3 ms·

Frankly, I believe that this tone and rhetoric devalues some of the great things he has done. I completely disagree. He has certain values and political goals

Frankly, I believe that this tone and rhetoric devalues some of the great things he has done. I completely disagree. He has certain values and political goals which he believes very strongly in -- and espouses them aggressively. This is true for all of us. I personally disagree with him (I am willing to give up some of my freedom for money), but I would never say that that diminishes his accomplishments and contributions.

mkr-hn 16y ago
You don't necessarily give up freedom to use proprietary software. If free (as in speech) software offers no suitable solution for what you need to do, and you lack the skills or time to improve the existing alternatives, I don't think you can be free if you choose to use the next-best option. Proprietary vendors can do things to prevent a suitable alternative from existing, but that's a separate consideration from whether or not you're freer for choosing one way or the other.
- turtle4 16y ago
  If you are using free software, and a feature is missing or a bug is present, and you have neither the time nor skills to correct the issue, you can sponsor or request that someone else make the change. Alternately, anyone else using the software could have that time or skill, and their contribution would benefit all. With proprietary software, you absolutely give up that ability. So yes, you do always give up the freedom. The counterpoint, though, is that if you were never to exercise the freedom, it has no value. So even though you've given up a freedom to use a proprietary solution, if you never encounter a case where you want/need to exercise that freedom, it hasn't really hurt you. That may be more what you are getting at?
  - mkr-hn 16y ago
    Yeah, that's what I was getting at. I've spent too much time in places (rest of the internet) where there's no real incentive to make sure your point is clear, so I had trouble making it so. :( Working on it though. :)

mkr-hn 16y ago

You don't necessarily give up freedom to use proprietary software. If free (as in speech) software offers no suitable solution for what you need to do, and you lack the skills or time to improve the existing alternatives, I don't think you can be free if you choose to use the next-best option. Proprietary vendors can do things to prevent a suitable alternative from existing, but that's a separate consideration from whether or not you're freer for choosing one way or the other.

turtle4 16y ago
If you are using free software, and a feature is missing or a bug is present, and you have neither the time nor skills to correct the issue, you can sponsor or request that someone else make the change. Alternately, anyone else using the software could have that time or skill, and their contribution would benefit all. With proprietary software, you absolutely give up that ability. So yes, you do always give up the freedom. The counterpoint, though, is that if you were never to exercise the freedom, it has no value. So even though you've given up a freedom to use a proprietary solution, if you never encounter a case where you want/need to exercise that freedom, it hasn't really hurt you. That may be more what you are getting at?
- mkr-hn 16y ago
  Yeah, that's what I was getting at. I've spent too much time in places (rest of the internet) where there's no real incentive to make sure your point is clear, so I had trouble making it so. :( Working on it though. :)