Division By 0

Update: Since I wrote this, experience tought me that the vast majority of examples here work in great part because of inexperience, habit or lack of knowledge, but I keep the central point of this post

I still remember how some years ago I really despised radical free software activists. And well, I must confess it still annoys me somehow. But I don’t want to confuse no one here, I also fight for free software: My preferred O.S. is Debian, I prefer and use free alternatives when possible and the “not-so-many” things I develop are free…

But this isn’t always about how much you like free software and it’s philosophy. Sometimes one has an objective that must be developed, and typically there is no time to find alternatives or investigate. In those situations, the tool that gives out a fast and painless solution s the one that prevails. For example, should I need now to reencode some videos and can’t find a tool I can’t work with easily (Let’s clarify: I am a real noob in that scope), what I should choose is crystal clear. Of course, with time and the task done, searching for a similar free tool or learning to use the one I discarded is guaranteed.

There are even other situations in which, very exceptionally, there is propietary software that because one or more of it’s features gets the work done faster and easier. And I personally find dificult sometimes that when I want to do something, the software I use is a tool, and as tool it is all about how handy it is. Is that enough reason to point me with your fingers? Since when, in a environment in which freedom is defended no matter the cost, judging people that uses it’s freedom to choose is any good?

I understand and fight alongside the idea that we live in a world that even though the outstanding communication capacity (internet being the huge central pillar) there is, misinformation is everywhere. There is too much people that doesn’t choose because they don’t know about the alternatives o the information they has been manipulated and is false. But there is no excuse for going from one extreme to the other. Everyone has the right to choose, and the real need right now is to try and inform people so they can decide by themselves and choose. Imposing ideas, even if they were the best, still is an imposition and therefore, a deprivation of freedom.

For example, why lie? I like .NET technology, but I despise Microsoft politics. Should I because of that not develop in C# anymore, probably using the “for-me-worst” Java API? Now that Mono Project is advancing so much this question is easier to answer. But even though, is that important whether I used Java or .NET? A lot of people will think about philosophy and sacrifice, but a I see it, we should not throw trash onto something beacuse of it’s origin. I think there is a “not-so-thin” line between following the free software philosophy and imposing that everything must be free.

I don want a world in which free software establishes itself by activism and social pressure. I prefer it to establish itself because people has chosen it with judgment: because it is a better built piece of software, beacuse it’s reliability, because it’s flexibility and because with the truth in one hand, because it really is better. Let’s develop better software instead of use politics. Let’s give free software what it deserves making it stronger and stronger!

Tags: Free software