In the late 90's, I chose to focus my home usage on Linux, as opposed to FreeBSD, because of the politics. The Free Software advocates back then, especially the GNOME group, were more aligned with my values. FreeBSD was what we used at work, and it was great, but it wasn't the focal point of principles in software.
It's absolutely mind boggling how things have changed. Today, I'm worried my Linux distro of choice is going to collaborate with censorious government and corporate initiatives, and as a parent I'm worried about my children's privacy using Linux in future.
NetBSD may not be able to resume from suspend on my thinkpad, but it I have no such worry about privacy and civil liberties using it.
Thomas (@[email protected])
For years the awkward entente between civil libertarian Free Software types and illiberal Open Source advocates has more or less worked out. It's clear that this entente has broken down. These people advocating compliance with identity tracking and censorship regimes, where would they have stood in relation to PGP, GPG, the Clipper chip, DVDs, and all the other fights for civil liberties the Free Software movement engaged in decades ago? With their positions today, they'd have been on the other side. We must not accommodate them. This is not a time for compromise, it's a time for principled stands.

IT/sysadmin

