I posted that I sometimes choose convenience over principle. Quiliro asked
me to clarify which principles. I meant that I sometimes choose convenience
over the free-software principles.
"I personally find the ideology of the GNU project very inspiring and
uplifting. That's why I'm here." - Lembas
I'm with you Lembas. But some people are not interested in abstract thoughts
generally. Some people are not attracted to our particular abstract thoughts
- our particular vision of fairness. We have been the minority for a few
decades.
Quiliro posted that ideology can be practical and convenient:
"It is always convenient and practical to use free software. If you choose
not to do it because you don't want to make the effort now, you will pay for
it in the future with money, dependency and/or unjust conditions imposed onto
you and others you pull along with you." - Quiliro
I think this approach is more likely to work with those people who are not
interested in "seeing beyond the superficial" in an abstract way.
I agree that free software can be more convenient and practical in the long
term.
I would not agree that free software is more convenient and practical in the
short term. At least not in every case.
It's a big step to not use the proprietary software or formats that your
peers use. It's often self-marginalizing. Your peers may not be interested
in your explanation, and may judge you negatively for your choice.
How do you successfully explain the benefit of a long-term convenience, when
challenging a short-term convenience?
