returned to trisquel7

"Power corrupts, so the proprietary program's developer is tempted to design the program to mistreat its users—that is, to make it malware. (Malware means software whose functioning mistreats the user.) Of course, the developer usually does not do this out of malice, but rather to put the users at a disadvantage. That does not make it any less nasty or more legitimate."

The point of me linking that page, is to show you that your "ethics" is not more important thyen privacy and security, even according the FSF. An organization you supposedly represent. They are one and the same. Again, knowing something is immoral is NOT human nature. But hurting others whether intentional or not, IS. Pain is something that we understand from birth, because it is a physical and biological real existence, not an idea. But we must learn and be taught why we shouldn't cause it to others.

Privacy and security is important, because not not only can prop software stop you from sharing information with others. But the methods of malware described by the FSF, in their description of prop software, can enable malicious people to destroy your pc hardware, they can cause you to lose your job, lose your money. These are all potential things that can happen, due to the human nature the FSF is implying, by how power corrupts. Again, human nature which you fail to understand.

But I have outlined many other examples of why privacy and security are important to ones self, yet you keep ignoring them. So I will keep reposting it and reposting it, until you have the balls to address it and stop ignoring it claiming i gave none.

"For example, The same way the stasi in nazi germany used seemingly innocent information to blackmail people into doing things that would hurt others in their communities. Because things we do in private should sometimes stay private because it could lead to endangering others physical well being or hurt them mentally, when it is unnecessary and taken out of context or misunderstood. Because I don't believe users should be treated as a product unknowingly for others gain, whether monetary or not, for all the above reasons. People are not property or products, and treating them as such can stall our human evolution, which hurts our well being"

Again, Claiming an idea deserves no explanation, because you think its something that should be automatically known as human beings, not only shows your lack in understanding of human nature, but is a poor excuse and copout to hide the fact you don't understand the philosophy yourself. And i implore you to stop being so self righteous and arrogant, because you end up driving away new users. you draw a dividing line like you do between the words gnu / linux, when claim one reason for supporting free software, is more important then another. And you especially come off self righteous and ego feeding, when you are claiming these things with words that have identical meanings to what you are arguing against.

Any reason for using free software is as important as another. Learn that they all make up your definition of "ethics" and "morality", and that they all should be embraced by your community.

lmao, the actual title of a section in that article you linked is "Free Software: More Than “Advantages”"

wow dude, you are already not grasping what that article is trying to say, What that article is actually saying. is to NOT explain them as advantages.

"I'm often asked to describe the “advantages” of free software. But the word “advantages” is too weak when it comes to freedom"

Yet you chose to use it! lol You are contradicting that article with your statement already!! Being able to share software, can be considered just as much an "advantage" as security and privacy benefits. Being able to modify software could also be considered an "advantage". Being able to redistribute modified software, is another "ADVANTAGE" Again, NO DIFFERENCE!! ONE IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS THE OTHER! To claim otherwise, and to describe it as an "advantage" goes against another line in that article, which is:

"Freedom includes the freedom to cooperate with others. Denying people that freedom means keeping them divided, which is the start of a scheme to oppress them. "

And this is my point. You divide people when you claim your reasons are "more important" then someone elses reasons for supporting free software. The word advantages is meant to seperate reasons from others as being more or less important. The reasons people hae are ALL just as important, and ALL fall under why supporting it is the "right" "ethical" thing to do.