Skip Navigation
145 comments

  • They're openly disdainful of all things Open Source and OSI, and their software is not Open Source.

    They're a fully for-profit company using consumer rights kind of rhetoric to manipulate people in service to FUTO's own pocketbook. Don't fall for their use of the .org tld or promises to "never abuse customers".

    I've written many times about what assholes FUTO is. I'm fully convinced they're way more part of the problem than part of the solution and they're not to be trusted.

    They've soured me on Rossman. Back when he was doing coverage of things like the court cases around right to repair and tractors and stuff, I watched a few videos of his and thought he was awesome. And then he got involved with FUTO and started billing Grayjay as "Open Source" and I've gotten sufficiently disillusioned with FUTO that I haven't followed Rossman at all. I've got coworkers changing their avatars to Clippy and shit, and I believe their hearts are in the right place, but I can't in good conscience really get behind anything or anyone associated with FUTO.

    Edit: Oh. I honesty didn't even see this OP was a link to an article. Lol. Now I'm very interested to go read that article.

    Edit 2: Shite. I've now read the article. I knew FUTO was assholes in a lot of different ways, but now I know how deeply, completely irredeemable they really are.

  • Son of a removed! I'm so fucking tired of this... Everywhere you look you gotta examine EVERYTHING about a company/group because they might be fascists now...I love Grayjay, it was working so great and I loved the proclaimed mission...I was even trying to get FCast to work since I lost casting ability when I moved to Linux...

    I'm just gonna take a break over here for a bit.

  • I'll take a look at the interviews later tonight.

    A few minor items stuck out as a bit disingenuous to me:

    The donation page that FUTO used includes this explanation: “This offer is for individuals, and may be available to small organizations on request. Commercial entities wishing to be listed as sponsors should inquire by email.” It’s pretty clear that there are special instructions for institutional donors who wish to receive musl’s endorsement as thanks for their contribution.

    It DOES say that, but literally only for the "monthly contribution > 150 section. For a one time grant of 1000 dollars, it doesn't appear to say anything.

    FUTO appears to list efforts it has donated to (and use their name/logo), under the title, "Our sponsored grant programs". Which to me seems more of a semantic argument of whether they can say they've donated to something or not.

    The inclusion of a logo without permission is a good critique, nonetheless. Likewise, if they are lying about donating to some of these projects, that is a problem.

    • The author makes a point of complaining about a video posted to odysee. There are not many great options for posting videos outside of Youtube. That FUTO would post videos to multiple other youtube alternatives, including odysee and peertube does not seem like a surprise to me. Not saying anything about the video though, until I've sat and watched.

    • So, I'll start by saying that I think FUTO may have changed their messaging on their website TODAY Regarding this. They now have three split sections,

      1. what they develop/fund
      2. "sponsored grants" (logos used)
      3. "donations, ~60K" (logos not used)

      That seems more sensible if they have small donations to OSS efforts or individuals who maintain them. It would be excellent for every group listed to review if they or any developer received donations from FUTO and publically decry falsity (as the 3 in the article mentioned)

      Videos:

      I don't know Yarvin, don't know shit about him. But wikipedia entry on him is not heartwarming. It does seem an odd choice to have the two videos posted by FUTO. The one is fairly mundane, but the interview with Rossman is just strange as hell in general, and disconcerting. rossman mostly just seems uncomfortable as heck. And Yarvin seems like an insufferable know it all who wants to explain everything and not give anybody the chance to complete their thought.

      So I'd say endorsing this video is a dark side to FUTO. It should have been easy to stay mostly apolitical and focus on ownership and software. Not conversations about the efficacy of monarchy.

      FUTO manifesto/open source:

      I can at least palate that a group could think that open source is not working. There are successes and failures. Linux is a great success. Android is becoming less so as it is dominated more by vendors & Google. Talent, resources, time is continually sunk into would-be inferior software at companies. Those softwares that have closed source, harvest our data, and ultimately don't have our interests in mind - are often more polished, and attractive to the majority of users out there. One or two people primarily heading an open source repo can often make an awesome competitive software, but perhaps not as polished and with the threat of losing time to maintain it, archive the repo, etc. In that regard, offering optional licenses to pay base wages to attract talent while still letting you verify the code you execute - could still be appealing if successful.

      I believe in FOSS, and will embrace & use it til I die, but I'm willing to entertain they have a difference in opinion on what will most advance our interests.

145 comments