11 ms·

I admire Stallman's unworldly, unfettered commitment to his principles. It's difficult to live an ethical life, and twice as difficult to live an ethical life u

I admire Stallman's unworldly, unfettered commitment to his principles. It's difficult to live an ethical life, and twice as difficult to live an ethical life under capitalism. Stallman's manic devotion to assiduously following his own moral compass is, bizarre though its manifestation may be, something we should all aspire towards. That being said, I'm perpetually frustrated by the boneheadedness of his ethical commitments. They strike me as ineffective and, more critically, unsound: it seems to me like Stallman ad-hoc transformed an (absolutely justified) distaste for closed-source software into a system of ethics by, fundamentally, adopting aphorisms as axioms. Whether this was done as a post-hoc justification for his depth of passion in this area, or whether it was just a gradual metastasis, I don't know.

paulpauper 10y ago
I always get a laugh reading his site... he has a lot of rules .. I think that his 'religion' that he imposes on himself
- cakeface 10y ago
  There is in fact a religion called Stallmanism. http://stallmanism.wikidot.com/ http://stallmanism.wikidot.com/
- racl101 10y ago
  I also admire him but I think it's also funny he continues on this dogmatic existence. I think he ought to let himself make mistakes, punch out for the day, crack open a brewski, kick back with an iPad, and listen to some classic rock, Google some porn on pornhub (incognito of course) and just take a load off. Even if he started using closed source products in old age or, God forbid, did anything for profit or selfish reasons, he's still a good guy who made a difference in the world. His legacy lives on in his Copyleft, all those sweet GNU tools and Emacs. But all the same life moves pretty fast. And if he doesn't stop and look around once in a while, he could miss it.
  - Freak_NL 10y ago
    Do you need proprietary software or Apple devices to get the most out of life? I never got the impression the Stallman was missing out on something.
    - bertiewhykovich 10y ago
      Yeah, there's probably something to be said for stringent limitations on the kinds of technology you can use as an antidote to ease of spending every waking moment looking at a screen. If I wasn't allowed to use Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, an OS with nonfree drivers, any DRMed media, and so forth, I'd probably spend a lot less time screwing around. I'd miss out on a lot too, of course, but the tradeoff may not be all that bad -- my life would, in all honesty, probably be substantially improved just by not having a smartphone to look at constantly. That's a pragmatic assessment about lifestyle, of course -- it's not germane to the rigor of Stallman's ethics (or, more accurately, the apparent lack thereof).
  - qntty 10y ago
    http://www.theonion.com/article/exhausted-noam-chomsky-just-going-to-try-and-enjoy-17404 http://www.theonion.com/article/exhausted-noam-chomsky-just-...
  - bertiewhykovich 10y ago
    Taking a day off from your principles seems suspect, at best. (That's not to say that there's no way to justify doing so -- but it's difficult to conceive of what that might be.) Also, I frankly doubt that Stallman's life would be improved by kicking back with an iPad and a beer and jerking it to Internet porn. Classic rock, maybe -- but there's no contradiction between that and his approach (as long as it's DRM-free).
tomcam 10y ago
Why is it twice as different to live an ethical life under capitalism? And under what alternate systems is it easier to live an ethical life?
- symlinkk 10y ago
  I'm not the guy you replied to but I would say living ethically is difficult under capitalism because capitalism is all about competition, which incentivizes certain unethical behaviors: keeping secrets (closed-source software), sabotaging others (patent trolls, lawsuits), and taking away freedom from your customers (vendor lock-in, not using open standards).
  - marcoperaza 10y ago
    As opposed to life under communism? I have family that grew up under communism and they told me that everything is about stealing in that system. You get a job not because it pays more, but because it lets you steal more. You horde things that you're not allowed to. You steal steal steal, because no one can live well on the ration books. Unless you're part of the nomenklatura, in which case your official job is stealing.
    - bertiewhykovich 10y ago
      I'm not defending the Soviet Union. I'm not even defending communism, nor proposing a concrete alternative to capitalism. But the fact that other systems have led to worse abuses absolutely does not absolve capitalism of its crimes -- even the least-bad criminal is still a criminal. (And it's not clear that capitalism is, in fact, the best of the bunch: it's bizarre that Silicon Valley, a culture that is so dedicated to pushing the boundaries of the possible that curing death is a completely pedestrian ambition, believes that /this/ economic system is the real global maximum.)
      - tomcam 10y ago
        If I understand correctly, what you are saying is that to be a capitalist is to be a criminal?
jomamaxx 10y ago
I don't believe that his commitment to his supposed ideals is in any way 'moral'. I'd refer to his position that 'only free software is ethical' as simply wrong - and arrogant. Yes - we can admire his tenacity, and some of the great things he's contributed. Paradoxically, his 'ideals' have probably contributed to his personal ability to make these things, at the same time, his ideology is I think more than naive, it's just plain wrong. I like Stallman, but I take him with a huge dose of salt.
baldfat 10y ago
I am a Theology/Philosophy degree holder. Academically speaking I am always amazed at how brilliant the man actually is. When i hear him speak in a more conversational manner I always think, "That guy thinks he just got RMS, but RMS actually knows the guy lost the logical/ethics/battle. I still remember when The Linux Action Show interviewed RMS and Bryan Lunduke couldn't even wrap his brain around the ethics piece besides (I have to feed my family). RMS said get a different job if closed source is your job and explained his ethical system. I disagree with RMS on most things but I do identify him as an intellectual genius above my own abilities. As crazy as he is we are so far better off in this world with RMS then a world without RMS.

paulpauper 10y ago

I always get a laugh reading his site... he has a lot of rules .. I think that his 'religion' that he imposes on himself

cakeface 10y ago
There is in fact a religion called Stallmanism. http://stallmanism.wikidot.com/ http://stallmanism.wikidot.com/
racl101 10y ago
I also admire him but I think it's also funny he continues on this dogmatic existence. I think he ought to let himself make mistakes, punch out for the day, crack open a brewski, kick back with an iPad, and listen to some classic rock, Google some porn on pornhub (incognito of course) and just take a load off. Even if he started using closed source products in old age or, God forbid, did anything for profit or selfish reasons, he's still a good guy who made a difference in the world. His legacy lives on in his Copyleft, all those sweet GNU tools and Emacs. But all the same life moves pretty fast. And if he doesn't stop and look around once in a while, he could miss it.
- Freak_NL 10y ago
  Do you need proprietary software or Apple devices to get the most out of life? I never got the impression the Stallman was missing out on something.
  - bertiewhykovich 10y ago
    Yeah, there's probably something to be said for stringent limitations on the kinds of technology you can use as an antidote to ease of spending every waking moment looking at a screen. If I wasn't allowed to use Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, an OS with nonfree drivers, any DRMed media, and so forth, I'd probably spend a lot less time screwing around. I'd miss out on a lot too, of course, but the tradeoff may not be all that bad -- my life would, in all honesty, probably be substantially improved just by not having a smartphone to look at constantly. That's a pragmatic assessment about lifestyle, of course -- it's not germane to the rigor of Stallman's ethics (or, more accurately, the apparent lack thereof).
- qntty 10y ago
  http://www.theonion.com/article/exhausted-noam-chomsky-just-going-to-try-and-enjoy-17404 http://www.theonion.com/article/exhausted-noam-chomsky-just-...
- bertiewhykovich 10y ago
  Taking a day off from your principles seems suspect, at best. (That's not to say that there's no way to justify doing so -- but it's difficult to conceive of what that might be.) Also, I frankly doubt that Stallman's life would be improved by kicking back with an iPad and a beer and jerking it to Internet porn. Classic rock, maybe -- but there's no contradiction between that and his approach (as long as it's DRM-free).

tomcam 10y ago

Why is it twice as different to live an ethical life under capitalism? And under what alternate systems is it easier to live an ethical life?

symlinkk 10y ago
I'm not the guy you replied to but I would say living ethically is difficult under capitalism because capitalism is all about competition, which incentivizes certain unethical behaviors: keeping secrets (closed-source software), sabotaging others (patent trolls, lawsuits), and taking away freedom from your customers (vendor lock-in, not using open standards).
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  As opposed to life under communism? I have family that grew up under communism and they told me that everything is about stealing in that system. You get a job not because it pays more, but because it lets you steal more. You horde things that you're not allowed to. You steal steal steal, because no one can live well on the ration books. Unless you're part of the nomenklatura, in which case your official job is stealing.
  - bertiewhykovich 10y ago
    I'm not defending the Soviet Union. I'm not even defending communism, nor proposing a concrete alternative to capitalism. But the fact that other systems have led to worse abuses absolutely does not absolve capitalism of its crimes -- even the least-bad criminal is still a criminal. (And it's not clear that capitalism is, in fact, the best of the bunch: it's bizarre that Silicon Valley, a culture that is so dedicated to pushing the boundaries of the possible that curing death is a completely pedestrian ambition, believes that /this/ economic system is the real global maximum.)
    - tomcam 10y ago
      If I understand correctly, what you are saying is that to be a capitalist is to be a criminal?

jomamaxx 10y ago

I don't believe that his commitment to his supposed ideals is in any way 'moral'. I'd refer to his position that 'only free software is ethical' as simply wrong - and arrogant. Yes - we can admire his tenacity, and some of the great things he's contributed. Paradoxically, his 'ideals' have probably contributed to his personal ability to make these things, at the same time, his ideology is I think more than naive, it's just plain wrong. I like Stallman, but I take him with a huge dose of salt.

baldfat 10y ago

I am a Theology/Philosophy degree holder. Academically speaking I am always amazed at how brilliant the man actually is. When i hear him speak in a more conversational manner I always think, "That guy thinks he just got RMS, but RMS actually knows the guy lost the logical/ethics/battle. I still remember when The Linux Action Show interviewed RMS and Bryan Lunduke couldn't even wrap his brain around the ethics piece besides (I have to feed my family). RMS said get a different job if closed source is your job and explained his ethical system. I disagree with RMS on most things but I do identify him as an intellectual genius above my own abilities. As crazy as he is we are so far better off in this world with RMS then a world without RMS.