Thread by @lzsthw

Given my recent Arch Linux debacle I think I should cover a few persistent FLOSS vs. Commercial software myths. These are usually put forward as some kind of defense when leaders of a FLOSS project screw over their users without consent.

#1) Commercial Whataboutism

"Commercial companies screw people over too. Why do FLOSS projects have to not screw people over?!"

That's whataboutism, and more importantly authoritarian whataboustism. I say there's two kinds of whataboutism:

You have whataboutism that is pointing out a bias that people in positions of authority have:

"Why do you punish this kind of person more than that kind?"

Then there's what I call Authoritarian Whataboutism:

"I'm allowed to harm that person because that other guy does too."

FLOSS vs. Commercial myth number #1 is they're allowed to treat you like crap because commercial software does too (more on that in a bit).

That's Authoritarian Whataboutism, which is only used to shut down challenges to the FLOSS project's authority after you caught them.

FLOSS vs. Commercial Myth #2)

Commercial software vendors frequently destroy their customer's systems and get away with it.

No, there are many agencies devoted to protecting consumers from abusive companies: FTC, FCC, FDA, and FAA to name a few.

Go look at judgements by the FTC against Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook over privacy *alone* and you'll see hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and 20-30 year moratoriums on future behavior.

The claim that commercial software vendors get away with abuse is false.

Not only that, but on an individual level, you have a contract with them and you can sue them if they did destroy your business. If Microsoft pushed out an update to Enterprise customers that caused a bunch of Fortune 500 companies to crash there would be *hell* to pay.

FLOSS vs. Commercial Myth #3:

FLOSS is free so you can't complain that it doesn't do what you want.

First, I'm not complaining it doesn't have a feature I want.

I'm complaining that it has a DEFECT that caused my server to collapse, and the leaders say it's NOT a defect.

But, more importantly, if you release a FLOSS project, and then *invite* users to use it, promise it's "stable", and make it free so there's zero barrier to entry, then you've just created a public good and public space that anyone can access, just like radio or a park.

A FLOSS project that invites people to use it, and then screws those people over, is abusing the public good promise they made. Since *anyone* can access it that means they're taking advantage of potentially unskilled people and promising them it's a safe place.

By making the barrier to entry low, and enticing people with marketing and free software, they are under a *higher* standard of behavior than commercial software because the impact of a bad change can cause more damage and users have no recourse.

FLOSS vs. Commercial Myth #4: You can't complain because it's free.

If you offer up something for free to everyone and it harms them, then it's *your* fault. You can't then say "NO, I'm not to blame because it's free." No, you are to blame. The price is irrelevant.

This behavior by FLOSS ("Shut Up! It's Free!") is like inviting your friend over for a chicken dinner and then he ends up in the hospital from salmonella poisoning. You can't go, "Shut up dude. That chicken was free."

So? You still poisoned your friend. Price is irrelevant.

And that should tell you something about the kind of person who puts forward the "Shut Up! It's Free!" defense.

What kind of a immoral piece of crap yells at someone to shut up when they've hurt them? You've got to be a misanthropic loser to defend your bad behavior that way.