When your friends are using proprietary software it's like theyre a virus carrier
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
How do you guys deal with this special knowledge you have???
This stuff(freedom) is driving me crazy!
I'm still trying to figure out all the freedom stuff I need in my life and all the corporate stuff I need to remove from my life. It's pretty much a life-long effort, unless you are someone like RMS who can write his own free operating system. And he started from a place of freedom rather than a place of being in the clutches of corporations like I did.
But I enjoy sharing my learning about freedom related things to the normies around me. I don't try to hammer them with it, but it's enjoyable to debate and make suggestions and to cajole them. I've gotten a bunch of the normies around me onto GNU/Linux distros, Libreoffice, Firefox, and other normie-friendly software over the years, which is also fun to watch.
I guess it actually varies, what we consider to be socially acceptable in terms of computer programming, depending on what school you go to...what education you receive.
I think clearly, in some schools, they are definitely teaching Gnu/Linux
In other schools, they're teaching Microsoft/Windows instead
The rest, is like corporate actualization, imposing protocol onto people and behavior in effect
It's really obvious for example, that in either camp there is a noticeable political divide
on a side note, I was just examining the latest upstream ubuntu kernel, and theyre starting to build in support for Windows filesystems, virtualization, and communication protocols by default, which across the entire gnulinux domain is essentially anathema
>"on a side note, I was just examining the latest upstream ubuntu kernel, and theyre starting to build in support for Windows filesystems, virtualization, and communication protocols by default, which across the entire gnulinux domain is essentially anathema"
Yeah, but we have to remember, their money comes from selling subscriptions for server instances and cloud instances to big corporate enterprise outfits. We are not Ubuntu's customers with our little free desktop uses - Canonical could probably care less than nothing about us.
Which is why Linux-libre is so vitally important. Without Linux-libre, would we really have any chance at all to escape the big corporate entanglements of Canonical, RedHat and others? Linus Torvalds seems completely bought in to making big tech happy.
pretty much all of the main distributions you can name ship out the same kernel, I've started seeing people put the timer ticks in their configs to 1000hz, but they all use idle ticks for example, which are appropriate for a server system, and not a single user system that most individuals use. So the latest upstream branch of ubuntu, just like everybody else, has a kernel just like the one kernel.org ships routinely. They barely configure anything except for like 10 unique settings literally. So mainly they attempt to configure the system in other ways that are transparent to their users, or in other words, behind the scenes. It's honestly really strange, I'll give you one simple perfect example, they are shipping wayland by default which means that all of the desktops, which contain nvidia cards have broken functionality by default. Which is a crazy decision to make. Why would they ship out broken software by default? Doesn't that demonstrate they don't care about their users, and are in effect breaking the linux desktop on purpose? That's like the tip of the iceberg. And that kind of behavior has literally been going on for decades, the kind of behavior that drives people away from linux and makes it impossible to use.
>"And that kind of behavior has literally been going on for decades, the kind of behavior that drives people away from linux and makes it impossible to use."
Well, it's important to remember that the only people who can possibly run a GNU/Linux distro as a desktop OS are those people who:
a) are willing to install a new OS on a Windows computer after they purchase it
b) are willing to build their own computer from scratch with individual components
There's almost nothing else. There's a very, very few manufacturers of GNU/Linux computers like NovaCustom and TuxMachines and StarLabs and System76 - but they have tiny numbers of customers compared to the big manufacturers like Asus, HP, Dell, Acer. And forget about Apple - saying that modern Macs can run GNU/Linux distros at this point is almost entirely wishful thinking.
So think about it - almost no one except the most extreme hackers and tinkerers are ever going to build their own computer or change the OS on the Windows computer they buy. And if people like you and me are among the most extreme hackers and tinkerers on planet Earth, why should the big GNU/Linux distros ship anything with sane defaults to us? We're just going to start hacking on it the moment we install it anyway - which we do in fact. And then after we've hacked on it, we are going to demand support, and it is very hard to support a GNU/Linux distro after someone's been hacking on it for awhile. So there's very little incentive for the big GNU/Linux distro developers to give us any sane defaults, since we are just going to change everything anyway.
When you say that these insane defaults "drive people away" from GNU/Linux - keep in mind - normies are not trying to come over to GNU/Linux. Normies are going to do one thing - buy a computer from BestBuy or Amazon or Walmart, and use the Windows that it comes with until the day that Microsoft cuts off support and forces them to buy a new computer.
Now, every once in awhile a normie will know someone like myself who will put Trisquel on a cheap new SSD on my mom's broken Windows computer and say, "here is your web browser, and here is your word processor", and she's totally happy. But if a normie doesn't know an extreme hacker/tinkerer, there's almost no chance that they are going to wind up using anything except the Windows that they bought originally.
then they literally just do things like: targeting the boot process, in the name of: making it boot faster, for the purpose of making it boot faster, because the bootup process is too slow.
it's like indirect development, serving indirect goals