On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 11:34:32 AM UTC-4, yura...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 3:26:05 PM UTC, cooloutac wrote:
> > I'll be disappointed but I'm not going to be mad at them for trying to get 
> > paid, they deserve it. 
> > 
> > But I also wouldn't mind if they turned me into a money asset like windows 
> > so they can keep designing it for home users...lol
> > 
> > I look at things differently.  You are referring to linux architecture and 
> > developers,  while I'm referring to the majority of its users and community 
> > members, as the Product.
> Alright, I respect that, we see some things differently. But the discussion 
> is good, it does not have to come down to agreeing in the end. 
> I don't like customers being turned into assets though. The way I see it, it 
> essentially make people "not people" anymore, customer service is out of the 
> window, it's all about cheating and manipulating people into making the best 
> use of them, rather than making a fair trade between a company and a 
> customer. So I kind of black out when I see business models that turn people 
> into assets, I really, really don't like that approach.
> But I do really agree that I wouldn't mind Qubes taking a fee, ask for more 
> donations, or focus partly or entirely on business users. They do a lot of 
> hard work, and regardless of the target group, the change will be for the 
> better of humanity. Perhaps it's asking too much for Qubes to focus on both 
> companies and end-users at the same time, nontheless, I do hope they can 
> manage to do that.
> It's obvious they had their hands full on Qubes 4 too, so it might just be 
> that and we're reading too much into the issue here at hand. But lets see, 
> with time comes answers. I just hope it wiill be in good time rather the long 
> wait.

You are going to be someones asset or product as part of nature,  whether you 
know it or not.

The ends justify the means to me. Especially if it means being able to use 
Qubes or not.   

I also think its silly to not support secure boot, simply because the idea was 
created by Microsoft.   FSF/Richard Stallman supporters who are against secure 
boot,  is like Bernie supporters not voting for hillary.  Seems more spiteful 
then practical. 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to