5 ms·

Freedom isn't ideological, it's very concrete. It just means you are allowed to tinker, share, and learn about the software on your computer. And generalizatio

by mbrock 10y ago

Freedom isn't ideological, it's very concrete. It just means you are allowed to tinker, share, and learn about the software on your computer. And generalizations about what "people" need make the mistake of assuming that all people are the same which they're obviously not.

swah 10y ago
> It just means you are allowed to tinker, share, and learn about the software on your computer. You say tinker, I read "everything broken for non-expert users that can't compile their own kernel modules". Tinkering is fun when all the subsystems are working flawlessly and you're just fiddling with a couple variables. Example: "to get a complex project to compile on Windows requires a lot of tinkering".
- mbrock 10y ago
  When I was 15, tinkering with kernel modules was the most fun I'd ever had, and the combined experiences of Linux configuration boosted my skills and intelligence. Then thanks to the freedom to tinker I was able to get into open source software communities which gave me a career, new friends, and immeasurable amounts of learning. That's why software freedom isn't a matter of abstract ideology to me.
  - uola 10y ago
    I don't see how that is unique to Linux. Plenty of people, probably more, have had those same experiences with other operating systems. I can see why someone would like, or even prefer, to tinker with Linux and it would of course be a loss if it didn't exist, but that doesn't mean that Linux developers are the only ones tinkering. So it does seem like that it's primarily an ideological difference in what tinkering means. Unfortunately the Linux community largely seem to attract and retain people who mainly care about their own freedom to tinker. Every time someone pushes out something broken, users lose thousands of tinkering man hours on trying to make those things work for themselves. As someone who likes to tinker, time is my most valuable commodity and Linux doesn't respect my time.
    - mbrock 10y ago
      Do you see how it's a bit rude to insist that my personal appreciation of free software and open source is "ideological" when I just explained how it is actually based on my own concrete experience of being able to modify and share programs within the free software community?
      - uola 10y ago
        You are free to tell me why you think I'm rude or respond to any of my argument and I'll be happy to answer, but please don't use this rhetoric were I'm supposed to either admit that I'm rude or come off as arrogant denying it.
        mbrock 10y ago
        I'm content just to let you know I think it's rude. Sorry I don't have time to explain exactly why right now.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    - Sylos 10y ago
      The point is not whether you can tinker or not, the point is how much you can. And Linux allows you to tinker with stuff with which neither Windows nor OSX would ever let you play.
      - uola 10y ago
        Yes and those arguments, that open source is a good or even the best way to tinker is to a large extent based on the ideology of open source. Someone who isn't convinced about the greatness of open source and/or might prefer other things like a large application ecosystem or other forms of tooling won't agree that this aspect of Linux is important.
- erlehmann_ 10y ago
  If you read “everything broken for non-expert users that can't compile their own kernel modules”, how long has it been since you used Linux? Your example is spot on. I once spent over an hour with a friend who wanted to test a multimedia application [1] on OS X and tried to help her installing it. In the end it turned out that installing the needed C compiler and SDL dependencies – a task that is only an “apt-get install” away on Debian – was a lot harder on OS X than we both had expected. [1] IBNIZ: http://pelulamu.net/ibniz/ http://pelulamu.net/ibniz/
  - uola 10y ago
    While I agree that Linux has become better in this regard, this is not a good example of it. That you have problem running a cross platform application on a platform that has much larger ecosystem of users and experienced developers and that also have well established native alternatives is damaging the Linux ecosystem more than anything.
    - erlehmann_ 10y ago
      I do not understand, which cross-platform application are you referring to?

by mbrock 10y ago

swah 10y ago

> It just means you are allowed to tinker, share, and learn about the software on your computer. You say tinker, I read "everything broken for non-expert users that can't compile their own kernel modules". Tinkering is fun when all the subsystems are working flawlessly and you're just fiddling with a couple variables. Example: "to get a complex project to compile on Windows requires a lot of tinkering".

mbrock 10y ago
When I was 15, tinkering with kernel modules was the most fun I'd ever had, and the combined experiences of Linux configuration boosted my skills and intelligence. Then thanks to the freedom to tinker I was able to get into open source software communities which gave me a career, new friends, and immeasurable amounts of learning. That's why software freedom isn't a matter of abstract ideology to me.
- uola 10y ago
  I don't see how that is unique to Linux. Plenty of people, probably more, have had those same experiences with other operating systems. I can see why someone would like, or even prefer, to tinker with Linux and it would of course be a loss if it didn't exist, but that doesn't mean that Linux developers are the only ones tinkering. So it does seem like that it's primarily an ideological difference in what tinkering means. Unfortunately the Linux community largely seem to attract and retain people who mainly care about their own freedom to tinker. Every time someone pushes out something broken, users lose thousands of tinkering man hours on trying to make those things work for themselves. As someone who likes to tinker, time is my most valuable commodity and Linux doesn't respect my time.
  - mbrock 10y ago
    Do you see how it's a bit rude to insist that my personal appreciation of free software and open source is "ideological" when I just explained how it is actually based on my own concrete experience of being able to modify and share programs within the free software community?
    - uola 10y ago
      You are free to tell me why you think I'm rude or respond to any of my argument and I'll be happy to answer, but please don't use this rhetoric were I'm supposed to either admit that I'm rude or come off as arrogant denying it.
      - mbrock 10y ago
        I'm content just to let you know I think it's rude. Sorry I don't have time to explain exactly why right now.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - Sylos 10y ago
    The point is not whether you can tinker or not, the point is how much you can. And Linux allows you to tinker with stuff with which neither Windows nor OSX would ever let you play.
    - uola 10y ago
      Yes and those arguments, that open source is a good or even the best way to tinker is to a large extent based on the ideology of open source. Someone who isn't convinced about the greatness of open source and/or might prefer other things like a large application ecosystem or other forms of tooling won't agree that this aspect of Linux is important.
erlehmann_ 10y ago
If you read “everything broken for non-expert users that can't compile their own kernel modules”, how long has it been since you used Linux? Your example is spot on. I once spent over an hour with a friend who wanted to test a multimedia application [1] on OS X and tried to help her installing it. In the end it turned out that installing the needed C compiler and SDL dependencies – a task that is only an “apt-get install” away on Debian – was a lot harder on OS X than we both had expected. [1] IBNIZ: http://pelulamu.net/ibniz/ http://pelulamu.net/ibniz/
- uola 10y ago
  While I agree that Linux has become better in this regard, this is not a good example of it. That you have problem running a cross platform application on a platform that has much larger ecosystem of users and experienced developers and that also have well established native alternatives is damaging the Linux ecosystem more than anything.
  - erlehmann_ 10y ago
    I do not understand, which cross-platform application are you referring to?