In June 2010, the government was expressing real interest in social networks. The Air Force issued a public request for “persona management software,” which might sound boring until you realize that the government essentially wanted the ability to have one agent run multiple social media accounts at once.
It wanted 50 software licenses, each of which could support 10 personas, “replete with background, history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographically consistent.”
The software would allow these 50 cyberwarriors to peer at their monitors all day and manipulate these 10 accounts easily, all “without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries.” The personas would appear to come from all over the world, the better to infiltrate jihadist websites and social networks, or perhaps to show up on Facebook groups and influence public opinion in pro-US directions.
There’s a whole slew of software aimed at creating numerous sockpuppet accounts that is called “Persona Management Software.” It’s certainly the word the US government uses to describe an online identity.
Especially in regards to Linux, which with many of the most vocal adherents doing so because they reject corporate control over their lives and want to see the rest of the world do so as well. It is very much a political issue to them, and so it’s not surprising that you see it crop up just as much as politically oriented posts, because the Linux-posting is essentially the same thing. It’s “politics” for the nerd-set. Same with piracy. Some people involved with these have deep anti-corporate and anti-capitalist philosophical roots for their reasons behind why they live like that, and they’re often not afraid to “preach” it to others.
So yeah, shitposts sadly aren’t going to stop it anytime soon.
Frankly, freedom of computation (basically, property rights as applied to electronics) is politics for everyone; it’s just that normies don’t understand how important it is.
You know, it’s kind of interesting, because I kind of wonder, and I’m sure someone could educate me to, the differences between philosophical outlooks that drive these different ideals.
If you were like, a windows or mac purist, you’d maybe just be gunning for as much mass adoption as possible, meaning that you have as much interoperability, or, accessibility, as possible, and maybe you’re just biting the bullet in terms of like, corporate shenanigans and control. Basically you’d just be like, admitting defeat, to some extent, it’d be a compromise ideology. It’s sort of like the same ideology that pushes one big centralized set of servers for everything, compared to everyone running their own little instances. Sure, you’re getting a lack of security, lack of flexibility, and thus, potentially, the functionality of the app ends up sucking depending on what you’re doing, yadda yadda. But in return, you get mass adoption. This is kinda flip-flopped with like, Linux purism, right? And then the natural use cases and market adoption for it tends to just be the more niche uses, that demand such flexibility.
So, which is more important for free access. Actual legal freedom, which even works itself into the structure of the app itself, right, or just, straight mercenary mass adoption, under any means necessary? I dunno.
On one hand, within the current structure of the economy and political landscape, globally, it’s kind of impossible to achieve mass adoption with Linux, and I think mass adoption of it is almost kind of antithetical to the anarchism of the project itself, as is mass adoption of most anarchist political projects. It’s just kind of impossible to win in a head-to-head competition with larger corporations, or with more short-term gains focused ideologies.
I’m still just running windows 10 LTSC with MAS, and it works fine for me, so that’s obviously where my ideological line is kind of threaded, just having everybody have the best free version of windows, maybe with some sort of increased privacy modifications to cut down on telemetry and shit like that, but I kinda doubt people could actually do that without destroying the usability of the system like all of those tend to do, or else someone would’ve probably done it by now.
Liking an OS isn’t a personality trait, but evangelizing for Free and Open Source Software which generally has no budget for advertising is a noble cause.
I mean if you come into a community which has a leaning it is just a natural consequence to get confronted with that leaning more then somewhere else, isn’t it?
Like going into a Bible circle and saying that every other comment is about god which borders on obsession. I mean yes maybe but it is not surprising.
The problem is that I don’t know whether or not it’s gonna be worthwhile until I read the comment, and by that point, it’s already too late, because I’ve already read it.
“I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Android, is in fact, GMS/Android, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Google plus Android. AOSP is not an ecosystem unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Google ecosystem made useful by Google Play Services, monetization models, and mandatory telemetry components comprising a full OS as defined by Alphabet.”
Have you tried windows 11? It’s actually pretty amazing.
Just kidding.
But seriously, I don’t support shaming people for not using Linux. Let people use the OS they are most comfortable with! I mean, unless it’s a Mac. Fuck that noise.
You all stay here as long as you need. Nobody likes Windows… Nobody likes it. Shhhh shhh shh. It’s okay. Linux is the open source solution everyone needs, not just some niche communities. Everyone!
Hey…I also advocate for more solidarity within communities, growing your own food, using less plastic & cars, and Star Trek…Linux is just like 30% what I talk about.
Add comment