| To expand on car_analogy's point: you're ignoring second-order effects. Look at the avalanche of user-hostile nonsense that has become the norm in non-Free software. Much of it is incompatible with the FOSS model. * Microsoft is apparently pushing to make it impossible to install Windows 11 without a Microsoft online account. [0] I know of no FOSS with the nerve to try something like that. * Non-Free games that charge real money for in-game cheats, and are of course designed to prevent you from manipulating your own game-state * Mobile apps that request clearly unnecessary permissions, for reasons never revealed * Mobile apps that sell your location data, and anything other data they can get their hands on, with minimal regard for how this might impact your physical security * Lies of omission about fixes to security flaws, and their specifics * Intrusive telemetry that can't be disabled (although FOSS doesn't offer a total guarantee against this, see Firefox) * edit Lies about security properties that are hard to verify without access to source code, such as falsely claiming proper end-to-end encryption * For more see [1] If you only run Free Software, you get many benefits even if you're unable to modify the software yourself. > Genuinely open computing would make customisation and sharing available to everyone, not just tinkerers who know what a command line is. This cannot be done. You can't make a car that anyone can repair, either. Software development is a skilled craft. That doesn't mean there's nothing to gain in Free Software. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30387866 [1] https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/proprietary.en.html |