Interviews: Ask Richard Stallman a Question 359
RMS founded the GNU Project, the Free Software Foundation, and remains one of the most important and outspoken advocates for software freedom. He now spends much of his time fighting excessive extension of copyright laws, digital restrictions management, and software patents. RMS has agreed to answer your questions about GNU/Linux, how GNU relates to Linux the kernel, free software, why he disagrees with the idea of open source, and other issues of public concern. As usual, ask as many as you'd like, but please, one question per post.
Companies Selling Actually Free Software? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I run a small open source project that I sell compiled binaries of for 10$ a pop, it pulls in around 200-300 dollars a month even though I have a public build server as well as the entire project hosted on github. I imagine it would work on a larger scale as well.
Re:Companies Selling Actually Free Software? (Score:5, Interesting)
a little related, but GE doesn't even bother selling the nuclear power plant plans to the Chinese, because to the Chinese, they don't give a shit about your design or intellectual property, they'll just steal it, because to them, if they can copy it, they shouldn't have to pay for it.
So instead, GE basically gives them the design for free, and then charges them out the ass for 'support'. Which in this case, is the management and oversight necessary for the meticulous implementation that's not going to blow up in their face. They pay for it, because we have the expertise, and it's something they simply can't copy....for now.
So anyways, RedHat and Linux are like that. The logo of the Fedora you see on their software? That's actually a travelling-wave nuclear reactor. When you install Fedora, you're harnessing the POWER OF NUCLEAR REACTIONS inside your VERY COMPUTER. This is what makes Linux, truly so incredible. Microsoft really has nothing on them. Windows 10? More like Windows EXPLOSIEN! Because Microsoft is like the Chinese and Japanese, they simply don't know how to make a nuclear reactor that doesn't EXPLODE. Linux is like the AMERICANS. beecause the MERICANS know how to HARNESS the power of nukulear fission using LINUX.
Just think! 2015! the year of nuclear reactors on your desktop.
--
ok, so I got carried away, but that's actually how GE is monetizing it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Last I checked, the vast majority of software was internal, for the private use of an enterprise. In that case, license really doesn't matter. RMS has addressed the issue of programmers earning a living before.
I generally agree with you on the problems of applying the GPL all over the place, but RMS does have a well-reasoned position and does address the question of paying the developers.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey now, I may be no fan of Stallman, preferring more pragmatism in the open source movement, but I don't consider him a troll.
A better way of putting it might be:
Stallman has a skewed view of "living in the real world" since he squatted at MIT till 1998 and spents most of his time traveling to foreign countries to speak about "free software" now.
Someone should tell him that while foreigners invite him to talk about software freedom, the really care more about free as in beer part of it. Part of the reason
Re: (Score:2)
We do have to cut him "some" slack on this because he formulated his movement BEFORE the mass adoption of home computers and gaming.
When he joined the MIT AI Lab, computer access was still pretty much limited to the "bearded priesthood". It's also why I think he needs more pragmatism. He's out of touch with the actual needs of people who "aren't" members of the MIT AI Lab style bearded priesthood. As I've said before, he mostly computes as if it was 1964, since he uses EMACS on the console EMACs origin
Re: (Score:2)
three words:
Three Mile Island.
Thank you, come again.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they give the plans away for free because most of them have to be published as part of the regulatory procedure.
Re: (Score:2)
Software developed for governments perhaps? I seem to recall some countries mandated that software written for government departments had to be open source. They paid an external developer to write and maintain the software, but the source code was available.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, regarding the problem of selling free software, I'd specifically ask RMS:
Would you support a licence that allowed free redistribution of modified or unmodified source and build systems, but removed the freedom to run (Freedom 0) for non-development uses? The license would specify a default distribution of a use-fee up the chain of fork parents, though a differing split could be negotiated. For example, would you have had trouble with that non-free printer driver back in the 80s if you had been able
The next big thing (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you see as the next big issue coming up with software licensing that isn't addressed with the existing GPL and AGPL licenses?
Re: (Score:2)
Probably "people not being legally required to use the GPL or AGPL licenses for their projects".
On the matter of smartphones (Score:5, Interesting)
Mr. Stallman. Firstly thank you for all your many amazing and brilliant contribution. The list is long so let me leave it there.
I'd be very grateful if you could answer my question: What changes are necessary to make a smartphone truly secure?
Re: On the matter of smartphones (Score:3, Interesting)
Or even better, how do we take smart phones out of the control of corporations and back into user's control? There's Linux for computers which gives the users freedoms, but there's no equivalent for smart phones yet. I see this as a serious problem because people are largely abandoning computers and laptops to move toward smart phones and tablets.
So my question is: How to make a smartphone that truly has the user's interest at heart? (Not trying to sell them apps, spy and track on them, restrict them to a w
Re: (Score:2)
To make a smart phone mostly secure all you need to do it switch off all networking features, WiFi, Bluetooth, phone signal etc.
Of course at that point it really isn't a smart phone anymore as a huge part of the usefulness of a smart phone is how you use it to connect with the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe there is an Ubuntu smartphone out now. In fact, the users will never be able to control the software running the cell voice and data communications, because the FCC won't allow it.
Re: (Score:2)
Won't fly. Despite all efforts to make smartphones anything BUT a phone, they still are. And hence you still need a carrier.
And carriers won't really enjoy the idea of NOT being able to lock you down to their contract.
Get a Neo900 (Score:3)
The in-development Neo900 smartphone, whilst it doesn't have the latest and greatest hardware specs, is specifically being built to make it harder to do this crap. Option of going 100% FOSS on the main ARM processor with the exception of some userspace blobs for the PowerVR GPU (at least that is the intention) plus a hardware architecture that prevents the closed parts of the system (WiFi, cellular radio etc) from having access to the other hardware (there is no way to for the cellular module to have any ac
Re: (Score:3)
That aside, Mr. Stallman is opposed to all mobile phones based on the fact their location can be triangulated.
As opposed to? All phones can have their position located. Land lines are far easier to locate than a GSM phone.
Re: (Score:3)
the only thing he's really done is crate more extremists in the world. That's hardly a good thing
I think crating extremists is a good thing: every extremist RMS has packed into a crate is one less extremist out in the world doing extremist things.
The future of private and open tech? (Score:5, Interesting)
My biggest concern in this day and age is the dumbing down and comercialization of computing. What used to be open, interoperable programs has now turned into ad based, closed apps. We've gone from having something like Pidgin being able to run all instant messaging clients ad free to now having to download a separate app for every messager, for example (no one uses the older ones anymore, or they've been shut down). Also, open standards like email have been falling out of favour due to corporate pushes to lock down users into walled gardens like Facebook. Of course there's always the option of not using these closed source apps, but it really hinders your social life. Also, programs (now called "apps") are designed to milk the users for money, rather than to benefit the users, as you know is the case with things like " defective by design" DRM.
Is there any way computing can truly become open and user centric again, or do you think it's truly a lost cause? If so, how can we do it without losing connection with the rest of the world who will not give up their FB/WhatsApp/Kik (and don't answer their phone or emails anymore)?
The future of reading before posting? (Score:2)
You're unlikely to get the answer you seek because you've framed your question in terms of a movement Stallman is (rightly) opposed to, and in ways that he's already explained many times (even the /. summary points to one of the essays on this) -- why Stallman objects to the open source movement (older essay [gnu.org], newer essay also pointed to in the /. summary [gnu.org]). He recommends against using Facebook [fsf.org] (and has started every talk in the past year or so [gnu.org] with an explanation of why posting pictures of people in Facebook
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there's always the option of not using these closed source apps, but it really hinders your social life.
You know, there was a time when there was no such thing as Facebook. Believe it or not, people still managed to have social lives.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, there was. And people had social lives with other people not on facebook. But facebook exists now. And too many people allow it to gatekeep their entire social life. So there is no social life with those people without facebook.
Depending on where you live, how old you are, etc, excising those people may be acceptable or not.
Re: (Score:2)
.
We've gone from having something like Pidgin being able to run all instant messaging clients ad free to now having to download a separate app for every messager, for example (no one uses the older ones anymore, or they've been shut down).
You can blame the pidgin developers for that, for deciding to NOT implement Voice and video support as was earlier planned. Also, since the Pidgin developers mostly used the finch with XMMP on the console it meant that the protocols especially used by "normal" users got short shrift and didn't keep up featurewise.
You can also blame some of the silly UI changes to pidgin, made by some of those finch using developers that were ill-advised.
Freedom of expression (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's not "software freedom", that's using software to express some other freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
Favorite books (Score:5, Interesting)
Hi RMS,
What are your favorite books? What is the recent book you read and liked ? Is there any book you think every programmer must read ?
Thanks
Neutrino Kitten
On the matter of privacy (Score:5, Interesting)
In your opinion, how can a government strike a fair balance between privacy and snooping powers?
Given that the government needs to be able to spy on potentially dangerous people and groups and such desires have grown legs, wings and multiple heads over the years...
Have We Lost the War to Quid Pro Quo Complacency? (Score:4)
GFDL? (Score:5, Interesting)
The Gnu Free Documentation Licence (GFDL) has not been embraced with nearly as much love as the GPL and numerous issues have been raised:
*Non compability with GPL (both ways).
*Non-freeness (as deemed by Debian) of invariant sections.
*Cumersomeness of having to print the full licence when distributing physical printouts.
Etc.
Wikipedia for example does not accept contributions licenced under the GFDL only.
What do you see as a way forward in adressing the issues raised regarding the GFDL?
Education role in FSF goals (Score:3, Interesting)
How do you see education (CS) fit in achieving FSF goals? What involvement does FSF have with the current CS curriculum to further free software? (As we have seen both Google, MS, and Facebook are getting involved in education, how is FSF doing in this regard to further the free software movement).
Who are you voting for? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is there any presidential candidate that you feel is worth supporting?
Bernie Sanders (Score:5, Informative)
01 May 2015 (Bernie Sanders running for president)
Bernie Sanders is running for president.
He's going to have my vote.
In fact if you go right to stallman.org it's current front and center at the top.
Re: (Score:2)
apparently he does sometimes access the web with IceCat via TOR, that's relatively new thing for him I think.
https://www.stallman.org/stall... [stallman.org]
Microsoft's Contributions to Open Source (Score:5, Interesting)
Is Linus Torvalds a real person? (Score:2)
I always assumed he was like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. I figured you would know the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, technically, RMS has more similarities with Santa...
GCC, stable APIs and subversion of Free software. (Score:5, Interesting)
Hi RMS,
Firstly I am fan of what you've done and what you have given the world. I also asked you a weakly related quesion about two decades ago when I was a teenager and didn't realise one shouldn't just email random well known people on the internet. You were kind enough to take the time to write a thoughtful reply.
The question is about subversion of Free software via a stable API. If a stable API exists in some popular library/piece of software, it is possible to write a shim layer, where the GPL shim serialises the interaction then sends that to a non-free component[*]. The non-free component of course has the interesting and useful logic. Since it's not linking to the Free part, then it's not covered by the GPL.
Via such a mechanism, one could use a significant GPL component in a non-free program. Naturally this is very much at odds with the spirit of the GPL, but not the letter. From what I recall, you explicitly warned about this sort of thing when GCC were creating an API for interacting with external tools. GCC being arguably the leading compiler in the world[1], would be prone to such subversion.
I believe your suggestion at the time was to essentially neuter the plugin API so that there was nothing left to subvert. Naturally though that comes with downsides is that it also makes it harder for the Free software community to work with GCC. GCC did eventually decide to go with the plugin API.
Do you still think that not having an API would have been the right choice? If so, what to you think the relative tradeoff is between making Free software better and as a side effect making it easier for non-free software development? If not, what made you change your mind? Either way, where do you draw the line---gcc always could be used to compile non-free software and of course making GCC better makes such things easier.
It also seems that GCC went with the plugin interface because they believed that the improvement to the usability of GCC was worth it relative to the risks. Do you think it's possible in theory to have flexible plugin interfaces without openning the door to non-free software, such as some hypothetical license change?
Thankyou for your time :)
[*] related: if one has two libraries offering identical APIs such as the various libcs, then it's hard to argue that something using libc is a derived work of a particular implementation. Especially if it's dynamically linked it could easily pick up any number of several different compatible ones. The concept of derived work is what gives the GPL and indeed all of copyright its teeth.
[1] To anyone who wants to argue that LLVM or Intel CC or etc is better please don't. GCC is arguable the best in that I and others could make reasonable arguments for that case. It's not provably the best.
What are your views on open console gaming? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's long been possible to run entirely free software on a PC, but the world of game consoles has been a proprietary hellscape for many years.
In recent years there's been an attempt to open it up in some very modest ways, mainly through the proliferation of Android "microconsoles" and other Android-based set top boxes.
Do you find these new developments to be a step in the right direction and are you worried as I am that they're not catching on very well?
Censorship (Score:2)
What are the best ways to circumvent censorship? In other words, How can we make the *Internet* indelible and unblockable by our most vulnerable single point of failure, the ISP, which invariably acts as an agent of the state?
Software Freedom and SystemD (Score:5, Interesting)
I am someone who does not like the direction systemd goes in, as it replaces much of what I would call GNU/Linux (syslog,fstab,init.d,...etc) - I am not asking whether that point of view is correct. Assuming that it is, it seems to me that the scope and interconnectedness of the systemd changes is too much for any smaller organization to resist. The possibility of maintaining an ongoing form of GNU/Linux that still stays current seems to be an overwhelming task, although some (Devuan etc) are heroically attempting to do so.
Can the sheer complexity of a GNU/Linux distro like RedHat make it impossible to practically maintain a version with different technologies?
Following any developments in academia? (Score:2, Interesting)
My understanding is that you studied physics as an undergrad and early grad student. I'm curious if there was a particular area of physics you were interested in at the time, and do you still keep up with new developments in physics, the sciences, or other fields of academia?
Teaching about open-source in CS courses (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with twistedcubic. RMS, what questions should we be asking/proposing?
can we make the interval real short? (Score:3, Informative)
http://interviews.slashdot.org... [slashdot.org]
http://features.slashdot.org/s... [slashdot.org]
http://interviews.slashdot.org... [slashdot.org]
It's not like his position is going to change significantly on anything...
I don't see the point.
Re: (Score:2)
Emacs and LLVM. (Score:2)
Are you still a proponent of pedophilia? (Score:2, Insightful)
In your own archives on stallman.org, you state that "Prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness."
Have your views changed in the past nine years? If so, why? If not, can you provide a more nuanced view as to why pedophilia, even non-coerced pedophilia, is acceptable?
How do you feel about web applications? (Score:5, Interesting)
I know you don't like Software as a Service: article [gnu.org]
However, there are some web applications that really only work as a web application. Slashdot is an example of this.
Do you feel that creators of web applications should be obliged to make their source code available?
Also, if I am employed as web application developer, am I a bad person?
Open Source and Mobile Apps (Score:2)
With so much moving to mobile devices and applications I wonder about the state of open source on those platforms and how developers can make a living while writing open source mobile apps.
The ads and sales that most mobile apps use to generate revenue aren't really an option for open source apps. Does that mean developers have to rely on a donations or are there other ways they can fund their work?
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, clicked the wrong article. Someone mod the parent of this one (also by me) offtopic if you have some modpoints to spare. Thanks.
Energy (Score:2)
The disruptive potential of free software (Score:3)
Mr. Stallman, first I must thank you for The GNU Project, the gift the world doesn't yet appreciate. In a fifty years there will be a statue commemorating your achievement of preventing computers thirty years ago from becoming like iPhones are today. If there isn't I'll have to commission it myself. Thank you for buying us all this time to prevent 1984.
What I'd like to ask is whether you are concerned about how popular and business media conflate Silicon Valley start-ups and Apps with technology and software as a whole. As we all know, the internet has existed since long before MySpace and terms like "bloggers", "new media", "social networking", "big data", etc.
The cover of this week's Economist [economist.com] has a map, shaped like a brain, of various corporate entities which are dominating and strangling the web, entitled "Empire of the Geeks". Corporatization of web is killing communities as users become commodities to be sold to advertisers, or mined for valuable personal information. Users are thus taken for granted. For instance, Reddit is the only web-forum I've used that has a "Board of Directors" and a CEO, and I can't fathom how anybody can keep a straight face while contemplating such an absurdity.
The article in the Economist promises the tech-ignorant readership that, unlike 2000, there will be no web-bubble because start-ups are typically not purchased without demonstrating a potential to generate profit.
What all these suits seem to be missing is that Free Software exists, as a giant exit door, that could evacuate a large fraction, if not majority, from the surveilled, corporate web in a matter of months into a reactionary darknet built on, perhaps, webs of trust. The ephemeral and limitless nature of software, the virility of memes, the availability of encryption, and the well-established short-lifespan of internet communities all suggest that the current Facebook/Twitter empire is founded on sand.
Which is the likelier possibility: Tech-dumb investors are being fleeced by Silicon Valley which is well aware the clock is ticking on the current hegemony of monied websites? Or that the days of the free internet itself themselves numbered, and soon users will be shepherded into a locked-down, Compuservesque network which preempts the possibility of communicating online without using approved channels?
In either possibility, why is this not talked about more? All Free Software needs, at this point, is a Steve Jobs to bring our superior software ecosystem to the masses, and sell users on the benefits of direct, peer to peer communication omitting corporate in-betweeners. I am sure that day is coming, what clues have you seen in your long-time involvement in the software world which might affirm or relieve my concerns? Because either way, the information economy is in for a shock I don't think it is prepared for, and the results could be devastating.
Firmware (Score:3)
Mozilla corporation (Score:3)
We've read in the news about how prominently mozilla has integrated pocket into its web browser. This isn't the only change into the "closed service" direction they've made. On the other hand, they keep fighting at many fronts for the open web. What is your opinion on what mozilla stood for once, what it is today, and what it is becoming?
Future progress (Score:3)
Going forward, what do you believe is the relevance of GNU?
On the future of the Free Software Foundation? (Score:2)
Dear Richard,
first and foremost thank you for contributions and activism, you have made the world a better place for the likes of us. Now for the question:
What are your views on the future of the FSF?
Today's software landscape and dangers to freedom seem quite far from the initial days of the FSF, and with that, its purpose and effectiveness seem less relevant today.
Even giants like Microsoft have seen their dominance shattered, and are facing the dilemma of a radical overhaul vs obsolescence.
Do you feel th
Where we're going (Score:2)
The Free Software movement and the Open Source community have done great things. I have an excellent development system that runs entirely Free Software, for example. Nobody need pay for an OS or write their own. With a few exceptions, it's generally accepted that, if you're going to introduce a new computer language or framework, you need to provide at least a free-as-in-beer implementation with source available (and at that point going to free-as-in-speech is a minor jump).
What do you think are some
Copyleft and the future (Score:2)
At one point, with some obvious exceptions the most used Free Software came out of the Gnu Project and Linux, and all of that was copylefted. Nowadays, it looks like we've got a lot more high quality Free Software that isn't copylefted (I'll use LLVM as an example here).
How do you feel about the copyleft vs. permissive licensing going on today? How do you think it will change in the future?
The title of "Free Software" (Score:3)
Dear Richard
My question is about the name "Free Software". I find that many people I speak to have difficulties understanding the significance of those words: i.e. "free" as in political freedom, self agency, liberty etc.
I would say "Open Source" is easier to understand as words, but you've often emphasised that it doesn't capture the full scope of the freedom in Free Software - I agree with that. I think a lot of people say "Open Source" - not because they deny the importance of the freedom, but just because non-technical people think they mean "Freeware" or "Shareware". This is annoying, because I'm always telling people to choose Free Software, but I have to say "you should make sure you get Free/Open Source Software" or some such cumbersome terminology just to get them to understand me.
Do you recognise the problem of terminology that I'm referring to? Have you ever thought about describing "Free Software" with any other titles? "Freedom Software", "Libre Software" or such? Other titles such as these - do you regard them as defective? If you had your time again would you chose a different title to aid understanding? If not, what would you say is the unique importance of the label "Free Sofware" over any other possible labels?
Thanks
Joel
The meaning of freedom (Score:2)
The The Free Software Definition [gnu.org] states as one of the "four essential freedoms": "The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this." (bold mine)
Let's say I gave somebody a car out of charity, but I didn't give them the owner's manual. Are they now less free because they will have a harder time fixing the car than before I gave them the car? If I was compelled to give the person the owner's manual
Re: (Score:2)
I think you need reminding of the origin of the free software movement.
It was in a fight back against loss of previous common freedom, that are not so common these days. Having been born into a greater captivity than Stallman you maybe never had those freedoms and do not feel the loss.
"When Stallman noticed the jamming tendency in the Xerox laser
printer, he thought of applying the old fix or "hack" to this printer.
In the course of looking up the Xerox laser-printer software, however,
Stallman made a troub
Re: (Score:2)
In fact I suggest you read all of chapter 1 http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/fa... [fsf.org]
and then you will be ready to talk about freedom.
The Internet of Things (Score:2)
What's your position on this fad of appliances needing networking and whatnot other connections? Especially in the light of other devices (like routers) usually running something that used to be free software 'til the appliance maker got their hands onto it. It is likely that some if not many or even the majority of IoT appliances will run (allegedly) free software in one way or another, and most likely without any regard of the underlying licensing model.
Would you rather see it as a vehicle for OSS to move
Device Security (Score:3)
My question concerns the current fad of networking everything AKA "The Internet of (every)Thing/s". I'm not going to bug you with TFH-ish crap like the constant irradiation of the air all around us 24/7, that shit gets old really fast and debates on it go nowhere.
Are you concerned about what appears to be being overlooked, that being the security of information such things as digital thermostats and timers (like Hive [hivehome.com]), GDOs, water and power meters, larder fridges, cookers, TiVO and smart TVs, etc., transmit over the air on an almost continuous basis via wifi and/or Bluetooth, and cell networks (in the case of Hive)?
Crowdfunding (Score:2)
Hi RMS!
There's been a huge amount of success with crowdfunding recently -- Kickstarter and Indigogo and so on.The most facile projects can get funded to the tune of millions. Meanwhile venerable old free software projects have been neglected. Has the FSF ever considered starting some crowdfunded projects?
I know people can donate cash to e.g. the FSF directly but it's a black box and hard to emotionally engage with that. Compare for example a specific project that could gain a lot of public momentum -- e.g.
Binary blobs vs. hardcoded firmware (Score:3)
The FSF has made a stand against binary-only firmware. But isn't binary-only firmware files, provided they can be freely redistributed, better than firmware that is burnt into the ROM of a device?
Retitled: Binary blobs vs. embedded firmware (Score:2)
Free System Licence (Score:2)
Lots in our community want to be able to purchases devices that have all the source code available.
The FSF itself has championed 100% free OS's, and also tried to promote hardware devices that protect users freedom.
If there is binary blobs on a device then whoever controls the blobs has power over "good" developers and their users. The fewer binary blobs the more concentrated that power becomes, and therefore becomes harder to eliminate.
This is becoming more of a problem as software gets distributed in an a
No License, no copyright? (Score:2)
What do you think about people releasing software with no license, and no copyright? I know that you are against the very idea of copyright, and that GPL is your "fix" for the system. These days, many people publish by pushing their code to places like github. Some projects have no copyright notice on them at all. In a world where copyright exists, what are the ramifications of this, for the user, for the developer, for the corporation?
Free software in the broader consumer device space (Score:2)
Do you have any suggestions for popularizing Free Software with consumers in this age where we are moving toward software and hardware being even more tightly integrated in devices such as smartphones, DVRs, tablets, watches, etc...?
To clarify further, I understand the issues with locked-down and proprietary hardware & software in so many consumer products but simply informing people of those issues is not enough. To sway people we need functionally (and ultimately aesthetically but that can come later)
The two cultures. (Score:2, Insightful)
The majority of the posts here boil down to one simple fact:
The commercial - proprietary - mass market product or service is more appealing and accessible than anything the geek has to offer.
GNU DOS? (Score:2)
trust in digital world (Score:2)
A lot of the virtual world relies on ( somewhat hidden from end users ) layers of trust. We trust that some obscure agency is running the DNS root servers properly, we trust random SSL root certificates on our box preinstalls, we trust that a library called OpenSSL is reviewed by many smart people, we trust Amazon reviews, we trust a random package in NodeJS ir Debian repo to do what it claims etc.
In real world, trust is not a fixed, frozen in time notion, is never a binary true/false value. Moxie Marlinspi
Philosophy and Ethics (Score:2)
Let me preface this by saying that I am an avid Free Software and GNU Linux supporter and user and am very appreciative and grateful for RMS's contributions, directly to my benefit.
Q: It seems to me as an outside observer, that you have struck on this golden idea of Free Software and the 'rights' of the user and started a potent movement. How have your ideas changed over time? I say this because I've seen some interviews and when they stray outside of a narrow band directly related to Free Software, they
What do you suggest people USE, as opposed to... (Score:3)
Most of your advocacy is sloganeering against a whole range of software/tools/standards/sites - don't use Adobe Flash, don't use iBad, don't use TiVo, don't use FaceBook, don't use this, don't use that....
Instead, why doesn't the FSF/GNU project come out w/ products that are real alternatives to all the myriad list of things that you do not want people to use? So that you can have a positive alternative to offer to people, other than just ask them to follow your whims?
aren't doing this every year? (Score:2)
Come on. We did that last year and the year before! I love what stallman stands for, but this is getting stale!
http://features.slashdot.org/s... [slashdot.org]
http://interviews.slashdot.org... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Come on. We did that last year and the year before! I love what stallman stands for, but this is getting stale!
I think it's interesting to follow up on how the FSF is coping with a changing computing environment - more integration of software and hardware in devices, more proliferation of cloud services and SaaS for example - but I agree it's pretty pointless to rehash the old BSD vs GPL discussion every single year. Like there needs to be a plan to address these changes and not just a "no, no, no don't do anything different because it's all bad for privacy and freedom" response to change.
GPL violations (Score:2)
Dear Mr. Stallman, currently i see GPL violations all over the place, and nothing happens. Learn effect: The industry can very well get away with GPL-violations. What can be or is being done that the industry takes the GPL seriously?
IT management question (Score:2)
What do you think is the best way to automate managing linux/unix boxes? i.e. say you've got hundreds of them and need to control and monitor them all easily.
GPLv3 (Score:3)
Dear Mr Stallman
It is now 8 years, in fact, a few days past 8 years (if Wikipedia is to be believed) since the final version of the GPL v3 license was published. It feels an appropriate length of time to gauge how successful the new license has been.
How do you think we should measure the success of GPL v3? And by this/these measure/(s), do you believe that GPL v3 has been more, less or just as successful as you hoped when you launched it?
Re:Open source (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I can answer that. Because "Open Source" isn't a term coined by Richard. His ego demands that the term "Free Software" is used exclusively.
Ego is involved? - say it isn't so!
Actually, no prophet enjoys being one-upped by a successor prophet. Especially when the message of the latter is more general and gains more of a popular following than that of the former. In such cases, the original prophet has no logical choice but to brand his successor a heretic. The relative merits of the successor prophet's message are, of course, irrelevant in such cases.
Ironic, ain't it? - that using, modifying ,and redistributing many of the ideas of "Free Soft
Re: (Score:2)
Both licenses are both open source and free (according to the Open Source Initiative and Free Software Foundation respectively).
Re:GNU Project (Score:5, Funny)
Mr. Stallman, your GNU Project seems to have the momentum of a runaway freight train. Why is it so popular?
Is it hard work or sticktoitivness?
Re: (Score:3)
Uh, do we have any REAL questions?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Try having an opinion different than a liberal and you will see how puritanical they can be.
Re: (Score:2)
Only problem having the source code does not mean you can actually understand it. A lot of open source code is obfuscated, sometimes I'm wondering if its deliberate
The GPL handles this by requesting the "preferred form for modification." Consider reading the GPL sometime; it's a really well-written document that considers a lot of these issues.
Re: (Score:2)
how do you think precompiled binaries are compiled? with magic pixie dust? so that's not exactly a trade-off
Re: (Score:2)
I shudder at the thought. Imagine people with lower coding skills who resort to cargo cult programming thinking that hey, after all, it's from the biggest OS in the world, it can't be bad code!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I read something once, but have not been able to find it since, which seemed to indicate that his position on this was that the code should be free, but the content doesn't have to be. So you charge for your game but include the source code with it. The source can be freely distributed, but not the assets: art, maps, sound, etc.
This model has a lot of advantages: users can port these games to different platforms, and they can keep the source code up to date, e.g using newer libraries and making sure it stil
Re: (Score:2)
A company cannot "pirate" a GPL software without unambiguously violating copyright law. They can either distribute the software while intentionally violating the terms of the license, or distribute it without the (original) license. It's hard to tell which one will make the judge more furious, and that's why virtually no company will allow GPL violation cases to go to court.