Comment by fsflover

4 hours ago

Yes, it does. Nobody was speaking about "most people" here, except you. Your comment is irrelevant to the discussion. See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46569163

3 comments

fsflover

JCattheATM 4 hours ago

Original comment said:

> We need a third alternative, based on freedom with your device.

We does not refer only to HN users, and there is no implication as such.

The default assumption is that 'we' refers to the general population.

However, even if I'm charitable and go with your assumption that 'we' referred to HN users, I will confidently say most HN users also don't care about FSF approval.

You like to post a lot of HN links without ever giving an indication of what they point to. As a habit, I don't waste my time clicking random links that people post without context.

fsflover 2 hours ago
Most HN users don't know about the alternatives, just like the public. If you say that those who know don't care, I will ask you for some evidence.
In my linked post I explain why the public doesn't matter at this point of time. Also I explain that the public doesn't need the alternative before it works flawlessly, i.e., before it becomes popular among technical users.
- JCattheATM 2 hours ago
  
  > Most HN users don't know about the alternatives, just like the public.
  That's a rather ridiculous assumption on your part. As a tech-literate crowd, it's quite likely they are aware of them, if for no other reason those alternatives make the front page semi-frequently.
  > If you say that those who know don't care, I will ask you for some evidence.
  As soon as you provide evidence for the premises for your argument. As my position is simply saying yours is false, the onus is on you to support yours.
  > "we" are aware of the problem and care about the freedom.
  Sure, maybe, but caring about freedom isn't the same as caring about FSF approved software.