21–30 of 30 posts
Stallman hates the internet. What's bad about: Airbnb | Amazon | Amtrak | Ancestry | Apple | Ebooks | Eventbrite | Evernote | Facebook | Google | Intel | LinkedIn | Lyft | Meetup | Microsoft | Netflix | Pay Toilets | Skype | Spotify | Twitter | Uber | Wendy's |
Next question is: do we have alternatives? You know, the "libre/FOSS" version?
GNU social or Diaspora, maybe?
Nitpick: He seems to consistently spell ‘users’ as ‘useds’ in this article? Edit; he does so everywhere. What am I missing?
I really hope this practice of saying "Facebook useds" becomes a meme and goes viral.
Nitpick: He seems to consistently spell ‘users’ as ‘useds’ in this article? Edit; he does so everywhere. What am I missing?
You are not a user of Facebook, you are used by Facebook.
That page should be amazing because it's just a long curated list of every time someone has been majorly fucked by facebook. I really want a page like that so that whenever someone says "why do you hate facebook so much?", I can just say "read this" and then link them a massive litany of offenses.
Unfortunately, because it contains that snarky non-word, the entire page takes on an aura of conspiracy mania. It could read like a legal document, but with that one change it reads like a geocities site, and no one I link to it can take it seriously. What a waste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not a user of Facebook, you are used by Facebook.
I do wish Stallman articles wouldn't do this kind of thing. It's kind of like those guys who used to unironically write "Micro$oft" on documents during the 90's/2000's. How can anyone take a document like that seriously? That page should be amazing because it's just a long curated list of every time someone has been majorly fucked by facebook. I really want a page like that so that whenever someone says "why do you h…
Stallman hates the internet. What's bad about: Airbnb | Amazon | Amtrak | Ancestry | Apple | Ebooks | Eventbrite | Evernote | Facebook | Google | Intel | LinkedIn | Lyft | Meetup | Microsoft | Netflix | Pay Toilets | Skype | Spotify | Twitter | Uber | Wendy's |
So he explains some reasons why we should not use Facebook. Fine. Next question is: do we have alternatives? You know, the "libre/FOSS" version? GNU social or Diaspora, maybe?
In my Utopian world, small groups of technical people would host OpenLDAP servers and replicas. They would front end them with some open source SAML2/OAuth providers. That would allow them as a small group to have forums, chat servers, blogs, email, etc...
Their circle of non technical friends could then utilize all the services the technical folks share the support of. If the LDAP master drops out, someone else promotes their replica to master.
Why all this? No nation state back doors and potentially less risk if people reuse passwords, since this group can also host email.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do wish Stallman articles wouldn't do this kind of thing. It's kind of like those guys who used to unironically write "Micro$oft" on documents during the 90's/2000's. How can anyone take a document like that seriously? That page should be amazing because it's just a long curated list of every time someone has been majorly fucked by facebook. I really want a page like that so that whenever someone says "why do you h…
Also referring to trans people as “cross-dressers” is generally not good form. I don’t think he means anything by it, but it tends to put people off.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/01/victory-d...
Unfortunately I must say I think you're looking for reasons to be offended, which never helps any discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also referring to trans people as “cross-dressers” is generally not good form. I don’t think he means anything by it, but it tends to put people off.
Except that he is actually literally talking about drag/cross-dressing which is not the same thing as transsexualism, as you'd know if you'd clicked the link on that line: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/01/victory-d... Unfortunately I must say I think you're looking for reasons to be offended, which never helps any discussion.
BTW, the link mentions trans people too. Stallman was using it as a catch all term. Again, don’t think he meant anything by it (that is another way of saying: “I am not personally offended by the words themselves because I understand and acknowledge the context and intent of them”) but words matter when you are trying to make a point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that he is actually literally talking about drag/cross-dressing which is not the same thing as transsexualism, as you'd know if you'd clicked the link on that line: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/01/victory-d... Unfortunately I must say I think you're looking for reasons to be offended, which never helps any discussion.
If that’s what he meant that’s what he should have said. Using terminology that can be even the least bit confusing never helps any discussion. BTW, the link mentions trans people too. Stallman was using it as a catch all term. Again, don’t think he meant anything by it (that is another way of saying: “I am not personally offended by the words themselves because I understand and acknowledge the context and intent of…
>Under pressure from cross-dressers, Facebook said it would relax the 'real name' policy and allow people to use aliases, but only if they are generally known by those aliases or if they were victims of certain types of abuse or stalking.
I fail to see what he "should have said" instead, and I don't see where confusion could arise other than the fact that trans & abuse victims were affected as well.