasoline is a commodity, and so is electricity.  Commodities are <em>fungible</em>: there is nothing special about a drop of gasoline that your car burns today versus another drop that it burned last week.
zh_TW: 在這種情況下使用「消費」這個詞的人會說他們講的並不是字面上的意思。那是什麼意思呢？它代表了從狹隘的經濟學的角度來看待軟體與其他作品的副本。「消費」與物質商品的經濟有關，如汽車消耗的燃料或電力。汽油是一種商品，電力也是。大宗商品是<em>可替代的</em>：汽車今天燃燒的一滴汽油沒有什麼特別的，而上週燃燒的也是如此。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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="http://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;
zh_TW: 將作品當成商品看待是什麼意思？是假設任何一個故事、文章、程式或是歌曲都沒有特別之處？這是出版商所有者或會計師的扭曲觀點。無怪乎專有軟體希望你把軟體當成商品。他們扭曲的觀點在<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/former-google-exec-launches-sourcepoint-with-10-million-series-a-funding-2015-6">這篇文章</a>中清楚的表達出來，該文章也將出版品稱為<a href="#Content">「內容」</a>。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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="http://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.
zh_TW: 與我們的「消費內容」相關的狹隘思維為 DMCA 等禁止使用者破解數位裝置中的<a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org/">數位限制管理</a> (DRM) 功能的法律鋪好了道路。如果使用者對認為他們對這些裝置做的事情是「消費」，他們可能就會認為這樣的限制是很自然的。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It also encourages the acceptance of &ldquo;streaming&rdquo; services, which use DRM to perversely limit listening to music, or watching video, to squeeze those activities into the assumptions of the word &ldquo;consume.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 它還激勵了「串流」服務的接受，其使用 DRM 反過來限制聽音樂，或是看影片，將這些活動壓縮到「消費」這個詞的假設中。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Why is this perverse usage spreading? Some may feel that the term sounds sophisticated, but rejecting it with cogent reasons can appear even more sophisticated.  Some want to generalize about all kinds of media, but the usual English verbs (&ldquo;read,&rdquo; &ldquo;listen to,&rdquo; &ldquo;watch&rdquo;) don't do this.  Others may be acting from business interests (their own, or their employers').  Their use of the term in prestigious forums gives the impression that it's the &ldquo;correct&rdquo; term.
zh_TW: 為什麼這種不正當的用法會蔓延？有些人可能覺得這個詞聽起來很複雜，但有理由的拒絕它可能會讓事情變得更複雜。有些人想要推廣各種媒體，但是一般的英文動詞（「讀」、「聽」、「看」）做不到這件事。其他人可能是依照商業利益（他們自己或是他們的雇主）行事。他們在著名論壇使用術語給人的印象是，它是「正確」的術語。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: To speak of &ldquo;consuming&rdquo; music, fiction, or any other artistic works is to treat them as commodities rather than as art.  Do we want to think of published works that way? Do we want to encourage the public to do so?
zh_TW: 談論「消費」音樂、小說或其他藝術作品是將它們視為商品而非藝術。我們是否想以這種方式思考已發佈的作品？你想要鼓勵大眾這麼做嗎？

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Those who answer no, please join me in shunning the term &ldquo;consume&rdquo; for this.
zh_TW: 那些回答不是的人，請加入我一起迴避「消費」一詞。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: What to use instead? You can use specific verbs such as &ldquo;read,&rdquo; &ldquo;listen to,&rdquo; &ldquo;watch&rdquo; or &ldquo;look at,&rdquo; since they help to restrain the tendency to overgeneralize.
zh_TW: 要用什麼代替？你可以使用特定的動詞，如「讀」、「聽」、「看」或「檢視」，因為他們有助於抑制過度概括的傾向。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: If you insist on generalizing, you can use the expression &ldquo;attend to,&rdquo; which requires less of a stretch than &ldquo;consume.&rdquo; For a work meant for practical use, &ldquo;use&rdquo; is best.
zh_TW: 如果你堅持要使用概括性的詞，你可以使用「參與」，這個詞的延展性不如「消費」。而對可以實際使用的作品來說，「使用」當然是最好的詞。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: See also the following entry.
zh_TW: 也請參見以下條目。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Consumer&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「消費者」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 當用於指代電腦使用者時，「消費者」一詞充滿了我們應該拒絕的假設。有些人認為使用程式會「消耗」程式（請見<a href="#Consume">前一個條目</a>），這導致人們對可複製的數位作品強加了關於無法複製的物質產品的經濟結論。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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>.
zh_TW: 此外，將軟體使用者視為「消費者」指的是一種框架，其中人們被限制在「市場」可用的「產品」中選擇。這個框架沒有使用者可以<a href="/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html">控制程式功能</a>的空間。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: To describe people who are not limited to passive use of works, we suggest terms such as &ldquo;individuals&rdquo; and &ldquo;citizens,&rdquo; rather than &ldquo;consumers.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 為了描述不是被動使用作品的人，我們建議使用如「個人」與「公民」之類的詞，而非「消費者」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: This problem with the word &ldquo;consumer&rdquo; has been <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/11/capitalism-language-raymond-williams">noted before</a>.
zh_TW: 以前就有人<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/11/capitalism-language-raymond-williams">注意</a>到「消費者」這個磁的問題了。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Content&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「內容」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all means say you are &ldquo;content,&rdquo; but using the word as a noun to describe publications and works of authorship adopts an attitude you might rather avoid: it treats them as a commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make money.  In effect, it disparages the works themselves.  If you don't agree with that attitude, you can call them &ldquo;works&rdquo; or &ldquo;publications.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 如果你想要描述一種舒適與滿足的感覺，那你可以說那是「內容」，但是使用這個詞來描述出版品與其他作品則最好避免：其將它們視為商品，目的是填補盒子並賺錢。實際上，其貶低了作品本身，你可以叫它們「作品」或「出版品」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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>:
zh_TW: 那些使用「內容」一詞的人往往是以作者的名義（他們所說的「創作者」）推動強化著作權力量的出版商。「內容」一詞已經表達了他們對這些作品與它們的作者的真實態度。<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2016/aug/02/how-to-deal-with-trump-trolls-online">衛報</a>的 Tom Chatfield 也意識到了這一點：

note: type: Content of: <blockquote><p>
en: Content itself is beside the point&mdash;as the very use of words like content suggests. The moment you start labelling every single piece of writing in the world &ldquo;content,&rdquo; you have conceded its interchangeability: its primary purpose as mere grist to the metrical mill.
zh_TW: 內容本身就是重點，使用內容這樣的詞語就表達了這一點。當你開始把世界上每一篇文章都放上了「內容」的標籤，你就已經承認了它的可互換性：其主要目的只對量產工廠有效。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: In other words, &ldquo;content&rdquo; reduces publications and writings to a sort of pap fit to be piped through the &ldquo;tubes&rdquo; of the internet.
zh_TW: 換句話說，「內容」將出版品與著作減少到一種適合透過網際網路「管道」傳輸的紙張。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: See also <a href="http://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>.
zh_TW: 另請參見 <a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/06/14/love_7/">Courtney Love 給 Steve Case 的公開信</a>並在信中搜尋 &ldquo;content provider&rdquo;（內容提供者）。唉，Love 女士並不知道「智慧財產權」一詞也有<a href="#IntellectualProperty">偏見與混淆</a>。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: However, as long as other people use the term &ldquo;content provider,&rdquo; political dissidents can well call themselves &ldquo;malcontent providers.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 不過，只要其他人使用「內容提供者」一詞，政治異議人士就可以將他們自己稱為「不滿的提供者」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;content management&rdquo; takes the prize for vacuity.  &ldquo;Content&rdquo; means &ldquo;some sort of information,&rdquo; and &ldquo;management&rdquo; in this context means &ldquo;doing something with it.&rdquo; So a &ldquo;content management system&rdquo; is a system for doing something to some sort of information.  Nearly all programs fit that description.
zh_TW: 「內容管理」一詞取決於其空泛程度。「內容」的意思是「某種資訊」，而「管理」則代表了「用它來做某些事」。因此，「內容管理系統」就是一種對資訊做某些事情的系統。幾乎所有程式都符合這種描述。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: In most cases, that term really refers to a system for updating pages on a web site.  For that, we recommend the term &ldquo;web site revision system&rdquo; (WRS).
zh_TW: 在大多數情況下，這個術語實際上是指用於更新網站頁面的系統。因此，我們建議使用「網頁修訂系統」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Copyright Owner&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「著作權所有人」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Copyright is an artificial privilege, handed out by the state to achieve a public interest and lasting a period of time &mdash; not a natural right like owning a house or a shirt.  Lawyers used to recognize this by referring to the recipient of that privilege as a &ldquo;copyright holder.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 著作權是一種人為的權利，由國家授予以實現公共利益並持續一段時間，其並非如擁有房屋或是襯衫之類的自然權利。律師過去曾將這個權利的接受者稱之為「著作權持有者」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 數十年前，著作權持有者開始嘗試嘗試降低大眾對這一點的意識。除了經常引用虛假的<a href="#IntellectualProperty">「智慧財產權」</a>概念，他們也開始叫他們自己是「著作權所有者」。請加入我們，使用傳統的術語「著作權持有者」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Creative Commons licensed&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「使用創用 CC 授權」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The most important licensing characteristic of a work is whether it is free.  Creative Commons publishes seven licenses; three are free (CC BY, CC BY-SA and CC0) and the rest are nonfree.  Thus, to describe a work as &ldquo;Creative Commons licensed&rdquo; fails to say whether it is free, and suggests that the question is not important.  The statement may be accurate, but the omission is harmful.
zh_TW: 作品最重要的授權特徵就是其是否自由。創用 CC 發佈了七種授權條款；其中有三種是自由的（CC BY、CC BY-SA 與 CC0），而剩下的則是非自由的。因此，要將作品描述為「使用創用 CC 授權」並未說明其是否自由，並暗示這個問題並不重要。聲明可能是準確的，但遺漏則可能有害。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: To encourage people to pay attention to the most important distinction, always specify <em>which</em> Creative Commons license is used, as in &ldquo;licensed under CC BY-SA.&rdquo; If you don't know which license a certain work uses, find out and then make your statement.
zh_TW: 為了鼓勵人們關注最重要的區別，請指定使用的是<em>哪一個</em>創用 CC 授權條款。如「使用 CC BY-SA 授權」。如果你不知道某個作品使用哪個授權條款，請找出來然後製作你的陳述。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Creator&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「創造者」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;creator&rdquo; as applied to authors implicitly compares them to a deity (&ldquo;the creator&rdquo;).  The term is used by publishers to elevate authors' moral standing above that of ordinary people in order to justify giving them increased copyright power, which the publishers can then exercise in their name.  We recommend saying &ldquo;author&rdquo; instead.  However, in many cases &ldquo;copyright holder&rdquo; is what you really mean.  These two terms are not equivalent: often the copyright holder is not the author.
zh_TW: 用於作者的「創造者」(creator) 一詞隱含將其與神（「造物者」，The Creator）比較。出版商使用這個詞來提升作者的道德地位，超越普通人的道德地位，以證明給予他們更高的著作權權力。然後出版商就可以以他們的名義行使這些權力。我們建議使用「作者」代替。但大多數時候他們真正的意思是「著作權持有者」。而這兩個詞的意思並不相同：著作權持有者通常不是作者。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Digital Goods&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「數位商品」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;digital goods,&rdquo; as applied to copies of works of authorship, identifies them with physical goods&mdash;which cannot be copied, and which therefore have to be manufactured in quantity and sold.  This metaphor encourages people to judge issues about software or other digital works based on their views and intuitions about physical goods.  It also frames issues in terms of economics, whose shallow and limited values don't include freedom and community.
zh_TW: 適用於作者身份複製品的「數位商品」一詞，亦即將其認為與實體商品相同，但實體商品無法被複製，所以它們必須大量製造並出售。這個比喻鼓勵人們根據他們對實體商品的看法與直覺來判斷軟體或其他數位作品的問題。它也描述了經濟學方面的問題，而其淺薄與有限的價值並不包含自由與社群。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Digital Locks&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「數位鎖」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;Digital locks&rdquo; is used to refer to Digital Restrictions Management by some who criticize it.  The problem with this term is that it fails to do justice to the badness of DRM.  The people who adopted that term did not think it through.
zh_TW: 「數位鎖」是由一些批評數位限制管理的人所使用。這個詞的問題在於它無法公正地解決 DRM 的不良問題。而使用這個詞的人並沒有考慮到這一點。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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="http://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.
zh_TW: 鎖並不一定是具壓迫性或是不好的。你可能擁有許多個鎖，以及它們的鑰匙或密碼；你可能會發現它們有點用處或相當麻煩，但它們並不會壓迫你，因為可以開啟與關閉它們。同樣地，我們發現<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/01/encryption-wont-work-if-it-has-a-back-door-only-the-good-guys-have-keys-to-">加密</a>對於保護我們的數位檔案非常有用。這也是一種你可以控制的數位鎖。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: DRM is like a lock placed on you by someone else, who refuses to give you the key&mdash;in other words, like <em>handcuffs</em>.  Therefore, the proper metaphor for DRM is &ldquo;digital handcuffs,&rdquo; not &ldquo;digital locks.&rdquo;
zh_TW: DRM 就像一個被其他人放在你身上的鎖，而且他們拒絕給你鑰匙，換句話說，就是像<em>手銬</em>那樣。因此，DRM 正確的比喻應該是「數位手銬」而非「數位鎖」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A number of opposition campaigns have chosen the unwise term &ldquo;digital locks&rdquo;; to get things back on the right track, we must firmly insist on correcting this mistake.  The FSF can support a campaign that opposes &ldquo;digital locks&rdquo; if we agree on the substance; however, when we state our support, we conspicuously replace the term with &ldquo;digital handcuffs&rdquo; and say why.
zh_TW: 某些反對運動選擇了「數位鎖」這個不明智的詞；為了讓事情回到正軌，我們必須堅定地糾正這個錯誤。如果我們就實質內容達成共識，自由軟體基金會可以支持反對「數位鎖」的運動；不過當我們表達我們的支持時，我們會明確地使用「數位手銬」取代這個詞，並解釋為什麼。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Digital Rights Management&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「數位版權管理」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;Digital Rights Management&rdquo; (abbreviated &ldquo;DRM&rdquo;) refers to technical mechanisms designed to impose restrictions on computer users.  The use of the word &ldquo;rights&rdquo; in this term is propaganda, designed to lead you unawares into seeing the issue from the viewpoint of the few that impose the restrictions, and ignoring that of the general public on whom these restrictions are imposed.
zh_TW: 「數位版權管理」（Digital Rights Management，縮寫為 DRM）是指主要在對電腦使用者施加限制的技術機制。在這個詞裡使用「權利」主要是為了宣傳，用意是引導你不知不覺地從強加限制的少數人的角度看問題，而忽略了被強加這些限制的公眾的問題。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Good alternatives include &ldquo;Digital Restrictions Management,&rdquo; and &ldquo;digital handcuffs.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 比較好的選擇包含了「數位限制管理」與「數位手銬」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Please sign up to support our <a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org/"> campaign to abolish DRM</a>.
zh_TW: 請註冊以支援我們<a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org/"> 廢除 DRM 的運動</a>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Ecosystem&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「生態系」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It is inadvisable to describe the free software community, or any human community, as an &ldquo;ecosystem,&rdquo; because that word implies the absence of ethical judgment.
zh_TW: 將自由軟體社群或任何人類社群描述為「生態系」是不明智的，因為這個詞缺乏道德判斷。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;ecosystem&rdquo; implicitly suggests an attitude of nonjudgmental observation: don't ask how what <em>should</em> happen, just study and understand what <em>does</em> happen.  In an ecosystem, some organisms consume other organisms.  In ecology, we do not ask whether it is right for an owl to eat a mouse or for a mouse to eat a seed, we only observe that they do so.  Species' populations grow or shrink according to the conditions; this is neither right nor wrong, merely an ecological phenomenon, even if it goes so far as the extinction of a species.
zh_TW: 「生態系」一詞暗示了一種非判斷性的態度：不要問<em>應該</em>如何發生，只研究並理解發生了<em>什麼</em>。在生態系中，一些生物捕食其他生物。在生態學中，我們不會問貓頭鷹吃老鼠或老鼠吃種子是否正確，我們只是觀察它們是這樣做的。物種群體根據條件成長或縮小；這沒有對錯，只是一種生態現象，即便是一個物種的滅絕也一樣。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: By contrast, beings that adopt an ethical stance towards their surroundings can decide to preserve things that, without their intervention, might vanish&mdash;such as civil society, democracy, human rights, peace, public health, a stable climate, clean air and water, endangered species, traditional arts&hellip;and computer users' freedom.
zh_TW: 相較之下，那些對周遭環境採取道德立場的人可以決定保留那些在沒有他們干預的情況下可能會消失的事物，如公民社會、民主、人權、和平、公共衛生、穩定的氣候、乾淨的空氣與水、瀕臨滅絕的物種、傳統藝術……與電腦使用者的自由。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;FLOSS&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「FLOSS」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software)一詞意指自由與開放原始碼軟體，被創造為一種在<a href="/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html">自由軟體與開放原始碼</a>保持中立的方式。如果你的目標是中立，那使用 FLOSS 這個詞是保持中立的最佳方式。但如果你想要表達對自由的支持，就不要使用中立的詞。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;For free&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「免費」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: If you want to say that a program is free software, please don't say that it is available &ldquo;for free.&rdquo; That term specifically means &ldquo;for zero price.&rdquo; Free software is a matter of freedom, not price.
zh_TW: 如果你想要說一個程式是自由軟體，請不要說它是「免費」的。這個詞特指「價格為零」。自由軟體關乎自由，而與自由無關。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Free software copies are often available for free&mdash;for example, by downloading via FTP.  But free software copies are also available for a price on CD-ROMs; meanwhile, proprietary software copies are occasionally available for free in promotions, and some proprietary packages are normally available at no charge to certain users.
zh_TW: 自由軟體的副本通常是免費提供的，例如透過 FTP 下載。但自由軟體也可以透過收費的 CD-ROM 提供；同時，專有軟體的副本有時可以在促銷中免費取得，而某些專有軟體則是原本就可以免費提供給特定使用者。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: To avoid confusion, you can say that the program is available &ldquo;as free software.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 為了避免混淆，你可以說程式可以「作為自由軟體」使用。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;FOSS&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「FOSS」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: FOSS (Free and Open Source Software)代表自由與開放原始碼軟體，被創造為一種在<a href="/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html">自由軟體與開放原始碼間保持中立的方式</a>，但它並未真的做到這一點。如果你想要保持中立，FLOSS 是比較好的選擇。但如果你想要表達對自由的支持，就不要使用中立的詞。

note: type: Content of: <blockquote><p>
en: Instead of <b>FOSS</b>, we say, <b>free software</b> or <b>free (libre) software</b>.
zh_TW: 我們會用<b>自由軟體</a>來代替<b>FOSS</b>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Freely available&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「免費提供」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Don't use &ldquo;freely available software&rdquo; as a synonym for &ldquo;free software.&rdquo; The terms are not equivalent.  Software is &ldquo;freely available&rdquo; if anyone can easily get a copy.  &ldquo;Free software&rdquo; is defined in terms of the freedom of users that have a copy of it.  These are answers to different questions.
zh_TW: 不要使用「免費軟體」作為「自由軟體」的同義詞。這些術語並不相同。如果任何人都可以很簡單地取得副本，那是「免費軟體」。「自由軟體」則是根據任何擁有副本的使用者的自由來定義的。這些是不同問題的答案。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Freeware&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「免費軟體」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Please don't use the term &ldquo;freeware&rdquo; as a synonym for &ldquo;free software.&rdquo; The term &ldquo;freeware&rdquo; was used often in the 1980s for programs released only as executables, with source code not available.  Today it has no particular agreed-on definition.
zh_TW: 請不要把「免費軟體」當作「自由軟體」的同義詞。「免費軟體」通常用於1980年代，僅釋出可執行檔，但不提供原始碼的程式。但在今日，它並沒有具共識的意義。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When using languages other than English, please avoid borrowing English terms such as &ldquo;free software&rdquo; or &ldquo;freeware.&rdquo; It is better to translate the term &ldquo;free software&rdquo; into <a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">your language</a>.
zh_TW: 使用英語以外的語言時，最好避免借用英語的術語，如 &ldquo;free software&rdquo; 或&ldquo;freeware&rdquo;。最好將 &ldquo;free software&rdquo; 翻譯成<a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">你所熟知的語言</a>。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 透過使用<a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">你自己的語言</a>，就可以顯示你實際上指的真的是自由，而非只是一些神祕的外國行銷概念。提及自由可能一開始會讓你的同胞感到很奇怪或不安，但只要他們發現這實際上是在說什麼，他們就會明白這個問題的本質。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Give away software&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「贈送軟體」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It's misleading to use the term &ldquo;give away&rdquo; to mean &ldquo;distribute a program as free software.&rdquo; This locution has the same problem as &ldquo;for free&rdquo;: it implies the issue is price, not freedom.  One way to avoid the confusion is to say &ldquo;release as free software.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 使用「贈送」來代表「以自由軟體的形式散佈程式」相當具誤導性。這種解決方案與「免費」有一樣的問題：它代表了問題在於價格，而非自由。避免混淆的其中一種方式是說「作為自由軟體釋出」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Google&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「Google」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.)
zh_TW: 請避免將「Google」作為動詞，這通常指的是在網際網路上搜尋某些東西。「Google」只是其中一個搜尋引擎的名字。我們建議使用「在網路上搜尋」或（在某些情況下）「搜尋」。請試著使用尊重你的隱私的搜尋引擎；例如 <a href="https://duckduckgo.com/">DuckDuckGo</a> 聲稱其不追蹤使用者。（不過外人並沒有辦法證實。）

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Hacker&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「駭客」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A hacker is someone who <a href="http://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;
zh_TW: 駭客是<a href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html">喜歡俏皮聰明</a>的人，不只有電腦。1960與1970年代的 <abbr title="麻省理工學院">MIT</abbr> 自由軟體社群程式設計師將自己稱為駭客。但在1980年代，發現駭客社群的記者錯誤地將這個詞認為是「安全破壞者」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Please don't spread this mistake.  People who break security are &ldquo;crackers.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 請不要散佈這種錯誤。破壞安全的人是「潰客」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Intellectual property&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「智慧財產權」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as &ldquo;intellectual property&rdquo;&mdash;a term also applied to patents, trademarks, and other more obscure areas of law.  These laws have so little in common, and differ so much, that it is ill-advised to generalize about them.  It is best to talk specifically about &ldquo;copyright,&rdquo; or about &ldquo;patents,&rdquo; or about &ldquo;trademarks.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 出版商與律師喜歡將著作權描述為「智慧財產權」，這個詞也常用於專利、商標與其他更模糊的法律領域。這些法律的共同點很少，差別很大，所以不宜概括它們。最好指明「著作權」、「專利」或「商標」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;intellectual property&rdquo; carries a hidden assumption&mdash;that the way to think about all these disparate issues is based on an analogy with physical objects, and our conception of them as physical property.
zh_TW: 「智慧財產權」一詞帶有隱藏的假設，思考這些問題是以與物理現象的類比為基礎，以及我們將其視為物理屬性的概念。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial difference between material objects and information: information can be copied and shared almost effortlessly, while material objects can't be.
zh_TW: 在複製的時候，這種類比忽略了實體物件與資訊的差別：資訊可以被輕鬆的複製與分享，但實體物件則無法。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: To avoid spreading unnecessary bias and confusion, it is best to adopt a firm policy <a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"> not to speak or even think in terms of &ldquo;intellectual property&rdquo;</a>.
zh_TW: 為了避免傳播不必要的偏見與混淆，最好堅定地說不，<a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html">不要說也不要考慮「智慧財產權」</a>這個詞。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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>.
zh_TW: 將這些權力稱為「權利」正<a href="/philosophy/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html">開始讓世界「智慧財產權」組織感到尷尬</a>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Internet of Things&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「IoT」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When companies decided to make computerized appliances that would connect over the internet to the manufacturer's server, and therefore could easily snoop on their users, they realized that this would not sound very nice.  So they came up with a cute, appealing name: the &ldquo;Internet of Things.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 當公司決定製造透過網際網路連線到製造商伺服器的電腦化裝置，因此可以輕鬆地窺探他們的使用者時，他們想到這不太好聽。所以他們提出了一個可愛且吸引人的名字：「IoT」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Experience shows that these products often do <a href="http://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="http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/rinesi20150806">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.
zh_TW: 根據先前的經驗，這些產品通常會<a href="http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2015/09/cory-doctorow-what-if-people-were-sensors-not-things-to-be-sensed/">窺探它們的使用者</a>。它們也提供人們量身訂作<a href="http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/rinesi20150806">（有偏見）</a>的建議。此外，製造商還可以透過其依賴的伺服器來<a href="/proprietary/proprietary-sabotage.html">破壞產品</a>。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: We call them the &ldquo;Internet of Stings.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 我們稱呼為「Internet of Stings（螫刺之網）」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;LAMP system&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「LAMP 系統」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: &ldquo;LAMP&rdquo; stands for &ldquo;Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP&rdquo;&mdash;a common combination of software to use on a web server, except that &ldquo;Linux&rdquo; in this context really refers to the GNU/Linux system.  So instead of &ldquo;LAMP&rdquo; it should be &ldquo;GLAMP&rdquo;: &ldquo;GNU, Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「LAMP」代表了「Linux、Apache、MySQL 與 PHP」，這是用於網路伺服器上的常見組合，除了在這種情況下，Linux 是指 GNU/Linux。所以不是「LAMP」而應該是「GLAMP」：「GNU、Linux、Apache、MySQL 與 PHP」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Linux system&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「Linux 系統」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: Linux 是林納斯·托瓦茲從1991年開始開發的核心名稱。使用 Linux 的作業系統基本上是加了 Linux 的 GNU。把整個系統稱為「Linux」既不公平也令人困惑。請將完整的系統稱為<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html"> GNU/Linux</a>，以讓 GNU 專案取得應有的榮譽，並將整個系統與核心區分開來。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Market&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「市場」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the software users in general, as a &ldquo;market.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 將自由軟體使用者或一般軟體使用者稱為「市場」具有相當的誤導性。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: This is not to say there is no room for markets in the free software community.  If you have a free software support business, then you have clients, and you trade with them in a market.  As long as you respect their freedom, we wish you success in your market.
zh_TW: 這並不是說自由軟體社群沒有市場空間。如果你有自由軟體支援業務，那你就會有客戶，並在市場中與他們交易。只要你尊重自由，我們祝你在市場上取得成功。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: But the free software movement is a social movement, not a business, and the success it aims for is not a market success.  We are trying to serve the public by giving it freedom&mdash;not competing to draw business away from a rival.  To equate this campaign for freedom to a business's efforts for mere success is to deny the importance of freedom and legitimize proprietary software.
zh_TW: 但自由軟體運動是社會運動而非商業運動，其所取得的成功並非市場上的成功。我們試圖給予大眾自由來服務大眾，而不是從競爭對手那邊吸引業務。僅將這種自由運動視為商業上成功的努力就是否認自由的重要性，並使專有軟體合法化。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Monetize&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「貨幣化」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The proper definition of &ldquo;monetize&rdquo; is &ldquo;to use something as currency.&rdquo; For instance, human societies have monetized gold, silver, copper, printed paper, special kinds of seashells, and large rocks.  However, we now see a tendency to use the word in another way, meaning &ldquo;to use something as a basis for profit&rdquo;.
zh_TW: 「貨幣化」的正確定義是「使用某種東西作為貨幣」。舉例來說，人類社會將金、銀、銅、印刷紙張、特殊種類的貝殼與大石頭貨幣化。但是現在我們會看到另一種使用這個詞的傾向，意思是「將某種東西作為利潤的基礎」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: That usage casts the profit as primary, and the thing used to get the profit as secondary.  That attitude applied to a software project is objectionable because it would lead the developers to make the program proprietary, if they conclude that making it free/libre isn't sufficiently profitable.
zh_TW: 這種用法把利潤當作第一優先，而把如何取得利潤看成次要的東西。如此對軟體專案的態度相當令人反感，因為這會導致開發者只想讓程式變成專有軟體，如果他們覺得讓其變成自由軟體不夠有利可圖的話就會這樣。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A productive and ethical business can make money, but if it subordinates all else to profit, it is not likely to remain ethical.
zh_TW: 一個富生產力且道德的企業可以賺錢，但如果他們認為萬般皆下品，唯有利潤高的話，那就不可能再保持道德。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;MP3 Player&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「MP3 播放器」

note: The MP3 patents will reportedly expire by 2018. type: Content of: <p>
en: In the late 1990s it became feasible to make portable, solid-state digital audio players.  Most players supported the patented MP3 codec, and that is still the case.  Some players also supported the patent-free audio codecs Ogg Vorbis and FLAC, and a few couldn't play MP3-encoded files at all because their developers needed to protect themselves from the patents on MP3 format.
zh_TW: 在1990年代晚期，製造可攜式固態數位音訊播放器不再有技術問題。大多數的播放器都支援有專利的 MP3 編解碼器，而且到目前為止還是如此。某些播放器也支援無專利的音訊播放器 Ogg Vorbis 與 FLAC，而某些播放器則根本無法 MP3 編碼檔案，因為它們的開發者需要保護自己不受 MP3 格式的專利侵害。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Using the term &ldquo;MP3 players&rdquo; for audio players in general has the effect of promoting the MP3 format and discouraging the other formats (some of which are technically superior as well).  Even though the MP3 patents have expired, it is still undesirable to do that.
zh_TW: 為音訊播放器使用「MP3 播放器」一詞通常有推廣 MP3 格式並阻止其他格式（而且有些格式更好用）的效果。即便 MP3 專利已經過期，仍然不建議這樣做。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: We suggest the term &ldquo;digital audio player,&rdquo; or simply &ldquo;audio player&rdquo; when that's clear enough, instead of &ldquo;MP3 player.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 我們建議使用「數位音訊播放器」，或簡稱為「音訊播放器」，而不是「MP3 播放器」，這樣比較清楚。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Open&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「開放」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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.
zh_TW: 請避免使用「開放」或「開放原始碼」等詞語來代替「自由軟體」。這些詞有著<a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">不同的價值觀</a>。自由軟體運動關乎正義，可以為你的電腦爭取自由。而開放原始碼不是運動，更無法爭取些什麼。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When referring to the open source views, it's correct to use that name, but please do not use that term when talking about us, our software, or our views&mdash;that leads people to suppose our views are similar to theirs.
zh_TW: 提到開放原始碼觀點時，使用這個名稱是正確的，但請不要在談論我們的、我們的軟體或是我們的觀點的時候使用這個詞，這會讓人們誤以為雙方觀點相似。

note: type: Content of: <blockquote><p>
en: Instead of <b>open source</b>, we say, <b>free software</b> or <b>free (libre) software</b>.
zh_TW: 我們不會說<b>開放原始碼</a>，而是<b>自由軟體</b>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;PC&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「PC」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It's OK to use the abbreviation &ldquo;PC&rdquo; to refer to a certain kind of computer hardware, but please don't use it with the implication that the computer is running Microsoft Windows.  If you install GNU/Linux on the same computer, it is still a PC.
zh_TW: 可以使用「PC」來代指某種電腦硬體，但是請不要將其用於指稱執行 Microsoft Windows 的電腦。如果你在相同的電腦上安裝了 GNU/Linux，它還是 PC。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;WC&rdquo; has been suggested for a computer running Windows.
zh_TW: 建議為執行 Windows 的電腦使用「WC」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Photoshop&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「Photoshop」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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="/software/gimp">GIMP</a>.
zh_TW: 請避免將「Photoshop」做為動詞使用，這通常是指進行任何類型的照片處理或影像編輯。Photoshop 只是一個特定的影像處理程式的名字，因為它是專有軟體，所以應該避免使用它。有很多用於影像編輯的自由軟體，如 <a href="/software/gimp">GIMP</a>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Piracy&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「盜版」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Publishers often refer to copying they don't approve of as &ldquo;piracy.&rdquo; In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them.  Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) circumstances.  (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions more complete.)
zh_TW: 出版商經常將他們不贊同的複製稱之為「盜版」。透過這種方式，他們暗示這在道德上與攻擊公海上的船隻，並綁架與謀殺船員一樣。以這種宣傳為基礎，他們在世界上大多數的國家在大部份（或是幾乎所有）的情況下進行複製（他們仍然在迫使這些禁令更加完整）。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: If you don't believe that copying not approved by the publisher is just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word &ldquo;piracy&rdquo; to describe it.  Neutral terms such as &ldquo;unauthorized copying&rdquo; (or &ldquo;prohibited copying&rdquo; for the situation where it is illegal) are available for use instead.  Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as &ldquo;sharing information with your neighbor.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 如果你不相信未經出版商批准的複製就像綁架與謀殺一樣，你可能不願意使用「隱私」一詞來描述它。可以使用「未經授權的複製」（或針對非法複製的情況下使用「禁止複製」）等中性詞語。我們之中的一些人可能比較偏好使用正面的詞語，如「與鄰居分享資訊」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that <a href="http://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>
zh_TW: 主持著作權審判的美國法官承認<a href="http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-banned-from-using-piracy-and-theft-terms-in-hotfile-trial-131129/">「盜版」與「偷竊」是帶有毀謗性的詞語。</a>

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;PowerPoint&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「PowerPoint」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Please avoid using the term &ldquo;PowerPoint&rdquo; to mean any kind of slide presentation.  &ldquo;PowerPoint&rdquo; is just the name of one particular proprietary program to make presentations.  For your freedom's sake, you should use only free software to make your presentations&mdash;which means, <em>not PowerPoint</em>.  Recommended options include TeX's <tt>beamer</tt> class and LibreOffice.org's Impress.
zh_TW: 請避免使用「PowerPoint」來代指任何類型的投影片展示。「PowerPoint」只是一種特定的專有製作投影片的程式的名字。為了你的自由，你應該只用自由軟體來製作你的投影片，也就是說<em>不要使用 PowerPoint</em>。建議使用 Tex 的 <tt>beamer</tt> 類型與 LibreOffice 的 Impress。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Product&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「產品」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: If you're talking about a product, by all means call it that.  However, when referring to a service, please do not call it a &ldquo;product.&rdquo; If a service provider calls the service a &ldquo;product,&rdquo; please firmly insist on calling it a &ldquo;service.&rdquo; If a service provider calls a package deal a &ldquo;product,&rdquo; please firmly insist on calling it a &ldquo;deal.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 如果你正在談論產品，那請繼續這麼稱呼它。但如果說的是服務，那就請不要將其稱為「產品」。如果服務提供者將其服務稱為「產品」，請堅定地將其稱為「服務」。如果服務提供者把整批交易稱為「產品」，請堅定地將其稱為「交易」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Protection&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「保護」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Publishers' lawyers love to use the term &ldquo;protection&rdquo; to describe copyright.  This word carries the implication of preventing destruction or suffering; therefore, it encourages people to identify with the owner and publisher who benefit from copyright, rather than with the users who are restricted by it.
zh_TW: 出版商的律師喜歡用「保護」一詞來描述著作權。這個詞帶有防止破壞與避免苦痛的含義；因此，其鼓勵人們認同受著作權保護的所有者與出版商，而不是受其限制的使用者。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: It is easy to avoid &ldquo;protection&rdquo; and use neutral terms instead.  For example, instead of saying, &ldquo;Copyright protection lasts a very long time,&rdquo; you can say, &ldquo;Copyright lasts a very long time.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 很容易避免「保護」並使用中性詞語代替。舉例來說，你可以說「著作權會持續非常長的時間」而不是「著作權保護會持續非常長的時間」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Likewise, instead of saying, &ldquo;protected by copyright,&rdquo; you can say, &ldquo;covered by copyright&rdquo; or just &ldquo;copyrighted.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 同樣地，你可以說「受著作權法保障」或「有著作權」，而非「受著作權保護」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: If you want to criticize copyright rather than be neutral, you can use the term &ldquo;copyright restrictions.&rdquo; Thus, you can say, &ldquo;Copyright restrictions last a very long time.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 如果你想批評著作權而不是保持中立，你可以使用「著作權限制」一詞。因此，你可以說「著作權限制持續很長的時間」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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="http://DefectiveByDesign.org"> Defective by Design</a> campaign.
zh_TW: 「保護」也可以用來描述惡意功能。例如「複製保護」是一種干擾複製的功能。從使用者的角度來看，這是阻礙。所以我們可以將這種功能稱為「複製阻礙」。更常見的是稱為「數位限制管理」(DRM)，請見<a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org">設計式缺陷</a>活動。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;RAND (Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory)&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「RAND」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Standards bodies that promulgate patent-restricted standards that prohibit free software typically have a policy of obtaining patent licenses that require a fixed fee per copy of a conforming program.  They often refer to such licenses by the term &ldquo;RAND,&rdquo; which stands for &ldquo;reasonable and non-discriminatory.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 頒布專利限制自由軟體的標準簽發機構通常會有取得專利許可的政策，這種授權會在每份符合的程式中加入固定的授權費。他們經常使用「RAND」來提及這種授權，其即為「合理且非歧視性」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: That term whitewashes a class of patent licenses that are normally neither reasonable nor nondiscriminatory.  It is true that these licenses do not discriminate against any specific person, but they do discriminate against the free software community, and that makes them unreasonable.  Thus, half of the term &ldquo;RAND&rdquo; is deceptive and the other half is prejudiced.
zh_TW: 這個詞粉飾了通常並不合理也相當具歧視性的專利授權條款。確實，這些授權條款並不歧視任何特定的人，但它們歧視自由軟體社群，而因此變得不合理。所以，「RAND」的其中一半是在騙人，而另一半則是帶有偏見。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Standards bodies should recognize that these licenses are discriminatory, and drop the use of the term &ldquo;reasonable and non-discriminatory&rdquo; or &ldquo;RAND&rdquo; to describe them.  Until they do so, writers who do not wish to join in the whitewashing would do well to reject that term.  To accept and use it merely because patent-wielding companies have made it widespread is to let those companies dictate the views you express.
zh_TW: 標準頒發機構應該要了解到這些授權條款帶有歧視性，並且不再使用「合理且非歧視性」或「RAND」來描述它們。在他們這樣做之前，那些不想加入粉飾的作家會拒絕使用這個詞。接受並使用它只是因為專利權公司已在廣泛地使用它，而這些公司決定了你所表達的觀點。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: We suggest the term &ldquo;uniform fee only,&rdquo; or &ldquo;UFO&rdquo; for short, as a replacement.  It is accurate because the only condition in these licenses is a uniform royalty fee.
zh_TW: 我們建議使用「僅統一收費」或「UFO」一詞來代替。因為這些授權條款中唯一的條件就是統一的授權費用。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;SaaS&rdquo; or &ldquo;Software as a Service&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「SaaS」或「軟體即服務」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: We used to say that SaaS (short for &ldquo;Software as a Service&rdquo;) is an injustice, but then we found that there was a lot of variation in people's understanding of which activities count as SaaS.  So we switched to a new term, &ldquo;Service as a Software Substitute&rdquo; or &ldquo;SaaSS.&rdquo; This term has two advantages: it wasn't used before, so our definition is the only one, and it explains what the injustice consists of.
zh_TW: 我們曾說 SaaS（「軟體即服務」的英文縮寫）是不公正的，但後來我們發現許多人對哪些活動才算是 SaaS 的理解有所不同。所以我們換成一個新的詞「服務替代軟體」或「SaaSS」。這個詞有兩個優點：以前沒有使用過，所以我們的定義是唯一的，而它解釋了不公正的含義。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: See <a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">Who Does That Server Really Serve?</a> for discussion of this issue.
zh_TW: 參見<a href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">伺服器究竟為誰服務？</a>對此議題的討論。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: In Spanish we continue to use the term &ldquo;software como servicio&rdquo; because the joke of &ldquo;software como ser vicio&rdquo; (&ldquo;software, as being pernicious&rdquo;) is too good to give up.
zh_TW: 不過在西班牙語中我們會繼續使用「software como servicio」，因為「software como ser vicio」（「軟體為惡」）的笑話實在讓人捨不得放棄。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Sell software&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「銷售軟體」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;sell software&rdquo; is ambiguous.  Strictly speaking, exchanging a copy of a free program for a sum of money is <a href="/philosophy/selling.html"> selling the program</a>, and there is nothing wrong with doing that.  However, people usually associate the term &ldquo;selling software&rdquo; with proprietary restrictions on the subsequent use of the software.  You can be clear, and prevent confusion, by saying either &ldquo;distributing copies of a program for a fee&rdquo; or &ldquo;imposing proprietary restrictions on the use of a program.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「銷售軟體」一詞含糊不清。嚴格來說，交換一份自由的程式副本以獲得一筆錢是<a href="/philosophy/selling.html">銷售軟體</a>，這麼做並沒有錯。但人們常常把「銷售軟體」與軟體後續使用的專有限制相連結。你可以使用「為了使用費散佈程式副本」或「對程式的使用施加專有限制」來讓意思明確。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: See <a href="/philosophy/selling.html">Selling Free Software</a> for further discussion of this issue.
zh_TW: 請參見<a href="/philosophy/selling.html">銷售自由軟體</a>對此議題的進一步討論。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Sharing (personal data)&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「共享（個人資料）」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: When companies manipulate or lure people into revealing personal data and thus ceding their privacy, please don't refer to this as &ldquo;sharing.&rdquo; We use the term &ldquo;sharing&rdquo; to refer to noncommercial cooperation, including noncommercial redistribution of exact copies of published works, and we say this is <em>good</em>.  Please don't apply that word to a practice which is harmful and dangerous.
zh_TW: 當公司操縱或誘使人們洩露個人資料並因此放棄他們的隱私時，請不要將此稱為「共享」。我們使用「共享」一詞來指稱非商業合作，包含了非商業性的轉散佈已出版作品的完整副本，我們會說這<em>很好</em>。請不要將這個詞用於這種有害且危險的作法。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Sharing economy&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「共享經濟」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;sharing economy&rdquo; is not a good way to refer to services such as Uber and Airbnb that arrange business transactions between people.  We use the term &ldquo;sharing&rdquo; to refer to noncommercial cooperation, including noncommercial redistribution of exact copies of published works.  Stretching the word &ldquo;sharing&rdquo; to include these transactions undermines its meaning, so we don't use it in this context.
zh_TW: 「共享經濟」一詞並不是指稱 Uber 與 Airbnb 安排人與人之間的業務交易服務的好方法。我們使用「共享」一詞來指稱非商業性合作，包含了對已出版作品的非商業性轉散佈。延展「共享」一詞來包含這些交易會破壞其含意，所以我們不會在這種情境下使用它。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A more suitable term for businesses like Uber is the &ldquo;piecework service economy.&rdquo;
zh_TW: 對於像 Uber 這樣的企業來說，更適合的詞是「計件服務經濟」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Skype&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「Skype」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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>.
zh_TW: 請避免將「Skype」當作動詞使用，這通常代表了任何類型的透過網路傳送的影像通訊或電話。「Skype」只是一個特定的專有軟體的名字，一個會<a href="/philosophy/proprietary/proprietary-surveillance.html#SpywareInSkype">監視其使用者的應用程式</a>。如果你想要撥打透過網路傳送的視訊或音訊通話，並使用尊重你的自由與隱私的應用程式，試試看這些<a href="https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Skype_Replacement">自由的 Skype 取代品</a>的其中一個。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Software Industry&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「軟體工業」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The term &ldquo;software industry&rdquo; encourages people to imagine that software is always developed by a sort of factory and then delivered to &ldquo;consumers.&rdquo; The free software community shows this is not the case.  Software businesses exist, and various businesses develop free and/or nonfree software, but those that develop free software are not run like factories.
zh_TW: 「軟體工業」一詞鼓勵人們想像軟體是由某種工廠開發，然後交付給「消費者」。自由軟體社群就是一個相反的例子。有各種軟體企業存在，但那些開發自由軟體的狀況並不像工廠。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: 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>
zh_TW: 「工業」一詞被軟體專利的擁護者用來宣傳。他們稱軟體開發為「工業」並試圖爭辯說這代表其應該受到專利壟斷約束。<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20071215073111/http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/" title="archived version of http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/">歐洲議會在2013年拒絕軟體專利，投票將「工業」定義為「物質產品的自動化生產」</a>。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Source model&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「原始碼模型」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Wikipedia uses the term &ldquo;source model&rdquo; in a confused and ambiguous way.  Ostensibly it refers to how a program's source is distributed, but the text confuses this with the development methodology.  It distinguishes &ldquo;open source&rdquo; and &rdquo;shared source&rdquo; as answers, but they overlap &mdash; Microsoft uses the latter as a marketing term to cover a range of practices, some of which are &ldquo;open source&rdquo;.  Thus, this term really conveys no coherent information, but it provides an opportunity to say &ldquo;open source&rdquo; in pages describing free software programs.
zh_TW: 維基百科以令人混淆與模糊的方式使用「原始碼模型」一詞。表面上它指的是程式原始碼的散佈模式，但文本將其與開發方法混淆。它將「開放原始碼」與「共享原始碼」分開為兩個答案，但它們有重疊之處，微軟使用後者來代表一系列的實踐，其中包含了「開放原始碼」。因此，這個詞實際上並未傳達連貫的資訊，但它提供了在自由軟體的頁面中說「開放原始碼」的機會。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Terminal&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「終端機」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Mobile phones and tablets are computers, and people should be able to do their computing on them using free software.  To call them &ldquo;terminals&rdquo; supposes that all they are good for is to connect to servers, which is a bad way to do your own computing.
zh_TW: 手機與平板電腦也是電腦，而人們應該在這些裝置上使用自由軟體來進行他們的運算。將它們稱為「終端機」意指它們擅長的只有連線到伺服器，而這並不是執行你自己的運算的好方法。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Theft&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「竊盜」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: The supporters of a too-strict, repressive form of copyright often use words like &ldquo;stolen&rdquo; and &ldquo;theft&rdquo; to refer to copyright infringement.  This is spin, but they would like you to take it for objective truth.
zh_TW: 支持太過嚴格、具壓制性的著作權的人常會使用像是「偷」或「盜竊」這樣的詞來指稱侵犯著作權。這是一種詮釋，但他們希望你把其當做事實。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Under the US legal system, copyright infringement is not theft.  <a href="http://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.
zh_TW: 根據美國的法律體系，著作權侵權並不是竊盜。<a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=473&amp;invol=207"> 有關盜竊的法律並不適用於著作權侵權。</a>而壓制性著作權的支持者正在向當局提出上訴，並扭曲當局所說的話。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: To refute them, you can point to this <a href="http://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;
zh_TW: 要反駁他們，你可以指出這個<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/harper-lee-kill-mockingbird-copyright">真實案例</a>，其中顯示了怎樣會被恰當地描述為「偷竊著作權」。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Unauthorized copying is forbidden by copyright law in many circumstances (not all!), but being forbidden doesn't make it wrong.  In general, laws don't define right and wrong.  Laws, at their best, attempt to implement justice.  If the laws (the implementation) don't fit our ideas of right and wrong (the spec), the laws are what should change.
zh_TW: 在許多情況下（不是全部），著作權法禁止未經授權的複製，但禁止複製並不代表這麼做是錯的。一般來說，法律並不會定義對錯。在最好的情況下，法律是用來實現正義，如果法律（實作）不符合我們的是非（規範），那法律就應該被修正。

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that <a href="http://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>
zh_TW: 主持著作權審判的美國法官承認<a href="http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-banned-from-using-piracy-and-theft-terms-in-hotfile-trial-131129/">「盜版」與「偷竊」是帶有毀謗性的詞語。</a>

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Trusted Computing&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「可信賴運算」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: <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;
zh_TW: <a href="/philosophy/can-you-trust.html">「可信賴運算」</a>是一種重新設計電腦架構方案的支持者所給予的名稱，這樣可以讓應用程式開發者信任你的電腦服從於他們而不是你。從他們的角度來看，它是「可信賴的」；從你的角度來看，它是「不忠的」。

note: type: Content of: <h3>
en: &ldquo;Vendor&rdquo;
zh_TW: 「製造商」

note: type: Content of: <p>
en: Please don't use the term &ldquo;vendor&rdquo; to refer generally to anyone that develops or packages software.  Many programs are developed in order to sell copies, and their developers are therefore their vendors; this even includes some free software packages.  However, many programs are developed by volunteers or organizations which do not intend to sell copies.  These developers are not vendors.  Likewise, only some of the packagers of GNU/Linux distributions are vendors.  We recommend the general term &ldquo;supplier&rdquo; instead.
zh_TW: 請不要使用「製造商」一詞來指稱開發或打包軟體的任何人。許多程式是為來銷售副本而開發，而他們的開發者就是製造商；這甚至包含了一些自由軟體包。不過，許多程式是由不打算出售副本的志願者或組織開發。這些開發者就不是製造商。同理，只有某些 GNU/Linux 散佈版的打包者是製造商。我們建議使用較通用的「供應者」來代替。

note: type: Content of: <blockquote><p>
en: This essay is published in <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>.
zh_TW: 本文發表於<a href="http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>自由軟體，自由社會：理查史托曼文選</cite></a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: 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>.
zh_TW: 請來信到 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a> 詢問有關自由軟體基金會（FSF）和 GNU 的一般問題；或者<a href="/contact/">以其他方式</a>聯絡自由軟體基金會。至於損毀的連結及其他修正和建議，可以將之寄給 <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, replace it with the translation of these two: We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard to <a hr
en: Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations of this article.
zh_TW: 我們努力盡所能提供貼切、品質良善的翻譯。然而，我們無法十全十美，還請將你的意見評述與一般建議寄給 <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p>
    <p>請參照 <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">翻譯讀我 README</a> 來瞭解協調和提交我們的網頁翻譯相關事宜。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
zh_TW: 本頁面採用<a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/deed.zh_TW">創用 CC 姓名標示-禁止改作 4.0 國際</a>條款給予授權。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_TW: <b>翻譯</b>：黃柏諺 <a href="mailto:s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com">&lt;s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com&gt;</a>, 2019.

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_TW: 更新時間︰
