So, I had this question in my mind for a while, but Linux community wants everything to be FOSS. Isn't it a bit too extreme, guys? What's the deal if it's closed source? Not all of Linux users are software devs. We just want a software that works enough, even if it's on Arch or Gentoo (I use proprietary stuff on Arch).
For example, I was talking with a friend about his razer laptop, and he told me that he got the one with the dock because of he hates nvidia. If I was him, I would've gone for Razer Blade 2018 model. Along with that, proprietary Nvidia drivers work the fastest on Linux.
>in b4 ethics in tech
If you really care about ethics, stop buying electronics in general. They're built in workshops with less security and less wage (read: Foxconn).
You guys don't make the Linux community any better. You make us seem worse.,
However, my question remains... Why are some Linux users think like this?
I see the main crux of your argument revolves around the hardware side of FOSS and it's related drivers, which is fine if you were asking specifically but you lumped the entire crowd under this pretence. There's many reasons people decide to stick to FOSS only including paranoia, security, ease of mind / use (only if the software and hardware compliments them) and just in general good sportsmanship with regards to the contribution FOSS does. With the hardware side of things, it gets trickier as you did state, there's basically no freedom in the production of them, but that doesn't mean there has to be no freedom from your drivers that interface them, which closed source actively works against to potentially sabotage you with backdoors and blobs we can't see. Some people decide to buy AMD over Nvidia for ootb compatibility in Linux with minor blobs which are a somewhat necessary evil, and the closed source alternative does exist for people using CL-bench intensive software and can benefit from amdgpu-pro. Others ditch choose again, AMD over Intel for similar reasons in security and mitigations. I personally fall in a middle ground of FOSS and proprietary because I cannot imagine myself personally not using drivers without blobs that make them work as expected, nor use some tools that are at a current stage subpar compared to the opensource alternative, but I also don't wish to ever use blatantly hostile closed software with sensitive information when superior opensource ones exist.
This is an extremely high quality, high effort post. I just thought the Linux base was all about FOSS just because hobbycomputing, the ability to tweak under the hood to their desire, and enjoyment from contributing to projects that others would benefit from while also benefiting from the work and effort of others.
Grayson Brooks
Is this pasta?
Sebastian Hall
propriaty software developer & vendor here. that's the reason why we omit linux as a target for our products. because the best we could hope for is low sales and abuse by fosstards. get fucked with your toy os
Adrian Cook
>t.NPC
If you cant understand why FOSS is superior you are a brainlet.
>Letting anyone have power over you. >Trading privacy and freedom for usability
David Allen
they are communist zealots. they don't actually care about technology
Isaiah Hernandez
Each one has pros and cons.
Austin Morgan
Some people actually value their freedom and will fight to defend it, don't waste time making excuses for being a proprietary apologist
Austin Morales
>attempt to sell people an abusive product that attacks their freedom >accuse their OS of being a toy >wonder why they are hostile to you and don't buy your products btw last time i checked windows was the OS that ships with candy crush and minecraft
Brandon Turner
Because you yourself as well as everyone else is free to modify the code to suit their use case, among other things. With FOSS people are not reliant on a single entity for updates, since anyone can contribute. Many people can audit the code to make the program more secure, and to make sure it has no hidden/unwanted features like data mining. People can learn from the code itself as well.
Liam Foster
I'm not against FOSS. I'm against pro-Stallmanism
Henry Ward
What does that even mean?
Jack Nelson
>Stallmanism You mean the 'all code should be FLOSS'? That is what I was talking about. You have to start somewhere - someday, if we're lucky, everything from the tiniest hardware component to the most mundane program for some obscure use case will be libre.
Hunter Perez
>free, freedom, open source Misusing term to refer to a separate concept is one of the issues. Lying is another issue. Most being anti-Christian is a problem for me. Basically most are intolerable autists that you would never want to associate with.
Daniel Rogers
>Most being anti-Christian What?
Levi Martin
What I am saying is that refusing to use something because it's not FOSS is just a stupid idea. I love using both foss and prop.
Isaac Clark
Why not? People want to support the things they like and respect, and avoiding stuff that works against such things is part of that.
Zachary Morgan
I have nothing against FOSS. I use AMDGPU, I use Linux and etc. This thread is more for understanding why some people only want to use FOSS and exclude proprietary. I didn't even mean to say that the entire Linux community is like that.
Jack Rodriguez
I am not a prop apologist. I say both types of software have good sides and bad sides. One having more improvements, while other has a cleaner UI...
Ayden Garcia
>I have nothing against FOSS I understood that perfectly from the previous posts, yes. >This thread is more for understanding why some people only want to use FOSS and exclude proprietary. And I have tried my best to answer by giving you examples in what such brings as well as what FOSS itself brings to the table. >I didn't even mean to say that the entire Linux community is like that. Indeed it isn't, and people advocating for libre software do not limit themselves to Linux. You seem to be under the impression that the software license limits what the software is capable of, how it will interface with the user, etc. Design philosophy dictates that.
