You do not actually own your computer! For far too long, the majority of people are limited to the restrictions of devices and software and many are unaware that every user has a right to their freedom. The common user gives up their freedom in order for simple and easy to use software that inevitably collects their user’s data or charges money. Putting your trust into proprietary companies can expose you to risks such as: data brokers profiting over and selling the user’s data, software that utilizes telemetry or spyware, and the limitations imposed on the users such as Digital Rights Management.

Because of this, companies have taken advantage of the user's freedom. "A non-free program is a yoke, an instrument of unjust power." (Richard Stallman, n.d.) Proprietary software is often utilized as a tool from big companies in order to gather information about you and with proprietary software, comes spyware. A society under mass surveillance is not a free society. In order to achieve computer freedom where the user’s data privacy isn’t at risk, one should utilize software that respects the user’s freedom.

One of the prime examples of technology that respects user freedom would be the GNU project. It first started with Dennis Ritchie, who invented the C programming language and developed the UNIX operating system; the issue, however, was that UNIX was proprietary and was originally owned by AT&T’s Bell Labs. Due to its proprietary nature, Richard Stallman, creator of the GNU project, had the desire to create an operating system that prioritized user freedom. The acronym GNU stands for Gnu’s Not Unix and its objectives are to promote the ability for the user to modify, share, and study the source code.

However, GNU was not a complete operating system by itself. GNU can be considered a suite of tools and it is relevant in many things such as the (GCC) GNU C compiler, its own license, GNU General Public License (GPL), GNU Emacs (a text editor), and many more. A key component of every operating system is the kernel, which is the very core of the operating system. Linus Torvalds, creator of the Linux kernel, joined to form a symbiotic link with the GNU technology. This is why it is referred to as GNU/Linux even though people mistakenly label it as just Linux.

The GNU project has ground rules on what makes a software free and what doesn’t. There exists 4 rules which are: The ability to use the application for whatever purpose you like, The ability to examine how the software works and modify it so that it does your computations however you like, The ability to re-distribute copies in order to assist others, and the ability to make copies of your updated versions and share them to others. By doing so, you can ensure that your modifications benefit the whole community. And what is most important is that for those rules to apply, the community must have access to the source code which requires an open source license that respects the user’s freedom.

Free and open source software is available as an alternative to the restrictive software that most people use. In fact, the reason why such an advancement exists in today’s technology is because of the open source license which encourages development through collaboration worldwide. In fact, it is shown that the quality of code in free and open source projects looks to be on par with, if not greater than, that of proprietary software performing the same task:
The authors studied almost 6 million lines of code, tracking several programs over time, using the maintainability index (chosen by the Software Engineering Institute as the most suitable tool for measuring the maintainability of systems). Using their measurements, they concluded that FLOSS “code quality appears to be at least equal and sometimes better than the quality of [closed source software] code implementing the same functionality.” (David A. Wheeler, 2015)

Those working on open source projects are said to perform better or at the same rate of those working on closed source software because when working on open source software, you generally have more motivation to work rather than being in a proprietary environment and being told what to do.

In relation to open source, one recent experience I had which related to the importance of open source technology was when my Physics teacher told my class about a project he and other people worked on in the Naval Surface Warfare Center.

The project was essentially an IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) and he briefly showed us the source code along with the arduino (open source hardware kit) circuit board that was used. An IMU measures acceleration, orientation, and magnetic fields. He first started by showing us the device only working with the acceleration aspect on an accelerometer chart, however it did not measure the acceleration properly when the device was turned in any other way. The other portion of the project, which only measures the orientation of the device through a 3d model, only showed the object’s ability to just rotate around without moving any other direction. Once he merged the two scripts together, when you walked with or rotated the device, it would now accurately measure! This technology is important and we got to see how many different sides such as engineering and programming play into this. Our Physics teacher mentioned how crucial it is to work together to design innovative technology. This is all thanks to open source technology.

Without open source technology, people would only be able to turn to proprietary technology and miss out on important things such as earlier versions of the Geographical Information System (GIS), the Apache web server, Android, and most importantly GNU/Linux. In the absence of open source software, mankind would never be able to reach great innovations because they are constantly held back by having to keep remaking things and putting in unnecessary effort into something that already exists. If all companies were to keep their source code closed, then it keeps the people illiterate in a way. Individuals are not able to study or understand how that proprietary technology is made and this is incredibly wrong and not secure.

When interviewing a web developer at the Free Software Foundation, he described how unethical software patents and proprietary applications can be and why they impede progress into innovative work:
The main reason that I believe in free software and copyleft beyond a matter of freedom is to avoid redundant work. If everyone shared their work, there would be less waste and more innovation. Patents take this a step further and say anyone else that does the same thing will get penalized. If one person finds a more efficient way of doing something, everyone should be encouraged to become more efficient. Instead, we do the exact opposite with patents and discourage efficiency. It does not make sense and patents should be abolished. We should all be working together to make the world a better place. (McMahon, Michael. Personal Interview. 23 November 2021.)

Software patents and patents in general should be banned. They stifle creativity and are harmful to everyone. I believe that the root cause of this is due to the greed of companies as they profit over patents because they can simply be traded amongst others. Due to the existence of proprietary software and patents, we should care more for free and open source applications and projects. However, there is a major difference between free software and open source software. Great examples that show this are Android, a mobile operating system, and Telegram, a messaging service. Both are open source but utilize non-free components and are not so secure because of this; especially since Android versions are mostly developed by Google. There are several examples on how proprietary software limits the user’s creativity, privacy, and freedom because they cannot modify the source code at all.

One powerful method of combating proprietary software, is of course free software. Free, in terms of freedom and not in price. It should be apparent that these proprietary companies control your computer even down to the hardware, with Apple being a top example of a company that takes the most advantage of the users. Such examples include: Planned obsolescence, Using DRM, Disabling Face-ID when replacing the screen, disallowing customization, and most notably, using pentalobe screws. The screws will keep customers from ever getting into their device due to the screw being uncommon. This forces the user to visit Apple’s repair centers and charge them a lot more for something they could have done themselves, this scenario infringes on the customer’s right to repair and takes planned obsolescence to an even bigger risk that could easily be prevented.

One example on how Apple imposes DRM would be the new Mac studio and its limitations on upgrading its storage. An article at The Verge written by Chaim Gartenberg talks exactly about this issue. What occurs is that even when Apple made the SSD possible to be removable, they made it impossible to even get the extra capacity on the software side. Gartenberg writes, “You won’t be able to escape Apple’s heinously expensive SSD upsells for extra storage, even if you are willing to disassemble your entire computer to do so."(Chaim Gartenberg, 2022) This example shows how limiting Apple can be and this gives the audience more reason to alternate to devices that are fully upgradable and modular so you have complete control on your system. Apple's philosophy has gone too far on controlling its users.

Author Mike Peterson at Apple Insider, wrote an article that talks about a lawsuit targeted at Apple devices. The focus of this lawsuit was the noticeable drainage in battery life and lower processing speeds after each iPhone update. "Essentially, the lawsuit alleges that Apple is ostensibly trying to trick users into downloading software updates so that it can slow down iPhones in an attempt to get users to buy new ones."(Mike Peterson, 2021)

Another case involving Apple was investigated by the research team at ZecOps. This case demonstrated that iPhones are vulnerable to malware no matter how much Apple prides itself on “system security,” inherently misleading the customers. The malware would still have access to the user’s camera, even after rebooting the system. This is a great example as to why users should be weary of technology in today’s market.

Similarly, a motorcycle company named Klim is selling airbag vests with different payment methods. One of them is through a proprietary subscription-based option that will block the vest from inflating if the payments do not go through. This means that the user risks their life if they do not give the company their money for wanting basic safety. “When it comes to missing payments and airbag functionality, In&motion's payment notifications and 30-day grace period are reasonable—at some point, if a person stops paying for a service, that service has to be suspended, just like your utilities or a cell phone plan” (Aaron Gordon, 2021)

This path should be avoided, people should not have to risk their freedom and safety because of companies wanting more money. Gordon writes, "What they will likely do now that over the air updates are rapidly spreading to every new vehicle." (Aaron Gordon, 2021) This shows how many companies do not care about your safety and it is important that we negate these practices of supporting greedy companies like these.

Another situation of proprietary companies risking their customer’s safety would be the case of a 33-year-old lady that suffers from a heart condition. In order to nurse her condition, she obtained a pacemaker to strengthen the pulses of her heart. However, she ran into an issue with the pacemaker that started because a bug in the system occurred. "The heart rate limits on her pacemaker had been set incorrectly, so that as she exerted herself, the pacemaker’s default safety mode switched on, cutting her heart rate instantaneously from 160 beats per minute to 80." (K McGowan , 2016) In other words, her pacemaker malfunctioned and showed that the pacemaker’s settings were not fit for her.

She realized that the pacemaker she had could be altered remotely by a total stranger. "She found the technical manual for her pacemaker online, and learned that her device had remote monitoring capabilities that worried her. To a computer security professional, wireless communication was just one more way that the device was vulnerable to malicious tinkering." (K McGowan, 2016) The reason why this is concerning especially to those who have a profound background in computer security is because wireless or smart devices can be at risk of attacks or with hackers having unauthorized access if not properly encrypted. To have an unsecured device controlling your heart is incredibly frightening.

This is truly concerning because these machines are meant to save people's lives but in the hands of proprietary companies, it could end someone's life. "She was mainly alarmed that she’d entrusted her heartbeat to a stranger’s code, which might get updated without her knowledge. I want to know what code is running inside my body,” (K McGowan, 2016) she says.

A similar case that involves unauthorized data sharing would be the topic of third parties, some of which are advertising networks on Facebook and Google, receiving student information through 60% of school apps. The author of the article, Me2B alliance, an alliance which focuses on the respectful treatment of people by technology, researched and wrote an article on school applications selling user data. The root cause of this was due to advertising SDKs which uniquely identify the user and logging data such as their name, location, device ID, and email address. It's important that we protect everyone's private data, especially those of children. Proprietary software enforced by schools are profiting over the students' data.
During my interview with a web developer from the Free Software Foundation, he told me about his experience with free software and how proprietary software can negatively affect students and lower income families:
While studying film, I could not afford the expensive software (Avid) that my school was using so I had to either pirate or find free alternatives. I ended up pirating other software at the time. I recognized that with each passing year, pirating software was more difficult and more prone to malware. After pirating software, you could not trust your computer even if you did it very carefully by sandboxing questionable parts. Looking into alternatives kept leading me to software that was only available for GNU/Linux. I was eventually dual-booting all of my machines and only doing work that needed to be trusted on the GNU/Linux side. Now, I only use proprietary software for playing video games. Later in life as an after-school teacher at the Boys & Girls Club, I saw how harmful pirating software is to lower income families. A child wants some software that is more than they can afford, they find a website that says they have the software, they download it, the software seems to work, the installer additionally installed spyware, the computer no longer works, the family cannot afford to fix it and does not know how to fix it themselves, and the family no longer has access to the device that enabled them to do basic tasks such as applying for jobs and paying bills. I have seen this happen so many times. (McMahon, Michael. Personal Interview. 23 November 2021.)

This story is important to highlight because it is a situation that gives more of a reason for the masses to move to GNU/Linux and seek other alternatives to software. There are so many great alternatives to the software that people mainly use and pay for, and these alternatives should be more acknowledged since they respect the user’s freedom and privacy. Some alternatives include Blender, Krita, Gimp, Kdenlive, Ardour, and so much more. I remember when I was younger, I wanted to create digital art and videos but was always bombarded with Adobe’s suite of proprietary applications and I knew that I was not going to pay for it, especially being around the age of 10.

I grew more interested in the GNU/Linux operating system after hearing about its efficiency as an operating system in forums and imageboards, and I chose to learn even more about it during the pandemic. Now that I am about to go to university to pursue a degree in Computer Science, I find it frustrating how my university offers adobe products for free to students when they could have used free and open source software to begin with. This is wasted money for many students that are not going to use it to begin with but also, since I want to be able to use the GNU/Linux operating system, I would not be able to run it to begin with. Richard Stallman’s concerns about how private software strips humanity of their freedom, not just physically or economically, but also psychologically are becoming more and more accurate with the passage of time especially when we put our trust in large technology companies.

To conclude, the dangers of being credulous towards big tech companies can be the downfall to a free society. As a solution, we should move to more free and decentralized software while prohibiting the use of software patents. Promoting the use of studying source code in computer science classes is also great as well. In order for GNU/Linux to become more popular, there should be a common standard edition that is very user friendly and has better compatibility. A lot of beginners usually complain about there being so many different distributions or the lack of compatibility of some video games and VR support. There should also be laptops and other devices with GNU/Linux already pre-installed that are sold in stores. This is one reason why Windows got popular so this could be a great solution since people mostly stick to what the default is on their devices.