Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GNU LibreJS

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 165 posts

Re: GNU LibreJS

#101

Post by Delmania »

connorshea wrote: post #66

At GitLab we've been working with some volunteers at the FSF/GNU Project to improve our score on the Ethical Repo Criteria Evaluation [1]. We've got an issue open about LibreJS [2] specifically, as well as another to fix the other issue preventing us from receiving a B grade. We're also working on resolving some of the A grade criteria, albeit not all of them [3]. It's disheartening to see the FSF demonized here, as…

> This is partly the fault of the FSF having poor communication, of course.

You've highlighted here one of the biggest reasons why the FSF is demonized. The organization has made and continues to make significant contributions to computing. It also sounds like many people who volunteer there also realize the need to compromise in order to move forward.

However, the FSF itself, as a few pointed out belief, is an organization focused on it ideology. While making good software is important for it to advance its agenda, the simple fact is how you say something is just as, if not more than, important as what you are saying. The message comes off just as bad as many fundamentalist religious organizations. That's going to drive away a lot of people, many of whom would agree if the message was marketed better.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#102

Post by aaronbrethorst »

pessimizer wrote: post #83
Delmania wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The FSF has had a massive impact on the world. It has? I'll accept that only for the conception of FLOSS. However, I would then say that the OSI and Linux Foundations have had greater impact. They relied on the RMS's license, but they have actually managed to make inroads, whereas the FSF has stayed in it's corner, shouting. > maybe you just don't agree with them. What I don't agree with is the all or nothing attit…

> It has? I'll accept that only for the conception of FLOSS. However, I would then say that the OSI and Linux Foundations have had greater impact The OSI and Linux Foundations are results of the FSF. The FSF changed the entire face of computing, and the daily lives of every programmer in the world. > What I don't agree with is the all or nothing attitude they have. They are an ethics organization. They are consistent…

> They are an ethics organization

That sounds weirdly like Scientology.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#103

Post by jordigh »

Delmania wrote: post #101
connorshea wrote: post #66

At GitLab we've been working with some volunteers at the FSF/GNU Project to improve our score on the Ethical Repo Criteria Evaluation [1]. We've got an issue open about LibreJS [2] specifically, as well as another to fix the other issue preventing us from receiving a B grade. We're also working on resolving some of the A grade criteria, albeit not all of them [3]. It's disheartening to see the FSF demonized here, as…

> This is partly the fault of the FSF having poor communication, of course. You've highlighted here one of the biggest reasons why the FSF is demonized. The organization has made and continues to make significant contributions to computing. It also sounds like many people who volunteer there also realize the need to compromise in order to move forward. However, the FSF itself, as a few pointed out belief, is an organ…

That better marketing is supposed to be the open source movement. It is debatable whether that has achieved the desired effect or not. It really depends on what the desired effect is.

Also, the FSF does not really "compromise". If you ask them, "hey can you accept just a liiiiitle bit of non-free software", they'll say "no". A compromise can be disastrous to the FSF, in their view, akin to accepting a liiiiitle slavery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html

Re: GNU LibreJS

#104

Post by rpgmaker »

jordigh wrote: post #103
Delmania wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is partly the fault of the FSF having poor communication, of course. You've highlighted here one of the biggest reasons why the FSF is demonized. The organization has made and continues to make significant contributions to computing. It also sounds like many people who volunteer there also realize the need to compromise in order to move forward. However, the FSF itself, as a few pointed out belief, is an organ…

That better marketing is supposed to be the open source movement. It is debatable whether that has achieved the desired effect or not. It really depends on what the desired effect is. Also, the FSF does not really "compromise". If you ask them, "hey can you accept just a liiiiitle bit of non-free software", they'll say "no". A compromise can be disastrous to the FSF, in their view, akin to accepting a liiiiitle slave…

Exactly. The people that say that "they advocate for extreme ideas" probably ignore the FSF's actual mission.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#105

Post by stephenr »

matt4077 wrote: post #55
alfonsodev wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He usually says that we give up freedom in exchange of convenience. For example Facebook is convenient so, who cares about privacy ? I don't use LibreJS or plan to use it either, but I think his points are valid theoretically, implement them in our society is pretty hard but my point is, these libre tools being "impractical" doesn't invalidate the philosophical idea behind. I'd would call him idealist rather than a p…

Let's not forget that he's the impractical idealist who created gcc, bison, emacs, make, the GPL. I'd bet >70% of people here work with a complete or almost-completely free software stack. Thousands of startups were probably made possible by access to tools – not just because they couldn't afford it otherwise, but also because a large part of cs education depends on a 12-year old's ability to clone stuff on github.

> I'd bet >70% of people here work with a complete or almost-completely free software stack.

70% seems quite high if you mean "free" as rms does.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#106

Post by cyphar »

Delmania wrote: post #85
PeCaN wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as the FSF controls Emacs, GCC, and coreutils they're definitely doing a little more than shouting. I mean they're ‘GNU’ in GNU/Linux, which is a bit more widespread¹ than any BSD/Linux type thing. ¹Pretty sure Android/Linux wins in sheer numbers, but GNU/Linux has been historically more important and is deployed in more scenarios than smartphones. But if we consider ‘widespread’ to mean numbers, my statement…

It's Linux, not GNU/Linux. The other problem is people don't consciously associate Emacs or GCC with GNU or the FSF, they're just tools on a machine.

It is GNU/Linux. Claiming that Linux is the most important part of the system is rewriting history (the GNU project started almost a decade before Linux was created).

Re: GNU LibreJS

#107

Post by cyphar »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #102
pessimizer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has? I'll accept that only for the conception of FLOSS. However, I would then say that the OSI and Linux Foundations have had greater impact The OSI and Linux Foundations are results of the FSF. The FSF changed the entire face of computing, and the daily lives of every programmer in the world. > What I don't agree with is the all or nothing attitude they have. They are an ethics organization. They are consistent…

> They are an ethics organization That sounds weirdly like Scientology.

Riiiiiight, because the FSF conducts ritual hazing? Or do they pressure people into giving them money by harassing their whole family? Or because they have created the most successful pyramid scheme in the world? Since the FSF hasn't done any of those things, I'm surprised that someone would liken an organisation trying to give freedom to all users of software as being "oddly like Scientology".

Re: GNU LibreJS

#108

Post by cyphar »

Karunamon wrote: post #92
oneweekwonder wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RMS takes the polar opposite position to proprietary software. Is his viewpoint always practical; maybe, maybe not. But by creating such polar opposite he gives space for a lot more "lessor" free, more practical solutions and options. So he plays a very important guardian kind of role; which a lot of people will chalk up to paranoia.

It's still paranoia at the end of the day. Consistent paranoia, thoughtful paranoia, but still, ultimately, paranoia. I think what bothers people about Stallman (or at least, what bothers me about him, and extrapolating) is that he takes a moralistic approach. Non free software isn't a non optimal thing to be fixed for well-thought-out reasons X, Y, and Z, it is an Evil , and you are Wrong for perpetuating it.

It's not paranoia if proprietary software companies do take advantage of you. And they do.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#109

Post by marssaxman »

Touche wrote: post #73
EuAndreh wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of "doing your computing" is the concept of freedom within the Free Software movement. According to RMS, "freedom is having control over your life". "In a computer system there are just two possibilities: either the user controls the program or the program controls the user". So, "doing your own computing" is "having control over your life", and thus, having freedom.

My point, that I didn't articulate well, is that over time everything is going to be computing . Some day your pants will have a CPU in it. Do you not have control over your life if proprietary pants software cools your legs when it's hot? So it seems that the definition of "what is software" has to constantly be redefined OR the whole Free Software thing becomes more and more a luddite idea.

I draw exactly the opposite conclusion: over time everything is going to be computing, yes, and so the whole Free Software thing becomes more and more a fundamental, essential, political idea.

If the objects and systems surrounding you are controlled by software, then your personal freedom to make your own personal choices is determined by your ability to control the software that controls your environment.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#110

Post by stephen_g »

Spooky23 wrote: post #65
Touche wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The original idea of web servers wasn't to do computing for you, it was to publish information for you to access. Even today this is what most web sites do, and it doesn't pose the SaaSS problem, because accessing someone's published information isn't doing your own computing. The more grey area that exists the harder it is for me to understand what Stallman's beliefs actually are. "doing your own computing", why i…

Because laws around digital intellectual property are profoundly different from physical goods, even when the goods are intellectual property like a book. Consider a trivial example. I bought an iOS SSH app called prompt. The authors subsequently release a new version and removed the old one from the store. It works great on my phone and I decided decided to put it on another device. Guess what? It's not on the App S…

If you log in to the App Store on that device, go to Updates -> Purchased -> Not on this iPhone (or iPad, etc.) you should be able to install it on the new device.
Post reply on HN