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

161–165 of 165 posts

Re: GNU LibreJS

#161

Post by cyphar »

Karunamon wrote: post #160
cyphar wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read what I said? I never mentioned security. More secure software is not the goal of free software. The goal is for users to have freedom when using their computers. And it is a simple fact that proprietary software puts you in a position where you can be taken advantage of by the software developer and free software doesn't (you can always pay a developer to fix the code without needing to ask the original…

> And it is a simple fact that proprietary software puts you in a position where you can be taken advantage of by the software developer and free software doesn't Two (non security, as you mentioned, even though it's brought up continually by apologists) examples off the top of my head: * FileZilla, a GPLed FTP client, had malware added to its installer by Sourceforge at the request of its developers. * Ubuntu, an op…

In both of those cases, people either created forks or otherwise fixed the software. I recall several scripts people wrote to undo the Ubuntu mishap -- and I'm fairly sure someone made a fork of Ubuntu just to make a point. The point is not that a developer can't do something bad, the developer can't put you in a position where you can't do anything about it. That's what I mean by "take advantage". It's not really taking advantage of a person if they can fix it at any point.

Aside: I don't think that security is a good argument for free software, because it's certainly possible to have secure proprietary software (in theory at least). But even if the software is secure, you can't prove that's the case or fix bugs by yourself or release the fixes to everyone.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#162

Post by mankash666 »

icebraining wrote: post #151
mankash666 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly a hyperbole to use the said term. Nonetheless, from RMS' recent commentaries, it does seem like for software, he wants to replace capitalism with socialism. Like cited in the Slashdot link in my previous comment, he's gone so far as to demonize free software that isn't GPL.

Nonetheless, from RMS' recent commentaries, it does seem like for software, he wants to replace capitalism with socialism. Nonsense. There's nothing "socialist" about Free Software. Plenty of capitalistic companies make their money by using and writing FOSS. Like cited in the Slashdot link in my previous comment, he's gone so far as to demonize free software that isn't GPL. All he's doing is asking people to refrain…

"All he's doing is asking people to refrain from accepting a patch before he can talk to someone about it. What demonization?" - At this point I'm convinced that you're biased and wouldn't provide objective feedback. No point furthering this discussion.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#163

Post by justinlardinois »

Morgawr wrote: post #39
justinlardinois wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that you're likely to get a lot of false negatives. For your browser to remain usable after installing this, you'll pretty much have to add every new site you visit to your whitelist. This convention will only work if everyone follows it. And very few will because it's aiming to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

>This convention will only work if everyone follows it. Just like original FOSS licenses started out then? What's the problem? People who care will start to follow it and if it turns out to be a good idea (like how the original GPL & similar licenses came to being into a mostly proprietary licensed world) people will follow.

No, not really. I was talking about network effects (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect), in that this tool for detecting free Javascript is only useful if all (or at least most) of the free Javascript on the web is marked as such.

When you apply a license to a piece of software, it's immediately useful for that particular piece of software. You don't need an entire ecosystem of free software for one free program to be useful.

Re: GNU LibreJS

#164

Post by jeena »

jordigh wrote: post #135
jeena wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true, because every free software is open source, but not every open source software is free. (this is me oversimplifying to make a point)

What example do you have in mind of open source software that is not free software? I suspect you might have a (very common) misunderstanding of what each term means.

From http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.h...

"Under pressure from the movie and record companies, software for individuals to use is increasingly designed specifically to restrict them. This malicious feature....is the antithesis in spirit of the freedom that free software aims to provide. And not just in spirit: since the goal of DRM is to trample your freedom, DRM developers try to make it hard, impossible, or even illegal for you to change the software that implements the DRM.

Yet some open source supporters have proposed “open source DRM” software. Their idea is that, by publishing the source code of programs designed to restrict your access to encrypted media and by allowing others to change it, they will produce more powerful and reliable software for restricting users like you. The software would then be delivered to you in devices that do not allow you to change it.

This software might be open source and use the open source development model, but it won't be free software since it won't respect the freedom of the users that actually run it."

Re: GNU LibreJS

#165

Post by jjawssd »

cyphar wrote: post #134
pessimizer wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honesty, Linus has been more important than Linux. Linux was just a student's side project. Linus is a force.

But a force for what? The FSF is a force for freedom and good. Linus has questionable views on software freedom.

Linus is a force for marketing GNU tools
Post reply on HN