I decided a few months ago to convert all my computers, and hopefully in the near future my mobile internet-connected devices (haven't found a good solution yet), to Linux. My Desktop runs GNU/Linux, my Laptop runs GNU/Linux, my server(s) runs GNU/Linux.
It is becoming increasingly clear to me that a computer user has ended up in a constant war to be allowed to experience and treat his hardware and software as his property. It is telling that it has become a political struggle to be able to repair your own purchased products (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/ and https://repair.eu/ ).
Everything that has to be settled politically is in my opinion a losing battle for citizens and consumers. What is/was wrong with the shoemaker's relationship with his customer? Does that require political interference?
The software world it is increasingly moving towards a model that software is no longer owned by you, but that you “rent” it. If you rent something, there are often conditions attached to it, a condition can be not to copy the software and pass it on to others, there would be something to be said for that.
But what if there is a condition that, for example, you are not allowed to edit nude photos in a photo editing program because the owner doesn't like anything nude, or that you can only edit classical music in a DAW, which is the owner's favorite music, or that you are no longer allowed to edit videos that have a different narrative than the owner's favorite and trusted broadcaster?
When was the last time you read the terms and conditions often attached to the software you use?
But whether Linux has the future remains to be seen ... Microsoft is known for seeing Linux as an enemy and a threat, and an enemy is closer than a friend.
The videos below may clarify things better than I can:
It is up to us, digital world inhabitants and computer service users, to guard and defend our digital freedom. Our computers, the software we use and the network where we are connected is the battlefield.
English (UK) 
Nederlands