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."

Comments

Is that you Stallman?

[itsme1234]

Oh, sorry, it was you... Well in this case not only it isn't funny but it's somewhere from pathetic to dangerous. We can make fun of RMS but it's the world that's sick.

Re:Is that you Stallman?

[SurenEnfiajyan]

We can make fun of RMS but it's the world that's sick.

The world isn't ideal, and many things (not only software) sometimes require compromises to work. One of these things are closed source proprietary programs which have many reasons (including economic, security, quality) to have place in our world and they won't disappear anytime soon. RMS is just too idealistic to be able to put up with the imperfection of the world. The world just can't magically become ideal. IMHO Eric Raymond is a much better FSF leader candidate since RMS is doing more harm than good to FOSS because of his idealism.

Re: Is that you Stallman?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nonsense, Eric Raymond is an open source proponent, not a freedom software guy.

aRTee

Re:Is that you Stallman?

[Lennie]

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 ?

Re:Is that you Stallman?

[vux984]

" 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.

Re:Is that you Stallman?

[Kjella]

The world isn't ideal, and many things (not only software) sometimes require compromises to work.

The question is if you need an idealistic or pragmatic torchbearer. Like if it was FLOSS is great... but we understand if you need nVidia's driver blob for your graphics. Oh and Steam for your games, because it's just entertainment. And MS Office, because compatibility. And Photoshop, because GIMP isn't the same. And so on, it would be like "okay use open source when it's convenient but if not that's fine". You always know what corner RMS will be in, even when the deck is obviously massively stacked against him he'll tell you how it ideally should be.

And to be honest, he's not wrong. Your life is probably going to become more and more affected by computer code running somewhere that you don't really know what does, got no practical chance to inspect and even if you did you couldn't actually fix it nor pass it on to anyone else. But I'm thinking 99% of that is going to happen on a server in the cloud, granted we're not back to dumb terminals but a lot of the important ways our data is transformed is now off-device and the client might just as well be a web app running on Chromium or open source wrapped as an Electron app.

Re:Is that you Stallman?

[serviscope_minor]

The world isn't ideal, and many things (not only software) sometimes require compromises to work.[...] RMS is just too idealistic to be able to put up with the imperfection of the world.

I love how people just make up random shit that they think must be true about RMS without ever actually bothering to look at what he has done.

the GNU project was initially built with proprietary tools on UNIX workstations. It only became fully self hosting in 1994 with the Linux kernel, a full 11 years after starting the project.

Clearly RMS was entirely prepared to put up with the impefection of the world.

IMHO Eric Raymond is a much better FSF leader candidate

Maybe once upon a time, but he off went off the deep end.

Re:Is that you Stallman?

[serviscope_minor]

He just doesn't accept that proprietary software has its place when there are no sane alternatives.

[citation needed].

At most you could reasonably claim he says that free software could provide alternatives. I've never seen him claim it currently does.

For example, what software do you use [...]

Unless you back up your claims about what RMS says with actual not-out-of-context quotes/citations, I'm going to assume you're yet another person who's heard some stuff about RMS and so you assume you know what he says. Don't worry it's a popular hobby to do that. The problem is RMS is capable of a lot of nuance. People on the whole don't like nuance and it often gets lost.

I'm not having a go really. If you know about RMS from second hand sources, you've almost certainly got it wrong because other people's ability to misunderstand him is astonishing.

Sheesh

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

"Many dating Web sites run proprietary JavaScript..."

No shit, Sherlock. Why not just say "Many web sites run proprietary JavaScript..."? Why call out dating sites?

Practically every goddamn site I visit runs JS and sometimes they run fucking gobs of it to the point where my browser pops up warnings about scripts slowing down the system. Why are dating sites any different? Why not say car sales sites or blogs or Amazon? What's so special about dating sites?

Re:Sheesh

[stephanruby]

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.

When you're an extremist. . .

[RazorSharp]

. . .it's hard to find a date.

I support free software and see the obvious benefits of its existence, but these guys who try to excise all proprietary software are living in a dreamland. My wife thinks I'm weird enough for abstaining from social media. When free software is convenient and useful, I use it.

The ironic part is that, as much as guys like Stallman rant and rave about freedom, the lifestyle they promote is extremely limiting. No wonder those nerds can't get dates. A free software dating app wouldn't change things.

Re:When you're an extremist. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Social oppression works because most people are spineless weasels like you.

Parody of OSS activists

[Etcetera]

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.

Re: Parody of OSS activists

[lucasnate1]

Dating sites are not a critical aspect of modern communications.

Considering that most people seek a relationship, and that face to face first communication is becoming more and more of a taboo, are you sure about that?

No it's not.

[Qbertino]

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.

Re: When all you have is a hammer...

[Anonymous Coward]

What's this drill? I only have a hammer...

Prioritize SW freedom and set aside objectors

[jbn-o]

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.

Re:Yes, but......

[serviscope_minor]

Yes, and it'll also prevent you from using the site in most cases. That's kind of the opposite of "freedom".

That's about the most foolish definition of freedom I've seen today on the internet. Installing LibreJS is your choice. Claiming that choosing to not run non-free JS is 'the opposite of "freedom"' is several steps beyond facile.