Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
This is a flawed opinion. You can support a realistic approach of using proprietary software for usability’s sake without approving of things like ad profiles. (I say that instead of telemetry because benign things like crash reporting or reporting which features you use are technically also “telemetry”.)
Listen, I support foss as much as anyone here but there’s a reason SSPL didn’t get accepted as a foss license, and it’s because it’s impossible to have a fully 100% foss system. I’m not saying we shouldn’t push for or advocate for that, just saying we shouldn’t say someone isn’t fully embracing Linux just because they need to use a few pieces of proprietary software to get a working system that supports their individual needs.
But more to your point, it’s a false dichotomy. Even before the latest changes to the Debian install media, for years it was maybe unintuitive but still easy enough to just choose the “nonfree” install iso. That one would automatically include all the proprietary bits that are necessary for a fully functional Linux system.
But now those nonfree parts are in the Debian install by default, so there really is just nothing that you get from Ubuntu that can’t just as easily work in Debian - especially since everyone is moving toward flatpaks, and appimages anyway.
This is a flawed opinion. You can support a realistic approach of using proprietary software for usability’s sake without approving of things like ad profiles. (I say that instead of telemetry because benign things like crash reporting or reporting which features you use are technically also “telemetry”.)
Listen, I support foss as much as anyone here but there’s a reason SSPL didn’t get accepted as a foss license, and it’s because it’s impossible to have a fully 100% foss system. I’m not saying we shouldn’t push for or advocate for that, just saying we shouldn’t say someone isn’t fully embracing Linux just because they need to use a few pieces of proprietary software to get a working system that supports their individual needs.
It’s impossible to have a fully free system?
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
But more to your point, it’s a false dichotomy. Even before the latest changes to the Debian install media, for years it was maybe unintuitive but still easy enough to just choose the “nonfree” install iso. That one would automatically include all the proprietary bits that are necessary for a fully functional Linux system.
But now those nonfree parts are in the Debian install by default, so there really is just nothing that you get from Ubuntu that can’t just as easily work in Debian - especially since everyone is moving toward flatpaks, and appimages anyway.