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

Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

richard.stallman.usesthis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 262 posts

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#101

Post by julian37 »

DanBlake wrote: post #96
rudiger wrote: post #15

You have to give the guy some credit; Stallman believes in the free software movement, fights for it, and refuses to compromise his rights or values.

Does he have the same moral reservations for other devices in his life? ie; what car does he use and own? All (modern) cars accept software updates which is his definition of a computer. Most modern televisions, dvd players, routers and even some microwaves/refrigerators can take firmware updates also. Genuinely curious about the above - Not being a troll, just wondering how far the man really takes his beliefs. Does…

Does he have the same moral reservations for other devices in his life?

Yes, as far as I know.

ie; what car does he use and own? All (modern) cars accept software updates which is his definition of a computer.

I am pretty sure he doesn't drive, but this is what he had to say on the topic:

So, what about cars? Free cars would mean you are free to modify them and redistribute copies. Well, as for the modification, you are free to do that-lots of people modify and customize their cars. But when it comes to redistributing copies, the fact is we don’t have the technology to do it. There is no automatic car copier. Cars, today, are like books before the Xerox machine-the only feasible way to make copies was with a special factory. Copying your car is so hard that it makes little practical difference whether you are allowed to do this. Perhaps someday, through nanotechnology perhaps, a car copier will be developed. Then a Free Car Movement will be necessary.

Source: http://www.resonancepub.com/rstallman.htm

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#102

Post by Czarnian »

jshen wrote: post #89
Czarnian wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get them wrong: these people are not fanatic, they are just living and breathing a cause they started for a good reason. AKA Fanaticism. He's become an inflexible, computerized hermit. His dogmatic adherence to a demonstrably untenable principal of "freedom" has relegated him a permanent state of pre-1995 digital stasis. He's not principled, he's dogmatic. At best, he's a cautionary tale demonstrating the state…

" he's a cautionary tale demonstrating the state of the world if he had his way." Almost all of the things you consider modern in the computer world are built on top of his creations. OS X, google, facebook, HN, etc ... all built on the foundation RMS laid. Without his creations we would be closer to your idea of a "pre-1995 digital stasis"

And how many of those things would be around if they weren't generating revenue for someone?

He's a living, breathing demonstration of the limits of free software. A world where progress slows to a crawl because the only people who have the time to write code are hobbyists and people who can get paid to lecture about how everything should be free.

That's the main issue I have with his ideas, they are thoroughly disconnected from reality. Not in a "Everyone should be nice to each other all the time way," but a "I'm going to ride my dragon to work," way.

Free software is a nice sentiment, but impotent. Nothing that has happened in the past 10-15 years in computers happens without a profit motive. Without a profit motive you may get a spreadsheet program, but no one motivated enough to get it distributed.

Free may get you on the path, but it doesn't get you very far down the road.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#103

Post by diminish »

ceol wrote: post #72
slowpoke wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>you want to create a proprietary fork you can do it Why should you be allowed to take away the Freedoms of others? The one thing the GPL restricts is your Freedom to restrict the Freedom of others. That's the foundation of copyleft: your rights stop where mine begin, and that includes being granted the four Freedoms of software as defined by the FSF. In an ideal world, we would not need the GPL. Everyone would have…

> Why should you be allowed to take away the Freedoms of others? No one's freedom is being taken away when you create a proprietary fork. They are not forced to use your software, and the original is still intact. You do not automatically have a right to someone else's creation. I don't mind paying for software, and I don't mind if they don't let me see their code the same way I don't mind when my local restaurant do…

..and let me guess, you don't mind the company doing the proprietary fork, sue/threaten the open source forking guys, use software patents as a weapon/threat against open source developers. and you don't mind getting someone else's work, and giving nothing back.

In short your freedom is an egoistic tactic where you take, use and even abuse but dont care. There are people like RMS who think otherwise; they want a world where everyone shares to everyone so that everyone benefits from all derivatives.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#104

Post by pooriaazimi »

nknight wrote: post #78
pooriaazimi wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iOS example was just to name one of many limitations of using GPL code. > Enough for whom? Microsoft? No, for developers themselves. Dynamic vs. static linking mess etc. > ...some people do not have "allow companies to benefit from my work without giving back anything in return" as their top priority. But in reality, that doesn't happen a lot - to name a few on top of my head: Webkit, PostgreSQL, Minix, LaTeX, Mo…

> The iOS example was just to name one of many limitations of using GPL code. And is utterly irrelevant to the question that was asked. > No, for developers themselves. Dynamic vs. static linking mess etc. What mess? The requirements of the LGPL are clear, and in most cases quite trivial to meet. > But in reality, that doesn't happen a lot - to name a few on top of my head: Webkit, PostgreSQL, Minix, LaTeX, Mozilla's…

I'm sorry. Maybe the iOS app was irrelevant to his/her point. But I think most web startups would want to create iOS clients too, and that's how GPL might be a limitation to them.

> I have to ask, do you actually work in the software industry?

No, I'm just a student/programmer. I mean I'm not working in an IT department in a big company, so you've got a point there that I might not be realistic.

> All you've done is name some projects that happen to use non-GPL licenses in whole or part. You don't think companies take their output and use them in their own products without contributing back?

I named some non-GPL projects that big companies are contributing to them. And I think I missed LLVM and Clang (and the amazing static analyzer) that Apple is contributing to.

Google, Apache, Apple Yahoo, ... (even IBM) are all contributing to non-GPL open source projects - not because they have to, but because it's good for their business and they will benefit from that, and as a direct result of that, we (the developers) benefit too. What I'm saying is this: If Webkit was (pure) GPL, do you think Apple would even consider using it in the first place? No, they wouldn't, and they would roll out their own proprietary browser from scratch and the world would be a worse place. If Hadoop was not as liberally-licensed as it is now, do you think Yahoo would contribute to it? No.

I'm not offended - All I'm trying to say is that if you tighten up your software license, less people will use it, but they would have to contribute back. If you go with a BSD-style license, much more people will use and incorporate that project (for many reasons, including the fact that you can monetize your application much easier), and even if a small percentage of them contributes back, it's still good.

(I'm not a native English speaker, so I can't express what I want to say very well)

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#105

Post by diminish »

corford wrote: post #100
jorgecastillo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't take this the wrong way but I personally feel that the GPL is not a free software license, I feel it's a community software license. BSD is a free software license, BSD code is truly yours, you want to create a proprietary fork you can do it, you want to create a GPLed fork you can do it, you want to expand the BSD code base you can do it. One thing I really love about BSD licensed code is that I feel like I ow…

They're both free, just with different goals. The GPL gives freedom to the user of the software, the BSD license gives freedom to the developer of the software.

like the ultimate freedom Apple enjoys, sucking BSD licensed code freely, giving little back (except when enforced in case of khtml/webkit) and using software patents against others using open source software.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#106

Post by mark_l_watson »

Estragon wrote: post #76
ldesegur wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Richard Stallman is to software what Jean-Paul Sartres was to philosophy during his time and still now. JPS like RMS was living through his convictions and ideas to the point of refusing the Nobel prize because it would have tinted his motivations. RMS would do the same without any questions. Don't get them wrong: these people are not fanatic, they are just living and breathing a cause they started for a good reason.…

> RMS would [refuse a Nobel] without any questions. What's the difference between a Nobel and a MacArthur Genius grant? http://tech.mit.edu/V110/N30/rms.30n.html

Perhaps a MacArthur Genius grant carries a little less baggage than a Nobel prize? A MacArthur Genius grant is a no strings attached "do any research or work you want" funded by people who didn't have the huge negative impact on world society that Nobel did.

I would gladly accept either honor :-)

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#107

Post by diminish »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #65
nknight wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't (technically) use GPL'd code inside your iOS application. Web startups don't generally build iOS apps, they build web apps. > GPL is not the greatest license, that's why they created LGPL (to remove some of its stupid restrictions) and even that wasn't enough... Enough for whom? Microsoft? I know it's hard to believe, but some people do not have "allow companies to benefit from my work without giving back…

The iOS example was just to name one of many limitations of using GPL code. > Enough for whom? Microsoft? No, for developers themselves. Dynamic vs. static linking mess etc. > ...some people do not have "allow companies to benefit from my work without giving back anything in return" as their top priority. But in reality, that doesn't happen a lot - to name a few on top of my head: Webkit, PostgreSQL, Minix, LaTeX, Mo…

iOS example is simply one of the many limitations of iOS itself with regard to freedom/OSS.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#108

Post by why-el »

slowpoke wrote: post #61
noarchy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define "developer"? The man has certainly written his share of code, and has contributed it to the community. I don't know how he has made his living, over the years, but I bet he's been paid to develop at some point.

RMS makes his money by being paid for roughly half (iirc) of the talks and speeches he gives around the world. That has been his only source of income for years now.

I am also not sure we should tie developer with money.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#109

Post by Shamanmuni »

jorgecastillo wrote: post #47
rudiger wrote: post #15

You have to give the guy some credit; Stallman believes in the free software movement, fights for it, and refuses to compromise his rights or values.

Don't take this the wrong way but I personally feel that the GPL is not a free software license, I feel it's a community software license. BSD is a free software license, BSD code is truly yours, you want to create a proprietary fork you can do it, you want to create a GPLed fork you can do it, you want to expand the BSD code base you can do it. One thing I really love about BSD licensed code is that I feel like I ow…

The same argument could be said about slavery. You are told you have freedom, but you don't have the freedom to enslave other people. A society which admits slavery is more free in the sense you say. But, really, would you feel OK with it? I believe that society's well being is more important than absolute personal freedom. The GPL reflects that, so I support it, and we really shouldn't care about petty arguments about which one is "more free".

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#110

Post by prtamil »

5 years back when Mr.Stallman worried about Privacy,Free Software I used to think he is nuts.. Now with SOPA/PIPA scenario its nuts to not listen him. So now i'm following his advice i will never move my data to Cloud.....
Post reply on HN