Richard Stallman Was Right All Along • Hacker News Board

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#31

Post by clebio » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

dpkendal wrote: post #25

paulhauggis wrote: post #12

Take note who signed it.

A Nobel Peace Prize winner? The man who promised to close down Guantanamo Bay and has still yet to manage to do so? Whose election campaign promised "Change" yet whose only significant move in that way so far, in office for 3 years, is the repeal of DADT? The man who I (along with so many liberals) want desperately to believe in, but who just makes it too hard for us? Yes, that man.

Interesting take. I read the parent comment to mean, 'note who signed the OSnews article', which is Thom Holwerda, whose name I'm sorry to admit I'm unfamiliar with.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#32

Post by rbanffy » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

SaintSal wrote: post #30

"His only computer is a Lemote Yeelong netbook, because it's the only computer which uses only Free software - no firmware blobs, no proprietary BIOS; it's all Free." Interesting that it's made in China. I'm trying to reconcile the implications of that... http://www.lemote.com/en/products/Notebook/2010/0310/112.htm...

Not surprising. Everything is made in China these days. ;-)

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#33

Post by eternalban » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #6

wycats wrote: post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

Because tyranny has never been delivered by leaders speaking soothing reassurances.

The apparent mindset that the grandparent manifests is antithetical to the very principles that USA is founded upon. This is not a nation of personality cults; our system is based on checks and balances. (That was the whole point!)

The fact that he signed it and issued that anti-American --- see above -- statement makes the act even more repugnant.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#34

Post by kevinalexbrown » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:32 PM UTC

One problem with software you don't have control over is that anything is subpoenable. We don't have to wait for the government to impose their own tracking mechanisms, because as soon as they get probable cause, that's it (which includes missing a finger, having >7 days food supply at home, if you believe Rand Paul anyway). Or just look up Google's government transparency report[1]. When you don't have control over your data, it's just a warrant/polite request away from the government.

Not all government access to private data is bad. After all, it's needed to stop things like child prostitution/pornography rings, and yeah, terrorism. But what I liked so much about this article was putting the slippery slope into perspective. It's easy enough to quote the transparency report, "The number of user data requests we received increased by 29% compared to the previous reporting period." and go "well - just 29%" but that's one year. I'll make the surprising bet it doesn't go down. Compare to three decades ago, and a lot of what's happening now seemed draconian then.

[1] http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#35

Post by paulhauggis » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:32 PM UTC

dpkendal wrote: post #25

paulhauggis wrote: post #12

Take note who signed it.

A Nobel Peace Prize winner? The man who promised to close down Guantanamo Bay and has still yet to manage to do so? Whose election campaign promised "Change" yet whose only significant move in that way so far, in office for 3 years, is the repeal of DADT? The man who I (along with so many liberals) want desperately to believe in, but who just makes it too hard for us? Yes, that man.

This is exactly who I mean. People seem to have short memories.

"A Nobel Peace Prize winner?"

For doing what exactly? This actually makes me question the entire Nobel Peace Prize program.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#36

Post by rbanffy » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:32 PM UTC

wycats wrote: post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

You may trust him, but, being signed into law, such provisions requires you to trust each and every successor of his until a contrary provision becomes law.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#37

Post by zotz » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:36 PM UTC

wycats wrote: post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

> It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement...

He originally promised not to sign it at all.

Obama has no cred.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#38

Post by muhfuhkuh » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:36 PM UTC

dpkendal wrote: post #25

paulhauggis wrote: post #12

Take note who signed it.

A Nobel Peace Prize winner? The man who promised to close down Guantanamo Bay and has still yet to manage to do so? Whose election campaign promised "Change" yet whose only significant move in that way so far, in office for 3 years, is the repeal of DADT? The man who I (along with so many liberals) want desperately to believe in, but who just makes it too hard for us? Yes, that man.

The guy who also oversaw an economy that returned 401Ks to at least sane levels from -40% in 2007-8; the guy who actually said and then did get bin Laden; the guy who pushed for and signed a law that is as close to healthcare reform as anyone has gotten since Medicare was enacted almost 50 years ago; the guy who pulled us out of Iraq when the Republican candidate in 2008 said we should be there for 100 more years; the guy who has kept or compromised on over 200 campaign and administration promises?

You can talk of "change" like it's some concrete label you can bend to whatever cares you want, but remember you voted for a President, not a King.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#39

Post by aamar » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:36 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #29

aamar wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to note that Obama makes clear in both his campaign assertion and his official memo that he does not consider signing statements to be problematic in and of themselves. Rather, he argues, their use should be limited in scope and reach, clearly stating that President Bush went overboard. From Politifact's extensive discussion: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr... Politifact co…

Politifact isn't exactly the beacon of truth it purports to be either: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politifact - the SNL business was particularly odd

I agree that they've made errors, but they seem deserving of their fairly good reputation (not as high as, say, NYT).

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#40

Post by jonhendry » Mon, Jan 02, 2012, 9:39 PM UTC

jasonallen wrote: post #17

Agreed - Stallman was right all along. What's working against Stallman though is that his doomsday predictions are being delivered in piecemeal fashion. Each slight erosion doesn't seem too bad by itself. Only in retrospect does the magnitude of the problem reveal itself. Governments and corporations have evolved processes to change laws in such effective manners as to evade most human observation. tldr; No one tells…

I think the main flaw is that, no matter how popular GPL software becomes, it doesn't stop the government from saying "your machines need to run this closed-source software in order to be used or sold in this country".