Mozilla first, now FSFE?
ccosse at gmail.com
Sat Mar 24 05:22:41 UTC 2018
In all seriousness, I personally don't give a fuck about FSF/E's stance on
I've been on FB about 10x today. It allows me to connect with the people I
love, like and value. They don't give 2 F's about FSF values and it's not
for me to proselytize to them. That has nothing to do with my
relationships. I talk to my girlfriend, my family, my colleagues ... if
anyone in their right mind seriously believes that abandoning FB for the
reasons that FSF/E suggests, well, they are living in a complete and total
fantasy. J. D. Nicholson, I like you and the way you think and appreciate
that you are the only one who responded to my comment, which I made only to
point out the hypocrisy of it all. I'd say "friend me on FB" but I guess
you're not "in". That's cool. I still like you. Yes, after some
reflection I just cannot agree with any of this nonsense. FB enables
people to connect in an ever-disconnected world. Rather than boycott it
altogether how about campaigning to change it according to FSF/E values? I
don't believe the Mark Z. is part of the "Deep State" trying to undermine
good in order to promote "evil". C'mon and get real. FB let's me
communicate with fellow pilots, train enthusiasts, music enthusiasts, NORD
keyboard players, my first grade classmates, people I've met while
traveling around the world, interesting projects that I would otherwise not
be aware of, news that isn't covered by mainstream media, hardships
experienced by loved ones, the list goes on. How much change to FB
code/policy would it take to align with FSF/E "values"? That's the easiest
solution to the whole dilema, not to attempt to get the world to
switch-over to whatever-the-f*ck obscure platform FSF/E deems
"acceptable". I'm not an enemy -- I believe in FSF for the most part, but
this is absurd. It's contra-reality. What are you so afraid of? Get of
the internet if you're that neurotic about privacy. Huh? Go ahead and ban
me. I'm on your side, to a degree, but a practical degree. God bless RMS
and all his intentions, but you've lost the world by virtue of the FSF
cornerstone tenet that closed source is immoral. The universe doesn't
recognize software freedom as either moral or immoral. It's irrelevant in
terms of morality. You lose 99.9% of the world with that assertion.
Should I press the "send" button and own the above? Hell yes. C&C
welcome. Yours Truly, Charles Cosse.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:20 PM, J.B. Nicholson <jbn at forestfield.org> wrote:
> C. Cossé wrote:
>> To me it's a question of consistency: does FSFE not agree with FSF? RMS
>> says "absolutely no to Facebook", so then?
> I asked about a similar bit of FSFE policy on 2017-07-26 and is archived
> As you can see the responses I received indicated a remarkable departure
> from what Stallman (RMS) has said about open source's development
> methodology and its practical consequences. He's quite clear to point out
> in his talks and writings:
> that the two are radically different when faced with powerful, reliable
> proprietary software. You can still come across articles in the tech press
> that play out the very difference Stallman described so many years ago.
> I bring this up in order to back up the point that, no, apparently the
> FSFE doesn't agree with the FSF on all points.
> Perhaps now that it's in vogue to get rid of one's Facebook account (if
> one had such an account to begin with), FSFE will consider getting rid of
> theirs and explain why. It seems eminently sensible to me to join with the
> FSF's "not F'd" view per https://www.fsf.org/facebook.
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at lists.fsfe.org
> This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
> participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Discussion