Linux
Welcome to c/linux!
Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!
Rules:
-
Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
-
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
-
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
-
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
-
No NSFW adult content
-
Follow general lemmy guidelines.
view the rest of the comments
Well, then, let me give you a Tu Quoque: your original comment contains ad hominem and non sequitur.
Or, if you prefer: "No, U"
Attacking the ladybird dev who isn't involved in the discussion here isn't an ad hominem, and their response still fits the topic so it isn't a non-sequitur either.
At the same time: Just having a logical fallacy doesn't invalidate the argument. Claiming so is the fallacy fallacy.
Lol I always suspected people who call others out on fallacies all the time were committing some kind of fallacy. I call it the Ben Shapiro fallacy.
Fair enough, would you prefer my original term, "ideological purity testing", at which we leftists so excel? I was pointing out that this guy's original comment could just as easily be applied to Lemmy, so how is it relevant? If, for instance, The person who discovers, say, the Haber-Bosch process, also happens to design the chemicals used for the extermination camps, should we avoid using the Haber-Bosch process to revolutionaize agriculture? No, I stand by my claim of non-sequitur, since character assassination is an insufficient reason to throw out a valid argument, contribution, or invention. Should it be scrutinised? of course, but not because one of the developers is a dick. That is immaterial to the project. So either we should throw out the baby with the bathwater, and get rid of all of this free shit we use every day, or we can talk about things that actually matter, like functionality. Trans phobia should be fought, just like Fritz Haber deserves to get his name dragged through the mud. But the Haber-Bosch process has saved millions of lives.
So, is it relevant to the project? It's not like this is something I'm paying for, is it? Does it matter that Haber was a raving anti-semite, Dessalines is an authoritarian whackjob, or that the ladybird dev is a racist transphobe? Well, I'd like to know if it does matter. If things are being put into the browser that would go against its stated purpose, then that's deeply concerning.
If, for instance, the ladybird dev started saying "man, I sure do love Google's tracking protocols", or "wow, look at what a good job trump is doing cleaning up the USA of criminals!", then that would be sufficient for me to say "there's definitely something going on", but it's an open source project. It's going to be difficult to hide authoritarian spyware into it without security- and privacy-conscious people noticing. And when that happens, it will be for that reason, not because someone is a dick, that this will be relevant to the project.
Not because they're a dick; because they are authoritarian and literally control a platform of discussion. A communication platform dev being an authoritarian is extremely disconcerting. Any kind of bigot in control of the media you see would be.
My logical fallacy contribution: It's a slippery slope.
Is the ladybird dev an authoritarian? Because that's very different from a racist, or a transphobe.
I would sooner criticise Lemmy for being developed by actual, self-declared authoritarians, unless I have evidence of similar positions from ladybird. After all, that's why I left Proton. The CEO's a supporter of the US' Authoritarian regime. It doesn't bode well for a closed-source project.
I haven't seen a transphobe that didn't also share authoritarian ideas when it comes to suppressing trans folk. Do you not see how that would be just as bad as a tankie having a bias in propping up non-Western dictatorships?
Fair! The only reason I'm still here on Lemmy is because it's open source and I can defederate from them, but Ladybird's motives certainly bear scrutiny. However, I'm sure that we'll get a full rundown on privacy and security when it's in a truly unable state.
Fantastical! But unfortunately my dog is long gone. He is not just literally dead but has also phonetically, epidermally, notoriously, capricorniously, double-retro-undokiecongeably, irrelephantly, incognizantastically well distributed among air particles. Redonkeoulous right?
Are you ok?
I'm on Lemmy after all, aren't I?