I care about a lot of different kinds of freedom, like freedom of speech and information, not just software. What all kinds of freedom have in common is that people who only advocate them when it's a convenient means to an end do not believe in freedom, and more often than not are enemies of freedom who seek to undermine it.

Political extremists advocate for free speech in order to further their agenda, but when given power happily turn back it against their enemies. Corporations advocate for "open source" and once they have enough free labor and market capture will lock it up to gain control. Publishing companies ransom publicly funded universities for access to their own research. The pharmaceutical industry might as well be the most evil and corrupt in the world, and by god you, nor anyone else is ever going to benefit from any medical innovation, nevertheless get microplastics out of your body until it can get sold back to you, assuming you can even afford it.

If you only care about supporting things as means to your own ends, then that's your deal, but don't act like you're operating on some moral high ground. To me you're just another tool.

I PR'd a sqlx today. What did you do?

Look at this giant tirade you sent at me.

Telling consumers that they aren't allowed to pay for open source is like telling them only programmers are drive its creation it. All you see is mOnEy. Do you think we want to go back to a barter economy?

I have had enough of these conversations. Most of the time those opposed to money being used to produce open source have become so fixated on something some completely unrelated company did and then generalize it to everyone.

I will make you regret this attitude someday. I will break the back of this ideology that has done so much harm to open source by telling consumers they should just suck it up and stop liking Web 2.0 apps while offering them nothing, no means, no sustainable options.