This logic is not great. I’d rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it’s actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what’s under the hood. It’s not about concessions, it’s about being able to tell what the hell software is actually doing.
Comment on [META] Are paid for closer source advertising appropriate?
irmadlad@lemmy.world 17 hours ago Even if you change the ROM in your Android phone, guess what? The ROM still relies on closed-source vendor blobs from the manufacturer that come with the stock firmware and most often are required to make your ROM do what it do. I would say that the vast majority of people screaming about closed source and how they own their own data, yadda yadda, yadda, when it gets right down to the brass tacks, somewhere, they rely on something that is not FOSS. It’s a rather duplicitous diatribe.
AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 14 hours ago
- irmadlad@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
I’d rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it’s actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what’s under the hood
Mee2! However, not everyone here is of a hive mind. Not everyone here got into selfhosting for the same reasons. Like I’ve mentioned, it’s a big umbrella.
AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 14 hours ago
That’s not the question that was asked.
The question is if brand new accounts should be able to shill their closed source products without otherwise contributing to the community. They should not be able to do so.
speculate7383@lemmy.today 17 hours ago
Huh?
So, if we have the choice of something 90% open and 10% closed, versus 100% closed, you’re saying the first option is invalid to even desire, because it isn’t 100% open.
Wow. Just, wow.
So, let me be exactly clear here: WE ALL MAKE CONCESSIONS.
AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 14 hours ago
Apparently, some of us are okay making 100% concessions and not giving a shit at all.
Yeah. Selfhosting is a very large umbrella.