Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
I think most tech is bullshit. 4k screens, multi-camera phones, new gadgets. Bullshit. I have a 6 year old laptop, and an external monitor someone threw away. I have a 30 Euro 18 buttons mouse, from a non-brand, and a 20 Euro pair of headphones that are some 5 years old. All good. Am working on a multi hour documentary with these. My phone is 7 years old. My desk is made out of an old closet. My electric scooter is 8 years old. Not made out of an old closet!
Audio systems....bullshit. Microphones...mostly bullshit. Cameras, pretty bullshit.
What I mean is the difference between brands and prices is almost non-existent in terms of quality + what you do with them matters. The reason people are obsessed with these is because companies are great at selling illusions and useless features, plus blowing out of the water tiny miniscule differences to make them look important. Hard truth to swallow if you are a techy-guy/girl. But that's the truth.
Audio systems....bullshit. Microphones...mostly bullshit. Cameras, pretty bullshit.
What I mean is the difference between brands and prices is almost non-existent in terms of quality + what you do with them matters. The reason people are obsessed with these is because companies are great at selling illusions and useless features, plus blowing out of the water tiny miniscule differences to make them look important. Hard truth to swallow if you are a techy-guy/girl. But that's the truth.
@tio
> What I mean is the difference between brands and prices is almost non-existent in terms of quality
you had me in the first half not gonna lie, but this take is so wrong, everything else was okay, but brand vary WIDELY, both in quality and in value/price.
If you have ever worked with e.g. blender or had to compile large projects, it's also obvious that hardware matters, it can be the difference between days or minutes.
Yes they market it over the top. Yes, I'm on hardware mostly from 2012 and I have basically no need to upgrade anything, only repairs. No, a 750w power supply would not meet the needs of my system, I need one with 1500w, that's not an useless feature, that's how much power it can provide to my system.
Denying that there are objective measures of hardware quality really dilutes you message that I actually agree with somewhat.
Some brand are also more FOSS aligned than others, and choosing those might save you a lot of hassle down the line, and help you promote you and your friends self liberation from proprietary garbage.
> What I mean is the difference between brands and prices is almost non-existent in terms of quality
you had me in the first half not gonna lie, but this take is so wrong, everything else was okay, but brand vary WIDELY, both in quality and in value/price.
If you have ever worked with e.g. blender or had to compile large projects, it's also obvious that hardware matters, it can be the difference between days or minutes.
Yes they market it over the top. Yes, I'm on hardware mostly from 2012 and I have basically no need to upgrade anything, only repairs. No, a 750w power supply would not meet the needs of my system, I need one with 1500w, that's not an useless feature, that's how much power it can provide to my system.
Denying that there are objective measures of hardware quality really dilutes you message that I actually agree with somewhat.
Some brand are also more FOSS aligned than others, and choosing those might save you a lot of hassle down the line, and help you promote you and your friends self liberation from proprietary garbage.
@tio
> If say Mozilla calls their VPN as “free” as in “the source code is open and you can ‘fork’ it”, but they charge money for the service….it makes 0 sense. I can “fork” the code, ok, but can I use it with their VPN servers? No. Then what is the point of that!? Call the VPN client as “Public Source Code Software” that can be Edited/Shared/Copied or whatever “license” you want to attach to it. And call it a day.
https://www.tiotrom.com/2022/08/free-software-nonsense/
Free as in freedom dork, please consider being a bit more informed about the things you talk about. This is so fundamentally a part of FOSS.
> If say Mozilla calls their VPN as “free” as in “the source code is open and you can ‘fork’ it”, but they charge money for the service….it makes 0 sense. I can “fork” the code, ok, but can I use it with their VPN servers? No. Then what is the point of that!? Call the VPN client as “Public Source Code Software” that can be Edited/Shared/Copied or whatever “license” you want to attach to it. And call it a day.
https://www.tiotrom.com/2022/08/free-software-nonsense/
Free as in freedom dork, please consider being a bit more informed about the things you talk about. This is so fundamentally a part of FOSS.
TIOFree Software Nonsense.If you call a software “free” then you should not trade for it. It means, it is given to you without any conditions attached to it. You should not give your data to them, your attention (ads), your currency and so forth. You can’t say “free software” and sell it. That’s not free in any …
@cafkafk There is no freedom, fork, without having money to "buy" it. If it costs money, it is not free. You want to open yet another can of worms and discuss for days about what "free" means?
@tio There is no discussion, you're just not aware of the definition of free software.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
> “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, “free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.” We sometimes call it “libre software,” borrowing the French or Spanish word for “free” as in freedom, to show we do not mean the software is gratis.
> You may have paid money to get copies of a free program, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
This is foundational knowledge.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
> “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, “free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.” We sometimes call it “libre software,” borrowing the French or Spanish word for “free” as in freedom, to show we do not mean the software is gratis.
> You may have paid money to get copies of a free program, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
This is foundational knowledge.
www.gnu.orgWhat is Free Software?
- GNU Project - Free Software FoundationSince 1983, developing the free Unix style operating system GNU, so that computer users can have the freedom to share and improve the software they use.
@cafkafk Yes I know very well what "free-software" is. I am saying the word makes no sense anymore since if you have to pay for something, it is not free. Yet some say it is. You also took things out of context with the quote you posted from my original post about it. Read that post and the comments on that post.
The "Free-Software" "movement" is great, but also they bastardized the word "free" and that was abused by so many companies.
The "Free-Software" "movement" is great, but also they bastardized the word "free" and that was abused by so many companies.
@tio
> I am saying the word makes no sense anymore since if you have to pay for something, it is not free.
as a left-libertarian I agree with the idea you're presenting... but that's really missing the point.
is it not free speech if it's published in a paid magazine?
maybe it's not freely available, and it would be great if it was, and personally I actually wanted a version of the AGPLv3 that was non commercial... but I fail to see how the free software foundation makes a mistake in using the definition of freedom that is most widely used.
Surely you could say that we should redefine “freedom”, but this just comes of as you wanting reality to conform to your opinion. Which is post factual in my book.
> I am saying the word makes no sense anymore since if you have to pay for something, it is not free.
as a left-libertarian I agree with the idea you're presenting... but that's really missing the point.
is it not free speech if it's published in a paid magazine?
maybe it's not freely available, and it would be great if it was, and personally I actually wanted a version of the AGPLv3 that was non commercial... but I fail to see how the free software foundation makes a mistake in using the definition of freedom that is most widely used.
Surely you could say that we should redefine “freedom”, but this just comes of as you wanting reality to conform to your opinion. Which is post factual in my book.
@cafkafk I am saying that if you say "this software is free software and costs 9.99$" it is confusing. Yes, if you then read their concept of what "free software" is, you'll get the point. But the truth is that it is confusing when you use the word free to mean something that has restrictions of use. It goes against the idea of "free" itself.
