3 ms·

Although he’s very committed to free software and individual freedom ideologically, his arguments for them are quite excellent. I find his political views are

Although he’s very committed to free software and individual freedom ideologically, his arguments for them are quite excellent. I find his political views are very common sense too

falcor84 8y ago
Why "although"?
- snakeboy 8y ago
  I think they meant that he can argue for those principles rationally, even though he has an ideological bias towards them.
  - smadge 8y ago
    It still seems like a strange distinction. Is the implication that RMS did not arrive at his opinions through reasoning?
    - AlexCoventry 8y ago
      Most people use reasoning to justify ideological biases arrived at via emotionally charged experiences.
      - drivers99 8y ago
        "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion" is a book that's good at explaining that. It has changed how I observe other people's strongly held opinions online.
    - mwfunk 8y ago
      He most definitely got started down his path for emotional reasons, he had a sweet gig at MIT and he wanted to ride that train forever. When people at the lab he worked in left to join Symbolics, he was left behind and he has borne that grudge ever since. He has certainly backed up his philosophy since that time with much reasoning and writing, but even his most rational writings seem trapped under the weight of emotions IMO. It’s all good vs. evil, fire and brimstone stuff, he never assumes good faith on the part of those who disagree with him, and has never seen a bridge he didn’t want to burn.
      - eric24234 8y ago
        This post gives the impression to the reader that RMS had put his ego first and then rationalized it with fsf philosophy.From what i had read online he was pissed off when the printer manufacturer at MIT stopped sharing the source code to modify the software and he has formed(or thought about it and discovered) his philosophical leanings at that time. Very soon symbolics was formed developing closed source software and he was invited to it. But he believed strongly in his philosophy and was working hard to keep the free software up to date which symbolics was developing. Also the symbolics engineer had told in one of the interviews they were 5 people and RMS single handedly was keeping up with them. So the conclusion i had was he was 5x capable to the symbolics engineers (who are very smart people) and if he was that capable he could have become rich easily, but due to his strong philosophical belief he sacrificed his life for the greater good. If you have the links to the contrary please share.
        ryacko 8y ago
        Open source consultancies exist. RMS could make some living off of open source software. Interestingly, he has no wages from FSF. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/42888848/201702279349302910/IRS990 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/428...
        watwut 8y ago
        Based on mailing lists I read, some of those 5 people who RMS single handedly was keeping up with were kind of pissed off about that framing a long after. Kind of ... disagreed. He did not done the same amount of work as them, meaning work on other projects, prototyping, design work etc, through it is true that he could more or less copy functionality of the thing plus minus bugs. Designing it and trying out various ways how to do the thing takes more time then copying the project. I am fully confident in that, because I was porting a couple of projects in the past so I know how much time is saved. Aside everything else, self-glorifying stories about heroic saviors who are single so much better then second smartest person in a room should be treated with suspicion - and it is completely puzzling to me that some people are believed them so easily. Because really, for me to believe in that much of an unusual hero, I would like to have confirmations from other primary sources then just said hero and people who worship him. (That is not to say that he is incapable on the other extreme, absolutely not. But you can be extremely good and still not the god this story is about.)

Although he’s very committed to free software and individual freedom ideologically, his arguments for them are quite excellent. I find his political views are very common sense too

falcor84 8y ago

Why "although"?

snakeboy 8y ago
I think they meant that he can argue for those principles rationally, even though he has an ideological bias towards them.
- smadge 8y ago
  It still seems like a strange distinction. Is the implication that RMS did not arrive at his opinions through reasoning?
  - AlexCoventry 8y ago
    Most people use reasoning to justify ideological biases arrived at via emotionally charged experiences.
    - drivers99 8y ago
      "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion" is a book that's good at explaining that. It has changed how I observe other people's strongly held opinions online.
  - mwfunk 8y ago
    He most definitely got started down his path for emotional reasons, he had a sweet gig at MIT and he wanted to ride that train forever. When people at the lab he worked in left to join Symbolics, he was left behind and he has borne that grudge ever since. He has certainly backed up his philosophy since that time with much reasoning and writing, but even his most rational writings seem trapped under the weight of emotions IMO. It’s all good vs. evil, fire and brimstone stuff, he never assumes good faith on the part of those who disagree with him, and has never seen a bridge he didn’t want to burn.
    - eric24234 8y ago
      This post gives the impression to the reader that RMS had put his ego first and then rationalized it with fsf philosophy.From what i had read online he was pissed off when the printer manufacturer at MIT stopped sharing the source code to modify the software and he has formed(or thought about it and discovered) his philosophical leanings at that time. Very soon symbolics was formed developing closed source software and he was invited to it. But he believed strongly in his philosophy and was working hard to keep the free software up to date which symbolics was developing. Also the symbolics engineer had told in one of the interviews they were 5 people and RMS single handedly was keeping up with them. So the conclusion i had was he was 5x capable to the symbolics engineers (who are very smart people) and if he was that capable he could have become rich easily, but due to his strong philosophical belief he sacrificed his life for the greater good. If you have the links to the contrary please share.
      - ryacko 8y ago
        Open source consultancies exist. RMS could make some living off of open source software. Interestingly, he has no wages from FSF. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/42888848/201702279349302910/IRS990 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/428...
      - watwut 8y ago
        Based on mailing lists I read, some of those 5 people who RMS single handedly was keeping up with were kind of pissed off about that framing a long after. Kind of ... disagreed. He did not done the same amount of work as them, meaning work on other projects, prototyping, design work etc, through it is true that he could more or less copy functionality of the thing plus minus bugs. Designing it and trying out various ways how to do the thing takes more time then copying the project. I am fully confident in that, because I was porting a couple of projects in the past so I know how much time is saved. Aside everything else, self-glorifying stories about heroic saviors who are single so much better then second smartest person in a room should be treated with suspicion - and it is completely puzzling to me that some people are believed them so easily. Because really, for me to believe in that much of an unusual hero, I would like to have confirmations from other primary sources then just said hero and people who worship him. (That is not to say that he is incapable on the other extreme, absolutely not. But you can be extremely good and still not the god this story is about.)