Personally, while I generally agree with rms, in this particular situation I think he went overboard. Not in expressing his opinion, but in the way he did it.

Personally, while I generally agree with rms, in this particular situation I think he went overboard. Not in expressing his opinion, but in the way he did it. I say this as a free software advocate; this situation arises from a sad reality, and one that rms doesn't even address: it's really hard to make money from free software. I don't think Mark Shuttleworth was enthusiastic about sending users' information, the deal with Amazon is just a way to try to monetize an OS which its users mostly don't pay for. So, instead of rallying the people to boycott Canonical, rms should be more understanding of the situation. After all, the Free Software Foundation is well aware of the difficulties of obtaining money in this space. Have you noticed that the three biggest patrons of the FSF are companies whose money comes largely from non-free software? I'm talking about Google, Oracle and IBM. What does it tell us about the free software movement. https://www.fsf.org/patrons https://www.fsf.org/patrons We are close to 2013, many years ago, when I started using Slackware Linux, I would have expected that by this time there would be many thriving companies offering free software solutions for the desktop and competing for my money based not on lock-in, but on quality and innovation. Where's my flying car? I understand and completely support the "respect user's privacy" argument, but we should also understand the "money doesn't fall from trees" argument and seek acceptable solutions, otherwise the year of Linux on the desktop will never come.