To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This has nothing to do with Orwell.
*All* laws are based on restricting freedom of some people so others can have more freedom. The old saying "Your freedom to swing your arms around ends at my nose" is based on this principle.
If you want complete freedom, you want a Darwinian world where might makes right and anything that you can get away with is right. If I'm bigger and stronger than anyone else, then I have the right to hit anyone in the nose. You have the "right" to hit me back, of course, but you won't be able to because I can pound you into power before you even get close.
The GPL is based on the "quid pro quo" principle of "If you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours". If you want to play by those rules, then fine. If not, then fine too -- just don't expect that other people are your development slaves.
The BSD is based on the principle of charity (the only thing asked back is recognition). It is a noble mindset which it would be great if it were universal, but the moment one starts yelling that others leach your software, you're revealing a closet GPL hypocrasy.
I don't know if OpenBSD is or is not "completely free" in Stallman's purist philosophy. But like him or hate him, it is very consistent so if it was a misunderstanding, OpenBSD will be recognized.
But if it isn't, then, so what? If OpenBSD really cared about Stallman's opinion, it'll either create Gobuntu-like fork that allows a purist OpenBSD to be created or it'll go the distance and fix the issues, if there are any, at the expense of it's less pure OpenBSD users.
And if they don't care, they Stallman-type purists aren't their target customers anyway, so it's a waist of breath.
"If you want complete freedom, you want a Darwinian world where might makes right and anything that you can get away with is right."
This has nothing to do with Darwin. Darwin *described* a natural process. He did not advocate aping it (badly) in artificially constructed situations. He did not suggest that it has any kind of intrinsic moral significance, as of course it doesn't.





Member since:
2005-07-06
well ... no, you obviously don't fully understand the GPL. GPL promotes an ensures freedom, because it restricts that which would restrict freedom
George Orwell could not have put it better himself.