Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
mor wrote:give a man at least the benefit of the doubt.
I mean, yes, one could have definitely read it that way and, had I phrased it differently, like speaking of my history of longwinded and argumentative discussions here instead of assuming one would figure it out, would have helped you not getting to that conclusion, however, as you said, how monumentally narcissistic would one need to be to mean it that way?
My point is: would me being the most narcissistic person be the likeliest of scenarios in the absence of any other indication pointing that way? Or did I give any reason to lean that way, have I ever said or done anything here or elsewhere to support the preconceived bias of me being so self centered rather than, ehm, any other possibility?
In truth, I'm just self conscious about my proneness to let the flow of words go wild, and I figured you might have witnessed some of my forays here.
Yes, it is kinda narcissistic too to think anyone even registered me as a presence here, especially considering how poor my contribution to actual problem solving has been, however no, come on, just because my crap doesn't stink it doesn't mean that I think the world revolves around me.
good answer!
do you mind if i figure you like this from now on? can't get that image out of my mind...
Its difficult for me to give a simple answer to the OP question.
While I do regard RMS to be a Cyber-Jesus - I would be the first to admit that I am somewhat a sinner.
I tend to look at things from an engineering perspective, though.
From there I learned a few cardinal rules:
A. The right tool for the right job.
B. If it works, dont fix it.
C. Second source everything, if possible.
D. its not what you know, but knowing where to go fo find out what you dont.
Plus, i do not regard all FOSS as benign, nor do i regard all proprietary as evil. The issue is one of context.
For example, the lil lady needs Photoshop for her graphics class. This naturally requires Win7 (which I very much dislike) as well as an Adobe product on my system. Fortunately i do have Adobe blocked every which way to sunday - but the issue here is that necessary work cannot be done without it, and the FOSS system simply cannot compete with Win on graphics. Gimp blows chunks next to PShop, and other major Win graphics programs. Ergo PS is the right tool for the graphics job.
There are 'proprietary Win programs that are truly freeware. Irfanview comes to mind. In fact I use it in Linux as my normal image viewer.
However, as a general guidleine, particularly on the Win platform, one must be *very* wary of 'freeware' - and avoid those that do not have a stolid reputation. The reason, of course is often the software, such as Foxit, or ImgBurn starts off free, but it is only a bait and switch tactic to ensnare users in later versions, particularly with spyware and adware. Without source, TAANSTAAFL is a general rule (albeit with a few exceptions).
I do not see the use of proprietary software in and of itself as a moral hazard. I see it as a limitation on freedom, and also, of course as a potential vector for malware. RMS states the Golden Rule, but we must be practical. The one positive aspect of proprietary software is that it can drive the development of community efforts at replacement. One example of that is ReactOS, which is developing a replacement microkernel for Win itself.
From that aspect I have never had a issue with proprietary *drivers* at least in the past before the new techniques of malware embedded in hardware such as disk drives has come into vogue. The worst of course is the Ring-0 horrors embedded into modern processor code, and motherboard BIOS. Perhaps we *should* start paying more attention to FOSS hardware, to avoid where the real threats lie, as far as system security.
Of course there is the subtle evil of FOSS malware, of which I regard systemd to be only a symptom. But even Devuuan uses systemd where its the right tool for the right job, until at least a replacement can be found.
That said, in my Win7 boot on this machine where Photoshop lives, I also have Ubuntu in a VM, where i do not worry about freedom, as it is only a convenience, and limited in what it can do. Sometimes rebooting to Linux is inconvenient, and I want something simple to maybe test a script or do some basics I cant do in Win. I do not care about Canonical mechanations there.
But one of the main strengths of FOSS is its communalistic nature. Where it shines is its community forums such as this one, where users and the creative community can interact. A good example of that is VLC media player, one of the best and most feature laden, bar none. I use it across platforms. Alot of user input went into making it.
Although this is ultimately a religious issue, one should bear in mind that the bible was never finalized, and culminated in the Talmud, whose primary message was: Whenever possible be ethical, but when not- be practical.
This leads us right into blood diamonds, and here the main issue is whether the dehumanizing working conditions under revolutionary militias are qualitatively worse than those by korporate regimes? Is tantalum mining really worse than Foxconn? I am trying to avoid the fallacy of moral equivalence here, but the simple truth is that in a globalist economy the rot is systemic, and even to be *able* to escape it requires great wealth, which creates a Catch-22 situation since acquiring that wealth requires participation in the system itself.
For a good perspective on moral equivalence and hazards, study the Amish.
They have no qualms with electricity. It is the electric companies they despise.
Nope, don't avoid them at all and glad even Debian has finally made it easy(make that even easier) to enable them now. Hopefully more people will start coming direct to the source as a result. Rather than one of the 100's of Debian "based" distro's.
Edit: Would like to see some of the fragmentation end and credit given, where credit is due = Debian. Which is not to say imo/experience there aren't some kickarse Debian respins out there, ie: Bunsenlabs Linux (community continuation of #! Linux) and Linux BBQ (Debian Sid done by an uber kickbutt nixer = Machinebacon) jump to mind and I highly recommend.
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *
I like that Debian makes it easy for me to use my computer without limitations. I also think it is great others can avoid whatever software, firmware, etc., that they wish.
I use Debian because it cares for reliability and it makes it easy for me to stick with free software only. (I have been using my notebook for years without WLAN just because I didn't want to install proprietary drivers.)
I do work as a graphic designer and so far I didn't encounter anything I couldn't do with free software. Obviously, things sometimes need different approaches and more than one tool but free software is much more satisfying to me because with it I can ensure to not support policies I would rather get rid of. I am glad to have become a person who many people claim to be non-existent.
Using proprietary software does actual harm to others (ignoring my personal annoyances with it). There are many reasons but the most important ones are in my view:
1) With my money I would support actions I oppose. (Deliberately limiting people, spying, creating dependencies, abusing user data, etc.)
2) It would be rather burdensome (if not impossible in some cases) to create files in open formats. This way I would take part in forcing others to use restrictive tools.
I do avoid non-free software and I am fully satisfied with it. My only regret is that free operating systems only are only rarely pre-installed. This seems to be the main reason why "taking over the world" is so slow. I am convinced it will happen anyway because freely building on an already established base is undoubtedly more efficient than playing stupid hiding games (proprietary trade secrets). The biggest corporations are moving away from selling software already. Nowadays they most of the time use proprietary software only as a means to hide what data they do collect for their actual business since it has become rather pointless to sell something you can have for free without imposed limitations, data grabbing and spying. Therefore, its paramount to them to make the switch to free software as painful as possible.
Unfortunately creating free hardware needs world-wide coordination and funding if we want to get up-to-date results. But we will get there also.
Well, yes and no. I have a couple of necessary hardware blobs. I was quite surprised when I looked that I have very few contrib packages. There are not enough to keep contrib and non-free sources open so I blocked them.
Debian is a Linux OS. That said, if one can get a source package of just about anything it can be made to run in Debian. The kicker is that one has to know how.
I have a laptop that runs only free repos, and I have a desktop that needs the "firmware-linux-nonfree" package so I use that, I also like virtualbox so that is nonfree (at least the installer), other than that its all free.
Maybe no one in your privileged back of the woods, but certainly people who strive for a culture of all free software, media and information. It also hurts the people not privileged enough to afford the proprietary software.
EDIT: Back on topic: I sadly haven't paid attention to the hardware I purchased and therefore need several firmware packages.
^You don't really need any of those packages. Maybe intel-microcode only. ATI GPU's run good enough even with open-source drivers.
OT, I only used Microsoft fonts (contrib) since I needed them for college. It was on an old Dell PC, so no need for any wi-fi firmware (there weren't any wi-fi chips). For everyday use I could get by without any non-free packages.
As for the newer laptops and PC's, some non-free firmware is needed for optimal performance. Too few choices for full-blown free install.
Last edited by Wheelerof4te on 2017-06-29 13:39, edited 1 time in total.
Quick question about the liberation fonts if I may--when someone in windows or any other OS opens a doc written in liberation do they automatically convert to times new roman fonts on other systems?
Just something I've always wondered about.
deborah-and-ian wrote:
Actually, you don't. The Liberation fonts are a pixel perfect replication of the MS fonts.
Definitely a noticeable difference as far as I can see.
Sure, they have to look a bit different, or MS would sue them. BUT
1. they are the same size and mostly the same form (metric-compatible), so documents will render correctly and not have, for example, more or fewer pages.
2. LibreOffice automatically recognises that they are replacement fonts and thus uses them instead of the MS fonts. In my experience, MS Word also uses the MS Fonts as a replacement if I make a .doc(x) in LibreOffice with the Liberation Fonts.
Please note that these are only the old MS Fonts (Times New Roman, Arial,etc.), not Calibri -- for this font, Google has created the Carlito font, also available in the repos: https://wiki.debian.org/SubstitutingCal ... mbriaFonts
OP asked "Does anyone here avoid contrib or non free software?"
But people replied to the unseen "Why?" and even argued over why or why not.
No, I don't avoid contrib or non free software. I can't as my laptops need them, and sometimes I need the software to do some work. (That's to the unspoken "why?")