Slashdot Mirror

Show me where RMS told anybody to quit rather than write non-free code.

Here you go.

Just for the edification of the other readers here, which parts specifically do you feel you don't have to follow?

For the record, I know exactly which ones I would choose, but I'm interested to know what exactly you think makes Stallmann a 'crazy outlier'. Because, in my estimation, it would take a lot for someone to qualify for that kind of labeling.

On a number of occasions RMS has been asked how professional software developers can make enough money to earn a normal middle class income using only Free software licensing, and his response has been that earning money should not be a priority, to the extent that if a developer cannot earn enough money to support a family, that's ok. Software developers shouldn't have children. (example link)

If he had said that most software developers shouldn't expect to have as much money as Gates/Ballmer/Zuckerberg/Jobs/Ellison type people, I'd have been ok with that, but to take it to the extreme that you should deny developers the ability to have children, one of the most basic and fundamental life experiences, that was what tipped the balance into 'crazy outlier' in my opinion.

In the upper-left corner of the first third of the video Brian Lunduke is in the background.
He is a professional computer game maker (you can buy his Linux software from places like Steam), and has been giving speeches at LinuxFest for years. They range from entertaining to hilarious, as he is known to make a compelling speech proving one side of a controversial statement (like how Linux sucks more than anything else at all-- yes, he gives that speech at Linuxfest), and then he spends the next allotment of time successfully proving the opposite side (and successfully use the same evidence to support both sides). He's also gone a crony from SuSE (whom he is seen talking to in this video) and a crony from Red Hat/Fedora who have been known (especially in his 2013 speech) to serve to add to the entertainment value.
Brian Lunduke's announcement of LinuxFest Northwest plans
Why Linux Sucks (As Usual), 2013, Why Linux Does Not Suck (Not even a little), 2013 (unfortunately, the videos' view of the slides is sub-par)
Why Linux Sucks and Why Linux Does Not Suck (2012)
If anyone sees him at a fest, be sure to buy him a cookie. I, some random stranger posting as Anonymous Coward, can personally attest that he likes that.

In the upper-left corner of the first third of the video Brian Lunduke is in the background.
He is a professional computer game maker (you can buy his Linux software from places like Steam), and has been giving speeches at LinuxFest for years. They range from entertaining to hilarious, as he is known to make a compelling speech proving one side of a controversial statement (like how Linux sucks more than anything else at all-- yes, he gives that speech at Linuxfest), and then he spends the next allotment of time successfully proving the opposite side (and successfully use the same evidence to support both sides). He's also gone a crony from SuSE (whom he is seen talking to in this video) and a crony from Red Hat/Fedora who have been known (especially in his 2013 speech) to serve to add to the entertainment value.
Brian Lunduke's announcement of LinuxFest Northwest plans
Why Linux Sucks (As Usual), 2013, Why Linux Does Not Suck (Not even a little), 2013 (unfortunately, the videos' view of the slides is sub-par)
Why Linux Sucks and Why Linux Does Not Suck (2012)
If anyone sees him at a fest, be sure to buy him a cookie. I, some random stranger posting as Anonymous Coward, can personally attest that he likes that.

In the upper-left corner of the first third of the video Brian Lunduke is in the background.
He is a professional computer game maker (you can buy his Linux software from places like Steam), and has been giving speeches at LinuxFest for years. They range from entertaining to hilarious, as he is known to make a compelling speech proving one side of a controversial statement (like how Linux sucks more than anything else at all-- yes, he gives that speech at Linuxfest), and then he spends the next allotment of time successfully proving the opposite side (and successfully use the same evidence to support both sides). He's also gone a crony from SuSE (whom he is seen talking to in this video) and a crony from Red Hat/Fedora who have been known (especially in his 2013 speech) to serve to add to the entertainment value.
Brian Lunduke's announcement of LinuxFest Northwest plans
Why Linux Sucks (As Usual), 2013, Why Linux Does Not Suck (Not even a little), 2013 (unfortunately, the videos' view of the slides is sub-par)
Why Linux Sucks and Why Linux Does Not Suck (2012)
If anyone sees him at a fest, be sure to buy him a cookie. I, some random stranger posting as Anonymous Coward, can personally attest that he likes that.

Linux Tycoon

I know it's bad form to follow up on my own post, but I forgot to mention the Linux Action Show. If you really want to understand rms and his stance on GPL, you really must watch this: http://lunduke.com/2012/03/11/... which links to the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Essentially, rms believes that anybody who makes money from "non-free" software is "evil". That is, writing software is fundamentally incompatible with earning a living. Listen from 57:45 if you don't believe me! He gets even more radical at 59:00. "If it's not free software, I don't think you're making a positive contribution to society."

And remember the whole while, he's advocating a "less free" license in GPL. He wants to restrict the freedom of other developers because anything they do that might not be free software isn't a valuable contribution to society.

So, a plea to all the GPL advocates. Is that really your stance? Is that really what you believe? Seriously consider the implications of holding a worldview where you believe that anyone whose talent is writing code shouldn't be able to make money from that but instead have to find some other job and "maybe" fit in writing free software into their life as a hobby. Is that seriously beneficial to the field of computer science? Well, hope you enjoy your job in McDonalds!

Doesn't seem like kid to me.

Now, at last you can contribute to something we've all wanted - a new FreeDOS distro. You can support his 20-line BBS via Telnet. Read his web comic. Play his text adventure game. And there's an "app creator" program.

Not sure whether this is cute or pathetic.

Now, at last you can contribute to something we've all wanted - a new FreeDOS distro. You can support his 20-line BBS via Telnet. Read his web comic. Play his text adventure game. And there's an "app creator" program.

Not sure whether this is cute or pathetic.

1. Last May, this guy announced he would GPL his stuff once he gets $4,000 in monthly donations.
2. Eight days later, he received a total of $4,000 in one-time donations and released his code under the GPL.
3. About a month later, he discovered that one-time donations and recurring donations are not the same thing.
4. Apparently until today, he is whining around how bad this all is and that open source is evil.

1. Last May, this guy announced he would GPL his stuff once he gets $4,000 in monthly donations.
2. Eight days later, he received a total of $4,000 in one-time donations and released his code under the GPL.
3. About a month later, he discovered that one-time donations and recurring donations are not the same thing.
4. Apparently until today, he is whining around how bad this all is and that open source is evil.

1. Last May, this guy announced he would GPL his stuff once he gets $4,000 in monthly donations.
2. Eight days later, he received a total of $4,000 in one-time donations and released his code under the GPL.
3. About a month later, he discovered that one-time donations and recurring donations are not the same thing.
4. Apparently until today, he is whining around how bad this all is and that open source is evil.

It's one thing to have some Larry Wall style eccentricities, but Stallman hurts any movement he attaches his name to because of his extremist views. He believes, for example, that programmers should not expect to be paid for their work and that it's more important that non-free software disappear than it is for someone's children to be fed (he also believes nobody should have children). He's also made vile statements about what he calls "voluntary pedophilia", claiming that it should be legalized.

The annoying part is that in nearly every Stallman discussion, people will say things like, "You may not agree with everything he says, but we sure need someone like him who always sticks to their guns!" No, we don't. He's hurting the movement.

GNU was an interesting philosophy when it was started, but it's not as if it was the only open source ideology or that other open source movements wouldn't have taken hold. This isn't to diminish GNU so much as it is to diminish Stallman's glorified role in history among computer geeks and lessen the movement's reliance on a crazy person.

Your source is clearly biased, and fills his missive with ad hominens, which nearly instantly destroys any credibility for me

He never says that he doesn't think developers should get paid. Maybe you inferred that believing developers only get paid if they work on proprietary software.

I doubt, due to my first statement, that Stallman's views were accurately portrayed about any subject in that article, especially voluntary pedophilia and utilitarian ethics.

How do you know that a few children starving would be less important for the world then open software. Hypothetically, if open software leads to 10% more productivity, a few children starving would be offset by all the other benefits of that increased productivity (if it were evenly distributed) and then less children would starve. Thats just one argument, and you're wading into an insoluable problem and counting on the audience's ingrained sense of values to conclude that Stallman is a nut.

Same sort of line of thinking applies about whether children are always harmed by relations with an adult. Unfortunately, even me saying this will engender some knee jerk reaction calling me not human because I was able to compartmentalize my disgust long enough to consider the problem without letting repulsion bias me into thinking this automatically makes someone a nut...IF he even said it. Direct quote please.

You have such an inflammatory style, similar to the post you linked, I wonder why your post was modded up.

All that said, I'm not saying RMS is not a nut, but I am saying I don't think you advanced the argument in a legitimate way anywhere.

Z

It's one thing to have some Larry Wall style eccentricities, but Stallman hurts any movement he attaches his name to because of his extremist views. He believes, for example, that programmers should not expect to be paid for their work and that it's more important that non-free software disappear than it is for someone's children to be fed (he also believes nobody should have children). He's also made vile statements about what he calls "voluntary pedophilia", claiming that it should be legalized.

The annoying part is that in nearly every Stallman discussion, people will say things like, "You may not agree with everything he says, but we sure need someone like him who always sticks to their guns!" No, we don't. He's hurting the movement.

GNU was an interesting philosophy when it was started, but it's not as if it was the only open source ideology or that other open source movements wouldn't have taken hold. This isn't to diminish GNU so much as it is to diminish Stallman's glorified role in history among computer geeks and lessen the movement's reliance on a crazy person.

As far as I can tell, you can give this guy as much or as little as you like, and get the binaries. On his ask page, he allows one to donate at certain monthly thresholds, and provides a link to PayPal for one-time contributions. At any amount, you are entitled to the perks or rewards offered on that page. You make a DONATION, and you get a perk. His usage of the word is entirely consistent with the way that the rest of the English speaking world uses the word. You can argue until you are blue in the face that this does not meet the dictionary definition of "donatation," but it is entirely consistent with the way that NPR, public museums, and many other institutions use the word.

I would also note that this is entirely irrelevant to your example of buying a soda at 7-11. Donations are gifts given to charities. One could argue that lunduke.com is not a charitable organization (in which case I would agree that this is not a donation, but that isn't the argument that you have been making), but you would have to stretch the notion to its breaking point to include 7-11 as a charity.

and nowhere near as egotistical to name the language after itself either

Yeah, this whole article stinks of Microsoft FUD.

• This is as real as "Get the Facts". How'd it ever get to the front page?

Really? This is a Linux guru giving a talk at Linux Fest to a room full of proficient Linux users. Note the first 5 minutes trying to get a previously working multiple display going again.

Well for me RMS went into the "too fucking creepy" zone with this particular gem. For those who don't want to RTFL, I will quote RMS "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. "

Ooooooookay. Having RMS as the spokesman for GPL is getting to be like finding the guy in the wife beater shirt to put on the 11 o' clock news when a tornado rips through a town. I mean after the whole "anti-TiVo" GPL V3 is it any wonder that companies don't want to use GPL? And if you want to see some more of his 'far out wacky hi jinks" just read them yourself.

Of course I'll probably be modded to hell for daring to point out Saint RMS is a seriously weird and creepy guy, but let's be honest here. Image matters. In this day and age image matters a LOT. And while the things he did in the 1980s were great and all, maybe it is time to pick a better spokesman than seriously creepy RMS.

Thanks it has been awhile since I actually had to look up an argument. Notice how quick the RMS zealots downmodded me, that is funny as shit. I've got karma all day baby!

Lets be honest here folks, image matters! Does anybody actually believe that Steve Jobs is sitting there in some workshop cooking up the next iGadget? NO! But the man has presence and style, and he brings a level of cool to the company. Same as Bill had that "evil supernerd" thing going on. So who do we see all over the place representing Linux? RMS. linus has always been more low key and probably doesn't get 1/5th the press of RMS. So yeah, the fact that he thinks eating toe junk on fricking stage is cool matters. The fact that he won't give interviews unless you speak "RMS language" matters. Hell the guy even calls himself a squatter on the MIT campus. And finally you want relevant? How about this: Linux, whose big selling point is how well it works with the web, is taking pointers from a guy who doesn't actually browse the web.

Look, just because a guy once upon a time did something great does not make him a savior or expert now. Hell even Linus won't put the kernel under GPL V3 because he believes that RMS has pushed it too far. Bill and Steve couldn't ask for a better spokesman for Linux if they tried. The man just gets farther and farther from mainstream every single damned day. So the Linux guys need to ask themselves a question: Do you want a shot at the title? or do you wanna stay a niche? Because RMS is a guy that wouldn't even allow the wireless on his OLPC because it didn't have a driver that matched his "four freedoms".

And finally any guy who would allow himself to be quoted saying this does NOT need to be looked upon as a major spokesman for Linux "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children.". Ooooookay. Seriously, how much fucking creepier does the man have to get before the community stops listening to this dude? Notice I don't hide behind Anon coward. I don't because I think Linus is a MUCH better spokesman and once everyone stops treating RMS as all that and a bag of chips the better. RMS does nothing now but hurt the cause, especially with crap pouring out of his mouth like the above.

He probably means Linux Desktop not just Linux kernal.

Sad thing is it took a corporation to make Linux successfull by the likes of Tivo, TomTom, etc.; the open source community didn't develope any of this to a certain extent besides simple foundation.

I think to be fair; Windows does have a lot more professional software and some exclusive stuff used in the medical/accounting/legal business. I mean thats great

This article is about LINUX DESKTOP; so will all the Linux kernal trolls quit popping their heads up unless they have something to contribute to LINUX DESKTOP.
Linux Desktop is a hobby, Linux kernal/server is very professionally polished and refined piece of software for the backend.

Don't take it so personally when someone criticizes Linux; some people really mean to help out while saying "Linux Sucks"
http://lunduke.com/?p=429

'Linux Desktop' article, not a Linux Server/Kernal article.

...if the OSS community was as honest (and constructive) as this guy it might have a chance on the general-purpose desktop against Windows.

Karma be damned; I thought that despite the provocative headline, it was a really refreshing criticism of Linux on the desktop.

Some people seem to find the BoycottNovell website interesting, Bryan Lunduke for one and the Linux Haters blog, which is recommended by none other than Miguel de Icaza

"I was getting a little worried that I wouldn't have something appropriate to close of K-pride week with, but then sweet feces rained down from heaven"

And this is why Linux on the desktop sucks. I know, I have been trolled.

Back on topic, it would make more sense for these guys to put their time and money into fixing some of the problems us desktop Linux users have to face on a daily basis, than create yet another tech news aggregator site.

http://lunduke.com/?p=429