Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Jan 2012 19:12 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Late last year, president Obama signed a law that makes it possible to indefinitely detain terrorist suspects without any form of trial or due process. Peaceful protesters in Occupy movements all over the world have been labelled as terrorists by the authorities. Initiatives like SOPA promote diligent monitoring of communication channels. Thirty years ago, when Richard Stallman launched the GNU project, and during the three decades that followed, his sometimes extreme views and peculiar antics were ridiculed and disregarded as paranoia - but here we are, 2012, and his once paranoid what-ifs have become reality.
Thread beginning with comment 501940
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

"Your speaking against openness - the very concept which would enable you to experiment and learn."

No, I'm not. I'm merely arguing against the idea that not being open prevents curiosity and inspiration.

"Contrary to your claims, being open doesn't make things more difficult to use."

No, but it often does.

"What is your evidence of such causation? Difficulty and openness are two separate variables."

I didn't say one causes the other nor did I say they are the same variable. I am responding to the above comment saying that there is zero incentive to be inspired to learn about technology or programming from closed devices or closed source software which I think is nonsense. However, again based on views like those presented in the one I am replying to, it is not difficult to see why using/understanding open source software (or devices) is often more difficult than doing the same with closed ones.

"Yes, actually; whether your talking about computers, tablets, phones, cars, etc, the inability to tinker will hinder and dissuade independent developers, including kids who would like to learn."

Nonsense.

"Before we go further we need to be mindful of the differences between open devices and open source. You slipped in the term "source" in your post, but to me it's just as important for computing devices to be unrestricted by DRM and walled gardens."

To me the distinction is irrelevant. Open devices or source code is not inherently more or less inspiring or curiosity-producing than closed ones.

Edited 2012-01-03 06:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

jared_wilkes,

You speak as though open source software is necessarily more difficult - this needs to be defended because it doesn't stand as an obvious truth.

Me: "Yes, actually; whether your talking about computers, tablets, phones, cars, etc, the inability to tinker will hinder and dissuade independent developers, including kids who would like to learn."

You: "Nonsense."

Wow, I get the distinct impression you're not a tinkerer then. Some people just want to use devices "as is", which obviously includes you. But some of us see more potential and want to tear things apart and make them better. To the later crowd, open devices are much better (even if we happen to be in the minority).


"To me the distinction is irrelevant. Open devices or source code is not inherently more or less inspiring or curiosity-producing than closed ones."

Ah but the creative process is shallow and short lived if the ability to experiment and modify is inhibited as it is with closed devices.

Reply Parent Score: 3