4 ms·

I've read it all, and he really put the issues I somehow "felt" with free software to words. Maybe there could be a way forward, where developers and users prof

I've read it all, and he really put the issues I somehow "felt" with free software to words. Maybe there could be a way forward, where developers and users profit. Then I skim this comment section and I'm back to be really, really confused. I'm pretty new to developing software, but the Open Source subject, I don't get.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
Really? Your issues with free software are that you find the FSF to be a dictatorship, dislike that they tried to make GNU/Linux a thing, and dislike that they push the term "free software?" I find that hard to believe given the rest of your post. If you're unsure how free software can put food on your table, there has been plenty of debate on the subject. This particular post is not going to help you in any way.
- danybittel 6y ago
  I don't think I would go as far as calling it a dictatorship, the article mentions it in the context that there has been no new leadership emerged, no development in the movement, so the same people lead it. That does make sense. The article also mentions that FSF tries too hard to make Linux "their thing". So I'm not sure how one excludes the other. The article goes into length why "free software" is a bad term. Which is a bit pedantic, but.. Wait, did you actually read the article?
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    Yes, I listed their first, second, and third "signs free software is intellectually bankrupt." There wasn't a fourth, instead going on to say users don't care about freedom. While leadership of the FSF may not have changed, they're hardly the only relevant organization. Branches of GNU have seen new leadership, and there are many other organizations. Stallman won't try to hijack any project you create As for the other two, they are decades old debates with both sides explained to death and can largely be ignored by everyone. I will use terms I prefer, you can do the same, we both understand. You might get some copypasta complaints, but you don't need to listen.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

Really? Your issues with free software are that you find the FSF to be a dictatorship, dislike that they tried to make GNU/Linux a thing, and dislike that they push the term "free software?" I find that hard to believe given the rest of your post. If you're unsure how free software can put food on your table, there has been plenty of debate on the subject. This particular post is not going to help you in any way.

danybittel 6y ago
I don't think I would go as far as calling it a dictatorship, the article mentions it in the context that there has been no new leadership emerged, no development in the movement, so the same people lead it. That does make sense. The article also mentions that FSF tries too hard to make Linux "their thing". So I'm not sure how one excludes the other. The article goes into length why "free software" is a bad term. Which is a bit pedantic, but.. Wait, did you actually read the article?
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  Yes, I listed their first, second, and third "signs free software is intellectually bankrupt." There wasn't a fourth, instead going on to say users don't care about freedom. While leadership of the FSF may not have changed, they're hardly the only relevant organization. Branches of GNU have seen new leadership, and there are many other organizations. Stallman won't try to hijack any project you create As for the other two, they are decades old debates with both sides explained to death and can largely be ignored by everyone. I will use terms I prefer, you can do the same, we both understand. You might get some copypasta complaints, but you don't need to listen.