Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 4th Feb 2007 21:05 UTC, submitted by Marc Fiszman
GNU, GPL, Open Source "This show features an interview with Richard Stallman, founder of the free software movement and the man who put the GNU into GNU/Linux. After introducing the concept of free software, Richard offers some trenchant criticism of two tech superstars: the Lord of Linux, Linus Torvalds, and Apple guru Steve Jobs. From there, we move into a discussion of the impact of free software - and freedom more generally - on the evolution of personal and global consciousness."
Thread beginning with comment 209124
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Coxy
Member since:
2006-07-01

I really want to know. Really.

Why should I care about it? To paraphrase John Cleese: What has the FSM ever done for me?

I visited: http://www.gnu.org/

In the section: What is Free Software?

I don't need freedoms one to three and freedom zero comes with purchased software, at least enough for me to be able to do everything I need to with the software.

Edited 2007-02-04 23:03

Reply Score: 2

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Freedom 0 does NOT come with proprietary software.

Just take a look at the Vista EULA and you'll see you have extremely limited usage rights. Luckily it's mostly void in Denmark, but it's sad for those of you living in USA.

Freedom 1,2 and 3 are essential to me, mostly because I want to control _my_ system and _my_ data.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Redeeman Member since:
2006-03-23

Whats the point of the code of law?

why should i care about it? why should i care if my neighbor starves to death. why should i care if the porche dealer gets shot? why should i care that the vegeratian store gets bombed?

im not a vegetarian, i dont buy porches, why should i care? my neighbor doesent do anything for me, why should i care?

Reply Parent Score: 5

twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Freedom zero (in computing, numbers generally start from zero, since even storing zero requires some space in the computers memory) allows you to use a program without worrying, for example, whether you will be prevented by the vendor of software X from watching a dvd you have legally purchased.

Freedom 1 allows anyone to deconstruct a program and build another like it or improve it. Without this freedom in the "real world", buying BetaMax is fine - until everyone decides to only distribute VHS tapes. In the computing world, it's much worse: proprietary technology after proprietary technology has fallen victim to the Grim Reaper because the vendor went out of business or changed direction, and no-one knew how to replicate their work. Ergo, it, all the data you saved with it, and all the time you spent learning it, became obsolete.

Freedom 2 allows you to distribute the software that you have modified or improved or deconstructed, so that everyone, not just you, can benefit from VHS instead of being stuck with BetaMax or V2000. With proprietary software, you do not have this freedom - copying proprietary software and distributing it for a free without permission from the copyright holder is illegal (it is always illegal to distribute without permission, but free software *gives you* that permission).

Reply Parent Score: 3

pinky Member since:
2005-07-15

>I don't need freedoms one to three and freedom zero comes with purchased software

Nobody says that you need it now. The point is that you should have it if you decide to use one.

It's perfect OK if you say: "I don't need the freedom so i don't exercise it".
But if you would say "I don't need the freedom so it's not important that this freedom exists", for me this would sound quite selfish.

I for my self doesn't exercise a lot of freedoms too (not only in the software world). But i would never say that because at this moment i don't exercise a special freedom this freedom isn't important or it shouldn't exist.

Reply Parent Score: 5