A proposal for all users and developers of free software: Be a meanie! Don't enable users of proprietary software.

There's more than enough real, imagined and engineered divisions between all of us including race, religion, political beliefs, opinions on climate, vaccines, viruses, etc., and this divisiveness, very often fabricated for political purposes, works against our own progression as individuals and as a species. With the caveat of some radically different cultures, we are essentially one people on one planet and, as such, i think we ought to be helping each other far more often than arguing with one another. That said, i'm going to propose what i think is a logical reason for creating another division of sorts; one between those who use free software and those who do not.

Users of proprietary computer operating systems, such as Windows, may think that free software is software for which no money is exchanged, however this is a dangerously incorrect assumption. Free software is that which is rooted in freedom, meaning that the source code is freely available under an appropriate license to be used, modified and redistributed in whatever way one sees fit with little or no restriction. In other words, it is free as in freedom. Cost is irrelevant. Such software is often given the label "FOSS" or "FLOSS" as in Free, Open-Source Software or Free/Libre, Open-Source Software.

Whether one pays money for proprietary software or not, it is never free because restrictions are placed upon how it may be used, modified and distributed and, worse, it often includes security vulnerabilities and intrusive malware used to collect data about the system and the user habits which is then monetized in some nefarious way. Proprietary software is a black box one is not permitted to examine. It can never and should never be trusted, whereas the source code for free software is available for public review so that security and privacy issues, as well as improvements, can be readily addressed by anyone capable of doing so. I don't mean to imply that all free software is secure, respectful of ones privacy, or was written by ethical people, but free software in general is more secure and far more trustworthy than proprietary software. Those that think otherwise might ponder the fact that much of the internet's infrastructure and web services, as well as a plethora of hardware devices such as watches, cameras, routers and the vast majority of phones, are powered by free software, at least to some degree.

So my reason for suggesting another "division" among us is, i think, a very necessary one. Simply put, users of proprietary software compromise not only their own security and privacy, but also the privacy and security of everyone else. For example, when a user of a free operating system, such as a GNU/Linux-based OS, communicates with a Windows user, there can be no assurance whatsoever that such communications won't be transmitted to a 3rd party without the knowledge of either person, even if that communication is encrypted.

Now the reason i put division in quotes is because i am certainly not suggesting that users of free software stop communicating with users of proprietary software as this would obviously be hugely counter-productive. What i'm suggesting, and i'm certainly not taking credit for the being the first to do so, is that users of free software stop supporting users of proprietary software when they have technical problems and, perhaps more importantly, that developers of free software cease making their software compatible with non-free operating systems. In other words, i'm suggesting that enabling users of non-free software hurts us all. Instead of helping such people solve a technical problem, educate them as to the reasons why they shouldn't be using a proprietary operating system or software and then help them find alternatives. Help them create a bootable flash drive with a free OS so they can try it. Help them locate alternatives to proprietary software and support them when they have a problem.

I was wishfully anticipating that a significant portion of Windows users would immediately abandon Microsoft when the god-awful, privacy-hating Windows 10 garbage was forced down their throats, however this never happened on the scale i had hoped for apparently. It seems that most people simply don't care about what software they use or what nefarious activities that software performs behind their backs because they fail to make the connection between software and it's direct effect upon their own lives, much less the lives of everyone else, and so this is why i think a stronger approach is justified.

For further information...

What does a better world look like?

If you were tasked with re-imagining all of our systems in order to create a new way of living, what would your vision look like? Would there be governments? Would there be laws? Would there be money?

I've asked this question to several people and, as i recall, i was disappointed at their responses in every case because in every case they failed to think outside the box. Rather then imagining new systems, they always fell back to using our current systems as a template. Of course you have a monetary system! How else are you going to trade and buy stuff, and what incentive would people have to work absent money, they might say. And without government and laws you have anarchy, they posit. That last statement is kind of funny because, according to the definition of anarchy i'm familiar with, anarchy is a well functioning society absent government, a concept they generally find to be impossible, but is it? Unfortunately anarchy has taken on strong negative connotations over the years by authoritarian governments and their handlers who insist on total control over everything and, more recently, as a result of radical Marxists/communists like Antifa and Black Lives Matter who pretend to be precisely the opposite of what they are.

Already the reader may be sensing underlying tones of socialist or communist ideologies in one possible solution to our problems i shall shed light upon, however that isn't what is being suggested, not at all.

Anyone who has done any serious research regarding how and why the world works as it does will be intimately familiar with the phrase "new world order" and much of what that entails as laid out by its psychopathic planners. Such plans have since been rebranded under titles such as "The Great Reset" and "Build Back Better" following the engineered COVID-19 "pandemic", made possible in part by misusing polymerase chain reaction (rtRCR testing) and all of the puppet mainstream media, including all of the mainstream social media platforms. The truth of the matter however is that we do need a new world order, just not one which is dictated by self-serving, psychopathic, tyrants and trans-humanists who only pretend to care about the welfare of the earth and the human species.

If you ask anyone what they think the root of our problems are, they might answer that money or greed is the culprit and they would be incorrect. I see the root cause of the great majority of our problems, and probably all of our major problems, as being a lack of a proper education. Most of our systems, including government, education, science and healthcare, revolve around money and the curriculum in our schools is designed to support these systems. Schools don't produce free thinkers because a free thinker would be damaging to "the system".

While i admire any activist or journalist that fights for a cause i feel is just, especially those who risk their well-being, most of these people and organizations are fighting the wrong enemy in my opinion. They are attempting to upright capsized systems without ever questioning whether the existence of the system itself is necessary. For example they think the answer to a corrupt government is to cut out the corruption and while this may be a short term solution to a few problems, it is just that; a short term solution which guarantees a return to a state of corruption. This axiom has been cemented in U.S. history by Thomas Jefferson who apparently stated (i never sourced the quote myself) that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.". Can we not do better than repeating the same cycle of corruption and cleansing over and over? Is this not the definition of insanity? I, along with many others far more intelligent and educated than i am, think we can.

Many people would insist that greed is an inherent trait of our species, however there is evidence to suggest it is largely, if not entirely, a learned behavior. In an interview with High Times Buckminster Fuller stated:

Ignorance and greed are part of the evolutionary process, which is just to say that mistakes are part of learning. There is nothing bad about behaviors or perceptions that do not work; they simply have to be given up and replaced by behaviors or perceptions that do work.

Jacque Fresco, founder of The Venus Project, writes:

Human behavior is subject to the same laws as any other natural phenomenon. Our customs, behaviors, and values are byproducts of our culture. No one is born with greed, prejudice, bigotry, patriotism and hatred; these are all learned behavior patterns.

Fresco was an amazing man; a true out-of-the-box thinker who spent most of his life analyzing the problems of our current societies and systems and proposing logical solutions to them. He was an inventor and a futurist who was able to discard the perceived "necessities" of our current systems, including socialism, communism and capitalism, and create something entirely new.

With the exception of the "global warming" due to human produced CO2 bullshit, the following is a very worthwhile documentary. The other issue i have with the film is the proposal for power generation using technologies based on solar, wind and water. There are infinitely better, cheaper, more stable and environmentally friendly ways to produce energy either centrally or at the individual home level. For more information i might suggest reading A Practical Guide to Free Energy Devices (alternate link).

The Choice is Ours (2016) (alternate link)

This documentary explores the determinants of behavior to dispel the myth of “human nature”, demonstrating that environment shapes behavior. It illustrates how our social structures impose our values and behaviors demonstrating that our global monetary system is obsolete and increasingly insufficient to meet the needs of most people. It concludes with the vision of The Venus Project to build an entirely new world from the ground up, a “redesign of the culture” where all enjoy a high standard of living, free of servitude and debt, while also protecting the environment.

Peter Joseph, creator of the powerful Zeitgeist series of documentary videos, is on a path that is not so dissimilar from that of The Venus Project. Peter's work resulted in the international Zeitgeist Movement. The following is from their mission statement:

The focus includes recognizing that the majority of the modern world’s social problems, including mounting ecological crises and destabilizing economic inequality (oppression, poverty, conflict, corruption, etc.) is not an inevitable outcome of our civilization. Rather, TZM sees these issues as consequential symptoms of an outdated social system.

There are many resources available for those that recognize the problems with our current systems, including the following:

Interesting interview of Australian Evelyn Rae by Lana Lokteff

Evelyn Rae - Weak Men, Obese Women & Groomer Abortionists | Red Ice TV

This show was first published May 5, 2022. Australian conservative political commentator and writer, Evelyn Rae gives a Covid update but we also discuss the status of The Great Reset in Australia, the feminization of men and fat acceptance gone mad. Evelyn talks about the importance of eating organic. Later, we discuss the blatant grooming and abuse of children, Roe vs Wade and how everything is White supremacy. We also question if this planet will ever be a place of peace and freedom.