3 ms·

True - but I'd argue that the dangers aren't equal, and they are also not constant. Windows 7 wasn't nearly as invasive as Windows 10, for example. While the a

True - but I'd argue that the dangers aren't equal, and they are also not constant. Windows 7 wasn't nearly as invasive as Windows 10, for example. While the argument often seen from the FSF - that all non-free software is dangerous - is technically true, it's about the same level of true as "all software is dangerous if you can't read the source code," in which case, all software is dangerous to everyone who isn't a software engineer. Even though all non-free software has this issue, we should still be vigilant about fighting and curtailing it where we can. Proprietary software isn't going away, and the harm is real, so we need to encourage its lessening.

macintux 9y ago
> all software is dangerous to everyone who isn't a software engineer And even everyone who is, unless that engineer understands every language and hardware component in play, and is able to spot subtle vulnerabilities at a glance.
epicide 9y ago
Exactly this. You have to have some level of trust. That trust should have a pretty high barrier, though. FOR ME, one of the biggest things I look at is motivation. This often means looking at business models. We've seen where the race to the bottom for laptop prices gets us. I'd rather buy a laptop from a company that makes money off of selling the hardware, itself.