I don’t use software made by bullies

I often say something about “open source software” and if you ask most people what it means You’d get the impression it’s about what bytes are in the LICENSE file. For me, that’s the least important part of it. The source itself is usually just a curiosity. What’s important is how the software treats its users.

And many “free” and “open source” programs today treat their users like garbage, as if it wasn’t made for them but against them. And then the developers behind those projects proudly show off the disdain they have for them. Here are only some of many examples:

Let’s be clear, all of those projects are “open source”. you can download, read, edit, and redistribute their source code or the changes you make to it. You can make a fork any time and release it as your own. Many people did that already. But the things I mentioned above is counter to, if not the letter, tthen the spirit of free and open software. The things you can read on those bug trackers are not too different to the stock responses you’d get on support systems of various proprietary companies, And in the worst cases can devolve to the point where it looks like the developers don’t want to make good software but instead be the robber barons of their own little thiefdom.

In the 80s and 90s, people started making open software to counter corporate robber barons of the time, such as IBM, Microsoft, DEC, etc. While the barons made bland special-purpose software, cryptic manuals and sold it for hwoever much money they could get away with, projects like gnu and people like Larry Wall and Linus Torvalds instead made their programs opened, documenting their behaviors well and making them easy to change and improve. That’s why perl ended up dominating the 90s web, why linux powers the internet to this day and why today’s robber barons even have a community to rule.

Today we still have corporations desperately trying to regain some of their own power using these developers to weaken the community and reshape the software it makes in their own horrifying image. Besides the attitude to its existing users, they show their true colors in the way they attract new ones. Instead of organically spreading by word of mouth they flood online discussions with fake praises of their products. INstead of beating their competitors on their merits they lie, spread rumors, and slander their developers. Instead of justifying their alternatives and reimplementations they pretend they were the first and only ones and that anything else is either inadequate or deprecated. And when all the fails they call you every bad name the neoliberal establishment ever came up with(archive).⁴

We have a name for people who do those sorts of things: “bullies”. And just like bullies at school or bullies in politics, or bullies in the office, the only way to stop them is to say no and stay away. This isn’t just because of what they say or how they act, although that’s good enough reason. It’s because I rely on my software working like I want it to, and any breaking changes these bullies want to push for their selfish petty reasons is annoying at best and debilitating at worst.

If that last sentence sounds overly dramatic, I’m a blind person. Nearly anything I can do, I need to do it with computers. There are many different components involved so I’d be able to use computers. If one of those components breaks, one program could break, or many of them could, or I wouldn’t be able to get passed the log in screen, that is, not even be aware there was a log in screen. Bullies like to dismiss customisations and theming like it is for “ricers” and “tinkerers” but for some people, it really helps them.⁵

That’s also the reason why I can’t “separate the art from the artist” when it comes to software. Programs evolve with time and I actively rely on programs I use instead of passively contemplating it like a song or a movie. If one of these bully “developers” decides that nothing should ever exist in ~/writing/website, and update their software to delete everything in that directory to “make $HOMEs everywhere a cleaner place” then I’d suddenly have to change my directory structure around to appease their program instead of the other way around. Or maybe said bully “developer” decides that all Russians are responsible for what their government does and need to have all their files removed(archive).

In conclusion, when deciding which software to use I’m most of all concerned at how it treats and how it will treat me, and I judge that by the way the developer treats their users. when I make software I try my best to make it work, then to make it keep working as it did, improving without disrupting existing users. Whenever there’s a choice to make, I leave it up to the user to choose.

I’d also like to use this website to help programmers write more software like that.. I hope to see you around, and take care.

This isn’t an isolated incident within gnome either, just the most infamous one. A whole page could be written just about gnome developers and their antics.↩︎
Like with gnome, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Fortunately, digdeeper already wrote an article all about them(archive)↩︎
And again, this is just one example. I might just write an article about the misdesign of systemd, but until then here’s a whole website just about it(archive).↩︎
while looking for that article I found out that searching for “I’m tired of this anti-wayland horseshit” Drew’s article just barely appears on the first page of results under reddit, hacker news, and even /g/ making fun of him. I originally misspelled “horceshit” like I often do while searching, and then it didn’t even appear.↩︎
I however won’t let them get away with the original argument It’s not their choice whether “ricing” or “tinkering” actually makes someone more productive, that’s up to the user. They, and their opinions on what interfaces should look like should just let user’s decide what’s best for them.↩︎