FOSStards are everywhere online. They give us tech advice and some even use this board. I find some of the claims they make to be extremely dubious. Many of these people are Stallman followers, but they are closer to Eric B. Raymond's neoliberalism. But Stallmanism and neoliberalism cannot exist together. Its not compatible with the neolib free market. Many of these people claim that open source is better because anyone can see the code and spot bugs, errors, or secret features meant to spy on you. But does anyone actually audit the code? Programs are so huge now its very likely nobody is actually combing through thousands of lines of code. FOSS projects are also shittier than non-FOSS versions generally. FOSStards talk a big game about freedum etc. but they are actually elitists who look down on people. They treat ordinary humans who are not tech literate as scum and retarded idiots. If homebrew computer dorks in the 70s and 80s built computers because they believed it would help ordinary people, today FOSS fools think programs should serve other FOSS fools and the rest of the world be damned. So it develops into an extreme cultic fetishism of distro brands and culture wars, where these people argue about systemd as if their opting out of it makes a difference. Its a consumer mentality. These people are failed yuppies.

Now I don't mean to trash people but clearly something has gone very wrong or at least was flawed from the beginning?

But does anyone actually audit the code? Programs are so huge now its very likely nobody is actually combing through thousands of lines of code.

This is an important point and the reason why minimalist programs ought to be used over more elaborate programs. How minimal and easy to understand a program is, is directly proportional to how free or libre it is. For instance, sinit + daemontools is a lot more free than systemd, because an ordinary C programmer can oversee the whole code and understand it. The four freedoms, i.e. the ability to read, modify, and share the code are much more tangible with sinit than systemd in this example, as those things can be realistically applied to that sinit due to it's sheer simplicity and understandable code. This is why software minimalism is so important, since you don't really have freedoms if you cannot realistically exercise them. The GrapheneOS fags claim their OS good, since it's "open source", but this is only so on paper. No normal human can read, understand, and modify the code of Android. It requires complex software that nobody understands like Android studio to even get started, not to mention you'll never understand how it works. It's important that the freedoms are tangible and easy to exercise, otherwise they're worthless. No OS that can support a "modern" web browser, has currently those freedoms, realistically speaking. However, it's still important to use more simple systems to be closer, even when you're not there yet.

FOSS projects are also shittier than non-FOSS versions generally.

You compare pears to apples. The proper equivalent to MS Word isn't Libreoffice, but LaTeX. The real equivalent to Photoshop is not GIMP, but imagemagick. Of course those clones of Windows software that are only made to appease newbies, are not the real deal, but the programs that actually require learning and effort to git gud, are usually superior. I would claim one can be tenfold more productive with LaTeX or imagemagick than with their Windows/Mac equivalents, when you're really good at it. Those programs are usually command-line programs, which require much more effort to learn than your usual corporate GUI program, no graphic designer is going to learn all the command-line arguments and script features of imagemagick, but those who do end up with something a lot more powerful.

>>2
Minimal programs that are extendible. We do not live in the 60s, we have have the computing power to have to be able to edit the code. That can be accomplished by having non-critical programs not be compiled. Emacs can be fully changed, modified and altered without altering the source code of it, only utilizing an actual programming language it is written in. Okay Emacs is not 100% changeable, some features, namely the buffer, are written using C. Lem would be a better answer to that, as it is written entirely in Common Lisp.

Don't you think it's strange that "ordinary humans" are tech illiterate? As if it's in any way historically ordinary that the majority of the population don't understand anything about how the tools they use every day actually work. Do you actually think it's some irrational elitism that drives people to want to use programs they can actually fix if they break. What are you talking about.

not sure why this isn't under \tech\ but, oh well, whatever.
you bring up some fundamental failings of democracy. it only works if people are informed, and being informed is not a passive activity it takes work. and a system that requires the active good will of all to work, doesn't. thus they turn almost immediately toward despotism.
foss at least forces a groundwork where any sufficiently motivated individual can try to turn their little ship somewhat. of course as 2 says this is ideally done with a simpler ship. that's why there are at least a couple people on here who keep saying plan9. it at least gives you /all/ the code, and all the documentation you need to attempt an understanding. the codebase is also quite small compared to the bsds and god forbid the linuxes. this is also why the terry davis zealots exist. for all it's failings templeos is miniscule compared to modern corporate garbage.

and yes most people don't care. no one can ever make them care. as a the noose tightens further and further they won't see what's happened until far too late. some sense of superiority to those may be inherit to the prospect of caring about freedom at all.
latex isn't the foss equivalent to word btw 2, it's troff.
but see that's "superiority" and what's worse is it's pointless.
I still have to run my "much more readable code" on silicon i can not by any means audit. I still have to adhere to standards I have no say in to transmit these characters to your display.

3's implication is that C is unchangeable, and this is wrong. it is. you just have to know it. knowing it is a fair bit easier with C to begin with, but does lack some of the more abstracted ease of lisp at the high end, but again, if you aren't reading those abstracted details then you've set yourself to fall into the trap of control again.
live modification to a system is a nice ideal, but im not convinced this can only be accomplished through the likes of lisp and forth. so we need to compile things to change them? so what?

There is this idea that computer's were intended to benefit normans that i just don't think tracks, except in some trickle down economy nonsense way. has the proliferation of pocket sized mainframes benefited anyone? so they can post a 100 times filtered video clip to others, and see the 100 times filtered videos of nearly everyone else. so what? how is this a benefit other than some shiny new thing to market and drive profits? the current zeitgeist contains an active counter current to this on the very basis that it isn't useful, and\or accepting it's limited utility maintaining an aggression toward the control it costs.

There are a few problems with FOSSism. 1. Their vague idea of freedom 2. Nobody can completely audit anything but the simplest programs 3. Hardware is not FOSS which makes FOSS software rather futile. 4. Obsession with protecting privacy, again very vague.

>>2

the programs that actually require learning and effort to git gud, are usually superior

I would be more convinced if those who take this position were anti-productivity. Whereby, Windows/Mac apps and their clones could be dismissed as creating ease and convenience for the sake of productivity, of milking the empty drones that pass as humans of every ounce of labor instead of expanding the mind and opening the door for creativity. However, in fact they are just as obsessed with productivity.

>>4
The elitism of FOSSfags is well documented. I don't need to point out that they are sneering elitists because everyone knows this.

>>5

There is this idea that computer's were intended to benefit normans that i just don't think tracks,

Computers were originally military hardware meant to make the nuclear holocaust as destructive as possible and crack codes. The hobbyists of the 70s wanted to free the computer from this and make it something that would benefit everyone but this also opened the door to its exploitation as a consumer good. In a way, Stallman wanted to preserve this earlier idea of computing as a social benefit and communal good. The snobby elitist FOSSfags who hate on normals (despite being the most milk toast normal boring people) do not seem to understand this. Instead of benefiting society, they often take this idea that public are stupid, that they possess special knowledge that makes them superior, and a ton of stuff they make is really to benefit their own elitist group. You talk of as if people posting nonsense video clips is something FOSSfags don't do these things also and that this behavior is simply the outcome of handing people computers when they have been more or less trained and encouraged to behave this way thanks to a mix of societal and technological factors.

It seems that FOSSfags have more or less abandoned any social values and their whole movement is now just an aesthetic subculture revolving around themselves.

It seems that FOSSfags have more or less abandoned any social values and their whole movement is now just an aesthetic subculture revolving around themselves.

yes. obviously. all "countercultural" movements are recontextulized and comodified for the benifit of the system. because most people are retarded doesn't mean there isn't any benifit to pushing back, or cutting out some narrow hallow retreat. but "muh elitism".

Computers were originally military hardware meant to make the nuclear holocaust as destructive as possible and crack codes

how is this "social benifit"? this reads - computers were intended to control mass swaths of people, you know the same shit that's it's purpose now. some momentary "spring" is always present in every new development and is always squashed through the same mechinisms. we still need to push regardless of the pointlessness of it.

>>6

Instead of benefiting society, they often take this idea that public are stupid

When the grand majority demands less bread and more taxes are we supposed to stand side-by-side with them and sing "kumbaya"? To work in benefit of the public doesn't necessarily mean in appeasement of the public, nor does it constrain our action to the confused whims of this majority that confuses its own chains with the means of its liberation.
In moments such as today, where the people demand less bread more taxes, we are forced to be elitist, in moments like the ones we live today the solution lies _in_ elitism.

It is undeniable that the FOSS movement is deeply flawed and that is unable to free itself from the society that has birthed it, but that does not mean that to deny its victories counts as any sort of incisive or novel thought. Rather we have to understand the victories and defeats of FOSS, understand the great and undeniable benefits that it has infant brought to the totality of society in computing (the linux kernel, the modern web-browser (for good or for worse), and even several fundamental coding tools (compilers, UI-libraries) that are the basis for many proprietary programmes, etc.); and how it still cannot by itself and from itself save us from the bare-tyranies of the modern computer system.

We've stood by FOSSism, by FOSSism we've fallen, and tomorrow will come, by a different hand we will rise, and fall, whatever might it be.

>>6
can you tell me what a FOSSfag is? It sounds like you made up a guy and got mad at him.

>>7
Pushing back senselessly without any real concept of what you are doing or where you are headed is worthless. It seems to me most FOSS types are selfish yuppies who've bought into a rebellious aesthetic when they are completely non-threatening. This explains their weird cultural politics, their whole act where they pretend to be the opposite of normies and play up how rebellious and radical they are. This is smug fake rebellion. The acting out of a social media image, which is what they accuse "normies" of doing. Yes, computers were intended to control information and serve industry and warfare etc. but the point of early computer hobbyists and Stallman's free software movement was to make computers work for the people and serve a social good. FOSS types today seem to have completely forgotten about this and turned the whole think into a selfish game of acting out a persona and stroking egos.

I think you don't need the term FOSSfags, you're talking about Stallmanism people so isn't Stallmanists a good term or something? People telling you to choose FOSS software in general really aren't going to be Stallmanist the vast majourity of the time. To go with Stallman's philosophy you reject Linux distributions that prompt you with the option of non-free package manager repositories, so you become an absolute FOSS purist.

Now FOSS licences are wide-spread. Blender is becoming the accepted norm for all the serious 3D designers. People using or recommended this aren't necessarily die hards about the ethics.

Okay I've thought about this a bit more now, so this is the kind of person you're seeing here and you're suggesting the name FOSSfags and OK they have a collection of ideas that *can* be mutually exclusive, but ur pointing out that they share this collection of ideas and it's like a cult on denpa-chan or something, fine. Altho I would just say I think both those people and yourself should just talk about the individual topics separately.

Also I feel like the systemd part is the most significant part. Well that's another separate idea where they praise the unix philosophy and want to align with the unix philosophy as much as possible. I don't particularly get unix philosophy hardcores, I think systemd is best choice for my life to be easiest but also I love bash shells and the many do one job and do it well programs that u can use.

Tell me more about your hateboner for FOSS, I am very interested (not).

FOSS as a movement is very flawed but this is just vague kvetching about a number of ambiguous groups all clumped together under the "FOSSfag" moniker, hard to care about your very personal gripes sorry.

That being said the issue with FOSS you mentioned that I do agree with is regarding the way people talk about and treat it, which is because it was never designed for the consumer first, its for developers/producers, the natural consequence of this is that FOSS becomes less of a "free expression" deal and just another flavorful aesthetic to wear around and showcase to people, that's the only way a consumer can really interact with FOSS and nowadays that is the majority.

On the other hand your other point complaining that FOSS people look down on "tech illiterate" people is stupid, because those people (i.e. normies) are retarded and balk at the slightest amount of friction when it comes to learning anything new at all. Also:

FOSS fools think programs should serve other FOSS fools and the rest of the world be damned

Sounds completely vague and could mean anything, what FOSS programs are we talking about here, again, this is just aimless kvetching.

>>1

Stallman followers

I think you confuse foss with gnu philisophy.

Most Linux fanboys don't follow GNU philosophy. We already know this. Are they insufferable? Yes. Could you argue they betray the principals behind the GNU manifesto yes? What does this mean? They have been duped by corpos into doing the R&D work for them but without any pay. Is the GNU philosophy flawed? Yes. There's no need to be an ass about it. Are a lot of Linux fanboys buying into an image? Yeah but so are most subcultures.