@Suiseiseki Not sure how I loss freedom on a free trial. You just turn off auto renewal and you don't pay anything. I already had a GOG account so it was just more freebies.
@ooignignoktoo You received a copy of nonfree software under a proprietary license, therefore freedom lost.
Just because you don't pay with money doesn't mean you haven't paid with your freedom and your freedom is more valuable to you than money will ever be.
@Suiseiseki Considering I already had a gog.com account and already had games on there before this is a shit take.
Also for someone touts software freedom part of that aspect of freedom is freedom of choice.
It feels like to me you don't really value software freedom and only want people to use software that you approve of which is pretty authoritarian and quite contradictory of what the philosophy of freedom is.
Some free open source software is good and has it's uses but there is plenty of non-free software that is also decent as well and I'm not going to restrict myself from using it because some ideological zealots in the FOSS space online tell me do to so.
@ooignignoktoo >Considering I already had a gog.com account That was not relevant to what I was writing about.
You lose freedom with each and every proprietary programmed installed - whether you used a "gog account" or not is not relevant.
>part of that aspect of freedom is freedom of choice. Yes, part of freedom is being free to grab a pistol and start blasting holes in your feet, but I'm clearly going to mention that doing so is a mistake.
>It feels like to me you don't really value software freedom and only want people to use software that you approve of which is pretty authoritarian and quite contradictory of what the philosophy of freedom is. I don't see what's authoritarian about making suggestions that you shouldn't install malware on your computer, or you shouldn't shoot your feet, as I cannot do anything to stop you from doing either.
What would be a contradiction would be to support the execution of proprietary software merely because it was gratis, or the proprietary license had less bad restrictions than usual.
>I'm not going to restrict myself from using it You got it backwards - if you use it, it restricts you, but if you don't use it, you are free of restrictions.
That's also like saying; "I'm not going to restrict myself from not putting on these handcuffs".
>there is plenty of non-free software that is also decent as well What I regards as decency is; "not malware", "doesn't spy", "obeys the users orders", "won't stop working at any time" and "can be legally shared, understood and improved", which proprietary software fails all or most of.
The functionality of a program is no good if you cannot exercise such functionality in freedom.
Most proprietary programs frankly suck functionality wise and the main reason why people use them is often because there is proprietary sabotage that makes carrying out the tasks in freedom difficult.
>ideological zealots in the FOSS space online GNU/JIHAD AGAINST "FOSS" AND ALL OTHER FORMS OF PROPRIETARY DEGENERACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!