Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The GNU Manifesto Turns Thirty

Posted by Soulskill on from the live-free-or-die dept.

An anonymous reader writes: It was March, 1985 when Richard M. Stallman published the GNU Manifesto in Dr. Dobb's Journal of Software Tools. Thirty years on, The New Yorker has an article commemorating its creation and looking at how it has shaped software in the meantime. "Though proprietary and open-source software publishers might appear at the moment to have the upper hand, Stallman's influence with developers (among whom he is known simply by his initials, 'rms') remains immense. When I asked around about him, many people spoke of him as one might of a beloved but eccentric and prickly uncle. They would roll their eyes a bit, then hasten to add, as more than one did, 'But he's right about most things.' I told Stallman that I'd spoken with several developers who venerate his work, and who had even said that without it the course of their lives might have been altered. But they don't seem to do what you say, I observed; they all have iPhones. 'I don't understand that either,' he said. 'If they don't realize that they need to defend their freedom, soon they won't have any.'"

1 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. That's nice, just as opensource is falling appart. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Anyone not on the "SJW" bandwagon is "blackballed" and their free software projects taken down. ( early example: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6537 ) gnu utilities (unix utilities even) are being binned and replaced with systemd, choice is gone.

    It was good while it lasted.

    ----

    OpenSource release story removed due to developers opposition to Social Justice.

    A story on the Phoronix linux news site about a release of an Open Source videogame was manually removed after a few days.
    The reason cited was the developer's views on social issues such as gender equality (1).

    The release story was titled "Xonotic-Forked ChaosEsqueAnthology Sees New Release - Phoronix" and can be accessed via the google cache(2).

    Are the social or political views of an author of free software relevant to that software's inherent quality?
    Should the beliefs of an opensource developer weigh when when evaluating whether a piece of opensource software is worthy of any publicity or public notice?
    Should men with unpopular or "forbidden" views be excised from the opensource movement and "not allowed" to contribute, in a manner similar to that which is done in employment?
    Has the free/opensource software movement changed in these respects since its founding? If so is this a positive change?
    Should there be gatekeepers to opensource that decide who may and who may not contribute. Should abusive developers be "blackballed" to maintain proper social order and controls?

    Citations:
    (1) http://www.phoronix.com/forums...
    "Fortunately, the article has been removed now."
    "Thanks everybody for speaking up."
    (2) https://webcache.googleusercon...

    Removed story URL:
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...