Training the youth on proprietary software should be a sin. Rather than learning abstract skills or free software they can freely get, use, redistribute, inspect, students are taught a narrow, specialized task to where they think they need something proprietary. For instance, 90% of folks would be happy with a combo of darktable + GIMP + Krita for digital raster art/photography, but instead they want to pay Adobe a monthly subscription.
Lol paying for Adobe? Yeah right. You can easily patch the Cloud trials to be the full versions of the programs for free. Why use off brand versions of stuff when I can just pirate/crack the the used programs for free
Aside from the ethical reasons to choose free software over something built with lock-in in mind by a US-based, publicly-traded megacorporation… Sounds like you have never used Krita or darktable. These are best-in-class applications used by professionals. You also have been bitten into their propaganda that you need Adobe. Schools could even train on cheaper, decent software like Affinity (tho it’s not supported by Linux), but Adobe is funding indoctrination just like Microsoft does with Windows/Office/GitHub.
I'm sorry if I insulted you. Didn't mean to.
What I mean is that its not a matter of paying or not paying. Or a matter of privacy or not. It's a matter of freedom and the future of humanity.I Iove paying for libre software. We need software that respects people's rights and gives them the possibility of studying, sharing and evolving to us humanity as a whole. That gives them control over their computers and lives.
I understand your practical/functional approach. But I think the approach that sounds radical to you might also be a practical one that considers long term and big scale effects. I mean, the same happens in many aspects of life. Sometimes you do something in a more difficult way because you bet it will bring you benefits in the long term. Sometimes it really pays over but other times you think it will bring you benefits (and for example instead of doing something manually you write a script that does it) but you miss it and end spending more time on the job than if you've had just solved your specific problem manually. When we talk about sociology, politics and other complex subjects that go beyond our short term/personal benefit impact, we really frequently don't have the knowledge to make the best decisions, so we kinda guess based on our experience and convictions. I think that's what making us disagree right now. Personally, for me using libre software was a chimera until 6 years ago or so when I think it reached a mature point in which nowadays it can solve most needs with more practical benefits by far than proprietary software. Before that, I used Windows, Adobe and other proprietary software and dealt with its limitations. I mean I also have to say that I also used it because it was comfortable, easier and familiar for me (I was trained on Microsoft/Macromedia/Adobe ecosystem since a small kid) Probably, if I had no experience with computers before (and as I can confirm from the experience of installing GNU/Linux on other people's computers, those that have no former experience with Windows nor Mac whatsoever have so much better/faster adoption of GNU/Linux), I could have adopted it earlier. The thing with libre software (contrary to most things in the material world) is that the more people use it, the better it gets, so that makes a special point on why using it could be beneficial for the whole system called humanity. Well anyway... Thanks for reading!
Training the youth on proprietary software should be a sin. Rather than learning abstract skills or free software they can freely get, use, redistribute, inspect, students are taught a narrow, specialized task to where they think they need something proprietary. For instance, 90% of folks would be happy with a combo of darktable + GIMP + Krita for digital raster art/photography, but instead they want to pay Adobe a monthly subscription.
Lol paying for Adobe? Yeah right. You can easily patch the Cloud trials to be the full versions of the programs for free. Why use off brand versions of stuff when I can just pirate/crack the the used programs for free
Aside from the ethical reasons to choose free software over something built with lock-in in mind by a US-based, publicly-traded megacorporation… Sounds like you have never used Krita or darktable. These are best-in-class applications used by professionals. You also have been bitten into their propaganda that you need Adobe. Schools could even train on cheaper, decent software like Affinity (tho it’s not supported by Linux), but Adobe is funding indoctrination just like Microsoft does with Windows/Office/GitHub.
Considering most places use Microsoft office, Adobe suite, windows in general.. I have no issue using them since I'm not even paying for them anyways
I'm sorry if I insulted you. Didn't mean to. What I mean is that its not a matter of paying or not paying. Or a matter of privacy or not. It's a matter of freedom and the future of humanity.I Iove paying for libre software. We need software that respects people's rights and gives them the possibility of studying, sharing and evolving to us humanity as a whole. That gives them control over their computers and lives.
I'm not paying for stuff when I can get them for free
Good. But sometimes not paying for something now makes you pay more in the long run
How's that
With or actions, we are creating a future for humanity Something like this: https://mastodon.social/@jxself/111377315321163727
Check this short videos to understand more: https://www.fsf.org/resources/videos/
Oh no... Anyways
deleted by creator
I understand your practical/functional approach. But I think the approach that sounds radical to you might also be a practical one that considers long term and big scale effects. I mean, the same happens in many aspects of life. Sometimes you do something in a more difficult way because you bet it will bring you benefits in the long term. Sometimes it really pays over but other times you think it will bring you benefits (and for example instead of doing something manually you write a script that does it) but you miss it and end spending more time on the job than if you've had just solved your specific problem manually. When we talk about sociology, politics and other complex subjects that go beyond our short term/personal benefit impact, we really frequently don't have the knowledge to make the best decisions, so we kinda guess based on our experience and convictions. I think that's what making us disagree right now. Personally, for me using libre software was a chimera until 6 years ago or so when I think it reached a mature point in which nowadays it can solve most needs with more practical benefits by far than proprietary software. Before that, I used Windows, Adobe and other proprietary software and dealt with its limitations. I mean I also have to say that I also used it because it was comfortable, easier and familiar for me (I was trained on Microsoft/Macromedia/Adobe ecosystem since a small kid) Probably, if I had no experience with computers before (and as I can confirm from the experience of installing GNU/Linux on other people's computers, those that have no former experience with Windows nor Mac whatsoever have so much better/faster adoption of GNU/Linux), I could have adopted it earlier. The thing with libre software (contrary to most things in the material world) is that the more people use it, the better it gets, so that makes a special point on why using it could be beneficial for the whole system called humanity. Well anyway... Thanks for reading!