4 ms·
> The implication is that FOSS developers have no control over their users. Sure, you COULD fork your favorite tool's repository and spend many hours trying to
by bennettnate5 4y ago
> The implication is that FOSS developers have no control over their users. Sure, you COULD fork your favorite tool's repository and spend many hours trying to figure out how to make it do 'what you want instead of what the developers wanted'; but very few people are really willing and/or able to do that.
Few people are willing to do it because the kinds of restrictions/annoyances imposed by free and open source software are much less severe than that of nonfree software. Sure, there might be the odd feature or two missing in a FOSS project that you would like but that the author blocks from being added to the project for XYZ reasons. I'll concede that those kind of decisions give the maintainer of a FOSS project some semblence of "power". But it's not like proprietary software, where trackers, atrocious adverts and news links (looking at you, Microsoft start menu) and other arbitrary restrictions are a continuous reality. If those things were in a FOSS project, you can bet that _someone_ would make a fork with that stuff removed.