Hal Vaughan wrote:
On Friday 04 April 2008, Michael C wrote:
Hal Vaughan wrote:
On Friday 04 April 2008, Michael C wrote:
Ivan Savcic wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Andrew Sackville-West
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a problem with this. Debian, in it's default install is
almost assuredly GNU free. And it has the additional freedom of
allowing the user to choose to use non-free software within the
structure of it's packaging system. IMO that is more free than
preventing people from using the software they want.
I had exactly the same view on that. But RMS is obviously a
purist, he dreams to banish all closed source from this world.
Like Hal pointed out, RMS believes that there should be no
freedom when it comes to choosing freedom itself.
Ivan
RMS is more of a hypocrite than anything else. He morally objects
to distros/*BSD variants with non-free applications in their
repositories/ports systems, on the grounds that this implicitly
advocates the use of non-free software, whilst explicitly
advocating GPL-licensed software for use in conjunction with that
ultimate proprietary platform, MS Windows:
http://www.gnu.org/software/for-windows.html
I think what RMS objects to is anything that was not his idea
first.
Hal
Honi soit qui mal y pense!
Merde!
Granted that's just my opinion, based on what I've read and less than 2
1/2 hours at one of his talks (including some time talking to him
afterwards), so I could be way off base, but I did get the sense that
his world definitely starts and ends with his own views -- and
basically contains only his views.
The FSF's list curiously doesn't mention the GNU Foundation's support
for the Win32 port of emacs and gcc:
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/windows/ntemacs.html
I admire RMS and a lot of what he's done. I'm currently working on
source for controlling an HD radio in C++ so I'm using gcc, based on
his earlier version and he did write emacs (isn't that an OS or
religion?). That doesn't mean that I think he carries things too far.
But then again, maybe it's that blindness and need of his to go too far
that has achieved what he has.
Hal
FWIW, I don't have any particular problem with the notion -- implicit in
Stallman's position -- that there's a set of positive political freedoms
which *morally* override the permissive freedom to install proprietary
software.
What concerns me is that Richard, in common with many people
half-seduced by their followers' portrayal of themselves as a
prophet/guru figure, has stopped listening to anyone outside of his
coterie of sycophants.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
