291
[META] Are paid for, closed source projects, being advertised on this community, appropriate? (lemmy.world)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
145 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A number of brand new accounts have popped up shilling their paid for applications.

Is this within the rules? Is the community happy with this? Could mods clarify this in the rules?

Either allowing advertising, or banning it entirely.

my point is - there is a difference between an open source homegrown project that might be useful, vs closed source paid for projects from brand new accounts

some replies are misunderstanding, somehow.

I am against

brand new accounts who:

  1. first post is a brand new project
  2. project is closed source
  3. project will cost money
  4. is asking for free testing
  5. the post is literally an advertisement
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 34 points 4 months ago (8 children)

No. They should not be allowed, especially the closed source, non-FOSS ones. It'd be one thing to have a FOSS application that has a premium option (such as Frigate), but if it's closed source and you have to pay, they shouldn't be in the self hosting community.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] -20 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Even if you change the ROM in your Android phone, guess what? The ROM still relies on closed-source vendor blobs from the manufacturer that come with the stock firmware and most often are required to make your ROM do what it do. I would say that the vast majority of people screaming about closed source and how they own their own data, yadda yadda, yadda, when it gets right down to the brass tacks, somewhere, they rely on something that is not FOSS. It's a rather duplicitous diatribe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Huh?

    So, if we have the choice of something 90% open and 10% closed, versus 100% closed, you're saying the first option is invalid to even desire, because it isn't 100% open.

    Wow. Just, wow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    So, let me be exactly clear here: WE ALL MAKE CONCESSIONS.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    This logic is not great. I'd rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it's actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what's under the hood. It's not about concessions, it's about being able to tell what the hell software is actually doing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I’d rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it’s actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what’s under the hood

    Mee2! However, not everyone here is of a hive mind. Not everyone here got into selfhosting for the same reasons. Like I've mentioned, it's a big umbrella.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago*

    That's not the question that was asked.

    The question is if brand new accounts should be able to shill their PAID closed source products without otherwise contributing to the community. They should not be able to do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent