Slashdot Mirror
Free Software Foundation: Dating Is a Free Software Issue (fsf.org)
"I've been making the argument that everything is a free software issue for a few months now," writes the campaigns manager for the Free Software Foundation, in a new essay sharing thoughts on "the issues proprietary technology poses in dating and maintaining romantic relationships":
Many dating Web sites run proprietary JavaScript... Proprietary JavaScript is a trap that impacts your ability to run a free system, and not only does it sneak proprietary software onto your machine, but it also poses a security risk. Any piece of software can be malicious, but proprietary JavaScript goes the extra mile. Much of the JavaScript you encounter runs automatically when you load a Web site, which enables it to attack you without you even noticing.
Proprietary JavaScript doesn't have to be the only way to use Web sites. LibreJS is an initiative which blocks "nonfree nontrivial" JavaScript while allowing JavaScript that is either free or trivial. Many dating apps are also proprietary, available only at the Apple App and Google Play stores, both of which currently require the use of proprietary software.
The essay also warns about the proprietry software used for restaurant reservations, ride-sharing apps, and chat applications. (Not to mention the non-free software behind gift shopping on Amazon.) And even if you decide on a romantic evening at home, "you might find yourself tempted by freedom-disrespecting, DRM-supporting streaming services like Hulu and Netflix...."
"These are all proprietary tools, and the act of using them restricts our freedoms. When the ways we connect with one another are proprietary, we're trusting our secrets, intimacies, and relationships to technology we cannot trust."
Proprietary JavaScript doesn't have to be the only way to use Web sites. LibreJS is an initiative which blocks "nonfree nontrivial" JavaScript while allowing JavaScript that is either free or trivial. Many dating apps are also proprietary, available only at the Apple App and Google Play stores, both of which currently require the use of proprietary software.
The essay also warns about the proprietry software used for restaurant reservations, ride-sharing apps, and chat applications. (Not to mention the non-free software behind gift shopping on Amazon.) And even if you decide on a romantic evening at home, "you might find yourself tempted by freedom-disrespecting, DRM-supporting streaming services like Hulu and Netflix...."
"These are all proprietary tools, and the act of using them restricts our freedoms. When the ways we connect with one another are proprietary, we're trusting our secrets, intimacies, and relationships to technology we cannot trust."
I used to think "incel" was a made-up controversy of mainstream outlets picking up on some bizarre, niche forum of a very wide, global internet, but that this essay get made makes we reconsider that conclusion.
Free Software is important, and promoting its use in the fundamental components of software architecture and systems design is important, as is having its principles applied to critical aspects of modern communication -- arguably now including social network systems.
Dating sites are not a critical aspect of modern communications. This essay comes across as someone who thinks the reason they don't get hits on Tinder is because there's a binary blob somewhere, when chances are higher it's because the blob is you.
FSF has more important things to work on and much lower hanging fruit than this.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
Dating is a social activity with the end goal being to get some.
Software is the thing running on a computer that makes it useful (more or less).
Whatever weed you were smoking when writing this meta-article, please don't offer any of that to me.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
No shit, Sherlock. Why not just say "Many web sites run proprietary JavaScript..."? Why call out dating sites?
Obviously, the article was trying to ride the wave of Valentine's Day-related news.
It actually has nothing to do with dating at all.
Social oppression works because most people are spineless weasels like you.
Nonsense, Eric Raymond is an open source proponent, not a freedom software guy.
aRTee
OK, I would like to say something: why do you think he deserves it ?
It's his principles who got this open source revolution we have now to work at all. If you are on Slashdot there is a high chance that Linux and open source are at least part of what you support. So why make fun of him ? Or say he deserves it ? I would give him some respect instead.
You do understand that the GPL of the Linux kernel made sure that the companies (even competitors) could/would want to work together on Linux ?
And it was Linux and the GNU tools and compiler that got this ball rolling in a big way.
You might not agree with him or some issues or all issues, but why make fun of someone ?
New things are always on the horizon
" When you buy a car you don't rip the upholstery to see if there are any hidden microphones underneath"
But I am allowed to, and if i wanted to the manufacturer wouldn't try to stop me, and generally provides and so far to my knowledge the makers of cars have never been caught hiding mics in the upholstery.
"You also don't demand to examine the ECU software for any code designed to kill you on purpose while driving."
But you should be able to. 'Dieselgate' for the win right? software designed specifically to defeat pollution regulations so vehicles could get away with polluting more... maybe not designed to kill you personally, but leading to poorer air quality than there should have been which kills people daily.
"You trust there is regulation against this."
And even with the regulations actually being there, that trust was misplaced. I'm not sure you chose a very good example.
"To prove to you I am right, let me ask a question"
Wait, how on earth does that 'prove' you are right?
"I mean something that can be used in court against a vendor providing obfuscated (and unexaminable) GPL source code?"
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that if's not the, you know "source" code the original developers actually work with then its not the source code. A simple litmus test of code inspection for X isn't necessary. The courts have the power to subpoena witnesses, and the necessary evidence.
Richard Stallman isn't listed as the author of the "Dating is a free software issues" essay, Molly de Blanc is.
People used to "rant and rave" about how one was "living in a dreamland" to think that they could run a computer with a completely free OS. Fortunately people who fought for software freedom didn't take those criticisms seriously and now we have multiple completely free OSes. It seems that what was readily declared to be fantastic is becoming real thanks to those who push past the objectors and the namecallers. What matters is the substance of what we fight for—lazy convenience accepting whatever someone else wants to do to our computers, or demanding control over our computers and making it possible to do various jobs while retaining our software freedom.
Digital Citizen