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

The Javascript Trap

gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 117 posts

Re: The Javascript Trap

#91

Post by tesseract »

mjgoins wrote: post #42
critic wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a web developer arguing that all software should be free, except web apps. In my opinion, all software should be free, when all groceries are free.

Groceries are (usually) free, meaning if you buy an apple, you're legally allowed to use it to grow yourself an apple tree. I assume you didn't mean free in some other way, right?

you're legally allowed to use it to grow yourself an apple tree.

Legally, sure (modulo plant patents). Practically, you can only do it as long as you don't mind it being a crab apple tree. (Apples tend not to breed true; if you want a tree that is sure to produce edible apples you have to get it by grafting.)

Re: The Javascript Trap

#92

Post by randallsquared »

trapper wrote: post #90
randallsquared wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's already accomplished a very great deal, exactly by doing things in the way you say will prevent him from accomplishing anything. Of course, you may believe that this is incidental.

What has he really accomplished? All he has done is shift the focus from desktop development to SAAS models. Why do you think all software companies are doing SAAS now? We can use gpl on the server and not have to release our code. Just like google. You get the best of both worlds. FOSS becomes the infrastructure. FOSS can't compete in this space because they can't afford the servers - you have to have revenue to mak…

I think that SAAS was inevitable anyway. You just can't control what people do with their own machines, unless they're not really their machines in fact, and that makes SAAS one of the few ways to make money from software in the long run. The main effect that Stallman had was to push openness farther and faster than it otherwise would have gone at this point, and to make FOSS a legitimate alternative to completely closed systems. The SAAS world is still better than the world in which the IP regime managed to turn the freedom to read into the war on drugs 2.0.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#93

Post by critic »

arebop wrote: post #87
critic wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By accompanying your object code with GPL/LGPL, you are promising your customers that your code is GPL/LGPL, i.e. you will be bound to open your code. The fact that your understanding of the license is different shows just how sneaky and obfuscated LGPL is.

If that were true, why would would the FSF say that "using the Lesser GPL permits use of the library in proprietary programs; using the ordinary GPL for a library makes it available only for free programs" [ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html ]? The LGPL is not designed to trick you into using the moral equivalent of the GPL; it's designed to occupy the middle ground between GPL and BSD licenses.

Nonsense.

> Lesser GPL permits use of the library in proprietary programs

That means "in some cases", not "in all cases". Logical fallacy on your part.

> ordinary GPL for a library makes it available only for free programs

Here, GPL'ers contradict themselves (for both senses of "free"). GPL code can, technically, be non-gratis. And GPL code can be used in non-GPL programs (you just can't distribute them easily).

Re: The Javascript Trap

#94

Post by omouse »

critic wrote: post #83

Somebody, please save RMS, write an Emacs mode that inserts spaces into JavaScript and converts single char names into made up longer ones! For extra bonus, insert comments that talk about how if you are not using GNU, you are a slave! A slave, I tell ya!

I think Steve Yegge's JavaScript2 mode could handle that...

http://code.google.com/p/js2-mode/

Re: The Javascript Trap

#95

Post by ynniv »

tsally wrote: post #39

There's a disturbing lack of understanding in this community about free software, the GPL and other licences, and RMS himself. Of course Stallman is an extremist. Every leader of such a movement by definition must be an extremist, even if it makes them look foolish. The ACLU for example takes cases that make them look like a joke, but they are forced to because they must exhibit unwavering believe in their ideals. As…

While I appreciate those fighting the cultural battles for individual freedom (GOOG's history pretty much confirms for me that being a big requires exploiting the consumer), Stallman's message is unfortunately crippled to me as a programmer. Free software is better in almost every way. It is easier to install, possible to fix, increases the wealth of every owner of a compatible computer, lasts longer (defined by running on more generations of computer), and is often more popular and better known than proprietary software. Yes, software should be free.

Where this becomes useless is in his demonizing proprietary software, because even though proprietary software takes many of your rights away, it has some great benefits. Since it doesn't have to be free as in beer, a person can quit their day job and focus solely on writing that program, leading to better designed and better implemented software. It also creates a stable brand that people can evaluate, and clear responsibility for issues. Without a means of monitizing software, we probably wouldn't have the fit and polish systems that we do.

I love free software, but there are two RMSisms that bother me: 1) The GPL is actually less "free" than a BSD style license because of his campaign to promote free software. 2) His view is entirely supply side (except for the roundabout means of creating personal wealth by forcing others to use the GPL on their software) to the point where it seems to me like free software has to fall out of trees or large corporations (which I would rather due without).

RMS: I love the idea, but I want to see more!

Re: The Javascript Trap

#96

Post by ealar »

mjgoins wrote: post #42
critic wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a web developer arguing that all software should be free, except web apps. In my opinion, all software should be free, when all groceries are free.

Groceries are (usually) free, meaning if you buy an apple, you're legally allowed to use it to grow yourself an apple tree. I assume you didn't mean free in some other way, right?

Just so you know, if you plant an apple tree from an apple you buy at the grocery store you will likely be sued for patent infringement. Though, it's probably sterile anyway.

So, the idea of a "free apple" is a pipe dream.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#98

Post by tsally »

ced wrote: post #88
tsally wrote: post #39

There's a disturbing lack of understanding in this community about free software, the GPL and other licences, and RMS himself. Of course Stallman is an extremist. Every leader of such a movement by definition must be an extremist, even if it makes them look foolish. The ACLU for example takes cases that make them look like a joke, but they are forced to because they must exhibit unwavering believe in their ideals. As…

Every leader of such a movement by definition must be an extremist, even if it makes them look foolish Why? RMS's movement would benefit most from convincing us , as developers, to contribute to FOSS. I pray that being a foolish-looking extremist isn't the best way to do that.

Again, going with the ACLU analogy, it's not the ACLU's job to convince you that the Bill of Rights is a good thing. It's their job to rigorously defend it without giving an inch. The same goes for RMS, it's not his job to convince developers to join up with FOSS. Leave the convincing to people who are better at it. Google's summer of code is a great example.

Based on the growing size and productivity of the FOSS community, I really don't think RMS needs to change what he is doing. Programmers have already produced billions of dollars of free software and will continue to do so. It's an amazing display of our (the hacker) culture.

Re: The Javascript Trap

#99

Post by derefr »

ynniv wrote: post #95
tsally wrote: post #39

There's a disturbing lack of understanding in this community about free software, the GPL and other licences, and RMS himself. Of course Stallman is an extremist. Every leader of such a movement by definition must be an extremist, even if it makes them look foolish. The ACLU for example takes cases that make them look like a joke, but they are forced to because they must exhibit unwavering believe in their ideals. As…

While I appreciate those fighting the cultural battles for individual freedom (GOOG's history pretty much confirms for me that being a big requires exploiting the consumer), Stallman's message is unfortunately crippled to me as a programmer. Free software is better in almost every way. It is easier to install, possible to fix, increases the wealth of every owner of a compatible computer, lasts longer (defined by runn…

> Since it doesn't have to be free as in beer

Neither does FOSS software, you realize. Let's say Google charged money for Google Earth. Now, if they open-sourced the client, they would still make money from it, because they'd still be the only one with the license to the map tiles themselves. There are many situations like this, where the software is actually worthless without some resource (perhaps just your brand) that you provide alongside it. You can make plenty of money selling water (a FOSS product)--but remember, it's the bottles that people are buying; the water is obviously worthless when you just pour all over them (or release the source to them.)

> The GPL is actually less "free" than a BSD style license because of his campaign to promote free software.

Here's a thought-experiment that I think shows you RMS's world-view. Pretend, for a second, that AI existed. The GPL would give it rights (it would be "free"), while the BSD license would allow it to be sold into slavery ("non-free.")

Re: The Javascript Trap

#100

Post by trezor »

dasil003 wrote: post #37
trezor wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I see it, freeness of javascript more or less meaningless in a web application. The fact is that the barriers to making web applications free are much higher, and there are a lot more legitimate arguments as to why it shouldn't be free. But you'll keep running them on those servers powered by free software running on a free operating system stating how open solutions are better , wont you? How is that for b…

Sorry, I made a leap there and you misunderstood me. What good is free javascript in a web application where a significant portion of the code lives on the server? The fundamental issue of software freedom is trivial when you are running software locally. I'm running this software locally, and I want to be free to do with it as I will. However web application software has the local component (JS) and the server compo…

Thanks for clearing that up. That statement makes a lot more sense.

There are a lot of free javascript libraries out there, and quite a few which doesn't directly involve server-callbacks, and leaves you with the power to hook things together as you please. In that case, free javascript libraries still makes a lot of sense.

For situations where the bulk of the solution is actually server-side code, I wouldn't really call that a "javascript library", but some regular server-side solution with added javascript/AJAX functionality. And in those cases I can be willing to agree with your statement.

Post reply on HN