story
> Where's their Youtube channel, or their Twitter?
You are seriously asking why the Free Software Foundation isn't using a propietary social platform?
Yes?
This is sort of the opposite of the "yet you participate in society, interesting" comic.
You can non-hypocritically call for people to move away from something you also use. It's especially important when it comes to communication because how on earth are you supposed to tell people to change behaviour if they never hear you? Running an ad on fox news calling for people to listen to say NPR instead isn't hypocritical.
An absolutist approach diminishes itself, as it's saying "hey don't use twitter, then just like us you'll have no reach".
Like it or not, YouTube and twitter are enormous with huge audiences.
Stallman almost screwed up gcc, I think multiple times. GRUB at this point can be safely declared obsolete in the age of EFI.
But yes, GCC is very nice.
> You are seriously asking why the Free Software Foundation isn't using a propietary social platform?
If only to direct people to content hosted elsewhere, but yes.
Normally you have GRUB being launched from EFI to avoid dealing with the legacy parts of EFI directly.
You can even boot Linux from EFI directly, I think, you just need to hardcode the kernel parameters, which is not ideal. So a very minimal loader is still useful, but way simpler than GRUB.
Twitter has been in the news for banning accounts for doing that.
And when the ban time comes, milk that for all it's worth.
They're terrible at it, Youtube or not.
Perhaps if the FSF wasn't so abysmal at advocacy, more people would care about software freedom. It's very easy to throw one's hands up and say "nobody cares!" but I think the FSF, and many Free Software enthusiasts, are not ready for the required level of introspection to really examine their approach and why it's not working.
"Knights for hot ladies", "eating skin parts of own feet on video", "..."
And this is about the front face, so what do you expect?
The purity inherent in insisting on using only free software is laudable, but evangelizing is only effective when there's reach. (It's also much more compelling when it demonstrably makes folks' lives materially better, but reasonable people will disagree on the particulars there.)
