A lengthy debate that began with a suggestion to dual license the Linux kernel under the GPLv2 and the GPLv3 continues on the Linux Kernel Mailing List. Throughout the ongoing thread Linux creator Linus Torvalds has spoken out on the GPLv2, the upcoming GPLv3, the BSD license, Tivo, the Free Software Foundation, and much more. During the discussion, he was asked we he chose the GPLv2 over the BSD license when he's obviously not a big fan of the FSF.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Maybe I'm wrong here but I think you misunderstood the person you're replying to...
I assume you're talking about this sentence: "The freedoms that the FSF promotes are meaningless to 99% of the population, who will never write a line of code in their life..."
He isnīt saying that FSF never coded or never will code anything, that would indeed be a lie, but he is saying that 99% of the population will never write a line of code which is the truth. Most people don't write code them self, they just use the software.
Member since:2006-03-12
Your absolutely right. I did read that wrong, but is the fact that 99% of people will never write code, make it meaningless to those people.
The reality is both Linus and the FSF are in 100% agreement. That there exists advantages to having the code open, whether it come from the benefit that those 1% offer or 100%.
One of the things that I find interesting, the move that open-source has done by going mainstream is Linus desire to please companies; pander to the embedded market and he is right, and definitely so for the kernel which is wrote by companies much more than by hobbiests; academics etc etc or for Political reasons.
..but I think he's making a mistake, you can see moving to a web desktop; Solaris being more friendly; Microsoft appealing to both the home server/developer crowd, just at Linux the Desktop is looking "good enough" for anybody, and getting better. And he's wasting time attacking Sun and FSF, when they are both actively *promoting* GNU/Linux. While he embeds himself more in the kernel.
People like open-source for lots of reasons privacy; security; future proofing; easy to customize; modular etc etc without touching a line of code, these people know what "Linux" is they expect these things and others. Notice I don't even *mention* abstract concepts like the four freedoms. Tivoization doesn't give them any of these things. Why would they care what OS was on the Tivo. The thing I find most bizarre about the whole thing is that the success of Linux the kernel, and of Tivo themselves is because of these people that use and promote Linux.
I personally bought a wireless/router/modem by linksys only last month to run http://openwrt.org/ on the thing, and the premise that I could both run; and change linux on there and I intend to use beyond its current software limitations...and not write a line of code, and it will be a better solution for what *I* want than any WHS.
To be fair I'm tired of Linus the politician, GNU is a better term for the OS now, or Solaris. Both Sun and FSF both seem *interested* in producing software for *me*, and that will get to be an increasing theme on here. Linus has lost touch with the very people who follow him. People often quote the day Linus and Stallman were together and Dick ranting while Linus played with his kids. How times have changed. If you read the thread he's appalling. To be fair Alexandre doesn't look that great, but only Alan Cox comes off looking an adult.
Member since:
2006-03-12
"The same for TiVo - they make a hardware device, intended for a very specific purpose, and they also have to protect the interests of their content providers in order to licence the content they sell. you are perfectly entitled to pull your TiVo apart and tinker with the software or hardware, but TiVo is under no obligation to support that activity, and nor should they be."
I'm not disagreeing with you. Ignoring the fact I don't need protecting from my content. How would allowing me to replace the kernel on the Tivo protect the content providers?
"Personally, I am sick of noisy minorities trying to tell me what is ethical and what is not - ethics and morals are arbitrary and relative, and each individual will have their own angle on what they consider ethical or not. The only practical option is to come to a general consensus that suits the majority, and in the case of the GPL v3, I suspect that the majority of developers and businesses will see it as excessively draconian and restrictive measure that will not be widely adopted or endorsed. "
Whats great about this comment, is the fact nobody is forced to use GPL3...or indeed use GPL3 software. Even Linus thinks he has a right to choose the license that suits him best. The reality is for adoption GPL3 software relies on being popular with developers. The simple fact is if it is not popular it will not be used.
"If you want devices that you can readily modify, then buy from manufacturers that cater to that market (it is a very small market though, so you may have to shop around). Same with software. Stop trying to force everyone into the same box. The freedoms that the FSF promotes are meaningless to 99% of the population, who will never write a line of code in their life, but the freedoms that the FSF are trying to restrict will negatively impact a fairly large chunk of the population who are trying to run (or work for) businesses and make a living."
Thats incredibly offensive and a lie, you can only argue that the FSF, hasn't worked on the kernel, but they have wrote an awful lot of code elsewhere.
Richard Stallman in GCC
http://www.opensource.org/node/155