floss.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
For people who care about, support, and build Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS).

Administered by:

Server stats:

691
active users

@csddumi I'd like to comment that my advocacy in response to seeing this exploitation of our labor is to advise being more mindful in regards to the projects we tackle.

Centralized services, JavaScript frameworks, big data analysis, etc are always the first things to be exploited. So try going more decentralized... Try making a GTK or Qt app...

This approach can go far, but sure. Not all the way.

@alcinnz

> to limit or define what constitutes “proper”,“sustainable” or “reliable” free software is to limit these freedoms by limiting how they are exercised “properly”, “sustainably” or “reliably”.
/1

@alcinnz
I say that because of just such considerations: Free Software shouldn't change the problems that it works on just in order to avoid exploitation. Instead we need to challenge the exploiters and demand equal and fair treatment. Whether this means that big tech should open source the projects they developed based on #FOSS or that they have to financially support #FOSS developers depends on the developers themselves

@csddumi I can appreciate such a viewpoint, but I do question the utility of these most-exploited domains.

Centralized services require, even more than anything else, require additional governance to deliver the benefits of free software. Not to mention p2p tech is advancing...

JavaScript (or rather the DOM) I don't view as sustainable, once Google for whatever reason looses interest the ecosystem will crumble.

And the only valid use for big data I see is science...

@alcinnz those are fine arguments and discussions to have.

But I do not think we should build these considerations into the system for sustaining free software.

Sustaining Free Software should not change free software's subjects - the freedoms of the developers.

@csddumi @alcinnz @mathew @Hyolobrika @humanetech @TMakarios I don't think I disagree that people should be able to protect themselves from perceived exploitation. I think forming an organization to do that makes perfect sense, if a group of people who maintain software wish to do that. Where the concept of unionization seems to fall down for me is the idea that any one group could ever be representative of all hobbyists or professionals. I have been denied a job (in trades) due to not being a member of a union before too so the term comes pre-loaded with some negative connotations for me I'm sure.

I still say that proper license selection should be all that is required. If there is no suitable license for your needs, I am sure there are avenues to create a new license model more inline with your particular concept of free software. One thing I don't know if you have considered is that many of the people hired by these big companies are the same hobbyists who in their free time also develop software off the clock. If they felt like their labor was being exploited by the company they could always coordinate a protest or walkout to make some noise. I've never heard of anything like this happening except for the political noise you sometimes hear out of facebook or twitter (also opensource powered companies who have "given back" to some degree).

Keep in mind I do not like these companies. I feel a little icky defending their use of community developed software as non-exploitative. There are plenty of other ways we are all being exploited by them. I just think our licenses should say what we mean, and if they don't that would be a better area to focus some attention than trying to get everyone to wave the same flag.

@thatguyoverthere @mathew @humanetech @alcinnz @TMakarios @Hyolobrika

Waving the same flag. I can certainly see why my proposal would could lead to this - as long as we persume that:
a) these groups would be closed gardens with strong gate keepers
b) that there was only a monopoly or duopoly of them
c) that only a monopoly or duopoly could act effectively.

I don't think any of these assumptions need to be true. There can be multiple of these groups - only coordinating when the need arises.

alcinnz

@csddumi @thatguyoverthere @mathew @humanetech@mastodon.social @TMakarios@theres.life @Hyolobrika@mstdn.io An existing one worth pointing out: The Software Freedom Conservancy!