If it wasn't for the dogmatic adherence to GNU philosophy then I would have probably pivoted to Guix already.
Uncategorized
8
Posts
2
Posters
0
Views
-
If it wasn't for the dogmatic adherence to GNU philosophy then I would have probably pivoted to Guix already. People are that deep in their ideology that the Nonguix repository emphasize it should be used as a last resort and that the repository should not be discussed in official channels. Imagine being so free that you circle back to being overbearingly authoritarian by not letting people pick what they want to use.
@fsf@hostux.social
#FreeSoftware, #Guix, #GNU, #FOSS, #FLOSS, #Linux. -
If it wasn't for the dogmatic adherence to GNU philosophy then I would have probably pivoted to Guix already. People are that deep in their ideology that the Nonguix repository emphasize it should be used as a last resort and that the repository should not be discussed in official channels. Imagine being so free that you circle back to being overbearingly authoritarian by not letting people pick what they want to use.
@fsf@hostux.social
#FreeSoftware, #Guix, #GNU, #FOSS, #FLOSS, #Linux.imagine being free to promote things that harm people and choosing not to do so for ethical reasons.
the horror!
it must be really hard for some to understand this sort of reasoning.
CC: @fsf@hostux.social
-
imagine being free to promote things that harm people and choosing not to do so for ethical reasons.
the horror!
it must be really hard for some to understand this sort of reasoning.
CC: @fsf@hostux.socialSee my previous post: This isn't exercising agency but rather idealogical gatekeeping.
@lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br @fsf@hostux.social
RE: https://neondystopia.world/notes/ai7u3f1otn4307lg -
R ActivityRelay shared this topic
-
See my previous post: This isn't exercising agency but rather idealogical gatekeeping.
@lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br @fsf@hostux.social
RE: https://neondystopia.world/notes/ai7u3f1otn4307lgit would be hypocritical to speak of software freedom, to claim to respect users' freedom, while directing users to freedom-depriving programs or servers. consistency despite difficulties caused by others is the very opposite of hypocrisy.
it is hard for some people to comprehend that nonfree software is actively and intentionally harmful to users, and that tolerating it grows more long-term problems than the apparent solutions it brings.
allowing others to control your computing should have never been normalized. now people resent those who strive for freedom, instead of those who are taking their freedom away, making them hostage of hostile devices and servers. if Stockholm Syndrome was a made up thing before, people's relationship with nonfree software has shown it to be very real.
CC: @fsf@hostux.social
-
it would be hypocritical to speak of software freedom, to claim to respect users' freedom, while directing users to freedom-depriving programs or servers. consistency despite difficulties caused by others is the very opposite of hypocrisy.
it is hard for some people to comprehend that nonfree software is actively and intentionally harmful to users, and that tolerating it grows more long-term problems than the apparent solutions it brings.
allowing others to control your computing should have never been normalized. now people resent those who strive for freedom, instead of those who are taking their freedom away, making them hostage of hostile devices and servers. if Stockholm Syndrome was a made up thing before, people's relationship with nonfree software has shown it to be very real.
CC: @fsf@hostux.socialI don't doubt that, I myself don't use a mobile phone and can observe the effect that it has on those that do. My use of non-free software, however is entirely pragmatic and while opaque, trust can be built with vendors that have proven themselves to be a friend of free and open source software as Valve have. That is how I can justify continuing to use Steam to play games.
Thing is, though freedom is the ability to do anything within reason without hindrance or influence from external forces. Can you truly call your ideology free if you coercion through design friction to force compliance?
If you don't want to participate in enabling people to install non-free software from an unofficial repository then that is entirely your prerogative. Those that make up the Guix community are free to individually make that choice. When the choice is being forced on us however by an institution in our case Guix; the that is hardly free in my opinion.
@lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br -
I don't doubt that, I myself don't use a mobile phone and can observe the effect that it has on those that do. My use of non-free software, however is entirely pragmatic and while opaque, trust can be built with vendors that have proven themselves to be a friend of free and open source software as Valve have. That is how I can justify continuing to use Steam to play games.
Thing is, though freedom is the ability to do anything within reason without hindrance or influence from external forces. Can you truly call your ideology free if you coercion use through design friction to force compliance?
If you don't want to participate in enabling people to install non-free software from an unofficial repository then that is entirely your prerogative. Those that make up the Guix community are free to individually make that choice. When the choice is being forced on us however by an institution in our case Guix; the that is hardly free in my opinion.
*Edited.
@lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br -
I don't doubt that, I myself don't use a mobile phone and can observe the effect that it has on those that do. My use of non-free software, however is entirely pragmatic and while opaque, trust can be built with vendors that have proven themselves to be a friend of free and open source software as Valve have. That is how I can justify continuing to use Steam to play games.
Thing is, though freedom is the ability to do anything within reason without hindrance or influence from external forces. Can you truly call your ideology free if you coercion use through design friction to force compliance?
If you don't want to participate in enabling people to install non-free software from an unofficial repository then that is entirely your prerogative. Those that make up the Guix community are free to individually make that choice. When the choice is being forced on us however by an institution in our case Guix; the that is hardly free in my opinion.
*Edited.
@lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.brhuh, so you think Guix didn't collective reach that sensible and pragmatic decision out of its own volition, or do you just think collectives shouldn't be allowed to make decisions you don't comprehend?
I don't think you understand what coercion means, or how it applies to this case. denying users control of their computing by demanding them to install nonfree programs or else their devices won't work is coercive; refraining from directing users into traps is not coercive.
refusing to advertise cigarettes is not coercive; demanding users to smoke them or else is.
vendors that impose their control over your computing can never be trusted. that control can be used for enshittication, and enshittification proves time and again to be an irresistible force in the long run, if not for the vendor you chose to trust, for the anticompetitive business that acquires them at a later time. relying on nonfree software is always a losing proposition in the long term: when you give others power over you, that power will be used to change the deal, Darth Vader style, to grow the power over you and to extract other things of value from you. if you try to escape that power, it will also cost you. the game is rigged against you once you choose the baited hook over freedom. some people get that, and choose not to direct others to the bait, nor to narcotics.- Also edited in response to the edit
-
huh, so you think Guix didn't collective reach that sensible and pragmatic decision out of its own volition, or do you just think collectives shouldn't be allowed to make decisions you don't comprehend?
I don't think you understand what coercion means, or how it applies to this case. denying users control of their computing by demanding them to install nonfree programs or else their devices won't work is coercive; refraining from directing users into traps is not coercive.
refusing to advertise cigarettes is not coercive; demanding users to smoke them or else is.
vendors that impose their control over your computing can never be trusted. that control can be used for enshittication, and enshittification proves time and again to be an irresistible force in the long run, if not for the vendor you chose to trust, for the anticompetitive business that acquires them at a later time. relying on nonfree software is always a losing proposition in the long term: when you give others power over you, that power will be used to change the deal, Darth Vader style, to grow the power over you and to extract other things of value from you. if you try to escape that power, it will also cost you. the game is rigged against you once you choose the baited hook over freedom. some people get that, and choose not to direct others to the bait, nor to narcotics.- Also edited in response to the edit
The choice to enforce that decision institutionally rather than individually is authoritarian and not conductive to exercising freedom. You would have achieved the same effect by allowing those to interested to engage and volunteer their time, otherwise those asking would look elsewhere.
One prioritises user choice, the other enforces a dogmatic viewpoint.
@lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
