This article smacks of paternalism. Part of the fun of free software is that it ...

anonymars · 2025-08-12T15:55:26 1755014126

> Part of the fun of free software is that it might do terrible things

Yeah you lost me here

amiga386 · 2025-08-12T16:10:21 1755015021

Freedom is the freedom to say rm -rf /* and accept the consequences.

If you want to give someone else control over what you can and can't do with your machine, iOS is over there -->

anonymars · 2025-08-12T16:32:12 1755016332

False dichotomy.

Why should I expect that merely installing a dictionary will silently opt me in to sending everything in my clipboard to some third party?

You don't need some strawman tyrant to want it to require a user opt-in if that's what you really want to do

amiga386 · 2025-08-13T00:42:55 1755045775

You can expect that any software might do anything, either because of a bug or because it's intentional, and you won't know until you see it happen. It's why the major FOSS licenses say things like THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

You can want software to be well behaved, and in most cases it is. But if you want some level of assurance that the software is behaved as you'd like it, some requirement in law that the software is not allowed to exist unless it meets your requirements, or the platform it runs on is neutered so it literally can't do the thing you don't want it to do -- that's where the tyrant comes in.

anonymars · 2025-08-13T01:25:24 1755048324

Again, false dichotomy. If Debian's maintainers don't put things in the package manager with dodgy behavior, that's not a walled garden like iOS

Not having to check your cereal for razor blades is also a freedom

amiga386 · 2025-08-13T01:40:32 1755049232

You're asking Debian to check out all aspects of a program and hold them liable if it does something you don't like, or their volunteers does something you don't like.

That's not what Debian is doing. Debian is asking for volunteers to package the world's free software, also written by volunteers. They have their own checklists, your "dodgy behaviour" concerns aren't on it. Confirming the software meets your expectations depends on you evaluating it. If it doesn't, you can then volunteer your time to write them a bug report, which they might or might not accept and fix.

anonymars · 2025-08-13T04:20:17 1755058817

They did. The article exists. The package manager behavior was changed accordingly. It doesn't automatically include that plug-in. My understanding was you scoffed at the "paternalism" and said part of the fun is that there might be terrible behaviors. Others disagree.

amiga386 · 2025-08-13T10:03:41 1755079421

Indeed there were terrible behaviours, and they were fixed. My scoffing is at people who believe these behaviours should never have happened, or it shouldn't be possible.

Unless there is a omnipotent tyrant, there will be the possibility that you encounter terrible behaviours, and the possibility that those who could fix them, don't. You can try advocating to the maintainer that they should fix it, you can even try leading a campaign against the maintainer. If they still disagree, you can fix it yourself, with the source they gave you, and you can publicise your fixed version, which people might adopt over the other version if enough people agree with you. That is the fun!