[email protected] wrote:
I think that it's legit to publish a video on youtube in order to steer people away from youtube - just as legit as writing free software for a proprietary operating system so people can easier make the transition.
Substituting another program or some other service isn't the same as running that particular program. But one can watch a video in a variety of formats and see the same video, one can use different hosting services for the video data and see the same video. In cases where an oppressive system is unavoidable (like Stallman faced when first writing Free Software for the GNU Project), I think using the oppressive system to obtain liberation is fine to do. But we're not in that situation with video hosting. There are plenty of hosting and file format options.
With regard to Free Software running on nonfree OSes: I think there's a need for some good research as to whether Free Software on nonfree OSes eases a transition to running Free Software on a Free Software OS, keeps people using a nonfree OS, or something else.
What i'm talking about is impact; there's no point in uploading speeches if nobody will ever see them. The goal is to free as many people as possible - did you forget?
Saying "nobody will ever see them" strikes me as exaggeration. There's no evidence to show that videos hosted outside YouTube will be seen by nobody. I think the other points you've raised are points I've already addressed.
