5 ms·

“Why is he so threatening?” In my view, because he has influence based on credibility that he does not deserve any more, and because he exerts that influence i

“Why is he so threatening?” In my view, because he has influence based on credibility that he does not deserve any more, and because he exerts that influence in ways that do not benefit free software.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
its_so_on 15y ago
could you estimate for me how much it would cost ycombinator-backed companies if the Free software they used did not feel the need (promoted by zealots like him) to be free? How many of these companies could not exist at all? Look at your stack. How much of the software in it are you paying for, and how much is RMS's zealotry paying for? Did you contribute anything yourself to that stack? I think you should send RMS a paycheck and some hemp, to keep doing what he's doing. pedantic point. a lot of open source isn't Free in RMS's terms, but he does promote the whole open source movement as a whole, despite being to the left of some of it.
- tedunangst 15y ago
  You're asking a hypothetical that can't be answered, but it's based on the (very faulty, imo) premise that a world without Stallman would not have any free software. Open source was (and would be) alive and well without him.
  - pessimizer 15y ago
    >Open source was (and would be) alive and well without him. You're making a assertion with no evidence or argument, and using it as a premise to dismiss a rhetorical question.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
- olalonde 15y ago
  > a lot of open source isn't Free in RMS's terms, but he does promote the whole open source movement as a whole You are wrong. "I do not advocate open source [...]" - Richard Stallman See: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/09/15/rms_why_open_source_needs/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/09/15/rms_why_open_source_...
  - its_so_on 15y ago
    sorry, reading what I wrote I can see I didn't phrase my pedantic point correctly - I included it for just such a comment as yours! What I meant to say is that he doesn't endorse non-Free OSS. But he does end up "promoting" it however (not purposefully), DESPITE being stricter/more to the left than it. I guess rather than promote I should have said help or aid. If he didn't do what he did the open source movement wouldn't be as strong. He's insane and too left, but his being there helps the whole floss movement, even the parts he disagrees with on principle.
    - olalonde 15y ago
      I see what you mean. He does promote open source although it might not be his intention.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

its_so_on 15y ago

could you estimate for me how much it would cost ycombinator-backed companies if the Free software they used did not feel the need (promoted by zealots like him) to be free? How many of these companies could not exist at all? Look at your stack. How much of the software in it are you paying for, and how much is RMS's zealotry paying for? Did you contribute anything yourself to that stack? I think you should send RMS a paycheck and some hemp, to keep doing what he's doing. pedantic point. a lot of open source isn't Free in RMS's terms, but he does promote the whole open source movement as a whole, despite being to the left of some of it.

tedunangst 15y ago
You're asking a hypothetical that can't be answered, but it's based on the (very faulty, imo) premise that a world without Stallman would not have any free software. Open source was (and would be) alive and well without him.
- pessimizer 15y ago
  >Open source was (and would be) alive and well without him. You're making a assertion with no evidence or argument, and using it as a premise to dismiss a rhetorical question.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
olalonde 15y ago
> a lot of open source isn't Free in RMS's terms, but he does promote the whole open source movement as a whole You are wrong. "I do not advocate open source [...]" - Richard Stallman See: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/09/15/rms_why_open_source_needs/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/09/15/rms_why_open_source_...
- its_so_on 15y ago
  sorry, reading what I wrote I can see I didn't phrase my pedantic point correctly - I included it for just such a comment as yours! What I meant to say is that he doesn't endorse non-Free OSS. But he does end up "promoting" it however (not purposefully), DESPITE being stricter/more to the left than it. I guess rather than promote I should have said help or aid. If he didn't do what he did the open source movement wouldn't be as strong. He's insane and too left, but his being there helps the whole floss movement, even the parts he disagrees with on principle.
  - olalonde 15y ago
    I see what you mean. He does promote open source although it might not be his intention.