151 (edited by throgh 2020-07-23 21:45:07)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Offensive question for everyone being into Gnome or KDE: What are those desktop-environments about in the end? Are they about a choice? Yes, there are many things reached until now, thanks also to those projects and the team / individuals behind. That's really outstanding, of course. But where is the freedom of choice (well, one of the major points at all) when those desktop-environments presenting themselves as the "ultimate solution"? Being installed by default for example? Used by default making the impression there is no further need for the users to choose. But free software is about a choice to take, making many choices at all. The alternative is nothing less to loose everything in the end, making some really questionable decisions and compromises. There is the warning: Conferences, getting bigger and bigger, just with financial interests at all - most of the common we have at proprietary software and services in general. A Gnome OS? Well? Sounds like what? Another "completed environment"? Where is the freedom of choice in the end? Where is the open minded way to modify the system? That's the major interest for me to use GNU/Linux and the concurrent tools within, for using free software. To discover, to modify, to learn and to share. We'll loose that all and included the way being believable. sad

That's not the failure of the team behind Gnome or KDE at all. It's about us all and how we communicate, how major distributions communicate in general and presenting themselves. We have it in every testing scenario of some so-called webportals being into technology: When they present "Ubuntu" as "Linux" most people just take this as common sense. Not a good path and you see this already within the article I've posted here, same as major webportals being into Linux (without GNU) like Phoronix, not even one single mentioning of alternatives for systemd or other bloatware! Same with It's FOSS: Full with shortened information and of course .. the known proprietary services for (anti-)social networking. I'm not the one to declare what is right and wrong, of course. But that's a warning, just this and nothing more. Try to keep up being openminded for the smaller ones, for distributions and projects doing something different. They take time, of course. But they try to keep up being clear and strict into principles. And hey "Arch Linux" migrated where with their PKGBUILD-scripts? Guess what Github as proprietary service-framework. Well, nothing "evil" to see here but the "evil" comes up later and based on really wrong decisions to centralize everything, to make some false standards, making everything "default" like systemd itself. That's the way? You like it to download from centralized systems? I don't. The software itself stays free, but it is a risky dance and nobody knows where those centralized, proprietary services go in the future and what they really demand later on.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

152

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Therefore free, libre soft- and hardware needs also a discussion about the phrase "free as in freedom" in general. Yes, that's a good one. But companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Apple are mixing this up, taking their own advantage of this. And what exactly is going to change for the "better"?

First things first: What is the "better"? Well, that's based on views in general. But I'd say an environment for every living here on the planet to live in peace and freedom would be a starting point. Enough to eat and not to starve, no harassment and no fight for living places, being individual with own understanding and understanding for empathy towards others either human being or not. Okay, and the base would be ethical choices. Yes, there can be companies to provide services, no problem. But what kind of services? Being clear about that: No company can offer something "social" in our actual system named "capitalism"!

There is the problem: The phrase "free as in freedom" was done and constructed when companies denied mostly the idea of "open-source" included in free software. Remember the campaigns Microsoft did? Remember those horrible wordings and their attacks onto "free, libre software"? What now? Pretending they "love open-source"? No, they do not, especially as a complete monolithic name Microsoft will never do this until the day their complete software is released under a free, permissive license, being ready to review and compile for everyone. There are really good people working there, trying to be ethical and into freedom. But let's be honest: When it comes up to decisions it's all about the maximum money, not about ethical choices for the masses. And there is the problem: Making money out of "free, libre soft- and hardware"? Okay. But giving something back? Well, it depends. Microsoft is doing this with some really little pieces and pretending further to be in "love with open-source". As mentioned: That's a marketing gag. Because we can see that: Has Wine got some information rewarded for their outstanding work? Or did Microsoft released some older products into the public, including the source-code? Games or something? No, nothing. Same with Apple, same with Google, same with most other companies.

It's about the "profit", not about ethics. Therefore the phrase should also got a rework: Free as in freedom, being always ethical!
A proposal to think of, a first starting point for discussions. And we need those, as free, libre software and open-source split up long ago. Going different paths. In general most people don't even know the difference at all and struggle to recognize with the mentioned phrase itself.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

153

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

Offensive question for everyone being into Gnome or KDE: What are those desktop-environments about in the end? Are they about a choice? Yes, there are many things reached until now, thanks also to those projects and the team / individuals behind. That's really outstanding, of course. But where is the freedom of choice (well, one of the major points at all) when those desktop-environments presenting themselves as the "ultimate solution"? Being installed by default for example? Used by default making the impression there is no further need for the users to choose. But free software is about a choice to take, making many choices at all. The alternative is nothing less to loose everything in the end, making some really questionable decisions and compromises. There is the warning: Conferences, getting bigger and bigger, just with financial interests at all - most of the common we have at proprietary software and services in general. A Gnome OS? Well? Sounds like what? Another "completed environment"? Where is the freedom of choice in the end? Where is the open minded way to modify the system? That's the major interest for me to use GNU/Linux and the concurrent tools within, for using free software. To discover, to modify, to learn and to share. We'll loose that all and included the way being believable. sad

That's not the failure of the team behind Gnome or KDE at all. It's about us all and how we communicate, how major distributions communicate in general and presenting themselves. We have it in every testing scenario of some so-called webportals being into technology: When they present "Ubuntu" as "Linux" most people just take this as common sense. Not a good path and you see this already within the article I've posted here, same as major webportals being into Linux (without GNU) like Phoronix, not even one single mentioning of alternatives for systemd or other bloatware! Same with It's FOSS: Full with shortened information and of course .. the known proprietary services for (anti-)social networking. I'm not the one to declare what is right and wrong, of course. But that's a warning, just this and nothing more. Try to keep up being openminded for the smaller ones, for distributions and projects doing something different. They take time, of course. But they try to keep up being clear and strict into principles. And hey "Arch Linux" migrated where with their PKGBUILD-scripts? Guess what Github as proprietary service-framework. Well, nothing "evil" to see here but the "evil" comes up later and based on really wrong decisions to centralize everything, to make some false standards, making everything "default" like systemd itself. That's the way? You like it to download from centralized systems? I don't. The software itself stays free, but it is a risky dance and nobody knows where those centralized, proprietary services go in the future and what they really demand later on.

Lumina Desktop is the only DE that doesn't require a bunch of redhat bs to use.   Sad but true, although it is ironic given that its bsd licensed.

You would think GPL licensed software would have more freedom from redhat, but far from it!

I don't think escaping github will be easy. Especially with redhat bs masquerading as free software on github along with linux and even some free projects.  Libre stuff even! So yeah, this will be a hard fight.

That being said, microsoft and google are both bad although I almost think redhat is doing more damage to the gnu/linux ecosystem by making libre licensed freedom restricting backwards compatibility breaking software. So much irony there...

Hyperbola:

The Stable Secure Libre Arch!

154 (edited by throgh 2020-07-25 08:11:34)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

You shouldn't forget about Canonical as they do the same on another level: Most people even answer the question "Do you know Linux?" with "Ubuntu" these days. So there is the masquerade coming up with free as in freedom, same with democracy when used on that base. Both have very much in common as it used as some kind of "game" and that's the problem: The values are forgotten more and more.

Don't get me wrong: Free as in freedom is one high value as it is recognized for freedom in general with combination in ethical choices. Same with democracy, but with real meaning and with respect for every living individual, with empathy. I don't think Red Hat or / and Canonical do what they do because of some "evil masterplan". They just do it because of profit and most people handle the same with ignorance and arrogance, because they don't care or think others will look after that. Well, the damage is done until now: Desktop-environments like IceWM, JWM or Fluxbox can look very nice, but with no further dependencies on systemd or other bloatware. No dbus, no pulseaudio.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

155 (edited by zapper 2020-07-26 00:54:45)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

throgh wrote:

You shouldn't forget about Canonical as they do the same on another level: Most people even answer the question "Do you know Linux?" with "Ubuntu" these days. So there is the masquerade coming up with free as in freedom, same with democracy when used on that base. Both have very much in common as it used as some kind of "game" and that's the problem: The values are forgotten more and more.

Don't get me wrong: Free as in freedom is one high value as it is recognized for freedom in general with combination in ethical choices. Same with democracy, but with real meaning and with respect for every living individual, with empathy. I don't think Red Hat or / and Canonical do what they do because of some "evil masterplan". They just do it because of profit and most people handle the same with ignorance and arrogance, because they don't care or think others will look after that. Well, the damage is done until now: Desktop-environments like IceWM, JWM or Fluxbox can look very nice, but with no further dependencies on systemd or other bloatware. No dbus, no pulseaudio.

Hard to say, but I think they are trying to take over GNU and Linux completely.  But that being said, if that's not the case, then they doing more damage purely by their own stupidity/greed. 

Google and microsoft on the other hand...

Yeah... they do it on purpose.

Canonical is like microsoft in gnu/linux land.  So... I dunno.

Redhat I still dislike many times more though. You can escape ubuntu, but not redhat when it comes to their bs services such as systemd, dbus, and pulseaudio.

Although, rust and java are also problems. hmm

Hyperbola:

The Stable Secure Libre Arch!

156

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

The projects coming up from people being working at "Red Hat" have different layers: I see the major problem within the adaption of major distributions itself and getting lost of choices in that process. So this adaption is the responsibility of the whole community, because many people just accepted that for more kind of convenience.

Removing the dependencies from dbus, systemd, pulseaudio and avahi is reducing already the selection of desktop-environments. Even elogind is depending on major upstream "logind" in some cases. Yeah this project is splitting up from it, but when it comes towards Gnome and KDE there has to be look after "logind". While consolekit is also lost in the process. Well, "Red Hat" is the one offering questionable projects, but the community and many projects take and took them without further questioning - besides some discussions of course. Being critical towards that means in these days being named as "systemd-hater". And when you say, that you have no personal problem with "systemd" but just don't want to use it and keep your system small, this will be also ignored. So I see a complete problem at the major level within. sad

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

157 (edited by throgh 2020-07-30 20:50:12)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Staying at Linux means also staying at an unclear situation for so-called "gifts" from companies like Facebook. You know about Zstandard? Well, therefore a look onto this one as Zstd-compressed Linux Kernel Images look very close to mainline. What's the problem about this? Being dependent on a library created by Facebook, which is in fact nothing like a "gift" or better a very questionable one. Same with most other projects coming up on that region of companies!

There is only one ethical choice: To remove that and this won't be done.
And just to install the libre kernel into some distribution doesn't make this better. In fact this is another compromise to accept that there are always freedom flaws, done from ignorance, arrogance and convenience. You name it "libre distribution", but there is Rust. You name it free for the users freedom, privacy and security, but there are Java and Mono, full with questionable licensing. You name it "without problems", but there is NodeJS. There are so many problems just within those languages and afterwards there is coming Skype, Discord and Steam!

So question yourself: What's needed on your "GNU/Linux"-installation? And do you remember why you installed GNU/Linux, any kind of distribution one day? And what's about it today? Free as in freedom, but just only for our own "ego", our own individualism? No need to share anything else and others can "do the work"? How can free culture survive under that circumstances? And the companies don't share this thought, they don't want to destroy that intentionally, but they do for real and taking their "gifts", their marketing, is the way to destroy "free culture". Ask yourself where your trust is? Into the community? Or again into some company? Well, an open-sourced framework or / and library, but doing marketing-work just for proprietary services as Facebook opened up nothing so everyone can host this on own hardware. wink
What kind of "freedom" is this? A corporate one? Trusting into those libraries creates more dependencies and afterwards what? Using those applications, libraries and more with freedom-oriented systems? Sounds like a strange way forward besides "trust" is not rightful when looking onto the actions of companies like Facebok and others. While some are critical towards systemd and other projects, this is also needed here.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

158

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

The GPL and BSD-license, seems a neverending problem of two perspectives and indeed two sides of the same coin. But let's have a look onto the details: So what's the problem of BSD with the GPL? The major point is the definition of being "restrictive", meaning in short: You modify something? Please give back your modifications. The perspective of BSD: You modify something? Fine, your decision how to deal with it but please keep my name and copyright being working and into the corresponding data / files.

Where is the problem? Out of modifications on BSD there are corporate secrets made. So when talking about "gaming" for example: The Playstation-series is using a modified version of FreeBSD as operating system. You'll ask: What, but where are those modifications given back so everyone can use them? See the difference? And it's not about BSD being the bad here, it's just the systematic failure as capitalism and corresponding ignorance, arrogance are the major problem. To "share" means just more, but corporations and companies don't think in ethics, just in "money" and "profit". Loosing this can be compared to the "end of the world". But at Linux (without GNU) same mindset is coming up from another region as the GPL itself doesn't reflect one major freedom: The fifth one as not using one component and being free of it. Sounds strange? Well, yes: The existing four freedoms as use, study, share and improve. But where is the one with insights for consequences?

Consequences like systemd, dbus, pulseaudio and avahi being just major parts for most software and distributions these days on Linux (without GNU)? And not keeping the point here, going back onto BSD: Thinking about there are no "free hugs" just ignores the ethical and social problems coming up with egoism being mixed up as individualism. You can be individual, you can be free and nevertheless you can share your knowledge without any risk of loosing something. Well, okay: The last one is the pure theory as reality shows just another picture full with harassments, envy and more darkest reactions and feelings searching for power.

All in all: This point is the most complex one. Where is the social discussion, the share of knowledge? In fact nobody should have any kind of power except for the own position itself. This would an ideal, but as written down before: The reality is a hard one. Both licenses have their positive aspects, but both have their problems and the upcoming times getting even harder to fight for freedom without any kind of companies or corporations. Because their so-called "gifts" are nothing more than toxic ones in the end. I don't want to have the ultimate point here, but we should stop being kept into hateful reflections and projections, more thinking about how to create an accessible information-technology for every being.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

159

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

And besides that there is the question WHY: Why has the freedom-oriented community for soft- and hardware so little trust into own projects that they are oriented towards the proprietary services like YouTube, Instagram and Twitter? Where are those getting into MediaGoblin, Pixelfed and GNUSocial / Mastodon / Pleroma? Yes, there are some. But interface-implementations like Invidious, Nitter and Bibliogram are just shortened helper: They need in fact their proprietary counterparts for being fully functional.

Yes, it is an individual decision being into those proprietary services. But there is enough time for looking onto the results: So what happened towards GNU/Linux and BSD? Exactly that: Nothing more than corporate gifts coming up and some nice marketing-gags like "We love open-source!". Nothing more, nothing less. So choose wisely on what to do next, choose for rational arguments for freedom, privacy and security for everyone. No company will do this for us!

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

160 (edited by throgh Today 20:32:31)

Re: Sharing information: About being believable!

Today another posting with a far more widening perspective - including the technical aspects later on: So what is a correct fitting and believable criticism towards capitalism? There are different possibilities but from my experience and knowledge just only a few being really without intolerance, harassment, dogwhistle politics and schemes full with structural antisemitism and literal hatred. Simple as that: Start with yourself. We are all into this and we cannot make ourselves free from any kind of responsibility. With little steps you can start analyzing your own consume, your own issues and be aware of: You will run into mistakes! Meaning also don't think at anytime that you have fully understand all social and political aspects coming up.

You want an example? Here take this: Do you think of corporations and companies doing something just intentional for being "evil from the roots"? Think again: There are human beings into this and everyone has own goals to reach. The result maybe of course very problematic, but this is not done intentional. Same with ideologies running around these days thinking of political actors doing something out of "evil" or being "evil". Well, no - okay not in the first place? Most time we as human beings do something out of different actions and reactions. Sometimes of course intentional, but having any "great plans" behind something, some "evil groups" getting into politics is just the first failure of many to follow afterwards as this is a dark road with darkest outcomes later on. What do you think can extend out of this? The mob running around with fire and weapons on the streets for searching some individuals or groups being "responsible" for whatever. Another simple but very fitting viewpoint: Just have a look onto human history itself, just look onto the ways disturbing opinions get holding the global society and just get a step back looking onto yourself. There you have the first and only being responsible. Yes there are many things coming out out of capitalism being harmful, being not fair and literally the other way around for living in peace and harmony. But getting "peace" with hatred doesn't sound like a rational concept. Getting people to know and discuss about alternatives, about free soft- and hardware for example is not done throughout carrying the water bucket behind them into proprietary services or communicating throughout these. And nevertheless Microsoft is nothing about an "enemy" or the "greater / lesser evil". Just another company as so many others. Well, okay: I don't like Microsoft and I don't like what they do. Do I "hate" the company? No, I don't and I won't write something like this down. And I won't search for intentional deeds for Microsoft literally destroying "free software" as greater plan. The outcome can be this, yes. But ask yourself: Who is responsible? The one offering some semi-free or proprietary services, firmware-blobs, frameworks, drivers and projects? Or the one using this because of convenience? Just look onto Phoronix for example and the comment section under some articles for GNU/Linux-libre. There you have the major issue as many individuals being just into this ignorance (no, not Phoronix itself in the first place and of course not all users and individuals behind comments, as this is what they all are - also at Microsoft: INDIVIDUALS), Making a difference for being believable and remember not to follow shortened phrases and descriptions, they can be harmful enough, ending just in real bad consequences. And that's about it: The consequences, not just for you, not just for me, for everyone. it is all about arrogance and ignorance: If you just see yourself and to follow some ideology making only others responsible you should think again. Even though many harmful things started as "good intention" back than, and afterwards? Be aware of that even behind the callout for "peace" there can be even more. Peace for which people and beings exactly? For everyone? Okay. Not for everyone? Not okay, definitely not okay.

And I know: This is all far more complex when looking at the blue planet in a whole. But just start with yourself and question your own actions as first step. Look behind the phrases, search for wordings and phrases as they define our reality. Hateful speech, harassment - therefore I name most platforms anti-social - has also consequences we can literally see for now. Stop that for yourself, criticize companies, groups and individuals? No problem. But with reasonable arguments and even though it is reasonable that somebody just don't want to use something. Systemd is too big and too complex for handling own modifications? Okay. No personal insult given, rational of course for own individual ways. And besides that: You can also look for projects like Hyperbola getting more input for the community here, so everyone else reading here has also information shared doing for example PKGBUILD-scripts. A perfect situation and no need for some faulty projections coming up from anywhere. smile
There is the best way to discuss and challenge ideas being worth as they are inclusive.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!