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

111–120 of 262 posts

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#111

Post by Czarnian »

keenerd wrote: post #90
Czarnian wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These days, if you ask someone for a phone and you are more than a few feet away from a landline, you're asking for a cell phone. To say otherwise is being disingenuous. To me, it demonstrates a far less altruistic motivations.

> To me, it demonstrates a far less altruistic motivations. He does not have a problem with cell phones. He has a problem with the fact that if you use the same cell phone repeatably, you give up a large portion of your privacy though all the meta-information that can be collected. To make a simple analogy: RMS's cell phones complaints are the same as his compaints about the CharlieCard system that lets you pay for r…

What he's doing is leeching off of other peoples resources. A swap implies that he's letting other people use his phone, which he's not.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#113

Post by eurleif »

Czarnian wrote: post #111
keenerd wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To me, it demonstrates a far less altruistic motivations. He does not have a problem with cell phones. He has a problem with the fact that if you use the same cell phone repeatably, you give up a large portion of your privacy though all the meta-information that can be collected. To make a simple analogy: RMS's cell phones complaints are the same as his compaints about the CharlieCard system that lets you pay for r…

What he's doing is leeching off of other peoples resources. A swap implies that he's letting other people use his phone, which he's not.

The GP said he's swapping the cards, not the phone use. He is using other peoples' resources without giving back with the phone use, I guess, but so what? I've let people borrow my phone before, and I don't really care if they've paid it back or not.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#114

Post by gst »

nknight wrote: post #54
pooriaazimi wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the linked HN discussion (and also the original FreeBSD.org article). As an example, You can't (technically) use GPL'd code inside your iOS application. 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...

> 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…

Sure you can - as long as you abide by the GPL and release your own software under the GPL. iOS libraries aren't GPL, but that's no problem as the GPL allows you to link against non-GPL libraries if they are part of the operating system.

The only problem is that Apple doesn't allow you to publish GPL'ed software on their market. But that's not the fault of the GPL.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#115

Post by nikron »

Czarnian wrote: post #102
jshen wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" 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 disco…

I think you are confusing free as in beer, and free as in speech. No one says you can't sell GPL software.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#116

Post by slowpoke »

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…

>No one's freedom is being taken away when you create a proprietary fork.

You're free to make forks for your own personal usage and never give anyone the source. You don't even have to tell anyone that you did.

As soon as you share that software with anyone and refuse to hand over the source, and deny the recipient the right to modify and/or redistribute your program, you are taking away that person's Freedom.

>You do not automatically have a right to someone else's creation.

Then why do you insist on taking someone else's creation and basically make it your own by taking away the Freedoms granted to you by the original creator?

If find it highly unethical to want access to Free Software without having to actually contribute to it. It's demanding rights without wanting to have to deal with the responsibilities that come with those rights. It's selfish and greedy.

>I don't mind paying for software

Except money's got nothing to do with Free Software. It's explicitly stated that you're allowed to charge for distributing copies. I'm sick and tired of this "argument". It pops up every time Free Software is discussed here and elsewhere, and the only thing it proves is that the person bringing it up has not understood what Free Software is about in the first place.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#117

Post by Avshalom »

lysol wrote: post #14
Argorak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practically? No. From the ultra-geek perspective? Yes.

The real geeks I know what to get work done, not send email all day.

People were getting work done back when RMS's computer would have been cutting edge.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#119

Post by mark_l_watson »

Some comments on the other posts here: I often find people to be most interesting and potentially valuable to communicate with when I don't totally agree with them. I don't agree with some of Richard's positions but acknowledge his huge contributions. I believe that he deserves some positive karma every time I use Emacs, gcc toolchain, various GNU utilities, and software and services built using GNU software (Google, Twitter, many libraries and applications, etc.) His knowledge, talent, and works are broad and deep in scope. It is interesting to hear so much dislike for the guy, but people have the rights to their opinions.

Re: Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

#120

Post by tedunangst »

diminish wrote: post #103
ceol wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 worl…

Where do people get the idea that if you GPL something it suddenly becomes immune from patent lawsuits?
Post reply on HN