Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

linuxjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 264 posts

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#11

Post by jordigh »

ralph84 wrote: post #2

Most people engage with FOSS for practical reasons, not ideological reasons. Given that developers of proprietary software have made a lot more money on the whole than developers of FOSS, I don't see that changing anytime soon.

The ideological reasons are practical reasons. We don't want to give you software freedom because we believe in some abstract ideology. We want to give you free software because we believe this is the way that you will eventually get the best software that will let you do the most.

Indeed, for software of good quality, free software wins. GNU R has completely dominated most areas of statistical computing, for example. The ideology is there not because we think you're "impure" or "evil" or something if you use non-free software, but because we think you'll be happier if you do, because you deserve it, because we all deserve free software.

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#13

Post by saidajigumi »

– We collaborate inside proprietary environments

Why is that? Why have users chosen those environments? Assume they are rational beings, and get at the heart of it. Ask: "How can we address the actual user needs while supporting our goals?"

– Many Linux and FOSS geeks today use Linux only professionally

Same answer as above.

– We're not modeling our values

WHY? (Hint: "the use of nonfree" is not, and has never been a primary human motivator even for many people who "get it".)

etctera.

Finally, regarding the below... only one of these, the first, even tangentially touches on the user experience. There's an implied expectation of so much FOSS advocacy which reduces to "by writing and using our software, you will be wearing a hairshirt for the cause". This mindset is guaranteed to fail in front of users, who are by and large "non-believers".

     "Having real-time chat is absolutely essential to the advancement of free software."
    "We're the resistance now." "We need to create mass movement."
    "Volunteer to write free and open code, to participate in communities."
    "If you didn't live the history, learn from those who did."
    "If you did learn from history, teach those who need to know it. Respectfully."
    "Be patient. Remember that the tortoise won not only because it was patient, but because it ignored insult, ridicule and dismissal."
    "Model your values. Use free software and hardware."
    "Remember always how 'the rights to copy, share, modify, redistribute and improve software' are fundamental rights that matter to people."
    "Work to convince developers that their software freedom matters."

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#14

Post by AdmiralAsshat »

So the initial letter hits upon something that the article itself ignores, namely that the FOSS community requires more than just developers. I see this attitude all the time in certain circles that only the developers contribute any value to a project, and prospective contributors should either learn to code or get f--ked. It's not terribly welcoming to the larger community (of whom the majority are not developers), and the fact that many of these projects lack adequate documentation, wide availability, or a centralized support forum only reinforces that understanding.

It's a problem that can be remedied, provided the projects stop pretending that the packagers, technical writers, GUI/UX artists, and community managers are expendable.

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#15

Post by dreamcompiler »

groovybits wrote: post #6

I am generally a fan of Linux and FOSS on my personal gear. However, I'm still not sure where this article is coming from, or who it addresses. The author seems to be mixing the use of FOSS in the professional world with the use of FOSS in their personal world. In a professional environment, there is no room for "modeling your values". It sounds harsh, but that is the way it is. You use what works. Yes, Linux OSs do…

I think part of what the author is addressing is the ignorance exhibited in your comment. I don't mean to be rude; it's easy not to see the big picture when you're busy just making a living.

To me, Searls' point is that an overwhelming pressure to monetize everything has corrupted the health of the open source community. This is not just holier-than-thou moralizing; there will be real financial consequences if the creators of open source products don't start eating a lot more of their own dogfood.

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#16

Post by kazinator »

saidajigumi wrote: post #13

– We collaborate inside proprietary environments Why is that? Why have users chosen those environments? Assume they are rational beings, and get at the heart of it. Ask: "How can we address the actual user needs while supporting our goals?" – Many Linux and FOSS geeks today use Linux only professionally Same answer as above. – We're not modeling our values WHY? (Hint: "the use of nonfree" is not, and has never been a…

> Why have users chosen those environments?

Because they don't give a rat's ass about the freedom aspect of free software. If software A requires four clicks to do something, but B has a way to do it in 3, they are on B without a second thought.

But in this case, those users are not just any old end users; the are actually supposed to be FOSS developers, so there is a heavy irony there.

I think what is doing on is that large numbers of people are now "reluctant" FOSS developers. They do FOSS because someone told them to. They got a job somewhere and the job involves writing code that gets upstreamed somewhere and is redistributable. Well, they don't give a damn about that, it's just a job, no different from working on proprietary software. Or they work on some proprietary stuff, but it interacts with and depends on some FOSS pieces so they get in there and make changes out of necessity, and those changes are freely licensed only because they are derived from a work which requires that due to copyright doctrines about derived works.

It's partly a generational thing. Notice how Doc Searls looks about fifty-something. He remembers a grassroots free software movement which was about actually about displacing proprietary software and liberating the user, and not about about providing reliable commodity middleware for locked-down devices and cloud services.

If you were born after 1990, you don't know a world in which Linux and other FOSS wasn't used for making locked-down tech, and proprietary web sites that lock in millions of people and step on their privacy. So of course it's hard to understand someone like Doc Searls.

The free software ideology originated in a world in which you still installed applications locally and ran them on local data, on a machine where you were allowed to stick in a floppy disc with any piece of machine language in its boot sector that could easily take over the machine. The machine that was understood to be owned by you once you paid for it.

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#19

Post by jaabe »

jonawesomegreen wrote: post #4

> We collaborate inside proprietary environments, such as Slack and Google Hangouts. Most of the chat and messaging systems in use today are also proprietary and closed. So are most video-conferencing systems and the codecs they use. This one in particular worries me. Having access mailing list conversations and IRC logs provides such a rich history of open source development. I worry about every open source project…

I’m probably bad but I honestly can’t get slack to work with all the different communities I’ve been invited to. Discord basically works like IRC, except almost every channel I’m in is by invitation only, making it almost impossible for new people to join.

In my opinion IRC is still the best tool out there and I really, really wonder why we stopped using it.

Re: We Need to Save What Made Linux and FOSS Possible

#20

Post by Drdrdrq »

ralph84 wrote: post #2

Most people engage with FOSS for practical reasons, not ideological reasons. Given that developers of proprietary software have made a lot more money on the whole than developers of FOSS, I don't see that changing anytime soon.

This. The problem with FOSS are incentives which are not aligned.

Sure, some developers will give their best for free... for some time. But sooner or later the going gets tough and maintaining (let alone developing further) your pet project becomes a chore. Will you still do it? For how long? And if you try to monetize the project to at least somehow offset the lost energy and time, and maybe even pay someone else to help you, then you figure out you can't. Because free / open / libre means that anyone can take what you did and run with it.

This is the reason why FOSS projects don't reach the maturity and polish of closed variants. The only exception I can think of is Firefox, because it is able to capitalize on its unique position where it threatens (a bit) Google Search. With Google also making its biggest rival.

And the end result is that while the FOSS software is free (as in freedom), its quality leaves much to be desired, so the users are not flocking to it. Far from it.

Until FOSS movement rethinks what "freedom" is, nothing is going to change for better. Maybe giving Commons Clause and other hybrid licenses a chance could be a way out? I don't know, but it makes me sad that I'm typing this on a closed phone without (realistic) choice.

Post reply on HN