Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RMS Says "Software As a Service" Is Non-free

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the ok-thats-a-bit-inflammatory dept.

BillyG noted an RMS interview where he says "'Software as a service' means that you think of a particular server as doing your computing for you. If that's what the server does, you must not use it! If you do your computing on someone else's server, you hand over control of your computing to whoever controls the server. It is like running binary-only software, only worse: it's even harder for you to patch the program that's running on someone else's server than it is to patch a binary copy of a program running on your own computer. Just like non-free software, 'software as a service' is incompatible with your freedom."

62 of 715 comments (clear)

  1. I must not use it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Try and stop me, Emperor Neckbeard.

    1. Re:I must not use it? by impaledsunset · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe he uses the word "must" as in "you must not try to check if your gas tank with a lighter". You are free to do so, but he wants to tell you that it is a bad idea. And in his opinion, it is a ridiculously bad idea. It is certainly worse than proprietary software, and we all know what he thinks of that.

      I would have to agree with him. Preferring software as a service vs. software running on your machine is a bad idea. It might be convinient in many cases, but you shouldn't trust a third party with your data and your work, especially when you can avoid it. It might not look that bad, but as you already have the tools on your computer, it's not worth it even if the issues don't look like a big deal to you.

      This does not apply in each case you use 'software as a service'. Examples of acceptable use of software running on someone else's server would include using Slashdot for news discussion, using web hosting services and using GNU Savannah for your software project. His point is not to use Google Docs to edit your private documents, and not to use Gmail to send your private mails, or to be more specific - not to let them become a replacement for your office suite and mail client/server.

      Of course, avoiding any software services is nuts, it is not needed, and it is not even possible. And running a program on your friend's server doesn't hurt, either. You should, however, be well aware of the risks. Unfortunately, in many cases you have to trust your data to a third party. Read stories about leaked private information here lately? Then I say you shouldn't let your word processing and spreadsheet needs become a part of those cases. Simply don't do it.

    2. Re:I must not use it? by mea37 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was in disagree-with-RMS mode right up until I read your comment.

      What motive? Money. They've shut services down before for exactly that reason. If a software service isn't profitable to its operator, it could go away. Or, the service's provider might decide it would be more profitable to change the subscription terms.

      With SaaS, what you are getting is bounded by contract, ToS, and not much else. If you assume it's like a program on your computer, and don't understand the limitations -- if you say "what reason would they have to take away what they're giving me right now" -- then you are an audience that creates a need for a warning like RMS's.

      (However, I still think his argument is driven too much by one-sided idealism and too little by pragmatism; and that the assertion toward never using a non-free service only hurts his credibility.)

    3. Re:I must not use it? by Decameron81 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe he uses the word "must" as in "you must not try to check if your gas tank with a lighter". You are free to do so, but he wants to tell you that it is a bad idea. And in his opinion, it is a ridiculously bad idea. It is certainly worse than proprietary software, and we all know what he thinks of that.

      I would have to agree with him. Preferring software as a service vs. software running on your machine is a bad idea. It might be convinient in many cases, but you shouldn't trust a third party with your data and your work, especially when you can avoid it. It might not look that bad, but as you already have the tools on your computer, it's not worth it even if the issues don't look like a big deal to you.

      This does not apply in each case you use 'software as a service'. Examples of acceptable use of software running on someone else's server would include using Slashdot for news discussion, using web hosting services and using GNU Savannah for your software project. His point is not to use Google Docs to edit your private documents, and not to use Gmail to send your private mails, or to be more specific - not to let them become a replacement for your office suite and mail client/server.

      Of course, avoiding any software services is nuts, it is not needed, and it is not even possible. And running a program on your friend's server doesn't hurt, either. You should, however, be well aware of the risks. Unfortunately, in many cases you have to trust your data to a third party. Read stories about leaked private information here lately? Then I say you shouldn't let your word processing and spreadsheet needs become a part of those cases. Simply don't do it.

      I totally disagree. I realize there may be some inconveniences with using online services sometimes, but we should try and face the challenges to solve those issues, instead of simply tagging them as evil.

      If there are privacy issues, we should look for ways to avoid them, by using cryptography or legistlation where necessary.

      It's all about progress. We wouldn't be doing ourselves a favor by just rejecting it. We should embrace it and fix whatever issues show up in the way.

      --
      diegoT
    4. Re:I must not use it? by Unordained · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a small example: just recently I had Yahoo! inform me that their "briefcase" service was going away, and that I should download my stuff before it gets deleted. It was nice of them to inform me, at least. It was handier than (ab)using gmail to store stuff, though. I used to use Yahoo! notes, too -- and again, gmail just isn't quite right for that, nor are (that I can see) any of Google's other services. So it's sad, but I'll live. I don't have a good competitor to run to, but it's not the end of the world.

      More so than just your processing living on someone else's servers, though, you should be worried about your data living there. How many of the services you give data to will let you re-export all of it? Can you easily take all that wisdom you posted to that forum site and save it offline, in case the forum goes belly-up from one day to the next? That was an issue when BrickShelf was teetering on the edge of disappearing -- did we have a good way to get all our stuff back out? What about all those product ratings you posted online? Sure, you were part of the mob, and the value comes from the mob -- but those were your product ratings. Did you keep a copy for your records? If Amazon goes away, do you have a backup of your "likes" and "dislikes" so you can easily shop elsewhere? All that time you spent updating that Wikipedia article -- did you keep a copy of your work in case some court decides you can no longer access the site in your country?

      We don't, but we ought to, demand that services we use and trust also give us a way to leave -- or at least to keep a backup of our data. Wasn't it ma.gnolia.com, recently, that went down and didn't have a useful backup? Do you demand to know what the backup policies are from each service you use? Do you have a way of verifying this? Do you ask about security? Is their server in a rack, protected by a crack team of techies, biometric locks, with security cameras -- or is it sitting under a dingy old couch?

      You're putting value into these social sites -- are you being treated as a value producer?

  2. Dupe? by maccallr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems uncannily like this story from a month ago: Richard Stallman Warns About Non-Free Web Apps

    1. Re:Dupe? by Jurily · · Score: 5, Funny

      Seems uncannily like this story from a month ago: Richard Stallman Warns About Non-Free Web Apps

      Newsflash! RMS has the same opinion he had a month ago!

    2. Re:Dupe? by Sockatume · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, that was about how doing tasks with web apps was bad. This is about how the whole concept of doing computing on a machine which is not under your control is wrong.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    3. Re:Dupe? by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On reflection, it seems that RMS has reached the conclusion that software freedom is beneficial, therefore the absence of software freedom is harmful, and furthermore that any absence of software freedom is unacceptable. I look forward to him publishing future articles from a home-built, hand-fabricated microcomputer, or perhaps some sort of elaborate open-source mechanical turing machine, when he decides that nonfree microcode is unacceptable. ;)

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    4. Re:Dupe? by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you agreed with RMS in principle, and wanted to create a SAAS business that is ethical, how would you do it?

      Because really, it's the entrapment that makes it non-ethical, not the collaboration.

      Making sure your users are able to get copies of their data in a useful format that are complete enough for them to walk away from you is an obvious one. Using an entirely open source stack and releasing any changes and improvements you make back to the community is another, more indirect one.

      What other steps might you take?

      Seems to me, releasing your entire source tree wouldn't necessarily be relevant for a lot of web apps, because they're more about representing network effects and business relationships on a grand scale, and are only useful if you wish to also be a service provider. Giving someone the source code that makes eBay run isn't going to be particularly useful if all they want to do is sell used merchandise.

      Anyone got any clever ideas?

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    5. Re:Dupe? by Minwee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or perhaps he could just run GNU/Linux on, say, an OpenSPARC based system.

      It's not like nobody has ever thought of this before.

    6. Re:Dupe? by Daemonax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He already uses a Lemote Yeeloong laptop which has a Free BIOS and doesn't require non-free firmware.

  3. Obviously! by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm no RMS fan (GPL2 all the way) but isn't this shit obvious?
    The only point in software as a service's defense, is that at least you know you don't own the software.

    --
    IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    1. Re:Obviously! by rumith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is, paying for all that computing power, data storage, software development and other stuff may occasionally not be my goal. Sometimes I just want to browse a damn photo gallery or write an online document.

    2. Re:Obviously! by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      no it's not.

      I had a customer just last week ask for us to get his backups from carbonite. I was confused and he said," I stopped paying for it a month ago, I want the copies of my backups from them."

      I had to explain to him that you cant go to the car wash and demand the dirt off your car given to you after the wash cycle. It's gone, they delete all of it when you stop paying them.

      He still did not fully understand it. And this is a college educated business owner.

      "that's unprofessional of them to delete MY data."

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Obviously! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody has any intentions of stopping you from doing so. RMS merely recommends that you don't. I've never understood why that raises so much ire. Were he proposing coercive measures to stop you, I'd see it; but (correctly) noting that, if you use SaS, you have fuck all control over the software is simply true.

    4. Re:Obviously! by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well it is a bit unprofessional. As a backup company they should keep the backup on hand for a period of time (probably 6 months) before deleting it. I mean at least then you can charge for several months of service at once and possibly a graveyard fee, that is dusting off the backups of your backups to get the data accessible. You might come off as a bit of an asshole but at least you'll have saved the day.

      While that may be a good idea in general it can also cause problems as well; unless what they do is specifically called out in the contract.

      For example:

      If the owner assumed the information was deleted when the account was canceled; if they discover you kept the data they may get upset and decide to sue.

      If they cancel and you still have the data and they get involved in litigation you may then get dragged in and have to provide the data. Who pays for the recovery? Or, if you delete at some later date you might be in trouble for "obstructing Justice" if criminal acts are involved.

      You don't delete it for some period of time after the contract expires; but for some reason you lose the data. Who's responsible for recovering it?

      Far fetched? Maybe. But why risk it. Delete it when the contract expires and move on. Why take the risk?

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:Obviously! by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sometimes I just want to browse a damn photo gallery or write an online document.

      You can't! It's wrong! Stop now, before it's too late!

      Yeah, I'm being sarcastic. I've always thought that RMS's notion of "free software" was totally out of touch with practical realities. But this latest proclamation makes me realize that he subscribes to the Everybody's Like Me fallacy. That is, he believes every computer user is enough of a hacker to compile and run all the software they will ever need. For some of us, that's simply too much trouble just to make a silly ideological point based on bad economics. But for most people, it's simply not possible. About 90% of humanity is not a hacker and never will be. Either they lack the intellectual fundamentals or (more commonly) simply have too much of a life that has nothing to do with computers.

      Another thing: if RMS thinks that using an application that somebody else hosts is Evil, why does he stop at Software as a Service? When you surf the web, you're relying on HTTP servers you don't control. When you send email, you rely on SMTP servers you don't control. And consider that there's simply no way you can make a phone call without using somebody else's software.

      I give RMS credit for helping to create Open Source. (Credit he won't take, since he thinks the concept is as evil as any other "non-free" software.) But when it comes to almost anything else he's done, including most of the software he's written (baroque bloatware most of it), he's a mediocrity at best.

    6. Re:Obviously! by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is, he believes every computer user is enough of a hacker to compile and run all the software they will ever need.

      Yes! I mean, what the fuck is he thinking?! I'm not a damned hacker who can type a document in OpenOffice and save it to - of ALL PLACES - my LOCAL machine!

      This man should have a haircut and shave mandated by law enforcement!

      Talk about fallacies...

      --
      Send your spendthrift head of state this
    7. Re:Obviously! by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, I understand RMS's position - I just think it's fundamentally flawed in certain respects.

      Besides, having the source code doesn't mean you can do something about it - you have to find someone with the skills necessary to understand the source code and make the appropriate modifications without breaking anything else, and you have to be able to afford to hire that person.

      This is much easier said than done, of course; how is your average small business owner supposed to be able to determine whether programmer X is better than programmer Y, or even whether either programmer actually has the skills necessary?

      Most of my disagreement with RMS's position comes from the actual logistics of what he wants people to do - he ignores the real-world with his fanatic purism, and IMHO the entire open source community is suffering because of it.

      Vocal OSS purists like RMS are, IMHO, driving the average person away from open source software. A good many people shy away from zealots and their goods.

  4. Congratulations to RMS... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...for spotting the major con of software as a service. I'm sure companies and individuals considering the use of such services will now weigh this con against the pros and develop an informed decision about whether or not a given service is right for them.

    For services where personal data is kept, I'm sure that concepts like security, trustworthiness, and portability of data are key concerns.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    1. Re:Congratulations to RMS... by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is it really a con?

      I always thought the whole idea of SAS was simply shifting and consolodating the effort of creating and servicing software to (hopefully) lower costs. Not eliminate them. Kinda like call centers for help desk support (they usually manage multiple companies' help desks at one center), only it's serving your software. Honestly, who said paying someone else to serve software for you to use would be free? There's a contradiction in that statement if they did.

      I'm surprised anybody needed to point this out. It blows my mind. And calling it a con? I'll bet they never thought anybody would be dumb enough to think it's free! Even at the most basic level.

      Wow.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    2. Re:Congratulations to RMS... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I always thought the whole idea of SAS was simply shifting and consolodating the effort of creating and servicing software to (hopefully) lower costs. Not eliminate them.

      That would be under the pros category.

      There are a lot of advantages to having someone else host your data. But there are also risks. Which RMS did put his finger on, but he's far from the first to do so. If anything, he's blowing the whole thing WAY out of proportion. (Thus the mildly sarcastic tone of my post.)

      My basic issue with RMS's logic is that he doesn't want to trust anyone. Because if you don't trust anyone, you can't be double-crossed. Right?

      The only problem is, society cannot operate without trust. At some point I have to trust someone else to handle a repetitive task, least I needlessly waste my time. Not to mention the myriad of skills I'd need for basic survival!

      Think of it this way: Without trust, we would all be too busy farming, hunting, building our own homes, fabbing our own materials, and providing our own healthcare. Technology would go absolutely nowhere, because just one of those items is a full time job. Anyone not skilled enough in any of those trades would probably suffer a horrible death from starvation, disease, exposure, or predators. Even if people share discoveries ala the GPL, who would have time to examine and build upon the discoveries?

      Thankfully, we trust each other. At least enough to where I let someone else farm the food, someone else build my house, someone else provide medical attention to myself and family, etc. I pay for those services with the expectation that my food will not be poison, my house is safe to occupy, and my doctor is a skilled medical practitioner. Society has a number of checks and balances to help verify those levels of trust, and thus we arrive at "good enough".

      If there's anything I've learned over the years, save for a small percentage of exceptions, "good enough" is many orders of magnitude better than "superior". :-)

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    3. Re:Congratulations to RMS... by melikamp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dude, compared to your idealistic hippie post (not that it's bad in itself), RMS sounds like the oracle of common sense.

      The only problem is, society cannot operate without trust.

      Certain aspects of it do operate without trust. Any time you see 1000000.00 written on a check, you can (and should) forget about trusting anyone.

      Think of it this way: Without trust, we would all be too busy farming, hunting, building our own homes, fabbing our own materials, and providing our own healthcare.[sic]

      You are thinking of what we would do if we did not have a money-based economy. This has nothing to do with trust.

      RMS is correct in distrusting commercial software manufacturers and providers. Time and time again these people (with MS and Apple in the lead) have tried to fuck us over by supplying us with software that is bloated, insecure by design, intentionally buggy (DRM), cannot be configured, spies on us, comes with file format lock, etc., etc. A few exceptions aside, none of their code ever gets open, not even the oldest stuff. In order to get a functional product, the community has to rewrite everything from scratch, and they won't even open their code after we have a superior FLOSS product. Why??? Because commercial software manufacturers hate us and distrust us. They want us to bend over, take it from behind and scream like we are enjoying it while writing them a large non-refundable check.

      Fuck that. RMS may be nuts, but he is looking after your interest, unlike MS, Apple, Google.

      P.S. I really don't mean to sound dickish, I am just sick tired of stupid commercial commodity software. It's hurting pretty much everyone, and it's awful.

  5. Not to mention by atomicthumbs · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...you can't use it when you don't have an internet connection. Why doesn't anyone think about this?

    --
    http://pinopsida.com
  6. Ok, seriously by FictionPimp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does anyone give a shit anymore?

    In any case, I use a few software as a service type websites that offer their software as a gpl download so I could install it on my server and run it myself.

    In fact, I'm doing just that with dimdim (netmeeting software) for my work.

    But seriously, this is getting old.

    1. Re:Ok, seriously by El+Lobo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Exactly. I use whatever tools I want, and "my freedom" and the limits I want to impose to "my freedom" (whatever THAT is) is only my business. I use the tools I like/need, and there are free tools, commercial, open source ones, binaries only, etc. They help me in my work and I pay whatever *I* think is worth to pay for them. That is my freedom. But having some long bearded troll telling me what my freedom is and what I must do and not do... that's not freedom, that's the closest to catholicism we got on the software arena....

      And yes, I use public transport as well. And pay for the service. And no, I cannot repair their buses either if there are problems with them (don't have or want to learn mechanics).

      --
      It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
    2. Re:Ok, seriously by FictionPimp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is my stance. When I'm programing software, I want the best tools possible to do my job. I like to use open standards and libraries when possible because they tend to foster a solid product. I'd like to make my code open source, but in most cases I'm not allowed by my employer (besides it's all for our internal staff).

      When I'm using software, I just want it to work. I don't want to fuck with it, or tweak it, or read the source code. I don't want to modify it, edit it, hell I really don't want to even open a properties dialog if I can help it.

      This is how I ended up moving away from linux. I was a big linux buff for years. I have taught classes at a community college on linux. I have gone to events and handed out ubuntu CD's by the dozens. But in the end, I wanted my computer to let me do work, not to let me work on the computer.

      So I settled on a middle ground. I stopped being a hard line must be open source advocate. I use a mac (the most unfree of unfree) because it is solid, unix, and has a good selection of software that I need to do work.

      So I use open source software if it meets my needs. But I'll also use non-free software without any hesitation. Who cares if I can't edit the code to my liking. I can't think of a single time I've done that in an open source product. Who cares if it can go away. I keep good backups of my important data. I can move to something else.

      In the end I just want to get the task done as efficiently as possible so I an move on to having fun.

    3. Re:Ok, seriously by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's funny that, for all his talk about freedom, if you listen to what he says he doesn't just try to open your mind to what's out there. No, he tries to tell you what you should do! Freedom is doing exactly what I say? An odd way of expressing freedom, in my opinion.

      I know he has been influential in pushing FOSS, and getting it where it is today. That's great, don't stop! But FOSS is just another option that may or may not fit the situation. It cannot meet every need, because there are different criteria for what is important, and honestly "free" doesn't offset the costs of using some FOSS tools, whereas a multi-thousand dollar price tag may be offset by another piece of software's toolset.

      Same with SAAS, there are situations that make SAAS a better solution than purchasing and then supporting commercial software, or developing the software in-house, or hiring people who can support a FOSS solution. There are a lot more factors to consider than simply the upfront cost. That you are handing over control of your data to someone else. But that may not be a big deal, the important factor may be low support costs and the software service itself. Whether or not it gets over-used because it's the "hot new thing", well, that happens in all aspects of life and people who live that way tend to be fools anyway. Live and learn. Some people can't think through things, they have to screw them up first before it's clear that they probably didn't want to go that direction in the first place.

      The true freedom is that we have options. RMS wants everybody to live by his definition of "freedom", but his is pretty narrow and restrictive, which kinda defeats the purpose of the concept of freedom.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  7. The World doesn't care by prayag · · Score: 4, Insightful

    RMS is right of course. Software as a service is not free and one should always be at guard while using them.

    Having said that, it is also important to realize that general public does not care, if its free. If you just ask them, "Do not use it." It does not help the cause. Shouldn't you instead try to educate them and warn them of the pitfalls ?

    The world is not black and white. And software as a service is here to stay. When would RMS realize that ?

    1. Re:The World doesn't care by mr+crypto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. RMS's advice seems to be to run your own server, but how many people can or will do that? If he presented a viable alternative for the masses I'd be more sympathetic.

  8. No need for him to lift a finger by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first hiccup in your company internet connection will have you scrambling to replace many of the services you signed up for...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:No need for him to lift a finger by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe we shouldn't rely on phone service or power service either then. Last time I checked phones were more critical to most companies than being able to access the internet.

      You simply need to recognize the risk if you internet goes down and have back up plans to work around it.

    2. Re:No need for him to lift a finger by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As with mutual funds ... past performance is not an indication of future performance.

      Then again, even if you can perform your work, not being able to communicate with anyone may render it useless in many cases as well.

    3. Re:No need for him to lift a finger by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 5, Funny

      When did you last check? 1992?

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    4. Re:No need for him to lift a finger by Mr_Magick · · Score: 3, Informative

      The difference being that my phone and power have a specified up-time (that might even be set by government mandate, I'm not sure) that is much higher then my ISP uptime.

      Most small to medium businesses that I know of use consumer grade DSL or cable connections that are notorious for going out weekly for minutes or hours, and yearly for a day or more.

    5. Re:No need for him to lift a finger by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I supported an SAAS app which did point of sale/accounting. Trust me - 30 minutes without internet makes people freak - especially when they can't sell anything.

      It came to the point where most of our customers had modems they could use as backups if their net connection went offline and our bigger customers had frame relay connections directly to our customer network.

  9. He's showing his myopia. by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Software-as-service is only free if you own or have consistent access to a given computer. For the millions of people throughout the world who have been given the ability to use online applications for free (at cybercafes, etc) even though they could never afford a computer, RMS' line is almost insulting.

    And what does this mean for mobile computing?

  10. C'mon . . . Just a taste? by MarkvW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've got some really neat cloud for you. I'll set you up real cheap, free even . . .. You're gonna like this stuff. C'mon, give it a try. You won't get hooked . . ..

    You can always quit later . . .

  11. Some people don't care by grasshoppa · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have a business problem which a properly programmed computer can solve. I can either;

    a) Hire a programmer, or a team of programmers, to create this application for me.
    b) Utilize a proprietary application, with a contract to protect my rights.

    Is the proprietary application free? No, but it does increase my efficiency 10x over. Would I get that kind of increase by hiring the programmers? Not after you take it to account all of the overhead I have with that plan. It just doesn't make business sense to go with option A, regardless of my personal belief on the topic.

    As for my client? Ya, they simply do not care.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  12. Re:Ever get the feeling that.... by Cheviot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly. I don't dry clean my own clothes. Theoretically, I could. The methods and chemicals aren't a secret. Instead I turn over control of my cleaning to a third party. Precisely how they do things I do not know... and if they use too much starch I have no way to debug the process.

    But guess what, it's a lot better than wasting my time and money learning the process, buying the equipment and filling my basement with vats of noxious chemicals.

  13. Isn't Savannah SaaS? by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The world is not black and white. And software as a service is here to stay. When would RMS realize that ?

    Even RMS's organization offers software as a service: Savannah, a hosted free software development tool suite based on a fork of SourceForge.net's software.

    1. Re:Isn't Savannah SaaS? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you can export your data from the Savannah service, download the Savannah source, and run it yourself, then I think that's good enough for RMS. The software is free (as in freedom), and you can free yourself, that's the important thing.

  14. Re:Ever get the feeling that.... by Seakip18 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem is when you crack open your daily life and look at computing services you can't crack open and look at.

    Every minor, hidden process is suddenly game. Go to a grocery store and use your credit card? You are using the credit card company's servers to take care of the work of moving your money from account to account. Your data. Their software. Cut up your cards. Heck, stow your money in a mattress. You don't want the bank to be liable for doing account computing when you can't get to the software.

    I mean, I'd like to see the underlying process and know how their software works, up-to-the-code-level, but realistically? I don't have the time or interest. I'll trust the bank to keep my money safe and they get to enjoy the benefits of that trust.

    --
    import system.cool.Sig;
  15. The article is mugglebaiting... RMS gets it... by Art+Popp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The message if you Read The Lengthy Article, is that if they don't have and open license to the server code, don't use them. He seems OK with the idea that you use a server based application if they are covered by the GNU Affero GPL.

    If you are reading this, you have a perfect example of software as a service, in an open fashion. If you want to make your own /. go download the slashcode and set it up.

    The correct direction to charge with pitchforks and torches would seem to be pressuring the Gmail team for a G-Code release, or making SquirrelMail (or your favorite server-based e-mail) as robust and reliable and Gmail.

    That won't be easy. Does anyone here have a good suggestion for a starting point? What's the best FOSS ServerSide E-mail server?

  16. So... by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I should be running my own instance of /. at http://localhost/ ? Then I could patch /. to not have "idle" and editors I don't like. RMS, you're a lifesaver!

  17. Actually, pretty funny by huckamania · · Score: 3, Funny

    Can't you imagine all of the web based applications converted to work on a single computer...

    Twitter - A single text entry box with a 126 character limit that appends to the text already displayed.
    Facebook - An html file on your desktop that links to your media folder.
    Google - Grep from a bash shell.
    WoW - A virtual landscape with no other players, just lots of rats (this already applies to 2nd life).
    StumbleUpon - A file browser.
    Wikipedia - Man pages.

    Where do I sign up?

  18. Re:He has a history by heffrey · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Richard_Stallman

  19. Re:Ever get the feeling that.... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Exactly. I don't dry clean my own clothes. Theoretically, I could. The methods and chemicals aren't a secret. Instead I turn over control of my cleaning to a third party.

    And RMS has no problem with this. Would you, however, buy a new suit which could only be cleaned by the manufacturer, with an undocumented chemical formula? Would you encourage your organisation to adopt a policy that only people who wear these suits are allowed to attend important meetings?

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  20. This goes for other services too by davidwr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Telephony as a service is not free. If you use a telephone carrier which manages your advance custom calling features like voicemail or call waiting you are at their mercy if they change software.

    To be truly free you must manage your own PBX and voicemail system and it must be open source.

    --
    Payroll outsourcing is not free. If you use a payroll outsourcing company to manage your payroll you are not free. You must use an in-house payroll system and it must be open source.

    --
    Outsourcing your banking needs is not free. If you want to be free, you must own your own in-house bank and use only open-source software to manage it.

    --
    Outsourcing electricity is not free. If you want to be free, you need your own generators with fuel created or captured under your control. Of course, if you use computers to manage your in-house electrical grid, the software must be open source.

    --
    The list goes on. The point is: Duh. The whole point of contracting things out as a service is so we don't have to worry about is as much. With that comes the risk of vendor failure. Using closed-source software or for that matter open-source software that you yourself don't maintain is somewhere between the extremes of "doing everything in house, under our control" and "complete outsourcing, where we have no worries other than 'it better just work.'"

    I bet most die-hard open-source advocates outsource their power and banking and most outsource at least some of their non-plain-old-telephone-service telephony needs. Even an open-source PBX or cell phone isn't truly open if it depends on a carrier whose failure would deny you phone service. In summary: To some extent, we are all p0wned by someone, and most of us like it that way.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  21. 95% of people don't want to make software by presidenteloco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and are not suited to doing it well.

    If that sounds elitist, so be it. Reality is that people have all kinds of different skills, and a small percentage are good programmers. I can't run a marathon or play a cello, and I don't mind anyone saying so.

    While I agree with RMS that software should be free, I don't believe that means that people should not simply use information services that are provided for them on managed information infrastructure.

    In the 70s if you wanted information, you hired a programmer to write a program for you.

    In the 80s and 90s if you wanted information, you used a program that was already written.

    In this decade, if you want information, you use an service on the web.

    Unless you are that most rare breed; an open source software geek, in which case you may still be in the business of gluing together or even modifying programs and web services.

    I would believe more that free software was intended for the masses if it had in general any kind of document quality or code simplicity. But expecting Joe Six-pack to deal with maven builds, hierarchical make files, and package dependency graphs. Hah!

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  22. A silly analogy but ... by ClosedSource · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If the undocumented formula produced much better results, I might adopt such a policy.

  23. Re:Ever get the feeling that.... by Seakip18 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The problem is when you crack open your daily life and look at computing services you can't crack open and look at.

    I really need to proofread, but instead, I rely on Firefox's little red lines. Maybe Stallman has something right....

    --
    import system.cool.Sig;
  24. Sewer as a Service by tarsi210 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "'Sewer as a service' means that you think of a particular sewer as doing your poop disposal for you. If that's what the sewer does, you must not use it! If you do your pooping on someone else's sewer, you hand over control of your poop to whoever controls the sewer. It is like using truck-stop toilet paper, only worse: it's even harder for you to wipe an ass that's sitting on someone else's toilet than it is to wipe an ass sitting on your own bog. Just like dye-free Charmin, 'sewer as a service' is incompatible with your bowel freedom."

    --
    Blog,Twitter
  25. Neither is 'Dinner As A Service' by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I completely trust a restaurant's food suppliers, chef, wait staff, sanitation, and even their "non-free" recipes, when I outsource meal preparation because I'm feeling lazy that night. So? That's the whole point of it. Let someone else worry about it, and understand that you're making some compromises. I'm not sure which is worse, The Prophet's loopy, hippy-dippy hyperbole, or his condescension and patronizing nonsense.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  26. OK this is just stupid by seeker_1us · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Software as a service" means that you think of a particular server as doing your computing for you. If that's what the server does, you must not use it! If you do your computing on someone else's server, you hand over control of your computing to whoever controls the server. It is like running binary-only software, only worse: it's even harder for you to patch the program that's running on someone else's server than it is to patch a binary copy of a program running on your own computer. Just like non-free software, "software as a service" is incompatible with your freedom.--RMS

    So if I remotely log into a linux server running 100% GPL software, and use that software to crunch data, it's non-free and I must not use it, because the server is owned and controlled by someone else.

    So now software isn't free by it's license, it's free only if it's got a free license and it's on your personal box.

    Ironic, because I was introduced to free software on my universities mainframe (e.g. emacs, LaTeX) and now I find out that wasn't free at all because I didn't have the money to buy a computer that could run it locally.

  27. In the name of freedom... by Wolfger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We must only do what RMS tells us we may do. Then we shall be truly free.

    --
    Nothing to see here. Move along.
  28. Re:RMS goes to the Zoo by Verdatum · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why does this sound like a really bad Infocom game?

  29. Re:Uh, why? by Gerafix · · Score: 3, Informative

    Because the software required to make the hardware or make it work is non-free.

  30. This Just In by rssrss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

    Mr. Stallman, and the ever shrinking group of people who care what he thinks, need to grow up. Nothing is free. Absolutely nothing. Everything has a cost. And everybody is subject to constraints on their knowledge, wisdom, and actions.

    If we are lucky, the costs are well within our ability to pay, and the constraints are not heavier than those that rational civilized men place on themselves for the sake of good order and pleasant society.

    --
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  31. Re:RMS goes to the Zoo by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is pitch black. You are likely to be raped by a Gnu.

    --
    Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
  32. Re:Yeah Right by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ever been unable to connect to Google? Did you stop using google?

    No, I use them to host my email and the few times the mail server has been down have not been critical (at least for the time they were down for)

    Ever noticed that Amazon suddenly messed up (e.g. thousands of items no longer catalogued)? Did you stop using Amazon?

    Actually yes, EC3 outages scared me off hosting on that service.

    Ever had a black-out? Did you stop using electricity?

    Yes, kind of - bought a backup generator long ago exactly because of unreliability where I was.

    Bet you didn't.

    Pay up smartass.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley