Spacc BBS Spacc BBS
    • Categorie
    • Recenti
    • Tag
    • Popolare
    • Mondo
    • Utenti
    • Gruppi
    • Registrati
    • Accedi
    La nuova BBS è in fase Alpha. I post precedenti al 22 luglio 2024 potrebbero non essere trasferibili, ma rimarranno disponibili per la lettura su /old/.

    Forgive me Stallman for I have sinned.

    Pianificato Fissato Bloccato Spostato Uncategorized
    12 Post 4 Autori 77 Visualizzazioni
    Caricamento altri post
    • Da Vecchi a Nuovi
    • Da Nuovi a Vecchi
    • Più Voti
    Rispondi
    • Topic risposta
    Effettua l'accesso per rispondere
    Questa discussione è stata eliminata. Solo gli utenti con diritti di gestione possono vederla.
    • jordyd@types.plJ Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
      jordyd@types.pl
      ultima modifica di

      Forgive me Stallman for I have sinned. I used a GNU/Linux distribution with a non-free repository. I enabled the non-free repository, and worse, I installed the unholy abomination that is Nvidia proprietary drivers. I am ashamed of myself, for I have spit in the face of the holiest of our documents, the GNU Public License.

      hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
      • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
        hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @jordyd@types.pl
        ultima modifica di

        @jordyd what if the GPL likes that freaky shit

        hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
        • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
          hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
          ultima modifica di

          @jordyd nvidia has "open source" drivers now which is useful when they fucking break and i have to patch them by hand but i heard they just dumped everything into the firmware instead so they're still unusable without accepting the blob into your heart

          hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
          • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
            hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
            ultima modifica di

            @jordyd personally i think a completely free software stack is important but it's only one component of the entire framework and infra that achieves software freedom. interop with proprietary and permissively licensed code is imo absolutely necessary as it provides a bridge to a free system and ensures free software maintains equal or better functionality to nonfree systems

            hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
            • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
              hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
              ultima modifica di

              @jordyd otherwise we risk stagnation. obviously there's a point at which interoperability work begins to support proprietary code, and it's always a dynamic tradeoff. but the fascination with the fully free stack which stallman epitomizes demonstrates i think one of the enduring fallacies of the free software movement which actively detaches it from empowering users and works directly against solidarity with users who are coerced into proprietary environments

              jordyd@types.plJ 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
              • jordyd@types.plJ Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                jordyd@types.pl @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
                ultima modifica di

                @hipsterelectron Stallman can get away with having such strict principles because he barely uses a computer. But everyone else has to face the reality of dealing with hardware that just does not yet have good FOSS drivers, compatibility with commonly-used proprietary formats, and sometimes just FOSS software not having feature parity with proprietary equivalents

                dalias@hachyderm.ioD valhalla@social.gl-como.itV 2 Risposte Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                • dalias@hachyderm.ioD Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                  dalias@hachyderm.io @jordyd@types.pl
                  ultima modifica di

                  @jordyd @hipsterelectron Stallman's only "strict principle" is that hebephilia isn't pedophilia. Anything else is open to change.

                  hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                  • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                    hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @dalias@hachyderm.io
                    ultima modifica di

                    @dalias @jordyd i mostly saw that clause as a setup to the "barely uses a computer" line which correctly identifies how detached he is from any material realities which he deigns to speak upon. i think it's important to undermine his technical credibility as well since it allows us to identify structural issues with free software beyond stallman himself

                    hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                    • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                      hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
                      ultima modifica di

                      @dalias @jordyd i appreciated the reply on emacs-devel in 2012 (in response to him demanding the use of "Lose64" over "Win64") which directly described this kind of bullshit as taking away their time from actually working on improving emacs https://circumstances.run/@hipsterelectron/115634500393545899

                      hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                      • hipsterelectron@circumstances.runH Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                        hipsterelectron@circumstances.run @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
                        ultima modifica di

                        @dalias @jordyd people so often set up this false dilemma of like oh well he makes these incredibly harmful public statements which he refuses to retract but muh muh technical contributions mumble mumble. in my experience the technical contributions are either in the distant past, or more frequently a result of taking credit for the work of others. i personally believe it's important to undermine the technical credibility of fuckboys who don't care about hurting others and can't be trusted with authority.

                        valhalla@social.gl-como.itV 1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                        • valhalla@social.gl-como.itV Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                          valhalla@social.gl-como.it @jordyd@types.pl
                          ultima modifica di

                          @jordyd @hipsterelectron OTOH, there are other, much better, people than Stallman that manage to be almost as strict, while using computers and living in the modern world.

                          And yes, they do accept that there is a need for compromises, especially on things that aren't under one's control.

                          And they deal with them in a sane way, e.g. by just using the damn bank website rather than asking somebody else to do it so that they can remain pure.

                          But also at times by making choices to use something (software, hardware) that is maybe just acceptable rather than the best for the job, *when they can afford to do so*

                          1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                          • valhalla@social.gl-como.itV Questo utente è esterno a questo forum
                            valhalla@social.gl-como.it @hipsterelectron@circumstances.run
                            ultima modifica di

                            @hipsterelectron @jordyd @dalias in my opinion the *only* reason Stallman is still relevant today is that we are still dealing with issues that he correctly identified in the 1980s (maybe 1990s)

                            and yes, it would have been nice if society had been listening to him back then and worked on those problems rather than letting them fester and grow worse

                            but after that time he's gone from irrelevant to increasingly harmful *for the very cause he started*, and if only his cultists could realize that the important thing they should defend are the ideas he originally promoted and not his cult of personality we would live in a much better world :(

                            1 Risposta Ultima Risposta Rispondi Cita 0
                            • Primo post
                              Ultimo post