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

The Free Software Foundation is dying

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 247 posts

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#141

Post by simiones »

Mizza wrote: post #88
simiones wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would an Affero LGPL (a weaker license than the AGPL) help in any way with the reason ES moved to a more restrictive license than the AGPL (as did MongoDB, for example)?

I guess I don't have an answer for that specifically, but I think it shows the need for some innovation or flexibility to protect from Amazonification in order to avoid the situation from getting to that boiling point entirely.

The problem though is that this desire is incompatible with the existing definition of Free Software. The principle that users are free to use the code however they see fit, and distribute it to others as long as they extend this right to others, explicitly allows this type of Amazonification.

That is, Amazon offered their users every right and information about how Elastic Search works. All of their modifications are public. I believe they even offer deployment information if you want to replicate it. The problem is that they are out-competing Elastic's managed offering on price and overall integration, and that they are not contributing to the Elastic Search code base, they are simply offering the existing code. This is all fully within the letter and spirit of any GNU license, and any further restriction would in fact be a violation of the 4 Freedoms described in the GPL. This is/was not a TiVo situation.

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#142

Post by brodouevencode »

einpoklum wrote: post #115
brodouevencode wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then they can take full control of the FSF, already they have their hands in it. This is neither good nor bad, so I'm not sure why your whole point seemingly is based on it. Corporations will act in their own self-interests just like everyone else. There are examples of where corporations worked together and it turned out well for all and examples of the opposite happening, so I'm not sure why this is necessarily f…

> Corporations will act in their own self-interests just like everyone else. Corporations are not part of "everybody", except in insane US law which recognizes corporate "personhood". In other words: A corporation is not just like, or even remotely like, anybody.

You made that association, not me. Corporations will act in the interests of the corporation - there is no argument here.

A well-run foundation that would benefit from corporate help doesn't necessarily have to bend to the whims of the corporation. The Linux Foundation is a good example of where private/corporate partnerships are done much better.

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#143

Post by brodouevencode »

richbell wrote: post #87
brodouevencode wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the foundation is set up to allow this, then that's a fault of the structure of the foundation.

> If the foundation is set up to allow this, then that's a fault of the structure of the foundation. "If I'm able to exploit you, it's your fault" is a strange take. Just because something isn't expressly forbidden doesn't make it ethical or moral.

The same take applies to individuals too, which basically nullifies your argument.

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#144

Post by eletrotupi »

pferde wrote: post #19
shortrounddev wrote: post #10

> We need more leaders of color, women, LGBTQ representation, and others besides. The present leadership, particularly from RMS, creates an exclusionary environment in a place where inclusion and representation are important for the success of the movement. I'm not a fan of RMS, but this is the exact kind of left wing platitude that people think will revive an organization, but really just signals thats the organizat…

The funniest part is that this Devault's argument is the exact opposite of "inclusion and representation". Make arguments for RMS's removal based on his actions, but wanting him gone because of his gender, skin colour and/or age is just as exclusionary as Ku Klux Klan is. It's just wrong.

[flagged]

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#145

Post by eletrotupi »

honeybadger1 wrote: post #26
shortrounddev wrote: post #10

> We need more leaders of color, women, LGBTQ representation, and others besides. The present leadership, particularly from RMS, creates an exclusionary environment in a place where inclusion and representation are important for the success of the movement. I'm not a fan of RMS, but this is the exact kind of left wing platitude that people think will revive an organization, but really just signals thats the organizat…

Could not agree with you more, it's one thing to say a person is a product of their time and we need leadership to take the same approach however with new modern social viewpoints and diplomatic approaches. RMS is not a proper businessman, and not a social butterfly either, he has many haters whether you agree with what he says or not. However, it is a complete other thing to say 'we'll fix this with more inclusion,…

>However, it is a complete other thing to say 'we'll fix this with more inclusion, yep, that'll fix it', this is the pinnacle of doing the least amount of effort, just like a convincing leader that use anecdotes to sell their vision..its cheap.

It's amazing how the article present five points and y'all are obsessed over this one point (which concerns the removal of RMS and open up for more diversity & inclusion). But sure buddy, that's the issue.

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#146

Post by vrtx0 »

ghusto wrote: post #125
bo1024 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technical and socially competent leadership is compatible -- actually, well-aligned -- with diverse representation.

> Technical and socially competent leadership is compatible -- actually, well-aligned -- with diverse representation Reality begs to differ. If they're well aligned, where are these people? Have they been oppressed by not being given a chance? Let's see where we are in 20 years when that argument can finally be put to rest (when's the last time you saw a positive _male_ role model in films or other pop-culture, tech-…

My perspective as an openly gay male with 20+ years of experience in software security, systems programming and distributed databases: Tech companies tend to be extremely supportive and welcoming of talent from diverse backgrounds. My proudest technical accomplishments have always been with a diverse group of peers, including straight white males who champion diversity. These people are heroes to me, but it’s not like they’re the type to gloat…

I’m not the best person to ask about movies, but most example of protagonist “hackers” that comes to mind include white males. Counter examples that come to mind are “The Web” (female), and Sens8 (transgender lead, helped by straight white male)…

That said, I may have misunderstood your point, but happy to correct it elaborate if I’m off base!

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#147

Post by philistine »

jmclnx wrote: post #4

>It’s time for Richard Stallman to go I was expecting to see this, there is nothing more corporations would like more then to see him gone. Then they can take full control of the FSF, already they have their hands in it. So far many of his predictions have come true and there are a few more that seems to be on their way to happening. What FSF should do is work stop the move to secure boot. Already there are Intel Lap…

I'm endlessly fascinated by people who have one major problem (inability to run unsigned code) and assign blame to another thing (secure boot). We're talking about technology here! The problem is one of implementation.

And Apple, of all companies, has offered an implementation solution. Their ARM chips in Macs can boot an OS with a fully-vetted chain of trust on the same drive as a completely untrusted Linux distro. And macOS does not reduce its security level to allow this. Why can't Intel do that? Wouldn't that be a great compromise? Don't any Linux people see value in a chain of trust?

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#148

Post by davexunit »

rekado wrote: post #135
davexunit wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of talk about "forced diversity" that ignores the diverse pool of talented people that the FSF has pushed away because they don't think "GNU+Linux" is a hill worth dying on or whatever.

It goes beyond just battles on mole hills: the FSF and the GNU mailing lists are full of extremely time-consuming discussions that are fueled by conspiratorial thinking, feature excessive celebration of nitpicking, with participants that regularly lose themselves in groan-worthy tangents, operate on oversimplified models of society with unjustified arrogance, etc --- they are really bad places for constructive discou…

Thanks for following up with more details. You're absolutely right about all of it. After experiencing some/all of those things, most rational people realize there time is better spent elsewhere and move on.

Re: The Free Software Foundation is dying

#150

Post by philistine »

Scubabear68 wrote: post #5

From my perspective, movements need multiple organizations that exist on different levels of the “extremism” spectrum. Just like there are various environmental NGO’s, some very radical, and others more mild and open to compromise, the free software movement needs the same. The FSF is the extreme org, the canary in the coal mine that is going to alert on critical issues, but also which frankly are going to send out a…

And yet this canary in the coal mine seems to have spent as much effort trying to get us to say GNU/Linux than on trying to fight its valid battles.
Post reply on HN