10 ms·

I stand against Stallman. I'm no bully. I don't personally know or insult him. But I do disagree with his position on software (I agree with some of what he

I stand against Stallman. I'm no bully. I don't personally know or insult him. But I do disagree with his position on software (I agree with some of what he says, but I think we end up falling in opposing corners nevertheless). But standing against someone and pointing out why you disagree I think is quite in the spirit of Stallman himself. With that said, I don't know the extent of the abuse that Stallman has received from others, but its not obvious to an outsider what the abuse is. Some mocking over a rider? You should hear the abuse I've gotten over some of my haircuts. I will say that while I disagree with RMS I do think his influence has been large and positive for most of his career. I don't think he's a particularly good spokesperson, but he makes up for it in other ways. I've even listed RMS as one I think is on the short list of potential Turing Award winners (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2305496 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2305496). I stand against Stallman, but I'm glad he's there to stand against.

shareme 15y ago
actually RMS is an excellent spokesperson which is why the movement is so successful.
- lightyrs 15y ago
  In a world of Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Open Source, I wonder if FSM is actually successful. Sure it's had successes, but success-ful, I would hesitate to call it. Also, I'm pretty sure the original commenter was implying that RMS is a bad spokesman because he is so polarizing/unattractive (idealogically).
  - jrockway 15y ago
    How much did it cost you to learn to program? Before Free Software, it would have been a lot. Now you can learn and create amazing software without spending any money. And there is a culture of sharing that's made software one of the most successful fields to date.
    - davidw 15y ago
      This stuff is always difficult to figure out with any certainty, because the "what if" world will always remain hypothetical. For instance, the FSF is fairly successful, but in an alternate universe, with, say, David Hasselhof (or, KITT, for that matter), as their spokesperson, maybe they would have been vastly more successful. With regards to the availability of free software, who knows how much is due to them, how much is due to BSD type sharing, and how much is simply due to the economics of free software making a lot of sense for some kinds of programs.
      - rjbond3rd 15y ago
        gcc.
    - maximusprime 15y ago
      Please don't pedal this nonsense. "Free software" existed well before Stallman. I learnt to program from magazines that had "free software" written out in BASIC. It was free (cost and freedom). After that we used to download free software from BBS's. Fractint etc. Free software existed before, it'll always exist. It's existence has nothing to do with Stallman. About as irritating as hearing 'Crockford invented JSON'.
      - jrockway 15y ago
        That was "free software". This is Free Software.
      - icebraining 15y ago
        Words and expressions often have more than one meaning. This is the case. See Gratis versus Libre: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre
      - rryan 15y ago
        Was it actually free as in libre? Did the magazine include a license for the code samples? If there was no explicit license then it was absolutely not libre due to copyright.
  - bryanlarsen 15y ago
    Free Software is successful because Apple and Google would not have been successful without it. OSX & iOS are built on BSD, and Google's entire back end is based on open source software (Linux, Java, et cetera).
    - absconditus 15y ago
      BSD has nothing to do with the FSF and Stallman.
    - pyre 15y ago
      BSD does not use GNU software, IIRC. The BSDs use a separate re-implementation of the Unix base software under a BSD license (instead of a GPL license). That said, I'm a little fuzzy on how much FSF may be inspired the BSDs to exist. edit: I was overstating what I actually meant when I said that they don't use GNU software. I don't know about the current crop of BSDs, but I was referring to the original BSD system not being built on top of the GNU base.
      - absconditus 15y ago
        Most of the current BSD projects do in fact use some GNU tools. BSD predates the FSF.
      - X-Istence 15y ago
        There are a lot of tools and major projects within the various BSD's that are GPL'ed software. This includes but certainly isn't limited to gcc, gdb, grep, binutils, diff, and more. It is only recently in the last few years that the BSD projects have started removing GPL'ed software from their base trees and replacing them with BSD equivalents. clang is slowly being accepted by FreeBSD (a BSD compiler developed by Apple), tools like grep and diff are being redone under the BSD license, and OpenBSD is looking at pcc to replace the gcc compiler for their base system. The main reason is simply because they want to create a fully BSD distribution of components, where none of it is under the GPL license, secondary only recently has there been a new compiler available that is as good as gcc and could be a viable replacement.
    - 15y ago
  - Tichy 15y ago
    In a world of Apple, Google and Microsoft FSM seems to be our only hope...
rjbond3rd 15y ago
Not to get bogged down in words, but you are saying, "I stand against Stallman," but isn't it better to just focus on the ideas? He is a man of ideas, after all. If you disagree on the ideas, you could still be friends with the man (and he is an incredibly nice and friendly guy who treats people better than he gets treated, that's for sure.) Just curious: by any chance, are you "standing against Stallman" while simultaneously using his work? I could not do my job without using Stallman's work in some form (in many forms in fact).
- cperciva 15y ago
  If you disagree on the ideas, you could still be friends with the man Can you? Is it possible to be friends with someone who says that anyone who disagrees with his ideas is evil? I'm an atheist, yet I have no problem with being friends with people who are religious. I do, however, have a problem with being friends with someone who ends every conversation with "... and you're going to burn in hell for an eternity". RMS' refusal to accept the possibility that any position other than his own might have value puts him firmly into that camp of people I don't want to have anything to do with.
  - rjbond3rd 15y ago
    > I don't want to have anything to do with Gotcha, and I'm not trying to be argumentative, but do you use his work? And if so, are you okay with using his work, but disagreeing with his ideas?
    - gbhn 15y ago
      I don't want to speak for anyone, but while Stallman definitely thinks that using work created from a differing ideological perspective is seriously problematic, one shouldn't assume the same from people who disagree with him.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - 15y ago
lambda 15y ago
First of all, this article was about standing up against people bullying Stallman for personal quirks. Is that what you stand against? You think it's bad for him to be a bit weird? Or did you just read the headline, and not the article? Also, standing against a person isn't terribly productive, unless you think that person can do no good or have no good ideas. Do you disagree with everything that Stallman says? Will Stallman saying something make you automatically disagree with a position, even if you agreed with it before? No? Then you don't stand against Stallman. You might disagree with some of his tactics. You might stand against free software. But I'm not sure why you would state this as "standing against Stallman," as if he, personally, is an affront to you.
- srdev 15y ago
  I can't speak for kenjackson, but Stallman states that writing proprietary software is unethical, and I find that idea unpalatable. I generally think that its better for software to be open, but I don't think a person who writes a piece of proprietary software has taken anything away from society, nor have they done any harm. That puts me at odds with Stallman's philosophy, which is predicated on the idea that writing such software is unethical and enslaves the user.
  - gbog 15y ago
    RMS himself showed he'd accept some degrees in the evil scale. ie said Android is not really free but a great step in the right direction. He said also it is ok to use non free software, eg Google. I'm not in his shoes nor in yours but I think there is a scale for proprietary software, ie if you write server side, it is less enslaving than client side, if your product use open formats and allow users to go away with their data, it is better than not, etc.
    - eropple 15y ago
      The assumption that proprietary software is slavery is the primary reason that I have no use for Richard Stallman. (Secondary is, yes, his personal behavior. I don't make fun of him for his grooming or anything quite so superficial, but I think his behavior towards women in the tech community is notably not something to be proud of and his lack of common respect in other ways[1] is appalling. [1] - "It doesn’t take special talents to reproduce—even plants can do it. On the other hand, contributing to a program like Emacs takes real skill." http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/36460 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/36460 )
billpatrianakos 15y ago
You said it perfectly, kenjackson. Everyone needs to chill and stop crapping their pants every time someone disagrees with Stallman. Public figures get insulted by morons like us all the time. They don't sweat it and if they do should get out of the public eye. I'm a Steve Jobs fanboy but I certainly don't care if someone mocks him, even posthumously. I did get very offended by Stallman's comments the day after his death but that's a whole other animal there. Otherwise people need to stop taking our opinions so personally. If I disagree on just one point or everything he stands for it doesn't mean I don't like him unless I say so. It also doesn't mean I respect or don't respect his previous work. Enough with this cult of personality stuff already.

shareme 15y ago

actually RMS is an excellent spokesperson which is why the movement is so successful.

lightyrs 15y ago
In a world of Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Open Source, I wonder if FSM is actually successful. Sure it's had successes, but success-ful, I would hesitate to call it. Also, I'm pretty sure the original commenter was implying that RMS is a bad spokesman because he is so polarizing/unattractive (idealogically).
- jrockway 15y ago
  How much did it cost you to learn to program? Before Free Software, it would have been a lot. Now you can learn and create amazing software without spending any money. And there is a culture of sharing that's made software one of the most successful fields to date.
  - davidw 15y ago
    This stuff is always difficult to figure out with any certainty, because the "what if" world will always remain hypothetical. For instance, the FSF is fairly successful, but in an alternate universe, with, say, David Hasselhof (or, KITT, for that matter), as their spokesperson, maybe they would have been vastly more successful. With regards to the availability of free software, who knows how much is due to them, how much is due to BSD type sharing, and how much is simply due to the economics of free software making a lot of sense for some kinds of programs.
    - rjbond3rd 15y ago
      gcc.
  - maximusprime 15y ago
    Please don't pedal this nonsense. "Free software" existed well before Stallman. I learnt to program from magazines that had "free software" written out in BASIC. It was free (cost and freedom). After that we used to download free software from BBS's. Fractint etc. Free software existed before, it'll always exist. It's existence has nothing to do with Stallman. About as irritating as hearing 'Crockford invented JSON'.
    - jrockway 15y ago
      That was "free software". This is Free Software.
    - icebraining 15y ago
      Words and expressions often have more than one meaning. This is the case. See Gratis versus Libre: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre
    - rryan 15y ago
      Was it actually free as in libre? Did the magazine include a license for the code samples? If there was no explicit license then it was absolutely not libre due to copyright.
- bryanlarsen 15y ago
  Free Software is successful because Apple and Google would not have been successful without it. OSX & iOS are built on BSD, and Google's entire back end is based on open source software (Linux, Java, et cetera).
  - absconditus 15y ago
    BSD has nothing to do with the FSF and Stallman.
  - pyre 15y ago
    BSD does not use GNU software, IIRC. The BSDs use a separate re-implementation of the Unix base software under a BSD license (instead of a GPL license). That said, I'm a little fuzzy on how much FSF may be inspired the BSDs to exist. edit: I was overstating what I actually meant when I said that they don't use GNU software. I don't know about the current crop of BSDs, but I was referring to the original BSD system not being built on top of the GNU base.
    - absconditus 15y ago
      Most of the current BSD projects do in fact use some GNU tools. BSD predates the FSF.
    - X-Istence 15y ago
      There are a lot of tools and major projects within the various BSD's that are GPL'ed software. This includes but certainly isn't limited to gcc, gdb, grep, binutils, diff, and more. It is only recently in the last few years that the BSD projects have started removing GPL'ed software from their base trees and replacing them with BSD equivalents. clang is slowly being accepted by FreeBSD (a BSD compiler developed by Apple), tools like grep and diff are being redone under the BSD license, and OpenBSD is looking at pcc to replace the gcc compiler for their base system. The main reason is simply because they want to create a fully BSD distribution of components, where none of it is under the GPL license, secondary only recently has there been a new compiler available that is as good as gcc and could be a viable replacement.
  - 15y ago
- Tichy 15y ago
  In a world of Apple, Google and Microsoft FSM seems to be our only hope...

rjbond3rd 15y ago

Not to get bogged down in words, but you are saying, "I stand against Stallman," but isn't it better to just focus on the ideas? He is a man of ideas, after all. If you disagree on the ideas, you could still be friends with the man (and he is an incredibly nice and friendly guy who treats people better than he gets treated, that's for sure.) Just curious: by any chance, are you "standing against Stallman" while simultaneously using his work? I could not do my job without using Stallman's work in some form (in many forms in fact).

cperciva 15y ago
If you disagree on the ideas, you could still be friends with the man Can you? Is it possible to be friends with someone who says that anyone who disagrees with his ideas is evil? I'm an atheist, yet I have no problem with being friends with people who are religious. I do, however, have a problem with being friends with someone who ends every conversation with "... and you're going to burn in hell for an eternity". RMS' refusal to accept the possibility that any position other than his own might have value puts him firmly into that camp of people I don't want to have anything to do with.
- rjbond3rd 15y ago
  > I don't want to have anything to do with Gotcha, and I'm not trying to be argumentative, but do you use his work? And if so, are you okay with using his work, but disagreeing with his ideas?
  - gbhn 15y ago
    I don't want to speak for anyone, but while Stallman definitely thinks that using work created from a differing ideological perspective is seriously problematic, one shouldn't assume the same from people who disagree with him.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - 15y ago

lambda 15y ago

First of all, this article was about standing up against people bullying Stallman for personal quirks. Is that what you stand against? You think it's bad for him to be a bit weird? Or did you just read the headline, and not the article? Also, standing against a person isn't terribly productive, unless you think that person can do no good or have no good ideas. Do you disagree with everything that Stallman says? Will Stallman saying something make you automatically disagree with a position, even if you agreed with it before? No? Then you don't stand against Stallman. You might disagree with some of his tactics. You might stand against free software. But I'm not sure why you would state this as "standing against Stallman," as if he, personally, is an affront to you.

srdev 15y ago
I can't speak for kenjackson, but Stallman states that writing proprietary software is unethical, and I find that idea unpalatable. I generally think that its better for software to be open, but I don't think a person who writes a piece of proprietary software has taken anything away from society, nor have they done any harm. That puts me at odds with Stallman's philosophy, which is predicated on the idea that writing such software is unethical and enslaves the user.
- gbog 15y ago
  RMS himself showed he'd accept some degrees in the evil scale. ie said Android is not really free but a great step in the right direction. He said also it is ok to use non free software, eg Google. I'm not in his shoes nor in yours but I think there is a scale for proprietary software, ie if you write server side, it is less enslaving than client side, if your product use open formats and allow users to go away with their data, it is better than not, etc.
  - eropple 15y ago
    The assumption that proprietary software is slavery is the primary reason that I have no use for Richard Stallman. (Secondary is, yes, his personal behavior. I don't make fun of him for his grooming or anything quite so superficial, but I think his behavior towards women in the tech community is notably not something to be proud of and his lack of common respect in other ways[1] is appalling. [1] - "It doesn’t take special talents to reproduce—even plants can do it. On the other hand, contributing to a program like Emacs takes real skill." http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/36460 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/36460 )

billpatrianakos 15y ago

You said it perfectly, kenjackson. Everyone needs to chill and stop crapping their pants every time someone disagrees with Stallman. Public figures get insulted by morons like us all the time. They don't sweat it and if they do should get out of the public eye. I'm a Steve Jobs fanboy but I certainly don't care if someone mocks him, even posthumously. I did get very offended by Stallman's comments the day after his death but that's a whole other animal there. Otherwise people need to stop taking our opinions so personally. If I disagree on just one point or everything he stands for it doesn't mean I don't like him unless I say so. It also doesn't mean I respect or don't respect his previous work. Enough with this cult of personality stuff already.