Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement • Hacker News Board

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#561

Post by okareaman » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:32 PM UTC

thinkingemote wrote: post #309

okareaman wrote: post #169

From what I can tell, RMS asserts we have the right to inspect the source code of the software that runs on our machines. What is the source of this right? Is it a universal human right? A self-evident inalienable right? Did RMS want to hack a printer one day and found he couldn't so he made up a right for us? Why are people who ship closed software evil? For someone who goes around moralizing and judging others, RMS…

you could have left out the last half of your paragraph and gotten a much better discussion. Many people really don't know what Freedom actually means. The rights and origin of Freedom with computing should be understood. Is it a natural common law extension of property, for example? But that last half was just highlighting that you are not after a discussion or answers to your questions, and that it was just rehashi…

I realized that later after my comment went into negative point territory, but couldn't edit it. I apologize for attacking the character of RMS because I don't know him. What I am reacting against is being told I am wrong for running proprietary software, no matter who says it.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#562

Post by okareaman » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:34 PM UTC

passivate wrote: post #250

okareaman wrote: post #169

From what I can tell, RMS asserts we have the right to inspect the source code of the software that runs on our machines. What is the source of this right? Is it a universal human right? A self-evident inalienable right? Did RMS want to hack a printer one day and found he couldn't so he made up a right for us? Why are people who ship closed software evil? For someone who goes around moralizing and judging others, RMS…

I don't know if you know this - all rights are made up. To the extent that we can convince others to adopt/agree to them, they can be considered universal, but otherwise they don't mean anything. It remains to be shown, but I would imagine plenty of people would be on-board with having the right to inspect inner workings of things they purchase - including firmware/software as most products have become heavily or com…

> I respect anyone willing to fight for their beliefs

So do I, but I disagree with moral judgement and shame being used as a weapon in that fight. I look forward to the day when RMS and his acolytes make a more convincing case and provide an alternative system that would allow us to inspect all source code, which I think is a goal to strive for.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#563

Post by okareaman » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

betwixthewires wrote: post #207

okareaman wrote: post #169

From what I can tell, RMS asserts we have the right to inspect the source code of the software that runs on our machines. What is the source of this right? Is it a universal human right? A self-evident inalienable right? Did RMS want to hack a printer one day and found he couldn't so he made up a right for us? Why are people who ship closed software evil? For someone who goes around moralizing and judging others, RMS…

Well, the reasoning is that the machine is our property, our resources are used to run it, so we should be able to decide what runs on it. We can, of course, waive that right on a per case basis and run proprietary software, but we shouldn't, or at least we should be wary of it and avoid normalizing it. If you decide you will not run any software on your machine who's source is unavailable to you, that is your right.…

Yes and if RMS doesn't like Apple Computers he doesn't have to use them. It's not his business if I decide Apple Computers are acceptable to me.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#564

Post by BashiBazouk » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #515

BashiBazouk wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not anymore than any other technology he disparages: it's proprietary and steals your information, which is all likely true. But if he is using open source free software as a replacement, shouldn't he have tested and fixed said software? Isn't that his entire shtick? High minded ideals are great and all but at the end of the day the software needs to work and on that day it did not...

> But if he is using open source free software as a replacement, shouldn't he have tested and fixed said software? You can’t put the onus on him to personally write and fix all software he uses. He has written quite large amounts of software, so I’d say he’s done more than his share. He is still, if only tangentially, involved in some software, and you could perhaps reasonably criticize him if he were using, say, Ema…

Why do so many people feel the need to make excuses for him? No, I don't think the onus is on him to personally fix all software he uses, but I do think making sure that his big "The state of the Free Software movement" talk should be a tiny bit more slick and tested than a rushed college freshmen tech demo from the early 90's which is about where I would put the whole thing I watched then mostly listened to...

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#565

Post by jrm4 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:36 PM UTC

Gollapalli wrote: post #136

thebigman433 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon Musk is buying Twitter to increase his wealth, mindshare, and influence. He does not actually care about free speech, and its naïve to think that he is buying the platform for "altruistic" reasons. He is also the lead of a company that has seemingly fired an employee for posting about their publicly available features, and is also facing one of the biggest labor lawsuits ever in the state of California. He is a…

He built huge amounts of wealth by building rocket ships and electric cars because he's worried about the earth becoming uninhabitable and thinks we need to be an interplanetary civilization. This is a dude who's dedicated his entire life to (in his mind) save all of humanity from certain doom. I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that it's all just exploitation.

I don't believe this.

I believe he built huge amounts of wealth because he's something like "genetically predisposed to"; he's not different from other billionaires, who I think have something like a mental defect that encourages them to rack up their score as high as possible.

It's just that he has more interesting hobbies (Space, EV, whatever) than the rest of them; but for any move he makes, first ask -- does this look like part of a play to just gain more money? And 9 times out of 10 the answer is yes.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#566

Post by causality0 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:39 PM UTC

worik wrote: post #89

causality0 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

all Stallman is saying, is that this is bad for us. That is just plain not true. If it were, that would be fantastic. Unfortunately that's only part of Stallman's message, and a good portion of the rest of it is either simply unworkable or batshit insane. To quote David Schlesinger after RMS got up on stage and talked about how "women who have not been introduced to emacs are emacs virgins and 'relieving them of thei…

I have paid a lot of attention to RMS over the years. I took him out to dinner once, my wife and I, and had a lovely evening talking mostly about his childhood experiences. He was extremely respectful to the staff at the restaurant I recall. Going out of his way to compliment them on the food. That at some point he said: "women who have not been introduced to emacs...sacred duty of all members of the church of emacs"…

I do think it is important to play nice in politics. So if you have criticisms of RMS' stand on software, make them.

That's the issue. Stallman's technical contributions and early political contributions were both foundational and heroic. That does not negate the fact that for the better part of two decades he's been a constant embarrassment that continuously degrades the movement in the eyes of anyone who hasn't developed a tolerance for him. Evangelizing free software was comparatively easy in the days when peoples' reaction to his name was "Haha, that guy who ate stuff off his foot on stage? Wild." It's gotten considerably harder now that the reaction is "wait, the guy who wrote those pedophile emails and harasses women at conferences?"

I'm tired of trying to advocate for free software when just the name "Free Software Foundation" is a conversational liability.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#567

Post by jrm4 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:39 PM UTC

giantrobot wrote: post #154

jrm4 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, this is why I relatedly believe the Linux Desktop is actually a ridiculously huge success. I don't compare it by percentage of market share, I compare it do "how garbage would desktops be if Linux wasn't around to provide useful pressure?"

> I compare it do "how garbage would desktops be if Linux wasn't around to provide useful pressure?" In what world does Linux on the desktop provide "useful pressure" to anyone? The only Linux "desktop" that has provided any pressure on the desktop to Microsoft and Apple is ChromeOS. ChromeOS is decidedly not a "Linux desktop". If Google flipped ChromeOS to Fuchsia tomorrow it would provide the same pressure with zer…

Go count how many Windows desktop features were widely used on Linux first.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#568

Post by jrm4 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:43 PM UTC

chx wrote: post #144

jrm4 wrote: post #36

I really think far too many people are missing why Stallman and the FSF are so valuable. It's not that everyone should behave exactly like them; it's that they provide a useful extreme endpoint such that there can exist a reasonable "Overton Window" of Free/Open Source/ Whatever Software. I 100% support what they do and preach knowing FULL well I will likely never 100% do as they recommend. That's not actually a big…

And I think far too many people are missing why Stallman should be, to use a popular term, cancelled. Toxic people shouldn't have a voice because then all sorts of people will decide to not get involved in a community where such people can be leaders. Trust me in this, I should know :(

I do not trust you, and I also should know.

"Cancelled" and "toxic" are vague terms that we really need to stop using, please use the more precise words you mean. Has he broken the law or been unforgivably abusive, etc? If so, say that. If not, stop throwing accusations.

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#569

Post by jrm4 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:44 PM UTC

charcircuit wrote: post #133

jrm4 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering Stallman's Free Software predates "Open Source" I'm not sure it actually would, or if it did, it would likely be less free. And again, helpful to whom? Yes. Stallman's no diplomat or ambassador, but that's not the job he's trying to do.

It's not like permissive licenses are a crazy hard concept to figure out. It's not like Fermat's last theorem where there is a large challenge in discovering a proof. Sure it may not be labelled as "Open Source", but there would be something similar. Also I believe there is a good chance that software would be more free due to copyleft licenses potentially not gaining momentum.

They're not hard, and I think Stallman et al figured them out way long ago, and they are why they created free software. Roughly, "permissive" ends up meaning "bad faith actors are permitted to take advantage of others' spirit of sharing."

Re: Richard Stallman – The state of the Free Software movement

#570

Post by jrm4 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:47 PM UTC

KennyBlanken wrote: post #110

starwind wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they provide a useful extreme endpoint such that there can exist a reasonable "Overton Window" of Free/Open Source/ Whatever Software Or, ya know, they could just stake out reasonable, nuanced positions that organizations could adopt or at least be a starting point for further developments

It's pretty hilarious seeing people suggesting that someone fundamentally unable to engage in empathy, perspective-taking, or second-order strategizing...is actually making some big-brain play to hold down the extremist end so that more moderate voices and exist. Stallman is infamous for his inability to recognize viewpoints other than his own as having worth or validity. He is literally incapable of such a big-brain…

No. I also don't think Buddhist monks are strategizing a big-brain play to convert people to Buddhism. It's more hilarious to see people not getting the idea that this is just his thing and I admire it, even if I ain't doing it.