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 Open Source DRM Programming

Richard Stallman Speaks on the State of Free Software, and Answers Questions (libreplanet.org) 112

Posted by EditorDavid from the joining-us-now dept.
Richard Stallman celebrated his 69th birthday last month. And Wednesday, he gave a 92-minute presentation called "The State of the Free Software Movement."

Stallman began by thanking everyone who's contributed to free software, and encouraged others who want to help to visit gnu.org/help. "The Free Software movement is universal, and morally should not exclude anyone. Because even though there are crimes that should be punished, cutting off someone from contributing to free software punishes the world. Not that person."

And then he began by noting some things that have gotten better in the free software movement, including big improvements in projects like GNU Emacs when displaying external packages. (And in addition, "GNU Health now has a hospital management facility, which should make it applicable to a lot more medical organizations so they can switch to free software. And [Skype alternative] GNU Jami got a big upgrade.")

What's getting worse? Well, the libre-booted machines that we have are getting older and scarcer. Finding a way to support something new is difficult, because Intel and AMD are both designing their hardware to subjugate people. If they were basically haters of the public, it would be hard for them to do it much worse than they're doing.

And Macintoshes are moving towards being jails, like the iMonsters. It's getting harder for users to install even their own programs to run them. And this of course should be illegal. It should be illegal to sell a computer that doesn't let users install software of their own from source code. And probably shouldn't allow the computer to stop you from installing binaries that you get from others either, even though it's true in cases like that, you're doing it at your own risk. But tying people down, strapping them into their chairs so that they can't do anything that hurts themselves -- makes things worse, not better. There are other systems where you can find ways to trust people, that don't depend on being under the power of a giant company.

We've seen problems sometimes where supported old hardware gets de-supported because somebody doesn't think it's important any more — it's so old, how could that matter? But there are reasons...why old hardware sometimes remains very important, and people who aren't thinking about this issue might not realize that...

Stallman also had some advice for students required by their schools to use non-free software like Zoom for their remote learning. "If you have to use a non-free program, there's one last thing... which is to say in each class session, 'I am bitterly ashamed of the fact that I'm using Zoom for this class.' Just that. It's a few seconds. But say it each time.... And over time, the fact that this is really important to you will sink in."

And then halfway through, Stallman began taking questions from the audience...

Read on for Slashdot's report on Stallman's remarks, or jump ahead to...
- One questioner asked Richard Stallman about copyright and trademark law


Copyright covering works and monopolizing the use of the contents of those works is very similar to the Enclosure Laws. Enclosure was basically theft, and copyright is vicious in a similar way, when it's used to stop people from sharing.


But then he added, "Now I am not against copyright 100%."


I think it's legitimate for there to be copyright, and for it to cover commercial distribution and use of a work, and to cover publicly-visible modification of the work. However, non-commercial redistribution of exact copies should be allowed for any published work. (Now, not for private, personal data, but for published works, yes.) And then some works, the works that exist to be used — not just looked at, thought about, contemplated, appreciated — you know the works that are meant to be used by each person? Those need to be free. So for instance, software should be free. Recipes should be free. Patterns for sewing clothing should be free.


- Someone asked Stallman his thoughts on the recent controversy around the node-ipc package. (Specifically, how last month some versions reportedly "began deleting all data and overwriting all files on developer's machines, in addition to creating new text files with 'peace' messages" for users in Russia in Belarus (to protest Russia's invasion of Ukraine). Stallman responded:


I think that was really nasty, that change — deleting people's files is really nasty. And it's not as if this deletion was being done to a war criminal, you know? It could be anybody in Russia. It could be anybody in Belarus, and most people in Belarus hate Lukashenko — you know, they want him gone. But they're still being punished. So that was not a good thing to do. It's not a good thing to broaden the condemnation and the hate.


- Another question asked Stallman what he thought of videogames — and whether more free-software videogames would benefit the libre world?


Well, first of all, I don't think there's anything bad about playing a game. Unless the game is non-free — then it's bad for you, if you play it.

But typically these games are not solitaire; you're playing with other people. And using a non-free program together with other people? That's particularly bad. Because it means that those people are pressuring each other to keep running that non-free program. And whenever a non-free program generates that kind of effect, where each user is pressured by all the other users to continue doing something that's bad for you — that makes all of them ethically responsible for pressuring the others. Which means you really should stop.

Now, more free games? It doesn't satisfy an urgent practical need, obviously... But the crucial thing is, free ones might make it easier for some people to say, 'Let's move off this non-free thing, and play a game that is free. So we can have the same pleasure, but without paying freedom as the price.'

And by the way, anyone who plays Minecraft could switch to Minetest. Minetest is a free game, similar to Minecraft.


- Towards the end of the questions, Stallman teased an upcoming project. "We're about to take a step forward in documentation."


I have written a manual for GNU C, and the Free Software Foundation is going to publish it in not-too-terribly long. Now, why do I say it's a manual for GNU C? It does not try to describe the C standard — because that would be tremendously complicated, and tremendously hard to use.

It's not just that there are a lot of details in the C standard. It's written in terms of abstractions. Instead of telling you what the program means, it tells you what the program is permitted to mean. So you need to think at a second-order level to make sense of the C standard. Well, the purpose of this manual is to enable people to learn C, and also to enable them to look up the details of what C constructs mean... And indeed, C inevitably is full of wrinkles and more complex rules, but I've tried to express them in ways that make it easier to understand C programming. And part of what enabled me to do that is forgetting about the standard.

Now, GCC follows the C standard. It will be quote "conforming" if you specify certain options, which you don't actually have to specify. But by only describing what GCC does — and not all the other possible things some other compiler might do without violating the standard, it makes the manual much simpler and clearer. So I hope that once this manual has settled down, people will adapt it to cover other languages that are more or less of the same category.

For instance, I think it wouldn't be terribly hard to modify the GNU C manual to get a Java manual.


- For one of the final questions, Stallman was asked if the free software community has a role in limiting environmental damage to our planet? And Stallman answered, "Well, I know of one way where it's directly relevant."


Planned obsolescence causes a lot of waste. And in particular, it produces lots of e-waste. Of course, manufacturing the new devices to be sold to people who have just suffered planned obsolescence uses a lot of energy and a lot of material resources. So free software is exactly the thing to help people keep using the same device for longer.

Now this is not a very direct connection. It's a consequence of being in a community where individuals have more control over what they do. And that is very important, itself. But it also enables people to be less wasteful.

Businesses will direct you into wasteful consumption, because it's profitable for them. And if they have less influence over you, you can stay away from the wasteful consumption.


Stallman closed his talk with some gracious words for his audience. "I'd like to thank people once again for joining my talk, and to wish all of you happy hacking.

"And please volunteer for the GNU project. Please join the Free Software Foundation."


Slashdot's additional coverage of Stallman's other remarks:
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Richard Stallman Speaks on the State of Free Software, and Answers Questions More

Richard Stallman Speaks on the State of Free Software, and Answers Questions

Comments Filter:

  • Really curious about that C manual (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Saturday April 16, 2022 @05:11PM (#62452908)

    The description of the C manual he gives makes me think it would be pretty interesting to read, and as he says maybe see if a similar manual could be written for other languages. It sounds like an interesting twist on a normal computer language guide, to tie it so directly with an implementation.

    It could be we are all a bit too abstracted from the compilers and interpreters we use daily.

  • You can't be forced to use Zoom if it doesn't run on your OS. (Hint: Windows in S Mode)

    • Students in primary and secondary school will mostly use the tablets or notebooks issued by their schools, which is usually either iPads, Chromebooks, or Windows Surface, and over which they have no real control. Parents may have signed paperwork promising that neither they nor their students will attempt to bypass any controls or install any additional software, and that they will not try to log in with computers other than those issued to the student.

      Colleges don't generally have such control, but being a

    • Runs fine in a browser on Linux, etc. At that point, are they even "distributing" the software?

      Which means, that software could be Free (GPLv2 or 3, but not AGPL) and not be distributed because it is still on Zoom's server. Of course it isn't but then it comes down to an argument about what Free licenses you personally care to use or agree to.

  • (Many) Video games are large artistic endeavours, more akin to movies than just strictly software. The require an enormous amount of effort not just from programmers but from artists and animators and writers and so many more people.

    The current state of capitalism is a nightmare, don't get me wrong, but what he's saying effectively amounts to telling game devs they're immoral for making entertainment that people can buy on proprietary systems.

    But this is kind of his whole thing, I suppose. At least he's consistent. I wonder if he pays for books or movies or music.

    • Copyright still exists. People would still have reasons to buy the game content (artwork, scripting, music, etc) if the game engine was Free.

    • He doesn't oppose paying for things, he supports it. He opposes closed source.

      For video games, in the past he's suggested that it would be ok for video games to be closed-source for a while to recoup costs (or whatever), then to become open sourced.

      • Evidently he changed his mind, and is no longer supports the even temporary closed source. I'm sure Stallman is telling himself to be ashamed of his past ideas.

        • Why are you attempting to smear Stallman for changing his views as more evidence becomes available? Does it make you feel better about disagreeing? Is it a way to try to seem like you have valid input on topics you clearly haven't really given any thought?

          Whatever the reason, all it's doing is making you look bad. It's rational to change ones mind as one learns more about a subject, and irrational to attack people for doing so, especially through projecting ones own insecurities on them.

    • (Many) Video games are large artistic endeavours, more akin to movies than just strictly software. The require an enormous amount of effort not just from programmers but from artists and animators and writers and so many more people.

      A lot of the effort that goes into producing an AAA game is put in specifically because of what he's talking about. There is an enormous amount of duplication of effort in the game industry. Two people at two different games companies will be working on producing textures that you can only tell apart from one another by stopping and staring because of copyright issues. Instead of cooperating on one great engine, we get two mediocre ones because they are competing. And when any work that doesn't need to be d

    • But, let us be clear here.

      Are you saying there is no way to release a game on, say, the Unreal Engine, where the level and asset scripts are open as well as engine code, but the other assets are not open?

      I would like to think such a solution would be a best-of-both-worlds, technology could be further developed by fans and ported to new platforms for instance - yet the game assets are still being sold as a separate entity.

    • I know I'm dog-piling with everyone else here, but take the original Doom as an example: The code and engine that makes the game run is Free and open source, but the WAD files, the content, the artwork, even the Doom name are still covered by nonFree copyright.

  • No Minetest is NOT a replacement (Score:3)

    by UnknownSoldier ( 67820 ) on Sunday April 17, 2022 @12:59AM (#62453488)

    > And by the way, anyone who plays Minecraft could switch to Minetest. Minetest is a free game, similar to Minecraft.

    No, Minetest is not even close to being functional equivalent to Minecraft. For one Minecraft "just works". With Minetest you need a bunch of mods to have "redstone".

    • Yeah I'm pretty surprised that I haven't been able to find one modpack for minetest that makes it behave like minecraft. But even if you did, virtually nobody is using it compared to mc, so there's not this whole community around it with tons of players and servers and trackers. It's the same reason faceboot is popular.

  • - I have spent a number of considerable years building and concentrating efforts into what I believe would be a simple project, its objectives where thus: 1. Protect the environment by reducing unneeded replication, storage, and useless waste thru a compositional framework to unify data, science, economics and its influence on policy. 2. Concentrate the maximal utility of the technology we have manifested and adopted into the framework of our global society. 3. Reduce carbon emissions to give humanity a ch
  • whos that? why should we have any interest in this guy?

Slashdot Top Deals

An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.

Close