3 ms·

Why do you continue to use HN, which contains URLs to nonfree software?

fsflover 4y ago
A user has the right to use non-free software if they want. A company should not force anyone to use non-free software: it's unethical.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  > A company should not force anyone to use non-free software: it's unethical. Why is it unethical? Would it be unethical to be required to use an entirely mechanical machine that was still covered by patents or trade secrets?
  - School-Cotton 4y ago
    You’re replying to someone named “fsflover”. This is a bit like trying to convince someone named “maolover” that capitalism has some advantages. The idea that non-free software is unethical and should be abolished is the bedrock of all of the FSF’s philosophy, and is held almost as a religious view for RMS and his adherents.
    - paulryanrogers 4y ago
      Not sure what their nick is supposed to mean. And I'm more interested in understanding why they feel so strongly, and whether their view extends elsewhere, than trying to change their mind.
    - fsflover 4y ago
      Religion is completely unnecessary here. It can be purely practical. By relying on nonfree software you loose your possibility to escape walled gardens (Apple), could be forced to pay more for support, or can't get any support at all (some Android phones, old Apple phones) and so on.
  - fsflover 4y ago
    It's unethical, because the developers of nonfree software have too much power over the user. They create an artificial monopoly, where nobody except them can provide support in case something goes wrong. Thanks to this monopoly, for example, you have to buy a new Android phone every two years. All these questions are answered in book "Free Software, Free Society" (with better explanations than I can give). > mechanical machine that was still covered by patents or trade secrets I would say, yes, it would be unethical, too.
- squeaky-clean 4y ago
  Why is Debian in that list then? It sounds like they just allow their users to access non-free software if they want to > people can readily find these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online package database and its wiki.
  - fsflover 4y ago
    Debian does not clearly separate free and nonfree repositories. Users might be mislead into using nonfree packages without their knowledge/consent. I once was misled like this. Today, I am using Debian myself and avoid nonfree packages knowingly. However I am glad that FSF keeps reminding users about it. Note that they do not prohibit the usage of Debian. They just don't endorse it.

A user has the right to use non-free software if they want. A company should not force anyone to use non-free software: it's unethical.

paulryanrogers 4y ago
> A company should not force anyone to use non-free software: it's unethical. Why is it unethical? Would it be unethical to be required to use an entirely mechanical machine that was still covered by patents or trade secrets?
- School-Cotton 4y ago
  You’re replying to someone named “fsflover”. This is a bit like trying to convince someone named “maolover” that capitalism has some advantages. The idea that non-free software is unethical and should be abolished is the bedrock of all of the FSF’s philosophy, and is held almost as a religious view for RMS and his adherents.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Not sure what their nick is supposed to mean. And I'm more interested in understanding why they feel so strongly, and whether their view extends elsewhere, than trying to change their mind.
  - fsflover 4y ago
    Religion is completely unnecessary here. It can be purely practical. By relying on nonfree software you loose your possibility to escape walled gardens (Apple), could be forced to pay more for support, or can't get any support at all (some Android phones, old Apple phones) and so on.
- fsflover 4y ago
  It's unethical, because the developers of nonfree software have too much power over the user. They create an artificial monopoly, where nobody except them can provide support in case something goes wrong. Thanks to this monopoly, for example, you have to buy a new Android phone every two years. All these questions are answered in book "Free Software, Free Society" (with better explanations than I can give). > mechanical machine that was still covered by patents or trade secrets I would say, yes, it would be unethical, too.
squeaky-clean 4y ago
Why is Debian in that list then? It sounds like they just allow their users to access non-free software if they want to > people can readily find these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online package database and its wiki.
- fsflover 4y ago
  Debian does not clearly separate free and nonfree repositories. Users might be mislead into using nonfree packages without their knowledge/consent. I once was misled like this. Today, I am using Debian myself and avoid nonfree packages knowingly. However I am glad that FSF keeps reminding users about it. Note that they do not prohibit the usage of Debian. They just don't endorse it.