10 Jan
2022
10 Jan
'22
2:31 a.m.
On Sunday 09 January 2022 16:51:16 E. Liddell wrote:
On Sun, 9 Jan 2022 18:50:50 -0500
"E. Liddell" <ejlddll(a)warpmail.net> wrote:
Yes, and I am bummed out about this, because I use audacity to create demos &
layered tracks, and mix them. Nothing else in the Linux family quite does it
so well as audacity; one would have to move over to some totally proprietary
software, probably the rotten Apple or maybe Windoze.
I tried some of the forks of audacity, or other software that is supposed to
do the same things, but none of them are as good.
And the really weird thing is, audacity doesn't require a connection to do its
job: it's pretty much wholly offline use, except for updates and such.
There's no reason for these new "developments" except to collect more data,
and to give typical corporate obfuscation in their responses to,
and "clarifications" of, their new practices and polices.
Why somebody cannot just copy the old audacity code, rebrand it with a
different name and icons: this is beyond me. The code was totally GNU/Linux,
free/libre, open source, no barriers to further development. But I am not a
dev, so there could be things that I don't know.
Bill
On Sun, 9 Jan 2022 08:35:55 -0800
William Morder via tde-users <users(a)trinitydesktop.org> wrote:
Scratch this. I was confusing it with another piece of software. Versions
of Audacity from 3.0 do contain some dubious components. Curiously
enough, Gentoo is frozen on 2.4.2.
E. Liddell Maybe you have not heard about the changes in
audacity? It now collects
and shares our data. Even though it is used almost entirely offline,
requires no connection for actual users working at home. Audacity is
now at least non-free in the GNU/Linux sense of the term.
If I remember what I heard about this (quite some time ago), tracking was
included only in some precompiled versions (possibly not even Linux
versions) on the upstream website—if you build your own copy from
source, it should still be clean.