Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
I've been around this stuff far too long, your bold sentences just make me smile. They are the phrases I've see from open source evangelists many times before. They read very nicely but they are not embedded in reality. The only "users" who are able to fully enjoy the freedom of such software are users who also happen to be software developers - a (relatively) small and select group. It's much the same as the users on here talking about the evils of DRM, because it's important to them they think it is important to everyone. It's not. (Okay, so in principle it might seem like it is, but in practice it simply isn't relevant/important to most users.)
There is nothing venal or apathetic about not caring how some particular thing works. There is far too much technology in our lives these days for it to be practical to be familiar with the ins and outs of everything we interact with. I used to tune my own car, but I wouldn't try it these days. I currently have our washing machine in for repair because I don't want learn how to fix it for myself. I have other things to do (like continue probably pointless discussions on here  ). |
I think principles are important, even if it means being an implied "evangelist." Thank you for not saying "zealot," at least. I don't care if my principles aren't "embedded in reality." It doesn't matter how many people can "fully enjoy" the freedoms in free software. I don't need to be able to modify the software to enjoy the freedom to use it as I wish, or to share it with others.
Whether you work on your car or your washing machine is irrelevant to software freedom, except in the cases where unfree software prevents you. It certainly means nothing to my preference for free software over freeware, does it?