How Richard Stallman does his computing
-
Because why would you do things the easy way?
Visit my blog at Sander's bits - Writing the code you need. Or read my articles at my CodeProject profile.
Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. — Edsger W. Dijkstra
Regards, Sander
-
It is not new to me that Stallman has a twisted mind...but why tell the others about it? Personally I have no problem that my name connected to online purchases or someone can check what sites I visited in the past week - it hurts in no-way my privacy...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
I stopped because the OLPC project decided to make their machine support Windows, so I did not want to appear to endorse it. The OLPC uses a nonfree firmware blob for the WiFi, so I could not use the internal WiFi device. OK, this guy, I don't care who he is or what he's done, is a certifiable lunatic. I know people like this. They try to get everything for free, thinking they are socially conscious, not realizing that the entire freaking infrastructure, their very ability to even exist on the planet, is the result of the hard work of others. Just because you think you use something "for free" doesn't mean that there hasn't been a cost associated with it. People like this are so freaking naive. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
He has the right to live that way. And also to tell others they should follow suit (no one has to, though). His talking about "free" is not about refusing to pay altogether. It's mostly about anonymity. And money leaves a trail that can be followed. So free services reduce the risk to breaking anonymity. And if there's no free alternative, then it's okay to not take part, or to create your own. And he is one of the others that have done some of the hard work. Just in case I haven't been clear: I like that guy.
Ciao, luker
-
I stopped because the OLPC project decided to make their machine support Windows, so I did not want to appear to endorse it. The OLPC uses a nonfree firmware blob for the WiFi, so I could not use the internal WiFi device. OK, this guy, I don't care who he is or what he's done, is a certifiable lunatic. I know people like this. They try to get everything for free, thinking they are socially conscious, not realizing that the entire freaking infrastructure, their very ability to even exist on the planet, is the result of the hard work of others. Just because you think you use something "for free" doesn't mean that there hasn't been a cost associated with it. People like this are so freaking naive. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
I don't think he is so much concerned with "free" as he is concerned with "freedom". There's a major difference between the two. There's no doubt he's a smart guy, and he is the founder of the GNU project. He has stated before that his issue with proprietary software is not related to its costs but to fact that it can't be modified by the end user, and therefore limits their freedoms with it.
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
-
I don't think he is so much concerned with "free" as he is concerned with "freedom". There's a major difference between the two. There's no doubt he's a smart guy, and he is the founder of the GNU project. He has stated before that his issue with proprietary software is not related to its costs but to fact that it can't be modified by the end user, and therefore limits their freedoms with it.
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
Dominic Burford wrote:
no doubt he's a smart guy
It's true, but with a kind of too-focused smartness that can lead you to the closed ward...
Dominic Burford wrote:
that it can't be modified by the end user
And he totally ignorant to the fact that 99.9% percent of the end users can't even imagine where to start such modification...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
I stopped because the OLPC project decided to make their machine support Windows, so I did not want to appear to endorse it. The OLPC uses a nonfree firmware blob for the WiFi, so I could not use the internal WiFi device. OK, this guy, I don't care who he is or what he's done, is a certifiable lunatic. I know people like this. They try to get everything for free, thinking they are socially conscious, not realizing that the entire freaking infrastructure, their very ability to even exist on the planet, is the result of the hard work of others. Just because you think you use something "for free" doesn't mean that there hasn't been a cost associated with it. People like this are so freaking naive. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
To be fair, a large part of that infrastructure is now built using tools originally created by Stallman. (GCC in particular springs to mind, plus a hell of the lot of the miscellaneous free UNIX tools are created by him or the GNU team).
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough." Alan Kay.
-
It is not new to me that Stallman has a twisted mind...but why tell the others about it? Personally I have no problem that my name connected to online purchases or someone can check what sites I visited in the past week - it hurts in no-way my privacy...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
Personally I have no problem that my name connected to online purchases or someone can check what sites I visited in the past week - it hurts in no-way my privacy
Not only is it an invasion of privacy, it hurts your safety. Imagine what could happen if a homophobic government came to power. Or when a certain class of religious people is deemed "terrorists". Don't say that it can't happen again - it is already happening.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
Personally I have no problem that my name connected to online purchases or someone can check what sites I visited in the past week - it hurts in no-way my privacy
Not only is it an invasion of privacy, it hurts your safety. Imagine what could happen if a homophobic government came to power. Or when a certain class of religious people is deemed "terrorists". Don't say that it can't happen again - it is already happening.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
To be honest not my safety and not my privacy is an issue - since we live in a democracy our life given to other to rule from birth to death...You can accept it and live a happy and long life or fight it and die in bitterness... If a government goes too far in sniffing into my personal life (and I mean my offline life, as since I'm online I have no real personality) I will do what I think the best to do...But it has nothing to do with the sites I'm browsing and items I'm buying...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
To be honest not my safety and not my privacy is an issue - since we live in a democracy our life given to other to rule from birth to death...You can accept it and live a happy and long life or fight it and die in bitterness... If a government goes too far in sniffing into my personal life (and I mean my offline life, as since I'm online I have no real personality) I will do what I think the best to do...But it has nothing to do with the sites I'm browsing and items I'm buying...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
since we live in a democracy
The opinion on that varies, and yes, the kind of government I'm warning about is typically 'elected'.
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
But it has nothing to do with the sites I'm browsing and items I'm buying...
Perhaps not according to you, but it is valuable enough for companies to pay big bucks for it. For a government, that kind of information is even more valuable :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Dominic Burford wrote:
no doubt he's a smart guy
It's true, but with a kind of too-focused smartness that can lead you to the closed ward...
Dominic Burford wrote:
that it can't be modified by the end user
And he totally ignorant to the fact that 99.9% percent of the end users can't even imagine where to start such modification...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
Quote:
And he totally ignorant to the fact that 99.9% percent of the end users can't even imagine where to start such modification
As we all know, customers ALWAYS have additional requirements for their software, after all it's what keeps us both in paid work. It doesn't have to be the customer themselves who is making the modifications, but another developer working on their behalf. You need to fully understand where he is coming from to fully appreciate what he is saying. His main point of contention is that software should be open to extension by anyone. Either directly, or indirectly (such as paying someone else to make modifications on our behalf).
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
-
Quote:
And he totally ignorant to the fact that 99.9% percent of the end users can't even imagine where to start such modification
As we all know, customers ALWAYS have additional requirements for their software, after all it's what keeps us both in paid work. It doesn't have to be the customer themselves who is making the modifications, but another developer working on their behalf. You need to fully understand where he is coming from to fully appreciate what he is saying. His main point of contention is that software should be open to extension by anyone. Either directly, or indirectly (such as paying someone else to make modifications on our behalf).
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
As for pure software it is a reality - you only have to choose and there is a software option for free... When software directly bounded to hardware (like device drivers) it is not about software, but about public, and full, hardware specifications... As not Stallman I do see why hardware companies not want to release all that knowledge - after all it is about money...So I do not agree with Stallman, that if there is no free software you certainly have some evil behind it!
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
