5 ms·

I like RMS however the sad thing is that most people don't care. We can call those people sheeple or whatever, but at the end of the day they are just users wh

I like RMS however the sad thing is that most people don't care. We can call those people sheeple or whatever, but at the end of the day they are just users who don't have the time/knowledge to care about free software. It took me a few times before I could grasp free software Vs open source and I'm knee deep in the code most days. Another issue this ideology faces is it's main proponent; RMS. He's not charismatic and as another user pointed out, does not present well on videos or talks. If he wants free software to continue, then he should pick new champions and take a step back.

chrisseaton 8y ago
> who don't have the time/knowledge to care about free software Or... they have the time and knowledge to carefully consider it and just haven’t concluded that it has any benefit for some reason. Not everyone who disagrees with you is doing so because they just haven’t thought about it hard enough yet.
- confounded 8y ago
  True, but for most people I’ve discussed Free Software with this is the case. They think it’s a great idea, and would love if they could do everything they do currently with FOSS, and no extra time-investment. But, with few exceptions, that’s rarely possible, especially as more and more computing happens on phones. Of course, the people I speak to about FOSS are by no means wholly representative. But IME it’s that software freedom tends to end up being considered a nice idea but a very low priority, rather than an idea with no benefits.
simion314 8y ago
The thing I like about RMS is that when he speaks it is like presenting a mathematical proof, he explains the terms, rules and shows the logic arguments, the interviewers are most of the time impatient or incapable to understand such a rigorous style of response.
- gitgud 8y ago
  Yes, I like that too, but at times he can also appear very intolerant and dogmatic about his beliefs. This makes it hard for regular people to appreciate his point of view... but I don't think he cares what people think of him anyway ...
  - simion314 8y ago
    Some people can't admit that they ever are wrong, I use proprietary software, believe and FSF and free software and I am a hypocrite, i do not feel the need to justify what I am right for using proprietary software, I am not right, I should not do it but I do if for some bad reasons, my hope is that I may do better in the future. Anyway some people here that use or create proprietary software try to defend this as a good thing, maybe is necessary for the circumstances but is not good(IMO)
    - zzo38computer 8y ago
      I use some proprietary software (but never as native code; some of the problems are most relevant when it is run as native code), although I intend to replace them with free software when possible (for example, I am currently in the process of writing Free Hero Mesh, as a replacement for Hero Mesh (which is very slow on DOSBOX), that is compatible with Linux, and preferably also BSD; later I may also make FreeZZT as a replacement for ZZT).
    - chickenfries 8y ago
      This is basically how I feel about eating meat and free software. RMS and Vegetarians have made an argument that I cannot disagree with. I try to eat less meat and use more free software, but out of convenience and laziness on my part I don’t commit to abstaining from either.
- SquishyPanda23 8y ago
  I really think this is how Stallman thinks. As far as I know, he's never mentioned the words "deontic logic" in writing, but I get the impression he believes he's attempting to give a formal logical argument for morally obligatory behavior. Aside from the hassle involved with using only free software, I think one of the things holding him back is that he's much better at math/comp sci/logic than he is at social skills, and he's not especially suited to being the leader of a popular movement.
zekevermillion 8y ago
I found RMS very persuasive. He influenced me to change my approach to personal computing for which I am very thankful. That he lives consistently with his ethical conclusions is part of what persuaded me that I should consider what he says seriously. I would say RMS is very charismatic, but his speaking and writing is a bit of a dog whistle which does not strike the right note with many folks. Yet, almost everyone in the developed world still benefits greatly from his technical work, if indirectly. On the whole, I would say RMS is an incredibly influential and prolific contributor to the software we all use, as well as how we think about computing in general. If he isn't everything to all people, well that is a good sign -- we should not worship free software authors as religious figures. But we should be thankful for contributions, and perhaps be inspired to treat software users well in our own work.

chrisseaton 8y ago

> who don't have the time/knowledge to care about free software Or... they have the time and knowledge to carefully consider it and just haven’t concluded that it has any benefit for some reason. Not everyone who disagrees with you is doing so because they just haven’t thought about it hard enough yet.

confounded 8y ago
True, but for most people I’ve discussed Free Software with this is the case. They think it’s a great idea, and would love if they could do everything they do currently with FOSS, and no extra time-investment. But, with few exceptions, that’s rarely possible, especially as more and more computing happens on phones. Of course, the people I speak to about FOSS are by no means wholly representative. But IME it’s that software freedom tends to end up being considered a nice idea but a very low priority, rather than an idea with no benefits.

simion314 8y ago

The thing I like about RMS is that when he speaks it is like presenting a mathematical proof, he explains the terms, rules and shows the logic arguments, the interviewers are most of the time impatient or incapable to understand such a rigorous style of response.

gitgud 8y ago
Yes, I like that too, but at times he can also appear very intolerant and dogmatic about his beliefs. This makes it hard for regular people to appreciate his point of view... but I don't think he cares what people think of him anyway ...
- simion314 8y ago
  Some people can't admit that they ever are wrong, I use proprietary software, believe and FSF and free software and I am a hypocrite, i do not feel the need to justify what I am right for using proprietary software, I am not right, I should not do it but I do if for some bad reasons, my hope is that I may do better in the future. Anyway some people here that use or create proprietary software try to defend this as a good thing, maybe is necessary for the circumstances but is not good(IMO)
  - zzo38computer 8y ago
    I use some proprietary software (but never as native code; some of the problems are most relevant when it is run as native code), although I intend to replace them with free software when possible (for example, I am currently in the process of writing Free Hero Mesh, as a replacement for Hero Mesh (which is very slow on DOSBOX), that is compatible with Linux, and preferably also BSD; later I may also make FreeZZT as a replacement for ZZT).
  - chickenfries 8y ago
    This is basically how I feel about eating meat and free software. RMS and Vegetarians have made an argument that I cannot disagree with. I try to eat less meat and use more free software, but out of convenience and laziness on my part I don’t commit to abstaining from either.
SquishyPanda23 8y ago
I really think this is how Stallman thinks. As far as I know, he's never mentioned the words "deontic logic" in writing, but I get the impression he believes he's attempting to give a formal logical argument for morally obligatory behavior. Aside from the hassle involved with using only free software, I think one of the things holding him back is that he's much better at math/comp sci/logic than he is at social skills, and he's not especially suited to being the leader of a popular movement.

zekevermillion 8y ago

I found RMS very persuasive. He influenced me to change my approach to personal computing for which I am very thankful. That he lives consistently with his ethical conclusions is part of what persuaded me that I should consider what he says seriously. I would say RMS is very charismatic, but his speaking and writing is a bit of a dog whistle which does not strike the right note with many folks. Yet, almost everyone in the developed world still benefits greatly from his technical work, if indirectly. On the whole, I would say RMS is an incredibly influential and prolific contributor to the software we all use, as well as how we think about computing in general. If he isn't everything to all people, well that is a good sign -- we should not worship free software authors as religious figures. But we should be thankful for contributions, and perhaps be inspired to treat software users well in our own work.