Slashdot Mirror
ZNet interviews Richard Stallman
ProgressiveCynic writes "ZNet has just published an interview with Richard Stallman. Much of the interview will be review for Slashdot folks, intended to introduce ZNet's audience to the free software movement, but many interesting bits remain including a discussion on the outlawing of free software, patents as applied to literature, and this quote: 'I'm a Liberal, in US terms (not Canadian terms). I'm against fascism.'"
For those puzzled, RMS's Liberal comment is in reference to Canada's Liberal party.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
I think it's a fairly obvious trollf +water
The first result is from encyclopediadramatica.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=RMS+has+a+phobia+o
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Go to prisonplanet.com, its podcasts for 15th Dec has a interview with him too.
Now yo'all stop voting for the 2 parties , vote independant, and no neo-cons any more.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
"Fascism is associated with one or more of the following characteristics: a very high degree of nationalism, economic corporatism, and, after attaining political control of a country, a powerful, dictatorial state that views the nation as superior to the individuals or groups composing it."
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
""A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
-- American Heritage Dictionary
Even though there are no clear definition of Fascism there is definititly clear that corporatism - the merging of big business and the state - are part of Fascism.
US today are leaning more and more towards fascism. Not many likes it - but its the sad truth.
Just saying it like it are.
Fascism and corporatism are closely linked. So cut out all that drama queen eye rolling, and quit supporting Bush. He's a fascist.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
This definition has some holes in it, but "liberal" in the US means left-leaning (more centralized government, welfare state, etc), whereas liberal in Canada and Europe and most other places means the same thing as "conservative" means in the US (or used to mean anyway), including smaller government, lower taxes, less government control, pro-business, etc. It is even confusing in the US, with the "Libertarian" party conforming to strict conservative ideas -- conservative in the classical-US sense, not the current big government, pro-war definition. I should also note that the "left" in the US is much more like the "center" or even "right" in many other countries.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
He draws a $32000/year salary from the FSF. Traveling expenses are typically paid for by the conferenses he speaks at.
RMS on Chomsky:. html
"I don't have as complete and overall philosophy as he does. I agree with some of the things he says. I've seen things that he said that I didn't agree with. But certainly what he says about the engineering of consent seems valid. Recently Chomsky gave a speech about what it means to oppose terrorism which I was very impressed by, because he essentially said that we should put an end to terrorism, and that includes the terrorism against the US but also the terrorism committed by the US... and I agree." --Richard Stallman, November 2001
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky
http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/rms-zer0111/index.en
Free Software and Marx have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Marx was a social critic who (correctly) surmised that the workers of his day were unfairly exploited, but then used voodoo economics and bad Hegelism to go off on a wild apocalyptic-cult trajectory.
By contrast, Free Software is not a cult, and it is not a "scientific" view of history. It is simply a proposition that one of the inalienable rights of Homo sapiens -- along with the right to free speech, free press, and democratic elections -- is the right to freely use one's computer. (Granted, computer use is not in the usual list, but if Locke, Rousseau, and Jefferson had computers, I am sure they would have put Free Software in the rights of man.)
Marxism belongs to the general category of apocalyptic cults (like belief in rapture and the singularity).
Free Software belongs to the general category of campaigns for a specific rights (like womens' suffrage and the civil rights movement).
My definition is more the original meaning. What you are talking about are neo-corporatism which is alive and kicking in Netherlands and my own country Sweden.
""neo-corporatism" refers to social arrangements dominated by tri-partite bargaining between unions, the private sector (capital), and government. Such bargaining is oriented toward (a) dividing the productivity gains created in the economy "fairly" among the social partners and (b) gaining wage restraint in recessionary or inflationary periods."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
For example Sweden has no minimun wage. Instead the unions and the corporations have agreements as what they see as reasonable wages for labor. As soon as one employee are part
of the unions in a corporation they have to abide by those agreements for all employees. The different egreement in the different business sectors thus controls the minimum wage within that sector.
What I am talking about is corporatism when the goverment are so dependent on certain business that they give them large input in how the legislation is done - basically witout letting the opposing side have any input in the matter.
Just saying it like it are.
Absolutely false. What you've described is, in fact, the definition of Fascism.
Although the term "Fascism" is commonly met with revulsion, the ideals of Fascism are alive and well. In fact, there are people who openly support Fascism, whether they accept the title of Fascist or not.
Vice President Henry A. Wallace warned quite often of the dangers of Fascism in America.
He also defined it in the classical, Mussolini sense:
After reading the article I am really worried about software patents and treacherous computing. Please help ZNet migrate to free software by registering and showing your support at the following link. http://znet.2y.net/zbb/index.php
Creativity uninhibited www.kreeti.com
As in who pays for RMS' living and traveling expenses? Donations to the FSF? Someone with insight please comment. I think in many ways RMS is brilliant, but how has he paid his bills promoting FOSS for the last 20+ odd years?
In 1990, he was awarded a $240,000 fellowship by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
In 2001, he won an $268k Takeda Award for Techno-Entrepreneurial Achievement for Social/Economic Well-Being.
He ain't exactly hurting for cash. That's just the awards he has won. He makes most of his cash from speeches and personal appearances.
Which is cool, you know, if you're a superstar and can make money that way. But most programmers aren't, and can't.
Coming soon - pyrogyra
This definition has some holes in it, but "liberal" in the US means left-leaning (more centralized government, welfare state, etc), whereas liberal in Canada and Europe and most other places means the same thing as "conservative" means in the US (or used to mean anyway), including smaller government, lower taxes, less government control, pro-business, etc.
That isn't true of Canada. There are several kinds of Liberals in Canada. Big-L Liberals are members of the Liberal party, as Big-R Republicans are members of the American Republican party. This party has a progressive ideology but tends to govern in a centrist manner, similar to Britain's Labour or America's Democrats ("an end to welfare as we know it", "don't ask, don't tell", etc.). Small-L liberal could mean one of several things in Canada, just as it does in the US:
I do not believe that the classic liberal sense of the term is particularly prevalent in Europe and I know it is not in Canada. In Canada, Liberal means "a political party willing to adopt any ideology that will allow it to stay in power."
Your definition of "European liberal" does not describe those parties and groups in Europe who identify themselves as "liberal". Quite the opposite.
:-)
The main difference is that in the US, "liberal" appears to be a perjorative term
From the wiki article (I know its not gospel, but its reasonable..):
Since the mid-1990s, Stallman has spent most of his time as a political campaigner, advocating free software and campaigning against software idea patents and expansions of copyright law. The time that he still devotes to programming is spent on GNU Emacs. He supports himself by being paid for around half of the speeches he gives.
liqbase
I'm not sure how serious you are trying to be here, but the reason for starting with 0 (zero) in our arrays has nothing to do with the number of combinations of single digits. When we supply an array element designator what we are really doing is supplying the offset from the starting point of the array; hence the first item in the array is at offset zero, the second item is at offset one, etc. It has nothing to do with the "count" of items in the array, except that the last element will always be designated as one less than the size of the array.
Disclaimer: Some of these concepts may not be true in the programming language you use. If that is the case then it is because the authors of the language have hidden that detail from you.
Evolutionary thinking will move you down the road, revolutionary thinking will put you on a new road!
I believe he also won a MacArthur foundation "genius" grant. That probably defrayed some of his expenses for a while.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
I don't think zmag would like his positions on certain issues. Beneath the veneer of talking about the tyrant Bush, he supports free enterprise and freedom of exchange. You can even see that in his interview: Instead of asking for a government program to develop software, he went and did it himself. You can see that he appreciates the freedom he had to do this, even at great personal cost. I do not think he would be happy under a Communist tyranny.
:-(.
But in terms of his idealism, I'm afraid you're right. And that's why I mentioned in my original message that his idealism was a little scary. It seemed to defy condiions on the ground. I can respect his idealism while still saying that alas, it's not workable for most people.
I stand by my statement that it's really crummy this is the case. They were building a little utopia up there at the AI lab, where users from outside could get in via the ArpaNet and play around with the same computers the big guys did. It worked amazingly well while it lasted, but subsequent events make it all too clear it was not scalable past a community where everyone knew each other
It didn't hurt that ITS (the Incompatible Timesharing System, which was used at the AI Lab at the time) was very hard to learn. People keen to learn it tended to be relatively benign, which is why they were able to maintain open public access for a time. As an example, you would log in by using u - dhdu would log me in, and you could log out with u. Control-O deleted files, Control-R printed them, and so on.
If you knew the secret, you could type lock and at the _ prompt, 5down to take the whole system down in five minutes. No way that could survive in the modern era.
D
Don't worry; it wasn't invented by them, yet another set of brown people that Americans generally confuse with Arabs (and consequently irrationally hate).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting