196

I used to use boost for reddit so I was excited it was coming for Lemmy until I saw all the anti privacy aspects of it.

By the time it and sync finally launched. There were so many great foss apps for Lemmy that it made no sense to use one that tracked me.

Nah it's fine for people to make money off of their work, i even support sopuli.xyz continuity

Free software != free of charge.

Nothing about free software says you need to give it away for no cost, nor that anyone can't do it. You can charge $100 for a simple calculator program that is under the GPL for its code. Nothing is there to prevent you from assembling the code and making it yourself, or from the buyer from copying and sharing the program. It's just way way easier to show off the program for free as in price and freedom for most programmers.

It's why the people who made Debian/Slackware/Ubuntu discs could charge money for an otherwise free product. Because the programmers openly allow this.

And programming is itself labor, just a lot of free software devs don't worry too much about getting paid for it.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

Except for one special situation, the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) has no requirements about how much you can charge for distributing a copy of free software. You can charge nothing, a penny, a dollar, or a billion dollars. It's up to you, and the marketplace, so don't complain to us if nobody wants to pay a billion dollars for a copy.

The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed without the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are required by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request. Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set a fee too large for anyone to pay—such as a billion dollars—and thus pretend to release source code while in truth concealing it. So in this case we have to limit the fee for source in order to ensure the user's freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there is no such justification for limiting distribution fees, so we do not limit them.

Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU GPL plead for permission, saying that they “won't charge money for the GNU software” or such like. That won't get them anywhere with us. Free software is about freedom, and enforcing the GPL is defending freedom. When we defend users' freedom, we are not distracted by side issues such as how much of a distribution fee is charged. Freedom is the issue, the whole issue, and the only issue.

They're paying for the use of the Boost app that the developer themselves created though? If they were charging for a Lemmy server I'd understand the point but they're paying for a client that they don't have to pay for. If it brings more people over to Lemmy then we all benefit really.

I also paid for Boost because the UI beat out all the other clients that I tried, replacing Connect which was my favourite at the time. It felt the most like Relay that I used to use on Reddit.

It's the anti privacy/ ads i really have issues with. I don't think there's anything wrong with paying a developer.

Oh yeah, the notice on the app store is for the ads, which gets deactivated once you pay for the app. But other than that using a service of a third party means sending information to that service even if not called that by an app store.

Will I'm on android so perhaps that's it