Conversation

Notices

1. Wolf480pl (wolf480pl@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:44:05 JST Wolf480pl

   An irregular, perhaps oddly-timed reminder that the whole idea of free software was to prevent software developers from imposing their will on software users.

   • Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:43:58 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to
     I wish my non-technical neighbors used free software. without that, this scenario isn't even possible. now, once they do, it will only happen if they get out of the proprietary mindset, realizing that the possibility is there. we've got a long way to go, but there are plenty of requests for enhancement in change trackers, so I think what we're missing is in density, not in kind
     DCent likes this.
   • Wolf480pl (wolf480pl@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:43:59 JST Wolf480pl

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva

     @lxo the part where individuals do that as well. The part wgere your non-technical neighbour asks you if you can do a tweak to the software they use.

   • Wolf480pl (wolf480pl@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:44:01 JST Wolf480pl

     in reply to

     • Xerz! :blobcathearttrans:

     @xerz In the end of the day, the question is: if a piece ofbsoftware does something you don't like, can you fix it?

     And that means to get full benefits of software freedom you have to be a developer.

     The part about getting someone else to modify the software for you is IMO the least working in practice part.

   • Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:44:01 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to
     companies hire third-party developers to customize, develop and improve software for them all the time. it seems to be even more common than licensing off-the-shelf software. what part of this doesn't seem to be working?
   • Wolf480pl (wolf480pl@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:44:02 JST Wolf480pl

     in reply to

     • Xerz! :blobcathearttrans:

     @xerz The 4 freedoms are just a means. I don't know what Stallman thought about Symbollics, but perhaps it was like NVidia - great technology made by an control-freak company?

     In any case, he also said on nultiple occasions that "they [developers] have power over you" and this is what Free Software is trying to prevent. And it all makes sense IMO. Even if Stallman didn't believe it, or was hypocritical about it.

   • Xerz! :blobcathearttrans: (xerz@fedi.xerz.one)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:44:03 JST Xerz! :blobcathearttrans:

     in reply to

     • Xerz! :blobcathearttrans:
     @wolf480pl I actually think the will imposing part was BY FAR the weakest part — I mean, Stallman didn't think MIT/Symbolics software was bad per se, and he made sure to keep tight control of his stuff under FSF copyright and e.g. making sure GCC parts couldn't be used as libraries for non-FOSS apps
   • Xerz! :blobcathearttrans: (xerz@fedi.xerz.one)'s status on Thursday, 29-Sep-2022 00:44:05 JST Xerz! :blobcathearttrans:

     in reply to
     @wolf480pl …wasn't it to be able to know what it does, share it and choose who to get help from as well?