Skip to main content

in reply to ๐••๐•š๐•’๐•Ÿ๐•–๐•’ ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€โšง๏ธ๐Ÿฆ‹

heh, yeah, we're on the same page. I labeled nonfree software as the original sin in the presentation. (your meme made it, BTW; thanks again :-) I hope I pronounced your name correctly there
in reply to ๐••๐•š๐•’๐•Ÿ๐•–๐•’ ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€โšง๏ธ๐Ÿฆ‹

Once I discovered GNU licensed software in 1997 far exceeded everything else out there, I never understood why people keep falling for horrific propriety software.

That was the year when a Windows 95 computer at work controlling a machine exploded next to me, filling the area with chlorine gas and shot a massive steel assembly across the plant floor. All because Microsoft Visual Basic had an I/O problem and thought temperatures were all zero degrees. So it was cooking PVC plastic in a massive cannon like extruder tube as hot as burning rocket fuel. Could have killed me in an instant.

That weekend, I would find how reliable and powerful Linux was.

in reply to ๐••๐•š๐•’๐•Ÿ๐•–๐•’ ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€โšง๏ธ๐Ÿฆ‹

the issue is not the operating system one uses, it's whether the user retains autonomy with it. throwing nonfree software into the mix always renders users divided and helpless.
in reply to ๐••๐•š๐•’๐•Ÿ๐•–๐•’ ๐Ÿณ๏ธโ€โšง๏ธ๐Ÿฆ‹

Exactly. Non free software is all about control. Interestingly, the worse it is, profits exponentially increase for the vendor. If it works perfectly, almost zero profit. It's the mechanic's dilemma, maintain everything perfectly and you'll work yourself out of a job. Microsoft maximizes profit and chaos
โ‡ง