How did the ideology of libre/free software get so politicized?

I’ve noticed advocates for exclusively for libre software and actively discourage simple open source software for not going far enough, also want censorship of not allowing any proprietary software to be mentioned, and don’t allow any critiques of the software they use because it’s libre software so there are no faults or bad designs.

I thoroughly enjoy the code purity of what is labelled as libre software, for license I only like the ISC license for freedom. My attitude is if someone changes my code and doesn’t give back, it does not harm me or injury me in any way.

I also believe libre software can be used for the surveillance of other people, libre software does not be default mean privacy. How network software is configured in systems that other people don’t control, it doesn’t matter if it’s open source when people have no knowledge of other networks configuration.

On the principal of freedom, I do support the right to develop proprietary software. The fact that it exists does not harm anyone who chooses not to use proprietary software.

It seems the die hard libre software crowd, not open source people but the ones who want to live in an only GPLv3+ world can start to live in ther own world, their own bubble, and become disconnected losing perspective that which software other people use is not something that should affect your day in any way. Unless someone is both a network engineer and does infosec or something similiar, they’re not in a position to understand fully appreciate how network protocols matter more than a license and code availability.

  • jadedctrl@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    want censorship of not allowing any proprietary software to be mentioned

    I personally haven’t run into this, though I have seen people immediately hop into a conversation to say, “You shouldn’t use X! It’s proprietary!” Worst-case scenario, I’ve seen social shaming for using proprietary software. Which I think is to some degree OK? Encouraging and advertising proprietary software is unethical, and I think it’s fine to annoy people into not advertising things like Discord. That’s not censorship, it’s just how relationships work, it’s how people associate.

    don’t allow any critiques of the software they use because it’s libre software so there are no faults or bad designs.

    Again, I haven’t run into this. I have seen people defend even garbage libre software on the basis that half-broken free code is better (ethically) than wonderful non-free code — which is true!

    My attitude is if someone changes my code and doesn’t give back, it does not harm me or injury me in any way.

    It only hurts the people that use the proprietary software that was made; now they don’t have control over their PC, and are at the mercy of the developer. Really, all they can do is cross their fingers and hope the dev is friendly and not up to anything unscrupulous. Speaking of which…

    I also believe libre software can be used for the surveillance of other people, libre software does not be default mean privacy

    Not inherently, obviously! No one actually thinks that free software is a magical silver bullet that vanquishes any possibility of malware, spyware, or anything of the sort. The argument is that these sorts of things are, compared to proprietary software, significantly easier to identify and remedy.

    For instance, let’s say you find through some network analysis that a program phones home with suspiciously large payloads. You can’t actually see the contents of the packets as they’re encrypted in some weird format you can’t make heads or tails of. With a proprietary program, you’ve hit a brick wall that’s very hard to climb — you can’t find out what the program is sending, not easily. Your only hope is some back-breaking reverse-engineering work, which probably isn’t feasible unless you’re a professional security researcher. With a libre program, though, you could snoop through the code for anything net-related, and discover much more easily that it’s sending your private keys to the project’s server. Heck, with the libre program you could even remove the malware code and use the program again!

    One is leaps and bounds more amicable to privacy and security.

    • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thank you for countering me point by point, I fully respect. Even if you say that I’m wrong, I must always respect someone who argues point by point, and doesn’t do the usual internet trash of “You sound stupid, you don’t know anything”.

      I have seen in Trisquel Linux forums, they get irritated or offended for mentioning something that is not 100% open source. For example, if someone obviously new posts “I want to stop using Windows, will Trisquel help me to only use free software from now on?”, to which the replies will be “Yes, but please don’t mention that software in the forum here, we don’t like that kind of promotion”. I read that and my thought is “Dumbass, they were explaining their current situation and what background they are coming from in pursuit of trying to find guidance, they were not promoting anything.”

      At a certain point, people have to address the way the world is, not the way they want everything to be running. I would love to live in an exclusively BSD world with a heavy majority towards OpenBSD, along side FreeBSD to to run on all other systems. But in the mean time, since people who do all production work with various proprietary program, we have to live along side them.

      My view is until free software can match the quality of a $100 million movie project as proprietary software vendors, libre software does not exist any any conversation with those people. A movie editor that makes a million dollars doing all of the editing work production does not care about software.

      I think that’s what I find puzzling, is how to libre/free software advocates not see that for people who get paid for their production work on computer all day, open source software is not an option. I am not going to criticize someone who uses various Adobe programs or Pro Tools for being able to produce better quality work in less time, and there is no libre software alternative for what those programs do.

      • L3ft_F13ld!@social.fossware.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Trisquel is sadly the kind of software that would attract those kinds of users. It’s all about being completely free and open source. No driver blobs or anything even slightly proprietary. I appreciate the stance and how they’re doing it but people who go that far in their software choices tend to be quite serious and almost radical when it comes to their choices. Some of them also feel superior to people who haven’t been able to make the switch to free software. It’s also sad that the way they react will probably chase away more potential converts than it actually helps.

        • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The people who heavily push the libre/free software exclusionary attitude have very much turned people off with the attitude. I suspect that there have been a few that went back to Windows dueto the fanaticism.

          I come from BSD, and outside of maybe Slackware and Gentoo, Linux people are not the technical people they think they are. As a collective whole, I find Linux users in general who are not paid Linux servers admins have more opinion than knowledge.

          I deal with it in person and online, when Linux users hype the benefits of Linux over Mac and Windows, if I start talking about OpenBSD and FreeBSD, they shutdown or are put off by it, have nothing to say about Linux vs BSD.

          I do wonder what is the real world, face to face, social skills of people who only use Linux-libre exclusively and won’t touch anything it. Given the posts on Trisquel forums, I get the impression that a few of them are not functioning in a healthy and socially observant manner.

          • wet_lettuce@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            if I start talking about OpenBSD and FreeBSD, they shutdown or are put off by it, have nothing to say about Linux vs BSD.

            Maybe they shutdown because they dont know enough about OpenBSD or FreeBSD to have an opinion?

            I used FreeBSD a while ago just to try it out. That little devil guy was too hard to resist. Besides the fact that the community is tiny what would you be discussing? That its like using linux but harder :) ?

            • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              To discuss peop’e’s skill and what productive things they use it for, take about make config options for world, kernel, ports, pf rules, do they use a hypervisor, LLVM/Clang, use it as a build server, basically what you call being harder I can real skills experience, not opinions.

              • wet_lettuce@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Are you saying, when you talk to people who use Linux, they can’t explain what they use it for? Or are you doing some weird gate-keeping because you’ve complied a kernel before?

                To your last point, yea sure, you get lots of experience building software from scratch, configuring everything manually, etc etc. But doing things manually for no other reason than to do it that way is a huge waste of time (eg Gentoo and your BSD oses–although don’t port and pgk sorta do it for you now?)

                There are plenty of opinionated Linux gurus out there with experience and skills. The more experienced ones would probably get a chuckle at compiling software from source or debating make config options…when they can just use a package manager or a flatpak and get their job done in 20 seconds.

                • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t mean it in a gatekeeping way. Since the BSD’s do not have a GUI installer, none of them come with a desktop, you have to manually enable software installation, you edit your own startup daemons, it’s more of an exact precision. We like to see each other’s .conf files to see how they run their system.

                  There is binary pkgs and system updates, but compiling ports and comping the whole operatig system allows for different configuration options. I don’t likebinary updates because they can be removed, but re-compiling the whole operating system while using it to run other things helps the patches all get mixed in with the other code so it’s one solid fully covered systen, rather than installing and uninstalled patches. Code can stripped out, run in a different way, target the build for a different system. For example it’s possible to build for different hardware than what a system is currently running on and export BSD over the network to another system to run.

                  There’s native virtualization like jails on FreeBSD to run a FreeBSD installation within FreeBSD, or QEMU on OpenBSD.

                  I’m not gatekeeping, it’s about technical skills and abilities, and sharing how each person runs the guts of the system. It comes from the original UNIX culture of sharing code and commands with each, sharing commonality with others who maintain networks and making suggestions about their system text files configuration.

      • flatbield@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Regarding Trisquel Linux. These guys are trying to make a totally Free (Free as in Freedom) Linux distribution. That is still very hard even to this day. I think you have no idea how hard it is to have say a totally Free laptop. This is for many reasons. So you do kind of insult them by pushing Windows on them. If you do not care about this then use Debian or Ubuntu. I have used Linux for over 25, but I do not use totally Free software because it is not very easy and the trade-offs are difficult. On the other hand I totally support the FSF and their mission. We need people doing the really hard things too.

        BSD. Apple OSX is based on one of the BSDs, maybe FreeBSD. They basically took it made proprietary software out of it and gave very little back. These sorts of licenses encourage that behavior which is basically free loading. If you think that is OK in terms of software you write then your fine. I am not sure I do. Thankfully Linux is protected from that or it would have already happened.

        A worse situation is GitHub. Lot of projects on there do not even state a license which means they are proprietary. So not FOSS. So though people worship GitHub it is not exactly Free Software friendly.

        • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you want to focus on license, I’m curious to ask, if people in all different countries take GPL software and make it propreitary, what happens in each country around the world about software licenses? It’s a difference in culture and tradition between the ISC/BSD crowd and the GPL crowd. I am an ISC person. I only care about source code and the license is irrelevent.

          For example, did you know in some countries the bulk of the population only use a pirated copies of Windows, people don’t actualy buy Windows, and venders sell systems with pirated copies of Windows. Microsoft has no legal recourse in several countries so the population pirates Windows. What would the courts do for GPL?

          Are lawyers in every country going to try to sue, when there are places that don’t have laws about software copyright?

          Compliance with GPL is on a voluntary basis. If I set up servers in a country that does not recognize software licenses, steal GPL code and make it closed source, the license is worthless. The license is only effective in countries where corporations can buy influence.

          People have turned license into an idol when has no affect on people that really don’t care. SSH is licenced under ISC or BSD, Apple uses it and gives nothing to OpenBSD for SSH. The OpenBSD project is continuing on perfectly fine and SSH is the built-in default in all operating systems, even though most don’t donate to OpenBSD.

          Mac is based on FreeBSD 4 from 15 years ago, it is unrecognizable today compared to FreeBSD 14.

          • flatbield@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            GPL compliance is not voluntary. Legal validity has been proven many times. Specific jurisdictions that would require a lawyer in that jurisdiction to give an opinion. The FSF though did look at general treatment of copyrighted works around the world when writing GPLv3. Keep in mind too, that what people do versus what is technically legal varies widely. More then that, global corporations or corporations that are part of a global supply chain will probably have to comply with the rules in the most restrictive jurisdiction. The copyright owners can choose to sue at any time if they find out about a violation. It is of course more likely to occur when a pattern of abuse is found.

          • flatbield@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I will say something that may appear counter to what I said. One advantage of permissive licenses is that they are more flexible and compatible over time. Also certain licenses become the thing in certain communities. It also depends on who you want to use your code or library. Most corporations will not use code that is any more restrictive then LGPL. So though GPL and LGPL are interesting if they work, they do not always make sense. It is also why GPL and LGPL should be applied as version 3 or later, not just version 3 so the license can be modified to remain compatible. The other option is to assign your copyright to the FSF so they can make any modifications.

            • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I fully reject FSF ad everything they do. I am strogly against Stallman and everything he believe.

              You admit software license only matters in countries that corporations can buy political influence.

              GPLv3 is about ideology forcing people into submssion and some people have turned it into a religion by putting their faith in a license rather than focusing on social structure. It’s about leeching, not protecting. By you advocating for GPLv3+ you are saying freedom can only be protected by tyranny as opposed to working on changing the culture.

              That’s why I always enjoy working with hackers but I dispise crackers.

              Hacking is the root of BSD and hacking helped turn OpenBSD into the most secure operating system. It was done through culture, not a license and punching people in the head to comply with the license. That’s what GPL whackjob retards don’t understand, is the cultural difference.

              “Shut up and hack”, meaning stop complaining and show your work to make the source code better. If you have not submitted a diff, your opinion is pointless.

              • flatbield@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Wow! Why are you so threatened by the 4 freedoms? No one is telling you what to do with your own code. It is rather astounding to be condemning the FSF for an agenda when you clearly have one of your own.

                As far as companies and other actors buying power, that is everywhere. IP laws well that more depends on if the country wants to exploit IP or freeload on other people’s stuff. I cannot say I feel strongly either way.

                • Lengsel@latte.isnot.coffeeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  FSF is a cult looking for adherents to voluntarily submit their ideology of Marxist tyranny.

                  I believe in freedom so much that I support the right to develop proprietary software and also ooen source software. While I may choose to run OpenBSD and FreeBSD, I am ok to help fix a Windows problem.

                  You a lying by calling them “4 freedoms” similiar to how Islamists, not muslims, but Islamists that say there is freedom in Islam but also advocate for destroying any person who go against Islam.

                  Stallman and FSF are leeches, not innovators.

                  • flatbield@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    So your so much into freedom that you think that others should not have the freedom to choose the licenses they use on their code and similarly users to decide what code they run in part based on the license? I am not sure your talking anything about freedom.

              • frosty@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                If you have not submitted a diff, your opinion is pointless.

                Please submit your diffs for our consideration so we can decide whether to take your opinions seriously.