5 ms·

I agree totally. The most frustrating part about Stallman's "free software" is that he has to control how everyone else uses it. Linux people don't even get the

I agree totally. The most frustrating part about Stallman's "free software" is that he has to control how everyone else uses it. Linux people don't even get the freedom to name their own operating system.

jrockway 15y ago
I don't think Stallman ever said that you don't have the freedom to call Linux Linux. He's simply asking that you don't. As you can see, it's very easy to ignore his requests. That doesn't mean he should stop making them.
- nimblegorilla 15y ago
  Stallman has never said that people can call it just Linux if they choose. My understanding is that he refuses to interact with anyone unless they agree to call it GNU Linux. Seems like a control issue to me.
bad_user 15y ago
he has to control how everyone else uses it One of the goals of free software is to allow you to use it for any reason whatsoever, and I don't know if you realize what this actually means, or maybe you are to young, but once upon a time you couldn't use Visual Basic to create a Microsoft Office competitor. If by usage you mean the copy-left behavior of GPL, I think it's only fair for a software author to demand whatever the fuck he wants from the software he wrote. And it's also in everybody's right to have his own opinion on how things should be done. Linux people don't even get the freedom to name their own operating system. But in fact "Linux people" have always named their operating system however they pleased, which is really what upsets Stallman so greatly. But even so, he remained true to his original beliefs and never included such requirements in his own software or the GPL, he only bitched about it. You really should look for the definition of "freedom" in a dictionary ;) Here, I'll do that for you ... the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint Are you in any kind of confinement or physical restraint regarding the naming of Linux-based operating systems?
- gaius 15y ago
  once upon a time you couldn't use Visual Basic to create a Microsoft Office competitor I don't know if you know much about VB, but doing that would almost literally be a case of creating an app with a rich text control in the middle. It would be like changing a few keywords and calling Python your own language.
  - bad_user 15y ago
    a case of creating an app with a rich text control in the middle The ActiveX / OLE controls available in Windows by default are nothing short of useless. To have a Word-like processor in the middle of your window, you have to have Office installed ... I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that you can create a competitor that way, where a "competitor" would be a piece of software that actually replaces Office, not just augments it.
- demallien 15y ago
  I think it's only fair for a software author to demand whatever the fuck he wants from the software he wrote Like, a fee of $50, for example? I would say that your position is diammetrically opposed to Stallman's stated goal. But it's not your fault, the GPL is also in opposition to Stallman's stated goals. He went from having the high ideal that software should always be open, to trying to force other people to think the same thing, thereby actually limiting how people use software. We will forever wonder now whether we could have had all of the benefits of OSS without copyleft. But I for one would have much more respect for Stallman if he had instead supported BSD-style open licenses, and tried to convince others that open source was the way to go, rather than trying to control people's behaviour through the threat of legal actions.
  - bad_user 15y ago
    Like, a fee of $50, for example? Well yes, since you mentioned it, I think that's the author's right. Having the opinion that all software should be free, that doesn't mean I want to force people into doing it, as that is indeed in opposition with the idea of freedom. through the threat of legal actions What threats? The only threats I'm seeing from FSF are in response to GPL-violations. If a software author chose GPL, that was his right and it doesn't mean you can relicense it as BSD.

jrockway 15y ago

I don't think Stallman ever said that you don't have the freedom to call Linux Linux. He's simply asking that you don't. As you can see, it's very easy to ignore his requests. That doesn't mean he should stop making them.

nimblegorilla 15y ago
Stallman has never said that people can call it just Linux if they choose. My understanding is that he refuses to interact with anyone unless they agree to call it GNU Linux. Seems like a control issue to me.

bad_user 15y ago

he has to control how everyone else uses it One of the goals of free software is to allow you to use it for any reason whatsoever, and I don't know if you realize what this actually means, or maybe you are to young, but once upon a time you couldn't use Visual Basic to create a Microsoft Office competitor. If by usage you mean the copy-left behavior of GPL, I think it's only fair for a software author to demand whatever the fuck he wants from the software he wrote. And it's also in everybody's right to have his own opinion on how things should be done. Linux people don't even get the freedom to name their own operating system. But in fact "Linux people" have always named their operating system however they pleased, which is really what upsets Stallman so greatly. But even so, he remained true to his original beliefs and never included such requirements in his own software or the GPL, he only bitched about it. You really should look for the definition of "freedom" in a dictionary ;) Here, I'll do that for you ... the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint Are you in any kind of confinement or physical restraint regarding the naming of Linux-based operating systems?

gaius 15y ago
once upon a time you couldn't use Visual Basic to create a Microsoft Office competitor I don't know if you know much about VB, but doing that would almost literally be a case of creating an app with a rich text control in the middle. It would be like changing a few keywords and calling Python your own language.
- bad_user 15y ago
  a case of creating an app with a rich text control in the middle The ActiveX / OLE controls available in Windows by default are nothing short of useless. To have a Word-like processor in the middle of your window, you have to have Office installed ... I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that you can create a competitor that way, where a "competitor" would be a piece of software that actually replaces Office, not just augments it.
demallien 15y ago
I think it's only fair for a software author to demand whatever the fuck he wants from the software he wrote Like, a fee of $50, for example? I would say that your position is diammetrically opposed to Stallman's stated goal. But it's not your fault, the GPL is also in opposition to Stallman's stated goals. He went from having the high ideal that software should always be open, to trying to force other people to think the same thing, thereby actually limiting how people use software. We will forever wonder now whether we could have had all of the benefits of OSS without copyleft. But I for one would have much more respect for Stallman if he had instead supported BSD-style open licenses, and tried to convince others that open source was the way to go, rather than trying to control people's behaviour through the threat of legal actions.
- bad_user 15y ago
  Like, a fee of $50, for example? Well yes, since you mentioned it, I think that's the author's right. Having the opinion that all software should be free, that doesn't mean I want to force people into doing it, as that is indeed in opposition with the idea of freedom. through the threat of legal actions What threats? The only threats I'm seeing from FSF are in response to GPL-violations. If a software author chose GPL, that was his right and it doesn't mean you can relicense it as BSD.