Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs • Hacker News Board

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#111

Post by akuzi » Fri, Oct 07, 2011, 11:04 PM UTC

pork wrote: post #99

akuzi wrote: post #22

It's worth remembering that even Stallman himself admits he is mildly autistic. Autism is often characterized by black and white thinking and lack of empathy towards others - both of which are displayed to excess in his comment.

This is fascinating and very relevant -- do you have a source?

http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch03.html

From end-note 2. "Stallman considers himself afflicted, to some degree, by autism: a condition that, he says, makes it difficult for him to interact with people."

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#112

Post by 2muchcoffeeman » Fri, Oct 07, 2011, 11:20 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #80

jsavimbi wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because people have feelings.

Why should it hurt anybodies feelings to point out that Steve Jobs wasn't all fairy dust and benevolence? This need to whitewash people when they die is truly bizarre.

We're not trying to whitewash it. It's just empathy. Would it have been so bad to wait a week or 2 after the funeral?

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#113

Post by marshray » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:36 AM UTC

T-hawk wrote: post #110

marshray wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's a false dichotomy. There's nothing inherent about usability that requires jailed computing. I submit two examples: 1. The Apple Mac was unquestioningly a pioneer in computer usability. Yet it didn't need a kernel that refused to run apps that weren't "approved" with a cryptographic signature from some central authority. (Yes the original Mac case was closed but there was a high voltage monitor in there and i…

> There's nothing inherent about usability that requires jailed computing. Not a requirement, but there is a correlation. Programming for an unjailed ecosystem takes more effort to support the vastly wider environments on the devices. Classic example (in an industry largely orthogonal to Apple, to factor Apple out of the discussion): game programming for a PC versus a console. The PC game company has to support a mil…

Yes, this was always the argument given in support of the monopoly Microsoft Windows used to have on commodity computer operating systems. Some proposed that having only one platform choice was more economically efficient for the industry as a whole. I don't think Apple was really on board with this idea back then.

I do not think that requiring all computers have only one display resolution for the convenience of software developers ends up being a winning strategy in the long run. It may be a winning strategy for Apple's business of course, at least until Apple decides to do an iPad or a "retina display" or for whatever other reason decides that a different form factor is in their own interest.

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#114

Post by marshray » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 12:43 AM UTC

srdev wrote: post #106

RexRollman wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to computing, it seems to me that most people would rather have a pretty prison than freedom.

A closed computing environment isn't a prison. I have the choice of using an iPad or something more open. If I choose an iPad and later wish for something more open, then I can replace it with a more open tablet or a laptop. I find the implication that I "prefer a prison to freedom" disingenuous and off-putting.

OK, so it's only a prison to the extent you use it.

Better not let your important data get locked up in any non-portable formats though. A literal prison is far easier to release someone from.

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#115

Post by thomasgerbe » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 2:13 AM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #89

Toady wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equating the iPhone to a "jail" is goofy political hyperbole. Normal people don't even view software in that context. It's just a piece of hardware and software they choose to use or not use. Stallman represents the strain of computer nerds who want to view their hobby as the bold movement of a freedom fighter. They are out-of-touch and don't understand what normal people think and feel. They want their nerd playgrou…

It's hard for me to say how representative my non-techie friends are, but nearly all have some understanding that the App Store is tightly controlled by Apple, and not always in ways they agree with (apps being banned or not approved makes mainstream news semi-regularly). They accept it because they still like the iPhone more than the alternatives, but I wouldn't say that they are 100% happy with the way the App Stor…

Well as long as we're giving anecdotes, nearly all of my friends who have iPhones are happy that the Apple Stores has that quality control.

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#116

Post by yesreally » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 3:15 AM UTC

pushingbits wrote: post #23

yesreally wrote: post #15

For those that are kneejerkingly chastising Stallman, understand his point of view. OS X and iOS are not free, and Apple led by Jobs changed the way that people thought about installing Applications on desktop operating systems as something that requires manufacturer approval (App Store), which led the way for others like Intel to make AppUp, etc. This restricts what the user has access to install is more of a setbac…

Makes me wonder whether a free software Steve Jobs (equivalent) would be possible. Maybe you need to be a powerful autocrat to generate enough directed force to dent the world? It certainly seems like the divide between computer consumers and computer developers is getting ever wider. One side has their computer experience made ever simpler, whereas the other has to deal with ever more complexity (cf. Ryan Dahl rant)…

The ultimate revolution is to provide an operating system and applications simple enough that anyone could use them. Programming on the other hand should be easy and fun- simple doesn't have to play into it; something can be complex and still fun, and fun is what keeps people coming back.

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#117

Post by srdev » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 4:26 AM UTC

marshray wrote: post #114

srdev wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A closed computing environment isn't a prison. I have the choice of using an iPad or something more open. If I choose an iPad and later wish for something more open, then I can replace it with a more open tablet or a laptop. I find the implication that I "prefer a prison to freedom" disingenuous and off-putting.

OK, so it's only a prison to the extent you use it. Better not let your important data get locked up in any non-portable formats though. A literal prison is far easier to release someone from.

It's not a prison even if you do use it. The defining characteristic of a prison is that you cannot leave it. I can stop using an iPad any time I wish.

And yes, important data should not be locked in non-portable formats. At the same time, I've never found myself in a situation where I simply could not extract important data from a non-portable format into a more portable one.

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#118

Post by flarg » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 11:04 AM UTC

Toady wrote: post #73

flarg wrote: post #33

Stallman is consistent and vastly intelligent and whilst his comments can be seen as insensitive he is quite correct that Steve Jobs did suppress software freedom. We don't go to Stallman for sensitivity (you're a dolt if you do), we go to him for the truth, no matter how painful. We can all do with that sometimes - http://www.skepticblog.org/2011/10/06/steve-jobs-succumbs-to...

Equating the iPhone to a "jail" is goofy political hyperbole. Normal people don't even view software in that context. It's just a piece of hardware and software they choose to use or not use. Stallman represents the strain of computer nerds who want to view their hobby as the bold movement of a freedom fighter. They are out-of-touch and don't understand what normal people think and feel. They want their nerd playgrou…

But you paraphrase me without really 'getting it' :(

Stallman represents what a lot of people would think if they really though about software freedom - it is in fact the only common sense approach. Computer software runs the world (along with JP Morgan ;) so it is very important that is adheres to these common sense, though rather hard-to-think-about ideals.

Maybe the iPhone will ultimately be inconsequential in historical terms, but it should adhere to the same principles; everything should.

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#119

Post by flarg » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 3:52 PM UTC

flarg wrote: post #118

Toady wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equating the iPhone to a "jail" is goofy political hyperbole. Normal people don't even view software in that context. It's just a piece of hardware and software they choose to use or not use. Stallman represents the strain of computer nerds who want to view their hobby as the bold movement of a freedom fighter. They are out-of-touch and don't understand what normal people think and feel. They want their nerd playgrou…

But you paraphrase me without really 'getting it' :( Stallman represents what a lot of people would think if they really though about software freedom - it is in fact the only common sense approach. Computer software runs the world (along with JP Morgan ;) so it is very important that is adheres to these common sense, though rather hard-to-think-about ideals. Maybe the iPhone will ultimately be inconsequential in his…

Sorry - I meant 'thought' and not 'though'

Re: Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs

#120

Post by steviesteveo65 » Sat, Oct 08, 2011, 7:18 PM UTC

ramanujan wrote: post #31

yesreally wrote: post #15

For those that are kneejerkingly chastising Stallman, understand his point of view. OS X and iOS are not free, and Apple led by Jobs changed the way that people thought about installing Applications on desktop operating systems as something that requires manufacturer approval (App Store), which led the way for others like Intel to make AppUp, etc. This restricts what the user has access to install is more of a setbac…

Look, all respect to Stallman for writing Emacs and the GNU toolchain. Among technologists he's clearly one of the few figures on par with Jobs. Indeed, he's also personally a difficult figure and a bit of a totalitarian about his craft, much like Jobs himself. [Though I don't think Jobs would ever publicly emit something like Stallman's "eulogy".] Where Stallman falls short is in supposing that open, hackable system…

In this situation it's not as much a question of personal ideology as it is basic interpersonal skills. You generally avoid telling the world you're happy someone's gone immediately following their death. It's completely arbitrary, and no one's going to throw you in jail if you do it but it's just one of these things.

How you think software should be developed doesn't really come into at this level. It's just a question of how you deal with people and that's where Stallman's fallen short here.