Did PewDiePie Just Crack the Code for How to Present Libre Software?
Did PewDiePie Just Crack the Code for How to Present Libre Software?
On June 26th ( two days ago ) PewDiePie ( who I believe needs no introduction ) released another video in his liberation saga. This time titled I'm DONE with Google. In this video he goes over his process of getting "de-google-efied", or as he clarifies toward the end of the video, his process of ge...
You're viewing a single thread.
A lot of the times when people hear of Richard Stallman, or other people, who correctly state that all proprietary software is absolutely inexcusable, they feel pressured. Which makes them recoil and distance themselves from those types of ideas. If you need to suddenly re-learn the entire way you are using the computer, and you may have certain habits, or certain things you rely on, or enjoy very much, either games, or software, or in case of PewDiePie, the platform he is on. You will automatically feel like whatever these Stallmans are asking from you is so absurdly hard for you to do, that you don't even consider it. More than that, to protect yourself from that hard work, you come up with a bunch of reasons, to not even engage in that idea. Which creates an opposition. And it is not something that we want.
It's not just that, the overbearing FOSS mentality, from Stallmans corner of that world, is that you need to take a damn political position on software to be able to interact with other people that use it.
Which in itself is not actually true, but if you approach it like this with non-technical types then they will rightly and instinctively balk at both the software and you.
Bringing people to FOSS should be the same as bringing them to any other software, and if the ideology behind it is so self-evidently true then - by its own standard - it won't need significant petitioning to convince them they should use more of it for ethical reasons as well as to meet their needs. This is software, not Amway. They're trying to write a word document, not to join a cult.
It’s not just that, the overbearing FOSS mentality, from Stallmans corner of that world, is that you need to take a damn political position on software to be able to interact with other people that use it.
FOSS is literally a political and ideological set of positions. The entire thing that makes Free Software and Open Source differentiated from just "normal" software development and distribution are a set of political and organisational positions, which are in limited fashion codified and expressed in software licenses, and also through e.g. structure of organisations around projects and why they're structured that way.
Without that, you just get companies making money from pawning off a portion of their development and infrastructure costs to volunteers and other organisations (non-profits, other companies, governments).
Bringing people to FOSS should be the same as bringing them to any other software,
FOSS isn't about fandom of a particular piece of software.
and if the ideology behind it is so self-evidently true then - by its own standard - it won’t need significant petitioning to convince them they should use more of it for ethical reasons as well as to meet their needs. This is software, not Amway. They’re trying to write a word document, not to join a cult.
This is absurdly politcally and socially naive. Also can we please ban stemlords from ascribing every aspect of politics and political advocacy to always being a cult.
You seem to have some reasonable points here but as you're resorting to lame ad hominems, you can bicker with yourself.
As a developer and maintainer of FOSS, you are a part of the problem I'm describing
but as you’re resorting to lame ad hominems
lmao
all people who don't share my political naivety are "cultists"
invokes ad hominem so your argument is invalid
Perfect representation of STEMlord redditor.
As a developer and maintainer of FOSS, you are a part of the problem I’m describing
The problem being we aren't all as absurdly shallow in our understanding of the world and politics as you are? Get your head out of your arse.
More of the same. Shocking.
Enjoy your day.
Politics is what happens whenever more than 2 people make a decision
Maybe "adopt an ideology" is fairer than "take a political position"
The challenge is that we're not just selling software, we're selling an idea - the idea that users deserve control over their computing. We're not competing on the proprietary software marketplace, we're offering an alternative to it.
We are already seeing the proprietary software world enshittify. More and more "non-tech" people are looking for a way out. The challenge is to demonstrate that these problems are inherent to the world of proprietary software and not just because "Google is evil."
Sure it's a challenge, but it's not necessary for getting people to use the software. One does not require the other, but it is a gateway to being able to do that.
It is self-evident that free software with open licensing and no strings attached is a superior and more beneficial ownership model than closed source paid licensing. That part I don't think anyone needs to be convinced of.
It's just not necessary to make that one of your core beliefs, or add several others, before using the software.
It is self-evident that free software with open licensing and no strings attached is a superior and more beneficial ownership model than closed source paid licensing. That part I don't think anyone needs to be convinced of.
As someone who has both technical and nontechnical people in their family, I call bs. Even if it is partially self-evident (in the fact that you dont need to sign into an account or pay for it), the details, and more importantly the weight, of FOSS is often lost on people.
I've had to watch some of them walk into a rake and bruise their foreheads several times over before really absorbing it.
It's something people need to really read up on before true comprehension. That, or get burnt really really badly.
Ideology? Politics? Tomato tomatoh in my eyes. At the very least, they're nearly inseperable (think: DMCA, copyright law, etc.)