I am now a published author.
Great article, but you could’ve gone deeper into the modern ramifications. I feel you cut that short, just after mentioning the Zuckerborg - there would have been so much more to get into.
You should also have clarified that you’re talking about Linux as a consumer device OS; most of the internet and probably some social media giants run Linux or UNIX-like OSs, too.
And that Linux is not equivalent to FOSS, nor is the EFF.
And a link to that article you’re refering to.
probably some social media giants run Linux or UNIX-like OSs, too.
i would be surprising if most didn’t.
What else are they going to run? beOs?
Look, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you are treading into virtue signalling territory and your article has the superior tone of those who bought electric cars in the late 2010s to lord it over the rest of us.
Using Linux is not going to stop your doom-scrolling, nor is using Linux by itself telling the big corpos anything at all. Stop conflating using Linux with “sticking it to Facebook”.
Linux is a tool, and it is a tool that allows freedom of its use. That’s it.
Look, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you are treading into virtue signalling territory and your article has the superior tone of those who bought electric cars in the late 2010s
Except electric cars are hella expensive and linux is free. It is true that OP is making a moral judgement but I don’t think thats the same as ‘virtue signalling’. Open software is a morally charged topic. Some the main reasons why people like open software are moral reasons (the goods of collaboration without profit incentive, the harms of big tech, etc.). So bringing morality into the discussion seems appropriate.
Using Linux is not going to stop your doom-scrolling,
Linux itself might not prevent doomscrolling (though it can help a bit, since default Windows and MacOS settings are always trying to push news and other articles onto the user to plug their respective news aggregation services). But other FOSS software (like the ActivityPub protocol) can for sure make a very sizeable dent in the amount of doomscrolling in one’s life. I agree that OP could have done more to distinguish the Linux project from other FOSS projects, but I think the point still got across.
nor is using Linux by itself telling the big corpos anything at all.
Microsoft is a big corpo. If one of its biggest competitors were free and open source linux distributions with libreoffice suite installed would that not be telling it something? Same goes for Apple as well
Edit for typos
Except electric cars are hell expensive and linux is free.
That was literally my point. Some people bought electric cars because the could, not because they wanted to effect any social change.
But other FOSS software (like the ActivityPub protocol) can for sure make a very sizeable dent in the amount of doomscrolling in one’s life.
Is activity pub only used on Linux desktop apps? Can’t a Mac or windows user participate in mastodon? Fediverse use and Linux are separate issues.
This false equivalence between Linux itself and the path of our collective salvation from social media, corporate manipulation, etc, etc is a big problem for Linux, because Linux is just a tool.
btrfs is widely praised… and also a product of Facebook. Google has poured Fons of money into FOSS development. Should we shun these tools?
Especially now, with a sizable influx of users to Linux, articles like the one Op posted create a completely false us v them narrative that just isn’t there.
You want to fight the evil social media? Drop them.
That was literally my point. Some people bought electric cars because the could, not because they wanted to effect any social change.
Okay. Then don’t really see the relevance here. OPs point was clearly about trying to effect social change.
Is activity pub only used on Linux desktop apps? Can’t a Mac or windows user participate in mastodon?
I wasn’t trying to suggest that they couldn’t.
Fediverse use and Linux are separate issues.
Literally speaking they are different projects, but they are also similar in that they are both open source projects, often both FOSS, so the underlying philosophy behind their development is the same
product of Facebook. Google has poured Fons of money into FOSS development. Should we shun these tools?
Shunning doomscrolling is not the same thing as categorically shunning everything that Google or Meta has ever output. I think its great they contribute to open source projects, I hope they do continue to do so
Op posted create a completely false us v them narrative that just isn’t there.
Personally speaking I didn’t find OPs post to be especially divisive, it I didn’t make me feel compelled to go harm some Windows users or anything like that, but your mileage may vary
it I didn’t make me feel compelled to go harm some Windows users or anything like that, but your mileage may vary
I’m happy to let the conversation take its course, but I take exception to this. You damn well know that’s not what I meant.
I was being hyperbolic but the point is the article didn’t point any real negativity towards the users of big tech, just the corporations or CEOs or whoever behind big tech
Interesting article! Linux seems very techy to me so I never thought of it as being similar to Luddism but it makes perfect sense when you spell it out like that. Thanks for sharing!
Site seems to be down.
They’re a luddite, if the site wasn’t down then I’d doubt their credentials.
Luddites are (and always were) fucking idiots tbh, it’s inherently a reactionary ideology. The left and more broadly - progressives of all sorts - should embrace technological progress and resent corpos who exploit it and promote open source and public non-profit alternatives, this extends from the basics like the OS and hardware all the way to LLMs
To expand on the other comment, Luddites were not necessarily against technological progress. Rather they used destruction of certain types of machinery as a political tool: to temporarily extend their power as skilled laborers, and to intimidate the factory owners into recognizing their unions or getting certain laws passed.
You just called luddites idiots, and then proceeded to suggest they embrace…the core tenants of luddism.
Hmmmmmm…did you read the atricle?
lol funny how I just noticed that too.
But I do want to say that as with many many radical movements and ideologies, the best solution is usually somewhere between their proposed tenets, and the behaviors of those they oppose. Usually around halfway between, but slightly closer to the protesting ideology.
So while I would not agree that shunning all progress is a good idea just to make sure all the workers continue to have a status quo they’re used to - I think that’s just stunting the betterment of society. But when progress enables the kind of employment elimination like we see in the 21st century, which also contributes to an accelerated imbalance of wealth that very quickly turns into a freakin global oligarchy and serfdom of 99% of the population, you can’t allow progress to run untempered.
The best solution is that any advancement of technology that can replace human employees, must be implemented with an accompanying program that provides laterally equivalent employment roles.
So like, replacing workers with machines - well okay, then do it in a way that the workers can be trained to participate in the maintenance of said machines, to perhaps fill roles in safety and quality assurance, and even some could perhaps become part of the labor force involved in new innovation.
But all this ideology is moot as long as the wealthiest people aren’t satisfied with just being filthy rich and living lavishly. They want to control the fucking world. And ultimately, they are gonna, unless there’s a massive event to take them all down.
Everyone does well when everyone does well. Everyone prospers when everyone is prosperous. But when wealth can get to such levels of imbalance that individuals can literally buy governments, you have a system that is inherently bad for almost everyone.
But I’m not saying anything that anyone doesn’t know. It’s all a matter of making it happen by merely not being apathetic and complacent, not just accepting things. Knowledge and ideas need to be shared and ideologies shared and refined for the better.
So much really good change took place because of the internet and how it facilitated a vast ocean of idea exchange. Why do you think the 1% have been working tirelessly to poison it and encapsulate it for their own use. Good thing it’s nearly impossible. They have had some good success with social media, but more and more people are aware of having been used and abused by it, and they’re growing intolerant of that.
Sorry ranting more. I just really like sharing my thoughts. If you’ve gotten this far, thanks so much for your patience, and I welcome any constructive responses. Bear in mind that I’ve been extremely abbreviated and nutshell-ish. Nuances of course exist in multitudes.
Nice rant!
I’m not going to nitpick, agree with you. Like you said, nuance is everywhere, you can’t talk about general things without leaving out a load of details.
I think you have the right focus. So many people are focused on false dichotomies. Right vs. Left. Innovation vs. Tradition. East vs. West. The list goes on. But they are all distractions. Trivial differences that are magnified by the 1% to keep the masses at each others throats.
The class war is the only real war. The 1% (quickly becoming the 0.0001%) vs the rest of us.
Eat the rich.
Agree 100%! People have been indoctrinated to see things in absolutes, and in fully opposing forms. This is why so many think that if someone is <insert label> then they definitely think all the things on a list alike. Few people can comprehend that people’s actual views are almost never partisan and binary. But they feel necessary to fit in with their tribe; to conform, so they seldom speak out about a single specific issue with which they disagree. And always purely out of fear of social friction. People need to learn to feel safe not being exactly alike! The USA was founded on the idea that we can be different and still work together for the common good. Hence, United.
But nowadays it’s the Divided Corporation of America.
