Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #78724 > unrolled thread

Please do not donate to any Linux distro

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-10 23:49 +0000
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-10 18:54 -0800
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-11 03:41 +0000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-11 03:42 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-10 20:47 -0800
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-12-12 21:50 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-13 02:02 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-12-13 10:01 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-13 14:14 +0100
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-13 20:41 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-13 16:00 -0800
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-14 03:11 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 19:02 +0000
                    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-15 23:53 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 19:01 +0000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Harold Stevens <wookie@aspen.localdomain> - 2025-12-11 03:27 -0600
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-11 08:56 -0800
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-11 18:25 +0000
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-11 11:26 +0100
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-12-12 06:37 +1000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-12 05:04 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-13 09:11 -0600
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Beej Jorgensen <beej@beej.us> - 2025-12-13 15:53 +0000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-16 01:21 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-16 12:16 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-12-17 07:37 +1000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-16 21:53 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-12-18 06:54 +1000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-17 22:13 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 23:43 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-18 01:26 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-18 10:07 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-12-19 08:28 +1000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-12-19 08:24 +1000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-19 01:08 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 13:20 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 13:57 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 14:34 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-17 20:23 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 23:41 +0000
                    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-18 01:20 +0000
                      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-18 10:02 +0000
                        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-20 07:17 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-18 10:01 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-18 09:59 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-12-18 06:43 +1000
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro kouya <kouyaheika@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-11 16:21 -0600
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-12 05:01 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-12 08:43 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro kouya <kouyaheika@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-12 14:30 -0600
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-13 14:16 +0100
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-13 14:03 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-14 00:03 +0100
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-14 03:18 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-13 20:36 -0800
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> - 2025-12-14 16:51 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-14 11:36 -0800
                    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-14 20:56 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 19:07 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-12-16 05:54 +0000
                    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkymaykr@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-16 07:40 -0600
                      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-16 14:33 +0000
                        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-12-16 20:42 +0000
                          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 01:05 +0000
                      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-17 01:46 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 19:05 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-17 01:43 +0000
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-12 15:48 -0600
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-12 23:46 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-13 14:26 +0100
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-13 07:38 -0600
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-13 14:08 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-17 01:41 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-17 08:01 -0800
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-12-19 14:50 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-19 18:05 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> - 2025-12-13 14:56 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-13 15:52 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-13 18:00 +0000
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-17 01:37 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-14 00:10 +0100
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-14 12:03 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-14 10:41 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-14 06:23 -0600
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-14 13:27 +0100
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-14 18:26 +0000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-13 09:33 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-13 10:54 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-13 14:28 +0100
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-13 14:09 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-12-14 00:11 +0100
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-13 13:56 +0000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-14 10:52 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-14 06:25 -0600
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-14 13:50 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 00:18 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-15 10:40 -0600
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 21:12 +0000
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-15 15:41 -0600
                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 23:02 +0000
                    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-15 17:09 -0600
                      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 23:23 +0000
                        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkymaykr@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-15 20:58 -0600
                          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-16 11:25 +0000
                            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkymaykr@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-16 07:35 -0600
                              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-17 01:09 +0000
                                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkymaykr@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-17 08:11 -0600
                                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-17 14:37 +0000
                                    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkymaykr@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-17 09:02 -0600
                                  Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-18 01:39 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-19 20:27 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 19:11 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 20:51 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-17 01:34 +0000
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2025-12-13 23:18 +0800
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro John McCue <jmclnx@gmail.com.invalid> - 2025-12-15 16:05 +0000
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-12-15 08:53 -0800
    Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jmj@energokod.gda.pl> - 2025-12-15 18:46 +0100
      Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 20:54 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 21:32 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 23:06 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Diego Garcia <dg@linux.rocks> - 2025-12-15 21:34 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-12-15 21:35 +0000
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 23:07 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-19 20:32 +0000
        Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jmj@energokod.gda.pl> - 2025-12-15 22:42 +0100
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-15 14:09 -0800
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jmj@energokod.gda.pl> - 2025-12-15 23:38 +0100
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-15 14:41 -0800
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro kouya <kouyaheika@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-15 16:45 -0600
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-15 14:55 -0800
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> - 2025-12-15 17:10 -0600
                Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 23:27 +0000
            Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-12-19 20:30 +0000
              Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-12-19 12:35 -0800
          Re: Please do not donate to any Linux distro CtrlAltDel <Altie@BHam.com> - 2025-12-15 23:18 +0000

Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7  Next page →

#79290

Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2025-12-15, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 13/12/2025 23:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> Look at China. They claim to be communist.
>>
>> That's more or less the way countries still claim to be Christian.
>>
>> Or left wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
> 
> Or right-wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
> 

Or governments claim to be 'working for the people'

-- 
*bonkmaykr*
Director, Programming Lead
<https://canithesis.org/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79293

On 16/12/2025 13:40, bonkmaykr wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2025-12-15, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 13/12/2025 23:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>>> Look at China. They claim to be communist.
>>>
>>> That's more or less the way countries still claim to be Christian.
>>>
>>> Or left wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>
>> Or right-wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>
> 
> Or governments claim to be 'working for the people'
> 

What would you call a government that by some fluke of happenstance 
actually *was* 'working for the people' ?


-- 
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as 
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79313

On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 14:33:01 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 16/12/2025 13:40, bonkmaykr wrote:
>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2025-12-15, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 13/12/2025 23:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Look at China. They claim to be communist.
>>>>
>>>> That's more or less the way countries still claim to be Christian.
>>>>
>>>> Or left wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>>
>>> Or right-wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>>
>>>
>> Or governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>> 
>> 
> What would you call a government that by some fluke of happenstance
> actually *was* 'working for the people' ?

Short lived.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79335

On 16/12/2025 20:42, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 14:33:01 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> On 16/12/2025 13:40, bonkmaykr wrote:
>>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> On 2025-12-15, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 13/12/2025 23:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Look at China. They claim to be communist.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's more or less the way countries still claim to be Christian.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or left wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>>>
>>>> Or right-wing governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Or governments claim to be 'working for the people'
>>>
>>>
>> What would you call a government that by some fluke of happenstance
>> actually *was* 'working for the people' ?
> 
> Short lived.

Very good :-)

-- 
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79345

On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 07:40:17 -0600, bonkmaykr wrote:

> Or governments claim to be 'working for the people'

The only way to get close to that is with effective checks and balances. 
Like independence of the judiciary, electoral commission and the press.

The trouble with the US system is it was founded by people who were 
worried about “kings”, but completely overlooked the threat from 
“dictators”.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79192

On 13/12/2025 13:16, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-12-12 21:30, kouya wrote:
>> CtrlAltDel wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 16:21:51 -0600, kouya wrote:
>>>
>>> Or, they could get a job and do any OS development as a hobby and when
>>> they have free time.  That is how it should be, pure and for the love of
>>> the ideal, not the money.  If they can't bear to do something without
>>> getting paid, concerning Linux distro development, don't do it.  Simple.
>>
>> I feel like you're just entirely trolling at this point. They do it 
>> without
>> getting paid regardless. Most jobs don't pay enough to afford the bills
>> right now, and perusing their hobby still takes time out of their day. 
>> This
>> isn't free software developers being greedy, it's you being a complete 
>> and
>> utter cheapskate. Sorry, free software does not mean you get to insert 
>> your
>> communist idealogy. Stop being an ass.
> 
> Even communists get paid.
> 
Oddly enough the whole point was that no one needed to, Everything would 
be provided free, by the State.

You worked for the  State, and it looked after you. People still believe 
this is possible..


-- 
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing 
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79344

On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 19:05:43 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 13/12/2025 13:16, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>> Even communists get paid.
>> 
> Oddly enough the whole point was that no one needed to, Everything would
> be provided free, by the State.

Obviously, that’s not how things are done in China, or in its “mini-me”, 
Vietnam. They have come up with a unique combination of Communism + 
Capitalism that is currently eating the lunch of many companies in the US 
and other bastions of “Capitalism”.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#78952

CtrlAltDel wrote:
> Linux is supposed to be free, not free with constant nags about donating.
> If you want to donate, go buy a Windows release and donate your money to
> them.
> 
> As far as Linux goes, the whole concept behind it and the various distros
> is that it is free.  Free, as in no money needed to use.  Not free as in
> it's free to use but we are going to pester you to no end to donate to
> keep it free.
> 
> If the maintainers of the distros can't afford to maintain them, let 'em
> die off. There are around 600 distributions currently maintained with
> about 500 of them still in active development. There are many, many
> options for freedom.
> 
> When Linux first arrived on the scene, it would have been almost literal
> apostasy among the nerd fiefdoms online if someone had asked them for
> money and they would have abandoned it faster than an eye could blink.
> 
> Now it's almost like a guilt trip is played on you if you don't *donate*.
> Let's go back to how it was years ago and bring the purity back to Linux,
> the FREEdom, the excitement.  Down with the commercialization.
> 

Respectfully, because I don't take pleasure in shouting vulgarities in 
public: This is either a very obvious troll post or you have shockingly 
little idea what you are talking about.

It takes less than thirty seconds to, upon hearing the term "free 
software", check your search engine, and find decades worth of 
educational and historical material about how it, infact, has nothing to 
do with being commercial or not.

Donations are not commercial either. Every non-profit or charity off the 
top of my head begs for donations.

This post was so terrible it made me finally bother registering for usenet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#78956

On 2025-12-12, bonkmaykr wrote:

> CtrlAltDel wrote:
>> Linux is supposed to be free, not free with constant nags about donating.
>> If you want to donate, go buy a Windows release and donate your money to
>> them.
>>
>> As far as Linux goes, the whole concept behind it and the various distros
>> is that it is free.  Free, as in no money needed to use.  Not free as in
>> it's free to use but we are going to pester you to no end to donate to
>> keep it free.
>>
>> If the maintainers of the distros can't afford to maintain them, let 'em
>> die off. There are around 600 distributions currently maintained with
>> about 500 of them still in active development. There are many, many
>> options for freedom.
>>
>> When Linux first arrived on the scene, it would have been almost literal
>> apostasy among the nerd fiefdoms online if someone had asked them for
>> money and they would have abandoned it faster than an eye could blink.
>>
>> Now it's almost like a guilt trip is played on you if you don't *donate*.
>> Let's go back to how it was years ago and bring the purity back to Linux,
>> the FREEdom, the excitement.  Down with the commercialization.
>>
>
> Respectfully, because I don't take pleasure in shouting vulgarities in
> public: This is either a very obvious troll post or you have
> shockingly little idea what you are talking about.
>
> It takes less than thirty seconds to, upon hearing the term "free
> software", check your search engine, and find decades worth of
> educational and historical material about how it, infact, has nothing
> to do with being commercial or not.
>
> Donations are not commercial either. Every non-profit or charity off
> the top of my head begs for donations.
>
> This post was so terrible it made me finally bother registering for usenet.

I think historically "commercial software" might have been used to refer
to what's nowadays called "proprietary software". But this observation
isn't from experience, but rather from a faint recollection of seeing
this referred to in a magazine issue commenting on covers of much
earlier issues of that magazine (was it "Linux Journal"?).

Some posts on this thread make me think it's worth pointing out that, on
the aftermath of CVE-2024-3094 [1], one of the things that was debated
and raised was the need to fund people working on free software for free
more, not less.

[1] "Jia Tan"'s liblzma backdoor, https://enwp.org/CVE-2024-3094


(Also, a warm welcome to USENET!)

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#78999

On 2025-12-13 00:46, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2025-12-12, bonkmaykr wrote:
> 
>> CtrlAltDel wrote:
>>> Linux is supposed to be free, not free with constant nags about donating.
>>> If you want to donate, go buy a Windows release and donate your money to
>>> them.
>>>
>>> As far as Linux goes, the whole concept behind it and the various distros
>>> is that it is free.  Free, as in no money needed to use.  Not free as in
>>> it's free to use but we are going to pester you to no end to donate to
>>> keep it free.
>>>
>>> If the maintainers of the distros can't afford to maintain them, let 'em
>>> die off. There are around 600 distributions currently maintained with
>>> about 500 of them still in active development. There are many, many
>>> options for freedom.
>>>
>>> When Linux first arrived on the scene, it would have been almost literal
>>> apostasy among the nerd fiefdoms online if someone had asked them for
>>> money and they would have abandoned it faster than an eye could blink.
>>>
>>> Now it's almost like a guilt trip is played on you if you don't *donate*.
>>> Let's go back to how it was years ago and bring the purity back to Linux,
>>> the FREEdom, the excitement.  Down with the commercialization.
>>>
>>
>> Respectfully, because I don't take pleasure in shouting vulgarities in
>> public: This is either a very obvious troll post or you have
>> shockingly little idea what you are talking about.
>>
>> It takes less than thirty seconds to, upon hearing the term "free
>> software", check your search engine, and find decades worth of
>> educational and historical material about how it, infact, has nothing
>> to do with being commercial or not.
>>
>> Donations are not commercial either. Every non-profit or charity off
>> the top of my head begs for donations.
>>
>> This post was so terrible it made me finally bother registering for usenet.
> 
> I think historically "commercial software" might have been used to refer
> to what's nowadays called "proprietary software". But this observation
> isn't from experience, but rather from a faint recollection of seeing
> this referred to in a magazine issue commenting on covers of much
> earlier issues of that magazine (was it "Linux Journal"?).
> 
> Some posts on this thread make me think it's worth pointing out that, on
> the aftermath of CVE-2024-3094 [1], one of the things that was debated
> and raised was the need to fund people working on free software for free
> more, not less.

Indeed, some devs have abandoned, because so many patches required 
becomes a non paid job, no more joy. There was a recent link, can't find 
it. Related to google sending a ton of found issues by IA review, perhaps?

> 
> [1] "Jia Tan"'s liblzma backdoor, https://enwp.org/CVE-2024-3094
> 
> 
> (Also, a warm welcome to USENET!)

Ditto.

> 


AI Overview

It is a common issue for free and open-source software (FOSS) projects
to be abandoned due to maintainer burnout, lack of financial incentive,
and the constant, often unrewarding, task of patching and maintenance.

The challenges leading to project abandonment include:

    * Burnout and Mental Health: Open-source maintainers of vital 
libraries often face burnout due to the overwhelming emotional toll, 
constant demands from users, and the sheer weight of responsibility for 
the project's security and stability.

    * Lack of Financial Compensation: Many developers create and 
maintain projects in their free time without pay. The lack of 
significant financial incentive to maintain and update the software 
makes it difficult to justify the time and effort required, especially 
when compared to a full-time job.

    * "Tired of Patching" (Maintenance Fatigue): Developers often find 
the continuous cycle of fixing bugs and maintaining old code to be 
difficult and less appealing than working on new, "greenfield" projects 
that use modern technology. The endless loop of fixing one bug only to 
potentially create another can be exhausting.

    * Lack of Recognition and Support: Maintainers often report feeling 
unappreciated, dealing with ungrateful comments or demands from users 
who don't understand the effort involved in maintaining a free project.

    * Career Concerns: Working on older projects for maintenance might 
not help a developer's career progression, as the technologies used 
might be outdated. Developers may prefer to work with newer stacks 
(e.g., React instead of JQuery) to keep their market value current.

    * Life Priorities: Personal life changes, new jobs, or simply 
wanting to work on something else are also significant factors in 
developers leaving projects behind.

When projects are abandoned, it can leave users open to security risks 
if outdated components continue to be used in other software, 
highlighting the real-world impact of maintainer fatigue in the FOSS 
ecosystem. The community sometimes responds by forking the project to 
continue development under new maintenance.



-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79000

Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-12-13 00:46, Nuno Silva wrote:
>> On 2025-12-12, bonkmaykr wrote:
>>
>>> CtrlAltDel wrote:
>>>> Linux is supposed to be free, not free with constant nags about 
>>>> donating.
>>>> If you want to donate, go buy a Windows release and donate your 
>>>> money to
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> As far as Linux goes, the whole concept behind it and the various 
>>>> distros
>>>> is that it is free.  Free, as in no money needed to use.  Not free 
>>>> as in
>>>> it's free to use but we are going to pester you to no end to donate to
>>>> keep it free.
>>>>
>>>> If the maintainers of the distros can't afford to maintain them, let 
>>>> 'em
>>>> die off. There are around 600 distributions currently maintained with
>>>> about 500 of them still in active development. There are many, many
>>>> options for freedom.
>>>>
>>>> When Linux first arrived on the scene, it would have been almost 
>>>> literal
>>>> apostasy among the nerd fiefdoms online if someone had asked them for
>>>> money and they would have abandoned it faster than an eye could blink.
>>>>
>>>> Now it's almost like a guilt trip is played on you if you don't 
>>>> *donate*.
>>>> Let's go back to how it was years ago and bring the purity back to 
>>>> Linux,
>>>> the FREEdom, the excitement.  Down with the commercialization.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Respectfully, because I don't take pleasure in shouting vulgarities in
>>> public: This is either a very obvious troll post or you have
>>> shockingly little idea what you are talking about.
>>>
>>> It takes less than thirty seconds to, upon hearing the term "free
>>> software", check your search engine, and find decades worth of
>>> educational and historical material about how it, infact, has nothing
>>> to do with being commercial or not.
>>>
>>> Donations are not commercial either. Every non-profit or charity off
>>> the top of my head begs for donations.
>>>
>>> This post was so terrible it made me finally bother registering for 
>>> usenet.
>>
>> I think historically "commercial software" might have been used to refer
>> to what's nowadays called "proprietary software". But this observation
>> isn't from experience, but rather from a faint recollection of seeing
>> this referred to in a magazine issue commenting on covers of much
>> earlier issues of that magazine (was it "Linux Journal"?).
>>
>> Some posts on this thread make me think it's worth pointing out that, on
>> the aftermath of CVE-2024-3094 [1], one of the things that was debated
>> and raised was the need to fund people working on free software for free
>> more, not less.
> 
> Indeed, some devs have abandoned, because so many patches required 
> becomes a non paid job, no more joy. There was a recent link, can't find 
> it. Related to google sending a ton of found issues by IA review, perhaps?
> 
>>
>> [1] "Jia Tan"'s liblzma backdoor, https://enwp.org/CVE-2024-3094
>>
>>
>> (Also, a warm welcome to USENET!)
> 
> Ditto.
> 
> AI Overview
> 
> It is a common issue for free and open-source software (FOSS) projects
> to be abandoned due to maintainer burnout, lack of financial incentive,
> and the constant, often unrewarding, task of patching and maintenance.
> 
> The challenges leading to project abandonment include:
> 
> ...

I am reminded of the recent controversy between Google's "security team" 
and FFMPEG, with Google submitting ridiculous amounts of bug reports and 
not contributing patches, and the FFMPEG maintainers complaining they do 
not have the resources to write fixes for them all. This isn't an 
uncommon thing for FOSS developers once they're depended on, despite the 
clear disclaimers that they provide zero warranty.

What one thinks of the value of Free Software is ultimately subjective, 
but the entitlement from some of the people who use it is disappointing. 
I would expect the average user should be more sympathetic towards 
developers that are waiving their control over their own project for 
almost solely the user's benefit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79003

Le 13-12-2025, bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> a écrit :
> This isn't an 
> uncommon thing for FOSS developers once they're depended on, despite the 
> clear disclaimers that they provide zero warranty.

That disclaimer isn't limited to FOSS. Last time I checked Microsoft
licence, I saw the same guaranty. But if big companies know they can't
sue Microsoft, they believe that guaranty is only there to protect big
companies, not FOSS developers.

-- 
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79343

On 13 Dec 2025 14:08:25 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

> Le 13-12-2025, bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> a écrit :
>>
>> This isn't an uncommon thing for FOSS developers once they're depended
>> on, despite the clear disclaimers that they provide zero warranty.
> 
> That disclaimer isn't limited to FOSS. Last time I checked Microsoft
> licence, I saw the same guaranty. But if big companies know they can't
> sue Microsoft, they believe that guaranty is only there to protect big
> companies, not FOSS developers.

There is this irony in an excuse often put forward by BigCorps™, as to why 
they prefer to pay lots of money to proprietary companies like Microsoft, 
instead of using Free software and managing their own support thereof: the 
“one throat to choke” excuse. That is, they claim that, in the event of 
problems with the software, they can go back to the owning vendor to get 
it sorted out, there should be no pointing of fingers at others.

Except it doesn’t work in practice, does it? When was the last time a 
company or Microsoft (or Oracle, or whoever) was successfully sued over 
the (lack of) quality of its software?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79387

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 01:41:18 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> Except it doesn’t work in practice, does it? When was the last time a 
> company or Microsoft (or Oracle, or whoever) was successfully sued
> over the (lack of) quality of its software?

Hell, MS doesn't even provide *backup* for your O365 instance - was a
real eye-opener when I learned that o_O

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79491

Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:41 this Wednesday (GMT):
> On 13 Dec 2025 14:08:25 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>> Le 13-12-2025, bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> a écrit :
>>>
>>> This isn't an uncommon thing for FOSS developers once they're depended
>>> on, despite the clear disclaimers that they provide zero warranty.
>> 
>> That disclaimer isn't limited to FOSS. Last time I checked Microsoft
>> licence, I saw the same guaranty. But if big companies know they can't
>> sue Microsoft, they believe that guaranty is only there to protect big
>> companies, not FOSS developers.
>
> There is this irony in an excuse often put forward by BigCorps™, as to why 
> they prefer to pay lots of money to proprietary companies like Microsoft, 
> instead of using Free software and managing their own support thereof: the 
> “one throat to choke” excuse. That is, they claim that, in the event of 
> problems with the software, they can go back to the owning vendor to get 
> it sorted out, there should be no pointing of fingers at others.
>
> Except it doesn’t work in practice, does it? When was the last time a 
> company or Microsoft (or Oracle, or whoever) was successfully sued over 
> the (lack of) quality of its software?


It also ends up affecting everyone when something goes wrong, which is
super annoying cough cloudflare
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79501

On 2025-12-19, candycanearter07 wrote:

> Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 01:41 this Wednesday (GMT):
>> On 13 Dec 2025 14:08:25 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>>
>>> Le 13-12-2025, bonkmaykr <bonkyboo@canithesis.org> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> This isn't an uncommon thing for FOSS developers once they're depended
>>>> on, despite the clear disclaimers that they provide zero warranty.
>>> 
>>> That disclaimer isn't limited to FOSS. Last time I checked Microsoft
>>> licence, I saw the same guaranty. But if big companies know they can't
>>> sue Microsoft, they believe that guaranty is only there to protect big
>>> companies, not FOSS developers.
>>
>> There is this irony in an excuse often put forward by BigCorps™, as to why 
>> they prefer to pay lots of money to proprietary companies like Microsoft, 
>> instead of using Free software and managing their own support thereof: the 
>> “one throat to choke” excuse. That is, they claim that, in the event of 
>> problems with the software, they can go back to the owning vendor to get 
>> it sorted out, there should be no pointing of fingers at others.
>>
>> Except it doesn’t work in practice, does it? When was the last time a 
>> company or Microsoft (or Oracle, or whoever) was successfully sued over 
>> the (lack of) quality of its software?
>
>
> It also ends up affecting everyone when something goes wrong, which is
> super annoying cough cloudflare

Cloudflare is on a different level (or perhaps not... halloween
documents and the ACPI e-mail) - they possibly market a service without
making it very clear it's basically whitelisting only a few browsers,
besides requiring JS on these browsers. Especially given that, in the
past, their browser checks supported more browsers and had more
fallbacks, but now it's all on top of "Turnstile" and that caters only
for specific browsers, and some of their customers might have just
continued without enough notice of these differences? Or did Cloudflare
really say it out loud that the new version would only allow using
select browsers?

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79006

On Sat, 13 Dec 2025 07:38:56 -0600, bonkmaykr wrote:

> 
> What one thinks of the value of Free Software is ultimately subjective, 
> but the entitlement from some of the people who use it is disappointing. 
> I would expect the average user should be more sympathetic towards 
> developers that are waiving their control over their own project for 
> almost solely the user's benefit.
>

It's free as in "freedom" and not as in "beer."

GNU/Linux has always been an AMATEUR endeavor, that is the development
is motivated by the love of programming and not by the need for profit.

My view is that if a GNU/Linux developer cannot sustain his efforts
without begging for donations then he should simply get out of the
game.

Sponsorship and donations are available for any project, but they
should never be actively solicited from the user.  If someone or
some organization wants to sponsor or donate then there are known
channels for that.  But begging the user should be strictly
forbidden.

I maintain my own website, at my own expense, and I don't ever
expect or solicit donations.  I am satisfied if my work contributes
to the public good.  I do not seek profit therefrom.

FOSS is free as in "freedom" and not as in "beer."





-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79013

Le 13-12-2025, Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> a écrit :
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2025 07:38:56 -0600, bonkmaykr wrote:
>
>> 
>> What one thinks of the value of Free Software is ultimately subjective, 
>> but the entitlement from some of the people who use it is disappointing. 
>> I would expect the average user should be more sympathetic towards 
>> developers that are waiving their control over their own project for 
>> almost solely the user's benefit.
>>
>
> It's free as in "freedom" and not as in "beer."

It's free in both ways for the limited mind. You can pay if you want,
you are not required to. The fact that you are answering that way means
only you are fighting about stupidity level instead of fighting about
knowledge level.

The fact that someone doesn't ask you for money doesn't mean it costs
nothing.

> GNU/Linux has always been an AMATEUR endeavor,

Linus TORVALDS is very well paid by the FSF to take care of Linux. There
is no definition in any dictionary which could be understood as amateur.

You just proved, once again, your lack of knowledge.

> that is the development
> is motivated by the love of programming and not by the need for profit.

The good part with programming is you can combine both. Your inability
to do that tells more about you than about possibilities.

> My view is that if a GNU/Linux developer cannot sustain his efforts
> without begging for donations then he should simply get out of the
> game.

As everything, your view is limited. The FOSS developer starts with a
program just done to fit his needs. Then, when the program starts to be
well spread, others are asking improvements. And the FOSS developer
can't provides those improvements on his spare time because he has a job
and other things to do. The only way for the FOSS developer to answer
every request is to switch to a full time job on his program. And as
nobody is willing to employ him to do that, the only way is to ask for
donations.

> Sponsorship and donations are available for any project, but they
> should never be actively solicited from the user.

They are never actively solicited in the tools I'm using.

> I maintain my own website, at my own expense, and I don't ever
> expect or solicit donations.

Because it costs almost nothing. If you are starting to have tens of
thousands or millions of people looking for it, you will need to put
more of your own money on it to be able to sustain the demand. And when
the money starts to be important the way to see things is starting to
change.

Don't worry, it's only a rhetorical answer, your website will never be
followed by lot of people.

> I am satisfied 

Good. It's the first time I see you happy. You should try that more
often, it will be better for your health.

> if my work contributes to the public good.

It doesn't because nobody knows about it and I don't see how it could.
But it doesn't mean you should stop. With your website you harm no one
so if it makes you feel better you should keep contribute to it.

> I do not seek profit therefrom.

Good. Because you won't get any as it is.

-- 
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79019

Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> writes:
> Linus TORVALDS is very well paid by the FSF to take care of
> Linux. There is no definition in any dictionary which could be
> understood as amateur.

AFAIK he is paid by the Linux Foundation, not the FSF.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#79342

On Sat, 13 Dec 2025 18:00:51 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> AFAIK [Torvalds] is paid by the Linux Foundation, not the FSF.

In fact, the Linux Foundation was, at least initially, expressly set up to 
pay a salary to Linus Torvalds. Not sure if that’s still true.

The FSF is Stallman’s crowd. They are the ones managing the GNU project.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web