Free Programs In Trisquel Considered Non-free

Many free, or open-source, programs are considered suspect, potentially dangerous, dangerous, and worse as anti-freedom or non-free throughout the broader GnuLinux community. The general idea conveyed by what generally become outcasts in the community is that GnuLinux should be modular, like a PC computer, which, allows us to replace it's components if they become faulty, and that we are forced by external organizations to adopt systems that we become dependent on, and unable to replace.

This is basically the style of the dominant software products we use every day. Instead of fostering development that is fundamentally independent, and lends itself to the independence of relative aspects of the system, organizations create software that is fundamentally based on dependency, and even supporting other dependency based systems. After the fact, they are labeled Free, or open-source, a misleading characterization, that is repeatedly emphasized. Over time, the reasons why we are stuck with certain realities in computing become forgotten, and sources of enormous frustration and vulnerability.

There is a broad culture of acceptance that has been fostered, through the communities that actually actively exclude new ideas, and that normalizes the systems of dependency; many of the common ideas surrounding GnuLinux systems, and how they, or technology works, are evidence of that effort. Old ideas, are repeated frequently, which leave us in a state of disability, and New ideas, are forbidden. (also punished)

It's important for us to understand, that what is repeatedly called free, as in on Trisquel, similarly to other projects, is not considered Free, as in fostering the freedom of people broadly, by all of us here. It's extremely offensive, and frustrating in fact, to watch as basically people are led into a giant system of hopeless dependency, that really is closely aligned with the the broader culture of GnuLinux, that compels people to obey the demands of remote organizations, which are not aligned with our own common intrests.

It's a really dangerous idea, that systems, or software, is Free, open, or even benevolent, when they are not. These concepts are hotly contested issues, their interpretation by an external audience determining the choices they will make as to what software to use, and which people/organizations to trust.

In a hypothetical forum, where people meaningfully communicated with one another, which this is not, we might discuss the systems in greater technical detail, like real computer scientists, and how to change them, in order to foster a system of independence. But instead I hope that people can learn to recognize the distinction between organizations/programs that foster the capibility, or the disability of people Freely.

We live in a world, that is highly dangerous, and organizations which effectively exploit people/software, irrespective of it's gpl/bsd licensing, don't care that others might read the source code, or figure out how the systems function, their goal is to exploit people or to serve an organization with basically the same ends, and in order to do that, in the Free software, open-source world, they must manipulate our comprehension of these systems, and our communications about them, in order to prevent us, from changing the situation for our benefit.

In other words, security, in a world composed of open-source software, requires that we can freely speak about it, and comprehend it. That is totally at odds, with the proprietary security paradigm, where the system is composed of closed-source software. There, the users simply have to accept the terms of service, and follow along, with everybody else, and automatically update their systems, irrespective of all the new bugs and vulnerabilities.