Linked by Linux Review on Tue 20th Mar 2012 17:07 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source It's been a while since we caught up with Stallman. But a couple months ago we took a look around at what's happening with law, politics and technology and realized that he maybe perhaps his extremism and paranoia were warranted all along. So when we were contacted by an Iranian Linux publication and asked if we would like to publish an English translation of a recent interview they had done with Stallman, I thought that it was a particularly rich opportunity.
Thread beginning with comment 511247
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re:
by kurkosdr on Tue 20th Mar 2012 17:53 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

"He's not pretending anything."

Really? Stallman never loses an opportunity to remind people how "Free Software" can't have DRM and how switching to free software is a way to make sure you will be free of DRM. When asked about how DRMed "free software" can be tivoized to pervent people from changing it (if it's tied to specific hardware), he will claim such software is not really free, despite the fact it is according to the definition, free.

". On the other hand money hungry monopolists and crooks will always try brush off anything that stands in their way, no matter Stallman or not."
And thanks to Stallman claiming that banning or avoiding proprietary software is the best way to avoid DRM, they have another excuse in their disposal. ("you just hate proprietary software and are using your anti-DRM campaign as a vehicle to force us to open our software.

Anyway. Stallman is an egoistic ungrateful jerk that damages open source. Access and distribution rights over the source code is a priviledge (a convinience), not a right.

Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2.2; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/FRG83G) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Reply Score: -1

RE: Re:
by Sodki on Tue 20th Mar 2012 18:14 in reply to "Re:"
Sodki Member since:
2005-11-10

Really? Stallman never loses an opportunity to remind people how "Free Software" can't have DRM and how switching to free software is a way to make sure you will be free of DRM.


Free software can have DRM, of course, and of course he aknowledges that. That's why he created the GPLv3 in the first place, so we can have a free software license that doesn't restrict the user's 4 fundamental freedoms regarding DRM. It doesn't prevent DRM, it prevents some restrictions that come with DRM.


When asked about how DRMed "free software" can be tivoized to pervent people from changing it (if it's tied to specific hardware), he will claim such software is not really free, despite the fact it is according to the definition, free.


Oh really? I dare you to find a single quote from him stating that. Just one. Hint: none in this article, although you might be tempted to think otherwise.


Anyway. Stallman is an egoistic ungrateful jerk that damages open source.


How can you say that? The guy quit his job so that he could make free software. Without him you wouldn't have GCC, glibc or other basic software foundations. BSD wouldn't have evolved the way it did, Linus or other contributors wouldn't be able to afford a C compiler for Linux, etc, etc.. The guy may be a wrecking ball in terms of PR, but he's anything but egoistic. Perhaps the ungratefulness lies with you.


Access and distribution rights over the source code is a priviledge (a convinience), not a right.


You have the right to believe in that, but remember that a lot of people don't agree with your view. I don't care about proprietary code, I just choose not to use it. And it's ludicrous to think that free software didn't help the advance of all software, including proprietary. Remember the old UNIX days? What a mess!

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Re:
by lucas_maximus on Tue 20th Mar 2012 19:14 in reply to "RE: Re:"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Most sane people actually think that free software is a convenience, unfortunately Richard Stallman is quite clearly a bit mental and a bit of an arse.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Other

Also Stallman was fired from his Job.

Edited 2012-03-20 19:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re:
by lucas_maximus on Tue 20th Mar 2012 19:26 in reply to "Re:"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Why haven't you joined http://omgcheesecake.net?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Re:
by danger_nakamura on Tue 20th Mar 2012 23:22 in reply to "Re:"
danger_nakamura Member since:
2011-06-21


Anyway. Stallman is an egoistic


Most probably... he seems to me to have a large ego and good deal of vanity (strange vanity, but vanity nonetheless). Most infuriating to me, he goes out of his way to try and communicate in such a way as to make it appear that he has no ego and is completely community minded. I don't buy it.


ungrateful


How so?


jerk


Possibly, but entirely subjective.


that damages open source.

I don't think he'd mind. He may be upset to learn that his antics have hurt "Free Software," but I'm not sure that there would be any way to convince him of this. I'm not even sure he'd be able to change if he wanted to.

Still, the man has accomplished a great deal despite his self-imposed handicaps.
[/q]

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Re:
by kurkosdr on Wed 21st Mar 2012 16:04 in reply to "RE: Re:"
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11


Most probably... he seems to me to have a large ego and good deal of vanity (strange vanity, but vanity nonetheless). Most infuriating to me, he goes out of his way to try and communicate in such a way as to make it appear that he has no ego and is completely community minded. I don't buy it.

Stallman is egoistic because he thinks that, just because he declared proprietary software to be "wrong" (never mind it's not really wrong if it doesn't come with DRM), the whole world has to agree with him. Otherwise, you are either a) brainwashed b) a pig who only cares about comfort and not "freedom" (never mind that no constitutional freedoms are violated by proprietary software) or c) on the payroll of some company making proprietary software (yeah, right).

Genuiely disagreeing with his ideology that proprietary software == wrong, simply because you do not really think it's wrong, is beyond Stallman's comprehension, because he is so egoistical.

If you release a piece of software as proprietary and that software becomes successful, he will badmouth you whenever given the chance, call you 'evil' and hold silly protests in front of your store (even if said software doesn't have DRM or user restrictions), until you agree with him and release it as open source ("free software"). Disagreeing with his ideology that "all software should be free" and still remain "good"/"non evil" is something egoistical Stallman cannot accept.

"
ungrateful

How so?
"

Because if you do decide to release some software as open source("free"), he acts as if it was your obligation anyway, instead or a warm thank you.

Edited 2012-03-21 16:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Re:
by r_a_trip on Wed 21st Mar 2012 11:03 in reply to "Re:"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Stallman is an egoistic ungrateful jerk that damages open source. Access and distribution rights over the source code is a priviledge (a convinience), not a right.

Depends on the license of the software. With GPL-ed software it is a right granted by the license stipulations.

One can rail against Stallman for doing damage to Open Source, but I don't think Stallman would mourn one day if the notion of Open Source vanished off the face of the earth. Open Source is nothing but Free Software with the philosophical and political parts removed. As such it considerably weakens the position of Free Software.

Stallman cares about Free Software. Software licensed in a way that gives you the Four Freedoms. Free Software is about more than the convenience of collaborative development models.

When it comes to excuses, developers don't have any. The power lies solely with the end user. It is the end user, who decides what terms are acceptable, not the developer. The developer can put any terms on his software he wants, but if end users deem these unacceptable, they either refrain from using the software or they brush aside the legalese and use the software against the stipulations anyway. The only decision the developer truly has power over is to develop and maintain the software or not.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re:
by demetrioussharpe on Wed 21st Mar 2012 20:47 in reply to "Re:"
demetrioussharpe Member since:
2009-01-09

Anyway. Stallman is an egoistic ungrateful jerk...


...who just happened to have been correct this whole time. Stallman never doubted the limitless depths of greed for money or power. IMO he understood, from the very beginning, the evils of human nature & where it would lead us concerning technology. Look around you, things that he's been ranting about for the past few decades are coming true. And, unfortunately, it's going to get a whole lot worse before it gets any better.

Everyone thought that he was crazy, but he wasn't. In fact, we was smarter than all of us. We're just now catching up, mentally, to where he was when he started his whole crusade. The difference? He knew it would happen, whereas we actually had to see it with our own eyes.

Reply Parent Score: 5