>Free Software isn't for hackers. It's for users. Hackers are also users, but they're not special. This is wrong. Hackers like to hack, which requires having c

>Free Software isn't for hackers. It's for users. Hackers are also users, but they're not special. This is wrong. Hackers like to hack, which requires having control over their tech. So you get foss which gives you lots of control. You get things like GPL which tries to protect that control. The control and freedom to hack is not relevant to regular users. Regular users don't want to modify and hack their software, they're happy to consume it passively. To them, the control is not a factor and foss is just another product. The pro is that they can maybe save a few bucks, unless the proprietary alternative is also free (they don't care about privacy or ads). The con is that it's less polished, the website is ugly, the docs are confusing and don't have cutesy cartoons saying to press the shiny button to make thing go brrr. Lumping both of these in the same category just confuses things. Hackers and non hackers want very different and fundamentally incompatible things.