The ongoing closed source tools vs open source tools debate (yawn)

@Oli SB

I fail to see any genuine problem/s from using their tools

A two second web search turned up this on a site called vpnoverview.com;

"Google has an “Abuse Program” in place for some of its services. According to them, this program aims “to curb abuses that threaten our ability to provide these services.”

They also state: “We may review content for violations of these policies and take action.” In other words, it seems Google can just review your documents as they see fit, with the reasoning that this is to protect some greater good.

It is unclear to us how often these reviews happen. However, we can only assume that, if Google wanted to, they can use these reviews to get tremendous amounts of data on their users."

... or from Goggle's own website;

"Google uses the information shared by sites and apps to deliver our services, maintain and improve them, develop new services, measure the effectiveness of advertising, protect against fraud and abuse, and personalize content and ads you see on Google and on our partners’ sites and apps."

In other words, it's part of an elaborate datafarming system that anyone running Goggle JavaScript is subject to.

I gain many valuable advantages over using open source tools which block people from collaborating.

1) How does using a CryptPad or HedgeDoc block people from collaboration in a way GoggleDocs doesn't?

2) The people blocked from collaborating by the use of GoggleDocs are likely to be among the most knowledgable about this particular topic.

@Danyl Strype - I think it's worth trying to understand your rationale here as the statement:

"[using G Docs] is equivalent to saying, 'in the interests of pragmatism, I chose McDonalds as the caterers for this organic farming meeting" feels like conspiracy theory to me.

Can you explain how you see using G Docs as detrimental?

I understand Alphabet inc may not have our personal interests at heart, but I fail to see any genuine problem/s from using their tools - and in fact, I gain many valuable advantages over using open source tools which block people from collaborating.

@Oli SB

in the interests of pragmatism I went with a G Doc...

This is equivalent to saying, 'in the interests of pragmatism, I chose McDonalds as the caterers for this organic farming meeting. Why is it any less pragmatic to use the flagship CryptPad instance, for example?

I hope you can bring yourself to collaborate that way? (Interesting that you do swallow your ethics if being paid as a consultant!) ;)

I didn't say I would expose myself to Goggle spy scripts even if I was getting paid. But as I said, I definitely won't be doing it for unpaid consultancy. Sorry.

@Danyl Strype Hi Danny - thanks for you r comment. I knew someone would say this!! (have we ever managed to collaborate without having the "which tool should we use" debate!?!?!) but, in the interests of pragmatism I went with a G Doc...

I'm afraid pasting the current words into a static field here, which doesn't enable anyone to comment inline is not a practical way to manage a constantly evolving working Doc. As things are changing and hence the copy and pate would soon get out of date...

I hope you can bring yourself to collaborate that way? (Interesting that you do swallow your ethics if being paid as a consultant!) ;)

@Graham the day Nextcloud facilitates easy sharing, formatting, multiple editors and inline commenting (on specific sections of text) with easily resolvable and manageable threads of comments from anonymous and/or authenticated users I will happily make the switch... until then I prefer utility, usability and practicality. The doc is open so anyone can read it and comment without needing a login. I'm a big fan of open source but tend to lean towards usability rather than allowing morals and ethics to get in the way of collaboration...

Or maybe even sticl the doc into a Nextcloud instance.

@Oli SB I'd certainly have thoughts on the potential of federated tools to benefit community groups and I'd love to share them. But I can't even read this document without allowing one of the world's biggest corporate datafarmers to run proprietary JavaScript in my browser. I'm just not willing to do that any more, unless I'm being paid as a consultant.

Can I suggest just copy'n'pasting your initial discussion document into the context box, which currently only says "Seeking feedback and collaborators"? That way we can give feedback without leaving this thread, and you can incorporate whatever you find useful back into your living document.