I up-voted this because I agree that large institutions should have the resources to not use Zoom/Meetings/etc. and should use open standards instead.

That said, I think it is fine for individuals to use one of the proprietary video platforms to talk with their parents, etc. I think organizations should be held to higher standards than individuals who are juggling getting work done, maintaining family and friends, etc.

I dropped my paid membership to the FSF a few years ago because in my own lifestyle I rely on closed platforms like Apple Watch + AirPods, etc. to enhance my life. I release software under open source licenses (I favor dual LGPL and Apache 2 licensing) and the books I write, even though I charge for them, are released under a Creative Commons license so (with some restrictions) people can share them.

Anyway, I find it a tricky balance between software and information freedom vs. friction free life.

The Orwellian statement "Freedom is Slavery" applies to the EFF and FSF more than any domain I've seen.

Like it or not, the Apple 1984 ad was all about how computers oppress people by exposing their innards: talk to business people and they will say you "get your hands dirty" if you spend any time reconciling the contradictory mess of desires people have with a computer's ability to show you the logical outcome of that contradictory opinion. In the U.S. they will give that job to an Indian, and the Indian would give the job to a Dahlit if they let Dahlits get an education enough to do it.

People don't remember that the Mac was the first computer that didn't come with BASIC or some other tool that would let you program it. We learned the hard way in the next 30 years that the computer programs you whether or not you can program it...

So when people like the "FSF" describe what they think of as "Freedom", most people think that is being a slave to the transistor and mathematics. What the "FSF" describes as "Slavery" is perceived by neurotypicals as "Freedom to let somebody else Slave on your behalf"