A short critique of Stallmanism • Hacker News Board

Re: A short critique of Stallmanism

#201

Post by schoen » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 3:20 AM UTC

schoen wrote: post #41

milesrout wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely disagree. There are some problems with the free software movement but the fundamental idea behind it is essentially inarguable: proprietary software is anti-user.

(Free software supporter here.) Thomas Schelling mentions the notion of "incomplete antagonism": you could have partly opposed interests to someone else's but still have ways in which you can cooperate with each other. Other people thinking about trade have suggested that this is almost always the case, even, maybe surprisingly, when people have directly opposed values in some respects (but not others). http://www.am…

Sad to see that Schelling died yesterday (!): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13172957

Re: A short critique of Stallmanism

#202

Post by SomeCallMeTim » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 11:36 PM UTC

threatofrain wrote: post #104

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing for features that would be genuinely challenging for companies to implement and support. I'd love to have the freedom to modify the software in every gadget I own. But the $40 digital toaster oven with absolute crap firmware coded by idiots doesn't even have a USB port or any way to attach it to a computer; it's probably got its code permanently burned into ROM and isn't even software upgradable even w…

There's a difference between the financial aspects versus the legal aspects of software freedom. You can make the argument that it's too financially expensive for most companies to make their devices more modifiable, but that same argument cannot explain why people are banned, by risk of government punishment, from decrypting their programs, which would be the first step to investigation.

>You can make the argument that it's too financially expensive for most companies to make their devices more modifiable, but that same argument cannot explain why people are banned, by risk of government punishment, from decrypting their programs, which would be the first step to investigation.

Because they're shortsighted and afraid, in short. Legacy companies feel that control is crucial.

But GPL and other Copyleft software requires you to make the code modifiable. That's an expense most companies don't want to take on. Hence, companies avoid GPL.

Re: A short critique of Stallmanism

#203

Post by jcora » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 12:36 PM UTC

quitspamming wrote: post #199

jcora wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I employ a materialist analysis of society in which means of production are owned by the few, and in which the majority of the people have to sell most of their time simply to have food. This is an undeniable fact of reality, and you merely choose to ignore it. Your ideology obscures simple facts of economic life in capitalistic society, I mean your entire comment completely lacks substance: what do you even mean by…

"I employ a materialist analysis of society" translation: I regurgitate Marx's works. "and in which the majority of the people have to sell most of their time simply to have food." as opposed to farmers who work 16 hours a day to grow food. Different occupations sell for different value and require different time. "This is an undeniable fact of reality, and you merely choose to ignore it" a smug way of saying 'I'm ri…

Well, you're certainly not interested in productive conversation, goodbye