Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Stallman On Free Software and GNU's 20th birthday

Hemos posted more than 10 years ago | from the pontificating dept.

GNU is Not Unix 698

An anonymous reader writes "Richard Stallman has written a piece on the state of free software and where it needs to go now, in celebration of GNU turning 20 today. It's available both on NewsForge and Linux.com."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Stallman Re: Non-free software (5, Insightful)

CreamOfWheat (593775) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881297)

Stallman asserts that "non-free software carries with it an antisocial system that prohibits coopoeration and community." This is MOST certainly overstating the importance of software's influence on each person's ability to cooperate and experience community. And I assert that this is where the open source movement fails. While open source software promotes cooperation and community for the developers involved in its creation, it doesn't attempt to build community by creating more user friendly tools. The general popluation doesn't care about the right to see the source code, most of the users of computers can't do any thing with the code any way. Open source project managers and developers need to better consider their end users. End users are not always other programmers, some are teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, housewives, grandparents. Usability must extend into high quality instructional programs that provide the information at the user's fingertips. Job aids and other electronic performance support tools that address the needs of the non-developer community will do more to foster cooperation and community between the developers and their users. After all what good is any application free or not without a high probability of end user acceptance?

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (3, Interesting)

smackjer (697558) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881332)

I think that you could correlate cooperation between developers with cooperation between those same developers and their user community.

Once developers get into team mode, they are more likely to seize the momentum it can provide. The end result can be improved user friendliness.

Next non-paying profession engineers (1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881339)

I agree completely.

Next we need to open source electronics so that paying electrical engineer jobs vanish

Re:Next non-paying profession engineers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881417)

It already is "open source" to some extent. Their's nothing stopping you from removing the cover of your favorite electronic gadget or appliance and seeing what components it uses. Reverse engineer it and build your own if you want. You may not have the schematic but that won't stop a decent EE type.

Re:Next non-paying profession engineers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881478)

Their's nothing stopping you from removing the cover of your favorite electronic gadget or appliance and seeing what components it uses.

Actually, there is, it's called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and you might want to search for some past Slashdot posts about it before that becomes illegal, too.

Re:Next non-paying profession engineers (1)

Patrik_AKA_RedX (624423) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881596)

Their's nothing stopping you from removing the cover of your favorite electronic gadget or appliance and seeing what components it uses.
Nothing? There are plenty IC you can't optain, because they are specialy made for one particular corporation. And how about the many differend flavors of programmable ICs? Many are protected against having their code read.

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881380)

for hackers by hackers.

community = i scratch your back and you scratch mine.

well guess what...99.9999999999999% of the community of end users which you refer to (non-developer), have nothing to give back!

money?

bwah aha haha.

hackers want more knowlegdge, not cash.

you can't buy respect. you earn it.

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881432)

Then according to you, free software is nothing but a geek developer's circle-jerk.

Also, by going "bwah aha haha" to the concept of payment for one's efforts you show yourself to be a spoilt little brat living of mommy and daddy's earnings.

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (5, Insightful)

gustgr (695173) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881405)

First of all, Open Source is a movement and Free Software is another. They have completly differents phylosophies and objectives as well.

The main concept of this kind of freedom is to give users the power to copy, modify and redistribute a software or a manual. This improves life quality and the karma (not the /. one) of the human beans. This is all the GNU Project is about: try to improve socially the humans.

If you have a free software but it isn't working well and doesn't do what you exactly need, no matter: you can just fix it because you have the source code. But if you don't know how to program, you can ask some friend of your to do it. If you don't have a programmer friend, you can hire someone to do it. That's all the beauty.

People need to see free software as a social movement. It gives you a chance to be a better human being by sharing your knowledge with your neighboor.

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (4, Informative)

passthecrackpipe (598773) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881410)

Your assertion fails when you state what open source developers should and should not do in order to gain end-user acceptance. Whereas a commercial outfit has a motive to sell as many copies of the software they create just in order to survive, and must therefore carefully think about and target their audience/market, most open source developers are simply "scratching their itch", and if others can benefit from that, then fine. If they can't, then, well, tough... Projects that directly target the non-developing enduser, such as OpenOffice, and to a lesser extent KDE etc. should, of course, take the non-developer end user as their main audience, something that is very, very difficult. If you are an end user and you need easy-peasy, non technical, non developer software, you can always go for the paid-for open source software (not Free Software, usually) such as Xandros, Lindows, StarOffice, etc. there is plenty of hand holding there.

Unless, of course, you expect handholding for free, a different case alltogether.....

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (5, Informative)

10101001 10101001 (732688) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881446)

Apparently you didn't fully RTFA. Stallman doesn't believe the goal of getting people to use free software is popularity but because they want the freedom that comes with it. As copyright enforcement through copy protection or other means becomes progressively harsher for the end user, it'll become more clear that the reason that can motivate people to use free software isn't that everyone else uses it but because they don't want to live in an entrapped world of software. To that end, Stallman admits that people will end up using free software that's inferior to non-free software, but given enough users some might begin to help with the project. Maybe it'll be only words of support or a little money to add a feature they want, but the free software can be made superior to the non-free one and people can choose to use the free software as encouragement until it gets to that point. If anything, Stallman is encouraging the communitizing of the people in free software, not the simple leeching of something that's free. In the long term, the former will help everyone. And if end users realize that, they can accept inferior software until it becomes superior.

So the Win98 community is in good shape, then? (5, Insightful)

emil (695) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881466)

I read today that Win98 is nearly 25% of the desktop clients on the internet.

If Win98 were open, somebody would be stepping in to support it as Microsoft bowed out.

Win98 is not open, and now everyone who drank the coolaid is beginning to feel the effects of the arsenic.

Commercial software is always a ring in your nose. The GPL can also be a ring, but it is lighter and the developing entity generally does not hold the chain as tightly.

Re:Stallman Re: Non-free software (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881574)

Stallman asserts that "non-free software carries with it an antisocial system that prohibits coopoeration and community." This is MOST certainly overstating the importance of software's influence on each person's ability to cooperate and experience community. And I assert that this is where the open source movement fails.

Tell that to people in developing nations that can't afford to buy licenses for proprietary software. Those who wouldn't have access to a computer or the internet at all if not for Free Software.

Well... (-1)

j0nkatz (315168) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881298)

There is also a story on the front page of Http://www.trollse.cx

HAPPY BIRTHDAY GNU!!!!!!

Yeehaw (1, Redundant)

gantrep (627089) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881300)

Happy Birthday

How about ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881303)

to the bottom of the compost heap?

Cause of Savannah compromise? (-1, Troll)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881308)

What happend about the Savannah compromise? According to a LWN.net interview with FSF director Bradley Kuhn it appears that the FSF is NOT trying to figure out what really happened.

Why not?

Re:Cause of Savannah compromise? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881367)

That's because Brad Kuhn is a crackhead just like Stallman. Someone needs to tell them both, "Cut your hair, get a job, and put down the pipe."

I agree mostly.. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881309)

Richard, I agree with your pitch on free software to some extent, but how exactly are we in the IT business going to make a living if all (or most) of the software is free in the future? Why shouldnt someone charge for their software if its good and useful, why should they give away the design or their work, and isnt a little commerical competition good? If software developers should work for free, why not electronic engineers, architects, every profession? Like you, I dont agree with monopolies and those that abuse them, but thats another issue. If being a professional (charging) software developer becomes "bad" or "unfashionable", then isnt that a bit unfair on good, honest and reliable developers? We dont live in a 23rd century moneyless community, and communism didnt really take off in its various guises, so what are you promoting, a utopian future in every sense, a turn away from capitalism? But how can this just apply to software?

Re:I agree mostly.. (1, Interesting)

Steve 'Rim' Jobs (728708) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881326)

I have no idea what R.S. would or will say in reply to your concerns, but I would like to give you my perspective as a professional economist. As such, I am perhaps somewhat less interested than R.S. is in arguing what SHOULD be, and perhaps somewhat more interested in explaining what exists.

What indisputably exists is a rapidly expanding set of free software which more and more perfectly substitutes for commercial software, and in many cases excels it. Particularly considering its low cost, there is no need to explain the demand for this software. The challenge is, to explain the supply.

It seems to me that among the key sources of supply of "free" software are (1) that rewards not directly compensatory can nevertheless have significant value (e.g. recognition as a good designer, inventor of algorithms, or project coordinator is valuable human capital); (2) that marketing a new piece of code is significantly more difficult and costly than simply handing it out; (3) that normal IT puruits inevitably yield as by-products sections of code that are useful to others but neverthess may be too small or too insignificant to be packaged and marketed as stand-alone software products (see 2); (4) that very many minds working on any given software development problem will generally produce a much better solution than a few minds (this effect is an 'economy of scale'); and (5) the existence of the internet as an inexpensive but effective mechanism by which production may be coordinated and promotion and distribution may be facilitated.

I personally believe that the cost advantages enjoyed by free software producers are such that free software will eventually drive out proprietary software for all tasks that are routine and widespread. I believe there will remain scope for the development of proprietary software only in applications that are highly specialized or require confidentiality. I believe that this will occur as a market outcome of the self-interested actions of economic agents. So I differ from what seems to be R.S.'s belief that this will require anyone's altruistic conduct.

I also disagree with his proposal that we should shun proprietary software for the sake of encouraging the development of free software. Any business should do what best, subject to the law, makes money for its owners. The profit motive, which is responsible for the great efficiency of our economy, leaves scant room for altruistic software preferences. As for individuals, R.S. may do as he likes, but I personally feel no obligation to give special preference to free software. Instead, I take into account the costs and benefits of each and use whatever I decide is best for my particular circumstances.

That's why I use free software like GNU Linux, GNU Emacs, the Ion window manager, Open Office, Cdrecord, Gphoto2 and so forth, but also why I use proprietary software like Windows 98, Win4lin, ChessBase, Hiarcs and Bookup (the latter three being chess applications that really have no equal in the free software domain and which, unfortunately, exist in Windows versions only). Oh, and I paid $39 for Opera for Linux, which I think is a very good browser. Detesting Windows as I do, I do not browse, word process or do anything but chess on my Win4lin setup. Someday, perhaps after I retire, I may devote some time to improving the free software that exists for chess. If I do, I will do it for my own entertainment and not for the altruistic reasons proposed by R.S. I admit, however, that I would take keen satisfaction in stealing business from developers who designed software for Windows only.

Re:I agree mostly.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881340)

That's why I use free software like GNU Linux

Unless you're talking about Debian, I suspect you mean GNU/Linux. The Linux kernel is most definitely not GNU software.

Re:I agree mostly.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881341)

So does this mean you've stopped copying and pasting other people comments and may actually try and redeem yourself by being original and insightful?

Re:I agree mostly.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881354)

You don't know him very well, do you? Or are you just being sarcastic?

I'll just let the irony set in...

Re:I agree mostly.. (4, Interesting)

awol (98751) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881533)

I agree with you almost entirely. Except that when you say;

I also disagree with his proposal that we should shun proprietary software for the sake of encouraging the development of free software

I disagree with you in the context of the state's use of software. It should _never_ be proprietary. Indeed I believe the state should fund the writing/improving of the free version to meet their needs rather than purchase the non-free equivalent. I am happy to limit this requirement to the same category of applications for which you (and I) believe that free software will eventually drive out non free software, however I would be even happier not to limit it at all. The reason why the state should mandate the free solution is that the state is well able to make the long term decision that having these applications will be of more benefit to all citizens in the long run than the short term cost of improving the software or accepting reduced functionality. Indeed, I would argue that it is the duty of rational government to make these kind of decisions.

Re:I agree mostly.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881573)

And how long until most Linux systems and download sites for Linux source carry EULAs that disallow the use of non-OSS software? Sure, it would be narrowing user freedom, but it would be forcing people in to Richard Stallman's version of freedom alright. Considering that they want to intentionally slow down proprietary device drivers to make people use OSS ones that aren't being intentionally crippled because of the OSS communities contention that only OSS software is safe to run, I don't see such EULAs out of the question.

If Stallman has anything to do with writing any licenses in the future, we may be in trouble.

Re:I agree mostly.. (2, Insightful)

Scarblac (122480) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881580)

Nice explanation. Two points:

One, one part of that economy of scale is that it is very often useful for a company that has taken Free software and modified it for internal use, to release those modifications back to the original project. The advantages are that it is now someone else's job to keep your modifications compatible with new versions of the software, and that some other company may actually improve your code and also release it back, for you to use. The first of those (stay compatible) is my favorite reason for releasing stuff back.

The second point is: Have you tried SCID [sf.net] ? I think it's a really great chess database application and it works on both Linux and Windows.

Re:I agree mostly.. (2, Insightful)

Mirk (184717) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881585)

I also disagree with his proposal that we should shun proprietary software for the sake of encouraging the development of free software. Any business should do what best, subject to the law, makes money for its owners. The profit motive, which is responsible for the great efficiency of our economy, leaves scant room for altruistic software preferences.

This is not a universal constant, it's just your preference of what you consider important. You say "Any business should do what best, subject to the law, makes money for its owners". This is a philosophical/ethical statement, and your ethics on this subject differ from Stallman's. For that matter they differ from those running the many and various non-profits out there. There are other motivations that making money.

That's not to say that your motivation is necessarily a bad one, of course. Just that you need to realise it's only a motivation, not the only one. So if the behaviour and statements of people like Stallman perplex you, then it's because he is marching to a completely different beat.

(And, BTW., may I say thank God he does.)

Re:I agree mostly.. (3, Insightful)

BJZQ8 (644168) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881338)

You make money like everything in the GNU/FOSS movement...by charging for services, installation, operation. Electronic and engineered items are harder to pass on to someone else, who can also make a contribution; software, on the other hand, allows you to make a copy, change it, and pass it on to someone else who might also make changes. That's hard to do with a bridge or a VCR.

Re:I agree mostly.. (0)

phillk6751 (654352) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881426)

You can also charge for the non-source code included with these programs(for example, the textures, maps and models for a game), which can allow a company such as ID software to STILL make money off of say Doom 3, but still keep the value of open source(as long as you make it clear that the media is copyrighted and such as normal, just that the source is open)

Re:I agree mostly.. (1)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881553)

You make money like everything in the GNU/FOSS movement...by charging for services, installation, operation.

The problem is, if your application is well designed and well documented (as in documentation for users - not just code comments) then there should be little to no need for users to require support for installation and operation.

Which only leaves you coding new features. Which if you code is suitably well written and commented, then it might be cheaper for them to do the majority of small things internally and leave you completely out of the loop.

Re:I agree mostly.. (1)

wcbarksdale (621327) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881444)

Remember that only 10% of commercially produced software is ever sold. I would happily accept a 10% decline in the software industry as the price for living in a Free world.

Re:I agree mostly.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881461)

You miss a big point. Only a small amount of software written is for public consumption. The vast majority of it is internal to companies for their own business. RMS does not say this software should be given away, and he has made the point several times.

Re:I agree mostly.. (2, Insightful)

gustgr (695173) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881485)

What the FSF proposes isn't to give away your software for free. You can charge for your work and you are encouraged to do this. But once you've sold your software to another you, you may let he/she to redistribute it for free or sell it under the same terms you used. You people who use the software are not ruled by the software or by the company.

Stallman doesn't encourage comunism or non-profit activies. He encourage the free software for the freedom of the users.

I could explain a lot of things here, but I would say exactly what have already been said at the GNU site [gnu.org] . Maybe you should read it really careful before saying thinks like 'turn away from capitalism'.

Re:I agree mostly.. (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881524)

but how exactly are we in the IT business going to make a living if all (or most) of the software is free in the future?
The same way most of us programmers make a living in the IT business - being paid to write software. Most software is not written for commercial sale, and while I have no difficulty understanding why people outside of the industry aren't aware of this (as the software they see advertised on the TV, etc, is obviously for sale), I do question how anyone in the computer industry could fail to spot this rather obvious fact.

Most software is written to solve particular problems. In my case, my business needs software to maintain and analyse volumes of financial information provided for a particular industry. A factory needs software to run its machines and process its payroll. A bank needs software to run its ATMs, to process financial transactions, to enable and log all communications between offices in a standardized way. Most of this software is customized for the needs of the end-user.

And elsewhere, hardware manufacturers will always want operating systems to be developed and have an incentive to pour development time into improving them, as they will basic tools such as word processors and spreadsheets. Games will continue to be developed, the trend right now is to build amazing games as data hooked up to standardized, centrally developed, game engines, and I suspect we may even see game engines become a part of operating systems in the long term (something a hardware manufacturer has an active incentive to further develop) - meanwhile, nobody's going to be concerned about the notion of selling maps/scripts that use these engines.

I see no problems with a shortage of jobs for programmers, and I believe the incentives to develop that tiny percentage of software that actually is sold today will continue to exist, just in a different form.

RMS/FSF/GNU == less paying software jobs (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881314)

just wait for the flood of GNU violation lassuits

This just in. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881315)

It's dying. Actually it's already dead, Jim.

Dead Jim? (-1, Offtopic)

Discoflamingo13 (90009) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881323)

Well, you grab his tricorder. I'll get his wallet.

THAT'S GNU/STALLMAN TO YOU, BITCH! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881317)

Hello, this is Richard Stallman. Even though I am clearly a hippy-ass piece of cocksucking shit, my post here will get moderated to +5 because I'm the fucking hero of so many fat, sexless GNU/fanboys. So therefore I'm posting anonymously as to not being a karma-whore.

Re:THAT'S GNU/STALLMAN TO YOU, BITCH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881416)

Gnu's Not linUx

RMS.. (5, Insightful)

Tirel (692085) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881321)

Moderators: this isn't meant as a flamebait.

I don't want to be the one dissin' RMS, but I think he needs a sanity check or just stop being a "spokesperson" for the Free software community. It is true that he has done a lot to further it's progress, but lets face it, this is the person who hates debian simply because they include THE OPTION (which, mind you, has to be enabled by editing a text config file) of downloading non-free software. This is the guy who refuses to follow the proper procedures laid out hundreds of years ago by the French revolutionaries (you
all know what I mean), etc

He gives the Free software community a bad name, and with him on the forefront, Free software will never be part of corporate america (which is becoming more and more synonymous with America itself.)

Thank you for reading this.

Re:RMS.. (2, Insightful)

kinzillah (662884) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881349)

I agree, someone less... zealous would make a better proponent for free software. I like my free software, but I like money too. Some things are better free, and some you need to pay for. Everything in moderation.

Re:RMS.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881356)

This is the guy who refuses to follow the proper procedures laid out hundreds of years ago by the French revolutionaries (you all know what I mean), etc

I don't. It's probably not about body hygiene, 'cause Stallman and the French seem to be pretty much on par when it comes to that. ;-)

Re:RMS.. Corporate America = America??? (3, Insightful)

dada21 (163177) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881379)

Why did you say something so untrue? How is corporate American becoming America? I own corporations, yet I have very little control over other citizens. If they don't want my products, they don't buy them from me.

The average citizen has far more control over my corporation than I have over them. They can refuse to buy. They can open their own competitive business. They can vote in the town I am in to ban my product or my business. They can zone me out of their neighborhoods. They tax my sales and use that money in ways I disagree with. They tax my property. They tax the money I pay my employees. They tax my profits, too.

How is Corporate America a bad thing? Corporations that are friendly with the government are given benefits (cheap loans, tariffs against competition, and even regulating competition out of the business) is NOT a free market, but a mercantilist one. America was never supposed to be mercantilist, it was supposed to be capitalist. Capitalism allows no monopoly, but mercantilism does.

And mercantilism can only happen from government getting involved in economic planning -- ruin from the start.

Re:RMS.. Corporate America = America??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881458)

Don't worry about it man. It's just Slashdork groupthink. Nobody in the sane world believes in any of this bullshit about corporations controlling citizens.

Re:RMS.. Corporate America = America??? (1)

dada21 (163177) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881502)

Are you kidding? The entire group of slashdot seems to be Greens with no grasp of why economies grow (capitalism) or fall (mercantilism/socialism). It is very important that people start to realize that the bad parts of the economy are due to mercantilism, and the good parts are do to profit-"greedy" people who are trying to better their own lives...

Re:RMS.. Corporate America = America??? (2, Interesting)

lukewarmfusion (726141) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881550)

I tend to agree with his statement. Maybe your corporation doesn't control citizens, but some corporations are in a position to influence and exert pressure. Record companies, Microsoft, many others... what OS do you use? Do you listen to music by artists that aren't associated with the RIAA? Corporate America is certainly becoming more synonymous with America in general. A hundred years ago, the major players in the world were the rich guys - Rockerfellers and whatnot. Now, it's corporations.

GNU/Richard Stallman (2, Funny)

ScottGant (642590) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881397)

GNU/I GNU/thought GNU/that GNU/he GNU/demands GNU/GNU GNU/placed GNU/before GNU/everything GNU/when GNU/speaking GNU/to GNU/him.

GNU/But GNU/I GNU/am GNU/could GNU/be GNU/wrong GNU/on GNU/this.

Re:GNU/Richard Stallman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881423)

SCO/Yea, SCO/but SCO/SCO SCO/wants SCO/the SCO/kind SCO/of SCO/credit. SCO/they SCO/copyrighted SCO/all SCO/of SCO/the SCO/Engish SCO/dictionary!

Soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881491)

SCO will win their lawsuit and purchase GNU for two keyboards and a can of Mountain Dew. Then we will be using SCO/GNU/Lunixware.

Re:RMS.. (3, Insightful)

Trashman (3003) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881420)

He gives the Free software community a bad name, and with him on the forefront, Free software will never be part of corporate america (which is becoming more and more synonymous with America itself.)


I disagree. Without people like Mr. Stallman, The free software movement would not be where it is today. His "problem" is that he envisions a perfect world where all software is free. This is a noble goal, but the reality is that this will never be. There will always be need (and a market) for non-free software. But keep in mind also that not everyone in america is a corporation.

Re:RMS.. (0)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881473)

They why did he release the Hurd OS maintainer because the maintainter wanted a more Free license for the docs and RMS wanted a less free one?

It appears that RMS isn't as consistant as he used to be.

Re:RMS.. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881594)

If its too free, they can't modify it easily later for upgrades to force its users to not use non-free software.

Re:RMS.. (4, Informative)

Gumshoe (191490) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881468)

It is true that he has done a lot to further it's progress, but lets face it, this is the person who hates debian simply because they include THE OPTION (which, mind you, has to be enabled by editing a text config file) of downloading non-free software.


He doesn't "hate" Debian at all. That's patently untrue. He has said [ofb.biz] however, that he doesn't recommend Debian because of the free vs non-free issue and instead encourages the use of GNU/LinEx.

This is the guy who refuses to follow the proper procedures laid out hundreds of years ago by the French revolutionaries (you all know what I mean), etc
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Re:RMS.. (1)

tommck (69750) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881579)

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.


Me too.

Re:RMS.. (1)

pwagland (472537) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881600)

This is the guy who refuses to follow the proper procedures laid out hundreds of years ago by the French revolutionaries (you all know what I mean), etc
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
What I think he meant is that we are meant to chop off the kings head. I guess the analogy would extend to Bill Gates, but I'm not sure...

not only GNU turns 20 (5, Funny)

sulli (195030) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881325)

but also RMS' beard. Send the Fab Five to do something about it!

Re:not only GNU turns 20 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881465)

20 years, and still not a working kernel in sight.

linux.com? (5, Funny)

SmilingBoy (686281) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881327)

But will RMS be happy that this artcle is posted to www.linux.com and not www.gnulinux.free?

Re:linux.com? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881548)

People who suffer from delusions are very, very good at rationalizing their irrationalities. Richard Stallman is a deeply delusional individual. The fact that there is a .com, short for "commercial", in the first place probably bothers him.

Hurd... (2, Funny)

TWX (665546) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881333)

So, was the Hurd mentioned as the new GNU kernel that Stallman still wants to use? I mean, Linux is supposed to be replaced by the Hurd, any day now...

Spelling Error (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881372)

Hurd == Turd.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLZ!!

# Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

Re:Hurd... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881384)

AnyDay = DateTime.Now + 365;

Re:Hurd... (2, Funny)

lxs (131946) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881395)

As Basil Fawlty would say:

Don't mention the HURD.

Re:Hurd... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881544)

That's the beauty of the GPL, every version of Hurd that I run is forked from the latest linux. I just search replace "linux" with "hurd" in all the files and I am running a state of the art hurd kernel for my GNU system.

Happy Brithday FSF! (0, Insightful)

stox (131684) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881336)

What would we have done without ya?

Open Source and Broader Community (1, Redundant)

Steve 'Rim' Jobs (728708) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881342)

Mr Stallman asks the question, "What does it mean to run free software?". Each person or organization who chooses an open source OS, application or other tool over a proprietary one chooses to do so for a their own reasons. In this article Stallman discusses why he chose this path but he is arguing that each person or organization should make the choice for the same reasons he did, with the same motivation.

Stallman asserts that "non-free software carries with it an antisocial system that prohibits coopoeration and community." This is certainly overstating the importance of software's influence on each person's ability to cooperate and experience community. And I assert that this is where the open source movement fails.

While open source software promotes cooperation and community for the developers involved in its creation, it doesn't attempt to build community by creating more user friendly tools.

The general popluation doesn't care about the right to see the source code, most of the users of computers can't do any thing with the code any way. Open source project managers and developers need to better consider their end users. End users are not always other programmers, some are teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, housewives, grandparents.

Usability for the community at large must go beyond RPMs and a GUI that mimics Windows. Usability must extend into high quality instructional programs that provide the information at the user's fingertips. Job aids and other electronic performance support tools that address the needs of the non-developer community will do more to foster cooperation and community between the developers and their users.

Organizations like the FSF and SEUL need to consider how to partner include Instructional Systems Design (ISD) and change mangement experts into their projects. After all what good is any application free or not without a high probability of end user acceptance.

Re:Open Source and Broader Community (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881412)

That's the second version of this comment posted in this thread. Nice job copying a comment from the NewsForge story.

Re:Open Source and Broader Community (1)

gnutechguy (700980) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881450)

You confuse software with instruction. As I understand Mr. Stallman, his goal is that people can share software freely. Your complaints have to do with end user training, and also with user familiarity. These are seperate issue from sharing free software per se.

Training for free software/open source software will increase as the acceptance of the software increases.Free software is already being used by teachers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, housewives, and grandparents.

Re:Open Source and Broader Community (4, Insightful)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881598)

This is certainly overstating the importance of software's influence on each person's ability to cooperate and experience community. And I assert that this is where the open source movement fails.

Except for two little facts:

  • Stallman is a member - a founding member - of the free software movement, not the open source movement.
  • Both the free software and open source movements are succeeding spectacularly.
The general popluation doesn't care about the right to see the source code, most of the users of computers can't do any thing with the code any way.

The general population doesn't install new plumbing fixtures either. But only a fool would buy a house where all the pipes were kept locked away with only one plumber having the key.

He's already accomplished a great deal. (5, Insightful)

Meat Blaster (578650) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881364)

Before the contributions of Stallman, and those designing software under the GNU banner, who would have noticed the horrid direction proprietary software and hardware have us headed in?

They've demonstrated not only that it is possible to roll your own system (GNU/Herd, GNU/Linux, EMACS, and the myriad utilities), but also why it is necessary. What must come next in this new era of DRM are those who can create their own hardware, free of the oppression and lock-in that tomorrow's systems will have. But we will not ask ourselves what we can run on our homebrew hardware, because an answer is ready thanks to the efforts of the Free Software Foundation.

Re:He's already accomplished a great deal. (1)

Fizzl (209397) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881589)

They've demonstrated not only that it is possible to roll your own system (GNU/
Herd, GNU/Linux, EMACS, (...)

RMS would hang you for that...

.
.
.

(Hurd)

GNU/Hurd (4, Insightful)

mhesseltine (541806) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881366)

Ok, since the Linux kernel allows binary modules, it's not necessarily "free software". Does that mean that the Hurd kernel won't allow binary modules, or open wrappers (Nvidia)? If not, does Stallman think that developers can create drivers for proprietary hardware that are at least as good as, if not better than, those provided by the manufacturer?

Or, is "free software" just the first stepping stone to "free hardware," where every innovation is public, and any competitor is free to use your innovations?

Re:GNU/Hurd (1)

GrenDel Fuego (2558) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881474)

Does that mean that the Hurd kernel won't allow binary modules, or open wrappers (Nvidia)

If they can't, I'm sure they'll just tell people not to buy those products.

mod me troll -1 but... (4, Insightful)

jasonbowen (683345) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881374)

Anybody else envision some larger than life figurehead standing at a podium telling you exactly what you need to do to be happy and that they have all the answers? I enjoy the spirit of cooperation and the quality of code that has come out of open source and free software but I'll be damned if I think it's the only way to do things.

RMS still doesn't get it... (5, Insightful)

goldspider (445116) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881403)

"non-free software carries with it an antisocial system that prohibits coopoeration and community"

If most people's expectation of software was to create "cooperation and community", RMS mmight be onto something here. But the truth is that most people and businesses want software that fulfills a particular need (or set of needs).

As long as RMS continues to deny the purpose of software for most people, free software will never meet the needs of the masses.

BTW... (1)

mirko (198274) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881407)

...GNUArt [gnuart.net] , which charter [gnuart.org] have been proof-read by RMS [stallman.org] has gotten 3 year old last Thursday !

I'm afraid I will have to disagree with RMS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881411)

No, I have to disagree. Evolution doesn't happen in phases like you are trying to explain it. All through mankind we have wanted to create something with only one thing in mind - it needs to be better than the previous solution. It doesn't matter what we're talking about - be it about making camp fire or cooking food. Mankind finds better solutions all the time but who is the on to judge which one is better than the other one. We can easily see that we just can't be objective so it turns out to be relatively pointless to talk about better innovation and how it effects on our everyday life. Evolutionary steps happen in our everyday life, think about you when you first learned to walk you thought wow this is better than crawling around well that you can call an 'evolutionary step' but if we are talking about manufacturing cars. Nothing evolutionary has happened since Henry Ford invented the motorized vehicle. It's been the same four wheels and the steering wheel combination even to this day. So, as a conclusion I would like to point out that it is quite useless to talk about evolutionary steps or 5 years, or five minutes. I mean, I wouldn't know the difference. Would you?

Where to go party? (4, Informative)

DrMorris (156226) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881419)

There is a webpage [gnu.org] for the 20th anniversary of the GNU project, but I can't see any planned events. Does anybody know if there are or have been some GNU parties around the world?

Savannah Compromise? What happened? (4, Interesting)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881429)

What happend about the Savannah compromise? According to a LWN.net interview with FSF director Bradley Kuhn it appears that the FSF is NOT trying to figure out what really happened.

Why not?

20 years old.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881440)

And still a virgin.

Bondage ? (1)

SteveAstro (209000) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881442)

From Stallman's article:
an attractive nuisance, a temptation to accept bondage
but some people LIKE accepting bondage.... Steve

RMS needs to (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881445)


take a bath. And for God's sakes brush his teeth.
I saw Stallman once and oh my god the smell and dragon breath was unbearable.

RMS (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881448)

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality,' which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

* Linus Torvalds is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
* Richard M. Stallman, spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
* Alan Cox is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail, which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted on leftist commie propaganda site Salon.com as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo slut!

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children. To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis, glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat is secret homo slang for the tip of a penis that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously /anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no /opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherit gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

Even the title 'Slashdot' originally referred to a homosexual practice. Slashdot of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, http://www.eff.org/.

The editors of Slashdot also have homosexual names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement. (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot runs on Apache!

The Apache server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'

FEEDBACK

What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo-calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus, Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator.

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism.

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h, Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church. Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee, Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

One scary thing about Perl is that it contains hidden homosexual messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

And PHP stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase, Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation. Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman.

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the fuck?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck right off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD, which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain. You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat, but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

Current changes: This version sent to FreeWIPO by 'Bring BackATV' as plain text. Reformatted everything, added all links back in (that we could match from the previous version), many new ones (Slashbot bait links). Even more spelling fixed. Who wrote this thing, CmdrTaco himself?

Previous changes: Yet more changes added. Spelling fixed. Feedback added. Explanation of 'distro' system. 'Mount Point' syntax described. More filth regarding `man` and Slashdot. Yet more fucking spelling fixed. 'Fetchmail' uncovered further. More Slashbot baiting. Apache exposed. Distribution licence at foot of document.

ANUX -- A full Linux distribution... Up your ass!

Black & White vs shades of gray (5, Insightful)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881457)

This is the problem with RMS - he is too black and white.

If you have read his writings, he has fairly convincingly argued from first principles that software should be free. I, and many others, have read this and been inspired, because the world he ultimately wants to live in is about co-operation and sharing.

However, RMS often leaves people behind with his extreme on/off view. This sentance is pivotal:

Users cannot be free while using a non-free program

This is seriously distorting his already bent definition of "free". Freedom, as he defines it, can be applied to software (and with a bit of work books, music etc) and while you might argue with the word used it's a useful concept to have.

Here though, he applies the word free to users, and this is a different thing entirely. Worse, he asserts that all it takes is one piece of non-free software to spoil his utopian dream.

I think a lot of people like the idea of free software, but we're willing to accept compromise. It's not an all or nothing proposition. Free software have inherantly good vibes because we're not imposing arbitrary limitations on what people can do with what we made (which is ultimately beneficial) but it's not like I'm a slave to the machine because I use the NVidia video drivers.

Yeah, I'd like to have free drivers, but Alan Cox himself has said he cannot think of a way to justify NVidia freeing their code - their fears of what would happen to their business if they did that are justified, he thinks. That's good enough for me. In this case, it just isn't practical. I don't like it, but that's life.

RMS sees it differently. That alienates people.

RMS and Linus (5, Insightful)

sgtron (35704) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881459)

God bless Richard Stallman for giving us GNU.
God Bless Linus Torvalds for making it usable.

RMS = William Wallace? (2, Insightful)

NixterAg (198468) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881472)

The most effective way to strengthen our community for the future is to spread understanding of the value of freedom--to teach more people to recognize the moral unacceptability of non-free software. People who value freedom are, in the long term, its best and essential defense.

I don't think Mr. Stallman defines freedom in the same way I do. I don't think Mr. Stallman's concept of morality is anywhere near mine either. I just can't take someone seriously who tells me that non-free software is morally unnacceptable. I think Mr. Stallman is a bit out of touch with reality and with his importance to the world.

The open source community is much better off gaining credibility and notoriety by making better software and being an inclusive place where developers and tinkerers hone their craft than by suggesting non-free software is immoral.

First line... (4, Funny)

jdreed1024 (443938) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881476)

The first line reads: "It was twenty years ago today that I quit my job at MIT to begin developing a free software operating system, GNU."

Did anyone else start thinking up new lyrics to Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band when they read that first sentence? Perhaps a new Free Software Song is in the making....

a curious quote and comparison (5, Interesting)

randyest (589159) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881480)

Stallman says:

The most effective way to strengthen our community for the future is to spread understanding of the value of freedom--to teach more people to recognize the moral unacceptability of non-free software. People who value freedom are, in the long term, its best and essential defense.

The current U.S. administration says (my paraphrasing):

The most effective way to strengthen the world for the future is to spread understanding of the value of freedom--to teach more people to recognize the moral unacceptability of non-free peoples. People who value freedom are, in the long term, its best and essential defense.

Isn't it odd that two apparently unrelated, or even diametrically opposed, groups can have such similar sentiments as their "mission statements"? I guess some will claim that my paraphrasing is optimistic or even naieve, but I believe it, and I believe a lot of others do as well.

So, we have now a view of Stallman working on free software as a microcosmic version of the U.S. working on world freedom. Discuss!

According to RMS I should be allowed to (1, Insightful)

ThePlasticSurgeon (730373) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881492)

If I were to design hardware for a computer I should (for the greater good) provide open source drivers for my hardware (this would not mean I would have to provide source code for advanced hardware engines). This would allow my hardware to be used under many systems (and would increase profits, but that isn't important).

If I were to design hardware for a computer I should not have to release the schematics for my hardware and let others make and sell their own devices (this would decrease profits and might ruin me).

We should stop RMS before he says any more. I don't give a shit about Graphical User Interfaces or ridiculous beards but that attitude is wrong.

RMS is before his time. (4, Insightful)

Cytlid (95255) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881508)

I can see where he is going with this. But before much of this can happen, other things have to happen. I recently changed my sig to compare RMS to Abraham Lincoln. I did some (quick, incomplete) research on the emancipation proclimation. One site describes is as "The first of many documents that slowly freed human slaves in the United States." The operative word here being "slowly". Much of the tech industry is still in its infancy. The best we can hope for right now is a "melting pot" effect. As people become more tech-aware and tech-savvy, maybe they'll embrace free software more, and even contribute to it. All it takes is enough of proprietary software, commercial entities and monopolies to get on the nerves of most people before radical change can take effect. I just believe that RMS is really ahead of his time. He could very well be the "first of his kind that slowly freed people from technical constraints."

Just my $.02.

How to recognize trolls from quite a long way away (-1, Flamebait)

wcbarksdale (621327) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881511)

1. Post a story about RMS.
2. ???
3. Everyone who replies is a troll!

Another RMS post (4, Interesting)

LittleLebowskiUrbanA (619114) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881521)

RMS is all talk and no walk. Take a look at what ESR and Perens have been doing to combat SCO. Then you see comments where all he does is worry about Linux being identified as GNU. Reminds of the zealots who have to pronounce GNU (guhnew" and Gnome similary and always have to say GNU/Linux not just Linux. Who cares?! It's just words.
Here's Stallman's comments:
""I am concerned about long-term entrenched confusions such as referring to a version of our GNU OS as 'Linux' and thinking that our work on free software was motivated by the ideas associated with 'open source.' These confusions lead users away from the basic issue: their freedom. By comparison, the events involving SCO are transitory and almost trivial," Stallman says".

Sure a lot of people don't like Stallman (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881528)

The goals are different. He even mentions it on the article, if you care just about popularity, closed source is more than welcome. If you're a cheap developer who wants to make money of other people's work without giving any back, LGPL is a blessing, GPL is bad. But if your goal is freedom, Stallman most likely is your hero and you agree with almost everything he says. So, don't call him crazy zealot just because his ideas and goals aren't the same as yours. All he is doing is being coerent to his principles. BTW, he's not telling that proprietary software turns people to antisocial, what he says is proprietary software is a reflex of how antisocial and coopoerative our society is. Also, as an economics student, I must point out: this is not anti-capitalist, comunist thing, it can be a market similar to most out there, one close example being the exchange of rights to use patented technology between companies.

SO... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7881536)

Free Software.... where do you want to go today?

GNOME? (3, Insightful)

nonmaskable (452595) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881543)

Why, then, does he advocate GNOME when it (more than anything else in the free software ecosystem) enables closed, non-free propriatory software?

GNOMErs gleefully point this out as the major selling point for GNOME over KDE.

I don't have a problem with the license choice, just the hypocrisy.

What about Free software on Windows? (2, Interesting)

gosand (234100) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881561)

I asked this question in the Slashdot interview [slashdot.org] questions to Bruce Perens back in July. (What ever happened to that interview anyway?)

My question was modded +5, and I would really like to hear one of the "leaders" answer on it. Here it is as I posted it then...

A lot of people equate Open Source with Linux, but what are your opinions on Open Source on Windows? Of course Open Source works well on Linux, it falls more in line with the philosophy of the OS. In your opinion, is it more beneficial to keep the concepts of Open Source and Linux coupled, or to get the message of Open Source out there in any way possible?

The question still applies to Free software too. Is it possible to run Free software on Windows, and not get RMS' hackles up? OpenOffice is a great example that runs on Windows. Is it worth it to get the word out about alternative to proprietary software, or is the whole movement about alternatives to proprietary OSs?

Profits below Zero to Negative ? (2, Interesting)

leoaugust (665240) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881564)


I love free software esp. when it is the underdog. The following comment is only meant in the sense of what will happen if free software becomes the Big Kid on the Block.

Simply by using a new and unfinished free replacement, before it technically compares with the non-free model, you can help encourage the free developers to persevere until it becomes superior.

I see an analogy with Economic Models where they talk of Perfect Competition and a Level Playing Field leading increasingly towards profits approaching to Zero. It is not really a bad situation in the Creative-Destruction evolution of the market economies.

This economic destination would be perfect if the 'free" software was being written in time that was "leisure" time, or even in "professional" time if it is going to lead to professional and career advancements. Then the concept of Zero Profits is not unreasonable as there are other intangible benefits.

But for many other people the time spent writing "free" software is going to entail expenses - esp. if they they don't have the above two mitigating factors. In that case the programmers are then paying themselves for the software they write - i.e. negative profits.

I know this question has been asked a million/gazillion times. But, hey, it's GNU's 20th Birthday, so why not nostaligically revist it.

  1. Does this mean that people should accept "negative Profits?"
  2. Does it imply that the "free" software users are being subsidized by the programmers themselves.
  3. How will the "societal benefits" of "free" software turn into some profits for the programming community - directly or indirectly.

I guess, all I am asking is that if the users are going to benefit from "free" software, and that becomes the dominant mode of software usage, how are the large number of programmers going to be compensated directly or indirectly -esp. the ones who are not Hobbyists and Resume-builders.

Motivations? (1)

mpath (555000) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881569)

There are two common motivations to develop a free program. One is that there is no program to do the job. Unfortunately, accepting the use of a non-free program eliminates that motivation.

I'm not following this... if there's no program to do the job, then how can one accept the use of a non-free (and non-existent) program?

He goes on further to say that the one true motivation for writing free programs is to replace non-free programs.

That only goes so far, though. Why must the free software folks resign themselves to coding clones of popular products? Why can't they be innovative themselves?

Maybe I'm not fully comprehending the whole free software mantra. I recently saw the OmniWeb Browser [mikematas.com] movie and was quite impressed with the whole tab/dock functionality. Why couldn't something like that come out of the Mozilla Firebird group? Instead, we're gonna have to duplicate that functionality (I hope) if we want it.

So OmniGroup was innovative and I'm sure they'll be rewarded with their sales. They also have a company structure for R&D to come up with these type of innovations. Same can be said of many other corporations, too. With those types of innovations and associated costs, the companies recoup them (& profit, too) by making them non-free. Unless the free software community becomes more innovative, I'm not entirely satisfied with relying on a completely free software world to keep progress moving.

any last words ..... freedom! (4, Interesting)

bain (1910) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881584)

I respect RMS for his work and some of his views, but I think that his notion that only OSS is right contracdicts his beliefs. By saying everybody should shun non-FS he's limiting their freedom of choice is he not.

I have always seen FS/OSS as choice rather then a need. I introduce people to it and leave them to choose if they want to use it or not. I think the FS should promote Freedom of Choice when using software, and point out the advantages of choosing FS rather then promoting using only Free Software to promote freedom.

I have two words for you Mr. Stallman. (1)

gregarican (694358) | more than 10 years ago | (#7881586)

Ayn Rand. Read "Atlas Shrugged" sometime and ask "Who is Bill Gates?"
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?