Seriously, Free Software vs. Open Source debate is important and all that, but if we do not recognize that these philosophies differ in details -- details which *are important*, but remain details! -- we are just letting ourselves get divided.

And that's all that's all the Microzon Facegoopple needs.

Don't feed the monster.
Shamar mastodon
@rysiek I understand your concerns.

But what you call details are basically every dimension that describes these phenomena except for the legal one!

Indeed you can easily see how #Microsoft (!!!), #Google and #Facebook are top contributors and leaders in several #OpenSource projects!

Do you really think they are doing so as a philanthropic endeavour?

They are pushing their own agenda and their own culture and ethics to users and devs, nerd-washed through this ambiguity!

They are fooling us!
@Shamar I do not consider Microzon Facegoopple to be a part of the Open Source movement. The Open Source movement is being co-opted by them. The Open Source movement can consider if they're okay with it and take action.

Still, the main front is between FLOSS and proprietary bullcrap. If we let ourselves get divided, we become weaker.
For me the OSS movement was always about a better way of working, sharing output to multiply results. It was also about that model crushing proprietary development.

I don't think you can "co-opt" that. The fact that MS/amz/goog/FB do so much open development, providing FLOSS that underpins SO MANY other projects, means that we won. Only dinosaurs do proprietary anymore.

What is there to co-opt? To what end?
@ohthehugemanatee @Shamar the business model has moved. Facebook might be running a lot of FLOSS on the server but that does not translate to preserving the freedoms of their users. Instead of being locked on the desktop, they're locked in the cloud. Same with Google, same with Microsoft, etc.

Without copyleft there is an imbalance: they can use OSS tools, but we cannot use their proprietary tools. Combine that with their budgets and you have a recipe for keeping users locked in walled gardens.
That's the difference between Free/Libre and Open Source. Are you saying that the problem is MS and Co are only open source, not Libre? Because that charge can be leveled against a lot of (IMO good) OSS.

Sidebar: do you think that it's facebook's proprietary code that creates the walled garden? What about chrome, then?
@ohthehugemanatee @Shamar I think saying it's open-source's fault that corporate behemoths abuse the lack of copyleft in OSS licenses is no different from blaming my octogenarian grandmother for forgetting to lock the door and getting burgled.

Would locking the door stop the burglary and save everyone's time and money? Sure.

Was it my grandma's fault? No, I will blame the burglars.

Victim-blaming is never a good idea. And does not help.
@rysiek And if she did it on purpose to give people a freedom to freely walk through any house :-)?
@xrevan86 then I would point out to her that there are organized groups there abusing this freedom to the detriment of everyone else.

And if she's so inclined she can donate the house to a community that will take care to give people the freedom without enabling the abuse.
@rysiek The end important thing is user freedom, and we should keep the message on freedom. That's why I end up in the user freedom / software freedom camp.

But damn, yeah people love to attack those *closer to them* more than the people farther away. A universal problem... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY
@cwebber @rysiek Minor differences create wide divisions.