Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News

Richard Stallman Says He Has Returned To the Free Software Foundation Board of Directors and Doesn't Intend To Resign Again (theregister.com) 275

Richard M Stallman, founder and former president of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), announced at the organisation's LibrePlanet virtual event that he has rejoined the board and does not intend to resign again. From a report: Stallman spoke at the event yesterday on the subject of unjust computing -- covering locked-down operating systems, non-free client software, user-restricting app stores, and more. Before the talk he stated: "I have an announcement to make. I'm now on the Free Software Foundation Board of Directors once again. We were working on a video to announce this with, but that turned out to be difficult, we didn't have experience doing that sort of thing so it didn't get finished but here is the announcement. Some of you will be happy at this, and some might be disappointed, but who knows? In any case, that's how it is, and I'm not planning to resign a second time."

Stallman resigned both as president and FSF board member in September 2019, saying: "I am doing this due to pressure on the Foundation and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations of what I have said." This followed remarks he made concerning MIT professor Marvin Minsky, who died in 2016, and his association with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Stallman's resignation was welcomed at the time by some prominent free software advocates including GNOME executive director Neil McGovern and FSF sister organisation FSF Europe.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Richard Stallman Says He Has Returned To the Free Software Foundation Board of Directors and Doesn't Intend To Resign Again

Comments Filter:
  • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:06AM (#61185714)

    I think he's an absolute Communist, but you gotta give it to the guy: you can't cancel someone who doesn't give a fuck.

    • by Entrope ( 68843 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:10AM (#61185724) Homepage

      Another way to view this is that the FSF has decided that the ship should go down with its captain.

      • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:19AM (#61185754)

        Or that the Internet's attention span has been exceeded and nobody cares anymore.

        • The response across multiple sites suggests that this is not the case.

          • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

            A search for Richard Stallman turns up stories about him resigning on CNN, Arstechnica, Wired, ycombinator, ZDNet and a bunch of others.

            Arstechnica seems to have a note about him coming back. Looks like your "multiple sites" makes it a mostly niche or internal discussion. I.e. nobody cares anymore.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by retiarius ( 72746 )

        It's not like FSF matters -- free software was fine way before the FSF came to be
        in 1985. The Berkeley Distribution pre-dated FSF by many years, and before
        that real men used the public domain for free software distribution.

        • It's not like FSF matters -- free software was fine way before the FSF came to be
          in 1985

          No it wasn't. Back when I got in, Linux and the FSF toolchain was the only practical way to go.

        • Berkeley Distribution was not free in some sense. You needed a Unix license first before you could use BSD, primarily because so much of BSD was modifications to the AT&T code. 1991 had the first version with most AT&T code removed (Net/2). The first BSD license from of the modern form was 1988.

          Sharing of code, especially the non-AT&T part (such as vi) was more open certainly and most people didn't worry about licensing much or cared to read them or whatnot. "Feel free", meaning if you can m

        • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

          by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @09:51AM (#61189020)
          Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by slasher999 ( 513533 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:33AM (#61185804)

      I feel much the same about RMS. He's interesting in a lot of ways, certainly intelligent, and absolutely beats to his own drum. Unfortunately his activist behavior and far left politics undermines much of the good that he's had to say and that he's done over the years.

      • by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:55AM (#61185888)
        I don't think you have to agree with him on anything outside his position with respect to FOSS to appreciate it or agree with his positions on that matter. No other person will have their beliefs fully align with your own and I think trying to dismiss or put someone down based on their personal beliefs that they keep out of their professional work and role to be a bit immature.

        Would you consider Noam Chomsky less of a brilliant linguist for his personal beliefs which in some areas likely overlap with those of Stallman, yet have no bearing on his work in that field? I don't think I've seen either be particularly pushy when it comes to their personal politics or other beliefs and I suspect they're both intelligent enough to realize that those should be separated out from their other work.

        If anything they should be held up as example to others that don't seem to realize that it's possible to have a belief, even one out at the fringes, that doesn't need to be shoved down everyone else's throats or consume your identity as a person. But even if a person wants to make themselves an insufferable waver of some cause's flag, I don't think it undermines their accomplishments as long as they keep their personal beliefs out of their professional capacity.
        • by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @12:08PM (#61185962)

          I don't think you have to agree with him on anything outside his position with respect to FOSS to appreciate it or agree with his positions on that matter. No other person will have their beliefs fully align with your own and I think trying to dismiss or put someone down based on their personal beliefs that they keep out of their professional work and role to be a bit immature.

          Would you consider Noam Chomsky less of a brilliant linguist for his personal beliefs which in some areas likely overlap with those of Stallman, yet have no bearing on his work in that field? I don't think I've seen either be particularly pushy when it comes to their personal politics or other beliefs and I suspect they're both intelligent enough to realize that those should be separated out from their other work.

          This! so very much this!

          We are reaching a weird point where forces are demanding purtiy of thought and ideology that must weigh more important than actual proficiency.

          Which by the way, is the exact opposite of meritocracy, where ability is considered in the mix. Where if you wore a sombrero at a sorority party has become a thoughtcrime, that while you might be the best at what you do, your presumed disrespect means that the inlcusive people have the right to exclude you.

          And the inclusive crowd is showing them selves to have mandatory political belief tests that are causeinf them to decrease the size of their tent just as the far right's ascendency requires s shrinking tent.

          Watch what you say or do or think, because the iclusive people are looking for peoplel to lose their jobs for wrongthink.

          And just so we're all clear, I don't care for his politics, or Chomsky's. I do know what happens when a group determines that one's worth is based upon political beliefs and is successful in ridding the undesireables that do not think as prescribed.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 22, 2021 @01:32PM (#61186336)

            50 years ago, the ACLU and others fought to defend literal Nazis marching to harass minority groups, because they recognized that when society blocks people you don't like, people you do like won't be far behind.

            In 2021, Amazon changes its app icon because some snowflake thought it looked like Hitler's mustache. Thanks, progressives!

            • 50 years ago, the ACLU and others fought to defend literal Nazis marching to harass minority groups, because they recognized that when society blocks people you don't like, people you do like won't be far behind.

              In 2021, Amazon changes its app icon because some snowflake thought it looked like Hitler's mustache. Thanks, progressives!

              Kinda kookoo, isn't it? Which makes me wonder why their main logo hasn't been canceled, because it looks like a raging circumcised boner.

              Which is really sexist.

          • I think the purity of thought people are an extreme minority and highly wrong-headed. And don't blame this on the left either, remember all those who lost their jobs during the McCarthy witchhunt eras, or those refusing to let someone they suspect is gay from being a teacher. But the human race is also a wrong-headed race when you get down to it, and political correctness occurs no matter what the politics. The human race is also highly hypocritical, unable to see that they never practice what they preach

        • by thereddaikon ( 5795246 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @12:21PM (#61186038)

          I don't much care about Stallman's politics outside of software. When discussing software advocacy he is an esteemed subject matter expert and more often than not right. Outside of that narrow topic he's just some dude. An old, weird dude who may be autistic.

          But when he talks about software and software freedom I listen. Because he knows his stuff, has a good track record and if for any other reason started the movement and deserves respect.

          There is a modern moral panic where people are no longer allowed to have nuanced or complex opinions. The ideas and feelings are strangely reminiscent of past religious moral crusades. I thought we were past it all but just as people can let just a little bit of power go to their heads, it seems when the shoe is on the other foot the cycle starts again.

          Its funny when they eat their own. When the twitter inquisition digs up a joke from 20 years ago that was funny then but its offensive now. If it happens to someone who has done unto others, then it couldn't have happened to a more deserving person. Ultimately that will be the downfall of the movement. There will be nobody left to be outraged when everyone has been kicked off the internet.

          Its sad when they don't and actually ruin people's lives. The Open Source movement has been dealt some serious blows the last 5 years from many important contributors being kicked out of their own projects by newcomers who's biggest achievement hasn't been submitting any code but has been "growing diversity".

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by DarkOx ( 621550 )

            Its sad when they don't and actually ruin people's lives. The Open Source movement has been dealt some serious blows the last 5 years from many important contributors being kicked out of their own projects by newcomers who's biggest achievement hasn't been submitting any code but has been "growing diversity".

            Which is why I can't stress enough
            1) NEVER Apologize - it won't save you, it will only enable them to victimize you more
            2) Adopt a scorched earth policy when possible. Make it clear to all involved you will do you damnedest to make sure they all fail. Expecting you to go quietly into the sunset is not in the carts. You'll sue, you claim exclusive rights any property involved you have and drag everyone else thru the mud as well. None of that will succeed in saving you, it will likely make it hurt worse but a

          • by mysidia ( 191772 )

            The Open Source movement has been dealt some serious blows the last 5 years from many important contributors being kicked out of their own projects by newcomers who's biggest achievement hasn't been submitting any code but has been "growing diversity".

            "Their own" projects? Got examples of that -- and what damage really, to those projects? Logically they must have others working on them to have been removed by their teammates...

          • There is a modern moral panic where people are no longer allowed to have nuanced or complex opinions. The ideas and feelings are strangely reminiscent of past religious moral crusades.

            It *is* religion. A set of beliefs that tolerate no dissent, that see the world in stark black and white. Convert or be outcast. Stallman attempted nuance, he pointed out that accusation is not conviction. He is not a true believer, therefore he is a heretic. He should never have resigned. At least he has corrected that mi

      • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:57AM (#61185892)

        Perhaps you should separate his views on software from his views on politics.

        RMS and the FSF have had a beneficial effect on software.

        RMS's views on politics are outside the Overton Window and can be ignored.

        Aspies tend to veer to the extremes. We are often either libertarians or commies. That doesn't make our views on other issues any less valid.

        • We are often either libertarians or commies. That doesn't make our views on other issues any less valid.

          Be that as it may, a small but significant number of these people think they can be both at once.

          That runs beyond "weird" and "quirky" territory and into "no demonstrable grasp on reality" land.

        • by nomadic ( 141991 )

          "Aspies tend to veer to the extremes. We are often either libertarians or commies. That doesn't make our views on other issues any less valid"

          Wouldn't having a tendency to veer to the extremes make your views on other issues suspect?

      • by sjames ( 1099 )

        His far left attitude lead him to copyleft and lead him to do all the work on GNU that he did. That in turn provided a ready made userland for Linus' kernel to use. Then the combination beat the pants off of the capitalist inspired proprietary Unix flavors.

        That huge success story happened in part because people with a good idea didn't have to fork over pallet loads of cash they didn't have or play "mother may I" with a bunch of suits.

    • Hip Hip Hooray!!!

      Also I have absolutely no problem with his brand of communism in software. Intellectual property is an artificial state created construct and would not exist in a free market.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      I think he's an absolute Communist, but you gotta give it to the guy: you can't cancel someone who doesn't give a fuck.

      The problem isn't cancelling HIM. RMS will always be RMS. The problem is cancelling what he touches, and thus includes the FSF. The board let him go because he was basically causing a huge distraction for the FSF board. Instead of being able to concentrate on free software, the FSF was being inundated with unpleasant associations.

      It's already hard enough to promote free software - not just

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:12AM (#61185728)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re: Good for him. (Score:3, Informative)

      by Entrope ( 68843 )

      That's not all that he wrote. He made very specific speculations about what happened by way of making excuses for Minsky: https://www.vice.com/en/articl... [vice.com] . Take Vice's spin with a grain of salt, but Stallman wrote a lot more about it than simply that he refused too believe accusations against his friend without evidence.

      • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:39AM (#61185824)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • by Entrope ( 68843 )

          What is your claim? That the emails quoted there are fabricated? I already recommended disregarding Vice's spin, but they quote emails. Are they wrong in claiming that Stallman wrote the things they quote?

          • Re: Good for him. (Score:5, Informative)

            by slasher999 ( 513533 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:47AM (#61185856)

            This, exactly. Ignore what Vice says, but they did provide the actual email chain to review. RMS went way out on a limb about "willingness" while admitting these were children. Children cannot consent, not to mention the entire felony aspect of what accusations were made. Willing or not, a felony is a felony.

            • Re: Good for him. (Score:5, Insightful)

              by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @12:12PM (#61185992)

              Children cannot consent

              She was only a child because of the legal jurisdiction.

              It was perfectly legal for Prince Andrew to have sex with her because the age of consent in England is 16.

              Minsky (allegedly) raped her because the age of consent in the US Virgin Islands is 18. If the sex had happened in the British Virgin Islands or back in Boston, it would have been legal.

              It was illegal to transport her, but neither Minsky nor Andrew did the transporting.

              Willing or not, a felony is a felony.

              Minsky was dead when the accusations were made and unable to defend himself. He was never convicted of any felony.

              What Richard said was insensitive and showed a lack of appreciation for woke-outrage, but he wasn't wrong.

              • Re: Good for him. (Score:5, Informative)

                by XXongo ( 3986865 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @12:42PM (#61186124) Homepage

                ...Minsky (allegedly) raped her because the age of consent in the US Virgin Islands is 18.

                Wrong!

                This is the part where everybody gets the facts in the allegation incorrect. There is no allegation of rape (statutory or otherwise). Giuffre was directed to do an action, which, if it had happened, would have been rape. But she didn't ever actually allege it happened.

                Specifically, her deposition said that Ghislaine Maxwell directed her (at the time age 17) to go to Epstein's private island in order to have sex with Minsky. ...it continues to say that she did fly to Epstein's private island... but the deposition stops at that point. She never actually say that she did have sex with Minsky.

                There was no allegation of rape. From all the facts we are given, she may have to the island, told Minsky "let's have sex," and Minsky replied "no thanks, you're just a kid". Or for that matter, she doesn't even say she even met Minsky, much less propositioned him.

                The deposition is here, if you want the details on what she said: https://drive.google.com/file/... [google.com]

                (It also has a lot of gaps. But those facts don't seem to be in doubt.)

              • by Entrope ( 68843 )

                Part of what Stallman wrote, quoting someone else, was this:

                > Giuffre was 17 at the time; this makes it __rape__ in the Virgin Islands.

                Does it really? I think it is morally absurd to define "rape" in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17.

                Stallman seems to be arguing for some idealized, universal definition of "rape". That is neither achievable nor reasonable. Different countries have different laws about what constitutes rape,

        • Vice is about as believable as Gawker. Thanks for playing, and better luck next time.

          Vice cited a named source for their information—an MIT alum named Selam Jie Gano—and linked to an article in which Selam provides even more details [medium.com]. Vice's believability, poor as it is, has no bearing on the matter.

          The emails from Stallman went out to a large mailing list that includes nearly the entire CS department at MIT, from which they were then forwarded on to others, including Selam. As such, if what Selam posted was in any way false or misleading, it should be trivially easy to refute th

        • Summary (Score:5, Informative)

          by Kunedog ( 1033226 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @01:25PM (#61186316)

          Vice is about as believable as Gawker. Thanks for playing, and better luck next time.

          -jcr

          This Reddit post I quoted in /.'s original coverage is still the most concise explanation I've seen (and yes, it reinforces how Vice and Gawker and Daily Beast and other such outlets are trash):

          https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... [slashdot.org]

          Good summary from reddit [reddit.com] (since Vice is not a credible source):

          Context: In a recently unsealed deposition a woman testified that, at the age of 17, Epstein told her to have sex with Marvin Minsky. Minsky was a founder of the MIT Media Lab and pioneer in A.I. who died in 2016. Stallman argued on a mailing list (in response to a statement from a protest organizer accusing Minsky of sexual assault) that, while he condemned Epstein, Minsky likely did not know she was being coerced:

          We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.

          Some SJW responded by writing a Medium post called "Remove Richard Stallman [archive.is]". Media outlets like Vice [archive.is] and The Daily Beast [archive.is] then lied and misquoted Stallman as saying that the woman was likely "entirely willing" and as "defending Epstein". He has now been pressured to resign from MIT [stallman.org]

          Furthermore the deposition doesn't say she had sex with Minsky, only that Epstein told her to do so, and according to physicist Greg Benford she propositioned Minsky and he turned her down [archive.is]:

          I know; I was there. Minsky turned her down. Told me about it. She saw us talking and didn’t approach me.

          This seems like a complete validation of the distinction Stallman was making. If what Minsky knew doesn't matter, if there's no difference between "Minsky sexually assaulted a woman" and "Epstein told a 17-year-old to have sex with Minsky without his knowledge or consent", then why did he turn her down?

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Entrope ( 68843 )

            How is that a good explanation? You, and that reddit comment, start getting things wrong in the first sentence. Giuffre testified that Ghislaine Maxwell -- not Jeffrey Epstein -- directed her to have sex with Minsky (and with many others).

            If Minsky accepted the offer of sex with Giuffre, and as you point out he may not have, the crime would not hinge on whether she acted like she was willing or not. It would hinge on whether she was younger than 18, and he was older than (as I read the laws) 23. There i

        • Vice is about as believable as Gawker. Thanks for playing, and better luck next time.

          -jcr

          Are you implying you somehow won a game? With nothing more than an ad hominem attack? Maybe you can provide either evidence or at least a written counterclaim that the sources (the full text of which was published by vice) is somehow incorrect?

          Stop acting so childish and actually come up with some substance. I've seen you post, you're normally much better than this.

      • Take Vice's spin with a grain of salt

        but Stallman wrote a lot more about it than simply that he refused too believe accusations against his friend without evidence.

        Uh...pick one? If it's a spin to be taken with a grain of salt, why would I simultaneously take it seriously?

        • by Entrope ( 68843 )

          There is what Vice quoted from Stallman's emails, and what Vice wrote beyond the quotes. The latter is Vice's spin. And, yes, they could misleadingly quote from emails -- but they provided a PDF of the email chain, only blocking out some of the personal names and email addresses of people involved. You can see it yourself, it is right at the bottom of the article I linked to. You can judge Stallman based on what he wrote without relying on Vice's opinion of it.

          • Yes, I read those things at the time when they came out and noticed how the articles in no way corresponded with their contents.
        • Uh...pick one? If it's a spin to be taken with a grain of salt, why would I simultaneously take it seriously?

          The suggestion is that you take the facts seriously while ignoring their opinion on the matter. Vice cites a named source and links to additional details from that source. The facts are the facts and are deserving of serious consideration, regardless of any words Vice put to paper on the subject.

          • I took the facts seriously when they came out and came to my own conclusions regarding Vice's and others' character assassination attempts. What about it?
            • You suggested there was a contradiction in something that was said. I pointed out that there wasn't. What you do with the facts is your own business. I'm fine with you drawing your own conclusions. After all, when it comes to anything even remotely close to these sorts of topics, any attempt at a nuanced argument gets blown out by people saying that the subject is a horrible person for not being on their side completely.

              I still think Stallman is an unlikeable sleazeball who was characteristically inconsider

    • by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @12:14PM (#61185998) Journal

      I don't think that's what he said. In this post I'm not going to comment on MY opinion about what he said. Here I'm going to just quote exactly what he said. Here are his exact words, at the bottom of this image https://bit.ly/2PeBK0y [bit.ly]

      The email thread was about Minsky. Stallman said:

      --
      > Giuffre was 17 at the time; this makes it __rape__ in the Virgin Islands.
      Does it really? I think it is morally absurd to define "rape" in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17. I think the existence of a dispute about that supports my point that the term "sexual assault" is slippery, so we ought to use more concrete terms when accusing anyone.
      --

      He also said:
      --
      The injustice is in the word "assaulting". The term "sexual assault is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X.
      --

      "we ought to use more concrete terms when accusing anyone"

      It seems that rather than saying "Minsky raped her", Stallman thought it would be more appropriate to say something like "Minsky had sex with a 17yo who had apparently been coerced by Epstein." Readers can make up their own mind about your own thoughts about that.

  • by AlanObject ( 3603453 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:17AM (#61185750)

    Back at the time there seemed to be surge demanding Stallings resign simply for having his name in the same news article as Epstein's name and the sort of impression that he "did something that wasn't totally an effort to murder Epstein with his own hands." The clamor drowned out all rational discussion and no fact could get traction trying to resist it.

    That's how these things go. Something similar happened to Al Franken and he also ended up quitting when he should not have. I could name others but don't want to draw that many hate responses just now. But you have to wonder who is next to be pulled under by a righteousness tsunami.

    Although we have to be vigilant and active with people who abuse their power to sexually (and otherwise) bully other people, this also creates an environment where political points and money can be made by stampeding the sheep. The only solution to that is to somehow create a culture of "not overreacting" but I don't see how that is going to happen.

    • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      Good luck. People have always loved to engage in some good righteous fury. They ain't called witch hunts for nothing.

    • You must have not seen the pics of Al Franken with the woman who seemed to have passed out.

      I found them very disturbing. To her credit, Nancy Pelosi tries to gets people like this kicked out of the Democrat party. They're better off without those albatrosses.
      • Do you find photos like this [blogspot.com] disturbing as well? That's his "victim" there. There's video with her on stage doing this and much more repeatedly but I don't have time to go find it for you. I didn't see any calls to end her career. In contrast, the photo you are so upset by he never touches her. So why that double standard?

    • People demanded he resign for saying Epstein's teenage prostitutes were all willing participants.

      Early in the thread, Stallman insists that the “most plausible scenario” is that Epstein’s underage victims were “entirely willing” while being trafficked.

      • I think you're conflating his statements regarding one particular case involving his deceased friend with girls that Epstein groomed and kept in general. You should reevaluate what you believe or produce some evidence that you're correct that doesn't involve linking to a similarly poorly researched news article written by someone else.
      • People demanded he resign for saying Epstein's teenage prostitutes were all willing participants.

        It's unreasonable to ask someone to resign for saying something he didn't say.

        Early in the thread, Stallman insists that the “most plausible scenario” is that Epstein’s underage victims were “entirely willing” while being trafficked.

        He never said such a thing.

    • Stallman. Apologies and that is after reviewing it twice. Something to do with Monday and coffee.

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      The difference of course is Franken is a sack of shit who got exactly what he deserved. He had been a load participant in woke cancel guilty even if proven innocent culture.

      It turned round on him, but in his case it was in no-way unfair - he'd of done it to anyone else if he thought it was politically expedient.

  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:29AM (#61185788)

    Stallman is 95% Passion and 5% Pragmatic. They are a lot of people who are onboard with the idea of Free and Open Software, as well are against on how it has been manipulated by going to the cloud, which he did warn us about before it was such a problem.
    However While Stallman is good at pointing out the problems and saying how bad it is, he doesn't do much on trying to find a good solution to the problem which is practical for the bulk of the people.

    People still want to make a career around writing software. So their work will need to be monetized in some particular way. Stallmans profit methodologies are out of date or impractical.
    1. Distribution: With storage cheap and internet speeds fast, is is super easy to download the software vs getting it on Tape/Disk/CD/DVD. As well being bundled with a set of software that you may not need anyways is just a waste.
    2. Consulting/Support Services: All fine and good, unless your software that you wrote, you had put in a lot of time and effort into making it easy to use and reliable.
    3. Giving away a tangential product that a company needed developed but not part of their core business. (Eg. IBM Supporting Linux Kernel Development) Where you may get stuck on spending money on resources to support and improve a product that will not affect your core business.
    4. Donations. All fine and good, but if your product is useful but not popular, you often cannot bring in the good will to keep it going

    Building software isn't cheap or easy. Most hobbyist may make something, then get tired of it and it will die off. To keep a product running and supported you need a dedicated team, and not all FOSS software will be a Linux or Apache. But just a special use tool that a few people would care about.

    • Most hobbyist may make something, then get tired of it and it will die off.

      xkcd.com/2347

      Hey Slashdot, since when does three slashes in a post qualifies as ASCII art?

    • You forgot one other method, and likely the one Stallman formed his viewpoint under: academia. It's an environment that works well for developing core components (BSD kernel) and analytical tools (R lang), but not commercial products.

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      unless your software that you wrote, you had put in a lot of time and effort into making it easy to use and reliable.

      Well than you have only yourself to blame.

    • 2. Consulting/Support Services: All fine and good, unless your software that you wrote, you had put in a lot of time and effort into making it easy to use and reliable.

      I'll push back a little on this one. In my experience when you make your software easier to use and more reliable not only is it more widely used but the people who use it will try to do more with it.

      Both factors which allow you to sell more Consulting/Support Services.

      Not to mention the fact that the best support contracts are the ones where the customer never calls you because they don't have a problem.

    • While Stallman is good at pointing out the problems and saying how bad it is, he doesn't do much on trying to find a good solution to the problem which is practical for the bulk of the people.

      Which are the most annoying kinds of people.

      "You all are doing it wrong!"
      "We know it's not perfect but we haven't been able to come up with a better way. Do you know of a better way?"
      "Yeah, you should use a perpetual motion machine to power it!"
      "Ok cool. Thanks for the input but we're going to keep using this approach."
      "Whatever, I see big oil got to you already." *Smugly walks away*

  • On one level, I have Stallman's work, life and devotion to walking the walk but he's a loose cannon that I would think an organization like the FSF would like to keep from coming back on board (to keep with the sailing metaphor). I like to visualize the FSF as a reasonable, measured and calculated response to the likes of Microsoft, Google and Apple, all of which are reasonable, measured and calculated in the way they are trying to take away people's rights to their data (and their lives). At some point i

  • by SpaghettiPattern ( 609814 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:38AM (#61185816)

    No I will carefully reconsider.

    FYI: Without RMS there would not have been the FSF and there would not have been the GPL. Without the GPL the Linux Kernel would have probably been taken hostage using any means possible.

    • That is certainly true. I don't buy the whole 'gnu/linux' nonsense but I DO support most anyone canceled for any reason... especially failing to hate on a buddy providing jailbait completely voluntary luxury lifestyles in exchange for voluntary activities.
    • No I will carefully reconsider.

      FYI: Without RMS there would not have been the FSF and there would not have been the GPL. Without the GPL the Linux Kernel would have probably been taken hostage using any means possible.

      True, but what's more important? Honouring RMS's legacy in this specific way or furthering the objectives of Free Software?

      10-15 years ago I remember tons of /. stories about the FSF and RMS. Now? Not so much outside of this controversy.

      Open source as a movement and business has exploded but the FSF as a thought leader is becoming irrelevant. There's a lot of important conversations happening about cloud computing, data ownership, data portability, and privacy. And frankly, when those discussions happen the

  • Oh really? (Score:5, Funny)

    by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @11:42AM (#61185830)

    We were working on a video to announce this with, but that turned out to be difficult

    Yeah, no shit, all the good video editing software is commercial and closed-source.

    • This made me laugh. RMS using film because cameras and phones use closed source video codecs.

    • by godrik ( 1287354 )

      Yeah. I am making videos for my class this semester. I am using cinelerra-gg which work in linux and is GPL.
      It is probably one of the better one there is. (pitivi is very limited in features; I could not even get kdenlive to do basic editting without crashes). But cinelerra-gg is still not great. I have encountered so many bugs and so many WTF user interface design, it is not even funny.

      Now that I know how to do the things I need, I'll keep it for the rest of the semester. But the tool definitely gets in th

    • Re:Oh really? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The Cynical Critic ( 1294574 ) on Monday March 22, 2021 @02:18PM (#61186524)
      It's obviously to do with the fact that his resignation was based on some pretty heavy handed misrepresentation of what he actually said.

      How do you debunk something like a total misrepresentation of his questioning weather it's correct to flat out say Minski "raped a 17-year-old" when that 17-year-old had been trafficked and coerced into propositioning him as well as given strict orders not to let anyone know she was underage? Specially when criticism of the media as a whole is heavily associated with a section of the Trump-supporting far right?

      If people couldn't understand the nuance of "Is it appropriate to call him a flat-out rapist when he was intentionally kept in the dark" in the first place, how are they going to understand it now?
  • Usually when people say that it means they may do it.

  • A night of blood I've long awaited. But be this my death or yours, free software will carry on! For a GNU dawn! For freedom! [1]

    [1] Randall Munroe. 2007. Open Source. Retrieved March 22, 2021 from https://xkcd.com/225/ [xkcd.com]

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...