I find it incredibly surprising that many or folk take the 0th pillar's "freedom of use" to mistakenly mean "freedom of usage by creating a software feature" instead of the true intended meaning: "freedom of usage under the license conditions".

Because that's what RMS has always been about: the software licenses being symmetrical in power between the distributor of software and receiver of software. It creates a level playing field in terms of what "politics" are contained in the software.

Show thread

Because that is the core of Software Freedom/Liberty: the right for a Person to take a software that expresses a [political] view they disagree with, obtain a copy of that software with equal capability as the distributor, modify that [political] view to be more amenable, and then redistribute it without any additional licensing burdens.

It's never about what specific views or capabilities are in the software itself. Heck, you could fork and purposefully add bugs and it is still no less Freedom respecting.

Show thread

So trying to argue the 0th pillar "freedom of use" is about specific software capabilities is mistaken. It's a gateway to the un-reconcilable "well N users demand my software have feature X, and an equal number also demand an incompatible feature Y." How could one ever satisfy the 0th pillar under this condition, and why would RMS never discuss this situation?

Perhaps because it is the wrong interpretation. :) RMS spends time at the "licensing level", not at the "what does your software do exactly" level.

Show thread
@TheCzar
you are within your right to do that, but it would also be really stupid. i don't know how to explain that you're not making some epic own here, you're accidentally supporting them @cj
Follow

@sylveon Seems whatever comment was left by @TheCzar is gone now. I can't pitch in anything specific.

I can generally say they believe that tech is "just code / no politics" which I've made clear in other comments that this mindset is the basis for a moral framework I find far too limiting for a multitude of reasons.

The latest ex is Kazakhstan's MITM of all HTTPS. It's "just code" working as intended but ignoring the erosion of digital freedoms is awful

@cj
Likely instance block/mute, I can see the post by @TheCzar on my self-hosted Pleroma.

@sylveon

@ivan Gotcha, thanks for the clarification!

@TheCzar TBH I am pretty worn thin on the Tusky/Gab debate. I don't care if it's admins determining blocklists for their own communities (freedom of association). I don't care if they use collective power to try to get others to do the same: it can be viewed as bullying or a social movement against hate speech. I'm not going to be the one convincing one side to join the other.

@sylveon

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!