Richard Stallman is nuts. Here's why.
11 comments
I saw Richard speak recently and I have to say he doesn't come across as being crazy.
However, his world view is very much permeated by the importance of individual freedom and he is somewhat zealous in getting his message out there.
I like to think I have a more pragmatic approach to individual freedom than that - I'm happy to sacrifice freedoms in some areas if they grant me freedoms/abilities in other areas.
However, his world view is very much permeated by the importance of individual freedom and he is somewhat zealous in getting his message out there.
I like to think I have a more pragmatic approach to individual freedom than that - I'm happy to sacrifice freedoms in some areas if they grant me freedoms/abilities in other areas.
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
I really like that quote too, but that doesn't make it true.
Being able to freely develop software on all the CPUs I own isn't an essential freedom.
Being able to freely develop software on all the CPUs I own isn't an essential freedom.
How could it not be? As you said, you own them. We're talking basic property rights here.
I think that the quote _is_ true, just not particularly applicable to this exact situation. I meant to mention that yes, I realized it was a stretch, and perhaps there is a more accurate or appropriate quote for this situation.
But what I meant to imply was that for some, freedoms are important enough that they're a part of their lives, and RMS is one of those sorts. It DOES permeate almost everything that he does, and I respect him for being, if nothing else, more of a sentinel than the average person about what impacts our freedoms and what doesn't.
I'll be the first to concede that I am not nearly as vigilant and RMS is, and often participate in things that I don't morally agree with, but here's the real question, I guess... why shouldn't you be able to freely develop software on all the CPUs you own? For what reasons do you allow those constraints?
But what I meant to imply was that for some, freedoms are important enough that they're a part of their lives, and RMS is one of those sorts. It DOES permeate almost everything that he does, and I respect him for being, if nothing else, more of a sentinel than the average person about what impacts our freedoms and what doesn't.
I'll be the first to concede that I am not nearly as vigilant and RMS is, and often participate in things that I don't morally agree with, but here's the real question, I guess... why shouldn't you be able to freely develop software on all the CPUs you own? For what reasons do you allow those constraints?
Oh noes, Stallman is nuts :(
1) So what ?
2) He did few things. He launched Free Software Movement, started Free Software Foundation, and GNU project. He is main author of GPL :)
3) So what ?
4) So what ?
"How can someone hear him when he says something like this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349 "
Because he's not hypocrite.
1) So what ?
2) He did few things. He launched Free Software Movement, started Free Software Foundation, and GNU project. He is main author of GPL :)
3) So what ?
4) So what ?
"How can someone hear him when he says something like this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349 "
Because he's not hypocrite.
2) ... author of GPL
Yes, imho the GPL (and the idea of viral copyleft that it inspired) deserves to be treated as one of the greatest legal inventions of our time. Given the ongoing reduction of just about everything to information, the ascendancy of code and data among the human race, and the extent to which it will shape our future history, a viable, effective, encompassing legal framework to ensure its freedom is one of the most valuable contributions to computing that anyone has made.
Yes, imho the GPL (and the idea of viral copyleft that it inspired) deserves to be treated as one of the greatest legal inventions of our time. Given the ongoing reduction of just about everything to information, the ascendancy of code and data among the human race, and the extent to which it will shape our future history, a viable, effective, encompassing legal framework to ensure its freedom is one of the most valuable contributions to computing that anyone has made.
I believe in paper voting over machine voting. (Actually, I believe in paper voting; I'm happy for machines to count the vote, but I want to make my vote on paper.)
The vote counting process has to be transparent, and closed source voting machines are not transparent.
Are you calling me nuts as well?
The vote counting process has to be transparent, and closed source voting machines are not transparent.
Are you calling me nuts as well?
I thought nearly everyone with internet or web socialization was for paper voting and squarely against any kind of anonymous machine voting? That doesn’t strike me as an unusual view at all, it seems like the most common view to me.
>> 1) He says that you should not own a mobile phone;
He shouldn't use a mobile phone, there are reasons why he would get tracked.
>> 4) He doesn't use a browser; rather, he uses wget and reads the fetched pages from his e-mail mailbox;
He needs privacy more than anyone else.
You see as a political activist/famous person he should be more careful with these things.
He shouldn't use a mobile phone, there are reasons why he would get tracked.
>> 4) He doesn't use a browser; rather, he uses wget and reads the fetched pages from his e-mail mailbox;
He needs privacy more than anyone else.
You see as a political activist/famous person he should be more careful with these things.
Are there people who understand computing and electronics who thinks electronic voting is good?
3) He believes in paper voting over machine voting
For important elections, so do I and many others. Its much easier to steal an election based on an opaque computer systems.
For important elections, so do I and many others. Its much easier to steal an election based on an opaque computer systems.
See my previous comment to you.... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3084650
Yes, he's crazy (aren't we all?) but he knows how to dance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pube5Aynsls
This guy confuses software with religion. I wonder what search engine he might use, Google or Bing?
Not really. He might be defending his position with the same zeal that others defend their religion (it's difficult not to be zealous about something for which you have made important sacrifices), but there is a huge difference.
Religions have questionable basis and use: it is both impossible to prove they are objectively true (at least through the scientific method, the only way we currently have to discover what is true) and to claim that they offer something valuable, which could not exist otherwise, to a human society.
Software freedom (or lack thereof) on the other hand has objective, practical consequences. They might not be direct, or apparent, or significant for every user in every possible use-case, but it is rather easy for a semi computer-literate person to understand that they exist and that they can be pretty negative and serious in too many cases.
Religions have questionable basis and use: it is both impossible to prove they are objectively true (at least through the scientific method, the only way we currently have to discover what is true) and to claim that they offer something valuable, which could not exist otherwise, to a human society.
Software freedom (or lack thereof) on the other hand has objective, practical consequences. They might not be direct, or apparent, or significant for every user in every possible use-case, but it is rather easy for a semi computer-literate person to understand that they exist and that they can be pretty negative and serious in too many cases.
Probably none as they all use non-free non-trivial proprietary javascript!
Probably something like Duck Duck Go, or something.
2) He criticizes Bill's charities, but have never done anything.
3) He believes in paper voting over machine voting
4) He doesn't use a browser; rather, he uses wget and reads the fetched pages from his e-mail mailbox;
How can someone hear him when he says something like this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3083349