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

171–180 of 264 posts

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

#171

Post by danans »

I don't think the problem is that FOSS (as a movement) can't accomplish what proprietary software does. For a while, some FOSS software did address certain user needs better than proprietary software.

But the world of proprietary software (including permissively licensed open source software) just moved faster, because its associated business models gave it the money, incentives, and the early signals needed to attack problem spaces in human-computer-interaction and secure, managed application platforms, among other things, that FOSS didn't have the resources to address, and so it just fell behind in key areas relevant to users.

We just don't know what the FOSS movement could have achieved given similar resources (or how it would have gotten those resources in the first place without a business model), or a lot more time.

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

#172

Post by nevrthepfhor »

soulofmischief wrote: post #139
nevrthepfhor wrote: post #137

People choose proprietary software because proprietary software doesn't make you memorize and type things like "systemctl suspend" for the most basic of tasks such as putting your computer to sleep. They don't want to find, audit, install, and evaluate dozens of obscure third-party extensions to make their OS usable. They want options for setting their background image besides Fit to screen. And they want to be able…

All of those are design choices. None of that has anything to do with open source.

All this time I was under the impression that OSS design was heavily influenced by a subculture involving hacking and ruthlessly rejecting any unnecessary features in 'officially' supported versions. I'm sure that the massive correlation between fake North Korean storefront-tier GUIs and open source is just a coincidence.

If you're going to say that these sorts of design choices aren't perpetuated by so-called open source culture as it currently exists then there's no conversation to be had. Unless OSS culture has radically transformed in the last three months and I missed it.

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

#173

Post by kazinator »

malvosenior wrote: post #149
kazinator wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"federated servers" is the only way to maintain a form of freedom while (out of necessity) operating software as a service. If you think that you can't do free software development without relying on all the capabilities of Slack, then the honest thing to do is to quit and spend the rest of your days just working on proprietary stuff. You obviously prefer the solution which has features over any other concern, so why…

Yeah, I don't think so. I work on other OSS and happily use Slack because it's fun and easy (I used to use IRC). I'm not conflicted at all because I appreciate a good UX. I think it would be totally awesome if more open source developers realized that people will use whatever is better for them which often doesn't mean prioritizing openness over usability or features. I totally get the value of a non-corporate, non-c…

You're only narrowly escape being conflicted because you identify as an "OSS" developer rather than a "free software" developer. The term "open source" and its identification was basically crafted to avoid being conflicted this way.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....

> A pure open source enthusiast, one that is not at all influenced by the ideals of free software, will say, “I am surprised you were able to make the program work so well without using our development model, but you did. How can I get a copy?” This attitude will reward schemes that take away our freedom, leading to its loss.

> The free software activist will say, “Your program is very attractive, but I value my freedom more. So I reject your program. I will get my work done some other way, and support a project to develop a free replacement.” If we value our freedom, we can act to maintain and defend it.

Relying on Slack, Github and what have you is clearly not to "get my work done some other way, and support a project to develop a free replacement.” It aligns with attitude exemplified by the "pure open source enthusiast".

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

#174

Post by p2t2p »

Drdrdrq wrote: post #37
kazinator wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 th…

>> 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. Convenience always wins. Always. Users do care about free (as in beer) and they care if the product or service will disappear without warning (hello Google!). But the defi…

It is not about "convenience". It is about "be done with it and get on with my life".

I don't want to use an IDE, I want to debug a Java program. I don't want to use video editor, I want to have a video. I don't want to use 3D redactor, I want a 3D print something.

I can go on forever. The problem with lots of free software folks and linux crowd is fetish of tools. Tools for the sake of tools. I couldn't care less about tools, I want to achieve something, I'll pick up whatever tool that allows me to achieve that quickly and effortlessly. And I'm telling you this as someone who's using linux and writing a bookmark manager for myself in Go right now to pair with menu because all other ways of doing bookmark management suck.

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

#176

Post by flukus »

wrs wrote: post #120
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #14

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)…

Having lived through the entire history of free software (well, Free Software with capital letters, anyway) it always comes back to this: Software freedom is fundamentally valuable only for developers, because only developers can use the freedom it gives. (That's pretty much the definition of "developer"—someone who can modify software.) Users get value only as a side effect of this developer freedom, because a devel…

> Software freedom is fundamentally valuable only for developers, because only developers can use the freedom it gives.

Substitute software freedom with open source and I'd agree. But software freedom is a whole other thing that is valuable to non-developers. Proprietary software can cost money, require subscription fees, make older versions no longer available, add all sorts of licensing costs like per CPU licenses, restrict features to "pro" versions, etc. Those are issues that affect people (and large companies) that will never read the source code.

Free software is about user freedom, OSS is just a means to that end.

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

#177

Post by dwaite »

jseliger wrote: post #46
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…

An excellent point. FOSS has long been great at underlying tech, freedom, and openness, and terrible at UI/UX and ease-of-use. That's been true for a long time and still seems to be true today. The reasons for this are much-debated and well-known, yet the underlying challenge persists.

Writing good UI/UX and having your software have a vibrant set of open source contributors are usually opposing goals, similar to how you don't see a lot of microservice devops architectures sold as on-prem products. It's certainly possible, but it has to be a fundamental decision and makes a lot of things harder.

Someone might contribute a nice screen layout, but actual design of a user experience involves design, which is usually a process of intelligently deciding on limitations.

Slack and iTunes often get smacked around for their designs because they are kitchen sinks of features, which makes them bulky and non-intuitive.

Open Source communities tend toward this sort of kitchen sink by default. This is because people are contributing the features they want and need, not the ones which fit into your product plan. So you typically see the most success for software that is under an open source license but has limited or banned the ability for people to contribute.

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

#178

Post by kibwen »

groby_b wrote: post #158
kibwen wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "It's not as good as this other (proprietary) software, but it's free" won't cut it. Except that it has to cut it in order for a free software movement to exist, because otherwise free software is starved by a chicken-and-egg problem where developers don't use free software because it's inferior, and free software never improves because developers don't use it. In other words, being willing to use technically infer…

That argument is not holding any water. First, free software doesn't improve "because developers use it". It improves because developers work on it. Blaming the users for that problem is not helping at all, except with a vague sense of moral superiority. Second, people use tools (e.g. software) to achieve things. "Making the engine of free software run" is not on that list of things for the vast majority of people, s…

The distinction between "developers use this" and "developers work on this" is irrelevant in this context, because to a first approximation no developer volunteers their time to software they do not themselves use or hope to use. If nobody wants to use your software, there is nobody who will take time out to contribute to it.

Secondly, nobody is suggesting that free software should not try to compete on non-philosophical terms. What people are suggesting is that a volunteer project cannot perpetually out-compete a well-funded proprietary competitor. If people care about the continued existence of free software, then they will at times have to console themselves with using software that, while hopefully fit for purpose, is quite possibly not best-in-class.

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

#179

Post by nexuist »

iaarn wrote: post #9
oldjokes wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one really freaks me out. Especially since many of the TOS are downright abusive. Discord, for example, reserves the right to read through and listen to all your communications and monetize that in any way and you agree to let them sell all that to anyone, forever. The fact that we're just sort of expecting everyone to slave away on github every night and weekend to remain employable is pretty disgusting too. Th…

Friendly reminder that Mozilla has decided to abandon IRC and the Rust community has therefore moved to Discord, a platform that is abusive regarding data and requires you to use a closed source javascript application to access the service. Mozilla is a bad example because their leadership is simply pathetic, but you get the point. This trend is very, very dangerous. But well the writing was on the wall when many ope…

>requires you to use a closed source javascript application to access the service

Closed source in the legal sense, I guess, but there's nothing stopping you from popping a devtools inspector inside of Discord and reading through everything. It is an Electron app after all.

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

#180

Post by dilawar »

p2t2p wrote: post #174
Drdrdrq wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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. Convenience always wins. Always. Users do care about free (as in beer) and they care if the product or service will disappear without warning (hello Google!). But the defi…

It is not about "convenience". It is about "be done with it and get on with my life". I don't want to use an IDE, I want to debug a Java program. I don't want to use video editor, I want to have a video. I don't want to use 3D redactor, I want a 3D print something. I can go on forever. The problem with lots of free software folks and linux crowd is fetish of tools. Tools for the sake of tools. I couldn't care less ab…

I agree with the sentiments you have expressed. But there is no way around it. People who develop for 'free' will write tools for the sake of tools but few of them will become numpy, latex, docker, Haskell etc.. You are interested in banyan tree, you'll get it if you find the way around the jungle or use a guide.
Post reply on HN