sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

I don't understand what fantasies you are talking about. We just want people to have freedom when using computers. Freedom that they deserve and that nobody should be able to take away from them. As a side effect we also get privacy and security and a society that works together to achieve common goals in a way that benefits us all. Those problems affect everyone who uses a computer.

The Free Software movement is 40 years old and it has already changed the world. It benefits everyone, not just technical people. Are you gonna tell me that all users of Firefox, Libre Office, Gimp, Matrix or Signal are only technical people? You are talking to me right now using Free Software and I'm responding to you on my fully Free Software operating system.

Free Software is not a licensing method. Software has to use licenses, because that's how copyright works. It doesn't give users any rights by default. Software should be free (as in freedom - we are not talking about price) by default, but it isn't, so we have to use licenses. The Free Software that we use today was created under capitalism, so I don't see how capitalism prevents us from making useful software and working together on improving it. There are also many developers and companies that sell Free Software (they make commercial programs).

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

I think it's important to have boundaries. If we keep our operating systems fully free, it will be harder for anyone to pressure us to add proprietary components to them. But if our OSes already contain non-free components, it's not that hard to add more. We not only want freedom, we also want to keep it.

It also needs to be clear for the people in our community that our main goal is freedom and getting rid of proprietary software. Convenience is less important.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

I didn't say that I'm never going to install any firmware updates. I just don't want to put it in my system if it's proprietary.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

The world won't change itself. If people did nothing 40 years ago, there wouldn't be a Free Software movement.

It sounds like you are not using a fully free distro anyway. Most of the popular distros contain proprietary firmware, so what's the problem?

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

I am forced to keep proprietary firmware in my OS to use the hardware and that's what you are advocating for. You want everyone to be forced to do that. But I don't want anything proprietary in my system. I see no reason why I should have a proprietary firmware package installed for my GPU to work. The firmware could be just on the device itself and if someone wants to change it, then they can install the package in their OS. But maybe there could also be some other way.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

The problem is that people don't care about freedom, security or privacy. If they cared, they would only choose software that gives them those things. They would use Free Software. Even when it's not always convenient.

So the issue here is not capitalism, but non-free proprietary software, because it makes it easy to abuse users. Unfortunately most people haven't even heard of Free Software. They don't realise that they deserve certain rights when using computers. I think if more people were familiar with the Free Software movement, they would think differently and they would demand freedom. Not all Lemmy users have heard of Free Software, but many of us understand that freedom is important. So we use it, even though it's not convenient and the UI sucks.

We are capable of competing with corporations and often making better software that them, but that's not enough. If people don't understand the issues we are trying to solve, they will just use whatever new shiny app that comes out next. That's why some Twitter users migrated to Bluesky and Threads. They don't understand that after a while they will be abused the same way as before.

Even if we make Matrix way better, Discord users will still use Discord, because to them everything is fine and there is no reason to switch. Learning to use something new is always inconvenient. I doubt that all Windows users are unable to switch to GNU/Linux. They just don't think it's worth the effort, because to them there is nothing wrong. Being spied on and restricted is ok as long as all their proprietary games work.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

You don't know what the proprietary update contains. It can be a security fix, but also a backdoor. People can decide on their own if they want to update, but I see no reason why I must be forced to have proprietary stuff in my system. I want a fully libre distro. I can't switch to one, because I would have to give up on using AMD GPUs, because people like you say that this is fine.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

That's not certain and them getting absolute power also isn't.

So to me it sounds a bit like the arguments that they like to use. Like:

if we accept immigrants, they will slowly replace us and destroy the country

Technically maybe that could happen, but there are many other things that could also happen and that you are failing to consider.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

// TODO: fix this code

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

But nobody is saying that there shouldn't be a way to update firmware. Firmware just shouldn't a be part of the OS, unless it's free. Adding proprietary components to our systems will only make it harder for us to keep our freedom.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

I will be crushed when this happens along with millions of others, like you, who thought this could never happen again.

Be careful of the slippery slope fallacy.

[-] Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago

No worries, he can optimize it later.

-1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Freesoftwareenjoyer@lemmy.world to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

I found two apps that seem to be violating the AGPL license. They both use the AGPL-licensed lemmy-js-client library, which means the apps themselves should also use the same license (which is the whole purpose of Copyleft). But they aren't. I don't know if Lemmy developers and contributors are aware of this.

The apps:

https://github.com/ando818/lemmy-ui-svelte - Apache license

https://github.com/aeharding/wefwef - MIT license

What should we do about this as a community? I informed one of the app's developers about this and it doesn't seem like they care. I wonder if some of the proprietary apps that are being developed right now also rely on this library.

Update: wefwef now includes the AGPL license in the repo. Thank you to the Lemmy user who reported it to the author and to the author for quickly resolving the issue :)

view more: next ›

Freesoftwareenjoyer

joined 1 year ago