Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th Nov 2010 22:24 UTC, submitted by koki
GNU, GPL, Open Source Now this is interesting. We see what is at its core a very valid concern, in practice not a problem to anyone, and, thanks to the tone of the press release, close to trolling. The Free Software Foundation Latin America is complaining about something that has been known for a while - there is some non-Free code stuck in the Linux kernel (mostly firmware). A valid issue of concern from an idealogical viewpoint, but sadly, the tone of the press release turns this valid concern into something close to trolling.
Thread beginning with comment 449908
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
gnufreex
Member since:
2010-05-06

So you basically agree that Linux is proprietary and property of one person? But you still want to attack FSFLA even thought you agree with them? And you attack wrong FSF (no, it is not branch, it is separate organization).

EPIC FAIL.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

I think he wanted to say that Linus is Linux's original developer and maintainer, at first his OS was to be run on the most large range of PC hardware, whatever the drivers... correction, the firmwares were open-source or not. He released his own work openly, that's not Linus' problem to release third-parties' sources as well.

When FSF decided Linux is no more Linus' property because 1) Hurd is incomplete, needs a working kernel 2) Linux uses GNU tools 3) thus Linux is renamed GNU/Linux 4) Linus adopted a viral DRM that should have forced him to release these third-parties sources OR at least remove the binaries, Linus persisted to maintain this established compatibility, yet removed them from the main tree and moved them aside for user-awarness usage.

What bugs many people is how FSF vampirize Linus' efforts and kernel and dictate him their narrow-minded view on how the world should bend before them and offer them everything for free on a silver plate, begging for pardon. Linux-free is the attempt to get rid from the proprietary binaries, and well, that's a good move for the fanatics out there, those that cannot stand freedom to use these binary firmware files or not.

Since it is obviously no use trying to speak, or just dealing with these FOSS-zealots, let's get move to another more important topic. This ain't going nowhere, script kiddies are just opening their mouth wide to be fed with open source code, making them believe they owns, checks, rules, controls and can changes how the world spins. Yet this is a fallacy, they just have to grow a little more.

Some said this is easy for zealots requesting to be given free source code, while they are working on academic projects and are thus fed by the nation, not some private corporations or just little companies. They cannot cope with the capitalisms and those companies trying to protect themselves from IT leechers by not providing their secret recipes.

If having such a grunt over closed-sourced firmwares, drivers, softwares, etc, why all those talented moaners don't try to figure out, organize themselves, create dedicated hardware from scratch (CPU, GPU, audio, network, ...) and the corresponding drivers, and offer everything for free to the said community ? Let's do a real move, if you're real mens...

Kochise

Edited 2010-11-14 10:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

FSF doesn't vampirize Torvalds, it is other way around.

You say FSF is lame because Hurd doesnt work? Where is Torvald's Photoshop replacement? Where is Torvald's desktop environment? Where is Torvald's Emacs? Where is Torvald's compiler? He must be pretty lame when he didn't wrote any of those things, instead he co-opted FSF's and named them all Linux.

How you like them apples? What I said above is may not be politically correct, but it is lot more correct then what you said about FSF.

No, Linux is not Torvald's property, even it is obvious that some Torvaldists think so. Reality is that FSF started writing free operating system, did the most work and when Linux came along they decided to embrace it and help it instead of competing with it. A nice thing to do. They advocated for people to go and help Linux kernel, they even de-emphasized Hurd and stopped all investment in it. All they wanted is to they get some credit for the OS they wrote, not for kernel named Linux (even though lots of FSF followers worked on it) but on whole OS. They deserve it.

I really don't get why all this hate against FSF. They sometimes overdo it, but so does Torvalds. He hates C++ fans. He is abusive against peole who like kernel debuggers. He likes to flame people on LKML. He said OpenBSD folks are masturbating monkeys. List goes on and on... So how come everyone from FSF is an asshole while Holly Torvalds never does wrong? All Torvalds did is start one pet project, which was then improved by people who thought they are doing it in the name of Freedom as defined by FSF. So in a way, Linux kernel is Torvald's bait and switch. I don't think it open core (at least not intentionally) but Torvalds in a way hijacked credits over other people's work to satisfy his enormous ego. I can name more than 10 kernel devs who did lots more work on Linux kernel, and yet they get lot less credits than Torvalds.

Lets face it, if there was no FSF, Linux kernel would be alternate kernel for MINIX operating system, it wouldn't have free userland, and it would probably be under Torvald's shitty "no commercial but give me code back" license. Than means no Android, no Red Hat, no Canonical. And probably we wouldn't have this conversation.

Reply Parent Score: 2