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

Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

esr.ibiblio.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 168 posts

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#71

Post by Spooky23 »

We live in a free society, and Stallman is free to have an opinion, and to interpret things strictly or loosely.

He is a fanatic or an extremist? Absolutely. But he continues to attract interest, and his contributions to society are real and significant.

Society needs fanatics. We need someone to question that moral righteousness of things like copyright, or to set a boundary for the meaning of "open source". If he's personally difficult for Mr. Raymond to deal with, so what? How would the world improve if everyone sat around getting along with each other?

Raymond's post is self-serving, and more about reminding us about how important he is while criticizing someone else.

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#72

Post by Spooky23 »

arthi wrote: post #49
cstross wrote: post #38

We need people like RMS. He marks one side of the Overton Window framing the debate on freedom and software. (Overton window: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window ) This doesn't mean he's right but what he does is necessary . If he didn't exist we'd need to invent him (or someone like him). (Oh, and he is indeed a fanatic, but of the pacifist variety -- not the kind who's interested in killing people to enforc…

No doubt you feel the same way about Rick Santorum.

Santorum is a true believer.

There's a difference between a leader who drinks the kool-aid, and a leader who mixes the kool-aid. Kool-aid drinkers by definition cannot set the agenda.

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#73

Post by bluekeybox »

cstross wrote: post #38

We need people like RMS. He marks one side of the Overton Window framing the debate on freedom and software. (Overton window: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window ) This doesn't mean he's right but what he does is necessary . If he didn't exist we'd need to invent him (or someone like him). (Oh, and he is indeed a fanatic, but of the pacifist variety -- not the kind who's interested in killing people to enforc…

Except: (1) Politics and public debate is multidimensional and not a single axis with a clear "left" and "right" as people sometimes mistakenly imagine; multiple and different extrema are possible. (2) On the axis where RMS appears to stand, I do not believe his position to be the most extreme one possible. (3) Just the way most people fail to understand that politics is multidimensional, without broad knowledge, they will often mistake one political axis for another. I believe people misunderstand RMS and project their own ideals about freedom and ascetic saints/prophets onto him. I do not believe RMS to be a champion of freedom that many people who had heard of him do. There exists an equally idealistic view, from where his positions are not wrong because they are fanatical, they are wrong period.

Take what RMS wrote about the early days of Symbolics. When you read him, you begin to realize that he believed the community of hackers that developed at MIT to be a goal unto itself, not as a means to achieve something specific. This is in spite of the fact that every individual who started hacking at MIT (this ironically includes RMS) surely saw himself as pursuing a specific goal. It is hard to reason with a man who believes that groups of people exist in and of themselves, independently of individuals and their goals. The only possible consequence that can stem from such a position is to define freedom as a property of groups, not of individuals, which is completely alien to the notion of freedom as most people (at least in the U.S.) understand it. The exact same position, when held by people in other countries, has lead to tyrannies being established, both of right- and left-wing kind.

The issue that ESR is raising is a very practical one -- RMS has become the de facto spokesperson for the free software movement, which hurts free software more than it helps it.

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#74

Post by gwern »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #45
papsosouid wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, RMS at least used to write code. ESR has always been a creepy hacker fanboy, latching on to and idolizing hacker culture, but has never been part of it, and never produced any code.

I'm curious, how does ESR make a living? He seems to spend a lot of time running his personal site (which carries no charges or ads) and has written a bunch of Open Source software. I don't see him doing anything that would put money into his bank account, or is he being sponsored by some company? If so who?

IIRC he was given a chunk of stock in a Linux IPO and while he lost most of its value in the dot-com crash, it still left him some spare change; add on consulting, royalties, the occasional job like being president, basic nerd frugal living, and you probably have the whole story.

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#75

Post by [deleted] »

cstross wrote: post #38

We need people like RMS. He marks one side of the Overton Window framing the debate on freedom and software. (Overton window: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window ) This doesn't mean he's right but what he does is necessary . If he didn't exist we'd need to invent him (or someone like him). (Oh, and he is indeed a fanatic, but of the pacifist variety -- not the kind who's interested in killing people to enforc…

[deleted]

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#76

Post by cwp »

cstross wrote: post #38

We need people like RMS. He marks one side of the Overton Window framing the debate on freedom and software. (Overton window: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window ) This doesn't mean he's right but what he does is necessary . If he didn't exist we'd need to invent him (or someone like him). (Oh, and he is indeed a fanatic, but of the pacifist variety -- not the kind who's interested in killing people to enforc…

No.

The difference between RMS and ESR is one of kind, not one of degree. Both the free software movement and the open source movement believe that open system are good, and the more open they are the better they are. The difference is in their answer to the question of "why?"

RMS and his adherents believe in inalienable human right to tinker, and consider limitations to that right, such as closed source technology, to morally offensive. ESR and his followers believe that open technology is better technology and that the benefits of technology are more fully realized when it's possible to tinker with it. RMS is concerned with morality, ESR with practicality.

The key thing here is that there's no spectrum with the RMS on one end, Steve Jobs on the other end and ESR somewhere in the middle. The open source movement is just as ardent, just as committed and just as "extreme" as the free software movement, but more successful.

Now perhaps you mean that the FSF serves an important function, in that their fanaticism makes the open source movement look more reasonable and thus more acceptable to the mainstream. But I think the very fact that actual positions held by free software and open source advocates are so similar make it hard for mainstream observers to appreciate the distinction.

So no, we don't need people like RMS.

[edited the last line for clearer rhetoric]

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#77

Post by arthi »

nickpinkston wrote: post #57
arthi wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No doubt you feel the same way about Rick Santorum.

I'd say I feel the same way about Ron Paul - he brings a refreshing perspective to politics, but he's certainly not right on everything. Santorum adds nothing to the debate but repetition of the narrative that's already going on. I should add to this that no one ever likes the same tactic they use to be used against them - in this case having Stallman define an extreme position to maintain a more pragmatic narrative.…

So it's more appropriate to say you don't mind fanaticism as long as you agree with most of what they're saying, not because fanaticism is good.

Typical hypocrisy. It's like saying "Yeah, I'm all for free speech... EXCEPT those guys who disagree with me."

Guess what? The other side feels the same way. Their guy is moving the Overton window in the direction they want. RMS and Ron Paul are not pragmatic to them.

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#78

Post by arthi »

Spooky23 wrote: post #72
arthi wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No doubt you feel the same way about Rick Santorum.

Santorum is a true believer. There's a difference between a leader who drinks the kool-aid, and a leader who mixes the kool-aid. Kool-aid drinkers by definition cannot set the agenda.

So RMS doesn't really believe in free software?

Re: Eric Raymond: Why I think RMS is a fanatic, and why that matters

#79

Post by hollerith »

_delirium wrote: post #51
jiggy2011 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, how does ESR make a living? He seems to spend a lot of time running his personal site (which carries no charges or ads) and has written a bunch of Open Source software. I don't see him doing anything that would put money into his bank account, or is he being sponsored by some company? If so who?

I believe he was employed by the Open Source Initiative (which he co-founded) for some years, as its President. So indirectly funded by the companies that donated to OSI.

Many years after found the Open Source Initiative, ESR stated publicly that he never made any money from it, and having read most of his writings from that period and a lot of commentary on the organization, I find that statement credible.

Also, he has claimed at least a couple of times over the years that he was (at the time of the claim) a consulting programmer.

Post reply on HN