Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Mar 2012 22:47 UTC
Linux "If you meet Linus Torvalds, he comes off as a mild-mannered, down-to-earth Finnish-American. He lives with his wife Tove, three kids, a cat, a dog, a snake, a goldfish, a bunny and a pet rat in a comfortable 6000 square foot home just north of Portland's tony Lake Oswego neighborhood. The house is yellow - his favorite color - and so's the Mercedes. But he's not really like any of his neighbors. He drives his Mercedes fast, slamming the car into gear and flooring it. There's no coaxing, no hesitation. Either the hammer is down, or the car is at rest. And he has an abnormal number of stuffed penguins on his mantle." Yup, sounds like the to-the-point Fin we all know and love.
Thread beginning with comment 511496
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: I like Linus
by WorknMan on Thu 22nd Mar 2012 02:04 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I like Linus"
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

You continue to prove my point that people have not thought this through. You have a really poor definition of "religion".


You are right, I use the term 'religion' to describe the philosophy of people who are more concerned about the moral/ethical aspects of software rather than the practical use of said software. I use that term simply because I don't know of a better one, and I think it gets the point across. In the end, Stallman cares more about freedom (or at least his warped version of it) rather than silly little things such as productivity and actually getting work done.

The most that comes from that group is the insistence that free software be preferred over binary blobs. They haven't tried to ban anything. They may have tried to create their own distros, but that's a personal choice that they haven't tried to force down other people's throats.


Quoting Stallman:

Our goal is to establish freedom for software users, and freedom is
much broader and deeper than "freedom of choice". Thus, our aim is
not just that people should be able to "make choices about software
freedom", but rather that they should actually HAVE software freedom.

Proprietary software is digital colonization, unjust and evil. Our
goal is therefore to eliminate proprietary software.
We cannot
eliminate it this year, but what we can and must do now is refuse to
legitimize it.

In the same way, the abolitionists did not seek to give people
the power to make choices about freedom or slavery. They sought
to abolish slavery.


Source:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/accessibility/2010-07/msg00055.ht...

No question about it... this guy is a fanatic. And yes, I would consider anybody who wishes to abolish FOSS to be just the same.

Edited 2012-03-22 02:07 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: I like Linus
by kwan_e on Thu 22nd Mar 2012 04:55 in reply to "RE[6]: I like Linus"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"You continue to prove my point that people have not thought this through. You have a really poor definition of "religion".


You are right, I use the term 'religion' to describe the philosophy of people who are more concerned about the moral/ethical aspects of software rather than the practical use of said software. I use that term simply because I don't know of a better one, and I think it gets the point across. In the end, Stallman cares more about freedom (or at least his warped version of it) rather than silly little things such as productivity and actually getting work done.
"

Another fine example of not having thought things through.

You think that worrying about the ethical aspects of software is opposed to productivity and actually getting work done? Have you or have you not seen the progress made because of certain projects adoption of open source licences?

Linux uses GPLv2. It is very successful and very active. Both corporations and hobbyists contribute to it. Highly productive. End of story.

Stallman is right to care about freedom because productivity and getting work done REQUIRES freedom. For you to make them out as opposite ideals is idiotic at best.

"The most that comes from that group is the insistence that free software be preferred over binary blobs. They haven't tried to ban anything. They may have tried to create their own distros, but that's a personal choice that they haven't tried to force down other people's throats.


Quoting Stallman:

Our goal is to establish freedom for software users, and freedom is
much broader and deeper than "freedom of choice". Thus, our aim is
not just that people should be able to "make choices about software
freedom", but rather that they should actually HAVE software freedom.

Proprietary software is digital colonization, unjust and evil. Our
goal is therefore to eliminate proprietary software.
We cannot
eliminate it this year, but what we can and must do now is refuse to
legitimize it.

In the same way, the abolitionists did not seek to give people
the power to make choices about freedom or slavery. They sought
to abolish slavery.


Source:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/accessibility/2010-07/msg00055.ht...

No question about it... this guy is a fanatic. And yes, I would consider anybody who wishes to abolish FOSS to be just the same.
"

And what ACTIONS have they taken to achieve that goal?

Basically, what we have here is people arguing "fanaticism" and "religion" based on a person having strong opinions or beliefs. What kind of philosophy course taught you this nonsense?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: I like Linus
by WorknMan on Thu 22nd Mar 2012 05:26 in reply to "RE[7]: I like Linus"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

You think that worrying about the ethical aspects of software is opposed to productivity and actually getting work done?


Depending on the situation, yes. Stallman said it himself in an article right here on this site:

http://www.osnews.com/story/25724/Interview_Richard_Stallman

If you convince people that some free software is technically superior, they might run some free software, but they will remain ready to use nonfree software in the areas where that is technically superior. They will continue to judge an important question based on superficial issues. This is just a partial success.

However, if you convince people that they deserve freedom, they will start rejecting nonfree software whether it is technically inferior or technically superior, because they will see that free software is ethically superior. They will understand the important question and judge it right. This is a full, deep success.


So basically, he says that you should use FOSS instead of proprietary software, even if you'd be more efficient and productive with the proprietary solution. You know, because things like productivity and efficiency are 'superficial issues' as far as he's concerned.

Linux uses GPLv2. It is very successful and very active. Both corporations and hobbyists contribute to it. Highly productive. End of story.


I didn't say you couldn't be as productive using FOSS; sometimes yes, sometimes no. Depends on the app and the situation.

And what ACTIONS have they taken to achieve that goal?


I don't know; I am not Stallman's keeper. Look, if you want to evangelize one type of software over another and preach to people why you think it is superior, great. But when you start talking about one or the other being evil and wanting to do away with it... well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm going to label you a fanatic.

Stallman is right to care about freedom because productivity and getting work done REQUIRES freedom. For you to make them out as opposite ideals is idiotic at best.


I don't even know what that means. As I said before, Stallman doesn't care about freedom. Actually, let me rephrase that - Stallman cares about freedom so long as it aligns with his FOSS agenda. But if you would like the freedom to either develop or use proprietary software, well.... as he said, proprietary software is evil and should be done away with.

Reply Parent Score: 2