• lemmeee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Neither is mine, the cost is extremely minor in this case, because steam is a gaming client, and the fundamental nature of a gaming client is non-essential and not integrated into the system deeply at all.

    You could use this excuse to justify almost any type of proprietary software. Most apps are not deeply integrated into the system. That doesn’t make them ethical.

    What you fail to understand is people being on windows is way worse in every single way than them having one proprietary app on their computer.

    It is more free than Windows and I never said otherwise. I just said that it was still unethical.

    There is huge benefit, more people are using much more FOSS, and the fact is, if more people were on linux, there’d be more foss software, which means better alternatives and outcompeting proprietary software.

    But those people don’t care about their freedom. That’s the problem. They will always use proprietary software, because they only care about convenience or features. We need to change that. Only then our movement will benefit from this. We can’t let them get attached to Valve as long as they make proprietary software.

    Steam ain’t that. It’s video games. And nothing else.

    Games are software. If you can’t control what they do on your device, then you don’t control the device.

    Steam isn’t going to be what “traps” them or anything, especially when it’s sandboxed, and when you sandbox it, it has literally no integration with the rest of your system at all.

    You are assuming that a company that makes proprietary software won’t try to get more power over their users. Why wouldn’t they? Their users don’t even care. Sandboxing improves your security (which is good), but not your freedom. You still can’t see what the software does or change it, so that program is still unethical.

    • Communist
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You could use this excuse to justify almost any type of proprietary software. Most apps are not deeply integrated into the system. That doesn’t make them ethical.

      I’m using that excuse to justify steamos vs windows, you’re assuming a vacuum, I do believe proprietary software is bad, just that you’re fighting the wrong battle.

      It is more free than Windows and I never said otherwise. I just said that it was still unethical.

      “I see very little benefit from people using GNU/Linux if they will use proprietary software on it”

      “It doesn’t matter how many nonfree packages it has, because even one package makes the whole thing proprietary.”

      The entire time my point has been steamos isn’t worth criticising because it’s just archlinux with steam, criticize steam. I’m totally fine with criticising steam, i’m not fine with criticising steamos, because it is literally just linux but with steam preinstalled. All of your issues are simply issues with steam, not steamos.

      But those people don’t care about their freedom. That’s the problem. They will always use proprietary software, because they only care about convenience or features. We need to change that. Only then our movement will benefit from this. We can’t let them get attached to Valve as long as they make proprietary software.

      That won’t change, they simply do not have the same values as you, so, be pragmatic and try to make FOSS software outcompete proprietary software, in this case, we need steam, we need people to move to linux as much as possible, and only once we have everyone on FOSS operating systems, THEN we attack the clients, that should be the order of operations. Steam is absolutely still bad because it’s proprietary but steamos is a good thing for the free software movement.

      You are assuming that a company that makes proprietary software won’t try to get more power over their users. Why wouldn’t they? Their users don’t even care. Sandboxing improves your security (which is good), but not your freedom. You still can’t see what the software does or change it, so that program is still unethical.

      I’m not saying they wouldn’t, i’m saying they’ve structured things in a way that they literally cannot, there’s no path to do that for them, that’s why if they wanted to do that they would’ve HAD to use BSD, there is no choice for them in the matter because this is based on linux.