Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android, Add Answer|AW: wert...@gmail.com; Greeting [Voicemail, New Economy]\[CARSTEN Lange, Mobile Home 0049|176765496|32|INVERS [,30: Han.,German] "Beschütze dieses 🏣 Haus, für die, die 🥀 Eingehen und Aus 📓"
<faifl...@danwin1210.de> schrieb am Mi., 23. Feb. 2022, 23:52: > > since Richard is a stronghold for freedom, we are relatively save > while he maintains it. > > He really isn't anymore. His position was clearly weakened even years > before the coup, warning people of problems the GNU developers simply > ignored and downplayed. Officially he was the Chief Gnuisance. > Effectively, it was a mix. > > I don't believe for a moment that everyone acting like a friend is > actually sympathetic to him. It's not my goal to make it seem like he has > no support when he clearly has some, but that support could extend to > taking his advice when it's a good idea-- not only when it's convenient. > > This goes doubly with regards to the GNU Project, but applies to the FSF > as well. > > > > Nevertheless, he should realize that he is not eternal. > > Everyone should. For years I've seen most advocacy fall into two camps: > "Ask Stallman" and "Repeat soundbites". > > I say this not to be harsh (I don't care if it is, but it's not the point) > but to point out that when he is no longer capable of leading (whether > it's due to personal limitations or lack of enough support where it > counts, I think we are there-- and I don't blame him for this) the FSF is > in for rough times if it cares about the mission. > > I'm too "cynical" to think it does care, but not cynical enough to think > no one will be disappointed. I will certainly be among the them. > > Sure there will still be marketing, um "advocacy", but as you say: > > > > People who do value freedom should be in charge of the FSF. > > And I think what we are finding is that people who fake it (Open Source > types, and this is fake free software from opportunists) are really taking > charge of things. That's seen as a good thing. It's a bit like celebrating > that termites are "cleaning up" the the frame of your house. "They sure > are busy!" > > Take the rumoured next president: Greg. Nothing against them yet, I don't > know them. Won't matter, as LiePlanet will run the show anyway. And once > again: > > > Most people I know who call themselves freedom activists promote freedom > but do not use free software. It is just propaganda. But propaganda > without personal example is demagogy. > > Exactly. > > And this is sadly true all the way up to GNU developers these days. They > might even care for rms "as a person" but they clearly haven't learned > from his examples or teaching. > > It's a problem when the people in charge of conveying the goals of Free > Software do not even have those goals themselves. > > > > > The first thing to do is not > speaking or writing. Activists should rather DO. Then they can explain > by speaking about their own example, a la RMS. > > That would be nice. "Walking the walk" has turned into "Grabbing the Uber" > and it won't be long before GNU developers are writing code on MacBooks at > this rate. > > That would be fine! If a MacBook was the only option at hand. Stallman's > finger doesn't melt when he touches a key with a Windows logo on it. But > leaving monopolies in charge of computing is still the opposite of Free > Software's goals. > > The goal is to put every user in charge of their computing. I know that > people transition, and that doesn't bother me. But the goal isn't "Write > some software under a free license". Even Apple and Microsoft have done > that! Is that as much as these people are trying to achieve? Freedom > according to Apple and Microsoft? > > Because that isn't Free Software. It is absolutely Open Source. > > If the FSF lets Open Source run everything, we can hardly say that > Stallman is holding anything together. And I blame everyone else as least > as much as blame him. I'm pretty sure he didn't call for his own coup > against him. That was the Guix people (among others). You know, GNU Guix. > Bastards, um "bastions" of user freedom-- not to mention due process and > free speech. > > I don't think Free Software is hopeless, just all the organisations so far. > > And the GNU Project. I give it until 2029 to collapse under the weight of > its sheer hypocrisy. Not of what it was originally, no-- what it is now. > It WAS the very flagship of Free Software. > > Before it can fall apart from rust, they will rewrite it in the same. As > with Jesus (and Stallman is no Jesus, but that's alright) it's not the man > that bothers me. It's (mostly) his followers that have let us down. Even > then it's the most vocal of them who have caused the bulk of the problems. > > I don't think he can fix this. It's up to advocates to be accountable to > what they claim to stand for. Like so many Bible thumpers, they say the > words but they just don't get it. > > And before anyone thinks I'm picking on one side, Open Source is a TRUE > corporate cult. Money of freedom, Profit over users having any control. If > all else fails, they co-opt our projects. > > It's going to take more than "just Stallman" to fix this. Maybe they'll > figure it out eventually. > > > _______________________________________________ > Discussion mailing list > Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu > https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion >
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
