Richard Stallman's Setup

tlvb · 2010-04-07 11:40:30

It is illogical to make a choice that does not fit oneself.
Choosing something instead of something other is a constraint.
Can we only be free if we do not choose?

toad · 2010-04-07 14:11:28

tlvb wrote:

It is illogical to make a choice that does not fit oneself.
Choosing something instead of something other is a constraint.
Can we only be free if we do not choose?

Bit too philosophical afaic - most people have no choice when it comes to OS, it is M$ all the way. Does that make them free?

fsckd · 2010-04-07 14:31:46

It's kind of like when Gandhi gave up tailored clothes from London in favor of homespun clothes. There's a loss in one thing (quality for Gandhi, choices for Stallman) in favor of something else (independence of the producer).

Anikom15 · 2010-04-07 15:20:36

Who really cares? This is worse than the Tiger Woods fiasco....

Ranguvar · 2010-04-07 21:48:17

Anikom15 wrote:

Who really cares? This is worse than the Tiger Woods fiasco....

No.
Not much is worse than several million people all incredibly and pathetically interested in one person's marriage and family life.
The debate about personal ethics is not one of them, for certain.

Vamp898 · 2010-04-07 21:50:59

why does RMS not use an SPARC Processor? Those are OpenSource too

corsakh · 2010-04-07 23:38:44

tlvb wrote:

It is illogical to make a choice that does not fit oneself.
Choosing something instead of something other is a constraint.
Can we only be free if we do not choose?

Pretty much so. Freedom is ephemeral, it always involves some sort of a compromise.

fsckd wrote:

It's kind of like when Gandhi gave up tailored clothes from London in favor of homespun clothes. There's a loss in one thing (quality for Gandhi, choices for Stallman) in favor of something else (independence of the producer).

That a little different. Ghandi was campaigning for the freedom of India and the move would fit his agenda, it did bring tangible benefits for his country. If Ghandi was also campaigning for the freedom of textile consumers for example, his move would make no sense whatsoever. And would actually be bad cos it would artificially affect the competition discriminating against the London producers.

Last edited by corsakh (2010-04-07 23:39:57)

tlvb · 2010-04-07 23:40:12

toad wrote:

Bit too philosophical afaic - most people have no choice when it comes to OS, it is M$ all the way. Does that make them free?

My bad, what I meant that from the other direction, if one by making choices modify the set of options for the next choice it is not un-free, because the constraints are volountarily placed there by oneself and can also be removed.

alexandrite · 2010-04-08 03:16:17

farvardin wrote:

I hope the power station which feeds Stallman's netbook is using free software and free hardware exclusively...

The power for RMS's laptop comes from a dense microsingularity at the core of his beard.

Anikom15 · 2010-04-08 03:24:01

A man's use of free software is only as big as his ... heart.

ChojinDSL · 2011-03-16 09:22:46

Is ist just me or does RMS sound a lot like Professor Frink from the Simpsons?

swathe · 2011-03-16 10:11:54

I met him last year while he was in Australia and he was good to have a chat with. We have exchanged emails a few times since. he always answers, but they are short and to the point.

Anthony Bentley · 2011-03-16 22:56:28

The Loongson netbook that rms uses is interesting, but quite buggy.

Vamp898 wrote:

why does RMS not use an SPARC Processor? Those are OpenSource too

The hardware designs are open, but as far as I know there are no actual open hardware platforms to run them on. (Think the software licensing situation is bad? Try looking at FPGAs, where the number of useful free synthesis tools is approximately zero. C programmers have no idea how bad it can get.) Stallman has spoken in favor of OpenSPARC.

GNU/Linux

This makes the assumption that

Your userland is GNU
Your userland does not have any major non‐GNU components

These are sometimes true, but not always. What license is X11 under? How about your wireless drivers? And remember, not everything GPL‐licensed comes from GNU.

My biggest problem with rms is that he believes in censorship to promote his agenda. He probably doesn’t call it that, but if it quacks like a duck… rms considers any system with a package manager that has “non‐free” software (for his definition of “free”) to be a non‐free system. Contrast this with the OpenBSD position: OpenBSD is known for having no blobs in the kernel; their view of the package manager is “clearly mark the license and let the user decide.” Which of these is freer?

rms advocates obfuscating source code to prevent people from using nonfree drivers. That’s something I just can’t get behind. That’s censorship.

Last edited by Anthony Bentley (2011-03-16 22:58:27)

skottish · 2011-03-17 02:47:55

Anthony Bentley wrote:

rms advocates obfuscating source code to prevent people from using nonfree drivers. That’s something I just can’t get behind. That’s censorship.

Agreed. Elitism isn't helpful when promoting the idea of Freedom.

ANOKNUSA · 2011-03-17 04:41:31

skottish wrote:

Anthony Bentley wrote:
rms advocates obfuscating source code to prevent people from using nonfree drivers. That’s something I just can’t get behind. That’s censorship.
Agreed. Elitism isn't helpful when promoting the idea of Freedom.

It's always been my biggest problem with the guy; brow-beating and strong-arming people into particular ethical choices and modes of behavior in the name of "freedom" and "liberty" seems to be a staple of just about every American political movement. Stallman is welcome to his personal choices and ethics, but the proposed use of various legal tools to thrust them upon others doesn't help his case.

Arch Linux

#126 2010-04-07 11:40:30

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#127 2010-04-07 14:11:28

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#128 2010-04-07 14:31:46

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#129 2010-04-07 15:20:36

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#130 2010-04-07 21:48:17

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#131 2010-04-07 21:50:59

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#132 2010-04-07 23:38:44

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#133 2010-04-07 23:40:12

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#134 2010-04-08 03:16:17

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#135 2010-04-08 03:24:01

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#136 2011-03-16 09:22:46

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#137 2011-03-16 10:11:54

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#138 2011-03-16 22:56:28

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#139 2011-03-17 02:47:55

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

#140 2011-03-17 04:41:31

Re: Richard Stallman's Setup

Board footer