I’ve spent years championing Linux as the only escape from Big Tech, but I’m starting to get twitchy.

While we’re distracted by the Steam Deck making Linux “mainstream,” the corporate players and politicians are busy building a digital cage. Between California’s AB-1043 mandates and Microsoft’s “Face Check” infrastructure, I’m worried we’re heading for a hard schism: “Sanitised Linux” vs the “Free Rebel” distros.

If the compliant, age-gated version becomes the industry standard, where does that leave the rest of us? Digital exile?

I’ve put some thoughts together on why the “Golden Cage” is closing in and why education, not mandates, is the only real fix.

  • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    What people don’t realize is, that every year is the Year of Linux Desktop. We just beat the previous year. It’s like having a new world record every year.

  • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ive been running Linux for close to a decade now and one thing that I’ve noticed is rarely brought up in Linux circles is that Linux Kernel Development is heavily funded by major big tech corpos. Examples include Microsoft, Google, Oracle, and IBM.

    There is a vested corporate interest in keeping Linux well maintained as it is the OS that underpins the vast majority of corporate server architecture and infrastructure.

    I’m not saying Linux development wouldn’t exist without them, but imho, Linux certainly wouldn’t be as ubiquitous as it is today without this corporate backing. Thusly, it is worth noting that in many ways, we Linux users have not escaped corporate influence simply from switching from Windows or MacOS to Linux.

    We’ve maybe lessened it to some degree, but to think we are somehow immune to the misguided mandates from state governments, like the latest recent age verification laws, is misguided.

  • utopiah@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think the “trap” is to believe “we” can “win” once and for all.

    Under capitalism (and I’m not suggesting there are better systems, only highlight a core mechanism) there will always be competition to capture value, both customers and lawmakers who (should) protect them.

    There are countless examples but one of the most obvious on that topic if Microsoft itself with it’s sadly now classic EEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish of which we can admire the comtemporary version with Github. Initially Github was acquired and no changed, nowadays a lot of basic functionalities, e.g. search within a repository are locked behind a login, there are more and more advertisements for Microsoft other products, e.g. CoPilot. That last product itself is questioning the foundation of free software and open source with its license washing process making unclear who did what, breaking provenance, etc.

    The same happened with Google acquiring Android but not locking it down more and more.

    The list could grow longer and longer, overall the point is to showcase a pattern : nothing is just “let” alone to grow on its own. It’s gradually captured and enshittified until there is nothing left but the name of a project because corporations exist only to extract more money. There is no moral, only an imperative for profit or their death.

    So… unfortunately we WILL have to keep on both building AND protecting what’s been built so far with newer and more powerful threats. Microsoft, Google, and all large corporations who advertise themselves as allies of free software and open source MUST be judge on what they actually do, not on what they claim.

    We have to push back and we will always have to. This year and the next.

  • FoundFootFootage78@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think it’s helpful to put some thought into why you use Linux and what you really need from it. I use it primarily for choice, privacy, and to just not be using anything by Microsoft/Apple/Google. Security is nice to have but it’s not the reason I’m using Linux, so handing over my photo ID to a third party I trust is an acceptable if disappointing risk.

    Sure, my OS will be tied to my ID, but as long as my online traffic isn’t that should be fine. If they wanted to monitor my online traffic it would make far more sense to do it at the VPN level instead. Not by having my open source operating system redirect my traffic so that it’s associated with my ID.

    The big risk is social media requiring proof of ID. Bots are becoming more and more common and proof of ID available at the OS level on Windows, Mac, and Android would be very tempting for social media. That’s a different concern though.

    • TheIPW@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think that’s a dangerous assumption to make. If the OS is tied to your physical identity, the ‘VPN’ layer becomes much less of a shield. Once the kernel level is ‘compliant’ with an ID check, the metadata being leaked or even the hardware ID itself makes anonymity a lot harder to maintain.

      You’re right about the social media risk, but the OS is the foundation. If you give up the keys to the house, it doesn’t matter how many extra locks you put on the individual room doors. That ‘disappointing risk’ is exactly how the ‘invisible borders’ start getting built.