Technology

I definitely agree that there are problems with some FOSS enthusiasts, but I don't think it's constructive to paint FOSS and FOSS enthusiasts as a whole based on their actions. To me, responding to problems involving diminishing the visibility of Linux and FOSS with "but why don't you care about x" isn't particularly constructive, and does little more than drive a wedge between people who think FOSS is a priority (but not their only priority) and people who place FOSS as a lower priority but who are otherwise natural allies.

In particular, the casting of open source devs focusing on what their own creative impulses drive them to make as 'authoritarian' is itself an attempt at authoritarian imposition. To take one's own time out of one's own day to code something is an act of creativity. FOSS is, by nature, less inclined to operate on a top-down model than corporate software development.

What you're asking for isn't a less hierarchical structure, it's a more hierarchical structure. As it stands, open source devs create what they feel is best and you are, as they say, absolutely welcome to fork it. There's nothing authoritarian about that. They've put their time in to create what they see the need for, and you literally are able to either go code additions you want to see yourself, roll back to earlier versions, or even hire someone to make it for you. You are not free to demand that they create what you want to see.

That isn't them holding an authoritarian model over end-users, that's them graciously handing out their hard work, their mental energy, indeed even their spoons, to the rest of us. The only authoritarian part of the conversation between end users making demands of developers and developers focusing on what they choose to spend their time on is the attempted authoritarian demands of end-users.

This is work that they literally give out for free. Not just the end product, but the source. If there's a feature you want, you literally are welcome to add it. That is not the case with closed-source software. In fact, if you attempt to modify closed-source software and redistribute it, there's a significant chance that you'll end up with a lawsuit or at least a DMCA take-down notice on your hands.

Stallman is a creep. 100%. There are other creeps who code. 100%. But there are also all sorts of other people, including members of marginalized groups, who code. For some of them coding is something that helps them feel okay. For others it's something that takes up a lot of the energy that they have. Sometimes it's both. It is completely unfair to demand that they code what you want the way you want when you're unwilling to do that yourself.

I think you're not really looking at the demands that you're making of others and exempting yourself from out of hand in the same breath. If you want to see something in FOSS, you have every right to go add that thing. You do not have a right to others doing it for you.

FOSS is the solution to a lot of the problems we're running into right now. It's no coincidence that Trump's inauguration was packed full of billionaire tech bros who are currently doing everything in their power to further marginalize every marginalized group. FOSS may well be the only reason we continue to have spaces where we can have these sorts of discussions and actually advocate for social progress or any form of leftist solidarity.