Sure it's a challenge, but it's not necessary for getting people to use the software. One does not require the other, but it is a gateway to being able to do that.

It is self-evident that free software with open licensing and no strings attached is a superior and more beneficial ownership model than closed source paid licensing. That part I don't think anyone needs to be convinced of.

It's just not necessary to make that one of your core beliefs, or add several others, before using the software.

[–] solardirus@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 hours ago

It is self-evident that free software with open licensing and no strings attached is a superior and more beneficial ownership model than closed source paid licensing. That part I don't think anyone needs to be convinced of.

As someone who has both technical and nontechnical people in their family, I call bs. Even if it is partially self-evident (in the fact that you dont need to sign into an account or pay for it), the details, and more importantly the weight, of FOSS is often lost on people.

I've had to watch some of them walk into a rake and bruise their foreheads several times over before really absorbing it.

It's something people need to really read up on before true comprehension. That, or get burnt really really badly.

Ideology? Politics? Tomato tomatoh in my eyes. At the very least, they're nearly inseperable (think: DMCA, copyright law, etc.)