4 ms·

What is his utopia? That all software would be free software? I for one would love to live in such a world. Why? Because then I could trust and be free with my

by zxcdw 13y ago

What is his utopia? That all software would be free software? I for one would love to live in such a world. Why? Because then I could trust and be free with my computing. Now I can't, and I value my trust and freedom over conveinience and entertainment, as such I haven't opted-in for many common usages of computers and computing. It would be nice, but no thanks. Would the world be a better place if Firefox and GNU/Linux were proprietary? I doubt that. How could we trust Tor? How could we(as in the whole internet-connected world) have any form of secure communications which we could trust? In fact, I think we would see far more oppression and totalitariatism in such an alternative, I believe free software helps tremendously with this as it gives more freedom and makes it harder to take freedoms away and harder to enforce blind faith on authorities.

dinkumthinkum 13y ago
You say you would but I don't think you understand the implications of the his view and his Utopia. RMS is perfectly fine, he has admitted as such, if the implication is that we would have not had such a technical revolution that we have had. You talk about how great Firefox is and I agree but I don't think it would exist in this Utopia, or even have a reason to exist. I think we'd be to busy tilling the fields for our feudal lords. =)
- zxcdw 13y ago
  I would rather live free with 80's technology and free software than live in a totalitarian surveillance state* of 2020's. I simply value free software and the ideologies behind it as a social movement more than I value capitalistic self-centered profit reaping at the expense of end-user freedoms. This also borders the issues with trusting authorities and the whole concept of trust especially with revelations earlier this year, but lets not get there. Why are you making an assumption that progress couldn't happen without proprietary software? Are you also implying that without copyright we would not have entertainment to enjoy? If so, at all, then our mindsets are the polar opposite. :) As I mentioned, I've had to opt-out from computer practices which are the norm these days because I disagree with the way they operate. This is a big pain, as I understand their value, however as I value my own freedoms more than I value the conveinience they bring, I am still acting in my best interests here. I wish more people would be willing to make such "sacrifices" to make a point and consider end-user freedom and user and civil freedoms as a more important social issue than what they are considered now. I would see such a world a better place than what we have now. I see free software as promoting transparency and giving rights, and proprietary software as promoting shady practices without user consent and imposing limitations and reducing rights. This all boils down to reducing the amount of trust and having a cultural and social change to fight against abuse of power and corruption among others. First and foremost it is a social and a cultural thing. *: Assuming that we get there with current progress and free software doesn't hinder it.
  - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
    How about 1680s technology? As far as totalitarian surveillance state, oh pshaw. Try the Kamir Rouge. You think Free Software would protect you from a surveillance state? You're being hyperbolic. Is it really this hard to see the direct implication of RMS' view? He certainly understands it and is quite OK with it but I don't think you would be. 80s tech? Really? That seems pretty posh compared to what would we would have achieved the RMS morality had been the order the day from the beginning.
    - zxcdw 13y ago
      What on earth are you arguing for here? You somehow seem to equate RMS' views with "no progress". Why is that? Why don't you explain your stance and view but make me ask for it explicitly? I really don't see how free software would hinder any sort of progress, especially if free software adoption became more widespread now. Fill me in here.

by zxcdw 13y ago

dinkumthinkum 13y ago

You say you would but I don't think you understand the implications of the his view and his Utopia. RMS is perfectly fine, he has admitted as such, if the implication is that we would have not had such a technical revolution that we have had. You talk about how great Firefox is and I agree but I don't think it would exist in this Utopia, or even have a reason to exist. I think we'd be to busy tilling the fields for our feudal lords. =)

zxcdw 13y ago
I would rather live free with 80's technology and free software than live in a totalitarian surveillance state* of 2020's. I simply value free software and the ideologies behind it as a social movement more than I value capitalistic self-centered profit reaping at the expense of end-user freedoms. This also borders the issues with trusting authorities and the whole concept of trust especially with revelations earlier this year, but lets not get there. Why are you making an assumption that progress couldn't happen without proprietary software? Are you also implying that without copyright we would not have entertainment to enjoy? If so, at all, then our mindsets are the polar opposite. :) As I mentioned, I've had to opt-out from computer practices which are the norm these days because I disagree with the way they operate. This is a big pain, as I understand their value, however as I value my own freedoms more than I value the conveinience they bring, I am still acting in my best interests here. I wish more people would be willing to make such "sacrifices" to make a point and consider end-user freedom and user and civil freedoms as a more important social issue than what they are considered now. I would see such a world a better place than what we have now. I see free software as promoting transparency and giving rights, and proprietary software as promoting shady practices without user consent and imposing limitations and reducing rights. This all boils down to reducing the amount of trust and having a cultural and social change to fight against abuse of power and corruption among others. First and foremost it is a social and a cultural thing. *: Assuming that we get there with current progress and free software doesn't hinder it.
- dinkumthinkum 13y ago
  How about 1680s technology? As far as totalitarian surveillance state, oh pshaw. Try the Kamir Rouge. You think Free Software would protect you from a surveillance state? You're being hyperbolic. Is it really this hard to see the direct implication of RMS' view? He certainly understands it and is quite OK with it but I don't think you would be. 80s tech? Really? That seems pretty posh compared to what would we would have achieved the RMS morality had been the order the day from the beginning.
  - zxcdw 13y ago
    What on earth are you arguing for here? You somehow seem to equate RMS' views with "no progress". Why is that? Why don't you explain your stance and view but make me ask for it explicitly? I really don't see how free software would hinder any sort of progress, especially if free software adoption became more widespread now. Fill me in here.