Captain Beyond

The most obvious difference going from Debian stable to GNU Guix is that Guix is a rolling release distro, not stable (in the Debian sense) at all.

Package management is also very different as it’s fundamentally a source based distro, although sometimes the build servers can provide prebuilt packages if they’re available. Also, Guix has the concept of “profiles” which group sets of installed packages; typically, there is a system profile as well as a profile for each user, but users can also create their own separate profiles. This means that a user can install packages to their own profile without needing root permissions.

Profile updates are done in an atomic manner, such that changing the set of installed packages (installing, updating, or removing a package) actually creates a new generation of the profile, and it’s possible to roll back to a previous generation if something breaks. This is true of the system as well as the user profile(s), of course. A profile generation can also be exported as a manifest, which can then be imported to create a profile generation on another system, allowing package management to be done in a declarative manner.

Finally, Guix has a commitment to ship only free software, and uses linux-libre as its kernel. Debian has a clear separation between free and non-free components but does ship non-free software, including firmware blobs, and I believe as of recently the installer provides them by default. There are unofficial Guix channels (=repositories) that provide these things.

Currently I run GNU Guix on my desktop, laptop, and servers. I like the dedication to software freedom and the way package management works. Before that I used Debian until 2019, Trisquel until 2014, and Ubuntu until around 2010. Debian and Trisquel are fine and I don’t have anything against them, I just like the Guix package manager more. I’ve used Xfce with all of these (and before then, GNOME 2). I set it up the way I like it and it never changes.

I typically run LineageOS on my mobile devices, without microG or any proprietary apps. As I’ve said before my preferred OS would be some variant of GNU/Linux, preferably Guix as well, but LineageOS works well enough.

I run OpenWRT on my router, and had a previous router than ran LibreCMC (a variant of OpenWRT using Linux-libre).

Windows games are made for Windows so I prefer to use Windows for them. I don’t particularly want to turn GNU/Linux into Windows, I think it deserves better than that.

It’s worth noting the reason why Molly isn’t available on F-Droid proper: it’s entirely F-Droid’s decision. F-Droid policy requires that developers support (or do not oppose) inclusion in F-Droid, which Signal’s developers haven’t. Signal’s developers are also hostile towards forks and do not want them interoperating with Signal. Thus, F-Droid does not allow Signal or any fork of Signal.

https://gitlab.com/fdroid/rfp/-/issues/2297

I am not really a fan of this decision, I don’t think it’s logical that an upstream can forbid a fork from being published anywhere - but that’s F-Droid’s call to make.

Notice they avoid using the exact term “open source” in this press release. I’m ~90% sure it’ll turn out to be under some proprietary source-available license.

xkcd 743 moment

A tool with fewer features that is harder to use is by definition an inferior tool.

That’s only your opinion, not an objective truth, and I only partially agree with it. Having the most features is not as important as having just the right set of features, and there are anti-features to consider as well. Feature creep can actually impact the usability of a tool, so these two criteria are sometimes in contradiction.

Ease of use is subjective and depends on the user, because users’ needs, ability, tastes, and concerns differ. Of course, I don’t think anyone deliberately chooses a tool because it is hard to use.

I don’t agree that freeness is purely an ideological concern. I don’t think a tool that works against me, or imposes arbitrary restrictions on me is a good tool by any measure. A good tool doesn’t enshittify, or spy on its user, or refuse to work for arbitrary reasons. If a tool doesn’t work and you are legally not allowed to fix it (as in the printer which inspired the movement in the 1980s), it’s not a good tool. If a tool punishes you for something you didn’t even do (as BitKeeper did to the Linux developers) it’s not a good tool, even if it has the right features.

I don’t tell you that your opinion is wrong, only that I don’t agree with it. We are told our concerns are invalid and don’t matter.

This is proprietary software even if it’s been put in a git repo (presumably without the consent of the rightsholder) and run offline.

As has been pointed out in this thread, someone already got hit with a DMCA takedown for this.

I don’t understand why we spend so much time praising proprietary software in these communities.

As to your question, I have a separate Windows machine for gaming, but that’s it. I keep one foot in the free world and one in the proprietary. As for productivity tools I can’t think of a proprietary tool I “can’t quit” or that I would pick in favor of a free tool.

Fans of proprietary software have this weird belief that free software users choose inferior tools for purist or idealist reasons. This is offensively ignorant. No one chooses bad tools on purpose; we just consider freedom to be part of the criteria of a good tool.

“purple-discord” is the only free software Discord client I know about. It is a plugin for Pidgin and other libpurple based messengers such as Bitlbee.

“rdircd” the “reliable Discord client IRC daemon” might be an alternative but I’ve never used it.

Neither of these run out of the box on mobile but you can run them on a server you control, or maybe you could run them under Termux (have never tried this).

You can also use a Matrix or IRC bridge if you control the Discord “server.”

I don’t count client mods or web wrappers as they are fundamentally coupled to the proprietary client.

Unfortunately FUTO apps like this and Greyjay are not truly free software, they are source available with a proprietary EULA.

https://hiphish.github.io/blog/2023/10/18/grayjay-is-not-open-source/

I do not believe privacy guides is a friend to the free software movement. I have criticized them (and adjacent projects in the privacy space) for this in the past, but I’ll just try to summarize briefly why I believe so currently.

Their criteria prioritizes security over freedom and allows for recommending proprietary software if it has been sufficiently audited. They recommend at least two proprietary applications (a password manager and an email client) at the moment but I’m sure they’ve recommended others before.

They have made it part of their mission to debunk the misconception that free software is more secure than proprietary software. While this is indeed a common misconception, it is always associated with another misconception - that the purpose of the free software movement is to provide security and privacy. The free software movement has never promised security, only freedom. This message is unfortunately a casualty of the conflation of the free software and privacy communities.

They are complicit in spreading security FUD about F-Droid. Because it’s common to conflate the free software movement and the privacy community in so many “FOSS” or “open source” spaces, this means any time Android or F-Droid is even mentioned you immediately get hordes of people recommending Obtainium or posting that well-known FUD article, with only someone like me even willing to push back.

They praise the security of proprietary operating systems. In the free software movement, we recognize that security features such as secure or verified boot are useful if the user holds the keys, if not then they are a form of control over the user. For proprietary operating systems, “security” often means you cannot change the system to do something you want, or to stop it from doing something you don’t want. In other words, in the proprietary software world, the “threat model” includes the user themselves.

To their credit, I do not believe they are evil, malicious, corrupt, sold-out, or even wrong a lot of the time. I just don’t think they’re aligned with this particular movement. In essence my complaint is that they prioritize security over freedom, to the degree they even mention freedom at all (it gets a brief mention in their GNU/Linux recommendation list I think) they make sure to remind us that proprietary software can be as good or better.

In a wider view, the fact that people conflate these two communities isn’t really privacy guides’ fault, so I can’t really blame them alone for it.

A program is free software if the program’s users have the four essential freedoms:

• The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
• The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
• The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).
• The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

- What is Free Software? - The GNU Project

Privacyguides should always get a mention when talking about recommendations

I disagree - privacy guides isn’t a software freedom organization and the privacy community is not the free software community (although there is significant overlap). Conflating the two harms both.

There is at least one proprietary app there (Shizuku) and many others have proprietary blobs.

I’ll offer a counterpoint to all the Obtainium fans here: F-Droid is good and “middlemen” aren’t always pointless.

F-Droid enforces their own inclusion standards on every app they build. This mainly ensures that all apps are built from source and are 100% free (libre) software. When you “go outside the middleman” and “go directly to the source” you lose that assurance.

I don’t think it’s worth it for slightly faster updates. I enjoy knowing that I have the four freedoms with every app I install.

NFT Bros 🤝 Twitter Artists

Seething about their jpegs being stolen

Strictly speaking if you can control what the proprietary application has access to and what data leaves it, you can make it respect your privacy. This doesn’t make the proprietary application equivalent to true Free Software, which respects your freedom to use, share, modify, and share modified copies, but it does reduce the harm that the proprietary application can do to you.

You could say that the privacy community is about restricting what bad actors do, whereas the free software community is about good actors making tools that serve their users. The two concerns are confused so often, I see people come into free software communities suggesting that a firewall is a substitute to software freedom. Maybe that’s why I came off as a little harsh there. If you want to learn more I would suggest reading the philosophy of the GNU project.

The reason why people say free software is privacy respecting is because it usually doesn’t do all those harmful things that you need a firewall to block. If it did, the community can create a version that does not.

You don’t need windows. Remove all your windows and adopt a gnu and a penguin. They’ll keep you safe and private.

This is the open source community, not the privacy community. Privacy isn’t the only reason to prefer free software. Some of us enjoy having the four freedoms.

Note that this fork relies on the proprietary Google library to do this. It’s not really an alternative.