Boycotting FOSS projects in the wake of the "buy canadian/european" movement makes no sense
Boycotting FOSS projects in the wake of the "buy canadian/european" movement makes no sense
I've seen many threads suggesting products but they often don't mention FOSS projects, which should always be preferred to corporate software. With FOSS you are already boycotting capitalism, on either side. Free and Open Source ignores borders and shouldn't be categorized in nationalist terms, no matter where some of the maintainers happen to live.
I always like to say the fruits of FOSS labour are the common heritage of mankind. It belongs to all of us as a public good, created and maintained by selfless workers. (Nevermind the fact that most FOSS projects are based out of Europe anyways).
Free software is the antithesis of capitalism. It doesn't make sense to boycott them.
Is someone doing that? If it's FOSS it's from the internet.
There are some pretty corporate "open core" software companies tho, that's a more grey area
I would think it depends on the project
Use common sense. The nation isn't the only consideration.
I'm the most anti-American user on here and I agree.
I'd rather use USA-linked free software than Spotify.
Wasn't Spotify Swedish tho? But yeah
I think that's the point, he's saying he'd rather use USA-linked FOSS than non-USA proprietary software.
Agreed.
I came into this thinking its more like "Oh no open sores is full of communists let me pay for worse software I never own" which is an argument that comes from the same camp as "this software I don't like is woke"
I get it as an European that it means more to me to consume "locally" and to prioritize services that are European-based. But due to the nature of computers and FOSS, borders are redefined and it is more about ideas and politics rather than physical location. However, computers and servers are also physical and submitted to legislations of countries, we cannot ignore laws such as the Patriot act and the power that the American state can have even on FOSS projects.
For me the priority is to use software that match my needs; if I have the choice between an American and an European solution, I'll tend to choose the latter one.
I canceled ongoing donations to several projects based in the US and stated that my reasons for doing so was US policy against my country. It doesn’t matter if the dev or project lead supports those policies or not, I refuse to contribute to the US economy if I can at all help it.
I understand, but I am also thinking about the dev of those projects, as an individual who (probably) really despises the current US Gov, and even though they have to engage in the US economy, as they need to eat, pay bills, etc. It is a very tricky problem for those individuals and how to emancipate from. It is like with Russia where such individuals do not endorse at all the ongoing war but still live in that system 🤔
If you are worried about US laws affecting FOSS projects, it can always be forked, perhaps even be rewritten.
Of course, but what about the individual behind it, if it is someone who is also against their current government, while having to live in that country? It is tricky to ask how to reconcile the need for EU solutions while encouraging American citizens to fight against their system!
Seeing people look for corporate social media alternatives is painful.
I agree, but am happy that X is losing users to Bluesky, so I don't try to convert friends and family from Bluesky to Masrodon. I'd rather they start changing other stuff instead that is easier.
Oh definitely, Bluesky is far better than twitter. Honestly, seeing the fediverse piss itself over bluesky is annoying, because the alternative is people still on twitter.
> "Hey guys, I want to leave X, should I go to Bluesky or Threads? What? Mastodon? Never heard of that. Looks very complicated, I'll pass"
> -- CEO, founder, IT wizz on LinkedInEvery time!
From a purely "vote with your wallet" standpoint it doesn't make sense, because there's no money paid. However, one might worry about data/information getting in the hands of a fascist/compromised government. So I think people should judge this themselves case by case.
I think the important part is about who is running the server, rather than who made the software
The fediverse is interesting in that context because each instance can decide where they set up the infrastructure or how they process data / requests. The same applies to self hosting
I saw an article that outlined which country each fediverse platform "originated" from, such as Canada for Pixelfed and Germany for Mastodon. That's fun to know about, but otherwise not important to users compared to the instances themselves
At most it might speak to which laws will govern the project itself, but even then someone can fork a project that goes astray
People should pay for foss. Donations are oftentimes welcome
I mean, any FOSS project from anywhere could be being used by a fascist government or corporation, to be fair. That's literally one of the very serious and real downsides of FOSS. It's able to be used for good or ill.
I mean, it can easily be argued that the US corporate technology class has benefited far more from FOSS than end-users worldwide.
Initially, EC2 used Xen virtualization exclusively. However, on November 6, 2017, Amazon announced the new C5 family of instances that were based on a custom architecture around the KVM hypervisor, called Nitro.
Amazon leveraged FOSS to create their own successful closed-source offshoot. AWS pretty much runs the web. Amazon... is not a good company.
That being said, the US has chosen to be isolationist, whether all of its citizens agree with it or not. Having less of a presence on the international stage, including in the FOSS world, is simply a consequence of isolationism. So boycotting US FOSS is likely to happen in some ways on purpose, and in some ways just from diminished international respect and involvement.
Totally agree. The majority of Americans are great people. Not everyone is MAGA. We need to support the good ones. Sanctions and boycotts tend to unite.
One exception would be if the project imposse a security risk because key people and servers, within the US, may be blackmailed or pushed by the new administration. We're not there yet though. And I hope these projects and people migrate if this becomes the case.
Also, FOSS projects run by big tech are probably also wise to avoid for strategic reasons.
Totally agree. The majority of Americans are great people.
Not choosing to vote or speak is endorsing the establishment. We are not great people. We are dumbfucks.
The majority of Americans are great people
They're not the majority if they can't win an election — just sayin'.
American presidents rarely receive a majority of the vote. In this case, he did but thats the majority of voters in that election and not the majority of americans
if its run by a big company then it's just open source and not free, or do you mean something like a company contributing to the code?
lol who is suggesting boycotting foss projects?
I think OP means that one shouldn't boycott FOSS projects just because they are from USA. That said, I don't like to be told what I have to do and don't agree to "FOSS projects, which should always be preferred to corporate software". My pc, my LAN, my rules.
I don’t like to be told what I have to do and don’t agree to “FOSS projects, which should always be preferred to corporate software”. My pc, my LAN, my rules.
...he said, without a hint of irony.
Meanwhile, "my PC, my LAN, my rules" is precisely the reason I do agree with always preferring FOSS to corporate software.
Almost all the lists shared in the communities exclude FOSS projects.
Counterpoint: Fedora is a testing bed for Red Hat. One of Red Hat's notable customers is the US military. I'd prefer to stay off that path if I can help it. It's a matter of trust, and it's a matter of indirectly contributing. I've seen people say the same things about Deepin and everyone nods in agreement, but why the hell should I trust a US project, for the same reasons?
Honestly this should be a wake call to the FOSS community that we are way too reliant on the US.
Every default we have is US centric and if FOSS is really meant for everyone we should move away from that.
why the hell should I trust a US project
Bekuz Amerika fridom wurld polis, best kontri in da world!
But on a more serious note, did you know Linus banned those Russian contributors like a month after redhat and DoD signed a new deal. Can you guess who owns RH stocks?
I think you're missing the point a bit.
Both BuyCanadian and BuyEuropean are about supporting their respective economies as they are boycotting America's.
For Canada, we're looking at a recession (brought on by our "ally") so people are trying to help fellow Canadians out as things get rough and people lose jobs.
While I support FOSS and recommend them in threads etc I fully understand why they don't meet all the goals of those movements. (That being said, I think one of the most rocking counter punches would be EU investment in stabilizing Linux enough to make it a feasible alternative to Windows/Apple for casual and corporate users, solid shot to 2 of the magnificent 7.)
investment in stabilizing Linux enough to make it a feasible alternative
Do you care to elaborate? If I had to write a list of reasons why Linux might not be ready for your average cubicle... Stability wouldn't be one of them.
Not the other commenter, but they likely meant stability with respect to device drivers. The kernel is great at not degrading with a high uptime, but there's consumer stuff that's just perpetually unimplemented, buggy, or minimally-functional:
- Sensor monitoring on Ryzen platforms
- Realtek NIC chipsets
- Nvidia cards and proprietary drivers for anything and everything other than compute workloads
- Nvidia cards older than the RTX 2000 series and FOSS drivers
- Peripherals targeted towards "gamers"
None of this is the kernel maintainers fault, of course. The underlying issue is the usual one of shitty corporations refusing to publish documentation and/or strategically abusing the legal system to stifle reverse engineering for interoperability.