Richard Stallman sent a message to OpenBSD-Misc, explaining why he doesn't recommend OpenBSD. "From what I have heard, OpenBSD does not contain non-free software (though I am not sure whether it contains any non-free firmware blobs). However, its ports system does suggest non-free programs, or at least so I was told when I looked for some BSD variant that I could recommend. I therefore exercise my freedom of speech by not including OpenBSD in the list of systems that I recommend to the public." His mail started a huge thread (that's just page 1) and since then he's under a blast of messages from Theo de Raadt and the OpenBSD users. De Raadt replied: "Richard, you are wrong. You said very clearly in your interview that the ports tree contains non-free software. It does not. It is just a scaffold of Makefiles containing URLs, and an occasional patch here or there. You are just plain wrong. And you are not enough of a man to admit that you are wrong. I may be unfriendly at times, but you are a power-misusing hypocritical liar who attacks projects that try harder than any others to only make free software available. Shame on you."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-10-02
Unfortunately it is perfectly possible to enslave people utilizing software. Just as you can do that utilizing hardware.
Take the rights to modify XYZ away from a person and you have effective enslaved said person, since a fundamental right is missing.
Member since:2006-01-24
although I personally have no problem with the definition of freedom in regards to GPL since I understand the context in which it is used, I still find it an unfortunate choice of word since it's used as an (oh so tiresome) attack venue by those who for entirely other reasons than the semantics of freedom dislikes the GPL but has no real arguments to stand on.
in my opinion it would have been better to use the term rights, since I think this is what is actually granted and bestowed when recieving and distributing gpl licenced software. but again this choice in wording has no practical impact whatsoever, it only comes into play in forums such as these were the same old zelots start throwing the same fits over and over again.
overall this is the same spite-filled non-constructive shitstorms we've gotten used to when GPL and BSD are discussed here on OSNews.
my big disappoinment however is with the juvenile glee Thom has been applauding some really crappy comments,
it underlines my personal opinion of OSNews becoming more and more like a trashy tabloid interested in urging aggressive confrontations rather than constructive discussion.
Member since:
2005-07-06
>Freedom to enslave other people is the sole freedom GPL does not grant.
Good to know, since it is impossible to enslave anyone with software.