I’ve seen many threads suggesting products but they often don’t mention FOSS projects, which should always be preferred to corporate software. With FOSS you are already boycotting capitalism, on either side. Free and Open Source ignores borders and shouldn’t be categorized in nationalist terms, no matter where some of the maintainers happen to live.
I’m the most anti-American user on here and I agree.
I’d rather use USA-linked free software than Spotify.
Wasn’t Spotify Swedish tho? But yeah
I think that’s the point, he’s saying he’d rather use USA-linked FOSS than non-USA proprietary software.
Didn’t microsoft buy them?
No, they’re still independent with majority of shares owned by their founders.
Ah ok, maybe that’s why they arent enshittified that much then!
deleted by creator
https://www.avclub.com/spotify-donald-trump-brunch is just one of the many reasons not to support spotify.
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Spotify for lots more
Let me guess, you get your news from Facebook?
I think you’re missing the point a bit.
Both BuyCanadian and BuyEuropean are about supporting their respective economies as they are boycotting America’s.
For Canada, we’re looking at a recession (brought on by our “ally”) so people are trying to help fellow Canadians out as things get rough and people lose jobs.
While I support FOSS and recommend them in threads etc I fully understand why they don’t meet all the goals of those movements. (That being said, I think one of the most rocking counter punches would be EU investment in stabilizing Linux enough to make it a feasible alternative to Windows/Apple for casual and corporate users, solid shot to 2 of the magnificent 7.)
investment in stabilizing Linux enough to make it a feasible alternative
Do you care to elaborate? If I had to write a list of reasons why Linux might not be ready for your average cubicle… Stability wouldn’t be one of them.
Stabilizing might not be quite the right word I’m looking for. But for example, trying to connect a new wifi card etc. Or when one program updates but this causes instability and you have to undo the update. Even from the handful of linux wizards I know, their battle stories with updates or new configurations are enough to terrify someone.
Not the other commenter, but they likely meant stability with respect to device drivers. The kernel is great at not degrading with a high uptime, but there’s consumer stuff that’s just perpetually unimplemented, buggy, or minimally-functional:
- Sensor monitoring on Ryzen platforms
- Realtek NIC chipsets
- Nvidia cards and proprietary drivers for anything and everything other than compute workloads
- Nvidia cards older than the RTX 2000 series and FOSS drivers
- Peripherals targeted towards “gamers”
None of this is the kernel maintainers fault, of course. The underlying issue is the usual one of shitty corporations refusing to publish documentation and/or strategically abusing the legal system to stifle reverse engineering for interoperability.
I’m going to add Broadcom to your list, but otherwise it is a great, concise explanation of the root issues behind why some users will struggle with older hardware while others will have no issues.
From a purely “vote with your wallet” standpoint it doesn’t make sense, because there’s no money paid. However, one might worry about data/information getting in the hands of a fascist/compromised government. So I think people should judge this themselves case by case.
I think the important part is about who is running the server, rather than who made the software
The fediverse is interesting in that context because each instance can decide where they set up the infrastructure or how they process data / requests. The same applies to self hosting
I saw an article that outlined which country each fediverse platform “originated” from, such as Canada for Pixelfed and Germany for Mastodon. That’s fun to know about, but otherwise not important to users compared to the instances themselves
At most it might speak to which laws will govern the project itself, but even then someone can fork a project that goes astray
I mean, any FOSS project from anywhere could be being used by a fascist government or corporation, to be fair. That’s literally one of the very serious and real downsides of FOSS. It’s able to be used for good or ill.
I mean, it can easily be argued that the US corporate technology class has benefited far more from FOSS than end-users worldwide.
Initially, EC2 used Xen virtualization exclusively. However, on November 6, 2017, Amazon announced the new C5 family of instances that were based on a custom architecture around the KVM hypervisor, called Nitro.
Amazon leveraged FOSS to create their own successful closed-source offshoot. AWS pretty much runs the web. Amazon… is not a good company.
That being said, the US has chosen to be isolationist, whether all of its citizens agree with it or not. Having less of a presence on the international stage, including in the FOSS world, is simply a consequence of isolationism. So boycotting US FOSS is likely to happen in some ways on purpose, and in some ways just from diminished international respect and involvement.
People should pay for foss. Donations are oftentimrs welcome
Agree with the main point, though disagree that FOSS is “boycotting capitalism”, many for-profit companies contribute to FOSS and FOSS can be used by for-profit companies too, much of today’s capitalism runs on FOSS.
The point of free software is that it does not have owners, so what exactly are you “boycotting”?
Tell it to the Russian Linux devs that foss has no owners :-) Theory and practice are 2 different things
FOSS doesn’t mean that you are entitled to a place at the table or that your contributions have to be accepted. Nothing prevents these Russian devs from continuing to to work on the kernel.
Pretty sure American laws explicitly prevent them from working on the Kernel. It’s stupid but that’s what happened iirc
US laws prevented them from contributing while employed in a sanctioned company. Sucky situation for those individuals.
They can fork it, if nobody wants to work with them anymore that’s their problem
@not_IO
I agree on that.I think there is a different problem. Many of the best FOSS products are unknown to the general public ;/
lol who is suggesting boycotting foss projects?
I think OP means that one shouldn’t boycott FOSS projects just because they are from USA. That said, I don’t like to be told what I have to do and don’t agree to “FOSS projects, which should always be preferred to corporate software”. My pc, my LAN, my rules.
you seem to hold your individual freedoms high, there is a kind of software i think you’ll really like
You seem to wanting to school me about what my preference should be. I’ll happily block you. Bye.
They were just pointing out that saying “my PC my rules” is pretty funny when you advocate for closed source software on it. Your PC their rules.
Obviously it was tongue in cheek so chill.
That was a shitty reply with paternalistic attitude. The kind of fundamentalist attitude which alienates people from some communities. I use Linux exclusively since decades, but if I happily fire up a VM to use some CS software that is only available for Windows, if that allows me to do my job better or faster. I don’t need some stranger in the internet telling me that my workflow is broken because of “principles”. These people better stay in my block list.
What a childish response.
Nobody asked your opinion. Bye to you too.
Lemmy isn’t 1-on1 discussions
My account, my rules.
Me too! Me too!
Done
I don’t like to be told what I have to do and don’t agree to “FOSS projects, which should always be preferred to corporate software”. My pc, my LAN, my rules.
…he said, without a hint of irony.
Meanwhile, “my PC, my LAN, my rules” is precisely the reason I do agree with always preferring FOSS to corporate software.
nobody. op is insane.
Almost all the lists shared in the communities exclude FOSS projects.
Which lists?
There are quite a few in [email protected]
Well, if it’s buy European how can open source fit in?
FOSS is not American. Foss belongs to literally everyone.
I kept saying it all over the place regarding the fascistic rejection of Russian (as in race) code and got flamed as result. These people use FOSS, especially GNU/GPL software and yet they have no clue about the license themselves.
Weren’t Russian contributors (from very specific sanctioned companies) rejected from contributing because of US sanction laws and with Linux Foundation being HQ’d in the US?
I think that was mainly due to the concern of hostile actors committing code to the kernel.
I think it was US OFAC sanctions
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/navigating-global-regulations-and-open-source-us-ofac-sanctions
https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/23/linus_torvalds_affirms_expulsion_of/ (links to the OFAC sanctions set up after Russia invade Ukraine)
The OFAC sanctions do have quite a few lists, with one of them being “Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions”, so it could be fear of harmful actions and not just retaliation for the invasion
Lol, first time I hear that, as European😆 what a stupid movement…
I always like to say the fruits of FOSS labour are the common heritage of mankind. It belongs to all of us as a public good, created and maintained by selfless workers. (Nevermind the fact that most FOSS projects are based out of Europe anyways).
FOSS is definitely not boycotting capitalism, but its still an objectively good thing. I see FOSS work as a way for relatively rich imperial core citizens to give back to the world.
Definitely do not boycott FOSS projects.
I don’t understand why you say FOSS isn’t boycotting capitalism. I don’t disagree, but I also don’t know enough to agree yet.
Look at the success of Linux. It’s not in opposition to capitalism, it’s ba kernel widely used by capitalists. If Linux was truly a threat to capitalism, google wouldn’t use it in their phones.
I still think that Linux and open source are great. They’re just not neccesarily anticapitalist. They definitely can be in certain circumstances, and definitely make some rent seeking impossible
To be fair, what Google is doing is a perversion of the original intent of Linux. It used to be a direct competitor to commercial OSs. Google turned it into one.
The original intent was a hobby project, not a competitor to orher kernels
I came into this thinking its more like “Oh no open sores is full of communists let me pay for worse software I never own” which is an argument that comes from the same camp as “this software I don’t like is woke”
Free software is the antithesis of capitalism. It doesn’t make sense to boycott them.
There are some pretty corporate “open core” software companies tho, that’s a more grey area
Are they open or free? That’s the point here.
It’s hard to say. “Open core” means that most of the software is open source (licenses vary) but some features are locked behind a paywall. Gitlab takes this approach for example, also maybe onlyoffice.
Agreed.
