baod_rate

joined 1 year ago
[–] baod_rate@programming.dev 17 points 1 day ago

In fact, that model (conceptually, though not technically) is how most fediverse software already work

[–] baod_rate@programming.dev 6 points 1 week ago

Check the recent discussion on lobste.rs if you’re interested in the exact details.

For those coming from the future: https://lobste.rs/s/aa7ske/anubis_now_supports_non_js_challenges

[–] baod_rate@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I understand the definition of "Freedom" as laid out by e.g. the FSF. I was explaining why your argumentation is not convincing unless the audience already agrees that complicity in genocide is an acceptable tradeoff to software freedoms. I'm saying you could make a more convincing argument by just not making that comparison in the first place. Unless your point was "perhaps we should reconsider whether Open Source is Good".

[–] baod_rate@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This assumes the audience will agree that genocide is an acceptable tradeoff for software freedoms.

[–] baod_rate@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I don't know if "freedom to modify source code" and "committing a genocide" are morally comparable. This seems to undermine your point. I would have picked a different analogy