Slashdot Mirror
RMS On Why Free Software Is More Important Now Than Ever Before
jrepin points out an article by Richard Stallman following up on the 30th anniversary of the start of his efforts on the GNU Project. RMS explains why he thinks we should continue to push for broader adoption of free software principles. He writes,
"Much has changed since the beginning of the free software movement: Most people in advanced countries now own computers — sometimes called “phones” — and use the internet with them. Non-free software still makes the users surrender control over their computing to someone else, but now there is another way to lose it: Service as a Software Substitute, or SaaSS, which means letting someone else’s server do your own computing activities. Both non-free software and SaaSS can spy on the user, shackle the user, and even attack the user. Malware is common in services and proprietary software products because the users don’t have control over them. That’s the fundamental issue: while non-free software and SaaSS are controlled by some other entity (typically a corporation or a state), free software is controlled by its users. Why does this control matter? Because freedom means having control over your own life. ... Schools — and all educational activities — influence the future of society through what they teach. So schools should teach exclusively free software, to transmit democratic values and the habit of helping other people. (Not to mention it helps a future generation of programmers master the craft.) To teach use of a non-free program is to implant dependence on its owner, which contradicts the social mission of the school. Proprietary developers would have us punish students who are good enough at heart to share software or curious enough to want to change it."
I dare anyone, especially after mr. Snowden's revelations, to contradict mr. Stallman's points.
Thank you rms, for fighting for our freedom for 30 years!
assignment != equality != identity
One thing the FSF's licences haven't dealt with properly is the problem of Free software being used to TAKE control rather than GIVE it. Most of the huge SaaS providers are running Free software, adapted as they will - but with code not distributed, because it doesn't need to be as long as they're not distributing their proprietary platforms - and with all your data on their systems. Should the GPL be adapted to deal with that? Could it?
Maybe the FSF need to prepare a set of terms to explain what counts as adequate vs inadequate control over systems and data - to be more clear about e.g. how one could prepare a 'phone ecosystem which leaves control in the hands of the user. For "server" to be a person's home computer rather than Google's cloud would perhaps be a start.
but democratic values are less likely to be transmitted if I use Office?
If you are a teacher, yes. If you learn office at a young age, it becomes very unlikely you will switch to anything else. It can be difficult for some people too, as the interface is different. Once the students go home and have to set up their own computer they will likely use office. They will either pay for it or not pay for it. If they don't pay they are committing a crime which can be severely punished if they get caught. If they pay then the school is basically training them to give money to a large corporation. Not only that, a specific corporation, with a partial monopoly in that market. Evidenced by the fact that you write 'Office' with a capital O and take it as a given that everyone knows you mean Microsoft® Office®.
Training kids to give money to support a monopolistic corporation does not seem to be directly in line with the principles of democracy.
Crypto is what stops 'them' getting to see your data
End-to-end cryptography won't stop "them" from seeing with whom you communicate, how often, where, and when.
Of course, in practice there might be issues with trusting them to be running the code they say they're running.
Things like "trusting trust" are why David A. Wheeler invented diverse double compiling. Take two or more independently developed compilers, preferably Free ones such as such as GCC and Clang, and bootstrap a compiler in all of them. If the end result of both bootstrap processes is the same binary, the resulting compiler is overwhelmingly unlikely to be booby-trapped.
Free-Software-as-a-Service gives you the freedom to choose which Service to trust, or to run your own Service if you wish.
Which doesn't help if the Service is a social network whose value lies in allowing users to communicate with other users of the same Service. Nor does it help when telcos have a blanket policy of not letting home users run their own Service. Let me know when Diaspora and some federated alternative to Twitter are ready for inexperienced end users.
Why should the school itself not be in charge of it's own stuff? Should we give the students the admin password to the grade-tracking software?
I didn't see anything in Mr. Stallman's essay implying that students should have administrative privileges on the school's authoritative instance of the grade-tracking software. But students should still have the opportunity to obtain a copy of the software to study and possibly share with other schools that friends and family attend. Besides, software to administer a school is not the only software used in a school. Mr. Stallman used the example of Adobe Photoshop. Schools shouldn't teach particular proprietary software packages. Instead, they should teach skills, and skills can be taught in free software such as GIMP.
Every time I read an RMS opinion, it seems to start at a good position and consistently attempts to be more and more idealistic to the point that he seems to be arguing a strawman.
RMS definitely is radical, but I've never known him to use strawman arguments.
I know he defines Malware differently from the common way (he considers DRM as malware, for example),
I guess he's also talking about backdoors for law enforcement (aka "legal interception") and other purposes.
but democratic values are less likely to be transmitted if I use Office? Proprietary developers want to punish students? I guess he means the corporations
His explanation indicates why he does mean proprietary developers rather than just corporations: e.g. in the US definition of core democratic values, there are aspects like personal freedom (e.g., modifying software) and the common good (e.g., sharing things with others). Note that he's not arguing here that it should be illegal for others to write proprietary software, i.e., he's not arguing to impinge on other people's liberty.
- and again, they don't generally give their source for modification, so they might be preventing students from modifying other people's work. Is that punishing them?
It limits the possibilities for expressing their creativity. Schools should be places where encouraging creativity is one of the highest valued goals. I know that is generally not the case right now (amazing video, btw), but this is a (small) way in which the situation can be improved.
I won't even claim to understand what the social mission of schools are supposed to be - prepare students for functioning in society?
I'm obviously not RMS, but I'd argue they should be prepared for functioning in society, for critically thinking about that same society (and anything else), and for contributing to a society that they consider to be better than what it is today.
Prepare them for jobs? Prepare them for college? Prepare them to develop free software?
I'd say: prepare them to become the best they can be. That can include a particular kind of job, being an artist, college (about which you can have very similar discussions as about school), developing free software or any combination of the above and many more things.
Prepare them for ignoring copyrights?
Now that last part is a great a strawman on your part: encouraging students to use Free Software, which they can share and modify freely according to the copyright license terms of that same software, is by no means the same as preparing them for ignoring copyright. It mainly teaches them that there are also alternatives to software whose business model depends on artificial scarcity. They will get to know MS Office and other popular products anyway, and if you can work with OpenOffice or LibreOffice, the jump isn't that great in any case. Maybe one of the primary things schools should teach are transferable skills (of which creative thinking is probably the "übervariant").
Donate free food here
While proprietary software won't always do things the way you want them for normal applications you could always restrict their permissions, firewall their network and most importantly unless you had a very serious leak built in the data stayed on your own computer, it might be locked up in a proprietary format with software that has forced obsolescence but I always felt the hyperbole was a bit thick. If you buy a CD you buy the mix the artist wanted you to have, you don't get the raw tracks to remix it the way you wanted it to be. Likewise when you buy a closed source game you get the game experience they wanted you to have, not all the source and assets to remake it the way you wanted it to be. All other things being equal it'd of course be desirable, but it's doesn't make it worthless or immoral to buy it without that possibility.
With "Service as a Software Substitution" as RMS calls it or as web services and the cloud as I'd call it you've got no control at all of neither the software nor the data. You can't even do the slightest change in how it works. When they want it to change, it changes and there's nothing you can do to stay on an old version the only thing you could do is to go nuclear and stop using it at all. Getting the data out and over to a competing service is often far worse and more locked up than a proprietary format. And again, they control your data. I'd be far more concerned about all my documents being on a Google Docs server somewhere than in a MS Office document on my disk under my control.
The worst part is really the way you're tied not technically to their service though, but legally. When the iTunes app store tells me they've updated their Terms of Service and asks me to answer yes or no, it's basically "Would you like to continue using your phone as normal or totally cripple all access to new software and updates?" I don't even bother reading it, it's accepting at gunpoint anyway. And I really don't feel it'd be much different with Android and the Play store. It didn't concern me much when it was primarily so I'd have a phone to play Angry Birds on (see above) because I totally don't care where my scores go, but as you start wanting to use it for more serious things it matters but there's really no opting out.
The stupid thing is that I really do like advantages of cloud syncing, I'd just like it to be against my own private server or at least in a local colo of my choice. I don't want to route it through Apple or Google or Facebook or any of the other big megacorporations. But what we need is a solid alternative, not the wailing song of RMS. He could have complained about the lack of a free kernel forever but as long as HURD wasn't an alternative it just didn't matter much until Linux came along and became usable. Give us a real alternative, based perhaps on AOSP or Ubuntu Touch (ugh) and maybe we can turn the tide. P.S. There was a poll here, 90% wouldn't change their online habits one bit after the Snowden revelations - don't assume the general public is with you.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Sure, if you don't have any programming skill then you can't hack on Free code, but you can still pay someone else to add features/fix bugs/remove Bad Things.
Exactly. Here's how I explain it to people: Free software means you get the blueprints and are free to hire anyone to make the software do what you want.
Competition between FOSS projects can alleviate this. If/when Gnome make a bunch of unpopular user-interface decisions, its users generally have the option to move to KDE or one of its other rivals.
Competitors in this sense need not even be as different as GNOME and KDE products. MATE and Cinnamon are forks of GNOME 2 and GNOME 3 that have gained a following.
GPLv3 anticipates tivoization and requires distribution of "Installation Information" that allows use of a particular program with its intended platform. As for Chromebook, I thought Chromium OS was free software and that the hardware gave the end user the power to reimage the device and and unlock its bootloader.
but democratic values are less likely to be transmitted if I use Office?
If you are a teacher, yes. If you learn office at a young age, it becomes very unlikely you will switch to anything else. It can be difficult for some people too, as the interface is different. Once the students go home and have to set up their own computer they will likely use office. They will either pay for it or not pay for it. If they don't pay they are committing a crime which can be severely punished if they get caught. If they pay then the school is basically training them to give money to a large corporation. Not only that, a specific corporation, with a partial monopoly in that market. Evidenced by the fact that you write 'Office' with a capital O and take it as a given that everyone knows you mean Microsoft® Office®. Training kids to give money to support a monopolistic corporation does not seem to be directly in line with the principles of democracy.
This does not limit the abuse by monopoly to just school children! Our very first "home computer" was purchased so that we could become more literate in the coming "digital age". We had a 6 year old daughter and my wife and myself both needed to use fax for the purposes of both getting work and communicating. So we spent 2000 dollars on a decent 486 which could run "Windows" on top of dos. We both had used Vax at work for years and now that it was obviously being dumped and we knew that the "Windows" gui was going to dominate the very future of both our working lives. My wife insisted upon the then brand new Office which set us back another huge chunk of change and took for freaking ever to install from the set of floppies! When we upgraded the unit to the "start me up" roll me over and take it in the rear year 95 version of "Windows" our old version of office would not install PERIOD. So this was my first desperate and financially crippling experience with MSFT. We were almost bankrupted by this at the time because of health issues that occurred concurrently, so I pirated WORD so that we could still fax and my wife could keep her work communications up.
THIS EXPERIENCE SOURED ME so much against MSFT that I investigated what all the fuss was online about Red Hat. After a really good dummies book showed me that our old terminal skills could still make our older 486 work online (good old ifup ip foobar commands) and even do faxes by simply sticking in a different modem than the Win Modem we had things started to look up and the experience brought me into the light. I have never looked back. OR may I add have never "pirated" anything since!
IT WAS a revelation reading Eric Raymond and watching the antics of RMS, Linus and others, the one great rhetorical statement that always sticks in my mind and I am never going to forget is "WOULD YOU BY A CAR WITH THE HOOD WELDED SHUT?"
With companies like Corbis, and others trying to deprive and lock down the world to its very own shared historical great heritage of images online one comes to finally understand the true Ferengi like nature of those who like Milo Minderbinder with a computer have come to dominate digital communications. Do they deserve the laurels and accolades that are heaped upon them. Only history will tell, but if the young are left to believe that they are saints chances are we are headed into a digital dark age.
Thank you RMS and all the others for keeping up the good fight!
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
But that Linux kernel is at the complete mercy of the wireless carrier
Only in North America. Most of the rest of the world uses GSM and doesn't price a handset subsidy into the phone bill. If (like me) you happen to be stuck in the United States, switch to T-Mobile, the only carrier among the major carriers that respects hardware freedom.
Why is it that you think that if the entire chain is open that means it has to be zero cost to you the customer?
They don't follow on.
Free has more than one meaning. You're a free man, yes? Does that mean you work for zero wages?
Think on it.
If you can.
"In practice, free software is controlled by a technocratic elite."
There was a time when *all* culture was in the hands of a technocratic elite. Then society moved on and massively learnt to read write.
Programing is basically applying your rational skills and describe them in a formal language. It can be done by the masses if deemed important enough.
the one great rhetorical statement that always sticks in my mind and I am never going to forget is "WOULD YOU BY A CAR WITH THE HOOD WELDED SHUT?"
And yet, for every car I've had for the last 10-15 years, I have never opened the hood for anything other than putting in screen wash or checking oil (and maybe once in 20yrs to access the battery for a jump start) - put those on the outside and I would have no need. Otherwise I just open the hood and think "I don't even know where to start on this", close it again and take it to a garage. It's not that I don't know how an engine works or haven't stripped down and rebuilt one before - it's that modern ones are orders of magnitude more complicated, higher precision, lower tolerance, and shoehorned in so tight that it looks like if you don't have exactly the right tool at exactly the right angle you are going to have no arms left after about three bolts.
And yet we buy these cars (in their millions) ? Why ? Because they are ten times more reliable than the ones we had 20-30yrs ago, and getting under the hood just is not as necessary anymore. "It just works". Are we any less free because of this ?
Same goes for software, I've modified my kernel, back in the 0.99something days. I think it had about 100 KLOC. Today Linux is what, 15 MLOC ? Over 100 times the size. Sure, in theory I can still get under the hood of the kernel, but in practice at 15 MLOC I am not going to touch it - it would never be economic.
Then on the services thing, if it was cheaper to get a taxi everywhere than own a car, would I own one ? Maybe for nostalgia reasons, but then again maybe not.
But would I expect to be able to open the hood of the taxi when it turns up ? Do you ? Are you less free because the taxi driver doesn't let you under the hood of his taxi ?
The ~Loongson ~CPU exits, the OS and surround application code exists. People have a place to start, they can build on and give back.
Where did growth get average users via the big trusted global brands? The ability to generate plain text for govs after a user selects/wants to encrypt.
After all the years of 'growth' 'passion' 'art' 'fun' 'funding' 'wealth' and all the other generational buzzwords of closed brand name software, free software still shines with the simple reality of been: fit for purpose.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Yes, but since the hood is not welded shut, you can take your car to ANY garage: The dealer, Wal-Mart, Canadian Tire, the old scoundrel down the street... That is the freedom that you get with Free software. You can fix it yourself, or pay someone of your choosing to fix it.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
And yet, for every car I've had for the last 10-15 years, I have never opened the hood for anything other than putting in screen wash or checking oil (and maybe once in 20yrs to access the battery for a jump start) - put those on the outside and I would have no need. Otherwise I just open the hood and think "I don't even know where to start on this", close it again and take it to a garage. It's not that I don't know how an engine works or haven't stripped down and rebuilt one before - it's that modern ones are orders of magnitude more complicated, higher precision, lower tolerance, and shoehorned in so tight that it looks like if you don't have exactly the right tool at exactly the right angle you are going to have no arms left after about three bolts.
And yet we buy these cars (in their millions) ? Why ? Because they are ten times more reliable than the ones we had 20-30yrs ago, and getting under the hood just is not as necessary anymore. "It just works". Are we any less free because of this ?
Same goes for software, I've modified my kernel, back in the 0.99something days. I think it had about 100 KLOC. Today Linux is what, 15 MLOC ? Over 100 times the size. Sure, in theory I can still get under the hood of the kernel, but in practice at 15 MLOC I am not going to touch it - it would never be economic.
Then on the services thing, if it was cheaper to get a taxi everywhere than own a car, would I own one ? Maybe for nostalgia reasons, but then again maybe not. But would I expect to be able to open the hood of the taxi when it turns up ? Do you ? Are you less free because the taxi driver doesn't let you under the hood of his taxi ?
I am afraid you have obfuscated the reason and meanings of what I posted. And certainly WIndows and Office has been anything but reliable over the years. The vendor lock in and obvious logic bomb planned obsolescence nature of Windows and "Office" is the whole reason why I learned to use and maintain OSS software. My current IBM laptop that I am writing this on will not run Windows 7 or 8 PERIOD, but it will flawlessly run some of the latest non pae capable Linux kernel based distros and all the truly great open source software that is available.
Sir, respectfully your obvious ignorance of the truth about the stability, usability, versatility and indeed longevity through reliability of the core software of Linux based OS distros is jaded by ignorance or perhaps even malice toward those who know what is really going on in the digital age.
If you are ignorant of the true nature and indeed strengths of OSS then indeed you are either a shill or just in complete ignorance of what is truly happening.
The ability to save and recycle great devices like older laptops from the scrap heaps and recycle sweat shops in Asia created by our digitally dysfunctional consumerism is of great economic importance. Linux in the long run is helping to shield the less wealthy from the economic chaos created by corporations like MSFT and their minions like WINTEL and is a God send for those who are not financially well endowed but are still skilled, involved and love to learn! In short MSFT promotes and sells ignorance in the digital age through the very nature of how it functions as a corporation.
Ponder this, using the Windows old saw "people use it because it just works" doesn't. Treating your customers like sheep to be sheared periodically will eventually catch up to the WINTEL digital Ferengies even if they do not see it coming! Dell, HP, and all the rest are starting to finally catch on somewhat and soon all we will have is locked down closed devices in the market if Microsoft completely has its way this time around. All will be gone, except for those who learn to save things from the digital scrap heap created by iPads and Surface tablets that have their hoods welded shut.
Also ponder this;
all the cloud really is is an excuse to shear the sheep even further. AYDABTU "all your data are belong to us" The ne
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
Not really. Modern engines are not that much more complicated, they've just had loads of sensors and actuators added in odd locations. In some cases you do need special tools but those can either be made or acquired on the 'net. You'll need something to read, program and reset all those controllers which hook up to the sensors and actuators - preferably something more capable than a simple ODB-II reader. While this does add some complications it also makes working with modern cars easier in some ways - the car will often tell you enough about its condition to figure out what, if anything, is wrong with it.
And what does it matter that the kernel - all drivers included - has several millions of lines of code? If you plan to cut a tree in the forest, do you get distracted by the presence of several millions of other, similarly-looking trees? Of course not, let them be and they won't bother you. Same with the kernel, who cares about all those other drivers when you want to fiddle with that one specific driver? Their presence merely serves to give you a source of example code.
So no, cars with glued hoods are unwelcome here - and I don' t even have a car since I prefer 2 and sometimes 3 wheels over 4 - and neither is similarly-crippled software.
--frank[at]unternet.org
Slashdot is currently running this story with the logo of the Open Source Initiative—an organization RMS has never been a part of, did not start, and which offers a different philosophy that does not agree with the philosophy of the older free software movement Stallman did start.
I don't know why someone would make the choice to run this story with the wrong logo attached to it, but I hope Slashdot will correct the error. It is still unfair to misrepresent RMS's opinion.
Digital Citizen
For how long though? How long do schools need to pay for a WORD PROCESSOR? How long until this is considered a baseline function of any computer? The idea that they now want to now RENT us the wordprocessor is utterly amazingly stupid. Word should be done and closed and free. Sell all the extraneous functionality that only 5% uses as enhancement packs.
Good-bye
How about demand scarcity verses supply scarcity? The classic argument is that proprietary software uses artificial scarcity to maintain high prices. To fund the development of software with limited demand projected prices must be set high enough to justify the cost of building it.
True the bits don't cost anything and copying is unlimited but resources to develop don't become unlimited as well. I'd love to work on the GiMP or Inkscape but don't see many job opportunities for it at the moment.
Also what if instead of looking at it from the viewpoint of copying we consider the resource developer time and the available pool of talent? There again you find a scarcity that isn't artificial.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz