DanielTux @danielst@librem.one

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at @masterofthetiger@theres.life
"if what I heard [...]"

"If what the outraged people read into the public document is the truth, then you are wrong"

Well. Yes. Can't argue with that :)

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at @masterofthetiger@theres.life
I meant the lack of communication also. I know they are not perfect. And notoriously understaffed

But: "Unless otherwise noted, contents created by the Purism team on this website are copyleft with a CC-by-SA 4.0 license."

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at @masterofthetiger@theres.life
Purism tries a lof of things in ways that nobody tried before. In this case, reducing social media toxicity in a scalable way by other means than moderation or AI. Dismissing that experiment on the first day without trying to understand the concept (laid out in several blog posts) and without waiting for some mid-term results is unfair, and that was part of the outrage.
It seems to me that it works out much better than the mob expected.

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at @masterofthetiger@theres.life
I understand that and dislike their communication at times, but you have to admit there's quite a difference between "it literally says that" and "if you try hard, you can understand it that way"

My perception was that people were pissed by a few things that were not right day one and then were trying hard to find more things to be pissed about.

And, as you noted: as soon as you do something (well intentioned), people start criticizing you.

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at @masterofthetiger@theres.life
"It's vague, but I read on the Internet that it means they are okay with calls to genocide" 😐

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at @masterofthetiger@theres.life

https://librem.one/conduct/

And yes, they suck at communication.

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at
I take that back.

Actually, I dislike needless fragmentation (Debian/Devuan, OO/LibreOffice, ...), that's why it saddens me that your site intentionally doesn't show the full picture that unknowing visitors expect to see (gatekeeping). It saddens me that a shitstorm easily creates fragmentation between groups that should walk united against big tech.

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at
That's an unexpected response.
Are you saying your ~6k followers (as of now) are insignificant in comparison to the giants? Are you saying those won't influence their families?
Are you saying your work has no influence? Are you saying influence is not power?

Ask the social media experts of the despots of our time.

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at
Knowing what I know, I can imagine that talking IRL to some of the persons at Brave or Purism could change your mind, without changing your ideals.

Ironically, you might be embarassed to learn that people you think to protect work at companies you think should be avoided for the same reason.

Nobody has the full picture and that's why humility rocks.

4/4

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at
People might share your exact ideals and yet come to different conclusions about the concerns you have. And of course there are things you just don't consider. Likely, somebody at Nextcloud made a donation you disagree with.

Or just today I learned that digitalcourage runs their own instance of framadate, because of a problematic French law that could put people at risk.
/3

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at On top of user-freedom-respecting, my neutral was meant in the NPOV sense wikipdia has in theory.
Adding a critique section to entries would allow people to make more informed choices.
One key problem of Google/bigtech is that they are gatekeepers. You are too.
/2

@switchingsocial@mastodon.at
Nothing wrong with ideals and morals, I have plenty.
But whenever humans try to enforce justice/utopia, they inevitably create injustice/dystopia.
The best human judges fail.
Be the good you want to see in others, but don't force opinions on others.

That's the main problem of all ideologies, no matter how left or right they are: Wanting everybody so submit to it, because else they must be wrong.
/1

@masterofthetiger@theres.life
The only advantage of FLOSS is that the L explains the F. The OS is the problem. FSF dislikes both terms.
Maybe we should coin an alternative that only covers free libre software: FLiS 😎
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.en.html

@Amgine @switchingsocial@mastodon.at @akarshanbiswas@inditoot.com @masterofthetiger@theres.life
How is this relevant to Purism? SS dismissed Purism with similarly weak, ideology-laden arguments and seems to have a blind spot on the more actual problems of Mozilla, that I wish there was a neutral alternative to SS that does not hide projects by personal preference and leaves the choice to the user.

PureBrowser should not have the problems of FF. But I think there was also a mention that they might base on Gnome Web in the future.

@tuxdevices
Two excellent additional resources:
Spec comparison + in-depth design analysis by @amosbatto :

https://forums.puri.sm/t/comparing-specs-of-upcoming-linux-phones/6827/11

https://amosbbatto.wordpress.com/2019/08/15/adding-switches-not-simple/