3 ms·

Maybe you shouldn't think so much about your freedom as about maximizing the total freedom. If that means you can't do everything you want, too bad. When peopl

by lutorm 17y ago

Maybe you shouldn't think so much about your freedom as about maximizing the total freedom. If that means you can't do everything you want, too bad. When people in the US talk about freedom, they seem to only focus on the freedom of them to do what they want and disregard the possibility that their actions might have side effects.

GHFigs 17y ago
the total freedom What does this mean?
- lutorm 17y ago
  Hard to define, I know. But I'm sure you agree that giving you the freedom to imprison people at will does not result in a net increase of freedom when you take into account the people affected by that.
rimantas 17y ago
First, I am not in US. Second, I don't see how limiting everyone's freedom maximizes it. Nor do I think that imposing some particular understanding of freedom does that. Consider me releasing my code under GPL in one case and MIT in another. Which leads to maximization of freedom for those who may be interested in reusing it?
- loup-vaillant 17y ago
  Your question is biased. I'd say only this: if the GPL gets in your way, that's because you want to distribute proprietary software, right? But if you care about freedom, why on Earth would you take it away from your users?
  - rimantas 17y ago
    I'd say only this: if the GPL gets in your way, that's because you want to distribute proprietary software, right? Wrong. Compare GPL to MIT and you will understand.
    - loup-vaillant 17y ago
      I still don't understand. Please be explicit: what would you want to do that the GPL prevents you to do? Don't say "I want to distribute under another licence". If that's your reason, I would like to know why you would want to distribute under another licence (and beware circular reasoning). If you have another reason, please tell me because really, I have no idea.
- lutorm 17y ago
  My comment was just an observation of common rhetoric here, not a direct response to you. But re: limiting freedom: Do you think that giving everyone the freedom to kill people would be a net improvement of the freedoms of people when you take into account that people who are killed don't have any freedom at all. It's so easy to say that freedom means that "I should be able to do what I want without regard for others". But thinking of freedom only in the active sense is an extremely naive idea of freedom. What about my freedom to remain free of the consequences of your actions? Concrete example 1: SUVs disproportionately transfer risk to the occupants of smaller vehicles in the event of a collision. Is someone's freedom to choose to drive an SUV more important than my freedom to drive a Miata without undue risk of being killed by your SUV? Why do you think your lifestyle choice should be more important than mine? Concrete example 2: In the US, some people think it's an essential freedom to be allowed to own firearms. This has lead to a proliferation of firearms which means that the US has the highest rate of gunshot deaths of any modern country. Why should people's freedom to own a firearm be more important than my freedom to go about my business without worrying about getting shot? My point is: there's always a tradeoff. Not acknowledging that tradeoff is either disingenuous or naive.
  - rimantas 17y ago
    It's so easy to say that freedom means that "I should be able to do what I want without regard for others". I never said anything like that. I am talking code, not SUVs and firearms there. I don't want some RMS or EFF or FSF telling others what they can and cannot do with my code just because they have some weird image of freedom.
    - jrockway 17y ago
      They're not telling you that. License your own code under whatever license you want. When you use my code I want you to be restricted. I want you to make all your changes publicly available to everyone, and if you make a hardware device that runs my code, I want you to make it possible for users to modify my code and be able to run it on that device. If you don't want to agree to my conditions, don't run my code. But this isn't about taking away freedom; I want there to be more freedom. Because of the conditions I impose, anyone can build off your work in addition to my work. More code, more freedom.

by lutorm 17y ago

GHFigs 17y ago

the total freedom What does this mean?

lutorm 17y ago
Hard to define, I know. But I'm sure you agree that giving you the freedom to imprison people at will does not result in a net increase of freedom when you take into account the people affected by that.

rimantas 17y ago

First, I am not in US. Second, I don't see how limiting everyone's freedom maximizes it. Nor do I think that imposing some particular understanding of freedom does that. Consider me releasing my code under GPL in one case and MIT in another. Which leads to maximization of freedom for those who may be interested in reusing it?

loup-vaillant 17y ago
Your question is biased. I'd say only this: if the GPL gets in your way, that's because you want to distribute proprietary software, right? But if you care about freedom, why on Earth would you take it away from your users?
- rimantas 17y ago
  I'd say only this: if the GPL gets in your way, that's because you want to distribute proprietary software, right? Wrong. Compare GPL to MIT and you will understand.
  - loup-vaillant 17y ago
    I still don't understand. Please be explicit: what would you want to do that the GPL prevents you to do? Don't say "I want to distribute under another licence". If that's your reason, I would like to know why you would want to distribute under another licence (and beware circular reasoning). If you have another reason, please tell me because really, I have no idea.
lutorm 17y ago
My comment was just an observation of common rhetoric here, not a direct response to you. But re: limiting freedom: Do you think that giving everyone the freedom to kill people would be a net improvement of the freedoms of people when you take into account that people who are killed don't have any freedom at all. It's so easy to say that freedom means that "I should be able to do what I want without regard for others". But thinking of freedom only in the active sense is an extremely naive idea of freedom. What about my freedom to remain free of the consequences of your actions? Concrete example 1: SUVs disproportionately transfer risk to the occupants of smaller vehicles in the event of a collision. Is someone's freedom to choose to drive an SUV more important than my freedom to drive a Miata without undue risk of being killed by your SUV? Why do you think your lifestyle choice should be more important than mine? Concrete example 2: In the US, some people think it's an essential freedom to be allowed to own firearms. This has lead to a proliferation of firearms which means that the US has the highest rate of gunshot deaths of any modern country. Why should people's freedom to own a firearm be more important than my freedom to go about my business without worrying about getting shot? My point is: there's always a tradeoff. Not acknowledging that tradeoff is either disingenuous or naive.
- rimantas 17y ago
  It's so easy to say that freedom means that "I should be able to do what I want without regard for others". I never said anything like that. I am talking code, not SUVs and firearms there. I don't want some RMS or EFF or FSF telling others what they can and cannot do with my code just because they have some weird image of freedom.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    They're not telling you that. License your own code under whatever license you want. When you use my code I want you to be restricted. I want you to make all your changes publicly available to everyone, and if you make a hardware device that runs my code, I want you to make it possible for users to modify my code and be able to run it on that device. If you don't want to agree to my conditions, don't run my code. But this isn't about taking away freedom; I want there to be more freedom. Because of the conditions I impose, anyone can build off your work in addition to my work. More code, more freedom.