It’s not that paying for things is bad. The problem is that good software is vital to digital artists’ income, and both purchasing and learning that software is a substantial investment. When a company sells or otherwise enshittifies their software, the artist is then put in a very hard place. Open-source software is the only way to combat that unfortunately likely scenario. By all means, please pay for that software if you can afford to. Doing so subsidizes usage for less fortunate people who may be able to better their situation as a direct result of your generosity.

They aren’t though. They’re rectangular at the top and then have cylinders coming out the bottom. I think the heels of his shoes might be square on the bottom.

Making me realize Spongebob isn’t even square.

I think y’all who are upset over the use of “freeware” are out of touch with how language is used in non-expert settings. Like, I’m definitely more tech-savvy than most people and I still didn’t know about “FOSS” as a term until seeing it on Lemmy and looking it up. This just means “free software” to me and doesn’t imply anything negative.

It even says, “the premier free and open source image editing software for multiple platforms” right in the first paragraph, so what’s the issue? Do you think the headline will mislead someone into thinking that GIMP is proprietary?