• FizzyOrange@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Frankly I’m surprised they fund any of those in the first place. I would have thought F-Droid would be a bit less shit if it has actual employees!

  • GolfNovemberUniform@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    I mean, why would a government benefit from funding something like that? Also no large funding means no fear of doing something that the government won’t like. And with the size of anti-Trump movements, it’s probably a good thing.

    For the record, I still don’t really like this decision.

    • Colloidal@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 days ago

      Ideally government actions should benefit the society at large. Government is not a company, it’s a community service for the people.

    • artificialfish@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago
      1. Encryption technology is best done in the open for security reasons
      2. Linux is a widely used operating system as is all of its GNU components and many other open source projects in that ecosystem are important for national security
      3. languages like python, rust, etc are open source and generate significant economic innovation.

      Really just a lot of things.

      Are you sure you’re in infosec?

          • GolfNovemberUniform@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Your reasons don’t really give the government financial advantage imo. If the projects are big, they will find funding anyways.

            • artificialfish@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              The primary interest of government is not itself as a business, it’s the national security of the nation. So #1 and #2 are definitely that. The secondary interest of the government is the prosperity of its people, which in our country is measured via economic growth. #3 supports that, as does many open source projects, because open source is frequently the foundation of many buisnesses, who don’t have much personal altruistic motivation to give back, but financially prosper off the venture significantly. The government, in one view, handles the tragedy of the commons of such projects for the economic prosperity of the tech sector, which gives them military and prosperity advantages via having those sectors within their borders. They also handle the abstract and uncertain nature of the profit motive for such ventures, just as they handle the funding of research in medicine, military, fundamental physics, early computer, communications, and space tech. The economy, fundamentally, is not the best answer for everything.

              The more right-wingers fundamentally see the government as a business, the less they factually know or even can understand about how the world works.

    • Corbin@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      “For the record, I still don’t like this particular face-eating incident.” As if you aren’t a leopard enthusiast. Who cares whether you like something?

      • GolfNovemberUniform@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        Because on FOSS social networks if you personally like something that’s not leftist, you’ll get banned in a week at most.

        • artificialfish@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          FOSS social networks are literally perfect for specialized instances. There could be a incel, nazi, or libertarian instance just like there is lemmygrad. They’d probably get defederated, but so do the real leftist instances. They could form their own federation. They’d be completely free to moderate themselves as they see fit.

          • GolfNovemberUniform@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            I know that and it’s a good thing. But FOSS networks are unable to be general and all inclusive. That’s what I’m usually talking about and something I feel like they lie about.

        • spartanatreyu@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          You can be right wing in FOSS networks.

          There’s two things you can’t do (at least if you want to keep a community healthy):

          1. Break the rules of the network (which are usually things like: don’t spam, don’t scam, “Wheaton’s Law”, etc…).
          2. Be so unpleasant to be around that others don’t want to be around you.

          There are cases of those who dehumanise others (e.g. racists, anti-trans, literal nazis, etc…) who get banned because they’re doing the two things you can’t do. But in those cases they’re not banned because they’re right wing, they’re banned because those actions break communities, so the community has to ban them to continue existing.