I do like that he uses the term vlogger to describe me, as if he himself isn't just a blogger. Just because you type instead of speak it doesn't make what you're saying any more important
@immaculatetaste Also half the post isn't even about me, it's about It's FOSS covering things that aren't FOSS sometimes and Stallman getting cancelled
@gracicot I didn't even spot that, what is he saying Stallman is correct about lol. Stallman said Flatpaks and Snaps contain proprietary code and you shouldn't trust proprietary code, nobody is in disagreement
that's funny because not only is the title misleading the reader into believing that flatpaks and snaps themselves (not their stores) promote non-free software in some way, but also because, on the flatpak side, flathub actually displays a warning in every program that is proprietary, because having a closed source license is treated by it (flathub) as a security risk, so... If they're trying to incentive users to make use of non-free software, they're doing a terrible job.
@hiyatolol He is often a Stallman dick rider, if Stallman says something then it must be good. I've gone on record to say many times I think Stallman's stance on hardware code is counter to the entire free software philosophy (if it's baked into the hardware we don't think about it), and I don't like this idea that you have to go 100% free software, most people can not do that an in fact demanding that only hurts the movement, I take a more practical approach to the matter
@hiyatolol With that being said I think a lot of Stallman's early work was incredibly important and much of what he still says today on privacy is important to hear (albeit a losing battle)
@hiyatolol his stance on the hardware is also weird for me. But I understand the 100% demand. He started the "Free Software Foundation", and not the "software compromises foundation". We might have to make compromises in real life, but the advocacy should be about demanding software to be free, and rewarding those who abide by this philosophy.
@nicemicro @hiyatolol I understand the software stance I just feel it's counter productive to helping people adopt free software, for example if I couldn't game I would never be daily driving Linux
that's kinda the issue with the game industry, not free software though.
Most game studios exploit their workers with miserable working conditions, and then exploit their users with all imaginable hostile antifeatures.
Luckily, gaming is not a necessity in life, so I would definitely not make my computing decisions based on that. Sure, it's nice that I can run StarCraft on Linux, but it's not the purpose of my computer to run it.
@nicemicro It doesn't matter what the reason is, if you're thinking of the reason you're already miles away from the average person. I want to play video games, if I can't your system is broken therefore I use windows.
then we are back to square one, software companies have no problem exploiting their users, as long as their users don't care, and the FSF can't make the users care, because then "what about muh games".
The users don't do anything to force the devs to make free software, because if they took a stance that would mean no more playing with non-free software.
@nicemicro It would be nice if the games were free software but my stance is I want to help people have more free software in there lives, and actually pay attentionn to the software they're running, you don't get that by telling people how they use there computer is wrong, you only get that by helping them adapt in places they can adapt
In 2020 one of the people working on @privacyguides with me disclosed a potential conflict-of-interest when we were reviewing Startpage, and Techrights managed to manufacture plenty of drama out of that GitHub comment, and threatened to conjure up a story about paid Startpage shills unless they got a response to their pointed questions from us (and delivered on that "threat" when we wrote him off as delusional and ignored him) haha
@wiikifox To be fair I would like the Linux Foundation and Mozilla while we're at it to spend a lot more money on engineers and less money on social programs
Brodie Robertson
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
Unknown parent • • •NiceMicro
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to NiceMicro • • •Guillaume Racicot
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Guillaume Racicot • • •10-volt :neocat_flag_ace:
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •10-volt :neocat_flag_ace:
in reply to 10-volt :neocat_flag_ace: • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to 10-volt :neocat_flag_ace: • • •No, It's Not FOSS
Roy SchestowitzHiyato
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Hiyato
in reply to Hiyato • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Hiyato • • •Brodie Robertson
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •NiceMicro
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •But I understand the 100% demand. He started the "Free Software Foundation", and not the "software compromises foundation". We might have to make compromises in real life, but the advocacy should be about demanding software to be free, and rewarding those who abide by this philosophy.
Brodie Robertson
in reply to NiceMicro • • •NiceMicro
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •that's kinda the issue with the game industry, not free software though.
Most game studios exploit their workers with miserable working conditions, and then exploit their users with all imaginable hostile antifeatures.
Luckily, gaming is not a necessity in life, so I would definitely not make my computing decisions based on that. Sure, it's nice that I can run StarCraft on Linux, but it's not the purpose of my computer to run it.
Brodie Robertson
in reply to NiceMicro • • •NiceMicro
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •then we are back to square one, software companies have no problem exploiting their users, as long as their users don't care, and the FSF can't make the users care, because then "what about muh games".
The users don't do anything to force the devs to make free software, because if they took a stance that would mean no more playing with non-free software.
this is the circle of not giving a f*ck.
#FreeSoftware
Brodie Robertson
in reply to NiceMicro • • •Jonah Aragon
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •oh yes, we've made Techrights headlines before 🙃
In 2020 one of the people working on @privacyguides with me disclosed a potential conflict-of-interest when we were reviewing Startpage, and Techrights managed to manufacture plenty of drama out of that GitHub comment, and threatened to conjure up a story about paid Startpage shills unless they got a response to their pointed questions from us (and delivered on that "threat" when we wrote him off as delusional and ignored him) haha
Wiikifox
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •They even throw rocks at the Linux Foundation:
https://techrights.org/n/2023/12/20/December_s_Top_Posts_by_Views.shtml
December's 'Top' Posts (by Views)
Roy SchestowitzBrodie Robertson
in reply to Wiikifox • • •Maksym Hazevych
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •Riyan Gendut / Rigen
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •well, a bit unhinged.
Cow
in reply to Brodie Robertson • • •