/roulette/ - Tech

Tech board tryout

Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

(11.63 KB 265x314 Tux.png)
Linux Comrade 01/21/2020 (Tue) 16:28:10 No. 2
Why aren't you using Linux? If you are, good job. If not, you better start soon. >Open source vs. Free Software https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html >List of free as in freedom distros approved by the FSF https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html >A really good linux distro that doesn't have systemd, but a fast and simple init/service management system called runit https://voidlinux.org/ - Image credit: By [email protected] Larry Ewing and The GIMP, Attribution, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=80930
i use linux on my pphone
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
(50.72 KB 556x346 154732683644.jpg)
Yeah, I used to be afraid of linux, but, after the switch I am literally never going back. That being said, Debian is the least secure of all of them. Ubutnu has had compromises in the source code that have resulted in people being tracked by amazon and the like. Makes you dink, learn how to compile and install gentoo.
>>5 While I think that gentoo is indeed the best distribution for nearly every purpose, I wouldn’t recommend it to anybody who doesn’t want to invest to much time in their computer. Then again, because I always wanted to do so, I have no idea what that distribution would be.
>>6 Yeah, but, that's kinda of the thing. If you are worried about security then usability comes at a cost. Energy follows the path of least resistance. That's why every fag and their mother uses god damn windows. Cause they are lazy as fuck. Well, that and a massive propaganda campaign in the 90's for windows and against linux.
(6.33 MB gnyu+linyux.mp4)
Mint Linux gang
>Why Open Source misses the point More like "Why Free Software misses the point" (of the capitalist superstructure) "Free Software" and "Open Source Software" are the same in all, but name, enjoy your Linux "Free Software", backed by your corporate overlords
(10.11 KB 653x367 ms_loves_linux.png)
>The Linux Foundation >The GNOME Foundation >The Mozilla Foundation But who could be behind this "Free" software? Gotta love your freedumbs, hippies.
>>117 >>115 Oh god who let the geento fag in here.
>>119 Way to miss my point with some irrelevant community of masturbating monkeys Are you enjoying your "grassroot", "organic" Linux distribution? Gotta love all of thoses Red Hat, Canonical, Google, Intel, Novell, etc. "Free as in speech" developpers
Oh right, you can just fork it! Just like you can just start your own communist cooperative! Just fork the means of production bro, just like, copy it bro... forget about the real economy bro... just be free bro...
>>120 >>121 Bro, I am just trying to use something that doesn't cost 150 dollars to install. Right now, that be linux mint.
>>121 http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ Off you go lad, have fun
>>122 >150 dollars to install Just pirate windows lmao, stop being a moralfag.
>>5 >Debian is the least secure of all of them Why? They have a whole team working on security, often patching software before the upstream. It's the only distro to provide official .onion repos as well, so can securely anonymize what OS you're using.
>>34 But Linux is the ultimate lazy way. When I have to do something on Windows I can't believe so many people put up with that shit.
>>117 They integrate what they can't exterminate. Or rather it's way more profitable since it's basically free labour for them.
>>218 Yeah but setting up anything on Linux takes time and understanding.
>>221 You can install something like Mint for grandma and she will find it easier to use than Windows. Those with specific requirements had to learn how to do shit on Windows at one point as well, they just don't want to get even momentarily out of their comfort zone. It's like with politics, people prefer the predictable shittiness of status quo over trying something different.
I can't afford to make a backup.
>>219 Micro$oft is one of many Linux developers , and they are bound to the GNU license, they can implement Linux into windows , but they can not 'own' Linux itself. They don't have and they can never have a monopoly on Linux.
>>261 1. Microsoft and other corps are buying seats at the Linux Foundation board and can now effectively steer where the GNU/Linux world is going by deciding which projects to fund 2. They use GNU/Linux software developed and maintained by free software developers in their products and services which they profit from without paying anyone a dime, other than sponsoring various shit to promote the idea that they're the good guys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVHcdgrqbHE Free software was a great thing when it was a genuine community of developers that collaboratively wrote tools for themselves and each other. But now it's being integrated and exploited by the corporate world because it's free labour. Not to mention that even before that the "Open Source" """movement""" and startup/entrepreneurial culture already replaced free software movement to a large extent and made most devs (including Torvalds) spooked about the GPL and its mission. https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-meme-hustler Don't be a naive fanboy and realize things are going slowly to shit.
>>262 So we should move too FOSS is what you are saying?
>>269 I'm saying free software culture itself is now being increasingly incorporated and exploited by tech capital. Of course we should resist this as much as possible, although I'm pessimistic because most of software developers have been brainwashed by neoliberalism and now see things like GPL as too "extremist" and "restrictive". Most of them now dream of becoming successful entrepreneurs with a profitable startup that is going to be bought out by one of the big tech corps. That's how cucked they are. This change of attitude is one thing, the other is the sheer financial power of corps who can now essentially decide which free software projects get to be worked on and in which direction they ought to go. Then there's also the commodification of the community itself, gatherings being transformed into TED talks and sales pitches with expensive entry fees.
>>271 So what can we do? That's a a pretty depressing picture you just painted for me.
>>273 Honestly, I don't really know. It seems to me that users of free software are now actually more critical than the developers. I think it's because they use free software precisely to avoid big tech as consumers, whereas developers are creators and are thus more susceptible to seeing themselves as potential entrepreneurs that can become rich. You can see that with Linux distros. Ubuntu's popularity has actually decreased as it became more corporate, people were really pissed when Canonical partnered up with Amazon to essentially sell your searches. On the other hand the trend of providing software through "app stores" has also reached the Linux world, but I don't know how many people are actually using this. I still think that for a user free software is a good thing, it's just not that radically different anymore.
>>273 install guix
>>271 GPL is liberal >>275 "Linux" was a corporate project from it's inception.
>>279 Maybe after they apologize to Stallman.
>>280 It *was* but torvald opened and freed it and that's why GNU/linux work in conjunction to this day. Understanding the difference between free and open source is important here.
(160.56 KB 1280x853 freedumbs.jpeg)
>>283 You're so high on ideology, so just like the other dense motherfuckers from earlier, I'm not sure you're salvageable. "Free Software" comes from 60's pseudo-socialist hippie movements, which either amounted to nothing or were taken over by: "Open Source", which is the same thing, but accommodated to it's natural corporate setting. Linux (from the 90's) was always a corporate project, because it was funded and developped as such from it's inception. Linux "desktop" advocates are delusional, since it was never meant to be. The only relevant part of the GNU project, it's toolchain, was completely taken over by Red-Hat (now IBM). The rest, like GNOME, Mozilla (Google), KDE, X.org or whatever else have been funded by corporate consortiums for decades. The "free" software "movement" amounted to nothing, because it was not radical, it didn't take into account the fundamentaly industrial base of capitalist production. Now, where is your "free" hardware? Nowhere to be seen, because guess what, actual proles, working on the assembly line, are not hippies, who like to pretend to work for free. From "seizing the means of production" to "building your own means of production", there is only one step, the one of capitalist reproduction. Read Marx instead of listening to liberals like Stallman (try to read his political blog, you'll see his true face), or you will simply waste your life making history repeat itself.
>>284 >"Free Software" comes from 60's pseudo-socialist hippie movements And you know what you are talking about here since you know a lot about these movements from all the Hollywood dreck you have watched. Thank God Hollywood exists outside of capitalism. >Linux (from the 90's) was always a corporate project, because it was funded and developped as such from it's inception. Everybody who is a proper materialist like you knows that it's the original intention of somebody that ultimately causes everything. For example, if I give you something that is not poisonous, but it was my intent to poison you, you will die from that. >Linux "desktop" advocates are delusional, since it was never meant to be. You heard him. Linux as a working desktop OS will remain a pipedream forever.
>>280 >>283 >>284 Linux was Torvald's university project.
>>284 Lol, The freesoftware porject being "Dead" has nothing to do with Freesoftware being important and a controversial topic and has effected the discourse heavily. Thank Stalman for the fact that companies cant create proprietary forks of source code, dweeb. Plus, none of what you said nullifies the actual arguments of people like Stalman nore does it change the fact that there is plenty of free software available today to use; install GNU faggot.
>>285 >>286 >original intention Torvald's original intention was a toy project for his doctorate, but early on, Torvalds was employed by the predecessor of current Linux foundation to continue working on it. >Linux as a working desktop OS will remain a pipedream forever Linux IS a working desktop OS, just like thousands of other toy OS, but is only relevant for what it was designed for, it's corporate setting. >>287 >companies cant create proprietary forks of source code And they still employ wage laborers to work with it and make a profit on top of it, your point? >actual arguments of people like Stalman Tell me about it, some empty rethorics about "freedom" maybe? >there is plenty of free software available today to use Incredible, maybe one day the ones writing thoses softwares will be liberated from wage-slavery, we might even call it "socialism", too bad it only exists in your own imagination.
>>288 >And they still employ wage laborers to work with it and make a profit on top of it, your point? You live under capitalism and yet you participate in it. CURIOUS >Tell me about it, some empty rethorics about "freedom" maybe? More ad-hominems from the retard. >Incredible, maybe one day the ones writing thoses softwares will be liberated from wage-slavery, we might even call it "socialism", too bad it only exists in your own imagination. Any attempt to make things better until this point is bad. t. Sprudo.
>>289 >You live under capitalism and yet you participate in it. It's called lifestylism, and it's the petty-bourg type favorite pastime. You might use Linux because you fooled yourself into thinking it was somehow superior, but don't come saying this is somehow revolutionary praxis. >Any attempt to make things better until this point is bad And how is the working class any better? Most of them don't even know what "Linux" is, simply because it's irrelevant to them.
>>288 >is only relevant for what it was designed for, it's corporate setting. Once again, but without sarcasm: You believe intentions of actors are strong causal factors. That makes you an idealist. How do you even measure relevance in that context? And relevance for whom? Do you even think about what you have been typing here? Free software is relevant to me, as I'm using Linux right now. Do you perhaps think it has low relevance by some measure using money-sum aggregates? Such a measure of relevance would fit well with the rest of your faux radical wankposting. Things friends do for each other also look bad by that measure, power of friendship BTFO I guess, how will power of friendship ever recover. >empty rethorics about "freedom" Last year, Adobe cancelled access to Photoshop etc. in Venezuela: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49973337 Didn't matter one bit whether one was pro-Maduro or in the opposition, it was cancelled for everybody living there. >>290 >And how is the working class any better? Guess how those people in Venezuela have been affected who have been using GIMP for ages instead of Photoshop? Inb4 >Venezuela isn't workers' paradise so none of this matters
>>291 I'm all for using GNU/Linux, I myself refuse to use anything else, but he's right that currently it's kinda lifestylism and ethical consumerism instead of being a political movement with an ambition to changes the rest of society. I have contributed code to the projects that I use, and that's nice and all, but in the grand scheme of things it doesn't change the fact that the free software world has been invaded by corporate interests and I could be indirectly helping them with my contributions. All in all, I encourage others to use GNU/Linux but there's a serious need for a critique of where we're going as a community, and I don't see that critique a lot.
>>292 I do it to protect my anonymity, man.
>>293 Bourgeois value
>>294 >Le spooks.
>>295 Stirner was debunked by Marx.
>>298 >Thinking stirner and marx cannot compliment eachother and that some how keeping my self safe on a public space that was not designed for anonymity is some how "bourgeois values" If that is the case i'll be taking your SS number, ID Number and Copy of your birth certificate, please. Fucking dumb ass larpers. Fuck off back to reddit, LOL.
>>298 There's a reason that was only posthumously published.
>The Free Software 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Electronic Frontier 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Document 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The X.Org 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Software in the Public Interest 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Freedesktop 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Linux 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The FreeBSD 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The GNOME 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Wikimedia 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Xiph.Org 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Perl 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 >The Mozilla 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Foundation🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 All of them incorporated either in New York or San Francisco, I'm starting to see a pattern here...
Behold.. the Californian ideology brought to its natural conclusion: http://quotes.cat-v.org/economics http://quotes.cat-v.org/politics
So I am curious actually I never actually used linux but seeing some discussion in this thread, microsoft and other tech giants bought seats in the linux foundation. So what are we seeing is more corporate distos of linux or what had already happen fismantlingnehat made linux, linux and having everything incorporated into windows? Shouldnt we be fighting against more corporate control and centeralization?
>>334 You didn't read. Linux was always corporate, Microsoft choosing to embrace it is merely a recent phenomenon. >fighting against more corporate control Yes, I suppose you should just vote with your wallet.
>>334 It just means that they won't be sued for GPL violation.
(3.20 KB 90x20 pureos.png)
(6.56 KB 200x215 200px-Qubes_OS_Logo.svg.png)
(18.49 KB 585x215 Whonix_Logo.png)
Some GNU/Linux distros simply work, are secure and provide anonymity. This is what revolutionaries need.
>>355 Seconding this.
>>355 Last time I tried to instal qubes it went fucking crazy; Don't know if it is stable yet
I love Free® Software™! 25553 intel.com 20617 redhat.com 13662 amd.com 13370 kernel.org 11740 linux.intel.com 11477 linux-foundation.org 11045 linaro.org 8421 mellanox.com 7238 google.com 7200 huawei.com 5785 oracle.com 5714 arm.com 5347 linux.vnet.ibm.com 5298 suse.de 4567 ti.com 4182 suse.com 4073 codeaurora.org 3663 nxp.com 3610 samsung.com 3455 canonical.com 3297 lst.de 3282 chromium.org 3058 renesas.com 2763 nvidia.com 2648 fb.com 2477 broadcom.com 2305 linux.ibm.com 2232 pengutronix.de 2210 glider.be 2133 socionext.com 2115 infradead.org 1926 linuxfoundation.org 1854 zeniv.linux.org.uk 1805 osg.samsung.com 1763 st.com 1737 netronome.com 1733 mediatek.com 1733 lixom.net 1646 s-opensource.com 1604 imgtec.com 1548 suse.cz 1537 microchip.com 1511 cavium.com 1502 synopsys.com 1490 ffwll.ch 1450 rock-chips.com 1410 embeddedor.com 1336 ideasonboard.com 1336 atmel.com 1199 marvell.com 1151 microsoft.com 1143 de.ibm.com 1048 sang-engineering.com 1009 atomide.com 963 freescale.com 957 collabora.com 938 strlen.de 937 roeck-us.net 927 visionengravers.com 927 cisco.com 922 realtek.com 890 iogearbox.net 878 armlinux.org.uk 865 ericsson.com
>>355 You forgot Tails.
>>386 lmao the fuck are you whining about? Feel free to use your proprietary datamining OSes all you want. Doesn't mean I or other security-aware socialists will.
>>6 Guix has nearly all the upsides of gentoo for 1/10th the time investment
>>117 >the Free Software Foundation OH NO
>>273 The answer was to have licensed everything as AGPL3 from the beginning. Corporations make a profit off of free software because they use it to host all their proprietary webservices. Of course, the only way to fix it now is to go back into the past, which is impossible. Now the BSDs are around and a rich legacy of GNU software under an attractive license exists, any extreme licensing change would prompt an enormous backlash from all the companies who make most of the contributions (in the case of the linux kernel, a license change would be literally impossible). They would immediately fork any project that attempted to change the license and you would be left in the dust lacking most of your former developer power.
>>284 >Now, where is your "free" hardware? Nowhere to be seen, because guess what, actual proles, working on the assembly line, are not hippies, who like to pretend to work for free. Do you actually believe the "free" in "free software" is referring to "zero cost"?
>>290 >>294 I hope you get V& by the government because you insisted on using Windows to lord it over the "lifestylist" linux users.
>>402 "Foundation" means funded by porkies, retard.
(216.39 KB suckers.webm)
They're born every minute.


no cookies?