Administered by:
I've been pondering why current FOSS ideals don't really resonate with me and I think I finally have a succinct way to put it.
to me, software freedom means complete unwavering and unconditional support for the user's freedom of choice, with a focus on actual tangible freedoms that result in real-world benefits, rather than abstract ideals and notions of purity. this means putting the user first, even if they choose to use non-free software. interoperate. make stuff work *for* the user.
@gsuberland I feel like in today’s state of computing and the world at large, I care more about data autonomy and sovereignty than licenses on specific bits of code. (And yes that implies interoperability.)
@pmdj @gsuberland Which interestingly I sometimes find pretty old echoes to this idea.
Like Benjamin Bayart in 2004 expressed it with https://edgard.fdn.fr/liberateur/ (in french).
With taking the example of how OpenOffice.Org would effectively not interoperate with other software. It's a bit better nowadays but, let's face it, if you get an odt file, you're going to use LibreOffice or might have to ask for a PDF. Because Calligra (ex-KOffice) or AbiWord won't properly render the document.
And kind of wonder since when Cory Doctorow spoke about interoperability.
Like Benjamin Bayart in 2004 expressed it with https://edgard.fdn.fr/liberateur/ (in french).
With taking the example of how OpenOffice.Org would effectively not interoperate with other software. It's a bit better nowadays but, let's face it, if you get an odt file, you're going to use LibreOffice or might have to ask for a PDF. Because Calligra (ex-KOffice) or AbiWord won't properly render the document.
And kind of wonder since when Cory Doctorow spoke about interoperability.
edgard.fdn.frLogiciel liberateur