The drama stirred up again with the typical FLOSS-bros of "it's not free software", people who just want to code saying "it's a bug not a feature", and free speech extremists "screw developer speech my unprincipled take is user speech all the way".

Butt his time I can't point to the thread that I debated ALL these points because the thread owner is gone, and so is the thread.

TL;DR: It is still Free Software, it's a feature to prevent extremism growth, and developers have free speech.

You can bet your bottom dollar a blog post is quickly going to get written just to show how absurd I find some of these arguments.

FLOSS has always been about ethics, so of course devs get to put their personal ethics into the software. They have the liberty of speech, and don't need to restrict their own ethics to "just FLOSS and no more". And in practice they get to still "just code" and let the haters fork.

One can think it's dumb. I think that's a lazy knee jerk reaction just to protect ones own feeling that "something is wrong".

One can think developers *ought* not to put their ethics into software. I think that's called paid proprietary software. But I believe FLOSS is all about ethics, and doesn't get to drawn an arbitrary line.

One can claim "slippery slope" with the "poor white ethnostate advocates". I would ask, what's the slope *below* that, "poor child rapist white ethnostate adv"? Ew

So seriously -- before someone complains about again because it "just feels wrong" -- that moment of emotion, that gut feeling of getting flustered and passionate because it just feels "wrong" is and always has been my sign to myself that I need to step back and really check myself. My best personal growth both logically and emotionally has usually ensued by channeling that passion into learning and listening instead of writing and talking.

I hope others do the same.


And look - I get I come across as passionate and loud. It's because of all the engineering I've done -- studying nuclear engineering, defense contracting for the US government, NIST models for natural disasters, working at big G -- it's only in the Computer Software Engineering field where I've seen the privileged/ignorant mindset of "let tech take its course without injecting our humanity" run rampant. It's a plague.

Ex: Fission power & fission bombs: same tech. Ethics makes the difference.

Β· Β· Tusky Β· 1 Β· 1 Β· 6

It is not a weakness to bring your humanity into what you build. Injecting the human soul into soulless technology is a key part to making sure we can treat each other as fellow human beings worthy of living, even if we disagree. That's how peaceful transitions of power keep happening in a Liberal (as in liberty) Democracy.

So don't be surprised that I side *against* the group of people that believes certain other human beings are not worthy of living. That's a part of me, and I won't apologize

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!