This is a bad take, as much as I don't use social media at this point, people need access to good tools to curb use, and in this case, "good" means "open."
This is a bad take, as much as I don't use social media at this point, people need access to good tools to curb use, and in this case, "good" means "open."
Can you elaborate why? It sounds like we agree to me. People need access to good tools to curb use, and all else equal, open is definitely better than closed. I just am saying that I'd rather have an effective closed tool than no tool at all
It does sound like we agree, but my main issue is the further shifting of the (for lack of a better word) overton window around when closed software is acceptable.
For all its flaws (and despite my general ire towards them), the FSF has done one thing really well over the years, and that's keep the conversation alive around open-source software (which, in turn, has landed us at what I consider to be a really good compromise of a ton of high-quality source-available software).
The FSF isn't pulling as hard as it used to for a variety of reasons, but I think it's important to keep the pressure on and in cases like this, it's really easy to take the stance that at least source-availability shouldn't be compromised on, since the app presumably needs very broad permissions and capabilities from the OS.