4 ms·

GNU is somewhere between a non-profit software outfit and a cult in a way that is greater than either. I don't agree with all of the positions that GNU takes i

GNU is somewhere between a non-profit software outfit and a cult in a way that is greater than either. I don't agree with all of the positions that GNU takes in specific, but in aggregate I think the movement has been a huge force for good because of its cultlike unbending adherence to its philosophy. It would be bad if GNU stomped out all other philosophies of developing software and products, because it would remove the commercial incentive to innovate. On the other hand, we'd be much worse off without all the work that its philosophy has produced. I get your frustration, though - GNU will never be what you want it to be, internally, unless you're 100% on board.

chrismsimpson 3y ago
> but in aggregate I think the movement has been a huge force for good because of its cultlike unbending adherence to its philosophy Cringe. I will only participate in communities with meaningful codes of conduct.
themerone 3y ago
It would be bad if GNU stomped out all other philosophies of developing software But this is the aim of the FSF, they clearly believe that all software should be copyleft.
- teddyh 3y ago
  The FSF may believe that copyleft is the best way to achieve their aim, but they will not actively oppose any other licenses which are compatible. They see proprietary software and its ilk as the opposing force, not anyone else. The FSF looks at MIT and BSD licenses, etc. and think, “Oh, those are some people who might in theory be doing more to support us, but at least they’re not opposing us in any way.”. Some, even many, people has somehow got it into their heads that the FSF is equally opposed to anything which is not copylefted, and this is decidedly not the case.
mcpackieh 3y ago
> because it would remove the commercial incentive to innovate Not so. In a world were the FSF got their way: Organizations with a need for specialized software would be able to contract programmers to bring that software into existence. It's not as though every other profession in the world would throw up their hands and say they couldn't use computers anymore just because software could no longer be copyrighted.

chrismsimpson 3y ago

> but in aggregate I think the movement has been a huge force for good because of its cultlike unbending adherence to its philosophy Cringe. I will only participate in communities with meaningful codes of conduct.

themerone 3y ago

It would be bad if GNU stomped out all other philosophies of developing software But this is the aim of the FSF, they clearly believe that all software should be copyleft.

teddyh 3y ago
The FSF may believe that copyleft is the best way to achieve their aim, but they will not actively oppose any other licenses which are compatible. They see proprietary software and its ilk as the opposing force, not anyone else. The FSF looks at MIT and BSD licenses, etc. and think, “Oh, those are some people who might in theory be doing more to support us, but at least they’re not opposing us in any way.”. Some, even many, people has somehow got it into their heads that the FSF is equally opposed to anything which is not copylefted, and this is decidedly not the case.

mcpackieh 3y ago

> because it would remove the commercial incentive to innovate Not so. In a world were the FSF got their way: Organizations with a need for specialized software would be able to contract programmers to bring that software into existence. It's not as though every other profession in the world would throw up their hands and say they couldn't use computers anymore just because software could no longer be copyrighted.