Live data from Hacker News

Time to fork the FSF

larrythefreesoftwareguy.wordpress.com

61–70 of 340 posts

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#61
post #40

RMS has the FSF and Defective By Design sites as soapboxes if he wished to gain more attention from Jobs's death. This was a post on his political notes page. He did nothing to publicize it. He didn't post to aggregators or tweet to ask for upvotes (technically it was posted on his Identi.ca account which is linked to his political notes feed, but it got no special treatment). If some major sites hadn't picked up on…

And please don't think of forking the FSF because RMS made fun of Steve Jobs if that is what people think he did.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here, I'll let someone with much more eloquence than me explain to you why Stallman's diatribe is poorly wrought. If Stallman had to make a statement emphasizing his dislike of Jobs' influence, he could still have done so respectfully. Consider this; "I didn't share Steve Jobs' vision of computing, and I wish he'd chosen to embrace free software. I'm very sorry that he's gone and we've lost the opportunity to have th…

It was posted on his personal "politics" mini-blog, which consists of basically nothing but 2-3-line annoyed and not very nuanced statements on various topics. People who read it expect what they get there, and most people don't read it. Here's an example the quality of political cartoons you can also expect...: http://stallman.org/images/cartoon-6.jpg As can be seen from the Update to that linked article, I think a…

Stallman has made himself a public figure, and is a spokesman. Even on a "personal" blog, he has a responsibility to be tactful and not to make angry, hurtful, and unnecessary comments.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#63
post #14

I tweeted earlier that I see RMS as the Fred Phelps (Westboro Baptist Church) of Free Software. He may not have started out this way; but these days he's completely single issue. If you're not doing free software 100% his way; you not only disagree with him but you are actually evil. Not just free software; but free software as RMS defines it(see GNU/Linux) or you're wrong. He's so blinded by his own zealotry that I'…

While I don't always agree with RMS, I think he truly believes everything he says. I don't think the same of Fred Phelps. I long ago reached the conclusion that he tries to say the most inflammatory thing possible wether he really believes it or not. I have no idea why, but I believe he has some other agenda than just the condemnation of homosexuality. I've even almost seriously entertained the idea that he is a clos…

Phelps is the personal embodiment of Poe's Law.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#64
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was posted on his personal "politics" mini-blog, which consists of basically nothing but 2-3-line annoyed and not very nuanced statements on various topics. People who read it expect what they get there, and most people don't read it. Here's an example the quality of political cartoons you can also expect...: http://stallman.org/images/cartoon-6.jpg As can be seen from the Update to that linked article, I think a…

Stallman has made himself a public figure, and is a spokesman. Even on a "personal" blog, he has a responsibility to be tactful and not to make angry, hurtful, and unnecessary comments.

I guess that's an idea I fundamentally disagree with, and even find a bit offensive. As I said above:

I like that in geek culture we don't have this weird demand for people to be 24/7 ensconced in a professional PR-oriented persona, like a CEO or politician...

If people are pulling things out of a personal blog and broadcasting it across the web in sensational terms, I blame the yellow journalists more than him. I might still disagree with him, but I don't blame him out of context of his blog, as some kind of always-on spokesperson.

Plus, it's not like he hasn't telegraphed, for almost 30 years, that he doesn't plan to be that kind of PR-oriented spokesperson, so one can hardly be shocked about it in 2011.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#65
post #37

Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The trouble-makers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status-quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify, or vilify them. About the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them…

Note that this does not begin, "Here's the the assholes, the heartless, the tactless, the people who think they are above the rest of humankind, who always know better than everyone else, who must teach us how to think."

RMS has done some admirable things, but he's in dire need of some mental help. Seriously.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've won that battle, but not the war. Servers, databases, frameworks, languages, etc are often open source, but the majority of applications are not.

That's the problem, you're the problem if you refuse to accept that the best solution is going to be the freedom for people to sell commercial closed software as well as use open software. The idea that this is a war is exactly why RMS is wrong. The idea that we must win it and we must make everyone use the new hot open license is wrong. The idea should be to encourage people to use open licenses, and to promote the…

>That's the problem, you're the problem if you refuse to accept that the best solution is going to be the freedom for people to sell commercial closed software as well as use open software.

That's a debatable point since a sizable portion of the world's population does not think that capitalism is a good system. It's mind boggling that the task of convincing people to work together and share even exists, considering how social humans are.

>They're little more than negative campaigners "Windows 7 Sins" etc.

Here you have groups of people working towards the primary goal of taking money from you and the secondary goal of locking you into their brand so that you must continue to pay them and yet you vehemently defend them. These people are not your friends in a very active and direct way! Would we have solved other social issues such as equal rights without a stick or did they improve precisely because the powers that be begun to feel threatened? Are you aware of the fact that your local government is an organization which has a monopoly on sticks (which it is very ready to use against you)? Why do you not speak out about that if you are principally against sticks? Surely (I can't stop calling you that) those sticks hit a little closer to home? Incidentally, the very companies you are defending use their sticks the most.

Besides, since when did it become so politically incorrect to point out unethical behavior?

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some think he's just a novel con-artist: 1. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/gro... 2. http://kanewj.com/wbc/ Looks like it equates to fairly decent take-home pay given that he probably works far less than the 2080 full time hours a year for it. And remember, it's a church, so it's all tax free.

I would say that a very significant contingent of Protestant church men are in it for the money. We shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that they're all sincere -- cons often come with a generous helping of scriptural glaze.

Unless you're working a seriously crazy angle like Phelps, there's generally more money to be made outside the church than within it. I think most people who have devoted their lives to a church are either sincere, or they started out sincere and started working an angle after becoming disillusioned.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#68
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Naww, he's just a zealot. The history of religion is the history of zealotry, as well as oppression and violence. Funny how you think he must be an atheist, when he fits the religious zealot profile to a 't.' Phelps fits the character of so many religious leaders who have millions of followers and millions of dollars. Phelps' big issue is that he's poor at monetizing his crazy, unlike other successful bigots like Fal…

As an atheist, I think it's pretty clear from your post that hatred and bigotry is alive and well outside of religion. You know what else is typical in religion, including Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc.? Tolerance, love, and generosity. If you don't know religious people who are the epitome of these qualities and find strength to exhibit them from their religion, you are living in a bubble.

> "Tolerance, love, and generosity. If you don't know religious people who are the epitome of these qualities and find strength to exhibit them from their religion, you are living in a bubble."

Certainly there are many people of all cultures and religions who are tolerant, loving and generous. But mostly to those of their own culture/religion.

As for living in bubbles, that is _precisely_ the purpose of culture/religion - to enclose the individual with a selected group, keep him/her under control and prevent him/her from interacting with outside groups. Take food taboos as an example - it's difficult to be friends with someone if you can't eat with them.

And while there may be hatred and bigotry outside of religion, it pales compared to what religion has given the world. Of course I consider most "-ism"s to be religions too.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#69
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but RMS is simply wrong, here. Jobs has put great software into more hands than RMS ever did. Jobs might well have (indirectly) had an even more positive influence on FOSS by spreading BSD. (I'm not saying that there isn't a ton of FOSS out there in lots of hands -- but RMS isn't responsible for its being there in the same way Jobs is responsible. Jobs is responsible for the iPhone. RMS isn't responsible for And…

Jobs has put great software into more hands than RMS ever did. You do realize that Apple has been dependent on GCC to build its products for most of Jobs' second tenure, don't you? Some of that is code that RMS personally wrote. The GPL license that, again, RMS personally wrote covers the kernel of the Android system. "Great software" that's in "more hands" than Jobs' devices. Jobs was a slick businessman like Gates.…

That RMS wrote the GPL, or extended LLNL's Pastel compiler into GCC, does not endow him with responsibility for the success of all free software. Do you really think, given the influence of academia, that there would be no FOSS-equivalent compiler available but for RMS's efforts?

Jobs is responsible for Apple's success. For repeatedly creating devices that have disrupted industries. RMS deserves credit for his contributions, but it is not all-thanks-to-him that we have FOSS.

Yes Apple's software has been closed. But has this been at the expense of FOSS, as RMS claims?

Has Apple actively tried to subvert the GPL by lobbying governments to avoid FOSS? Has Jobs publicly whined about the GPL? Has he engaged in OOXML-esque bad-faith efforts to keep data formats proprietary?

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#70
post #21

I don't get it, personally. Yes, Stallman's a loon - although as an aside I think that every good movement needs its loons. Who's going to say "you know what? I believe in Free Software so much that I will use nothing else, and publicly and harshly declare that anyone doing otherwise is a moron and a traitor to the future of humanity"? Anyone who is willing to sacrifice the usefulness of the last 30 years of propriet…

The issue is not at all with his opinion. It is that he expressed it in a horrendously, gratuitously crass and offensive way. Here is a transliteration into humane language of what he said:

"My heart goes out to Steve Jobs' family in their time of grief. And my heart also goes to the millions of people who looked up to him as an icon and inspiration. But we need to not get so carried away honoring the dead that we forget the damage that Jobs' work had on the Free Software movement.

His pioneered the software walled garden, which destroys freedom and choice. And he targeted it at people who would not understand what they were sacrificing by giving up their freedoms.

We can only hope that his successors make Apple a more free company, or failing that, are not as effective at spreading it as he was."

Wasn't that better? And it communicated substantively the same thing, but without all the name calling and the seeming glee over the death of another human.

Disclaimer: I typed this on my Macbook Air.

Edit: One more thing to add. Saying "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone" is tripe. Being gone is a euphemism for being dead. The reason we mourn when a loved one dies is precisely because that means they are gone.

Maybe RMS sees a subtle distinction between death and gone-ness in his head. But I promise you that people in grief see absolutely no distinction between the death and the loss of the person they mourn.

Post reply on HN