Yep, didnt make a single sensible point. Just anecdotes and irrelevant examples. I’m bad at ignoring an argument so I went and blocked lol

That’s not what a false equivalency is, but ok.

FOSS has this reputation among most people.

Most people don’t have any clue what FOSS is. They just want software, and if its free and works, they’ll like it.

I am genuinely curious why you think people pay money for worse software though…

I provided two reasons in my post. Superior marketing and professional support.

That was my entire point. The person I was originally replying to seemed to suggest exactly that.

Ok, but thats not what you went on to say.

You are not arguing in good faith, I don’t care to continue going in circles.

You’re a fucking weirdo

How is that false equivalency? Comparing fdroid to the play store is about as close as you can get.

Like I said, there is bad FOSS software, but that doesnt make it generally false. People pay for software that doesnt have a good free alternative, they pay for support, and often they will pay to use software that has good marketing because they are simply unaware of the alternatives.

I’m not saying all FOSS software is great, but lots of software does have great FOSS options, for example, Firefox, Blender, and Bevy. Obviously there are also examples of proprietary software without a great alternative, like Photoshop. I like FOSS, but I don’t avoid proprietary solutions that do a better job. Believe it or not, I still end up using mostly FOSS software.

You’re not backing your points up with any actual reasoning or examples while also being condescending about it.

Works fine for me, I’ve used it with both Nvidia and AMD.

The fuck? There is nothing sexual about the character at all. Calling it pedophilic says a whole lot more about you than the software.

You can also go on the play store and find a huge list of proprietary apps that haven’t been updated.

You need some actual stats to back up this point. Plenty of proprietary software is unsuccessful because it fails to profit, so its shut down. At least FOSS software will continue as long as someone finds it useful enough to keep it going. Plus the obvious, that if you like a piece of software you can maintain it yourself.

Also saying that FOSS software is “notoriously low quality” is silly. There’s tons of great and important FOSS software and plenty of shit FOSS software, just like proprietary software. Your comments just ignore how much proprietary shovelware exists.

What issue are you having? When you go to patch an app Revanced should show you a suggested version. If you tap the suggestion it’ll search it for you and you can download it from an apk site. When you download it make sure you get a standard apk, not a bundle.

Or they’re just adding improvements to the software they heavily rely on.

I don’t trust or like Microsoft, but the likelihood of there being malicious intentions in this is incredibly low. Just imagine the fallout if Microsoft tried to sabotage the kernel.

Genuinely what negative ramifications could come of uutils being MIT licensed? The kernel license isn’t going to change and I really don’t see how companies can abuse uutils for a profit.

The Linux kernel still is and will always be GPL. It really doesnt matter if the coreutils aren’t.

Nothing. The language used has absolutely nothing to do with the license.

I’m not saying Librewolf is insecure, I’m just saying its a bit less secure. They generally do a good job keeping up to date, but there can be delays if an update conflicts with their changes.

Librewolf is not just a Firefox config. You can look at the repo and see a number of patches. Without a paid security team to review these patches with every update, it is less secure.

I’m not saying not to use Librewolf, the likelihood of a zero day specifically targeting it and effecting a significant number of users is very unlikely, simply based off of the size of its userbase compared to more mainstream browsers.

It does, but less than Firefox does. Their lack of manpower means delayed updates to fix zero days compared to Firefox. It also means less eyes on any patches introduced, so I’d be more concerned about malicious code being introduced.

Do people in this thread not understand that Microsoft frequently contributes to Linux? They’ve already lost the battle there. They rely on Linux for servers as much as everybody else.

Not necessarily saying this is a good thing or not, but writing off any Linux contributions Microsoft makes would be pretty silly.

It just lacks manpower unfortunately. Going with a browser that has the funding for a security team is the safer option.

I agree, Mullvad is the only fork that I have confidence in the security of (ignoring Tor ofc since it’s not really for general use).

Also want to add that this was caused by a configuration issue. If you want security, don’t use Firefox (or its forks) default configs, look into Betterfox. Apparently Zen also uses this as the base for its default preferences, which is a good decision.

What do you mean? The dev did acknowledge it and linked to a relevant discussion.

Because its a stupid issue. The complaint is that a Firefox fork acts like Firefox.