Bob Beck wrote on Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:47:14PM -0600: > Theo de Raadt wrote: >> In a private reply to my initial mail Jim Gettys (OLPC / Red Hat) said:
>>> Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the >>> sole end unto itself for OLPC. >> I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob >> says, is exactly what is going on. > I believe it says exactly what is going on with Red Hat - they wish > to bring the community on with the belief that this is a free software > project and it is not. The fact that it may in fact run a linux kernel > has no bearing on it. They might as well be running windows. There is a good deal of bitter irony in it. When the GPL was written, the author(s) were wise enough not trust themselves. So they wrote stuff like "we may not sell ourselves out" into the license. They were right. When people act inside social contexts involving large amounts of economical or political power, it is very hard for those people to remain true, even if they started out in search of freedom and equality. Even if they were never naive and knew their danger and the strength of their opponents. But they were wrong. To guard your Self against corruption, legal means are ineffective. Which means, then, might be effective? That is one of the most difficult questions i heard of. I cannot yet come any closer than this: Don't let people put you into social or political contexts that could pressure you to change your goals and your personality in any way you resent. Above all, do not trust your own morality or strength or whatever to remain true when tempted. Hardly anybody can resist any serious temptation for long. Do what you really want, and stay away from temptation. However, that's much easier said than done. After all, you need some cash to live on... The structure of the OpenBSD project suggests that this project might be able to resist better than others. It is no company. It is no charity. It is not so small that it needs to grasp at every straw to survive. It is not so large that any of the big players will put any real effort into trying to corrupt it. As long as it has a few people who know what they want, it might stand unconquered for a while. Not because those people are morally better than or in any way stronger than others, but because they wisely choose a context for living and working that lets them grow rather than corrupting them.
