Login
You're viewing the discuss.systems public feed.
  • Apr 23, 2023, 9:37 PM

    I've seen other terms, but I use the label "fossbro" to refer to a set of toxic attitudes which through their vocalness defines the software freedom movement to those outside it.

    Comprising:
    * Ableism, thinking everyone should have the skills & desire to modify their software.
    * Entitlement, thinking they're the entirety of the community a FOSS project may wish to serve. Harassing you if you e.g. reduce the visibility of configuration options.

    1/2

    💬 1🔄 5⭐ 0

Replies

  • Apr 23, 2023, 9:41 PM

    * Hubris, thinking licenses or (phantom) community size is enough to make software ethical.

    Perhaps the most difficult aspect of getting into software freedom is learning how to look past the fossbros. Knowing to avoid the forums. The people actually doing the work tend to be less toxic than the peanut gallery.

    I am grateful to the fediverse for helping me with this!

    2/2

    💬 4🔄 3⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 2:15 AM

    In case anyone reading this wonders if I'd count them as "fossbros" by this definition: If you're not opposing others modifying opensource software, probably not.
    If you're harassing projects as opposed to simply not using them, probably.
    If you oppose projects improving free software usability, yes!

    If you simply, like me, view free software as a political project, no!

    3/2

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 23, 2023, 11:40 PM

    @alcinnz I don't think anyone says that unless you modify your software, you aren't "really into free software".

    The "modification" provision as part of the computer freedoms is not about everyone explicitly modifying software. It is about software devs not actively taking away the ability from EVERYONE.

    You might not be able or willing to modify the software, but as anyone is allowed to, so you might ask someone to do it, or even find someone already did it, if you need something.

    💬 2🔄 1⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 23, 2023, 11:42 PM

    @alcinnz well I don't disagree with you to the fact that dumb takes exist on the internet 😂

    💬 0🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Apr 23, 2023, 11:41 PM

    @alcinnz the importance of the "modification" clause is mostly in the fact that even if the original developer gets tired of working on the project, there is at least a chance of someone being able to pick it up, and continue updating it.

    Even to modify it so it is easier to handle by others, bringing about the opposite of ableism.

    💬 0🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 12:22 AM

    @alcinnz

    I think it's a very imprecise term, and as such can be unfortunately counterproductive..
    Cryptobro is easy to understand because it's someone peddling a stupid digital ponzi scheme.
    Techbro refers (iirc) to guys who made bank on tech ventures and now are entitled little snits.
    fossbro, though? Anyone passionate about FOSS could be labeled a fossbro.

    ...

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 12:23 AM

    @alcinnz

    ...

    I don't even know that I'm *not* one, because I'm just Don Quixote enough to remind people that their own convenience isn't the only decision factor in life, and their choices affect others.
    🤷‍♂️

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 12:35 AM

    @RL_Dane Fair complaint. And it isn't necessarily used consistently. Which is why I have a personal definition!

    In which I don't count your example of advocacy that it is a concern someone like us might have.

    That can relate to a related issue of purity spirals, which is fuzzy as a matter of degree & attitude. But I doubt it's an issue here.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 12:54 AM

    @alcinnz

    I think attitude and intent should be a strong aspect of how to judge a person's approach. Otherwise it can be a rather slippery slope between comments like "I get that you don't want to have to configure everything, but computing *is* hard, and it's good to retain control over your digital life, which is a vital part of your real life"
    ...and...
    "You DON'T compile your own kernels? BRAH."

    ;)

    💬 1🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 1:10 AM

    @RL_Dane Agreed!

    When it comes to purity spirals I strive to avoid being judgemental unless they're striving to pull me further down, or if they're trying to out-pure the FSF. That gets an eyeroll!

    And one major line defining "fossbros" to me is opposing usability improvements in free software. Or the "just fork it" or "how dare you forked it" attitudes!

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 1:29 AM

    @RL_Dane I guess what it boils down to for me: Don't object to others modifying the software for their needs. That doesn't have to impact you, leaves me wondering if those saying this knows what they're advocating.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 6:03 AM

    @RL_Dane I was generalizing a bit, I don't think most people saying that realise it. But heard of the GIMP for GLIMPSE? Heard of the Audacity fork Tenacity?

    Those are some high profile cases!

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 4:33 PM

    @RL_Dane Think what you like about the rationals, but I whole heartedly defend anyone's right to fork! That's what The Four Freedoms boil down to, isn't it?

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 4:50 PM

    @alcinnz

    Absolutely! We can kvetch about the dilution and fragmentation of the FOSS "marketplace," but you can't restrict that freedom an iota without inherently damaging FOSS.

    In fact, I oppose any and all efforts to introduce power and coercion into FOSS, including using dependencies to force people to use a particular init system or libc, or using libraries to prevent modification of the visual style of a desktop.
    I think those are crappy. :P

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 12:25 PM
    @alcinnz On my side I think it's a bit weird to just put it into just "bro". I think a term that is too vague helps no one because it's quite difficult to meaningfully use/adopt it in existing communities and have it understood by people being criticized, I think it ought to be split in smaller chunks, or even just leaving it at words like ableism/entitlement/…

    Also while I think it makes sense, at a face value, the descriptions are a bit weird, like the "hiding configuration options" part isn't as simple as a lot of undocumented options are useful for basic needs like accessibility (things like an expert mode being of course a reasonable way to not hide but filter options), and I think it helps no one because then users will try to share unofficial documentation, occasionally leaving them with broken setups because they can't know what the option actually does.

    And I think a lot of software is both community-hostile and fork-hostile, meaning that creating a fork or a full-on replacement is a real pain (technical, social, material/infrastructure, sometimes legal, …) but it's sadly often the only way to address actual needs (needs ≠ wishes), which a single project cannot address but a cooperative community of different projects should be reasonably able to.

    Ironically I would say that you're contradicting yourself here:
    > You can still have your Linux distros which don’t use systemd, or are none of you techie enough to assemble one?

    In a way, because I can't point for sure at a beginner-friendly distro that is community-based rather than one where the important decisions are only made by the leader/board, telling "leave if you don't like it" like what happens with Ubuntu pretty regularly.
    systemd's reach of course having a lot of user-facing consequences because of either bugs on itself like mishandling fstab and leaving the system hanging, or design decisions breaking other programs like how closing programs on session leave broke switching of users at the lockscreen.

    And forking/creating a distro to replace a core dependency is pretty high in terms of pain, a lot being irrelevant to technical knowledge. (need to build a community, you need infrastructure and so money, and maybe being prepared for some legal troubles given some awful trademark policies like Rust and Mozilla's)
    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 4:53 PM

    @lanodan Yeah, that quip was meant to highlight that I think they're often not as techie as they consider themselves to be.

    And the example, which I have seen, of hiding configuration options (often phrased by them as "removing" said options, which noone's actually doing) ties back to the "ableism" in their insistance everyone wants them.

    1/2

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 4:56 PM

    @lanodan I think we can agree it's a term that's easy to overuse & should be avoided. I find it a useful term for diagnosing what I don't want to see, & describing social dynamics. But when calling out specific cases, best to avoid the term & focus on describing the specific behaviour we're seeing!

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 2:29 AM

    @alcinnz I agree with some of the replies that this could cut the wrong way (over labeling) but at the same time, I've clearly seen this (lightly) when I've tried to contribute (or even post here) e.g:

    * UX "dumbs down" products
    * UX is mostly "capitalist bullshit"
    * If I like it, it's a good enough UX

    I don't want to overuse your word but the common thread in both our uses is hubris, an overly confident mindset that dismisses other points of view without discussion.

    💬 2🔄 1⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 2:33 AM

    @scottjenson Ah yeah "Capitalist bullshit", that's the way I usually see it framed! Even when calling it such constitutes libel. Often involving RedHat vilification.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 2:41 AM

    @alcinnz I'll be using the term #FOSSBro as I want the #FOSS community to discuss this type of negative behavior.

    But to be clear, I'll never use this term towards any one person as that is just as bad! I'm not here for a fight.

    The FOSS community should be talking about it's culture and what it wants to see more of. Labeling what we don't want is a step in the that direction.

    💬 1🔄 4⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 1:00 PM

    @scottjenson

    Yep, but though UX and UI are absolutely crucial, it is true that many UX/UI proponents defends it through "capitalist bullshit", like "user adoption" (instead of "user needs").
    And also have the habit to actually dumb down products.

    @alcinnz

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Apr 24, 2023, 4:43 PM

    @lienrag @scottjenson You know what, I want more adoption of FOSS!

    I don't know where the "dumbing down" line is, but yes I agree the focus should be on user needs!

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0