On Ubuntu and Free Software
I've tried Ubuntu off and on since they first released. It's what I've recommended to friends as a first Linux distro and I'm writing this on a (borrowed) laptop running Ubuntu.
But for my own systems, I run Debian. One of the reasons I've stuck with Debian is I've found the project is most consistent with what I think free software should be and what it doesn't have to be. I'm ok waiting an extra six months (or 18 months) for a feature to be implemented in a free, unencumbered way. I'm ok not using features which require me to surrender rights or privileges to someone else. Until the last year or so, I thought Ubuntu shared that belief.
Benjamin Mako Hill wrote an
essay for the
Free Software Foundation about the arguments for "free software" versus "open source", where the latter argues that it is better because of the quality of code. For me, free software is better because it's free, not because of features or quality.
On quality and features, Ubuntu often makes a better desktop. On being free, Canonical keeps moving itself farther and farther away, as Novell and (especially) RedHat have done. Releasing code under GPL isn't enough.
I get why people use Ubuntu. For a long time, I've tried to like it - but too many problems, too many conflicts. And now, Canonical is trying to redefine what "free" means.
I get it. I get why people run OSX. Or Windows. I get why people choose lots of things I wouldn't. Sure, opinions vary. But I think people have to reconsider why they're running GNU/Linux, and if Ubuntu still meets those standards.
Labels: benjamin mako hill, canonical, debian, free software, free software foundation, linux, open source, ubuntu
Beware of FREE (part 2): There's no such thing as a FREE account.
I previously wrote about dangers of relying on "free" services because you relinquish control (and effectively ownership) of your property to the administrators of the services.An economics teacher of mine repeatedly lectured that "There's no such thing as a free lunch." We don't exist in a vacuum and everything has a cost, even if you don't see it. When you sign up for a "free" account (like the Google one I'm using now) you're paying for that account, but not with money. Usually, you're paying with personal information. There is plenty of in-depth coverage of what websites do with your information and that's not my focus.
I just want you to know,
it's not free.
Every "free" service you use is using you in return. Every time you connect two discrete facts together by "friending" someone on a website or listing your favorite books or reveal anything about yourself, you're paying that company for their service. There are billions of globally known facts about you; what isn't known is that
you are always
you. How does a company distinguish the John Smith who likes Ford Mustangs from the John Smith who likes sushi and also know that the first one is a vegetarian? They know it because you tell them. That information now belongs to them. You're
paying them for their service.
In perpetuity.
Labels: facebook, free software, internet, linkedin, livejournal, myspace, privacy, web 2.0
Lifehacker isn't hacking enough.
Lifehacker ran a list of "
Readers' Free Replacements for Paid Tools" which I would care about if I ever paid for software tools. More than seven years ago, I switched to Linux exclusively and the only software I buy is the
rare game (and I don't use unlicensed copies at all).
"Companies that suffered from piracy a decade ago now know the lesson well - piracy is a good thing so long as the pirates are folks who could never afford your products. So stop calling them pirates, call hem users. Free software has no pirates."
--Jonathan Schwartz, Free Software Has No Pirates
I know that it's hard for some people to understand but Free Software means I don't have to worry about getting audited for license violations or calling up the company because software I
paid for won't work after I upgraded computers.
All of starts by not running an operating system that tells me what I'm allowed to do with it. Or a phone or a DVD player or a television or anything. If I buy something and what I want to do is legal, I shouldn't be restricted by a license.
Labels: free software, law, lifehacker, linux, open source, windows
