3 ms·
This, and the few lines that Stallman writes should be instructive to many users here. RMS and Free Software is actually very radical. Much much more radical th
by thinkingemote 5y ago
This, and the few lines that Stallman writes should be instructive to many users here. RMS and Free Software is actually very radical. Much much more radical than any popular open source coder or progressive corporation can be. But the key thing is that this difference has been hidden. It's not a Silicon Valley libertarian optimism either (which we've seen challenged and wither in recent years). It's deeper. Not many of us really notices, and hardly anyone else outside does too!
It's something we don't encounter much as we are used to consuming software, or just doing open source, but Free Software is *philosophical* first and foremost. It's a fundamental different way of looking at and understanding the world.
I find it fascinating, and posts like this really enhance this difference between the worlds we are living in.
- Grakel 5y agoBot?
- hagbard_c 5y agoOdd, Stallman disavowing the radical concept of "cultural appropriation" is supposed to be proof of him being "very radical"? The opposite is true, Stallman's thoughts on this subject are rational, not radical.
- detaro 5y agoradical is not the opposite of rational, and the comment you replied to in no way suggested it's not rational.
- hagbard_c 5y agoRational does not need to be the opposite of radical, nor does the parent comment need to imply Stallman did not react rationally. The parent does see his comment as proof of his radicalism which is, as said, a strange statement given that Stallman decries the radical concept of cultural appropriation - a rational statement. Decrying radical statements is not a radical act.
- detaro 5y agoDecrying the concept of "intellectual property" entirely, as he does, is a pretty radical position nowadays, so yes, that comment is proof of a radical position.