El 21/11/15 a las 18:10, Lisi Reisz escribió:
On Saturday 21 November 2015 23:34:44 Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
When people is doing wrong, they ought to know that. If somebody isn't
going to listen to moral principles,
It is not up to this list to teach us all moral principles. We all have
different moral principles. Maybe some of us have none, though I doubt
it. "I like so and so" is fine. "I like so and so because" is fine.
Even "I recommend".
By "this list", I understand that you mean "the participants of this
mailing list". With this in mind: Yes, of course it is up to us to teach
you (or any other participant) the morals associated with using a computer!.
Your suggestion to treat morals as a matter of taste or a personal
decision is absurd. Moral is not a matter of taste nor "like". It comes
from observations, deductions, and judgment and it is precisely about
what and how things *should* be done. Do we ought to tell people "I like
to not to kill innocent people" instead of "You should not kill innocent
people"?. Of course not. I am not comparing proprietary software to
killing, I am examining the logical consequence of your "suggestion".
If people were responsible enough, we wouldn't have to insist on morals,
they would figure it on themselves and act accordingly; and would "catch
up" quickly on the remaining points from the existing conversation among
their peers that already figured those remaining points. We have to keep
insisting, like parents keep insisting on their misbehaving children,
because people and children are irresponsible and need to be told things
many times.
Moral is everywhere. From supermarket shopping to stock trading (all of
those financial movements including product purchases have moral
consequences) and of course, computers (including tablet computers and
computer phones, more popularly miscalled "smart phones").
We all participants of the mailing list are members of *THE* society,
the only society which is entangled to levels unthinking of in the best
dreams and worst nightmares of our ancestors just 500 years ago (when we
didn't have intercontinental planes, computers and computability theory
were inexistent, and men was completely terrestrial (now we have been to
the Moon and Earth's orbit)). What you do affects everybody.
We some people care about society's common good (we like to call it
"consciousness") and our good (we like to call it "human nature").
Naturally, we comment on the things you do that affect society for bad,
and in this context often that involves using or recommending
proprietary software.
The point is that moral is an unavoidable consequence of daily life, and
how you behave according to moral affects us individually and the
society we care for, so it is only natural to expect moral comment for
whatever you do.
I am tired of being lectured at and carpeted for using Debian. If the Thought
Police think that the contrib and non-free repositories should not be there,
they should take it up with the Developers. As I have pointed out earlier,
we should be able to use them in peace without being under this constant
pressure and bullying. (And it feels like bullying when I get jumped on
every time I or someone I offer to help wants to use my/his/her computer to
listen to the British media.)
One of the reasons I like Debian is that it gives me the freedom to choose.
Or anyhow, it did. There are plenty of fully Free distros for those that
want a fully Free distro. We should (yes, should) be free to use the whole
of Debian without being called immoral.
So either
(1) You are implicitly asserting that using proprietary software has no
immoral consequences. Since you said you have been "lectured t and
carpeted", I can tell that you have already been explained why it does.
(2) You are asserting nothing about whether it is moral consequences,
but you are asserting that IF it has moral consequences, somehow (there
is a missing step in your reasoning here) we ought to ignore those moral
consequences. Since morals is about good and bad, fair and unfair,
benefit and prejudice, you are implicitly asserting that we must just
watch actionless as these wrongs, injustices or prejudices are being
discussed as if there was nothing wrong, unfair, or prejudicial about them.
-----
Your problem is that you handle our criticism regarding the problems
that proprietary software causes for you and for society as if it was a
matter of taste, while it is not. There is a reason for this criticism.
If you are being pressured or "carpeted", there is a reason for that
pressure or carpeting. Why do you not listen to that reason?. If the
reasons are void, then there is no reason you should feel pressured by
them, since we would be speaking nonsense.
In short: If you do not want to be criticized for being indolent in
using proprietary software, then stop being indolent and do not use
proprietary software, period.
There was a driver who was cruising the 80th highway and heard in his
radio "Warning to drivers of the 80th highway; warning to drivers of the
80th highway: there is an idiot who driving backwards". He looks through
the windshield and says "Ahhh, it's not a single one. There are *TENS*
of them!!!".
That is all I have to said in this specific regard. If you reply, and I
don't reply back, it's not that I do not have anything to say, but that
I said it already.
