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

Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

osnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 236 posts

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#141

Post by Joakal »

pg wrote: post #130

This article doesn't seem to give any examples of specific predictions Stallman made that have turned out to be correct. All the article seems to be saying is that Stallman seemed paranoid, and present events seem to justify paranoia. (Incidentally, people always feel that.) Can anyone give some examples of specific predictions Stallman made that seemed surprising at the time, but that have come true? I'm not saying…

"Right to read" http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/03/stallmans-the-right-to-read-... (Related: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20069648-264/richard-stall... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Read)

Here's a lot more in the articles: http://stallman.org/#politics

Edit: IFSO: Richard Stallman: The Dangers of Software Patents; 2004-05-24 (transcript) http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html

Copyright and Globalization in the Age of Computer Networks - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF) https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.h...

2nd edit: You are a Terrorist (Du bist Terrorist) German, English Subtitles - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdIA0jeW-24

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#143

Post by Joakal »

kevinalexbrown wrote: post #34

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…

There's no control over what is bought for customers, or if they're nice, they allow opening it up but there's an automatic gag order. Thanks to anti-circumvention laws among others. Part of the powerful copyright lobby.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#144

Post by marquis »

jonhendry wrote: post #103
marquis wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One example: the free software movement should lead to a better DNS system where governments and corporations will have no control over how and where we access information online. I continue to support the EFF and groups like it in order to have funds directed into research on critical issues like this. Would you prefer a GPL DNS or proprietary?

I don't really see how GPL enters into it, as the problems are with laws, policies and regulatory bodies. The problems with the DNS system that I assume you're alluding to aren't due to the software or the software's license. It's the data the system runs on, and the people with the power to influence that data.

Yes, that's understood, I realise I used the terminology incorrectly. I've just been reading up on DNS and regulatory control and now more deeply understand that DNS is an extremely difficult problem to solve so that it outside of overt disruption by both governments and rogue attacks. However I do hope to see in my lifetime a system implemented where DNS is no longer affected by a single country's politics.

As bad_user comments above: "to change the world you don't need to change the laws. The alternative is to make them obsolete and technology has a habit of doing that".

Back to Stallman: if anyone could help us imagine an truly democratic DNS system, I'm sure he could point us in the right direction.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#145

Post by jbermudes »

pg wrote: post #130

This article doesn't seem to give any examples of specific predictions Stallman made that have turned out to be correct. All the article seems to be saying is that Stallman seemed paranoid, and present events seem to justify paranoia. (Incidentally, people always feel that.) Can anyone give some examples of specific predictions Stallman made that seemed surprising at the time, but that have come true? I'm not saying…

While not a specific claim to prediction of form X will happen in the year Y, it is a bit unsettling how since its original publication in 1997, RMS's "Right to Read" [1] has almost served as a playbook for the intellectual property lobby (1998's DMCA + UEFI's Secure Boot, trusted computing, etc). especially in light of the author's notes [1] that demonstrate that the laws required to create that dystopia are either available in some form already or have been proposed in the past, or are actively being worked on (SOPA, Protect-IP).

Ultimately it's not one particular statement that is eye-opening, but rather taking a holistic view of how the landscape of law and the aspects of what general-purpose computers (and programmers) can do and how that will continue to step on more and more industries' toes as pointed out by Cory Doctorow [2].

It's not so much that he's some sort of prophet as it is the unfortunate fact that his paranoia is increasingly justifiable with every new law creating new IP restrictions and laws dealing with civil liberties (PATRIOT, NDAA, etc). It's a self-perpetuating negative feedback loop.

[1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html [2] http://lwn.net/Articles/473794/

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#146

Post by abjr »

rbanffy wrote: post #36
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.

The Act is called "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012". Is this something that is passed every year? Could the indefinite detention clauses be removed in the 2013 "version" ?

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#147

Post by ams6110 »

abjr wrote: post #146
rbanffy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Act is called "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012". Is this something that is passed every year? Could the indefinite detention clauses be removed in the 2013 "version" ?

Certainly they could. How often does government give up a power like that though?

Another possibility is that if used, the law could (and likely will) be challenged on constitutional grounds.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#148

Post by lukifer »

Stormbringer wrote: post #106
lukifer wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll tell one thing which won't solve it: religious zealotry and advocations for everyone in the world to commit to FSF purity. Open software advocates should treat closed and controlled systems in the same fashion that techies implore content creators to treat piracy: an unstoppable force of nature that must be accepted and competed with, rather than feared and demonized. Also underlying both issues: the need for im…

Disclaimer: I'm no RMS fanboy by a long stretch of the imagination. What you're saying is that they should throw their arms up in the air and say "welp, that's how the real world works in reality, so might as well give up and accept it". But I think you're being unfair. The normal open advocates don't fear and demonize closed source. They may secretly pity it, they may secretly hate it, I don't know. The RMS vision o…

I am, admittedly, attacking a straw man, though in the case of RMS and a few others, it's not far off from reality.

> In one sandpit, everyone shares their toys. In the other sandpit... who cares what they do?

That's the attitude I mean. The fact is, a lot of people care: engineers, customers, and investors are making really interesting things happen in that sandpit. For FOSS advocates to avoid the development happening there is a hindrance to progress, not in aid of it. Maybe if RMS let himself own an Android or iPhone (perhaps with SIM removed), he would understand why these new platforms are a big deal, and be better equipped to create truly open equivalents, instead of insisting on living in his purist tech world of the 70's (wget-ing web pages? really?).

Closed source isn't evil. It's selfish. And we expect a certain level of selfishness from both individuals and companies. I fully support shifting our values in tech and elsewhere to a greater esteem for community and the commons. But calls for all software to be open and free is unrealistic: many people can't or won't create value without a selfish incentive. Time spent advocating against closed platforms is better spent making open platforms better.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#149

Post by jonhendry »

super_mario wrote: post #139
jonhendry wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues. And getting people to adopt free software is an orthogonal issue. Even if GPL software had 99% market share in the US, and everyone in the country were running the same kind of computer as Stallman, the government could still step in and pass all kinds of draconian laws. Getting regular people to adopt the GPL ethos is fine, but if the ethos doesn…

Are you seriously expecting Stallman or any one person to "fight" the government and prevent it from passing some draconian law. You seem to thoroughly misunderstand how a modern democracy operates. It's up to the people to prevent a government like that by not electing politicians that have draconian views on the subject. And the only way people can ever do that is if they are aware of all the issues. And Richard is…

Compare the FSF to the EFF.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#150

Post by jonhendry »

rjbond3rd wrote: post #138
jonhendry wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues. And getting people to adopt free software is an orthogonal issue. Even if GPL software had 99% market share in the US, and everyone in the country were running the same kind of computer as Stallman, the government could still step in and pass all kinds of draconian laws. Getting regular people to adopt the GPL ethos is fine, but if the ethos doesn…

> That's just it, he spoke about free software, not these larger issues... What's larger than freedom?

There are many freedoms. I suspect Stallman would be happy if he achieved all his free software goals, even if he lost freedoms that most other people consider more important.
Post reply on HN