4 ms·
I don't imagine the FSF has really spent a lot of resources on this page, so it isn't really troubling in the sense of "so much effort, what a waste," so it's m
by Frondo 10y ago
I don't imagine the FSF has really spent a lot of resources on this page, so it isn't really troubling in the sense of "so much effort, what a waste," so it's more of an amusing, "not much effort, but what a waste".
Those sorts of language changes happen, and it's just never worth fighting for. Especially hacker vs cracker, that one was lost a long, long time ago.
Several of these fit into the same mental territory as genericized trademarks, i.e. digital audio player instead of mp3 player, or Kleenex-brand facial issues instead of Kleenex, again, not worth fighting for.
And several of these carry political loading of their own (e.g. don't say "theft"), as well as that perpetual lost cause, GLAMP.
Oh well. Happily the FSF does a lot of other good work.
- vizeroth 10y agoIt's not necessarily that the FSF spends a lot of resources on this page, but that Stallman appears to spend a lot of his time and resources on the issues that are repeated throughout this page (or the whole "Philosophy" section of their website). In some ways, it's good to have someone like Stallman around to remind us that there is another way to look at some of these things, and to push the political debate. One of the biggest issues in my mind is that the GNU camp likes to expropriate words with established meanings, then attempt to categorize everyone else's use of the words as inappropriate. However, that is only a part of the in-fighting which tends to occur between the "free" and "open source" software movements and helps to marginalize them in the eyes of the layman.
- BoorishBears 10y agoThe problem for me isn't that "this is a waste", for me it's "this is demonstrating embarrassingly pretentious immature behavior that puts the FSF in a very unfavorable light".