Slashdot Mirror
RMS & FSF Directors To Meet With FSF Members
Free Software Foundation writes "Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen, Bradley Kuhn, and the rest of the FSF leadership are hosting a rare FSF members meeting in Cambridge, MA on March 27, where they will tackle topics including, 'The Dangers of Software Patents', SCO, 'Free Software in a Global Economy', and 'The State of the Foundation'. FSF members will have ample opportunity to gripe, praise, dialog, network, and eat."
FSF members will have ample opportunity to gripe, praise, dialog, network, and eat.'
funny, there's no mention of showering....
;)
i hope the xfree team goes there and talks the license issue with them
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
I think the song "Cavern" could be thoroughly rewritten to be about the FSF. Don't know if it should be, but it could be.
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
Get out and support your GNU Organisation if you're anywhere around! Networking in reality still means a lot more than its virtual counterpart.
((lambda x ((x))) (lambda x ((x))))
Enjoy yourselves, you deserve it.
BTW, my company is now an official corporate sponsor of the FSF, which means, I guess, that we're partly paying for the dinner. It's well worth while.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Hopefully, there's a barber nearby.
This guy is way out there
FSF members will have ample opportunity to ... eat.
Free food? Shit, where do I sign up?
Free Software in a Global Economy
This is a funny topic. A bit like "cycling download L.A." sort of funny topic...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Why support FSF when there are other licenses than GPL that are actually more free?
The owls are not what they seem
... that title has enough acronyms. Perhaps it should be "RMS & FSF Directors TMW FSF Members".
Darl McBride won't be there, so don't bother bringing your guns.
Anyone know if these things are good places to pick up chicks? "Hey babe. You say you support open source? Mind if I take a peek at your code?"
I think the most important matter would be discussing what the GPL is actually compatable with. There have been so many accusations lately of incompatablity (some of which conflict with that the GPL actually states) it's getting a bit out of hand.
A giant echo chamber for issues that everyone who's attendants are the most vocal members of the cause. Sounds fun! Where do I sign up?
anyone know the status of the FSF finances? it would be interesting to know.
the last i heard they had $750,000 in the account which is not too bad for a company that relies on external funding.
Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
don't these things happen yearly? (according to the website, they do)
-ninjaneer
1) Offer free dinner for FSF members
2) ???
3) Profits
RMS will go down in history as the visionary that made free software and open systems the prevailing technological force for the rest of the century. This is assuming that corperate influences can be subdued long enough to continue the huge momentum we've acheived over the past decade or two.
I'm inclined to predict at 10:1 odds against that RMS will go down as the most influential person of the next century, kind of in the same way as gutenberg is known now. He wasn't known at all really when he was alive, but the study of history set him in his proper place.
FSF & RMS about SCO and GPL ... LOL WTF
MoFscker
If you don't like giant echo chambers that promote groupthink, self-congratulation, and narcissitic behavior from memebers of a like community, why are you on slashdot???
We know the following:
1.) The meeting will not be for real
2.) If it was for real, it will have 90 percent lawyers
3.) All members attending will be automatically sued by SCO after the meeting
I know I saw this and was reminded to join... and perhaps I will now... nothing like argueing with RMS as an incentive to join :)
As a card carrying member of the FSF, I wish I could have learned of this a couple of months in advance. There, I got my griping in ahead of the meeting.
Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein
I'm beginning to wonder if SCO's second biggest negative impact (after the FUD it spreads) is all the time it is taking away from folks that would otherwise be having fun making open source software better.
I can't even begin to imagine how many man-hours have been blown obsessing about, discussing, worrying, or protesting SCO's latest actions. It really is appalling.
Furthermore, it doesn't seem like there's much point in "fighting" SCO any more. There isn't anyone in the tech community that takes them seriously. They are going to run out of money unless they get more cash influxes. It seems really unlikely that they will ever win even a minor lawsuit, much less something that will impact Linux. To the best of my knowledge, they aren't doing much to prevent Linux adoption -- there were a lot of journalists talking about how SCO might have a chance a couple of months ago, but it seems like everyone is pretty negative now (though I haven't read pure business publications for a while, so I might just be out-of-touch here).
Is there really any point to dealing with SCO any longer? It just wastes our time, and frankly, if I'm going to waste an hour of my life, I'd rather do it playing a video game or modeling something or writing software or cooking something than agonizing over SCO.
Unlike most Slashdot topics, SCO usually doesn't bring anything new or interesting to the table. A SCO article doesn't let me know about new LED displays that haven't existed before or a new VM about to be released or anything, really. Most comments in SCO articles are just jokes about SCO or McBride -- real analysis mostly happens at groklaw.
I just think -- every time Alan Cox posts about SCO or an indignant open source author spends a day disproving an new fabricated SCO claim so that they can come out with an analysis on groklaw, that's a driver patch that doesn't get applied, or a bit less threading work that can be done.
Frankly, even if the whole tech world started talking negatively about Windows, the kernel coders at Microsoft are unlikely to notice or care -- to them, that's just some crap for the PR people to deal with. They wouldn't let it affect them. SCO is wasting a good deal of time, time which actually does have value. Aside from passively providing the opinion that SCO is full of it when they come up in conversation, there doesn't seem to be much useful stuff that can be done any more.
Now, if you're really into IP law, of course, the case is interesting. But I just have a really hard time getting upset over whatever latest outrage SCO has come up with to stay in the press. I mean, who *cares* anymore? Noting we're going to say is going to stop them from making claims and getting quoted. Everyone in the tech world already thinks SCO is absolutely ludicrous, and IBM and Red Hat and Novell and God knows who else are already busily dealing with the situation. I'm sure the moment SCO crosses a legal line somewhere (and sooner or later, they have to), there will be a countersuit, maybe with a preliminary injunction against SCO stopping them from making new claims. My time is too valuable to me, and Darl McBride too worthless of a human being, to spend it on him.
The strength of the Open Source world is that one person contributes thoughts, code, analysis, whatever, and then that work propagates and is used and built upon by as many other people as are interested. Finding SCO's logical fallacies is work that is useless by the end of next month, as they're onto something new. It doesn't feel *good* when you're done with it. It's terribly inefficient and ineffective, even if it feels cathartic at the moment.
May we never see th
Are you sure gathering so much leadership is wise? You know, when you have armed enemies?
You should do like they do at the State of the Union address, and leave one* of the members at an undisclosed location, in case the FSF is bombed or something.
*: The rest of the FSF might hope to leave RMS out of there because of BO considerations, but, alas, he is too important not to attend. It would be like Dick Cheney staying away from State of the Union.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
The after dinner stripper ;)
Are you just taking the opportunity provided by mention of RMS to spout your fanboy rhetoric?
They should have scheduled the talk for a Thursday, because Thursday is belly dancer night at the Middle East in Cambridge. What a show!
Do you see the sig? Do you have it in your sights? Why yes, Miss Moneypenny...
I think the goal of many of the attendees will be to get bombed.
...The kernel coders at Microsoft are unlikely to notice or care...
Nope. I've heard that not much phases the kernel coders at MS... unless somebody forgets to bring them their bananas for lunch, or accidentally leaves a mirror within reach...
That's just what the LGPL (Log GPL) was created for.
I read the other day in my fortune something who said a CEO of a major japanese corporation around the eighties, he said the one who had control of software would control also the world.
The late nineties and the begining of this century have been controled by Microsoft, but now free software is starting to gain momentum. Big corporations supporting it, administrations changing to free models, like we have seen in Spain, Germany or Israel. If the FSF and RMS (the soul of the movement, IMHO) are gathering, I expect they do not only talk about present licenses situation, and the SCO incident, RMS has been advising Lula in Brazil and also was in India, the free software foundation and the free software in general is becoming something more political, and it all started in a very utopian idea.
I hope they think about strategy at medium or even large term, it's an advantadge over propietary software and increasing '%' each month and they (we) should benefit from that.
DON'T PANIC
The Dangers of Software Patents is an old one.
You can listen to it here if you're interested. I highly recommend all of stallman's stuff. They are at least as interesting as reading slashdot.
You'd think that /. would be the last place you'd find stereotyping of geeks. I have spoken with RMS face-to-face and he didn't smell.
This meeting of the GNU/FSF with GNU/RMS should be very interesting!!!!
So, anyone care to take odds on whether RMS can find anything to talk about other than yelling at everyone to say GNU/Linux?
Slipped the bloody "L" in the Wine license.
n/t
He he he... A good joke always is welcome! Thank you :)
It seems that both the GPL and BSD licenses have their place in the world.
I tend more to agree with the GPL because it does give what I believe to be necessary restrictions. Anything, including freedom, taken to its extreme is incredibly dangerous.
Imagine that there are no restrictions to which side of the road you can drive on, what you can do with someone elses property (can't steal or "borrow without permission"), etc. True freedom requires limits or it becomes dangerous; restrictions taken to the extreme are equally dangerous.
You can imagine where the participants will go.
sulli
RTFJ.
Look, while I'm personally in favor of the GPL, and think on the long run their is something wrong with the concept of BSD-style licenses if one wants to create an as broad possible environment of freedom, one can not deny that, on itself, it is more free than the GPL. There can be nothing more free, then something without restrictions. any restriction, even the limitation that it it should remain free, is a restriction. It restricts the freedom of not beingt allowed to decide whether or not one wants to make/keep it free. As long as one does not speak about own derivations, BSD is therefor more free then GPL, and only becomes less so, when it's made properietary (but then it's not longer BSD). Now, it is important to notice that others may use it with equal right to have made/keep it free, and that's why your analogy doesn't fly. The BSD-licence would make it able for the government to take free speech away, but nevertheless be unable to restrict the same free speech by any citizen that wanted to use it him/herself. That would be a more proper analogy. So, you see, there is no real power (as in: less freedom) in being able to restrict, when everyone has an equal right to use it unrestricted.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
I have spoken with RMS face-to-face and he didn't smell.
:-P
It's not my fault his nose ain't working
OK, sorry. We're just using RMS as the geek. You know, since he's extremely GNU, he's presumably got extremely more beard, more hair, more BO, more anime and Star Trek obsession, etc.
So, you met RMS. You're luckier than me.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
... are they going to be booking tickets for the comedy performance of RMS singing "Hackers you'll be free"?!
Am I the only one who thinks, instead of getting together to discuss "legal issues" and "licenses," maybe people should be getting together to, I don't know, discuss furthering the Linux desktop movement through some sort of unification effort?
This SCO thing will blow over. The real world expects results, not some licensing meeting between old UNIX hackers. I'd rather they be drawing up designs for an innovative desktop.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
No, this is why the GPL is MORE free than BSD style licenses- because the changes made to them will remain free as well. Freedom that can be taken away at someone else's whim is not free.
But you're taking away someone's freedom by dictating how they use your software. How is something MORE free by forcing someone to not freely do what they want? Your definition of freedom is to, in essence, "force freedom" on someone else. You're using freedom as a loaded word meaning to restrict the use of the software in a way that you're only allowed to use it unless you restrict other people's use of it, and so forth.
Its like claiming we'd be more free if the government could take away our right to free speech or public assembly at will.
What a hair-brained analogy. You're talking about a government RESTRICTING what someone does--just like the GPL--when the BSD license lets you do whatever you want. The better analogy of yours would be the government forcing everybody to reveal something about their product, while a free government would let the people choose whether or not to reveal that something about their product.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I wonder if they will discuss the dangers of free software being used in propietary and closed source applications like Mac is doing with OS X. If there is one thing we should have learned from the SCO debacle it is that the guy who acts like your friend today can have you in court tommorow.
I love how the "Free Software Foundation" Charges money for membership, even for poor College Students. So you can believe in free software, but not be a member unless you pay?
Does that bother anyone else?
Grass-roots web hosting.We are poor colleg
You'd think that /. would be the last place you'd find stereotyping of geeks.
Oh, come on. Slashdot is literally packed with noisy do-nothings these days with opinions to match.
---
The rest of the FSF might hope to leave RMS out of there because of BO considerations, but, alas, he is too important not to attend. It would be like Dick Cheney staying away from State of the Union.
Wouldn't it be more like Dubya staying away from the State of the Union?
In any case, the BO jokes are getting old. For you to be complaining about it suggests a certain proximity. In other words: maybe you should take your nose out of his ass.
I'm no fan of RMS, but that's because I personally saw him rip a young kid a new one during a Linux Expo in San Jose, CA. There was no excuse for him to do that and PR-wise was plain stoopid. I guess that's what he's known for and he probably got sick of the same silly comment made again. Still not the most diplomatic person you'd want to meet.
In any case, you got to respect the man for what he's done.
See: Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism
Please help publicise swpat.org - the software patents wiki
The FSF isn't about a unified desktop for Linux or any such nonsense. It's about (drum roll) free software. Free as in freedom. So what again does a unified desktop have to do with the FSF meeting again? Oh yeah, it doesn't. You were trolling.
At the end of the day, you just have to face the fact that foo bar baz.
The point'll likely be moot, but what does the Free Software Foundation (aka RMS) think of IBM's countersuit of SCO for software patent infringements?
Ed Craig "Who cares what you think?" George W. Bush, 4th of July 2001
Disclaimer: I have never met the man. All I know is that Doug threw out the couch he slept on.
I've worked with some water-proof types in the past, and even if you get them to bathe their clothes will carry a miasma through repeated washings. Not to mention the scent of their household furnishings, that will rub off on new clothes pretty quickly.
No, you have to bathe them, replace all their clothing, and burn down their houses. It's the only way to be sure.
RMS has personally received millions of dollars
in recent years for his advocacy of Free software.
I would like to know how much he has given back
(in money) to the cause of Free software.
Woohoo! LAN party!
AuMatar said:
No, this is why the GPL is MORE free than BSD style licenses- because the changes made to them will remain free as well. Freedom that can be taken away at someone else's whim is not free. Its like claiming we'd be more free if the government could take away our right to free speech or public assembly at will.
So the person who wrote the code is not taking away another person's freedom to use that code by releasing it under the GPL?
What happened to the other person's freedom to use the code as they want?!
Yeah...that's what I thought...
Blar.
Being a member means paying your dues. So it's not really free, you're just paying for it in advance and many times its costs.
I note with interest that the membership meeting is an "Associate
Membership Meeting". Associate member being described as: "Associate
Members are non-voting members of the Free Software Foundation, Inc." In
other words (pardon the expression) "nigger members" that pay dues but
don't get to vote. It's nice of them to condescend to speak with the
un-washed once and a while.
So I decide to look around the site to find out just who are the "real
members" that get to vote and run the FSF. But after poking around on
their web site, I don't see anything about Bylaws, Articles of
Incorporation, etc... For a bunch of people that have big mouths about
"freedom", this would seem to be most un-open and un-democratic. I think
that one of the items the "Associate Members" should speak on is increased
openness and democracy for the FSF.
Freedom can only apply to creatures possessing free will, because freedom is the absence of restrictions on the exercise of free will. Where there is no free will, there can be no freedom. The only software which could possibly experience freedom is a self-aware AI program. Until sentient software exists, talking about code having freedom is a non sequitur.
Freedom, when referring to software, means what PEOPLE can do with that software, period. GPL places restrictions on the use of that code that BSD does not, therefore by definition, it is less free.
More restrictions == less freedom. It's a pretty fucking simple concept.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
would be the sam adams brewery. free as in beer, free as in speech!
Even then it's not as restrictive as you claim, because you can use it in your closed source program all you want--you just can't distribute it. If you don't like that, the fallback is regular US Copyright law which says you can't use it at all without the author's permission.
I guess it all comes down to motive. If your motive is to take and not give back, then yes, the GPL is a bad deal for you. If your motive is to share with the world and enrich the body of open software, then the GPL is a good deal. Trying to cast it in terms of absolutes (a you and your ilk try to do) is complete waste of time.
At the end of the day, you just have to face the fact that foo bar baz.
So completely typical. Somebody makes a comment that doesn't bow before the greatness that is GPL and he's a troll?
How is linux ever going to gain any ground on the desktop if linux advocates are just going to bury their head in the sand and pretend that microsoft = bad/evil, and GPL = perfection. He makes a fucking legit point. I hope this post comes up for me to meta-mod.
The GPL means I OWN MY CODE, and you cannot use it for your own closed-source unless you talk to me and pay me for the right to use it.
It is as far from socalist as you can get and still see the code. The BSD license is "socalist" if you want, though really the people who release that are doing it because they want to, not because the government is telling them to.
But the GPL is applied for strictly selfish and greedy reasons and would may Ayn Rand quite happy.
The real "Socialists" and "Communists" are the people like you who whine "I can't use your code in my closed-source program unless I pay you. Wahh!!!! Unfair!!!! Gimme, gimme, gimme!" Tough luck, jerk. That's called capitalism and selfish greed on my part. Live with it, but don't you dare call me a Communist for wanting to control something I WROTE!
"Joey! Man! He's right there... I dare you. Say it..."
"I dunno, man... It sounded like fun on the way over here, but now... I mean, LOOK at these guys. It's like a cult. We'd probably get skinned alive. I dunno..."
"Joey, you puss... You ain't gonna wuss out on me now, are ya? Come on, he's RIGHT THERE. Ya GOTTA say it."
"I'm tellin ya, man, I dunno. These cats are WEIRD. Something weird is gonna happen. Let's just go."
"You big puss."
"Come on, man, you don't have to be like that."
"You're a wuss. Just admit it: say 'I'm a great big wuss'".
"Dude, it's not cool, ok? There are like a million of 'em, and only two of us. It'd be a slaughter."
"Ok, if you're not gonna do it, I'm gonna. You big puss."
"Dude! DO NOT SAY IT."
"I'm gonna say it."
"DUDE, I'm SERIOUS. Dude, come on, don't do it."
"I'm gonna say it..."
"If you say it, I'm leaving."
"HEY, RICHARD! Sign a copy of this here Linux book? It's for my boss, DARL MCBRIDE, who's RIGHT OVER HERE!"
"YOU FUCKING IDIOT!"
"RUN, JOEY, RUN! GO FOR THE DOORS!"
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
Do they have any plan to announce release date of GNU/Hurd? (this millenium or the next one?!)
"Code cannot be free in the same way that a spoon cannot be free -- both are inanimate objects which posess neither intelligence nor free will." A dangerous assertion. What about code that forms the mind of a true AI? As much as the Matrix currently is SF, I think it is, apart from some real disaster, inevitable that there will be AI's in the future equalling and surpassing human intelligence. In this respect, I think the fear of a struggle between humans and machines (see the Matrix, Terminator, etc.) is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you learn to fear and hate and mistrust (or at least predict war) with the AI's we create, then it will surely augment the chance, indeed, that it comes to such a struggle. Instead, we should accept the fact that they are entities with their own will, AND right to live. If we would regard and love them as our children, which in a sense they would/will be, then the prospect of a total annihilation war becomes very remote. We should not fear AI, we should fear creating an AI without compassion and respect for other life. But then again, we might have created something that is TOO close to our own image, won't we? For one thing; if humans tried to whipe out intelligent beings, even self-created AI's, I would support the AI's right to defend themselves.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
the 'artificial'.
The less there are restrictions, the more free something is. How will that do?
In your examples, then, Haiti has MORE restrictions, be it of a far more brutal, survival-of-the-fittest level. The strong and powerfull create the restrictions there, as where the USA tempers this and tries to set the restrictions more equally.
That said, if it were possible to create a true restriction-free society (which I fear can't be done in rl, at most in certain cyberspace area's) then you WOULD have more freedom.
The fact I like the GPL more is because, in the current world, you HAVE to defend your rights. While the GPL fights for them, the BSD is more like the ultimate pacifist: whatever happens, it's all right. So, in a sense, yes, they are more free, but to a level it endagers that things remain free in the future.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
They are not responsible for Linux development.
Software does not exist in a legal vacuum.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... is your shower every morning.
Exemplary clean, but nobody wants to know.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
"nothing like argueing with RMS as an incentive to join"
Arguing with RMS is like trying to knock down a wall with skunk while denouncing GNU/Communism - in other words it makes no sense and serves no purpose.
Open source is the art of letting other people write your bad code.
H4x0r, I must reply to others that would dispute the original and your post.
... okay what about the streets of India. Gandhi and Churchill, look at MLK in the "60s" and a national holiday today, .... .... ... many others that are much better known are not near the stature in character of the individual many of US just call RMS or Stallman. Many of us contribute (in many ways) to keeping the ship afloat for humanity and business, but I have "NO DOUBT" as to who built this mighty ship for all us and the future. Only the greatest of evils will sink ....
____ Ask people on the streets of Rome about 2 kilo years ago about Caesar or Octavian and most would be able to tell you something about them. Ask them about JFC, Jews, China, etc, and they will look at you funny. Greeks make up a very small percentage of hysterical groups. The only way for the average citizen to hear about any issues today is through big lawsuits like Pontius vs. Jesus.
____ Anyway, reality is almost always deceiving to almost all those present. Mother Theresa of Calcutta when compared to PD of the UK today in Europe/USA
____ I agree with the original post. RMS will be one of the greats in human history, some may try to remove him from history, but their efforts will not be effective in another century/millennium. RMS's ideals/concepts/ethics extend well beyond the parochial perspective of free-software verses profit/capital and the virtual power of the transient (life and money).
____ There are a few historical examples that strongly support the original post, and RMS is modern/technology origin of Open Source, Standards, Communities, free-software, international colleagues projects/collaboration for business and humanity,
____ RMS is today the greatest living American. George, Bill, John, Ronnie,
-
OldHawk777
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?