Comment by JCattheATM
1 month ago
Maybe, but that wouldn't explain the disproportionate lack of votes and replies, both of which also indicate a lack of interest.
1 month ago
Maybe, but that wouldn't explain the disproportionate lack of votes and replies, both of which also indicate a lack of interest.
Some of such articles and comments do get a lot of upvotes and positive attention, if they get to the main page:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44193198#44193459
From your first link the top comment says:
> I do not have a particularly strong trust for the (modern) FSF, so their validation adds nothing, IMHO,
Most upvoted reply says:
> having FSF validation doesn't prove anything but rather may be detrimental,
The second link no one is discussing the FSF certification at all, one guy mentioned it in passing and every other hit for 'fsf' is from your username.
Third link only hits for 'fsf' are from your username.
Final link 'fsf' returns no hits.
I think you are conflating interest in an open source and/or free phone with something FSF approved. My claim above was that most people don't care about an FSF approved phone, and your links here don't show otherwise.
I agree there is an interest in an open alternative to Android/iPhone, but that doesn't require FSF approval.
> The original comment said "We need a third alternative, based on freedom with your device"
FSF certification is just one way to indicate freedom. People may not care about it but they do care about freedom.
3 replies →