Post AwEFlHWjZQBaFeiD8S by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
(DIR) More posts by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
(DIR) Post #AwDuBqWzqlBlLw63iy by nixCraft@mastodon.social
2025-07-17T08:36:08Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Back in my day, we bought things once and actually owned them. Imagine that! You'd get a CD, a movie, a game, or a piece of software, it was a tangible item with a set price that was all yours. No strings attached. Now? Everything's a fucking subscription. It's like renting your life, but somehow it ends up being way more expensive in the long run. Go figure.This is why open source matters a lot. It still gives you freedom and whenever possible please support your favourite FLOSS app 👍
(DIR) Post #AwDuBsPcr8TtBefCVs by SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
2025-07-17T11:45:25.983Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nixCraft@mastodon.social If you are talking about freedom please make sure to mention free software and not open source. The open source movement doesn't really care about freedom.
(DIR) Post #AwDuBv7InibfZh76rw by nixCraft@mastodon.social
2025-07-17T08:44:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
> How do you support FLOSS? There are many ways you can donate money so that it helps the developer, maybe volunteer your time to fix bugs or documentation, if possible. You can even spread the word about your favourite apps on social media. Got a blog? Write about it. You can send a thank you note or hire a FLOSS developer for your project if possible.
(DIR) Post #AwDy01P9zoXDQ033y4 by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2025-07-17T12:28:03.738812Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@SuperDicq @nixCraft The "open source" movement is rather an attack on freedom, rather than not caring about it.
(DIR) Post #AwE7e0YzRWiJymmv5c by codingcoyote@floss.social
2025-07-17T14:07:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nixCraft I wish we treated software more like books. After X years the copyright runs out and the source code is released as publicndomain. This would be a treasure trove to have all the tricks and tips the graybeards of yore left for us to discover. Like the many stories of how crash bandicoot and doom overcame the limitations of their hardware but with the code to see how it was implemented.
(DIR) Post #AwE7e1twT74G83bAO0 by shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club
2025-07-17T14:16:10.421141Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codingcoyote @nixCraft yeah I would totally use some 120 year old software.
(DIR) Post #AwE7mRShJpRDiirmOO by shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club
2025-07-17T14:17:46.235533Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codingcoyote @nixCraft we need to go back to 14 years
(DIR) Post #AwEC4922ykgNaf6716 by codingcoyote@floss.social
2025-07-17T14:42:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@shironeko @nixCraft as fast as tech moves that might be a maintainable timeframe. Ideally any patents used in it would have expired around the same time though.
(DIR) Post #AwEC4ALE6vcPeR4wYC by shironeko@fedi.tesaguri.club
2025-07-17T15:05:44.514461Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codingcoyote @nixCraft yeah, not to mention software patents is generally a dumb idea to begin with.
(DIR) Post #AwEFlGDCSYxyAmZ636 by 09ed4307acbb03cdef4d733300ec3b59dd12582f57eae919ca9e2c7998347f63@mostr.pub
2025-07-17T15:23:28.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Explain it please. I'm all ears.
(DIR) Post #AwEFlHWjZQBaFeiD8S by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2025-07-17T15:47:07.884491Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@09ed4307acbb03cdef4d733300ec3b59dd12582f57eae919ca9e2c7998347f63 @nixCraft @SuperDicq "open source" was only ever applied to software because a group of people had problems with freedom; http://catb.org/~esr/open-source.htmlThe way such article is written makes it seem that he's okay with free software, until you realize what concept he is concerned about.The concept such people are concerned about is functionally better software, faster and getting money from proprietary software companies to fund development is an important part of that goal.For people to have the slightest chance of learning that proprietary software is evil really hurts the feelings of suits and can easily impact the funding from such businesses, thus the freedom had to go.A secondary concern is the availability of (most) of the source code - often if (most) of the source code is available, that allows software to be functionally better.Another group of people decided to actually give it a definition by writing the "open source definition"; https://opensource.org/osd (the free software definition made way too long and made looser) - but most "open source" supporters have never seen that and it's okay if the requirements aren't followed really.The "poster child" of "open source" is Linux, which follows an "open source" development model, but it is not even completely source-available and therefore does not quality for the requirements and is therefore not "open source".Such people don't care if what they are achieving is harmful - they would regard spyware programs and handcuffing software that stops people from changing the software as excellent as long as they are technically great at spying and preventing modifications and also that the source code is available to some people.https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.htmlhttps://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html