3 ms·

There is no contradiction in that.

ksec 5y ago
I dont know. I guess I am not well versed with FSF. I thought they were to promote Free Software, I didn't know their world view was any non-open source software are "unacceptable and unjust".
- yakubin 5y ago
  According to the FSF[1]: > To release a nonfree program is always ethically tainted, but legally there is no obstacle to your doing this. It paints a picture of a bigoted organisation. [1]: <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReleaseUnderGPLAndNF https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReleaseUnderGPLAnd...>
  - diffeomorphism 5y ago
    That sounds like the completely wrong word for that. The free software foundation advocates for free software, does not like non-free software, big surprise. Similarly fair trade does consider non-fair trade unethical. You might disagree with that but having an opinion does not make one a "bigot".
    - yakubin 5y ago
      There is a difference between advocating for free software and saying that all non-free software is evil. To compare to the original meaning of "bigotry", there is a difference between talking about how great your religion is and talking about how all other religions are evil.
    - trasz 5y ago
      Non-fair trade is considered unethical based on ethics. FSF considers closed source unethical based on their particular agenda, which has nothing to do with ethics or morality.
      - diffeomorphism 5y ago
        > Non-fair trade is considered unethical based on ethics. No, it is not. If it were, fair trade wouldn't be niche. It adds lots of other obligations on companies "based on their particular agenda". I think it is worthwhile goal and something I like to support, but won't pretend that it is somehow pure, self-evident goodness, just like non-fair trade is not pure evil. Again, you might disagree or have different ideas what "free" is supposed to mean but you should be better than throwing around phrases like "agenda" or "nothing to do with ethics or morality".
        trasz 5y ago
        People and societies have no problem with ignoring ethics when it benefits them. Otherwise we wouldn’t be waging wars and sucking profits off poorer societies. Fair trade is based on pretty fundamental ethics, such as fighting slavery. Can you point any such concept being foundational to Free Software?
        diffeomorphism 5y ago
        > Fair trade is based on pretty fundamental ethics, such as fighting slavery. Not really, no. Again, lots of non-"fair trade" products exist and those are not against fighting slavery. > Can you point any such concept being foundational to Free Software? Seriously? Their whole stick is fighting software practices they consider unethical. You might disagree whether that is fundamental ethics, but to them it is and it is rude and dishonest to pretend that is not the case. For example, I am not vegetarian, but understand that there are people who feel strongly about that. That is fine and if you go "vegetarians are pushing their agenda which has nothing to do with ethics" that says more about you than about them.
        trasz 5y ago
        To some people the Earth is flat. Is it rude and dishonest to call bullshit on them?
- tbrownaw 5y ago
  Their origin story is Stallman being frustrated with a buggy printer driver that couldn't be fixed because it was proprietary. It's told in this talk, you can search for "printer" to find it < https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt >. They promote Free Software (and specifically copyleft over permissive licenses) because they view proprietary software as morally wrong and something that should not exist.

ksec 5y ago

I dont know. I guess I am not well versed with FSF. I thought they were to promote Free Software, I didn't know their world view was any non-open source software are "unacceptable and unjust".

yakubin 5y ago
According to the FSF[1]: > To release a nonfree program is always ethically tainted, but legally there is no obstacle to your doing this. It paints a picture of a bigoted organisation. [1]: <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReleaseUnderGPLAndNF https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReleaseUnderGPLAnd...>
- diffeomorphism 5y ago
  That sounds like the completely wrong word for that. The free software foundation advocates for free software, does not like non-free software, big surprise. Similarly fair trade does consider non-fair trade unethical. You might disagree with that but having an opinion does not make one a "bigot".
  - yakubin 5y ago
    There is a difference between advocating for free software and saying that all non-free software is evil. To compare to the original meaning of "bigotry", there is a difference between talking about how great your religion is and talking about how all other religions are evil.
  - trasz 5y ago
    Non-fair trade is considered unethical based on ethics. FSF considers closed source unethical based on their particular agenda, which has nothing to do with ethics or morality.
    - diffeomorphism 5y ago
      > Non-fair trade is considered unethical based on ethics. No, it is not. If it were, fair trade wouldn't be niche. It adds lots of other obligations on companies "based on their particular agenda". I think it is worthwhile goal and something I like to support, but won't pretend that it is somehow pure, self-evident goodness, just like non-fair trade is not pure evil. Again, you might disagree or have different ideas what "free" is supposed to mean but you should be better than throwing around phrases like "agenda" or "nothing to do with ethics or morality".
      - trasz 5y ago
        People and societies have no problem with ignoring ethics when it benefits them. Otherwise we wouldn’t be waging wars and sucking profits off poorer societies. Fair trade is based on pretty fundamental ethics, such as fighting slavery. Can you point any such concept being foundational to Free Software?
        diffeomorphism 5y ago
        > Fair trade is based on pretty fundamental ethics, such as fighting slavery. Not really, no. Again, lots of non-"fair trade" products exist and those are not against fighting slavery. > Can you point any such concept being foundational to Free Software? Seriously? Their whole stick is fighting software practices they consider unethical. You might disagree whether that is fundamental ethics, but to them it is and it is rude and dishonest to pretend that is not the case. For example, I am not vegetarian, but understand that there are people who feel strongly about that. That is fine and if you go "vegetarians are pushing their agenda which has nothing to do with ethics" that says more about you than about them.
        trasz 5y ago
        To some people the Earth is flat. Is it rude and dishonest to call bullshit on them?
tbrownaw 5y ago
Their origin story is Stallman being frustrated with a buggy printer driver that couldn't be fixed because it was proprietary. It's told in this talk, you can search for "printer" to find it < https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt >. They promote Free Software (and specifically copyleft over permissive licenses) because they view proprietary software as morally wrong and something that should not exist.