I take the FSF seriously regarding privacy and freedom. Way more seriously than any number of FOSS projects that force users to use Twitter; Telegram; Discord or Reddit in order to interact with them.
@PublicLewdness This was obsivously hyperbole, the vast majority of people even those that know of the FSF do not treat them as a serious org and they don't help themselves in that matter
So much to unpack in this paragraph and, in the end, it doesn't help FSF... It's like a kid whining at other kids because they don't play in the same sandbox as them. To clarify, here sandboxes look so similar that this behavior is just ridiculous.
I think that it's really respectable for an organization to stay 100% true to their ideals for the entire duration that they exist. Some may see not wanting to link a proprietary website as extreme, but using linux-libre is also viewed as too extreme by many. And it certainly won't stop anyone from developing it. Everyone draws the line somewhere else.
I think the sole purpose of the FSF is to remind us every single time when an infraction on our software freedoms occur.
What do people expect from them? To go around and tell people how they can marginally improve their computing freedoms if they give up a few conveniences? They aren't the "Computing Compromises Advocacy Group" after all.
In our lives we need to go for compromises, but there must be some entity, that keeps up the torch for extreme purity.
Sure, but if you follow the link, with the (by default) Javascript turned on, it would.
It's a bit of an impractical faff to select and not-select links, but this particular decision is hardly the best time to start pulling up the FSF on recommending an impractical faff.
@malin Agree, if they typically don't link to non-free software, they are being consistent in not linking to websites that rely on non-free javascript.
@boilingsteam @malin I'm not anti-fsf at all, I'm anti wasting peoples time and understand that nobody outside of the free software space takes the organization seriously in it's current state and even in this group a lot of people disregard them
@malin If that's really your goal then there are more pressing issues that fighting over a link that frankly nobody cares about...
FSF is important because they are purists and stick to a strong dogma. They are not trying to be mainstream, and they will never be.
On the other end, the "open-source" movement is discredited right now, because they don't adhere to any strong standards and now even "hey you can see this code but you can't use it" qualified as "open source"
@malin If that's really your goal then there are more pressing issues that fighting over a link that frankly nobody cares about...
FSF is important because they are purists and stick to a strong dogma. They are not trying to be mainstream, and they will never be.
On the other end, the "open-source" movement is discredited right now, because they don't adhere to any strong standards and now even "hey you can see this code but you can't use it" qualifies as "open source"
@boilingsteam @malin It's funny you say that because open source is the only thing that exists in the eyes of anyone outside of free software. The issue you have is that without any interest outside of this space it doesn't matter how extreme you are, none of your goals can actually be achieved.
@boilingsteam @malin The link is an example, not the only reason why people don't take the organization seriously. Hammering on about GNU/Linux which everyone else accepts is Linux, having an incredibly difficult to approach FAQ and philosophy page just to name a few
@malin Historically FSF and free software predates the open source movement by numerous years, so it's a little rich to say that none of their goals can actually be achieved because the open source movement comes from the influence that the FSF had in the first place.
They also support numerous important GNU projects so on what metric do you consider that none of their goals is achieved?
Even if you end with 1% less proprietary software, that's an improvement and progress.
@boilingsteam @malin We're not talking about the past we're talking about today, that's the problem, they've achieved a lot through out history and if you make a development musuem they should have a dedicated room but can you name anything they've acomplished in the past 10 years. But it's not the FSF that's pushing away proprietary software it's the up and coming leaders in the community who are doing great work despite the FSFs lack of recent achievements.
PublicLewdness
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to PublicLewdness • • •Vint Prox
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Tsugu
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Tsugu • • •NiceMicro
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •What do people expect from them? To go around and tell people how they can marginally improve their computing freedoms if they give up a few conveniences? They aren't the "Computing Compromises Advocacy Group" after all.
In our lives we need to go for compromises, but there must be some entity, that keeps up the torch for extreme purity.
#FreeSoftware
#FSF
fbievan (Powered by Pizza)
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Ryan J. Yoder
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Malinux
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Malinux • • •Malinux
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •It's a bit of an impractical faff to select and not-select links, but this particular decision is hardly the best time to start pulling up the FSF on recommending an impractical faff.
Brodie Robertson
in reply to Malinux • • •Boiling Steam
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Boiling Steam • • •Boiling Steam
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Boiling Steam • • •Boiling Steam
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Boiling Steam • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Boiling Steam
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •FSF is important because they are purists and stick to a strong dogma. They are not trying to be mainstream, and they will never be.
On the other end, the "open-source" movement is discredited right now, because they don't adhere to any strong standards and now even "hey you can see this code but you can't use it" qualified as "open source"
Boiling Steam
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •FSF is important because they are purists and stick to a strong dogma. They are not trying to be mainstream, and they will never be.
On the other end, the "open-source" movement is discredited right now, because they don't adhere to any strong standards and now even "hey you can see this code but you can't use it" qualifies as "open source"
Brodie Robertson
in reply to Boiling Steam • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Boiling Steam
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •They also support numerous important GNU projects so on what metric do you consider that none of their goals is achieved?
Even if you end with 1% less proprietary software, that's an improvement and progress.
Brodie Robertson
in reply to Boiling Steam • • •Malinux
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Malinux • • •kuken
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to kuken • • •