> The Linux kernel is 100% open-source. Yet it's growing user-hostile features --- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26285683 --- and guess what all the locked-down Android phones run...?

That feature is optional, and depends on proprietary, closed-source TPM firmware. You just proved my point– it has to be 100% open-source to respect your freedom.

> Open-source doesn't mean anything for freedom if all you can do is look, because you don't have the signing keys and such to modify what you want. It just means they get to show you exactly how they put the noose on you, that's all.

I agree. That's why I prefer the term freedom-respecting software. Under the free software definition, that is no longer FLOSS, because users do not have the right to modify the software.

> and guess what all the locked-down Android phones run...?

Alas, Linux is not under GPLv3, which ensures that users have an equal right to modify their software.

> Firefox is also chock-full of "telemetry" and it's 100% open-source. That one you do get to modify, but it's still a bloody bastard to strip it all out and recompile to your liking.

Get a prebuilt build of LibreWolf: https://librewolf-community.gitlab.io/

That it's fully open-source checks Mozilla's power to do abusive things. Telemetry can be disabled in Firefox settings.

I've used both of your examples to advance my point further. 100.0% open-source = freedom-respecting and non-abusive.