@djsumdog@Suiseiseki under capitalism you can chose your master, but you're still subjugated to them and have no way to exercise democratic control over the fate of your company or who governs it. you're still subject to having a large amount of the profit you generate stolen by a corporation.
being self employed or part of a worker's collective is only possible for very few people when the vast amount of resources, factories, and land are owned by corporations. ergo the reality we live in is a reality where almost all people have to spend the majority of their waking hours under the command of someone they did not elect democratically. while it's better than feudalism, it is not a free society.
it has none of the advantages that it could derive from being text based instead of WYSIWYG. it's unpredictable and inconsistent as shit. it's huge, slow bloatware. it's the opposite of simple and painless.
typst feels like a good alternative to some extent. it has some amounts of corpo and walled-garden vibes to it tho so i want to give it more time before deciding if this is actually a good direction to head in
but yea I'll agree with GNU people any day before agreeing with MIT license GNOME/Linux-systemd techbros who have completely abandoned the ideals of both Software Freedom and the Unix philosophy and to whom Linux is a funny testing ground for corpos and "brands"
@Suiseiseki in a free world it is impossible to release nonfree software, not impossible to install nonfree software.
in a free world you cannot even voluntarily become a slave
actually, in our current world it is normal for most people to become a wage slave and sell their labor for money. we should not obstruct their ability to do this, they need it to properly live their lives due to how our world works. instead, we need to make the lives of the slavers, the bosses, the capitalists into hell.
it’s the same with proprietary software: don’t attack the victim and make things even harder for them, attack the perpetrator.
@SRAZKVT the nice thing about gentoo is that it doesn't treat all nonfree software the same, you can accept individual nonfree licenses individually and you can also do this per-package
accepting a somewhat permissive source available "modification allowed for non commercial use" license is a bit different from accepting a EULA that makes you promise to sacrifice your firstborn child to Odin
I'm just not a fan of how the -libre distros don't have proprietary software in the repos. I want my distro to manage all the software I install, and freedom includes the ability to, at your option, give up parts of your freedom ... I really like what gentoo does here with the LICENSE variable and package.license directory.
@amy don't, I've tried and I can't recommend it. it'll give you an endless stream of people bothering you about it and blocking you. it's better to just stick to being positive and uncontroversial only...
@flesh@sodiboo to be fair i'm not against devs putting their stuff on flatpak or whatever, that just means they are widening their reach which is a good thing. i also hate windows but i still think it's good when devs release their software for windows 🤷
@sodiboo@flesh "but on nix the idea is to actually package stuff" that's the idea on every distro it's just that some distros suck at it horribly. i suppose flatpak is okay as a fallback but that's not what flatpak people are pushing for, they unironically want to replace distro packaging for applications which just sucks