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

My Talk at Microsoft

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 248 posts

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#81

Post by GhettoMaestro »

simion314 wrote: post #44
5trokerac3 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a perfect example of how Stallman ultimately is an authoritarian. He wants all the freedom to do what he wants, but has no problem with his "free software" vision limiting the rights of others. As someone else pointed out, "what about proprietary HTML and CSS?" Stallman has no ability to recognize the need for others to protect their own work, he only wants his free access to the fruits of others' labor. Don'…

He is not forcing his views on you, don't like him don't read what he writes. If you want to have a discussion about freedom then let's do it in a rigorous way, go read the GNU page, read about the 4 freedoms then get back and explain your point more clearly. His point is that proprietary software is bad and you should now write it and not use it, I agree with him and I still run some proprietary blobs, I do not feel…

> He is not forcing his views on you, don't like him don't read what he writes.

I don’t think that’s going to be a happening argument given his pedo apologist comments.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#82

Post by eloisant »

jedieaston wrote: post #63

Interestingly, this is not the first time that I've heard Microsoft talk about open-sourcing Windows [0]. The licensing behind many of the components may make it a distant pipe dream, but since they make most of their money through their applications (i.e. MSSQL runs on Linux now, the software teams all work under Azure now), I could see it happening sometime. [0]: https://www.wired.com/2015/04/microsoft-open-source-…

They could open source the Windows kernel, and it wouldn't change anything.

Just like OSX is based on Darwin which is Open Source, and Android is based on Linux, that doesn't provide any more freedom for users or encourage interoperability.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#83

Post by jupp0r »

cameronbrown wrote: post #50
dhruvmittal wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should, however, be a bit more repentant about starting a McCarthy-esque red scare against all things open source. Especially since we're still suffering from it. There are enough project & program managers who see the words "open source" on an engineering document & send us back to build or buy some alternative.

I can understand their perspective, especially if they're non technical. Much of the time they see open source as some ragtag community project that has no real support so they believe in terms of risk, it can seem lower to build or buy.

If they don’t even know enough about open source (and are resistent to being enlightened), they shouldn’t be making this decision.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#84

Post by 5trokerac3 »

CaoCao wrote: post #80
5trokerac3 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That phrase could be used to describe how every genocidal maniac in history viewed themselves. Most of the steady progress that has been made in this world has been due to the efforts of diplomatic individuals who cast a wide, friendly net for their supposed adversaries.

Yes like the French Revolution and the wide, friendly... democracy nets. Come on.

Do you know there's a reason they call the tail end of the French Revolution "the Reign of Terror"?

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#85

Post by Jedd »

ChrisSD wrote: post #59
Jedd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should, however, be a bit more repentant about starting a McCarthy-esque red scare against all things open source. Or, as rms went to some lengths to explain here and elsewhere, free software. Paying attention is important in this particular case.

But MS were, at the time, against all things open source. Not just free software (although that did seem to get the full brunt of their ire).

> But MS were, at the time, against all things open source.

This may or may not be the case, insofar as an organisation can be said to have a position on a vague notion.

As per the article, rms is seeking that:

"Publicly take back Microsoft's attacks on copyleft made in the 2000s. Ballmer called the GPL a "cancer"."

I suspect rms doesn't care terribly much if MS were 'against all things open source' since no one really did, or does, know what that might mean.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#86

Post by watwut »

CaoCao wrote: post #80
5trokerac3 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That phrase could be used to describe how every genocidal maniac in history viewed themselves. Most of the steady progress that has been made in this world has been due to the efforts of diplomatic individuals who cast a wide, friendly net for their supposed adversaries.

Yes like the French Revolution and the wide, friendly... democracy nets. Come on.

> Yes like the French Revolution and the wide, friendly... democracy nets. Come on.

The French Revolution was most violent event of its time with many fractions fighting against each other and was followed by dictatorships.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#87

Post by raxxorrax »

typon wrote: post #64
5trokerac3 wrote: post #16

> I resisted Steve Jobs's snow job in 1989 or 1990; I am no easy mark for those who want me to change my views. Why do people still prop this insufferable person up? Interacting with everyone like an angsty teen is no way for anyone who considers themself a professional to publicly talk. IMO FOSS is where it is today more despite Stallman than because of him. Being an asshole isn't necessarily a sign of being a savan…

The whole phenomenon of rms worship on forums like these depresses me about the future of our industry

Glory to the software industry!

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#88

Post by soohyung »

syshum wrote: post #40
xiaodai wrote: post #25

Free software is difficult. I have a family and young kids to feed. I can't work for FREE. I have open-source packages that are "free", but that's my hobby or a living. If you get a professorship at a university then you can flog free software, but it doesn't work for the other 99.99999% of the population. Sigh. I wish open-soure software is funded like universities. European Union funds some software, but more shoul…

There are plenty of people that work on OpenSource at corporations. Linux Kernel is a widely known example, but not the only one. Further, there are funding models that do not require "donations" to fund libre software, "Free" does not mean free in cost, it means freedom. Some options include 1. Paid Binary Dististrbution 2. Support Agreements 3. Priority Features 4. Customization 5. Hosting / SaaS 6. Paid documentat…

Open source software isn't necessarily free software.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#89

Post by raxxorrax »

yummybear wrote: post #6

> Help make the web usable with Javascript deactivated. I don't quite understand why that is a goal in itself. If it's due to accessibility why not ask to "Help make the web more usable for people with disabilities"? Maybe I'm missing something here.

I would say my knowledge about software engineering is to 90% copied from ideas other people had before, but I am certainly underestimating that amount.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#90

Post by jacquesm »

Zhyl wrote: post #5

>Publicly take back Microsoft's attacks on copyleft made in the 2000s. Ballmer called the GPL a "cancer". Allchin called it "un-American". (from the "Suggestions I gave to Microsoft" section) This is something I agree with. I don't think that Microsoft are likely to apologise for EEE [1] as that is likely just considered 'business' and part of the zeitgeist; neither do I think that Microsoft necessarily needs to endo…

I'd be happy with a donation to the FSF roughly equivalent to all the money they made by scare tactics against Linux on the server, including their backhanded funding of the SCO lawsuit.
Post reply on HN