Interesting topic you all brought up! :) As far as I can see it, despite having negative informations about some products (I'm ignoring brands and for-profit organization names because of [[https://k7r.eu/there-is-no-free-software-company-but/]] and [[https://media.libreplanet.org/u/libreplanet/m/libreplanet-2016-the-last-lighthouse-3d51/]]), the negative information in various FSF and sister-organizations' campaigns are based on facts. Most of the facts can be seen at [[https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/]] (although the articles referenced in each subpage might not be universally shareable, they do serve as good basis for us to form arguments againts each product). Morever, we already know issues with:
- The majority of websites available as of today (due to non-free JavaScript being served to the guest/visitor/client, or not being clearly marked-up as free/libre, see [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html]]). - Products from Sony :: See the previous references, and DefectiveByDesign. - Products from Netflix :: Id. - Products from Amazon :: Id. - Products from Medtronic (and similar) :: See [[http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2010/transparent-medical-devices.pdf]] and [[http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2015.51009]]. - Products from Volkswagen :: See the GNU.org page on proprietary software. - Computers for voting :: Although this is the only case in which we must promote against the use of software (for registration of the votes, not for counting if the counting is also attested against human-made count), according to [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-digital-society.html#voting]], see the following example of a non-(free/libre) software in the voting system in Brazil: [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-digital-society.html#voting]]. Of special interest might be the section about appliances that is present in the GNU.org page about proprietary software. However, the GNU.org page on proprietary software also offers a double-sided knife against us if for some unknown reason, our messages switch from "in favor of freedom" to "in favor of security", at which point we run the risk of appealing too much for security and failing to raise awareness of the lack of the essential freedoms of the software. Software freedom is a requirement for security and privacy, but the inverse isn't true. Now, you might be asking: "If we don't appeal to the lack of security first, how do we reach out and make the explanation easier?". For this, answer, I find the explanation given by Stallman in the beginning of his speeches to be most suitable to let people know what we are talking about at first contact. The explanation goes similar to this: computers have the single job of getting the next instruction and doing what it says, without questioning if that's the right thing to do. With free/libre software, the user has the possibility of controlling the software either individually (if he wants to study it and does know how to do the changes), or collectively (through sharing, selling, community engagement, hiring/contracts, customization, and so on). Now, with non-(free/libre) software, the software is controlled by the proprietor. It's always one or another. And since in the non-(free/libre) case the essential freedoms are absent, then society must always assume the worst: insecurity, loss of privacy, loss of independence, and so on. After this explanation of how software is used by computers and what are the essential freedoms, then I usually give a fictional example of some non-tech person hiring someone else to fix a problem in the free/libre software they have, and say that this results in an improved version of the software which both the non-tech and the hired person can either share or sell. After the fictional example, I give real examples of how non-(free/libre) software impacts society. About Debian: I know it was only an example, but I must say that Debian is also non-(free/libre). If you want to discuss this further, please start a topic anew. :) -- - [[https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno]] - Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com gratis). - "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre, por isso não uso. Iguais a ele prefiro GNU Ring, ou Tox. Quer outras formas de contato? Adicione o vCard que está no endereço acima aos teus contatos. - Pretende me enviar arquivos .doc, .ppt, .cdr, ou .mp3? OK, eu aceito, mas não repasso. Entrego apenas em formatos favoráveis ao /software/ livre. Favor entrar em contato em caso de dúvida. _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
