After 30 Years of the Free Software Foundation, Where Do We Stand?
An anonymous reader writes with this interview with John Sullivan, Executive Director of The Free Software Foundation. "There is a growing concern about government surveillance. At the same time, those of us who live and breathe technology do so because it provides us with a service and freedom to share our lives with others. There is a tacit assumption that once we leave the store, the device we have in our pocket, backpack, or desk is ours. We buy a computer, a tablet, a smartphone, and we use applications and apps without even thinking about who really owns the tools and whether we truly own any of it. You purchase a device, yet you are not free to modify it or the software on it in any way. It begs the question of who really owns the device and the software?"
...it raises the question.
That's because only a vanishingly small percentage of the population really cares about hacking on their devices. I know this is heresy here on Slashdot, but it's true. 99+% of the population simply don't give a shit whether or not they can build their own applications for the device.
Why?
Because 99+% of the population does not have the necessary time, skill, and interest to do so. It's not that people are dumb - it's that they just don't care about replacing the existing software that lets them do all the things they want to do with their devices.
We assume the information gatherers track us at every chance, often with our tacit permission.
No longer bordering on tinhattery, there exists the very real possibility everything you purchase in the electronics section might report your doings for fun and profit. If you can break the phone, why wouldn't you?
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
> only a vanishingly small percentage of the population really cares about hacking on their devices.
I don't hack the software on my laptop, but it's all free software and I know it's written by people who aren't trying to spy on me or to give me inconveniences so that I'll buy some premium version.
If you have Window, then MS has owned your PC.
If you have free software, then you "own" it.
Help build the anti-software-patent wiki
Out of the box, the devices are not "Free" in the sense you can modify them directly.
But you ARE legally able to Free any device. Jailbreaking was explicitly declared legal to do, and indeed plenty of people do so.
As long as you are legally able to Free a device, I think we are OK - I don't see the need to force a device to be inherently insecure for millions so thousands of people can expend no effort to modify how a device works.
I still donate to the FSF (and begrudgingly the EFF) every year because I think it's good someone is keeping an eye on all this and striving to make things that are wholly Free. But I just don't see where it's realistic or even a good idea to hold every product to that standard.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
We where onto a good thing, but we failed to adapt.
We failed to adapt to the commercial attacks that make closed source software the gatekeeper to software freedom.
We lost the mobile space, Android is full of crap software running on a Free kernel that hardly anyone can use freely.
Free software is free beer that corporations on-sell minus the libre.