7 ms·
Stallman is like a goalpost. He's as far over to one side as you can be. We need people like him since we all tend to measure our views and beliefs in reference
by milesf 16y ago
Stallman is like a goalpost. He's as far over to one side as you can be. We need people like him since we all tend to measure our views and beliefs in reference to others.
I just wouldn't want to hang out with the guy. I say "Linux" and buy proprietary software. I'm sure he wouldn't want to hang with me either, but I do respect him.
- hugh3 16y agoWho is the other goalpost? Are they equally necessary?
- StavrosK 16y agoSteve Jobs?
- tvon 16y agoApple is pretty active in OSS for someone you'd call the polar opposite of RMS.
- vorador 16y agoOh, yes, they're active, but only in their interest. You won't see apple freeing the source of cocoa...
- loewenskind 16y agoBut they're active right? Who's interests should they be active in? I bet their shareholders are so mad that they didn't follow Sun's lead....
- gizmomagico 16y agoOr Big Brother freeing the source to their Ad-magic.
- stoney 16y agoBut Open Source!=Free Software, as I'm sure RMS would point out if he was reading this. Apple do contribute to open source software, but you certainly don't have freedom when using their products, which is what RMS is all about.
- tvon 16y agoVery good point. Apple uses OSS for the sake of creating better software, not because they believe in any FSF ideals.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- mishmash 16y agoBill Gates?
- alextgordon 16y agoOrganisations like the Business Software Alliance (http://www.bsa.org/ http://www.bsa.org/) are the closest I can think of to a pro-proprietary advocacy group.
- hugh3 16y agoDo they openly advocate for the end of free software?
- rbanffy 16y agoI don't think so, but I am quite sure most members would be quite happy with it.
- alextgordon 16y agoSort of. This article is about the IIPA, which the BSA are a member of: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/23/opensource-intellectual-property http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/23/openso... They're not as upfront about it as Stallman and the FSF are about proprietary software, but they clearly don't like open source software. From one of their reports: "For example, in March 2009, the Ministry of Administrative Reform (MenPAN) issued Circular Letter No. 1 of 2009 to all central and provincial government offices including State-owned enterprises, endorsing the use and adoption of open source software within government organizations. While the government issued this circular in part with the stated goal to “reduc[e] software copyright violation[s],” in fact, by denying technology choice, the measure will create additional trade barriers and deny fair and equitable market access to software companies." Source: http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2010/2010SPEC301INDONESIA.pdf http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2010/2010SPEC301INDONESIA.pdf
- btilly 16y agoThat would be a goalpost on the opposite end of the field, not the same goal. An example of an opposite goalpost on the same end as RMS might be Bruce Perens.
- ashconnor 16y agoGates.
- rbanffy 16y agoCasual users. There are lots of market forces pulling towards proprietary. Most people don't care about software freedom - they want shiny toys right now. Jobs, Gates, Ballmer and Ellison cater to them. They build and sell tools to help you lock yourself to their software. And they even use free software for that. edit: dear downmodder: try harder. I am sure you can articulate a useful argument instead of just downvoting a comment you disagree with. This should be a place for debating ideas.
- wtallis 16y agoI'm not the one who downvoted you, but I do think that casual users aren't quite the opposing goal post to RMS. They are greedy, but more than that, they are short-term thinkers. They can't (even collectively) cause quite as much harm as the guys like Jobs, Gates, Ballmer, and Ellison can when they manipulate the market. Big corporations led by big egos have the power to kill products and permanently remove innovations from the market: by [ab]using software patents, buying and killing threatening start-ups, or under-cutting competitors to drive them out of business. One of the most attractive aspects of a Free Software ecosystem unencumbered by patents is that ideas don't have to die while they are still useful to somebody.
- rbanffy 16y agoIndeed. I have no doubt people like Jobs, Gates, Ballmer and Ellison (among many others) oppose the freedom ideals Stallman stands for. Still, I think they rely (willingly or not) on the casual user and its disregard/unawareness of the freedoms they thrown away to reach their goals. Without uninformed users, they are harmless. Tools will be developed and willing users will free themselves from their power.
- bandushrew 16y agoI dont know whether they 'oppose' the software ideals that stallman stands for or not. I agree very strongly with Stallman and the points he regularly makes regarding the dangerous of proprietary software, and I am very grateful for the things he has done to push his ideals and to increase awareness of the issues and dangers surrounding copyright abuse and the freedom of software users. I also create and sell proprietary software, and I disagree with him that it is immoral to do so. No need to oppose him, I can simply disagree with his conclusions while agreeing with a very large number of the points that he makes.
- lutorm 16y agoThe SCO guy, forget his name, that equates open source with communism.
- blhack 16y agoSteve Jobs