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

Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 293 posts

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#191

Post by pessimizer »

tedunangst wrote: post #186
its_so_on wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

could you estimate for me how much it would cost ycombinator-backed companies if the Free software they used did not feel the need (promoted by zealots like him) to be free? How many of these companies could not exist at all? Look at your stack. How much of the software in it are you paying for, and how much is RMS's zealotry paying for? Did you contribute anything yourself to that stack? I think you should send RMS…

You're asking a hypothetical that can't be answered, but it's based on the (very faulty, imo) premise that a world without Stallman would not have any free software. Open source was (and would be) alive and well without him.

>Open source was (and would be) alive and well without him.

You're making a assertion with no evidence or argument, and using it as a premise to dismiss a rhetorical question.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#192

Post by Estragon »

mattbriggs wrote: post #189
mixmastamyk wrote: post #105

Every time an rms article comes up trolls come out of the woodwork to rally about what a kook he is and all "the horrible things" he's done. "Why the nerve, living a life different than I would choose!? IT MUST BE STOPPED." Snooze. I've been reading this fear-mongering regularly since '97. Why is he so threatening? It's not like you have to share a studio apartment with the guy. Have any complainers contributed 1/10t…

I don't find him threatening, but I find him offensive. The concept of freedom for human beings is an incredibly important one that people have fought and died over, and needs to be protected at all costs, even our own lives. His movement has consciously coopted the word and the emotive properties that go with it for the purpose of something that is orders of magnitude less important, the freedom of software. I would…

  > His movement has consciously coopted the word [freedom] 
  > for ... something ... less important
I don't think you realize how ubiquitous and critical to everyday life software is becoming. It's not just "freedom to play with source code," it's freedom to travel, read and form relationships as one sees fit and without being tracked.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#193

Post by paulhauggis »

ameen wrote: post #157
msg wrote: post #71

Stallman's critique of software, hardware, and services as tools of social control has only become more relevant over the years. Can you imagine his search records being rifled through by a government investigator? Or his Facebook profile being examined by an employer? No, because they don't exist. Nor can you imagine his computer being locked by a bootloader that only allows "Genuine Windows". He's not concerned abo…

While I certainly agree with RMS's reasons for being so committed to his philosophy, I just don't know if it would still be possible to practice in today's world. Almost every system out there, free software or otherwise is monetized one way or another, either you pay for the software, or you are the product being sold.

This is one of the the consequences of the "free software movement". Nobody wants to pay for software anymore and hosting and development aren't free.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#194

Post by zach95 »

I don't understand the hostility to RMS here in hackrerland. RMS is trying to recreate the best hacker environment that ever existed bar none: MIT's AI lab in the 1970's. I was alive then and knew some people there and it was all true--it was hacker nirvana. It got blown apart by his friends going off and founding some lisp machine companies that killed off lisp as a commerical language when those companies died from infighting.

What does RMS want? Four freedoms that businesses want to take away from you: the ability to read, modify, share, and run the programs that you or hackers like you write. There's nothing purist about wanting control over your own program, or for it not to be closed off from you against your will. That's what happened in the 1980's, and what continues to happen with proprietary software.

Obviously, as the leader of this movement RMS has to stay especially pure or no one would follow him. RMS may have his idiosyncracies, but you have to give him credit for not being hypocritical, which is more than you can say about virtually any other leader out there.

I'm a really proud supporter of RMS and what he stands for because I've spent half my life being burned by proprietary software, and I'd love to go back to the garden of eden that was MIT's AI lab in the 70's and early 80's.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#195

Post by paulhauggis »

Estragon wrote: post #192
mattbriggs wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find him threatening, but I find him offensive. The concept of freedom for human beings is an incredibly important one that people have fought and died over, and needs to be protected at all costs, even our own lives. His movement has consciously coopted the word and the emotive properties that go with it for the purpose of something that is orders of magnitude less important, the freedom of software. I would…

> His movement has consciously coopted the word [freedom] > for ... something ... less important I don't think you realize how ubiquitous and critical to everyday life software is becoming. It's not just "freedom to play with source code," it's freedom to travel, read and form relationships as one sees fit and without being tracked.

"I don't think you realize how ubiquitous and critical to everyday life software is becoming."

You can talk to people and drive around in your car. You feel you need to use things that track you, but it's not true. You choose to.

There is a difference.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#196

Post by king_jester »

mattbriggs wrote: post #189
mixmastamyk wrote: post #105

Every time an rms article comes up trolls come out of the woodwork to rally about what a kook he is and all "the horrible things" he's done. "Why the nerve, living a life different than I would choose!? IT MUST BE STOPPED." Snooze. I've been reading this fear-mongering regularly since '97. Why is he so threatening? It's not like you have to share a studio apartment with the guy. Have any complainers contributed 1/10t…

I don't find him threatening, but I find him offensive. The concept of freedom for human beings is an incredibly important one that people have fought and died over, and needs to be protected at all costs, even our own lives. His movement has consciously coopted the word and the emotive properties that go with it for the purpose of something that is orders of magnitude less important, the freedom of software. I would…

Freedom of the mind (which is what software freedom is) and physical freedom are equally important and you can't really be free without both. What good is being safe from physical harm if you can't express your own points of view and make your own determinations? Restricting what software you can use with a computing machine that you own is a harm and RMS is right to fight against in the way that he sees fit.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#197

Post by pessimizer »

b1daly wrote: post #95

I've only read a few writings by Richard Stallman. It seems plain to me that he is an egomaniac with some kind of rigid obsessional thinking patterns. People like this are very annoying, and ironically undermine their own case if they intend to persuade others of their views. The willingness with which he labels the practices of large swaths of the population (of the US) "unethical" would be very disturbing if he was…

This argument could be made against anyone who stands by any conviction.

The diagnosis of some psychological problem solely based on the fact that he won't agree to follow the arbitrary established order which is against his convictions is a common feature of authoritarian regimes.

The accusation that if he disagrees with a system of laws because he wants them to be more ethical and less ambiguous he is undermining a social construct that is needed to keep society "humane" is worse.

It's not helpful, when someone disagrees with a law or set of laws, to argue against the entire concept of disagreement with law - unless you want to either paint them as an absolutist or an anarchist. Psychological problems are usually diagnosed based on the amount of suffering of the individual, and RMS doesn't seem to be suffering at all. He has specific concerns that can be replied to specifically.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#198

Post by paulhauggis »

zach95 wrote: post #194

I don't understand the hostility to RMS here in hackrerland. RMS is trying to recreate the best hacker environment that ever existed bar none: MIT's AI lab in the 1970's. I was alive then and knew some people there and it was all true--it was hacker nirvana. It got blown apart by his friends going off and founding some lisp machine companies that killed off lisp as a commerical language when those companies died from…

"What does RMS want? Four freedoms that businesses want to take away from you: the ability to read, modify, share, and run the programs that you or hackers like you write."

He wants these at the expense of the freedoms of the people that wrote the software. If you want these freedoms, write the software yourself and distribute it.

"and I'd love to go back to the garden of eden that was MIT's AI lab in the 70's and early 80's."

Right. With none of the technological advances we have today. No thanks.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#199

Post by bmj »

king_jester wrote: post #196
mattbriggs wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find him threatening, but I find him offensive. The concept of freedom for human beings is an incredibly important one that people have fought and died over, and needs to be protected at all costs, even our own lives. His movement has consciously coopted the word and the emotive properties that go with it for the purpose of something that is orders of magnitude less important, the freedom of software. I would…

Freedom of the mind (which is what software freedom is) and physical freedom are equally important and you can't really be free without both. What good is being safe from physical harm if you can't express your own points of view and make your own determinations? Restricting what software you can use with a computing machine that you own is a harm and RMS is right to fight against in the way that he sees fit.

It's more than freedom of the mind--it the freedom to use and modify tools to do as you see fit. Software isn't the only industry that necessarily harmed by "closed" tools--Ivan Illich started making this point in the 1970s. If workers completely lose control of their tools, they necessarily lose freedom.

Re: Richard Stallman: How I do my Computing

#200

Post by zach95 »

paulhauggis wrote: post #198
zach95 wrote: post #194

I don't understand the hostility to RMS here in hackrerland. RMS is trying to recreate the best hacker environment that ever existed bar none: MIT's AI lab in the 1970's. I was alive then and knew some people there and it was all true--it was hacker nirvana. It got blown apart by his friends going off and founding some lisp machine companies that killed off lisp as a commerical language when those companies died from…

"What does RMS want? Four freedoms that businesses want to take away from you: the ability to read, modify, share, and run the programs that you or hackers like you write." He wants these at the expense of the freedoms of the people that wrote the software. If you want these freedoms, write the software yourself and distribute it. "and I'd love to go back to the garden of eden that was MIT's AI lab in the 70's and ea…

"He wants these at the expense of the freedoms of the people that wrote the software."

Huh? These are the freedoms that the people who wrote the software should enjoy.

And, I never said "with none of the technological advances", I meant the hacker culture. I think that was pretty clear. If you want to understand the culture read the book "Hackers."

I understand that it's hard for some people to understand that software can be more than something to commercialize. I suspect that even though this site is called hacker news, most of the people here are not hackers and don't really respect the culture.

Post reply on HN