Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GNU is Not Unix

Stallman Suggests Install Fest 'Deals With Devil' Include Actual Man Dressed As Devil (gnu.org) 191

Posted by EditorDavid from the devils-in-the-details dept.
This weekend's annual LibrePlanet conference, hosted by the Free Software Foundation, prompted a new essay about "install fests" from Richard Stallman: Install fests invite users to bring their computers so that experts can install GNU/Linux on them... The problem is that most computers can't run with a completely free GNU/Linux distro. They contain peripherals, or coprocessors, that won't operate unless the installed system contains some nonfree drivers or firmware... This presents the install fest with a dilemma. If it upholds the ideals of freedom, by installing only free software from 100%-free distros, partly-secret machines won't become entirely functional and the users that bring them will go away disappointed. However, if the install fest installs nonfree distros and nonfree software which make machines entirely function, it will fail to teach users to say no for freedom's sake. They may learn to like GNU/Linux, but they won't learn what the free software movement stands for.... In effect, the install fest makes the deal with the devil, on the user's behalf, behind a curtain so the user doesn't recognize that it is one.

I propose that the install fest show users exactly what deal they are making. Let them talk with the devil individually, learn the deal's bad implications, then make a deal -- or refuse! As always, I call on the install fest itself to install only free software, taking a strict stance. In this way it can set a clear moral example of rejecting nonfree software. My new idea is that the install fest could allow the devil to hang around, off in a corner of the hall, or the next room. (Actually, a human being wearing a sign saying "The Devil," and maybe a toy mask or horns.) The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user's machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program... Those users that get nonfree drivers would see what their moral cost is, and that there are people in the community who refuse to pay that cost.

They would have the chance to reflect afterwards on the situation that their flawed computers have put them in, and about how to change that situation, in the small and in the large.
Stallman adds that the Free Software Foundation itself would never let a devil near its events. "But given the fact that most install fests quietly play the role of the devil, I think that an explicit devil would be less bad.

"It would convert the install-fest dilemma from a debilitating contradiction into a teaching experience."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Stallman Suggests Install Fest 'Deals With Devil' Include Actual Man Dressed As Devil More

Stallman Suggests Install Fest 'Deals With Devil' Include Actual Man Dressed As Devil

Comments Filter:

  • I'm guessing Ray Wise is not a tech nerd, otherwise he would have been a perfect choice. He was perfect as the devil in Reaper.

  • Seriously? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    These people are insane.

    • Re: Seriously? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Twenty years ago I sat close to RMS for a dinner, the day after I resigned from my local LUG and left this nonsense behind me. I saw this man literally bang his head against a wall because we had t-shirts with tux on them and he thought this was proving we were not fighting for free software.
      This man is insane and his followers are not better than him.

      • I wonder what life would be without RMS (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 23, 2019 @05:40PM (#58322130)

        I wonder what life would be without RMS and GNU, especially GCC. I would really love to be paying $500 per machine for a compiler, because I believe free stuff is junk. I happily pay MS for Windows licenses, because I know I'm getting a solid product made by the top software company in the world.

        Linux is an OS for people too down and out to realize how good commercial software is. Nobody in their right mind would use something that does not need activation and license audits to ensure compliance. /sarcasm

        Yes, RMS is a pill... but without him, we likely would be paying by the hour for a cable set-top box to send "E-mails" with a "stamp fee" from our CompuServe accounts.

        • Oh come on, if it hadn't been him it would have been someone else who started the free software movement. This guy is an embarrassment.

          • I would not be so certain of this. Richard's consistent advocacy, and his very correct insights about how companies would abuse software licenses and patents, helped set the stage for the open source world. Critical components like gcc paved the way for Linux, and are critical to free software and open source computing today. The BSD licenses wwere crippled by each being subtly distinct and being impossible to follow them all.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Baleet ( 4705757 )
            And that other person would look and act pretty much like RMS. If RMS did not exist, we would have to invent him!

        • So, you've never heard of Keith Bostic, nor of BSD, then?

          • So, you've never heard of Keith Bostic, nor of BSD, then?

            I heard of BSD. It is that other OS that used to be compiled with GCC.

            • So, you've never heard of Keith Bostic, nor of BSD, then?

              I heard of BSD. It is that other OS that used to be compiled with GCC.

              It used to be compiled with cc.

              • So, you've never heard of Keith Bostic, nor of BSD, then?

                I heard of BSD. It is that other OS that used to be compiled with GCC.

                It used to be compiled with cc.

                Exactly. On BSD cc was symlinked to GCC since BSD 4.4, the parent of all "modern", open source BSDs. CC and cc were and are always symlinks to some other compiler, e.g. PCC [wikipedia.org] or GCC or Sun C compiler.

        • I wonder what life would be without RMS and GNU, especially GCC

          PCC and TenDRA were both around at the same time as GCC. If GCC hadn't been in the right place at the right time, one of them would likely have taken over (hopefully TenDRA, it was a much nicer design). Actually, if TenDRA and ANDF had taken off, the Free Software ecosystem would probably be in a better place than it is now.

          BSD systems are now pretty easy to keep GNU-free. I still use bash, but out of inertia rather than a conscious evaluation of alternatives (I'd probably pick zsh if I could be bothe

        • I suspect you're missing a few zeroes on the price per machine on a compiler without GCC as competition.

  • Or ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Saturday March 23, 2019 @04:50PM (#58321906)

    However, if the install fest installs nonfree distros and nonfree software which make machines entirely function, it will fail to teach users to say no for freedom's sake. They may learn to like GNU/Linux, but they won't learn what the free software movement stands for.... In effect, the install fest makes the deal with the devil, on the user's behalf, behind a curtain so the user doesn't recognize that it is one.

    Perhaps, it can demonstrate that compromise and practicality are sometimes necessary in a functioning society and not just a "deal with the devil". Rigidity to an ideology can often be more destructive and counter-productive over the long run. Progress comes from change not stasis.

    Stallman adds that the Free Software Foundation itself would never let a devil near its events.

    The devil is often in the details; I'm sure some will always be nearby.

    • Re:Or ... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Saturday March 23, 2019 @04:57PM (#58321940)

      Yeah, I was gonna say how it’s funny RMS thinks this would lead people to think the device manufacturers are the problem - when in reality all it would do is make most people think Linux is the problem and is an inferior platform.

      “It works on Windows, it works on Mac - shouldn’t it just work on Linux?”

    • I think Stallman got it right (Score:5, Insightful)

      by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Saturday March 23, 2019 @05:33PM (#58322092)

      While stallman has some rivid values I don't think he's disagreeing with you. He's just wanting the process to call attention to the philosophy more and the consequences of choices in our real world. He's being both realistic and educational by proposing the cute idea of the personified Devil

    • Perhaps, it can demonstrate that compromise and practicality are sometimes necessary in a functioning society

      RMS is the extreme end in FOSS and pretty much you can always attribute anything, and from the eight or so times I've been to one of his talks, /everything he says as being the furthest end of the spectrum.

      Rigidity to an ideology can often be more destructive and counter-productive over the long run

      RMS is definitely one of those folks you take in small doses. He's got a good point in general that is worth thinking about. The cross section between everyday life and computers is pretty big and gets bigger by the day. For example, cars are becoming more and more computerized. Imagine how liberatin

    • Re:Or ... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Saturday March 23, 2019 @05:54PM (#58322184) Homepage Journal

      We need people like Stallman to stick to their ideology rigidly, even if the rest of us don't. His suggestion is a good one - it informs people but doesn't stop if they want to go ahead anyway.

      Everyone blindly clicks through EULAs without reading them. A literal devil on site to discuss their contents sounds like a great way to get people to take notice.

      • The problem is he is just too idealistic, he only says what's good in ideal. However, he fails to provide any practical solution, his logic is "all or nothing", even if the reasonable solution was 99,999% FOSS, he would still refuse because it's not exactly 100%. This doesn't work. We need more pragmatic FOSS leader like Eric Raymond.

        • 99% of the FOSS community and 99% of FOSS leaders are pragmatic and happily stop with a partly FOSS solution. The job of RMS is to be the other guy who reminds everyone that there's more work to be done. We need a world where there are 100% FOSS solutions available, even though I won't likely use any of them.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by sjames ( 1099 )

          The fact that he has signed off on a devil that just makes it work for now through a compromise argues against your assessment.

      • Sure ... but do you have examples of people you consider to be like him? Just trying to get a more specific idea of the people you're talking about.

    • Perhaps, it can demonstrate that compromise and practicality are sometimes necessary in a functioning society and not just a "deal with the devil". Rigidity to an ideology can often be more destructive and counter-productive over the long run. Progress comes from change not stasis.

      Your statement is vague and not wise without applying it to an actual situation, so please be specific. As it stands you're replying to someone who has a far better track record of applying practical consideration to his decisions

  • Just "Linux" (Score:3)

    by queBurro ( 1499731 ) on Saturday March 23, 2019 @05:00PM (#58321952)
    I don't drive a Pirelli/Ford, it's just "Linux".

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by tepples ( 727027 )

      How easy is it to run apps made for "just 'Linux'" on an Android device, which uses Linux as its kernel?

      • How easy is it to run apps made for "just 'Linux'" on an Android device, which uses Linux as its kernel?

        Pretty easy, if it's rootable, and if someone's done a build compatible with your CPU. If it's not rootable, it's a PITA.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vux984 ( 928602 )

      I don't drive a Pirelli/Ford, it's just "Linux".

      Linux is just the kernel though; which since you are making car analogies is closer to the engine under the hood than the tires. GNU is everything else; the body, seats, steering wheel, headlights.

      If you buy a Lotus Evora, do you tell people you have a Lotus? A Lotus/Toyota or just a Toyota?
      Do you call a Pagani a Pagani/Mercedes or just Mercedes?
      If you take an old Porsche and put a Covette V8 into it... as some have done, do they have a modified Porsche, a Porsche/Chevrolet, or a modified Chevrolet?

      If anyth

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Burdell ( 228580 )

        But GNU is not "everything else" - there are vast numbers of projects that make up a common Linux distribution.

        Also, if you saw the GNU project prior to Linux, really only the development stack (GCC, binutils, flex/bison) were very usable. The GNU libc was in need of a lot of work to get usable, and that work happened because of Linux's need of a good C library. The various GNU projects have benefited significantly from the Linux communities, since Linux is the main OS that uses them as the primary tools (a

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sjames ( 1099 )

      When you describe your car, do you describe the engine alone or do you describe the rest of the car and perhaps throw in a bit about the engine?

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    Not sure that Stallman is fully versed in the relevant politics...

  • To bad the Honor System doesn't work. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Saturday March 23, 2019 @05:04PM (#58321964)

    The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user's machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program... Those users that get nonfree drivers would see what their moral cost is, and that there are people in the community who refuse to pay that cost.

    Implying that it's unjust and/or immoral for one's work to have tangible value and for one to make money from it. I know that's not what he means by "freedom", but, unfortunately, our society doesn't function on the Honor System.

  • >"However, if the install fest installs nonfree distros and nonfree software which make machines entirely function, it will fail to teach users to say no for freedom's sake."

    That is a bit extreme, but I wouldn't expect less from Stallman. His motive is pure, but lots of ours is more of a realistic one... Users are ALREADY making some sacrifices by installing and using Linux, regardless of the distro. I would think that having a 1% "contamination" by non-FOSS firmware or video drivers, or whatever, to

    • I wouldn't expect less from Stallman. His motive is pure, but lots of ours is more of a realistic one...

      In reality, only the very rich or very poor can afford to live their lives with motives 100% pure as they can either lose a lot without consequence or have nothing to lose. The more one can, or is willing to, give up or do without, the more one can live by their convictions and still live. Whether they become a burden on the rest of us is another matter.

    • It's about freedom though ... so maybe a warden would be more appropriate? You get to wear handcuffs while they install the appropriate drivers on your PC?

    • Users are ALREADY making some sacrifices by installing and using Linux,

      I mean techincally you're going to give u something no matter which you choose, but installing the best OS does mean making the minimum sacrafice.

      That's Linux by the way.

  • The devil represents the compromises we're often forced to make. Having a BigTech's binary closed source driver (often working in the background) playing any role in an Open Source system is ludicrous when you think about it. Having a horned devil representing this compromise is brilliant! It's also an honest approach to the current state of things.

  • What the hell is he talking about with special software needed for a "coprocessor"? Is he still living in 80386 land where you could install a 387 math coprocessor? Does he mean binary blob drivers?

  • I guess we know what Stallman thinks about FreeBSD then. ;-)
  • 4 years ago I bought an HP laptop and tried to put Linux on it. Could not get the lappie to boot from neither the DVD nor a USB stick. Trust me, I tried.

    Last October that lappie died with a hard disk crash. Nothing could be recovered (good backups FTW). Other than a dead hard drive it's a perfectly good laptop.

    I thought of buying a new hard drive and making it a 100% Linux box, but if the BIOS won't let me boot from anything other than the hard drive that seemed a waste of money.

    Are you now tel

  • I'll start by saying I respect RMS highly. Anything he says on free software is worth considering. But that doesn't mean you have to agree with it.

    It should be noted that RMS, when he was creating GNU, had to rely on proprietary commercial unix hardware and closed-source software (Sun Microsystems, IIRC.) As he said in his own essays, this was a necessary means to an end. He and his associates had to start with a working system and replace it bit-by-bit (pardon the pun) with free-as-in-freedom components. B

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      As you say yourself, when was creating GNU, he had to rely on proprietary hardware and closed source software. That is, he made a deal with the devil, because it was the only practical option.
      Now, we wish to follow in his footsteps by making our deal with the devil, for exactly the same reason, and he tells us it is unjust. It's just straight hypocrisy.

      • As you say yourself, when was creating GNU, he had to rely on proprietary hardware and closed source software. That is, he made a deal with the devil, because it was the only practical option.
        Now, we wish to follow in his footsteps by making our deal with the devil, for exactly the same reason, and he tells us it is unjust. It's just straight hypocrisy.

        Well not quite. I think you missed his point which is that we no longer need to shake hands with the devil, although he admitted he once had to. It requires some compromises, but it is possible now to use a computer with entirely free software. It was not possible when he was building Gnu.

        Keep in mind that as Gnu grew, RMS was pragmatic about evolving the stature of free software in a world of proprietary software. For example, consider the LGPL (aka the Library GPL or the Lesser GPL) which allowed propriet

      • HURD also tried _not_ to rely on commercial drivers. The kernel never worked well.

        Later projects, which have produced some amazing tools, included the "One Laptop Per Child" project which foreshadowed the "netbook" market, and whose physical design was brilliant. The LinuxBIOS project was also extremely effective in technology, though it became hampered by some very strange gender politics by one of its developers. BIOS design requires more hardware than many modern software projects.

    • Today you have hardware that respects your freedom [fsf.org] and free distros [gnu.org] to choose from. You aren't facing the same situation RMS did when he started GNU. You're not acknowledging this enormous difference. Also, the GNU GPL v2 (a license the FSF wrote and RMS is a chief author of) doesn't "allow" proprietary software drivers into the Linux kernel. Allowing that is a choice of Linux kernel copyright holders who don't sue, encourage other Linux kernel copyright holders not to sue, or pass on copies of that variant

  • We need to get going with some user friendly zero-fuss FOSS cloud solution that can replace Google, MS and Apple clouds and webapps with one install command. Think gnome/kde in neat and beautiful but for the web.

    Beat the proprietary services at their own game is what has been long overdue.

    My2 cents.

  • When you go to school, it is Windows, Android, and iOS that is taught with, not free variants. Same goes for attendant software. If you want to be a film maker, graphic designer, photographer--you are taught Adobe Creative Cloud, not free variants. In the workplace, proprietary software is the rule, free is the exception. The way people post here, one gets the impression that Stallman is some software Czar that denies the right to use proprietary software. The facts are the opposite. Proprietary software ha

Slashdot Top Deals

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Close