Post AQPRvIhQGy7ircHXiS by neo@pl.comfysnug.space
(DIR) More posts by neo@pl.comfysnug.space
(DIR) Post #AQNAzYuxpOWkmm8sSW by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T17:00:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Anyone comparing the philosophy of "open source" to "free software" without acknowledging the harmful stagnation and single-mindedness in the latter community is not making a thoughtful critique in the year 2022.
(DIR) Post #AQNAzZdz80XX2PCpdI by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T17:04:54Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
To the vast majority of people these terms do not mean different things. Semantically, free software and open source mean the same thing and agree on the same software licenses.The philosophical differences people attribute to "open source" vs. "free software" are usually a combination of development practices (dependent on the individual author) and arguing about copyleft licenses (even though the FSF agrees "permissive licenses" still make "free software").
(DIR) Post #AQNAzaGyn1jQzLRyPg by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T17:08:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The FSF and free software movement have failed because they prioritized the hero worship of a single individual over the actual furthering of their ideology. They have had nothing new or useful to contribute to the public conversation in over a decade.So I can't believe people are still parroting "open source is about efficiency, free software is about ethics" or similar. Free software is about the ethics of one man, it's not a movement. They have spent all their energy alienating new blood.
(DIR) Post #AQNAzb1lz3A7KTLLLk by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T17:13:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
If I cannot recommend your movement to anyone other than able-bodied cishet white dudes in western countries, and on top of that I have to caveat it with "it's prickly, hostile, and everyone does what Dear Leader says", then who the fuck is it for? That demographic is the *least* harmed by proprietary software.The manifestos of free software got me in the mindset of serving users and protecting fundamental rights. But the practice of free software is just like open source, with more hostility.
(DIR) Post #AQNAzbdhi1VHE75dTM by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T17:44:04Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
So let's drop the "open source vs. free software" debate please. What has it accomplished? Whether it's open source or free software, the software licensing movement alone is not enough to achieve any of these movements' stated goals.FOSS is necessary but not sufficient to ensure digital autonomy. https://techautonomy.org/
(DIR) Post #AQNCiaKDXg828TzEUS by iceloops@lizards.live
2022-12-07T19:38:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman free software just hates proprietary everything. Open source just accepts it
(DIR) Post #AQNCwSvVqWxTFC3A1I by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T19:40:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@iceloops false
(DIR) Post #AQNFbT44RCI5SAjRdg by iceloops@lizards.live
2022-12-07T20:10:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman explain why you have Microsoft, Nvidia etc on Ubuntu. And you have companies not supporting Linux. Like for a laptop most of it would be a wifi or graphics driver issue. Maybe a printer not working
(DIR) Post #AQNFvS89cWkWLdAhWK by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-07T20:14:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@iceloops Linux is both open source and free software. I don't understand the question
(DIR) Post #AQNFzeVBZ7exsLwlW4 by iceloops@lizards.live
2022-12-07T20:14:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman also the free software people do get anal if I use say Ubuntu or pop os. And I'm here just wanting things to work.
(DIR) Post #AQNGBcLbOysSfVAaau by iceloops@lizards.live
2022-12-07T20:17:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman I'm talking about drivers not working that are proprietary.
(DIR) Post #AQPR6W4wlirNag4Mgy by neo@pl.comfysnug.space
2022-12-08T21:28:53.123059Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@ehashman """open source""" is at best a corporate knockoff of truly free software
(DIR) Post #AQPRvHsNKlI4JIOm9I by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-08T21:37:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neo how
(DIR) Post #AQPRvIhQGy7ircHXiS by neo@pl.comfysnug.space
2022-12-08T21:38:02.371736Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman strong preference for weak pushover licensing rather than the tried and true GPLv3 and AGPL
(DIR) Post #AQPU6kecsRpaerYtI8 by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-08T22:01:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neo then why does the FSF list permissive licenses as free software?
(DIR) Post #AQPU6lBatsCcJ6zDg8 by neo@pl.comfysnug.space
2022-12-08T22:02:31.433267Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman Because sometimes it's stupid to license a short python script as full GPL.Sometimes it's easier to incorporate someone else's non-GPL code into yours and they WONT license it as GPL
(DIR) Post #AQQnCVqmvHisllffTE by webmink@meshed.cloud
2022-12-07T19:03:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashmanFYI @osi on Mastodon is routinely getting replies to posts that at best unreasonably promote FSF and at worst are ... well, ugly. This generally did not happen on Twitter. It's quite upsetting given how positive the rest of the experience here is. I'm not quite sure how to deal with them.
(DIR) Post #AQQnCWhFmDgrOUDZFQ by lxo@gnusocial.net
2022-12-08T06:10:30Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
OSS and OSI were born as an attack on FS; pretending they're equivalent or fighting against the same injustice is another attack;frequent demeaning of the founder of the FSM and the recent attempted decapitating the movement with tons of lies have been very mean ad-hominem attacks on FSseriously, what did OSS expect for initiating, sustaining and escalating attacks on us?
(DIR) Post #AQQoDMZ91o8gDYO6Vc by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2022-12-09T13:22:29.361949Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman >why does the FSF list permissive licenses as free software?Simply because certain permissive licenses respect the 4 freedoms, so those licenses are listed.I haven't yet read a single permissive license that is decently written mind you.@neo >sometimes it's stupid to license a short python script as full GPL.It is never "stupid" to license a short script under the GPLv3 - I license almost all of my software under the GPLv3 even if it is trivial.There still is some very rare cases where it is more optimal to use a weaker license like the Lesser GPLv2.1+.Once example is glibc - there was plenty of proprietary libc's already, plus support for software under non-GPLv2 compatible free software licenses was wanted, so it was decided to use the LGPLv2.1+ (which isn't a pushover license either).Another case where some small changes are to be made in a larger existing free software package under a certain license and it's just easier to license under the same license.
(DIR) Post #AQQogT2y0jtoiSDOS0 by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2022-12-09T13:27:45.007152Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman >The FSF and free software movement have failedI don't see any failure really - more free software exists today than in the past, so we're winning.>They have had nothing new or useful to contribute to the public conversation in over a decade.The public conversation rarely has been about anything meaningful for over a decade, while I've seen a nice stream of articles from the FSF and GNU over the past decade.>They have spent all their energy alienating new blood.They got me, so the alienation isn't very successful.Of course those who love proprietary software are going to be alienated hard by pure freedom.Don't worry, I will continue the GNU/Jihad against "open source" and proprietary software just as hard.
(DIR) Post #AQSImqEltUUs9zeTq4 by ehashman@toot.cat
2022-12-09T16:24:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Suiseiseki it's clear you are not convinced by anything I have to say here. That's fine; I can't imagine it's easy to consider this deeply when you've constructed your identity around free software "extremism". How long have you felt this way?What are you trying to convince *me* of? That I should care more about the inanimate tool, software, than how it affects the people using it?
(DIR) Post #AQSImqspUYXWAEOTHE by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2022-12-10T06:39:45.653462Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman >you've constructed your identity around free software "extremism".Except I haven't.>How long have you felt this way?I've felt the need for freedom since birth, but such has been hidden from me until recently.>What are you trying to convince *me* of?Nothing.>That I should care more about the inanimate tool, software, than how it affects the people using it?Software is a tool.You can have a terrible proprietary tool that doesn't respect your freedom or a decent tool that respects your freedom.If the software is free, then the people using it are able to work together in rectifying anything seen to be non-ideal, or even do so themselves.If you care about what people do to other people, go ahead, but that doesn't have anything to do with software freedom.
(DIR) Post #AQU7cu1wE6SLqfcxGK by lxo@gnusocial.net
2022-12-10T18:00:07Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
all free software licenses are permissive. they grant permissions required by copyright or other laws for users to control the software so that it does their own computing however they wish. the label "permissive" is specious.what differentiates free software licenses, and that brings about this terminology debate, is whether they transfer power to licensees to abuse other users. that's not about licensees' freedom, it's about power. the preference for one or another kind of license is about standing for users, or for abusers of users' freedoms. now, refraining from standing in the way of abusers doesn't necessarily make you an accomplice. one could even argue that it's about respecting their freedom, and if they do evil with their freedom, that's their moral wrong, not yours, and I'd mostly agree with that, except that abusing others is not their freedom to begin with.but that preference, between copyleft or pushover, is a secondary strategic decision. the primary, fundamental choice is whether essential freedoms are respected rather than taken away, and that's what defines free software (and also open source, despite its disfavorable, freedom-alienating distinguishing stances and pet projects that don't, and attempts to misrepresent and demean our strategic preferences as contradictory defining features)
(DIR) Post #AQU7dIQZWAQBW1KxzU by lxo@gnusocial.net
2022-12-10T18:02:23Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
you, accusing others of spending energy alienating people from our movement, come across as incredibly hypocritical. what do you expect your misrepresentations and lies to accomplish, if not alienating people from our movement?
(DIR) Post #AQWhO9itaG98qDuKdk by zkat@toot.cat
2022-12-07T17:04:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ehashman what does "stagnation" mean for a community whose goal wasn't corporate uptake to begin with?
(DIR) Post #AQWhOAFVd0EaTNANTU by technomancy@icosahedron.website
2022-12-07T17:28:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@zkat @ehashman the goal was user empowerment, but user empowerment accomplished by software running on your own computerit's been obvious for a long time how companies can do an end run around that by making you use their computers instead of yours, but the free software movement just ... hasn't noticed at all? or at least hasn't adapted
(DIR) Post #AQWhOAfO4mvzldH2oK by lxo@gnusocial.net
2022-12-12T04:49:23Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
while OSS has celebrated and welcomed the business opportunities of clown computing, FS has long campaigned that SaaSS is even worse for your autonomy than running a nonfree program on your own computer. maybe the problem is that our advice isn't heard or listened to, and it gets buried by others who've long been working at silencing us?