@Suiseiseki It's supposed to end the discussion because I'm sick of it and it will never go anywhere because it never does, it's a huge waste of time. If you think that a program that spies on people almost as much as fucking Google Chrome does and is blatantly anti-freedom, is free because of legalistic bullshit, then there's no point in saying anything else.

Free software doesn't have to respect the user's freedom, so it's just open source. It's just free as in money, really, the whole "freedom" thing associated with it means nothing, because "free" programs can assrape the user's freedom as much as proprietary software and still be "free". Pointless to argue against an ideology that believes that free doesn't mean free, and that software can be designed and used to take away human freedom and to be as difficult as possible to replace but still be free.

Even if it's something that can realistically be forked and made free, that does not make the original free. Freedom in software is dying, it has been declining for a while and corporations are taking everything over with intentionally clusterfucked software that is designed to be irreplaceable and to be a dependency for everything, and "free software" people are all for that.

I'm being an idiot, I'm making arguments again when the entire point is that I am frustrated by having to repeat basic shit over and over again. I should not have to make these arguments. At some point it's just us vs them and there can be no debate. It's like trying to make arguments to Microsoft about why what they do is wrong and is going to have disastrous consequences for human freedom. They don't care, they are just the enemy and they do it on purpose. Arguments should be made in front of an audience so that other people can be exposed to them. Debates are a complete waste of time.