I was introduced to "free software" through "open source". I was using "open source" long before I even read of "free software". And "open source" to me always meant the same of "free software". The problem is that Bruce minted this term for companies, because companies would never accept to do anything "for free", but then the same companies completely vandalized the term "open source". I don't really care of the "free software vs open source" contest, but today, 20 years after, they have grown to represent two very different attitudes even though they started the same.
Same. When I found my first blob years ago, I was confused because I was told "the whole OS is all Open Source" and believed it. When I found that blob, I felt lied to, and I got Trisquel immediately.
Now, I'm struggling to figure out which OS to use to do my computing. Trisquel and Parabola are dying, GuixSD is not ready, and Debian is not strict enough about software (including Pocket in Firefox, for example.)
Trisquel and Parabola are dying
Trisquel and Parabola are dying
Are they? Trisquel still gets quite a lot of donations and good PR.
It's not exactly dead, but it's struggling and I'm scared it won't be here in ten years. I want something reliable.
How is "GuixSD not ready" for you?
It depends on what you want.
I'm adding some more parts to it to use it in production (as a side job to the big project around GuixSD) on a server.
I've put a considerable high amount of time into making GuixSD work for me on a daily basis with all applications I want being present.
Maybe you just need a list of applications you really need, check if they exist and if they don't work on them. That's the point with volunteering, you learn sooner or later that the person you are waiting for to do the job is yourself.
And I have doubts about Trisquel and Parabola seeing less activity (dying? those are not living organisms…), so data to back up your arguments would be good.
Most of my needs can be met, except I need:
This was extremely interesting to read. Thanks for sharing.
The biggest problem with the term "Open Source" is that it worked. It did its job into tricking people to use Free Software yet, never understand the reasons for doing so. As far as I am concerned, it is an invalid term; since there is no "community" and it values pragamatism over principle. RMS wrote about this here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
Yeah. I happened to have a chat recently at university with a capitalist (of the less than 5 self-proclaimed, self-labeled ones I've met so far), an old businessman who learned computer science back in the 70s with punched cards. He is working with proprietary code only, only doing proprietary work for (I guessed by comments between the lines) military and other industries, and wasn't even aware that Linux went anywhere or what even Free Software is (I think Open Source he knew), let alone the GNU Project.
It was an interesting chat, from both sides.
Who would call themselves a "capitalist"? That's so bizarre.
Actually it's just honest. I would never deal with them personally, but it is interesting when you have a random conversation for 2.5 hours with them. Of the people I've met so far from that side he was rather nice and polite.
I love anti-capitalists. More for me...
Also, Free Software and Capitalism work well together; like peanutbutter and jelly.
I love your name.