Forgive me Stallman for I have sinned.
-
@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
-
@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
-
@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
-
@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
-
@jordyd @hipsterelectron Stallman's only "strict principle" is that hebephilia isn't pedophilia. Anything else is open to change.
-
@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
-
@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
-
@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.
-
@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*
-
@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 :(
