/tech/ - Technology★

>>1063401 (OP)

>How do we make FOSS great again?

How about by writing our own? Start small, don't bend over, get better over time.

As far as I have seen, FOSS projects (unlike these pseudo-open RedHat/GNOME/Freedesktop.org/etc projects) tend to welcome contributions.

Now that I think about it that post looks like a run of the mill scotsmanpost, but what I meant is that this is only true for a few known bad actors.

>in reality all the FOSS projects are fiercely maintained by a handful of people who don't want no outsiders poking around "their" programs.

Name and shame this FOSS project that rejected your no doubt sterling contributions, OP.

>>1063441

systemd

make your own OS.

Not kidding, the entire OS field today is plagued. and *nix fucking sucks with what we now know as convention even though it's still miles ahead of wangblows it still sucks

Don't contribute to Freetards, their retarded and will pass off your work as their own anyway while larping and sucking stallman's pedo dick.

Instead, fork templeos or shrineos/wtf ever.

Templeos is an os that is ACTUALLY MADE FOR DEVELOPERS. Unlike posix shit it doesn't use unhealthy amounts of abstraction and attempts to give the end user an idea of what's actually goin on.

It's also not copyleftist libralist shit, it's public domain. the fucking thing that should be used instead of this retardist communist crap that tries to inbetween freedom and corperate.

Unlike FOSS projects that can easily get userped by what ever fag decides to write some new gpl or commie CoCk. Templeos doesn't have that shit and is made publicly free from the retarded notions of "Muh pr".

>>1063401 (OP)

>How do we make FOSS great again?

Again? It was never great. Commercial software at least had some quality control in the past, though it has been getting worse over time because everyone is too incompetent for that to even matter, and most of it is made by an incestuous group of monopolies that isn't going anywhere, so it doesn't have to be good at all. It just has to be somewhat usable by retarded people. Dude open source dude software tends to be just "we copied what the big corporations did, but not well enough to sell, so here it is for free so we can feel good about ourselves". It's a form of virtue signaling, really. Very rarely has anything to do with morality. Free software does, but even then, most of it is not very good, and that's me being nice. Of course, going for dude open source is not even an option, because of how bad proprietary software has become. Too unusable and untrustworthy to even be worth pirating.

>>1063446

The problem is that what you're asking for would basically require hundreds of people working full time for free. No one person can make an actual OS that isn't a fork of cuckix. Turning temple OS into a workable, user-friendly experience would be the equivalent of turning lead into gold.

Unless you can convince 100 of your friends to start working on a free OS from the ground up, OP would be better off focusing on something smaller and more manageable.

>>1063578

Stallman managed to do this. The guys developing the BSDs managed to do this. ReactOS managed to do this. Why can't you?

>>1063590

Copying something else is different from actually creating something.

>>1063578

project oberon was made by one man though, and he wasn't a schizophrenic either. you need to ask serious questions like why create something nobody will use.

if the goal is a proof of concept that nobody has done before then fine but if all you do is reinvent the wheel you are doomed before you start.

is the goal security? if so then use a beowulf cluster over multiple architectures, so that if one machine is compromised the system goes down, or gets rebooted.

>>1063556

>Commercial software at least had some quality control in the past

You wish, just look at all that crappy banking software banks are still stuck with after some faggot shat out some spaghetti code over half a century ago.

>>1063596

Even if it doesn't end up used, it may influence other OSes for the better. For example, Oberon influenced the creation of Acme which still has a decent following today (even if Sam's is bigger).

>>1063599

Look at all that software that has been working for more than half a century and everyone else since then has been too incompetent to replace or even replicate. Clearly, we are better than the people that made it. We are just too good to do it, if you really think about it. You can't read their source? Well, then you must be too good to understand it. Writing software is a social activity. Everyone knows it has nothing to do with computers.

Consider suicide.

just fucking fork their project jesus christ it isn't that hard

>>1063614

t. never forked a project with frequent breaking changes

>>1063614

you can fork it but if the goal is to get the codes to the upstream project then it might not help

>>1063441

This one https://www.gnu.org/software/quickthreads/

I cry every time T_T

>>1063578

>The problem is that what you're asking for would basically require hundreds of people working full time for free

t.billgates

>worked on tails for years

>emmapeel is a sjwjew

>so is drwhax

>so is sajolida

faggots let google employees make decisions now

>>1063401 (OP)

You could try making your own fork with said fixes, loma

I don't know what foss is

>>1063641

Google owns them man, Mozilla gets billions from Microsoft and act like controlled opposition for browsers like chrome and Edge. They get to fly the flag of privacy while being just compromised software with a little bit of privacy makeup on, while chrome is completely compromised in every way and doesn't hide it. Both Chrome and Firefox are Microsoft garbage that should be evaded like the plague.

>I don't like how a program is managed or its community

Then FORK it. That's what freedom is about. You can control your computing 100%!

>>1063717

cont. the problem is you don't even KNOW how to be free.

>>1063718

Firstly the problem is society doesn't even know about freedom.

Secondly even when they learn about freedom, they are unwilling to invest into it. They will continue their mindset of simply complaining and waiting for other people to do the work. They don't understand the value and meaning of having freedom. The meaning of having freedom is to have personal responsibility over oneself instead of waiting and bitching about how other people refuse to do your own work.

>>1063747

Isn't voluntary slavery only possible for survival? Normalfags aren't even fighting over food, how can they be so dumb? There is an obvious trend of rising stupidity every where. What is behind all these shit?

>>1063401 (OP)

>Add to this the fact that by now most open software has been taken over by SJWs

>leftists has taken over free software defined by a leftist philosophy written by a leftist named Stallman, and developed by leftist devs and organisations

Leftists have taken over their own thing?

>>1063755

Well of course it sounds stupid if you put it into context like that.

>>1063446

This tbh

>>1063749

It's not necessarily a matter of society being dumb, I'd subscribe it as education about the status quo of how software works and that this is the way it is. The biggest cultprit behind the idea of respecting only proprietary software is Bill Gates when he wrote his famous open letter to the hobbists. From this pivotal idea, people are taught only the idea that users are supposed to respect the control of proprietary software.

People are not being taught about what is freedom as a computer user and what is the meaning of this freedom. I have become a free software activist after spending a bit of time thinking about the issue; I've concluded that freedom means I am allowed to control myself and that I don't have to beg for the master to service my request. What I do is teach people about freedom and also the consequences of what it means to be free. I tell people about why I refuse to touch proprietary software when they encourage me to install specific proprietary software titles.

>>1063983

Information is meaningless, unless they are interpreted by someone. Was RMS taught about software freedom? He was like you, he though through this shit. Like you and I did. Do not neglect the power of stupidity. How many years had the FSM be going on? How many articles had been written about GNU and Linux? How many times had people frustrated upon BSODs or spinning loop of updates?

Thinking. This is all about thinking. Constructing perfect argument backed with the most solid evidence, people just wave it off. Some may even agree with you, and use Siri immediately to share pictures about this weird freedumb guy on FB/Insta/insert_botnet_social_media. Pin one down on spot and convinced that guy. And be perpared for GIMP and Gnome filepicker argument.

At some point, you notice that the demand for real freedom is internal, it must be generated autonomously. Monkeys are perfectly euphoric in their cage with female monkeys and food supply. The desire must origin from a degree of insight and planning for future. The ability to see past what is in front of us. No matter where you are, we are all connected. Our action affects the whole world for years to come. Every second spent on Wangblows is a choice made against freedom. Every choice against freedom made is a step closer to total control.

Look around. Think again. Not for food, but for latest fruitoys. Not for life, but for jobs. Not for achievement, but numbers in bank accounts. The system is actually very efficient. Earn -> Spend -> Work -> Earn. Almost like matrix

When you figured it out, you realized that (((for some reasons))) people just stop thinking about anything other than money, work, fashion, entertainment and sex. And you realize not everyone can be saved

What about picking up/forking dead projects?

>>1064008

The issue of software freedom is a matter of values. So when people learn about software freedom, they are not necessarily going to feel that software freedom is an important value for themselves. For most of society, they place a high value upon software that has convenient and powerful features today; for most, they place a low value upon how well the software respects their freedom. People who support software freedom as a high value are normally people who also believe that it is a valuable virtue to support general individual freedom.

The value and meaning of freedom is a long term ideal that many people do not consider and understand; many live their lives only for the near future. For these people, they normally don't bother me so I normally don't bother with them. They can live their life complaining about the mistreatment of the masters they've chosen. As for me, I spend my time investing into the software that I want for my own life.

>>1063983

>People are not being taught about what is freedom as a computer user and what is the meaning of this freedom.

You mean people are not being taught about Richard Stallman's idiosyncratic definition of freedom as a computer user.

>I've concluded that freedom means I am allowed to control myself and that I don't have to beg for the master to service my request.

If you can alter the software you want to alter yourself, I guess that's possible. But among the ridiculous things about Stallman's beliefs is their naivete about the power of users. I sez, "What if the user isn't a programmer?" Stallman sez, "Why, the user just pays a programmer to alter the code for him!" A user of free software who can't program all of the changes he wants himself isn't free, he has just changed masters.

Not to mention all kinds of other problems, like the fact that a programmer who retains copyright to his work can opt to cease offering new releases under an open license. Oracle did that with OpenSolaris after they bought Sun. Descendants of OpenSolaris limp along, but proprietary Solaris outclasses them, hard. The grsec guy did that with his kernel patches, too.

And if that insane pedo is right about the revocability of the GPL, that just makes the whole situation even more clownish.

>>1064238

You don't seem to understand. Can you not see how everything is connected? Here is a rundown of recent events: (* means you are here)

>prism

>China great firewall

>no net neutrality*

>porn licence? *

>iPhone face recognization

>China-face-recognization.gif

>UK fact recognization (90 bucks for hiding face) >>1063809 *

>Credit/debit card

>Paypal

>RMS insist on cash

>China Alipay (no cash any where)*

>SJW extend tentacle cock everywhere

>Microsoft buy github

>Microsoft make WSL

>SJW pentrate Linus, he cucked *

>big data

>mach learning*

>javashit

>cloud+cloudfucks

>cdn

>5G*

>chromium

>SJW/rust/firefox usage down to 1%*

>electric car can't turn on without update

>self-driving car?*

etc etc. Is the trend not obvious? Imagine 5, no 2 years later, what will be on the list?

Those people that don't understand such problem is part of the problem. They are part of the botnet. They are voting, consuming, producing. They are numbers on OS and browser statistics. They are pressuring abnormal ideas, LMAOing at incel Android non-applel linux neet wizards. They are driving the botnet. They are directly influencing now and the future. This is not black pilling. Pushed back to a corner, fighting is the only way out. Not all people can be saved, some should not

>>1064240

>A user of free software who can't program all of the changes he wants himself isn't free, he has just changed masters.

This is false. Asking a programmer to write a computer program for you that respects the user freedom doesn't mean that the user has a master over themselves. Asking a programmer to modify the software you have is not a problem whenever they are willing to grant you all four following permissions: 0) run the program as you wish 1) Study and modify the source of the program 2) Share verbatim, unmodified copies of the program 3) Share any modifications that are made.

If the user is concerned about the revocation of a license granted without irrevocable interest, the answer is to simply offer a trade for the license so the license becomes an irrevocable interest. A seed of peppercorn is legally permissible as a token of exchange so you can offer any other larger token that you feel the licensee will accept. If the licensee will accept one dollar, then the license will become irrevocable with the dollar that you trade.

>>1064243

I completely understand what you're trying to say. For me, I would frame it as a perpetual and encroaching attack over our individual freedoms which include the right to privacy. The consequence of people who do not care about freedom will be people who have their freedoms stripped outside of their consciousness. While everybody deserves freedom, it is not within my ability to logically convince everybody into protecting their own freedom. The best I can do is understand what it means to be free and teach people who are willing to listen.

Take the CoC

>>1064243

What the fuck do machine learning, CDNs and 5G have to do with this?

>>1064274

Machine learning can be applied to distinguish and create fingerprints between posts in a public forum. This is a potential means to tracking individuals by their posting style. I don't know the beef with content delivery networks. 5G is a conspiracy to cause cancer with 5G radio radiation.

>>1064280

Machine learning is just fashionable statistics though. What makes it special?

Congrats, you just discovered the limits of FOSS philosophy.

There is nothing that a scattered group of individuals can do that a closed group of people who are talented and dedicated to their cause can't. And having an "open" project will inevitably cause somebody who craves power to take over and gatekeep the project anyway. And he probably won't have the project's best interest in mind.

>>1064274

>>1064290

Machine learning can be used to automatically categorize big data from prism. One possilbe implementation is:

>1. find connection between data, doesn't have to be done to NPCs that id themselves everywhere

>2. categorize profiles into psychological personality groups

>3. train network on groups of people and their actions to events

>4. use network to predict reactions to events

>5. produce events to alter groups and produce desireable outcome

Nothing is really strange though. Humans are machines that thinks and are (((increasingly))) predictable. When you can predict, you can change.

CDNs+5G. Internet speed is already enough at 4G for normalfags, why do they keep on upgrading infras? One way to defect any encryption is to compromise both the sender and the receiver. Do you still think you will be browsing the internet? Afterall, you don't own the backbone nor signal towers nor even the protocol. Hint: thin client.

>>1064255

Just because you are protecting yourself doesn't mean they won't strip your freedom from you. When the time comes, there will truely be no escape. Safe heaven no more.

>>1064308

But what's different to 4G or a site without a CDN? I guess what gets me is that some of these points are really overspecific.