I don’t think he has ever been transphobic, but I can believe the guy who made Emacs is an ableist, and no need to argue about the misogynist part

REGARDLESS, even if he was innocent of all accusations, the fact the FSF needed Stallman back is a sign they’re not actually capable of taking their own direction. Would the FSF just dissolve if he died?

Like, yeah, I can easily argue RMS doesn’t actually hate anyone or think women and children are his toys or anything like that. I can argue that just has very, very out of touch opinions.

This doesn’t matter.

First, because he’s still not a good representative of the community when defending these ideas. If you’re gonna have community leadership, it should be as inclusive as possible, and Stallman does the opposite there.

But more importantly, wouldn’t you want to grow up past him? We should have already moved on back when he called Miguel de Icaza a traitor (oh yeah, that was something), but the FSF didn’t feel like his time was out. They’re gonna stick with him as much as they can. For what? Is his ego’s presence really worth throwing out decades of the movement he created for?

@xerz I think that Stallman's biggest problem is that he's actually very naive. He doesn't really see the corporatification of open source, he still believes we're in the 80s, where it's "hackers" vs "corporations". Because of this, the FSF lost the marketing campaign a long time ago, and are now seen as "those weirdos that make everything happen slowly and care about irrelevant stuff".

Stallman lacks the people skills: like being soft-spoken, caring about his looks or the ability to "sell" (for the lack of a better word) himself. He still believes that being a good developer is all that matters, when it has mattered very little in the past decade.

The FSF needs someone who can turn the tide, and them being very dependent on the Stallman brand will hurt them more and more in an exponential fashion. Stallman is unappealing, and that appeal matter a great deal because they're fighting a political fight, not a technical one. They need someone with guile, charm and charisma, someone who can appeal to developers. And that person is 100% not Stallman, who people still ridicule for the foot fungus incident (rightfully so tbh).

@shellkr @famicom @xerz Thanks, but no thanks. While I respect the work that was done there 35 years ago, I don’t believe the FSF has been relevant for the problems we face today for a while now. Not to mention that I have no desire whatsoever to lead any sort of hierarchy. Heck, I wake up every day and try to write code that I hope will make hierarchies optional instead of a fact of life :)

@aral @shellkr @famicom @xerz The GNU AGPLv3 is a lot younger than 10 years and also highlights the difference between "free" and "open source" software. For instance, Signal and Telegram clients are "open source" but not free because you can't just fork a whole platform that's centralized around a single proprietary server (Signal's published server code is outdated). The FSF and GNU were responsible for writing the AGPLv3 license and several essays to address this concern.

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom With input from a few others, I have written a document called "Towards A Communal Software Movement" to start a discussion about where we go from here. I invite your comments!

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom The code is on Codeberg. Feel free to open pull requests to contribute however you can. codeberg.org/CommunalSoftware/

@be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom I love this. Just skimmed it and will have a think to see if there’s anything I can add. On first thought, I’d love to see a few of the Small Tech principles that are missing covered (like inclusivity and non-colonialism) small-tech.org/about/#small-te

I see this as very much compatible with small tech and something we could get behind :)

CC @laura

@aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura "private by default" and "interoperable" would be good ideas to add

@be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura Also, maybe “communal technology” – so it covers not just software but hardware and services too as they’re equally a part of the everyday tools that we use today?

@aral @be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura I like "interoperable", "communal technology" and "private by default". Will read the doc and comment in a while.

@be @aral @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura I'd recommend waiting a week or so before sharing this in other communities as you get more feedback. I'll submit some patches tomorrow.

I'd also recommend setting up a mailing list (e.g. on sr.ht) to lower the barrier to entry; expecting contributors to all create a codeberg.org account and enable javascript (free or nonfree) is a bit much IMO.

@be No obligation to answer, but I'm curious, what do you dislike about sourcehut? Totally just curious, not judging in any way. I've been trying to figure out a better place to host my small lil projects and stuff for a while so kinda seeing what people say about different services. ( have been using gitlab but.. /shrug )

@amatecha I honestly haven't looked that deeply into its features or UI. I love that it provides SSH access to CI VMs. But I think email is an outdated, clumsy technology that shouldn't be used for modern workflows. The guy behind it is also known to have strong Opinions. Some of them I agree with, but many I'm just like... err wat? I don't really trust someone like that to be good at UX design.

@be Oh wait, you can interact with the repos with a normal git client, right? ... or no? (and yeah, the web interface is not top-notch UX IMO, tho I can make sense of it at least, mostly 😅 ) Yeah, I notice that a lot of FOSS projects seem to rely on email, which surprises me a bit (even if I understand its staying power)...

@be @xerz @aral @laura @shellkr @famicom My main concern is that codeberg, github, gitlab, all the other gitea/gogs instances, etc. are basically the same; they’re all walled gardens and closed platforms that lock you in through issues/PRs/social features. They’re good examples of how “open source” software for collaboration/communication isn’t exactly “free” without an underlying implementation-agnostic open platform. I wrote about this in the article I linked and its seqel.

Email is federated and implementation agnostic. Furthermore, members have an offline copy of all patches/issues in a standard and interoperable format (maildir or mbox). If a remote goes down, you can switch to a different head of your hydra and keep working; if your mailing list server goes down, you can still contact others and send patches since email easily handles downtime and you can still CC contributors directly. The distributed model of git also works for issues over email.

This approach scales to projects with thousands of contributors that experience multiple migrations without issue. I’m not aware of a better example of user freedom that makes vendor lock-in completely impossible. There is no implementation, platform, or single piece of software to trust in a mailing-list-based git workflow besides git itself, and git has multiple implementations of its own.

That’s my sales pitch for distributed collab with DVCS systems. Oh boy I really need to write Hydra Hosting Part 2, don’t I?

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @laura @shellkr @famicom Facebook is a walled garden. I think it's a stretch to call Gitea a walled garden. In principle I agree that interoperability and decentralized architecture are generally desirable, but I don't think these properties are strictly required for all communal software and there can be good technical/practical reasons for not prioritizing or implementing them depending on the specific application.

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @laura @shellkr @famicom Anyway, I'm not really interested in discussing which tools to use for the "Towards A Communal Software Movement" document. It's just a single Markdown document in a static site generator. This isn't a large complex code base that people will grow and maintain far into the future, so I don't think the choice of tools is super important. Yeah, the repo may live well into the future, but it's just a tiny static site.

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @laura @shellkr @famicom However, using the "open core" GitLab would be hypocritical, hence the choice of Gitea.

@aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura Could you give an example of what "noncolonial" means when applied to software?

@be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura Building tech in a manner that doesn’t centre yourself. Understanding that you are not the best to build for communities that you are not part of so making things others can adapt, host, and use themselves. When what you make scales, you don’t have to scale alongside it. On a technical level, related to share alike and interoperability.

@aral @be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura All of my FLOSS work has been stuff I won't ever directly benefit from (HFOSS) -- if I were asked tomorrow to step aside, it might sting, but I'd do it because it's the best for the community.

@robbyoconnor @aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura I think that can be good as long as you work *with* the people who are affected by the software and take their input seriously.

@robbyoconnor @aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura but yeah "Imma fix ur 'third world' economiez with blockchainz!!!!" is not okay

@be @aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura Of course -- I'm not touching blockchain crap with no pole of any length.

@robbyoconnor @aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura Yeah, Bitcoin is why I mentioned environmental impact in that document.

@be @robbyoconnor @aral @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura I'd focus more on the economic/incentive structures cryptocurrencies create (pyramid schemes) than their environmental impact because environmental impact can be fixed (PoS) which distracts from the bigger picture that blockchain is absolutely fucked.

Talking about the incentives and economic aspects touches on the nature of mining/blockchain itself which is the root of the issue. Environmental impacts are catastrophic but they aren't the fundamental issue since alternative proofs exist.

That doesn't mean you should remove environmentalism from the document, of course. I think we should instead re-phrase it to revolve around low-end devices and not requiring users to upgrade their computers every N years unless they're broken. That will have the same impact but be more clear. I'll send a patch tomorrow with more.

This is why I refuse to upgrade my 2013 laptop and test in a throttled VM.

@aral @be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura I think that's similar to the "toolkits over frameworks" kind of idea I wrote about yesterday, no? I was missing an aspect of that as well. But not so technically prescriptive, so perhaps the "colonial" term is better - but it would need some explanation.

@aral @be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura

I very much like the text as an early draft. I think it's currently a bit long and a tad unstructured; but each point is something I can subscribe to.

I say "early draft", because... ok, so this is a bit tricky.

I know that we're all reacting to things having gone wrong somewhere, so the easiest thing to do is to say "not like that". And while I don't particularly need to hide the bad examples we don't like, I also think that what we should..

@aral @be @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura ... focus much more on is how we see things done right.

So I have a few issues with "not like RMS", "not like FSF", "not like capitalism", not because I disagree with the sentiment, but I think it would be helpful to start each idea with:
a) how things should be
b) how we would like to make that happen,
and only in c) go into negative examples.

A lot of work, I know. I'll try and come up with a few PRs. over time.

@aral @Seirdy @xerz @shellkr @famicom @laura I think espousing interoperability as a principle would prevent this bizarre Stallman episode: lwn.net/Articles/583390/

I like it. Do you see such a movement taking on some organizational form or forms?

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom

@bhaugen @Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom Sure! I'm personally not looking to do that myself though.

@bhaugen @Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom Sorry, I misunderstood your question as asking specifically about charitable advocacy organizations. In broader terms, I think the organizational form best for any particular project is idiosyncratic. Some may establish independent organizations to sponsor developers like Krita and Ardour. But that model isn't appropriate for projects that have no desire to have money involved. Some may join SF Conservancy, or a larger org like KDE or GNOME.

You talked about a movement, which I thought of as bigger than any individual project. Does that communicate the "Community" I thought you meant? I may have misunderstood, too....

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom

@bhaugen @Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom Right, a movement made up of many projects that operate cooperatively to produce technology. Is there a need for some larger coordination between projects? I'm not sure? I guess Linux distributions and organizations like Freedesktop kinda fulfill that role? There are also general conferences like FOSDEM and Linux Conf Au. Do you have ideas for how larger inter-project organization could help?

> Do you have ideas for how larger inter-project organization could help?

I've been involved in a couple of attempts, neither completely successful. This was one: loomio.org/g/exAKrBUp/open-app
Not a total failure, either. Some interesting work came out of it.

I continue to focus on software for real-life communities to use, though. So communal in that way.

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom

@bhaugen @Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom I kinda feel like the fediverse is part of that organization. I only joined the fediverse a few months ago and I've had *way* more interactions with people working on other software on here than I ever did before. Previously, I generally only interacted with other software projects when I used them and had a question or wanted to report a bug.

@be @bhaugen @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom You've essentially described how I feel about IRC. On IRC, it often works the other way around; I meet people, then a few weeks later one of us asks "are you working on anything?".

@bhaugen @Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom In a way, the open letter against Stallman's return to the FSF is the larger movement coming together in collective action. floss.social/@downey/105958349

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.