10 ms·

What GNU politics are you referring to that makes you reconsider using guixsd? EDIT: Also what's unsexy about GNU? I'm really curious.

by jolmg 9y ago

jcoffland 9y ago
It's not currently cool to like Richard Stallman because he has opinions that run contrary to Silicon Valley.
- ronsor 9y ago
  Stallman is generally not a very... tactful person.
  - seba_dos1 9y ago
    That's right, it might even hurt his mission, but it doesn't make him less right.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - astrodust 9y ago
      Was he right about abortion jokes? David Bowie made predictions far more profound than Stallman, and they came from a place of genuine concern, not tin-foil hattery of the GNU variety: https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/11/10753158/david-bowie-internet-future-interview https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/11/10753158/david-bowie-inte... I'd rather have people that cared and were on the right path, picking the right battles, than assholes who are technically correct but their observations are ultimately irrelevant to the larger fight.
      - M_Bakhtiari 8y ago
        I don't get the abortion joke debacle. It was blatantly pro-abortion, yet it seems like it's only the pro-abortion people that are upset about it.
        JdeBP 8y ago
        That's because you erroneously think that the conflict was about abortion. It was actually about whether user reference manuals should properly contain jokes about such highly politically charged topics.
- kiriakasis 9y ago
  As an outside observer it looks like GNU is conducting an ideological battle that is decreasing in public relevance in the years and so, now, it looks like they are the one not being good neighbours.
  - computerfriend 8y ago
    I'm not sure how anyone can honestly think that the ideological battle is decreasing in public relevance. It is massively more relevant now.
  - Digital-Citizen 8y ago
    It wouldn't have taken much more time for you to back your point with examples so we'd have some idea of what you're talking about. Please also explain the ideology of how proprietary software is not worth fighting with a practical implementation and ethical discussion. Most of the time when people object to GNU or rms they fail to convey that they understand what software freedom is or how continually relevant software freedom is today. I'd bet that the majority of threads on these (overwhelmingly corporate) repeater sites are easily handled by stressing how important a user's software freedom is. Every DRM, proprietary software (Windows ignores user settings, this new device from $VENDOR spies on its users, etc.) is easily dismissed by getting into the same discussion about how software freedom would allow the user to alter the software, protect their privacy, treat their friends and neighbors better by sharing improved versions of the software, inspect and modify the software (or have someone they trust do it for them), and run the programs when they want (instead of losing access when a proprietor feels like ending "support"). Snowden readily credits free software for his success in leaking sensitive NSA documents to us all (docs which still make media stories years later). Three cheers for software freedom, rms, and Snowden! Posts like the parent post tell me sites like these are the thing losing relevance by showing how ineffective public moderation is and how unacceptable it is to dare to say something not echoed in corporate tech media.
- astrodust 9y ago
  It's because he's a dick, and not in the good way. It's not about his opinions, it's about his ineffective and misguided leadership. Why is GNU still fighting the same battles from thirty years ago when new ones have emerged that they're not even paying attention to? GNU is becoming the PETA of software, and it's not a good look.
  - t0nt0n 9y ago
    What new battles have emerged that GNU and FSF are not paying attention to? Also, GNU is not RMS, and RMS is not GNU.
    - ChristianBundy 9y ago
      The FSF is (or seems to be) an extension of RMS, and the same argument could be made for GNU[0]. [0]: https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/753646/a6ebb50040c5862c/ https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/753646/a6ebb50040c5862c/
    - astrodust 9y ago
      While they were harassing Linksys about GPL the whole IoT thing happened and now we're living in a world full of trashy Linux-based devices that are a hazard to society. Sure, you can get the source code to your internet-based webcam, but because it can't be easily patched, it can also be hijacked by a couple of high-school kids in Alaska so they can sabotage their Minecraft server hosting competitors. So good job. As long as RMS is such a prominent figure the GNU/FSF organization there's no separation.
      - elago 9y ago
        "the whole IoT thing" was ever Stallman's responsibility to stop in the first place? he wants to champion free software, not every just cause under the sun. IoT devices shipping with insecure configurations is a "failure" of an infosec champion/thought-leader to step up and save us. On the free software front, RMS contribution are mind blowing to me. I'd be proud if I can ever contribute a fraction of what he did.
pecg 9y ago
GNU stands for a philosophy of freedom, thus guixsd won't provide official repositories for installing proprietary software, some users don't like it, even though they might be interested in the technological approach of the system. GNU utilities, are not only unsexy, they are bloated and messy, and prone to failure; the GNU implementations (coreutils: grep, cat, tail, etc) of standard UNIX tools are not done with simplicity in mind. But hey, after all GNU is Not Unix. For those of us, who really appreciate the UNIX philosophy still have OpenBSD, which is the only light in a world of chaos, in my opinion.
- jolmg 9y ago
  > GNU utilities, are not only unsexy, they are bloated and messy, and prone to failure; the GNU implementations (coreutils: grep, cat, tail, etc) of standard UNIX tools are not done with simplicity in mind. I've heard people say how GNU code is bloated and messy many times before, but never that they're prone to failure. I've never had any failure myself with any GNU code. Can you give some examples of failures you've experienced? Also, I'm looking at the coreutils source right now, and it's not as messy as I was expecting. true.c is only a pageful with 80 lines, many of which are simply because of the license comment and the usage() function for --help. cat.c and tail.c also seem reasonably understandable. Biggest complaint I can make is that there's cases where spaces and tabs are mixed in the indentation, but I've long resigned myself to expect that in projects that have more than 1 major contributor. I do, however, think that glibc and gcc are pretty messy. I tried looking for the definition of fopen() in openbsd's libc and found it in less than 30 seconds by grepping. I still haven't found glibc's. gcc seems to rely heavily on its own extensions, because I don't understand what's going on here: int main (int argc, char **argv) { toplev toplev (NULL, /* external_timer */ true /* init_signals */); return toplev.main (argc, argv); } That looks like a function prototype in a function definition, but it seems to mean an assignment going by the next line. Then in toplev.c, we have: int toplev::main (int argc, char **argv) { That looks like C++, but the file extension is ".c"... You know what? Nevermind. Comparing the code for true.c and cat.c between glibc and openbsd's libc, I do rather like how clear openbsd is in its code. Damn. Sexy is a good word. Now I understand why people speak so well of it. I don't even need grep, the source file hierarchy is so clear. Looking back at GNU's true.c, I don't even understand half of what's going on there in those 80 lines, and it turns out that true.c is also the source for false.c, it just #include "true.c". TL;DR I agree that GNU utilities are messy. I'm not sure of the bloated aspect, because I do like that utilities have internationalized documentation built-in, but that seems to be bloat by openbsd's standards. And I wouldn't know of them being prone to failure, because I never had one with them. EDIT: Huh. I wanted to reply to Hello71, but there's no reply link under his post. Anyone know why? Anyway, yeah, I saw a comment in the file mentioning that over a line that referred to stdout. Can't check now because I'm away from the computer. I didn't really understand the reason though.
jpeg_hero 9y ago
It starts with that weird ink drawing of a goat for a logo, it just screams “70’s green screen” And this is coming from a genx open source / Linux guy. What it must look like to the current generation?!?!
- keypress 9y ago
  Isn't it a gnu? I like the logo/art.
  - jolmg 9y ago
    Cool. I didn't know that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildebeest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildebeest
tremon 9y ago
Its refusal to package firmware binaries, for one, even if that firmware is required to have a useful machine. I'm looking at AMD specifically here, where recent graphics cards (including APU's) don't even do text-mode without the firmware. (edit: I understand the why of it, and even agree on principle, but it still prevents me from running linux-libre on most of my systems)
- t0nt0n 9y ago
  Next time you build or choose a system, consider one that can run free software. I did, and it makes most things quite a bit easier. Edit: I did after struggling with hw requiring nonfree blobs of different shapes and size for a couple of years. Currently I was lucky to get my hands on a system that I can run using linux-libre and the only component I have "extra" is a usb wifi card.
  - dragontamer 9y ago
    > Next time you build or choose a system, consider one that can run free software. The only workstation that boots with entirely free software is like, the Talos II PowerPC, with a minimum cost of $5000. Everyone else requires a binary blob somewhere. Either a UEFI blob, BIOS blob, some kind of driver somewhere, or whatnot. Raspberry Pi, AMD, Intel, everybody. And before the Talos II, I don't think an "Open PC" devoid of proprietary binary blobs even existed. At least, something that is reasonably modern (ie: 64-bit, decent security, decent support with modern OSes)
    - namibj 9y ago
      What about pre-ME thinkpads, after replacing the wifi card with an ath9k/open source firmware one? Does the intel chipset graphic require a blob for simple framebuffer/textmode operation? Because I can't remember including any blobs in the libreboot I use there, and iirc I get output before a linux kernel is able to load device firmware. It is 64bit, and runs pretty much anything from (from what I can tell, but not sure, due to CHMPXCHG16B) Windows 10, over FreeBSD to Android. Probably even something like QNX. Yes, you might not call this reasonably modern, but according to the hard facts you listed as qualifiers for being reasonably modern, they tick off.
peterwwillis 9y ago
> Also what's unsexy about GNU? "Gnu's Not Unix": A recursive acronym used as a pun about an operating system from the 1970s, existing solely as a reflection of an aging neckbearded hippie hacker's personal philosophy about software, that is pronounced "GUH-NEW".
- jolmg 9y ago
  I don't think it's only his philosophy. In fact, before, I would have thought that personal philosophy to be common sense, but it then turns out it isn't. It still bewilders me how it's the status quo that when you buy an expensive piece of electronics, it's never really yours to use as you please. It's more like the companies are lending it to you for a one-time payment. They keep full control. If they want to remove features[1] or brick the product you bought from them[2] or place arbitrary restrictions on features that require no work from them and then charge extra for lifting the restrictions[3], it's totally ok. How does that make sense? Yet it's the dystopia the industry has been turning into day by day, and it's all made possible because of closed source software. [1] - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100331/0128358800.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100331/0128358800.shtml [2] - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150321/13350230396/while-bricking-jailbroken-fire-tvs-last-year-amazon-did-same-to-kindle-devices.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150321/13350230396/while... [3] - One example of this could be Amazon's ridiculous rental of digital books, since it can only work by downloading the file to your device and then charging you more for it to prevent your device from deleting it. Another example is YouTube Red, to be able to download videos the app already downloads for free anyway to be able to stream, and also so that it won't pause videos when you move the android app to the background.

What GNU politics are you referring to that makes you reconsider using guixsd? EDIT: Also what's unsexy about GNU? I'm really curious.

by jolmg 9y ago

What GNU politics are you referring to that makes you reconsider using guixsd? EDIT: Also what's unsexy about GNU? I'm really curious.

jcoffland 9y ago

It's not currently cool to like Richard Stallman because he has opinions that run contrary to Silicon Valley.

ronsor 9y ago
Stallman is generally not a very... tactful person.
- seba_dos1 9y ago
  That's right, it might even hurt his mission, but it doesn't make him less right.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - astrodust 9y ago
    Was he right about abortion jokes? David Bowie made predictions far more profound than Stallman, and they came from a place of genuine concern, not tin-foil hattery of the GNU variety: https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/11/10753158/david-bowie-internet-future-interview https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/11/10753158/david-bowie-inte... I'd rather have people that cared and were on the right path, picking the right battles, than assholes who are technically correct but their observations are ultimately irrelevant to the larger fight.
    - M_Bakhtiari 8y ago
      I don't get the abortion joke debacle. It was blatantly pro-abortion, yet it seems like it's only the pro-abortion people that are upset about it.
      - JdeBP 8y ago
        That's because you erroneously think that the conflict was about abortion. It was actually about whether user reference manuals should properly contain jokes about such highly politically charged topics.
kiriakasis 9y ago
As an outside observer it looks like GNU is conducting an ideological battle that is decreasing in public relevance in the years and so, now, it looks like they are the one not being good neighbours.
- computerfriend 8y ago
  I'm not sure how anyone can honestly think that the ideological battle is decreasing in public relevance. It is massively more relevant now.
- Digital-Citizen 8y ago
  It wouldn't have taken much more time for you to back your point with examples so we'd have some idea of what you're talking about. Please also explain the ideology of how proprietary software is not worth fighting with a practical implementation and ethical discussion. Most of the time when people object to GNU or rms they fail to convey that they understand what software freedom is or how continually relevant software freedom is today. I'd bet that the majority of threads on these (overwhelmingly corporate) repeater sites are easily handled by stressing how important a user's software freedom is. Every DRM, proprietary software (Windows ignores user settings, this new device from $VENDOR spies on its users, etc.) is easily dismissed by getting into the same discussion about how software freedom would allow the user to alter the software, protect their privacy, treat their friends and neighbors better by sharing improved versions of the software, inspect and modify the software (or have someone they trust do it for them), and run the programs when they want (instead of losing access when a proprietor feels like ending "support"). Snowden readily credits free software for his success in leaking sensitive NSA documents to us all (docs which still make media stories years later). Three cheers for software freedom, rms, and Snowden! Posts like the parent post tell me sites like these are the thing losing relevance by showing how ineffective public moderation is and how unacceptable it is to dare to say something not echoed in corporate tech media.
astrodust 9y ago
It's because he's a dick, and not in the good way. It's not about his opinions, it's about his ineffective and misguided leadership. Why is GNU still fighting the same battles from thirty years ago when new ones have emerged that they're not even paying attention to? GNU is becoming the PETA of software, and it's not a good look.
- t0nt0n 9y ago
  What new battles have emerged that GNU and FSF are not paying attention to? Also, GNU is not RMS, and RMS is not GNU.
  - ChristianBundy 9y ago
    The FSF is (or seems to be) an extension of RMS, and the same argument could be made for GNU[0]. [0]: https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/753646/a6ebb50040c5862c/ https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/753646/a6ebb50040c5862c/
  - astrodust 9y ago
    While they were harassing Linksys about GPL the whole IoT thing happened and now we're living in a world full of trashy Linux-based devices that are a hazard to society. Sure, you can get the source code to your internet-based webcam, but because it can't be easily patched, it can also be hijacked by a couple of high-school kids in Alaska so they can sabotage their Minecraft server hosting competitors. So good job. As long as RMS is such a prominent figure the GNU/FSF organization there's no separation.
    - elago 9y ago
      "the whole IoT thing" was ever Stallman's responsibility to stop in the first place? he wants to champion free software, not every just cause under the sun. IoT devices shipping with insecure configurations is a "failure" of an infosec champion/thought-leader to step up and save us. On the free software front, RMS contribution are mind blowing to me. I'd be proud if I can ever contribute a fraction of what he did.

pecg 9y ago

GNU stands for a philosophy of freedom, thus guixsd won't provide official repositories for installing proprietary software, some users don't like it, even though they might be interested in the technological approach of the system. GNU utilities, are not only unsexy, they are bloated and messy, and prone to failure; the GNU implementations (coreutils: grep, cat, tail, etc) of standard UNIX tools are not done with simplicity in mind. But hey, after all GNU is Not Unix. For those of us, who really appreciate the UNIX philosophy still have OpenBSD, which is the only light in a world of chaos, in my opinion.

jolmg 9y ago
> GNU utilities, are not only unsexy, they are bloated and messy, and prone to failure; the GNU implementations (coreutils: grep, cat, tail, etc) of standard UNIX tools are not done with simplicity in mind. I've heard people say how GNU code is bloated and messy many times before, but never that they're prone to failure. I've never had any failure myself with any GNU code. Can you give some examples of failures you've experienced? Also, I'm looking at the coreutils source right now, and it's not as messy as I was expecting. true.c is only a pageful with 80 lines, many of which are simply because of the license comment and the usage() function for --help. cat.c and tail.c also seem reasonably understandable. Biggest complaint I can make is that there's cases where spaces and tabs are mixed in the indentation, but I've long resigned myself to expect that in projects that have more than 1 major contributor. I do, however, think that glibc and gcc are pretty messy. I tried looking for the definition of fopen() in openbsd's libc and found it in less than 30 seconds by grepping. I still haven't found glibc's. gcc seems to rely heavily on its own extensions, because I don't understand what's going on here: int main (int argc, char **argv) { toplev toplev (NULL, /* external_timer */ true /* init_signals */); return toplev.main (argc, argv); } That looks like a function prototype in a function definition, but it seems to mean an assignment going by the next line. Then in toplev.c, we have: int toplev::main (int argc, char **argv) { That looks like C++, but the file extension is ".c"... You know what? Nevermind. Comparing the code for true.c and cat.c between glibc and openbsd's libc, I do rather like how clear openbsd is in its code. Damn. Sexy is a good word. Now I understand why people speak so well of it. I don't even need grep, the source file hierarchy is so clear. Looking back at GNU's true.c, I don't even understand half of what's going on there in those 80 lines, and it turns out that true.c is also the source for false.c, it just #include "true.c". TL;DR I agree that GNU utilities are messy. I'm not sure of the bloated aspect, because I do like that utilities have internationalized documentation built-in, but that seems to be bloat by openbsd's standards. And I wouldn't know of them being prone to failure, because I never had one with them. EDIT: Huh. I wanted to reply to Hello71, but there's no reply link under his post. Anyone know why? Anyway, yeah, I saw a comment in the file mentioning that over a line that referred to stdout. Can't check now because I'm away from the computer. I didn't really understand the reason though.

jpeg_hero 9y ago

It starts with that weird ink drawing of a goat for a logo, it just screams “70’s green screen” And this is coming from a genx open source / Linux guy. What it must look like to the current generation?!?!

keypress 9y ago
Isn't it a gnu? I like the logo/art.
- jolmg 9y ago
  Cool. I didn't know that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildebeest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildebeest

tremon 9y ago

Its refusal to package firmware binaries, for one, even if that firmware is required to have a useful machine. I'm looking at AMD specifically here, where recent graphics cards (including APU's) don't even do text-mode without the firmware. (edit: I understand the why of it, and even agree on principle, but it still prevents me from running linux-libre on most of my systems)

t0nt0n 9y ago
Next time you build or choose a system, consider one that can run free software. I did, and it makes most things quite a bit easier. Edit: I did after struggling with hw requiring nonfree blobs of different shapes and size for a couple of years. Currently I was lucky to get my hands on a system that I can run using linux-libre and the only component I have "extra" is a usb wifi card.
- dragontamer 9y ago
  > Next time you build or choose a system, consider one that can run free software. The only workstation that boots with entirely free software is like, the Talos II PowerPC, with a minimum cost of $5000. Everyone else requires a binary blob somewhere. Either a UEFI blob, BIOS blob, some kind of driver somewhere, or whatnot. Raspberry Pi, AMD, Intel, everybody. And before the Talos II, I don't think an "Open PC" devoid of proprietary binary blobs even existed. At least, something that is reasonably modern (ie: 64-bit, decent security, decent support with modern OSes)
  - namibj 9y ago
    What about pre-ME thinkpads, after replacing the wifi card with an ath9k/open source firmware one? Does the intel chipset graphic require a blob for simple framebuffer/textmode operation? Because I can't remember including any blobs in the libreboot I use there, and iirc I get output before a linux kernel is able to load device firmware. It is 64bit, and runs pretty much anything from (from what I can tell, but not sure, due to CHMPXCHG16B) Windows 10, over FreeBSD to Android. Probably even something like QNX. Yes, you might not call this reasonably modern, but according to the hard facts you listed as qualifiers for being reasonably modern, they tick off.

peterwwillis 9y ago

> Also what's unsexy about GNU? "Gnu's Not Unix": A recursive acronym used as a pun about an operating system from the 1970s, existing solely as a reflection of an aging neckbearded hippie hacker's personal philosophy about software, that is pronounced "GUH-NEW".

jolmg 9y ago
I don't think it's only his philosophy. In fact, before, I would have thought that personal philosophy to be common sense, but it then turns out it isn't. It still bewilders me how it's the status quo that when you buy an expensive piece of electronics, it's never really yours to use as you please. It's more like the companies are lending it to you for a one-time payment. They keep full control. If they want to remove features[1] or brick the product you bought from them[2] or place arbitrary restrictions on features that require no work from them and then charge extra for lifting the restrictions[3], it's totally ok. How does that make sense? Yet it's the dystopia the industry has been turning into day by day, and it's all made possible because of closed source software. [1] - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100331/0128358800.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100331/0128358800.shtml [2] - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150321/13350230396/while-bricking-jailbroken-fire-tvs-last-year-amazon-did-same-to-kindle-devices.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150321/13350230396/while... [3] - One example of this could be Amazon's ridiculous rental of digital books, since it can only work by downloading the file to your device and then charging you more for it to prevent your device from deleting it. Another example is YouTube Red, to be able to download videos the app already downloads for free anyway to be able to stream, and also so that it won't pause videos when you move the android app to the background.