3 ms·

Stallman has done far more to enable corporate surveillance than anyone else. FAANG would literally not exist without "open source" software. Being able to use

Stallman has done far more to enable corporate surveillance than anyone else. FAANG would literally not exist without "open source" software. Being able to use volunteer developer effort for free has saved the industry trillions and made today's corporate Internet possible. Open source has also spread more than a few backdoors, some apparently written by state actors. (Of course we've found all of them now. Of course we have.) As a politician, Stallman is an idiot. His pitch - "You can write your own printer driver and customise your OS and this will save the world" is a naive appeal to the tiny minority of the population which enjoys tinkering. It excludes most users - which you'd think would be an obvious issue. So in practice it's an adolescent, oppositional and tribal view of how computing operates, socially and politically. Global infosec, corporate exploitation, user accessibility and customisation, three letter agency surveillance, personal privacy, disinformation factories, user empowerment, developer trust, attention farming, ad tech, and the politics and economics of data ownership are all hugely complex issues. "Give everyone the source code to everything and poof! - you'll solve all of them" is just such a stupid take. So no - he is neither a threat, nor a martyr. He's a distraction, and politically that's all he'll ever be.

mandmandam 2y ago
> Stallman has done far more to enable corporate surveillance than anyone else. Do you want to be taken seriously? Starting your comment with such a claim is no means to do it. > FAANG would literally not exist without "open source" software. Open-source software has contributed to the technological ecosystem. Attributing the entire existence of major corporations solely to open source is silly, and I find it hard to believe anyone could do so in good faith. > Open source has also spread more than a few backdoors, some apparently written by state actors. And closed source hasn't? I honestly can't tell if this is advanced satire. > As a politician, Stallman is an idiot Most of us are - that's a good thing. Being a canny political actor without being a shitbird of a human being is about a one in a million skill. > His pitch - "You can write your own printer driver and customise your OS and this will save the world" is a naive appeal to the tiny minority of the population which enjoys tinkering. Your strawman sucks - that's not his pitch. Stallman's advocacy focuses on empowering users with the ability to control and modify their software, not expecting everyone to write their own software. > in practice it's an adolescent, oppositional and tribal view of how computing operates What's "adolescent, oppositional and tribal" is making weak strawmen like this. > "Give everyone the source code to everything and poof! - you'll solve all of them" is just such a stupid take. Another strawman. Stallman's advocacy for free software is not a panacea for all societal and technological challenges, nor did he ever claim it to be. It addresses fundamental issues of user rights and autonomy, complex though they may be. > So no - he is neither a threat, nor a martyr. He's a distraction, and politically that's all he'll ever be. Fortunately, Stallman’s significant contributions to the philosophy and practice of free software, with their enduring impacts on technology, privacy rights, and digital freedoms, do not depend on your opinion. For your own sake though, I hope you clear up your thinking; because once you blame open source software for surveillance you've probably lost the run of yourself completely.

mandmandam 2y ago

> Stallman has done far more to enable corporate surveillance than anyone else. Do you want to be taken seriously? Starting your comment with such a claim is no means to do it. > FAANG would literally not exist without "open source" software. Open-source software has contributed to the technological ecosystem. Attributing the entire existence of major corporations solely to open source is silly, and I find it hard to believe anyone could do so in good faith. > Open source has also spread more than a few backdoors, some apparently written by state actors. And closed source hasn't? I honestly can't tell if this is advanced satire. > As a politician, Stallman is an idiot Most of us are - that's a good thing. Being a canny political actor without being a shitbird of a human being is about a one in a million skill. > His pitch - "You can write your own printer driver and customise your OS and this will save the world" is a naive appeal to the tiny minority of the population which enjoys tinkering. Your strawman sucks - that's not his pitch. Stallman's advocacy focuses on empowering users with the ability to control and modify their software, not expecting everyone to write their own software. > in practice it's an adolescent, oppositional and tribal view of how computing operates What's "adolescent, oppositional and tribal" is making weak strawmen like this. > "Give everyone the source code to everything and poof! - you'll solve all of them" is just such a stupid take. Another strawman. Stallman's advocacy for free software is not a panacea for all societal and technological challenges, nor did he ever claim it to be. It addresses fundamental issues of user rights and autonomy, complex though they may be. > So no - he is neither a threat, nor a martyr. He's a distraction, and politically that's all he'll ever be. Fortunately, Stallman’s significant contributions to the philosophy and practice of free software, with their enduring impacts on technology, privacy rights, and digital freedoms, do not depend on your opinion. For your own sake though, I hope you clear up your thinking; because once you blame open source software for surveillance you've probably lost the run of yourself completely.