RMS Talks Net Neutrality, Patents, and More

link would be nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:14 · Score: 1

Weird

Re: link would be nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:18 · Score: 1

This is why there is no link.
http://libreplanet.org/wiki/GNU30/RMS_30th_anniversary_address
Presumably it's not something he said in the keynote.
Re:link would be nice by smoothnorman · 2015-03-23 05:49 · Score: 4, Informative

yeah. is a bit. here
Re:link would be nice by c · 2015-03-23 07:08 · Score: 3, Funny

Heh. They put him in the "Open Source Development" category. He's going to just love that...

--
Log in or piss off.
Re:link would be nice by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 22:38 · Score: 0

There is no tinfoilery involved in saying that NSA have backdoors for ALL major OSs. Windows, Linux to Solaris. We know they have ways of getting ssh keys (source: Snowden). There are explicit references to Linux backdoors in den Snowden docs. The german ministry of interior says they dont care about crypto programs, because the can "do suerveillance at the source". Which also means they have ways of subverting the OS itself. William Binney (Ex NSA top guy) says the same.
In other words: Dont enter any un-encrypted stuff on your computer which could help the nastyballs who run the show. For example, if you organize a peach demonstration against some illegal war of Washington, dont do it via electronic means. That's not paranoia, that's prudence.

And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:15 · Score: -1

He has a problem with personal hygiene.

Re: And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:16 · Score: -1

Much like ur mom
Re:And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:12 · Score: 0

He has a problem with personal hygiene.
Yes, and Hitler never learned how to shave his moustache properly.
Still wondering what that has to do with anything relevant here.
Also, nerds calling out other nerds for hygiene? Those who type on glass keyboards...
Re:And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:34 · Score: 4, Informative

He has a problem with personal hygiene.
If this was intended to make RMS look bad, it has backfired. It just makes his detractors look like a bunch of schoolyard children who can't come up with a real criticism, but decided they just don't like the guy so he must be bad.
Re:And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 07:19 · Score: 0

The ultimate non-sequitur. NOBODY CARES!
Re:And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 07:48 · Score: 0

In a few years when digital olfactory transmissions are perfected ...
Re: And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 08:26 · Score: 0

I mean.. normally i might agree with you, but there is a video of the man eating toe cheese.
Re: And body odor by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 17:30 · Score: 0

Which reinforces RMS's point regarding Facebook. Your 'toe cheese' moment might not be forgotten either.

The link? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:15 · Score: 1

Any link? Who are these "editors"? What a piece of shit this website has become :-)

What kind of bullshit submission is this? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:16 · Score: 1

I mean, seriously? No link to the keynote or to any article discussing it?
This place is really turning into a crapfest thanks to the silly editors...

First by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:16 · Score: -1

????

Re:First by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:10 · Score: 0

That video is a classic!!!
Re:First by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:56 · Score: 1

Here is a link, for those who haven't watched it: https://youtu.be/I25UeVXrEHQ

End the Fed! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:17 · Score: -1

End the ponzi scheme Federal Reserve. The rest of the world *WILL* dump the dollar as we inflate our war debts away!

Re:End the Fed! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:12 · Score: 0

Kennedy was the last president who tried to do that and return to real, government-issued, debt-free currency. You know how that turned out. Oh, Lincoln did the same thing when he issued the Greenbacks. And Alexander Hamilton was another outspoken critic of central private banks, so he had to be "dealt with" by Aaron Burr, who went to great lengths to arrange a duel that was illegal in most places, and killed Hamilton even after Hamilton discharged his single round and was no longer a threat.
It's amazing the rationalizations people will perform to keep their cherished beliefs about the world intact. Example: you can tell someone that a petty criminal might mug you and shoot you in the process for the $50 in your wallet, and they will believe you. But if you tell people that rich and powerful men will kill to protect trillion-dollar empires, they will call you crazy, even though their incentive is very much higher and their likelihood of ever being brought to trial is non-existant.
The message of the Kennedy assassination was clear: these ... men are so powerful, they can take out a sitting President in broad daylight in front of many witnesses. Therefore, no one is untouchable.
Re:End the Fed! by blue+trane · 2015-03-23 06:27 · Score: 2

The Fed is not private. What private bank returns interest profits to the Treasury each year? What private bank explicitly is chartered to work in the public interest, and follow directives Congress gives it? The Fed was created to replace the private central banks ("clearninghouses") that had been evolved to expand the money supply in panics. The private sector realized that it was not good to have an individual such as J. P. Morgan as the lender of last resort, because as a private, profit-motivated individual he was in a position to help only his friends and hurt his enemies.
The Fed learns. In the Great Depression, it misguidedly tried to defend the dollar's gold conversion ratio and did not expand the money supply nearly enough. In the latest crisis, Bernanke expanded the Fed's balance sheet by a trillion dollars in a matter of weeks (and the predicted hyperinflation, from the quantity theory of money theorists, failed to materialize).
The Fed can and should continue to learn, to backstop individuals instead of corporations. The Fed should backstop social security, and local and state governments such as Detroit. We can expedite the learning process by voting in congressional representatives that tell the Fed: "Finance a basic income", for example. The Fed will figure out how, they know they can finance anything.
Re:End the Fed! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:39 · Score: 0

Nice try, Alan/Ben/Janet.
> The Fed is not private.
Wrong. The Federal Reserve is not a United States government institution.
> The Fed learns.
Wrong. Had the Federal Reserve truly learned anything, it would have learned the bitter lesson that a credit bubble, such as the one that occurred during the Roaring 20's, results in a devastating blowout. The Federal Reserve intentionally created a credit bubble after the dot-com bust. (Read Greenspan's speech from the early 2000's.) The Federal Reserve also ignored Bagehot's recommendation of what to do during a bank run: make money readily available but on good collateral at dear prices. Instead, the Federal Reserve paid good money for garbage from the banks.
Re:End the Fed! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:47 · Score: 0

Ponzi scheme is fraud. The Fed is clear on what it does: expand the money supply in times of "crisis".
Re:End the Fed! by blue+trane · 2015-03-23 07:05 · Score: 3, Interesting

What non-governmental institution turns over its profits to the US Treasury? What non-governmental institution has to have its head approved by Congress? What non-governmental institution has its charter written by Congress?
The Fed should learn to keep interest rates low. If you look at a graph of interest rates, you'll see that interest rate hikes preceded 8 of the last 9 recessions. Only four out of 12 rate hikes didn't cause recessions.
Why should the Fed raise interest rates now? It just raises costs to borrowers and increases bank profits. Interest rate hikes caused the housing crisis in 2007, because the ARMs adjusted to the increased prime rates instigated by the Fed.
Why is there this mass hysteria that rates have to increase, when clearly rate increases precipitated the most recent crash?
"The Federal Reserve also ignored Bagehot's recommendation of what to do during a bank run: make money readily available but on good collateral at dear prices. Instead, the Federal Reserve paid good money for garbage from the banks."
I would argue that the collateral is good. It was market groupthink that resulted in the crash, gossip in chatrooms hysterically screaming that every mortgage was in default. In fact the vast majority of mortgages didn't default. A few did, which was expected, but irrational paranoiac fear took over, as the market loves to let it.
Bagehot was too conservative with his "at a high rate of interest" dictum. Also, the Fed should bail out individuals, not banks. Even Kenneth Rogoff agrees:

Without question the best and most effective approach to the problem would have been to bail
out the subprime homeowners directly, forcing banks to take losses but keeping them manageable.
For an investment of perhaps a few hundred billion dollars, the US Treasury could have saved
itself from a financial crisis whose cumulative cost, counting lost output, already runs into many,
many trillions of dollars. Instead of âoesaving Wall Street,â a subprime bailout would have been
targeted, almost by definition, at lower-income households. But unfortunately, this approach too
would have been politically impossible prior to the crisis.
It is up to us to change the political possibilities by educating ourselves and voting in representatives that will tell the Fed to help individuals instead of corporations.
Re:End the Fed! by Beck_Neard · 2015-03-23 08:55 · Score: 2

From an interview on July 2005 about the housing bubble:
INTERVIEWER: Tell me, what is the worst-case scenario? Sir, we have so many economists coming on our air and saying, "Oh, this is a bubble, and it's going to burst, and this is going to be a real issue for the economy." Some say it could even cause a recession at some point. What is the worst-case scenario, if in fact we were to see prices come down substantially across the country?
BERNANKE: Well, I guess I don't buy your premise. It's a pretty unlikely possibility. We've never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So what I think is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize: might slow consumption spending a bit. I don't think it's going to drive the economy too far from its full employment path, though.

--
A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
Re:End the Fed! by Beck_Neard · 2015-03-23 08:56 · Score: 1

s/on/in

--
A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
Re:End the Fed! by PPalmgren · 2015-03-24 01:39 · Score: 1

Interest rates are about managing inflation/deflation and about creating a stimulus tool during difficult economic times. Think of the interest rates as a piggy bank - right now, our piggy bank is empty because we burned all our 'savings' in attempting to spur the economy after the most recent crash. If we hit another recession while this piggy bank is empty, we will lack a tool that helps ease the recession cliff significantly. As far as recessions go, this is the most important tool - if the economy changes too drastically too quicky, people don't have time to adapt and it creates a downward spiral with lots of irreparable damage.
Re:End the Fed! by phantomfive · 2015-03-24 12:12 · Score: 1

The Fed should learn to keep interest rates low. If you look at a graph of interest rates [stlouisfed.org], you'll see that interest rate hikes preceded 8 of the last 9 recessions. Only four out of 12 rate hikes didn't cause recessions.
That's the worst attempt to interpret data I've seen all month. Nice try bro.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:End the Fed! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 13:41 · Score: 0

The Fed is not private. What private bank returns interest profits to the Treasury each year?
Typical pro-Fed astroturf.
The Federal Reserve is 99.9 percent private. It has never been audited by any government, so how do we know that the Fed's "interest profits" aren't total fiction?
(Yes, the Fed is regularly audited -- by companies appointed by the Fed. What a joke. It's like asking the court clown to dare to evaluate the King.)

Link? Story? by Jimbo+God+of+Unix · 2015-03-23 05:17 · Score: 2

This is just a headline. Is there a link to an actual story?

zionic nazi genocider applies for patent on hymens by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:17 · Score: -1

unbelievable? repastical;; 1000s of our genuine spiritual & physical allys continue dying daily from 100% preventable starvation, rockets red glare, babys bursting in air etc... still no one is responsible,, or even aware.. momkind new clear options based on the universal spiritual axioms of tears & innocence equaling truth & mercy for all... meanwhile,, good medicine https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=stem+cell+therapy bad ama https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=nazi+zion+experiments.. turn it off http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=WMD+chemtrail+ingredients.. good neighbors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUeNtM6qakk bad "weather' https://www.youtube.com/results? earch_query=wmd+weather+media+censorship... we hang on to our hemispheres as the lights are coming up all over now..... rock on /. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-kA3UtBj4M

Where's the article? by Crazy+Taco · 2015-03-23 05:19 · Score: 5, Funny

This seems like a new low for slashdot. I mean, I know we all aren't going to read the article or anything, but a link to it should still be there so that we can feel like we read it!

--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.

RMS Should Try Google+! by Greyfox · 2015-03-23 05:20 · Score: 3, Funny

It's like an anti-social network! If you had some data you wanted to make sure no one would ever see, you could post it to Google+!

I saw some (i'm assuming) teenager post some angsty thing on a social page the other day and it occurred to me that we built this huge network that lets you reach out and speak to basically any other human being on the planet and people seem lonelier than ever. Odd, how that works...

--

I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

Re:RMS Should Try Google+! by causality · 2015-03-23 06:18 · Score: 1

It's like an anti-social network! If you had some data you wanted to make sure no one would ever see, you could post it to Google+!
I saw some (i'm assuming) teenager post some angsty thing on a social page the other day and it occurred to me that we built this huge network that lets you reach out and speak to basically any other human being on the planet and people seem lonelier than ever. Odd, how that works...
Getting a message out that can reach many, applies to few, and will be enjoyed by fewer is not the same thing as being truly understood and appreciated by someone who is willing to invest in a meaningful relationship. It's been framed into your standard quantity vs. quality affair.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:RMS Should Try Google+! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:20 · Score: 0

All working to plan. Troublemakers will become lonely in accordance with the system. Thought leaders will be promoted.
Re:RMS Should Try Google+! by causality · 2015-03-23 08:31 · Score: 1

All working to plan. Troublemakers will become lonely in accordance with the system. Thought leaders will be promoted.
The term with which I'm more familiar is "opinion leaders". But to expand on your idea, "the system" isn't the communications medium so much as the prevailing social norms and expectations. Being "different" in terms of which soda to drink, which football team to root for, or which major party to vote for will be celebrated and encouraged. Any serious questioning of anything more fundamental than that would make one a deviant, viewed (at best) as odd or eccentric and likely faced with the "loneliness" you mention in the form of marginalization.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein

Where's the link to the article? by Crazy+Taco · 2015-03-23 05:21 · Score: 3, Funny

This seems like a new low for Slashdot. I mean, I know none of us read the articles, but still, the link should at least be there so we can feel like we read it!

--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.

Re:Where's the link to the article? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:45 · Score: 0

Well, at least this time you got positive karma with your interesting mod instead of your funny one.

Where is the story? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:21 · Score: 0

Link to story, please?

Is that it? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:22 · Score: -1

Where's TFA?

Re:Is that it? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 09:01 · Score: 0

You need to enter your PIN number at the ATM machine to get the link to the TFA.
Re:Is that it? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 15:47 · Score: 0

You need to enter your PIN number at the ATM machine to get the link to the TFA.
No thanks, I'll steer clear of the ass-to-mouth machines. ...I'm sure you didn't mean to say "Automatic Teller Machine machine", after all.

Is that it? by t0mek · 2015-03-23 05:24 · Score: 2

Where's the TFA?

I know I'll get flamed... by cant_get_a_good_nick · 2015-03-23 05:24 · Score: 0, Troll

godfather of the free software movement

But I disagree with the having Stalman as the locus of free software. There was free software before him (BSD, etc) and will be free software after him. Maybe capitalize it right. Yeah, he created the Free Software Foundation. Just call it that.. godfather of the FSF.

Stalman has done a lot, but sometimes his ideas get in the way of actual software. Hurd? after decades still not shipped. gcc? Got out of hand until it got taken over by egcs. Was also the "Cathedral" in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" as the example of what NOT to do. emacs? Witness the hassle with xemacs and emacs.

Re:I know I'll get flamed... by serviscope_minor · 2015-03-23 06:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

Stalman has done a lot, but sometimes his ideas get in the way of actual software. Hurd? after decades still not shipped. gcc? Got out of hand until it got taken over by egcs.
That makes no sense. His idea was to have a 100% free unix. They started working on the hurd. Then Linux came along and it was under an acceptable license, so RMS declared that the problem was solved, GNU had the kernel it wanted and so developing one was no longer a priority.
Likewise ECGS (Experimental GNU Compiler System) was a fork of GCC it proved substantially better, so the FSF abandoned the mainline and adopted the superior fork.
In other words, I think both examples you've given of RMS getting in the way are actually examples of exactly the opposite.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by causality · 2015-03-23 06:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

godfather of the free software movement
But I disagree with the having Stalman as the locus of free software. There was free software before him (BSD, etc) and will be free software after him. Maybe capitalize it right. Yeah, he created the Free Software Foundation. Just call it that.. godfather of the FSF.
Stalman has done a lot, but sometimes his ideas get in the way of actual software. Hurd? after decades still not shipped. gcc? Got out of hand until it got taken over by egcs. Was also the "Cathedral" in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" as the example of what NOT to do. emacs? Witness the hassle with xemacs and emacs.
I believe Stallman is credited for this because the average user never heard of Open Source or Free Software until the arrival of the GPL and its enabling of systems built with the Linux kernel and GNU userland. Now that those have arrived and taken off, the corporate investment in open source software has increased tremendously and most people have at least heard of Linux even if they don't personally use it. Lots more people at least use some kind of open source software even if they are not programmers and don't appreciate what this means, e.g. Firefox, much of Android and its apps, many servers run Linux, etc. These things are all based around the GPL.
One could speculate that what the movement really needed was more ubiquitous Internet access, of course, but for whatever reason, FOSS and similar ideas were completely unknown to average users until the GPL took off. That's why Stallman receives this kind of credit. You also have to admire a guy when most criticisms against him boil down to "you are too much of a purist" which can be restated as "you are too consistent [for my liking/convenience] with your stated principles". He contributed not just a license that really facilitated worldwide collaboration, but also a consistent, well-articulated set of principles based on his best understanding of freedom; and he actually got many people to listen to them. That's an accomplishment all by itself.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:33 · Score: 0

> There was free software before him (BSD, etc)
I'm sure there are other examples, but BSD was not free until 1994. Linus started working on his OS kernel largely for that reason.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by ShanghaiBill · 2015-03-23 06:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

There was free software before him (BSD, etc) and will be free software after him.
RMS did not invent free software. But he was the first to espouse the philosophy of free software, and argue that it was an ethical and moral issue. He also made huge practical contributions. If you run Linux, you are likely using a lot more code written by RMS than by Linus.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by snsh · 2015-03-23 07:40 · Score: 1

Father? no. Godfather? sure why not.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by cant_get_a_good_nick · 2015-03-23 08:01 · Score: 1

BSD was free before that. Since the 70's. BSD used to pass tapes around to a lot of Universities. They'd add things, and then pass the tapes back. Sneakernet opensource.
AT&T sued to make it not free. But just because AT&T wanted to shut it down, doesn't mean it wasn't free software in spirit at the time. You can think of the BSD lawsuit as validating BSD, and free software (no capitals) as well.
Linus didn't think it wasn't free, but didn't want to deal with the mess. The original F.U.D.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by causality · 2015-03-23 08:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

Stalman has done a lot, but sometimes his ideas get in the way of actual software. Hurd? after decades still not shipped. gcc? Got out of hand until it got taken over by egcs.
That makes no sense. His idea was to have a 100% free unix. They started working on the hurd. Then Linux came along and it was under an acceptable license, so RMS declared that the problem was solved, GNU had the kernel it wanted and so developing one was no longer a priority.
Likewise ECGS (Experimental GNU Compiler System) was a fork of GCC it proved substantially better, so the FSF abandoned the mainline and adopted the superior fork.
In other words, I think both examples you've given of RMS getting in the way are actually examples of exactly the opposite.
It does take a certain humility to abandon what may very well have been a project dear to one's heart, in order to advance a larger goal that will benefit more people. What's more typical is to see Not Invented Here and other forms of pride get in the way of what should be a technical decision. The very idealism that draws so much (mostly useless) criticism to this guy (from people who haven't contributed a fraction of his works) is his best feature.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by greg1104 · 2015-03-23 09:29 · Score: 1

The world could have collaborated and built the modern Internet just fine on BSD licensed software, which is itself a variation of public domain. What Stallman deserves credit for is inventing the Copyleft license as a way to compel source code sharing. He's stayed relevant beyond that as source for paranoia about software being used against people, a stance that looks more prescient each year.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by TuringTest · 2015-03-23 09:45 · Score: 1

I believe Stallman is credited for this because the average user never heard of Open Source or Free Software until the arrival of the GPL and its enabling of systems built with the Linux kernel and GNU userland.
You make it sound as if it was a coincidence that FLOSS took off at the very precise time that the GPL was created. It was not. The GPL is different from other permissive licenses in that it perpetuates the openness of the system it's used in; therefore it has a natural mechanism for survival of the project, that confers it an competitive advantage and makes it more robust against closed forks.

for whatever reason, FOSS and similar ideas were completely unknown to average users until the GPL took off.
This "whatever" reason may very well be that the GPL was created. The fact that source for all published modifications had to be released back to the project was a strong incentive way back for FLOSS developers to prefer contributing in GPL projects over BSD ones. It may not be that much relevant nowadays because the sharing culture has grown stronger, but the idea of "copyleft" and the "share and share-alike" was a necessary element to make it happen.
The Unix wars were still fresh in our minds, so we were all painfully aware of what happens when Big Megacorp forks a free system and releases a strong closed fork with commercial support, competing with the original project. In that context, copyleft is a guarantee that the software you've volunteered to will not be strangled by a strong vendor using the software without giving anything back.
The idea that big companies should support open source software as proof of their good will, even if the license doesn't require it, was mostly a consequence of the dynamics reinforced by the GPL mindset. Prior to that, BSD licensed UNIX vendors fought over the patents achieved on their particular variant and treated it as intellectual property to be defended, not as a shared resource to be cultivated.

--
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by TuringTest · 2015-03-23 09:51 · Score: 1

The world could have collaborated and built the modern Internet just fine on BSD licensed software, which is itself a variation of public domain.
True, but the nature of collaboration with BSD software would have been much more enterprise-y and committee-centered.
The idea of grass-roots FLOSS development only happened after Stallman's ideals of "giving back to the community" spread around with strong guarantees that their contributions would remain open, which didn't happen with the "public-domain-but-not-quite" that plagued the BSD-licensed but patent-encumbered UNIX systems.

--
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by causality · 2015-03-23 10:00 · Score: 1

The world could have collaborated and built the modern Internet just fine on BSD licensed software, which is itself a variation of public domain. What Stallman deserves credit for is inventing the Copyleft license as a way to compel source code sharing. He's stayed relevant beyond that as source for paranoia about software being used against people, a stance that looks more prescient each year.
The BSD license very well could have worked, in the sense that I know of no law of physics or any other hard barrier making it impossible, yes. But generally to get something like what we've seen from the GPL Open Source movement, you need some kind of hedge against total selfishness. This is particularly true when dealing with corporations. That's the one thing the BSD license does not provide.
Perhaps in a more ideal world that does not still have such a pronounced scarcity mentality, the BSD license would have been sufficient. But in the world we know today, it's clear to me why one was more successful than the other (in terms of participation) long after a time when both were available.
I'll add, "paranoia" is one of those words that gets thrown around. Properly understood, it means an unreasonable fear of what is either impossible, or so astronomically unlikely as to be completely impractical. It doesn't take much study of history to see the repeating pattern that, again and again, any form of power or authority that can be abused, has been abused. Knowledge and technology are forms of power. It is inevitable that those who can wield them will abuse them. It's a scenario that is not only inevitable, but one that should be expected and prepared for.
To do otherwise is simply foolish and naive, an act of investing tremendous trust in institutions that have repeatedly proven themselves untrustworthy. I wonder sometimes if it's merely a problem of scale. If an individual lies, deceives, manipulates, or otherwise acts dishonestly towards another individual, confidence is quickly broken and trust withdrawn, often permanently. If a government or other large institution repeatedly acts dishonestly, you often see this faith-based (certainly not fact-based) defense that it meant well, will do better next time, and deserves our continued trust. This is usually never explicitly stated, but can be readily observed in the decisions many people make.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by exomondo · 2015-03-23 10:04 · Score: 1

That makes no sense. His idea was to have a 100% free unix. They started working on the hurd. Then Linux came along and it was under an acceptable license, so RMS declared that the problem was solved
However Linux isn't about Free Software and it doesn't assign copyrights to the FSF (so it will forever be GPLv2) so even though RMS is all upset about Tivoization it will continue to exist for Linux because Linus disagrees with RMS and sees Tivoization as a good thing because the philosophy of Linux is about sharing of code, not "freedom".
The world changed, we got more embedded systems and highspeed broadband which allowed for SaaS, the FSF copyright assignment meant these could be addressed with updated licenses to cater for changes to the technology sector but Linux not being about Free Software meant not handing the keys to the FSF and thus the quickest path compromise of using Linux has meant there is no real Free Software kernel.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by exomondo · 2015-03-23 10:27 · Score: 1

RMS did not invent free software. But he was the first to espouse the philosophy of free software, and argue that it was an ethical and moral issue.
That's really the part that hasn't taken off though. Even Linux - Free Software's biggest claim to fame - is about open source and code sharing rather than the ethics and morals of the FSF.
This is something they knew, GCC could have easily had a license term (just like the GPL has with library linkage) that the input to it must be GPL-compatible and as such could only be used for Free Software but they didn't because people are more interested in getting things done than aligning with the FSF's philosophical point of view. This gives developers who use GCC the ability to not give the Free Software freedoms to other people and that is exactly the thing the FSF's restrictive licenses exist to prevent.

If you run Linux, you are likely using a lot more code written by RMS than by Linus.
Not really, this is where the distinction is important. If you run GNU/Linux then maybe, but if you run another Linux - like Android for example - you may find there is very little GNU in there.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 13:19 · Score: 0

I honestly feel that a lot of people that feel the urge to flame RMS are doing so out of a jealous ego reaction.
"Great Minds Discuss Ideas; Average Minds Discuss Events; Small Minds Discuss People"
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by greg1104 · 2015-03-23 14:56 · Score: 1

Good old dictionary.com says paranoia is baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others. There are a few examples where I think Stallman is excessively paranoid. I personally like using the web only over e-mail to avoid "survellance". Wander that deep down the rabbit hole, and the all powerful three letter agencies out to get you will also have secret exploits for Lynx. Seriously, it's all in the Snowden documents! And I totally did remember to take my medication!
However, there are way less examples that seem extreme like that today then there used to be. Re-writing your hard drive firmware with secret monitoring tools? In 2015 evidence that might be happening is reasonable news, not paranoia.
I've seen plenty of examples of companies who do not want to share code unless compelled to. There are software compliance tools for lawyers whose main purpose is checking corporate source code repos to make sure there's no GPL code. But the number of corporate contributors to all the BSD distributions says the GPL is not mandatory to develop open code. Did it help? Sure. I think open source software as a way to share overhead on boring infrastructure code was inevitable though, even if there was no "free software" (tm).
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 14:59 · Score: 0

No one considers using fucking Android to be "running Linux" in the common sense. Similarly, I don't "run Linux" when I use the seat-back terminal on a Virgin America flight or when i turn on a router.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by greg1104 · 2015-03-23 15:10 · Score: 1

That grass-roots FLOSS development only happened after the GPL does not mean it was necessary to create it, nor even caused directly by it. Giving away free software to promote consulting and support revenue can be a profit center independently of other motives. I can easily imagine an alternate 2015 where there was no Stallman, so instead consulting companies shared boring infrastructure code to split its development costs.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by exomondo · 2015-03-23 15:52 · Score: 1

No one considers using fucking Android to be "running Linux" in the common sense.
Well what is "running Linux in the common sense"? If what you're saying is that GNU/Linux has a lot more GNU in it than non-GNU/Linux then that's obviously pretty redundant and makes no point at all.

Similarly, I don't "run Linux" when I use the seat-back terminal on a Virgin America flight or when i turn on a router.
Well that's not a personal computing sense, it isn't your computer but on a smartphone or a tablet it absolutely is. So which of the following is "running Linux in the common sense" and why: Ubuntu, Ubuntu Phone, Maemo, ChromeOS, Android?
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 15:59 · Score: 0

um...yes they do! i run Meego and Android on my N9, both are Linux! Meego is a GNU + Linux distro where Android is not GNU + Linux but both are Linux.
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-24 04:24 · Score: 0

Likewise ECGS (Experimental GNU Compiler System) was a fork of GCC it proved substantially better, so the FSF abandoned the mainline and adopted the superior fork.
In other words, I think both examples you've given of RMS getting in the way are actually examples of exactly the opposite.
It does take a certain humility to abandon what may very well have been a project dear to one's heart, in order to advance a larger goal that will benefit more people.
Not what happened in the case of GCC. The work by Richard Kenner on the "official GCC" was finally completed and merged back into EGCS; and sort of a condition for getting GCC nominally back under the FSF umbrella was the forming of a GCC steering committee rather than "Stallman says".
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by causality · 2015-03-24 06:09 · Score: 1

I urge you to consider that Occam's Razor does not apply in the social realm, where motives are often hidden. This makes "paranoia" difficult to distinguish from "foresight".
In my personal unqualified opinion, it's like using alcohol. If there is no sign that it harms your well-being or reduces the quality of your life, then you do not have a problem. If there are such signs, then you do. In the absence of such signs, I would call it "caution".

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by phantomfive · 2015-03-24 12:09 · Score: 1

for whatever reason, FOSS and similar ideas were completely unknown to average users until the GPL took off.

It wasn't entirely clear that source code could be copyrighted until 1980 (see history), shortly before the creation of the GPL. So that is probably why.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:I know I'll get flamed... by causality · 2015-03-26 13:48 · Score: 1

Rather than call it pure coincidence, which I deliberately and knowingly stopped short of saying, I was implying that it is not. I simply didn't care to get into the minutia of precisely how that happened and what the exact sequence of events were, since my point did not depend on the details, only on the truth that things happened in this manner.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein

Am I Doing It Right by kindbud · 2015-03-23 05:25 · Score: 1

Is this where a helpful /.-er is supposed to post a link to TFA?

--
Edith Keeler Must Die

Re:Am I Doing It Right by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:52 · Score: 0

LMGTFY... http://www.cio.com/article/2900492/open-source-development/stallman-joins-the-internet-talks-net-neutrality-patents-and-more.html

First by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:25 · Score: -1

But did he eat any skin from his toe?

So far he's right... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:25 · Score: 0

On so many counts, it's scary.

When can we destroy the voluntary panopticon?

Hmmm .... by gstoddart · 2015-03-23 05:26 · Score: 0

Is there an actual story here? Like anything with a link?

Or do we just get a one line snippet that says "RMS says Facebook evil 'n Stuff".

Come on guys ... two sentences and no links. That's not an actual "story".

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.

Re:Hmmm .... by wytten · 2015-03-23 06:00 · Score: 1

http://www.networkworld.com/ar...
Re:Hmmm .... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:07 · Score: 0

Just take alphadogg's word for it.

Such interesting. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:27 · Score: 0

Very read. Much informed. No article link?

14 comments? can't see any of them. by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:27 · Score: 0

21 now

Let me just say this about that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:29 · Score: 0

As of this writing, TFS contains no links and shows no comments, despite "Read the 14 comments" being displayed on the front page. Therefore, the most intelligent comment I can make about it is this:

"First post."

I hope that won't bother anyone more than the other 14 comments already have.

Re:Let me just say this about that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:06 · Score: 0

some kind of spam dos or something? First posts seem more offtopic than usual.

Everything is Terrible by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:30 · Score: 0

and its your fault.

Re: Everything is Terrible by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:52 · Score: 0

Nooooo :(
Re:Everything is Terrible by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:55 · Score: 0

Sorry. My bad.

RMS Speech??? by rstanley · 2015-03-23 05:30 · Score: 1

And the link to his speech is where??? Please provide the link(s) to a video or text copy of his speech.

Thank you!

Re:RMS Speech??? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:08 · Score: 1

Don't worry, they're saving you a lot of unneeded grief. RMS is a troll.

/. Says 24 comments to this story... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:32 · Score: 0

...and I'm not seeing a single one.

First Post?

Re: /. Says 24 comments to this story... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:02 · Score: 0

Not even the frist that thin mistakenly thinks it would be the frits psto.

Oh RMS... by TJ_Phazerhacki · 2015-03-23 05:32 · Score: 0

You keep on fighting the good fight, grandpa.

--
Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!

Need a standards based Facebook replacement by bigpat · 2015-03-23 05:33 · Score: 1

Facebook solved the problem of contact management very nicely. I remember the days of sending mass emails to all your contacts with new contact information... unless you manually updated your contact database then it was over and you didn't have great control over who's emails you would see and you couldn't discover old friends online...

To retain some small semblance of our privacy though we really need a set of Internet communications protocols for updating and managing address books and some sort of open directory infrastructure where people could register and look up and discover friends. But keep the information about who is connected to who private and not mediated by an all knowing third party who is selling that data to the highest bidder where it is really being used against our interests.

All it would really take is some protocol for sending or attaching updated contact info in an email or over any other protocol that a client would then use to automatically update a local/server copy of your friends list. People still rely on web mail primarily so the data would likely remain vulnerable to snooping, but at least people would have the option of keeping their data on privately owned hardware.

Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by WillAffleckUW · 2015-03-23 05:51 · Score: 1

Oh, come on, if you could replace FB with an alternate service, it would be like DOTA being as popular as WoW ... um. Err.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 05:58 · Score: 1

So then how do you propose that people find/identify the people you know, since so many people have the same first and last name? Oh, right, by their friends ... oops :-)

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by jedidiah · 2015-03-23 06:28 · Score: 1

> I remember the days of sending mass emails
So Facebook solves the "problem" of spamming your friends. NICE.
In other words, it doesn't solve any real problem at all and if anything just enables those that abuse the shared infastructure.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by bigpat · 2015-03-23 07:37 · Score: 1

> I remember the days of sending mass emails
So Facebook solves the "problem" of spamming your friends. NICE.
In other words, it doesn't solve any real problem at all and if anything just enables those that abuse the shared infastructure.
It isn't an abuse of shared infrastructure to send multiple people emails. Facebook is just a different type of social contract. You put something out there and you know it isn't certain anyone will see it, but there is feedback "like" when they do. With emails you expected people to read them, although with some possible delay. versus Texts or IMs which usually you expect an immediate read/response.
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by bigpat · 2015-03-23 07:40 · Score: 1

Finding people is what directories are for. Pictures, Location, affiliations... whatever people want to put out there. And what is to prevent a standard protocol for people to share their friends lists with their friends?
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by causality · 2015-03-23 08:38 · Score: 1

Finding people is what directories are for. Pictures, Location, affiliations... whatever people want to put out there. And what is to prevent a standard protocol for people to share their friends lists with their friends?
If you want to get rid of Facebook (have it go the way of MySpace -- remember them?) without replacing it with the next centralized panopticon, what you need is a completely standardized, completely open, secure, encrypted, cross-platform, peer-to-peer method of implementing the same features. Nothing less will do. Until then, when Facebook finally diminishes it will simply be replaced by the next Facebook-wannabe.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 09:10 · Score: 1

So your recommendation is to give people less privacy than now by putting even more information about them out there for the whole world to see?

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 09:12 · Score: 1

And who is going to pay to set this up and fund the day-to-day running of this operation?

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by causality · 2015-03-23 10:07 · Score: 1

And who is going to pay to set this up and fund the day-to-day running of this operation?
I assume it will be the same sort of people who paid (i.e. their time and expertise) to create and make freely available other software like BitTorrent, the Linux kernel, the Apache server, etc.
There is ample reason to believe this is possible. There are numerous extant examples, far too many to enumerate here, in the form of just about every GPL'd project ever created. Perhaps you missed the part where I said it would need to be decentralized and peer-to-peer, so much like BitTorrent, the users themselves would bear the cost of the bandwidth and CPU cycles.
The question of how to host content that many users will want to share without ever-increasing costs of a centralized system to bear the load was, after all, the chief problem that BitTorrent was created to solve.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:Need a standards based Facebook replacement by exomondo · 2015-03-23 16:26 · Score: 1

To retain some small semblance of our privacy
If you want privacy then don't put your information on the public web.

In other Words by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:33 · Score: 0

Stallman being Stallman... By the way where is the link of his full speech?

Pissed Roast! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:35 · Score: -1

W00t! I got the pissed roast! I got the pissed roast!

How would he know? by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 05:36 · Score: 2

After all, he says he doesn't use a web browser.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.

Re:How would he know? by JThundley · 2015-03-23 11:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

RTFA:

For one thing, he said, he now connects to websites from his own computer – via Tor and using a free software browser. Previously, he used a complicated workaround to more or less email webpages to himself. The announcement brought a surprised gasp and a round of applause from the 300-plus attendees./quote

It's the Stata Center at MIT... by bulled · 2015-03-23 05:36 · Score: 1

If anyone is counting

Wouldn't it be nice... by Anubis+IV · 2015-03-23 05:36 · Score: 2, Funny

Wouldn't it be nice if there were some way of linking us to additional information on the topic so that we could see his quotes in context? A shame that these things don't exist. They'd be hyper neat.

no TFS at all, eh? by suutar · 2015-03-23 05:36 · Score: 1

this is basically incitement to flamewar :)

Facebook == evil? by serviscope_minor · 2015-03-23 05:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

From TFS: According to RMS, Facebook is a "monstrous surveillance engine,"

Frankly, I think he's being excessively kind on Facebook there and that's the last thing I would have expected from him!

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.

Re:Facebook == evil? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 07:01 · Score: -1

With the depths of research he apparently put into other issues (see the Firefox trademark he mentions) he most likely doesn't think the topic needs any more thought. Which is quite horrible, limiting himself to that means he reaches less people than he could and normal people will just dismiss him.
Re:Facebook == evil? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 09:19 · Score: 1

Stallman already has a web page to warn users to avoid Facebook. It's not that the issue needs no more thought, it's that he didn't choose to spend more time discussing it. Like everything in life, it's a balancing act to direct your limited time according the space provided.

RTFA? by mcrbids · 2015-03-23 05:39 · Score: 1

Has RTFA become so absent that we just don't bother with TFA anymore?

--
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.

STRANGER DANGER by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:40 · Score: 0

parents should also lobby their children to not talk to creepy longbeards screaming about his privacy in public.

In Other Words by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:40 · Score: 0

Stallman is being Stallman... By the way where's the link to the full speech?

Link? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:41 · Score: 0

Missing the article links...

Stata Center by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:46 · Score: 1

Not Scala Center

Re:Stata Center by ChunderDownunder · 2015-03-23 13:46 · Score: 1

He he. I wondered if MIT had done a deal with Martin Odersky's Typesafe or partnered with EPFL.
Scala as a teaching language in the USA?

He's right, thank god for EU and Canada rights by WillAffleckUW · 2015-03-23 05:50 · Score: 1

In the end, the fact that citizens of the EU and of Canada reside in the US and, under the separate US/Canada and US/EU Data Treaties can not have their privacy rights stolen without specific item by item agreement (not Click To Accept), will be what saves the US Internet from itself.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --

No source? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:51 · Score: 0

For shame, an article (especially about Stallman) should have a link to the source.

How would Stallman know what Facebook is? by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 05:52 · Score: -1, Redundant

After all, he doesn't use a web browser, so it's not like he can conduct any original research.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.

Re:How would Stallman know what Facebook is? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:56 · Score: 1

you obviously didn't listen to his talk, he uses icecat with tor now.
Re:How would Stallman know what Facebook is? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:03 · Score: 2, Funny

You don't need a browser when you have emacs.
Re:How would Stallman know what Facebook is? by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 06:12 · Score: 0

So much for his I don't use a web browser stance.

For personal reasons, I do not browse the web from my computer. (I also have no net connection much of the time.) To look at page I send mail to a daemon which runs wget and mails the page back to me. It is very efficient use of my time, but it is slow in real time.
... or this rant. Since most sites no longer work without javascript, hahahaha. He's still, for all intents and purposes, stuck in the last century.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:How would Stallman know what Facebook is? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 08:14 · Score: 0

Modpoints or I'd post in my own name ...
Highly tempted to mod you up but I am terminally unable to decide whether to mod you as "insightful" or "funny"
Re:How would Stallman know what Facebook is? by causality · 2015-03-23 08:40 · Score: 1

Modpoints or I'd post in my own name ...
Highly tempted to mod you up but I am terminally unable to decide whether to mod you as "insightful" or "funny"
Definitely "Funny", since it's an AC. If it were a logged-in user, I'd use "Insightful" to contribute in some small way to their karma score.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein

Re:zionic nazi genocider applies for patent on hym by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 05:54 · Score: 0

I dare you to make less sense.

Where is the story? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:03 · Score: 0

See how this works is you give people something to read, then the people ignore your links and comment without reading it anyway. Still, you can't expect us to bother to write decent comments if you can be bothered to provide source information we won't read.

Slashdot Evolution by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:03 · Score: 1

I've always thought we should just dismiss the pedantry of linking to the article as it's never read anyway.

Re:Slashdot Evolution by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:09 · Score: -1

Well if you do that apparently this is what the comments evolve into... so yeah let's keep the links.
"unbelievable? repastical;; 1000s of our genuine spiritual & physical allys continue dying daily from 100% preventable starvation, rockets red glare, babys bursting in air etc... still no one is responsible,, or even aware.. momkind new clear options based on the universal spiritual axioms of tears & innocence equaling truth & mercy for all... meanwhile,, good medicine https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=stem+cell+therapy bad ama https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=nazi+zion+experiments.. turn it off http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=WMD+chemtrail+ingredients.. good neighbors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUeNtM6qakk bad "weather' https://www.youtube.com/results? earch_query=wmd+weather+media+censorship... we hang on to our hemispheres as the lights are coming up all over now..... rock on /. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-kA3UtBj4M"

Here's a link by ciaran2014 · 2015-03-23 06:07 · Score: 4, Informative

Here's a transcript: http://libreplanet.org/wiki/GN...

And an article written about the keynote: http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

(Thanks to 2 AC's for pointing these links out.)

The whole event was recorded and streamed, so the keynote video should be available some time soon.

(I can't see any reason why the article summary didn't include the link.)

--
Help build the anti-software-patent wiki

Re:Here's a link by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 09:18 · Score: 1

Here is the video.
Re:Here's a link by wertigon · 2015-03-25 11:02 · Score: 1

It is ironic this is on Youtube since that was what RMS explicitly told you *not* to do.
On the other hand, if one would follow *all* the rules RMS has, well...

--
systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.

Word missing. by Futurepower(R) · 2015-03-23 06:33 · Score: 2

"monstrous surveillance engine" He left out evil. Should be: "evil monstrous surveillance engine"

But Facebook can be useful: Are you too happy? Is it uncomfortable being happier than everyone else? Do you want to be miserable like everyone you see around you?

Facebook has an answer. Read Facebook use predicts declines in happiness, new study finds. Or download the scientific paper.

Finally some libre hardware recognition by GameboyRMH · 2015-03-23 06:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

Good to see that RMS is now backing libre hardware, I remember the last time Slashdot interviewed him he seemed completely unaware of it and thought that he was being asked about drivers.

The data logger in my sports car is libre hardware & software B-)

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel

Re:Finally some libre hardware recognition by Hartree · 2015-03-23 06:53 · Score: 1

A number of us brought that up in the questions session when he spoke at the University of Illinois back on March 16th. He hadn't mentioned it in his talk and didn't have much to say on it. Good that he's addressing it more now.
Re:Finally some libre hardware recognition by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 09:24 · Score: 0

Stallman has supported having libre hardware i.e. hardware where the internal design specifications are available for study and sharing. His position on this has been something like, "it's very expensive to manufacture high performance hardware, I hope other people can spend time and cooperate to make it happen".

What a Joke by TylerJWhit · 2015-03-23 06:45 · Score: -1, Troll

Stallman is a joke! He's super brilliant, but his stupid "Software should always be free, so I'm going to travel the world and make a religion out of this" idea is ludicrous. I mean... If I build something, I should get to decide what to do with it. If I want it free, then I'll make it free. If I want to make it closed, then I'll make it closed. That simple. And Facebook..... DUH! Facebook makes a killing off of data mining. Everyone knows that. Same with Google. If you don't want companies to know what your buying habits are, go to a brick and mortar shop and use cash. I personally prefer seeing ads that are geared towards me. I don't want to see Women's magazine ads popping up. But... tech stuff, linux stuff... awesome.

Re:What a Joke by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 07:17 · Score: 0

There are much worse religions than that.
Re:What a Joke by TylerJWhit · 2015-03-23 07:37 · Score: 0

Metaphor....
Re:What a Joke by Beck_Neard · 2015-03-23 08:52 · Score: 1

You're not only missing the point, you're also falling for the line that companies like facebook want you to fall for. There's no way to say this nicely and you'll probably hate me and disagree with me, but I have to tell you anyway.

--
A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
Re:What a Joke by causality · 2015-03-23 08:55 · Score: 1

There are much worse religions than that.
I wish most religions placed half that much value on justifying their doctrines.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:What a Joke by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 21:53 · Score: 0

Everyone knows that.
No, that's not how it works in the real world. Most people don't even think it through in the first place.

Crop mustache for gas mask seal by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 06:59 · Score: 0

Yes, and Hitler never learned how to shave his moustache properly.

Interestingly he may have had a "proper" mustache but it interfered with the seal of his gas mask during WW1. He may have cropped off the ends to ensure a good seal. Such cropped mustaches came to represent a man who served in the trenches. Interestingly in the US Navy of WW2 a sailor may have been allowed a mustache/goatee but not a beard for this reason, establishing a seal on a gas mask or firefighting mask. Well allowed by Navy regulations but at the discretion of the ship's commander.

I have a picture of a family member who fought in the Pacific during WW2. 1943, in uniform, while ashore on liberty. His goatee was a perfect prototype for what I saw in college not long ago.

Look, its Stallman: by Hartree · 2015-03-23 06:59 · Score: 1

Unless you've been under a rock since 1983, you already know largely what position he's going to take when you go to his talk.

Complaining about it is like going out of your way to attend a Baptist Tent Meeting and then complaining that they were evangelizing.

I disagree with him on a number of areas (Surprise! Must be the first time someone has disagreed with RMS.), but he's worth listening to. Often there's a kernel of clue in what the more extreme types say.

A few problems with that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 07:07 · Score: 3, Insightful

1) He's not made a religion out of it, you've decided that it is easier to "explain away" as a religion and therefore decided it is.

2) You can't build anything. You needed the freedom to use the tools how you wished to use them to create your edifice. If your hammer had an EULA that said you couldn't share the house you built with it and if you left or moved house, then you had to destroy the house or be jailed and/or fined, then you would know how much you need to have the freedom of hammer manufacturers curtailed.

3) Nobody made you use GPL software. You have to agree to MS's EULA which restricts you and what you do (and still pay) to use their code. You have to agree to Sun's EULA to use their code (and give away your patents). And all the GPL does is set the standard payment of "you cannot close the software" as the payment. Do you rip off Microsoft or Sun's code because you feel you should be free to use their code in your software for whatever you want? They disagree. But you only whine about the GPL having a problem with it.

4) FB keep changing their ToS and agreements. Much like Microsoft's network that originally made ANYTHING you discussed on their social media network that was patented a free and gratis grant of license to Microsoft to use, the agreements need serious consideration. And only when lots of people complained about a bad agreement did Microsoft change. You seem not to want this complaint of FB to stand. Is that because FB is sacrosanct, or because it's RMS doing it? Either of those two must be true (or both true) for this double standard.

5) The success of Linux required the GPL. Without it, it would languish like BSD has done. When a competitor can rip off your code and use you as development support, you want some payback, and GPL gave it when BSD doesn't. So only pointless stuff is added to BSD, stuff that doesn't make a difference. In the GPL code you can add your useful technology and get free help from people who are helping you because it helps themselves.

Re:A few problems with that by TylerJWhit · 2015-03-23 07:33 · Score: 0, Troll

You completely missed my point.... I have nothing wrong with the GPL or BSD licenses. I love them. But Stallman has a communistic extreme mindset. I thank him for his extremism, because without it, the GPL wouldn't have gotten the motivation and the drive forward that it needed. Linus's kernel wouldn't have had the success it had without the building blocks that the GPL community brought to it. My point is Stallman's extremism. He criticizes and belittles everyone that disagrees with his GPL mindset. I know that the vast majority of /. is part of the open sourced community and that Microsoft and Apple are targeted. For good reasons. But the reality is, BOTH corporations bring a lot to the IT industry. And Stallman throws the baby out with the bathwater and wants nothing to do with anything closed source. I for one, can't find an adequate replacement technology for Active Directory in the open sourced community. Now I know that at its root, it uses the LDAP framework. But it does it well. The *nix community lacks a satisfactory replacement. The nuts and bolts of what I'm saying is that Stallman disregards anything that's not GPL. Your point about a Hammer... completely erroneous.
Re:A few problems with that by causality · 2015-03-23 08:53 · Score: 1

I don't view Stallman as having a "communistic" mind-set at all. I view him as having a post-scarcity mind-set. In terms of the modern Information Age and its ability to make virtually infinite perfect copies of bits at nearly zero cost, he is correct. That you and others who share your viewpoint would read his works and falsely liken it to a doctrine arising in the mid-1800s (i.e. Marxism/Communism) simply tells me that the man is ahead of his time.
The point about a hammer stands, because much software is used as tools for making other things. No manufacturer of hammers would last a moment in court if they tried to implement an EULA, yet in the quest to make "intellectual property" more like physical property, copyright law allows this sort of thing to be done with software. Obviously this means it goes too far. The desire for software freedom is simply a desire to achieve a more reasonable balance.
The thing I have great difficulty understanding is this need so many have to worry about the guy personally. Did you know that no one is going to try to force you to agree with him 100%? Did you realize that you can take his ideas that resonate with you and ignore the rest? For example, you can run a mostly Open Source Linux system, but then use some proprietary software such as the nVidia drivers? Yes, you can, with your own systems, achieve whatever balance *you* find reasonable, no matter what Stallman says (of course, you have this option at all because of him).
If Stallman were threatening to send storm troopers to your home to force you at gunpoint to live the way he wants, then I would understand all this vitriol against someone you never had to listen to. I've never heard of him doing that and I don't consider it likely. Meanwhile, of course the man is going to advocate what he believes. Did you expect him to advocate a philosophy he doesn't believe in? So what's the actual problem, here? That he has an audience, that when he speaks it makes headlines, and when you speak it doesn't? Is that the root of the problem? If so, that's known as simple jealousy.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:A few problems with that by TylerJWhit · 2015-03-23 10:44 · Score: -1

I'm sorry..... but Just because I disagree with him, you assume I'm jealous? I believe that's called Ad Hominem....... You've taken my entire argument and exaggerated it way out of porportions in attempt to undermine my point. I believe you are the only one who assumed I wanted to find someone I agree with 100%. So let me try to explain one more time... The communistic phrase was an hyperbole. In essence, he believes that the software community is entitled to contribute to the community. Which is all well and good, in fact... it's immensely beneficial. But he takes it a step further and boycotts ANY hardware or software technology that doesn't follow the GPL license. Which is still Ok, if that's what he wants to do. But he takes it yet even FURTHER and criticizes other business and licensing models, including the BSD license. THAT is what bewilders me. I see the benefit in both. But he acts like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates committed a capital sin by being closed source. Your bout about Stallman being threatening and whatnot is pointless. That was never implied, or indicated by me. And to write me off and accuse me of Jealousy.... ROFL... Ok
Re:A few problems with that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 10:47 · Score: 0

2) You can't build anything. You needed the freedom to use the tools how you wished to use them to create your edifice. If your hammer had an EULA that said you couldn't share the house you built with it and if you left or moved house, then you had to destroy the house or be jailed and/or fined, then you would know how much you need to have the freedom of hammer manufacturers curtailed.
Obvious Strawman argument, that is not analogous to any proprietary software situation. There is no software that restricts what I can do with the result of what I produce with that software. For example I can produce free images with Photoshop and I can produce free software with Visual Studio.

3) Nobody made you use GPL software. You have to agree to MS's EULA which restricts you and what you do (and still pay) to use their code.
The problem is the absolutist view, I don't mind not being granted (yes no freedom is 'taken away', that is the idiotic MPAA/RIAA argument) the freedom to do something I couldn't do before (nor have no need to do) if it means I get a tool that allows me to accomplish what I want.
If I want a solid CAD modeler I will likely use Windows and PTC Parametric, sure they don't grant me the freedom to change and re-distribute the software but I don't need or want to do that. This is what free software advocates do not understand, why should I care about a philosophy which has no benefit to me and has no ability to accomplish the task I want within the context to which it applies?
If I have the choice of a hammer built to my ethical and moral standards and one that is not then even if I value a those ethics and morals above all else I am still not going to use the former over the latter if it does not drive nails. Software is a tool to do a job not a vehicle to push your ideology, it can do the latter but it must do the former first and that is where free software almost always still fails.
Re:A few problems with that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 14:03 · Score: 0

In terms of the modern Information Age and its ability to make virtually infinite perfect copies of bits at nearly zero cost, he is correct.
That you and others who share your viewpoint would read his works and falsely liken it to a doctrine arising in the mid-1800s (i.e. Marxism/Communism) simply tells me that the man is ahead of his time.
No, this is pretty much hand-waving. Copies might be zero-cost. Originals are not "zero cost."

No manufacturer of hammers would last a moment in court if they tried to implement an EULA, yet in the quest to make "intellectual property" more like physical property, copyright law allows this sort of thing to be done with software.
And how is the GPL not a EULA? Because you are not required to accept it? Every GPL program is effectively dual-licensed:
1) accept the EULA and gain special rights
2) don't accept the EULA, be stuck with normal copyright laws
Still a EULA, regardless of what you call it.

In the GPL code you can add your useful technology and get free help from people who are helping you because it helps themselves.
Umm....no. It is not "free" you are just hand-waving.
I don't believe the GPL disallows paying people to work on GPL code. So where does this magically "get free help" come from?
Sounds like a religion. Promise the world...deliver nothing.
I like RMS, and I generally like the GPL.
Where taxpayer money gets involved, is another story. Is the FSF tax-exempt?
re: the anonymous coward "1) He's not made a religion out of it, you've decided that it is easier to "explain away" as a religion and therefore decided it is."
RMS himself jokes about a "religion", so that is silly to call him out on it.
Also, "religion" and temporary, man-made, ever-changing, subject to voting governments and laws are forever separate from "religion" and "morality."
No law of the legal system could ever be religious, by definition. Nor could the GPL. Nor could the FSF.
Such comparisons, that RMS himself makes, speaks more to RMS' theory that the government is "God" that he would make such jokes. Serious or not, that view is communism/socialism 101.
People can still like and respect RMS and free software, and the FSF, and religion...and still criticize them. These are not mutually-exclusive.

3) Nobody made you use GPL software.

https://www.fsf.org/about/financial
https://my.fsf.org/associate/support_freedom?
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Boston, MA, USA
"
Form 990 is an annual reporting return that tax-exempt organizations must file. It provides information on the filing organization's mission, programs, and finances. We are audited each year by an independent accounting firm. We choose to publish our Form 990 and our audited financial statements on our own site so that our donors and supporters can have as much information as possible about our work. "
You can argue that is communist or not...the fact of the matter is, my tax dollars (exemptions are a form of subsidy) are propping up GPL software and advocacy.
So you are 100% full of shit on this claim.
Just like other false religions, the FSF is tax-exempt.
GPL alone, is not communism or socialism. Tax exemption is another story.
Tax-exempt "religions" are not religions either, for the record.
Re:A few problems with that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 14:06 · Score: 0

"Religions" should not be tax-exempt, and arguably the FSF should not be either.
Is that too consistent for you?
For the same reason, I don't like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Office_of_Faith-Based_and_Neighborhood_Partnerships
People of "religious" character and organizations should not have to register with the government, who gets to pick and choose who "is" and "isn't" a religion.
This is U.S.A. 101 stuff.
Doesn't matter how much good they do, which I might even agree with...I don't support the methods.
GPL as a voluntary contract is 100% fine, not communism in the slightest.
When the FSF is tax-exempt? That is different. That IS merging with the State. Using taxpayer funds (exemptions are a subsidy).
Re:A few problems with that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 14:15 · Score: 0

Yes, the GPL looks to be exactly like a "religion"...claim acceptance is "optional" all the while you are sitting comfortably tax-exempt because you don't want to actually compete or use your own money to promote your ideology.
Quick, claim BSD or Apache or Mozilla or other software groups are tax-exempt too and no different!
Play the "moral relativity" card, like a good little communist!
Things produced with taxpayer money (and exemptions, same thing) should belong to the people who funded it...that means 100% public domain.
Not wrapped in a EULA. Not imprisoned inside "no commercial use."
Not subjugated "only non-commercial use"
Not restricted "GPL only"
If taxpayer-funded software is restricted, it is literally "communism" ... doesn't matter much what direction it is forcing everyone to follow. Doesn't matter the justification. Doesn't matter how much "good" it does in the short term. Doesn't matter other people do it too. Or do two wrongs make a right now?
Does the FSF engage in "political activism" ?
That is also a no-no for tax-exemption (join the long list, churches included).
Hurry, jump to moral relativism to justify your pre-existing beliefs! "but he started it!"
The problem with hating things and groups, is you end up exactly like your enemies, and justify everything in the name of stopping them. Richard Nixon said as much.
Just like the military, I respect those who serve...but they did not "give" me freedom. No government can give anyone freedom, only take it away. This is the basis of the U.S. constitution.
Likewise, I respect RMS and the FSF and the GPL. Doesn't mean I agree with the methods used. Doesn't mean they are beyond reproach, they are all 100% angels who can do no wrong.
I could care less about nail and hammer manufacturers...if they are strong-arming a government, that is different. If they are tax-payer funded, that is different. If they made the hammers themselves, stick whatever EULA they want on it, I don't caree.
I still have a choice, unless the government granted them special monopoly powers (such as tax exemption).
l believe the term "useful idiot" applies in spades.
FSF and GPL is fine...do it on your own dime, please.
No different than "God" at the end of the day, all you want is a handout, and blather on and on about why only you deserve to leech off of the taxpayer, and noone else gets those special State privileges.
Good for you! Just like IBM lawyers! You have convinced the government to give you a monopoly.
Stare long enough into the abyss...it seems to have sucked you in, you don't even know what you are actually promoting anymore.
Re:A few problems with that by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 14:21 · Score: 0

Things produced with taxpayer money (and exemptions, same thing) should belong to the people who funded it...that means 100% public domain.
Not wrapped in a EULA. Not imprisoned inside "no commercial use."
Not subjugated "only non-commercial use"
Not restricted "GPL only"
If taxpayer-funded software is restricted, it is literally "communism" ... doesn't matter much what direction it is forcing everyone to follow.
correction: Not imprisoned inside "commercial use only"
Re:A few problems with that by gnasher719 · 2015-03-23 21:12 · Score: 1

2) You can't build anything. You needed the freedom to use the tools how you wished to use them to create your edifice. If your hammer had an EULA that said you couldn't share the house you built with it and if you left or moved house, then you had to destroy the house or be jailed and/or fined, then you would know how much you need to have the freedom of hammer manufacturers curtailed.
Nonsense. If all the hammer manufacturers used such a license, then out of nowhere a new company would open, sell hammers with the current standard license (which is you do with it what you want) at a good profit, and take over the whole market within five seconds.

Sometimes you gotta give it a rest. by fustakrakich · 2015-03-23 07:16 · Score: 1

Facebook and Google are far and away the best publicly available advertising tools you will find for a long time. The first place to put your business is on Facebook. And if you're selling really good shit, you cannot fail by putting all those little icons(Twitter, Linkedin, etc.) on your page. Trickle down technology, exploit it for all it's worth. Bring a friend!

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”

You must use software I like by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 07:42 · Score: -1

... and never use software I don't like! My opinions are objective truths of the universe and can never be wrong.

Re:You must use software I like by causality · 2015-03-23 09:01 · Score: 1

... and never use software I don't like! My opinions are objective truths of the universe and can never be wrong.
Perhaps this is a generational difference. In school, I was taught not to write "I think this is so" or "I believe this is true" in anything even slightly resembling formal composition. I was taught that, perhaps barring a rigorous scientific publication, anytime you read any written work of any sort in which the author takes a position, what you are reading is exactly that: one person's position. It should be understood as something like an opinion, something that may change at a later date, something with which others may have good reasons for disagreement. This is one part of thinking for yourself, by the way.
The more modern trend is to assume that anytime anyone speaks, they automatically presume to speak for everyone else in the most absolute terms possible unless this is otherwise disclaimed. Therefore much time is wasted bickering about things like "but I'm an exception!" and "that's just your opinion!" and many false judgments against someone's character are made, such as yours. While condemning someone for such a flimsy reason may be a reassuring outlet for the type of insecure people who contribute nothing but love to throw stones, if you are honest, you may have noticed it's not making any progress.

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:You must use software I like by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 14:29 · Score: -1

In school, I was taught not to write "I think this is so" or "I believe this is true" in anything even slightly resembling formal composition.

I was taught this too. It was 100% image, no "reason" given.
School does not allow "individual" thoughts. It is either backed up by a group, or not relevant.

anytime you read any written work of any sort in which the author takes a position, what you are reading is exactly that: one person's position.

I like that. Wasn't taught it, at all.

and many false judgments against someone's character are made, such as yours.
Seeing as how the FSF is tax exempt...AC is spot on.

... and never use software I don't like! My opinions are objective truths of the universe and can never be wrong.
This is how State-sponsored "religion" works. There is no escape.
This is why you never merge the two. Because then "government" becomes "infallible" and also it makes "religion" "malleable" and hence e.g. subject to change by votes.
AC is spot on. RMS may not feel that way, but can he be ignorant the FSF is tax-exempt?
In his mind, the ends justify the means.
I like the ends. I will even voluntarily support the ends, occasionally.
I don't care for his means. Leeching off of the taxpayer is not a way to gain respect. I don't like "commercial" and private for-profit companies that do it...why should I respect RMS when he does the same shit?
I believe the proper words to RMS are "get a fucking job"
"Thank you for all you've done" as well. "We need more of you"
"You've done good"
and then a scolding:
"get a fucking job, quit leeching off of the taxpayer, the world does not owe you a living"
"if you want a basic income, work towards that, for everyone, not just government-approved subjects"
"if you want an army of lawyers, there is always IBM"

Who is RMS? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 08:20 · Score: 0

Did somebody misspell rms?

Re:Who is RMS? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 15:02 · Score: 0

Did somebody misspell rms?
RMS and rms are spelled the same.

Also, by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 08:32 · Score: 0

"According to Richard Stallman, godfather of the free software movement, toejam tastes good"

The time I start listening to this wackadoodle is the time I suck on the wrong end of a shotgun.

Re:Also, by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 22:52 · Score: 0

Yawn. Bill Gates meanwhile talkes nicely to GWB, sends a fat check to him, who has 100000 dead Iraqis on his account. Very horrible, this toejam eater !

RMS reminds me a lot of this guy by Leo+Sasquatch · 2015-03-23 10:05 · Score: 0

http://www.ted.com/talks/thoma...

There's perfectly acceptable alternatives out there for £3.95, but he's just got to build his own for £1200. Looks like shit and works for 5 seconds, but he built it himself and that's what's important.

RMS's ego isn't as big when one examines evidence by jbn-o · 2015-03-23 10:52 · Score: 4, Interesting

Looking at the kerfuffle around LLVM/Clang you can find more of the same attitude from RMS—he doesn't have the ego invested in the work as his detractors claim he does (often without examples cited at all, sometimes as with the grandparent poster with wrong examples cited):

For GCC to be replaced by another technically superior compiler that defended freedom equally well would cause me some personal regret, but I would rejoice for the community's advance. The existence of LLVM is a terrible setback for our community precisely because it is not copylefted and can be used as the basis for nonfree compilers -- so that all contribution to LLVM directly helps proprietary software as much as it helps us.

Those aren't the words of someone who places ego above the good of the project or the public. For software freedom seekers, software freedom and defense of software freedom is the goal and good for the public.

--
Digital Citizen

RMS does. by jbn-o · 2015-03-23 10:55 · Score: 1

Actually, on 2015-03-16 he said he's been using a web browser and Tor. I don't know if the two are related and I don't know when he started using a common browser in a typical fashion.

--
Digital Citizen

Re:RMS does. by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-23 12:40 · Score: 0

So, is he continuing to rail against something he's never used, or has he tried it to get an informed view of the trade-offs?

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.

say what ? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 20:04 · Score: 0

...voting in representatives that will tell the Fed to help individuals instead of corporations.

You're fucking funny today, my man.

ERRATA by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-23 22:40 · Score: 0

"peace demonstration"

Re: encrypt on machine A for xmission on system B by lsatenstein · 2015-03-24 06:17 · Score: 1

Subject line says it all.

--
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada

Slashdot Mirror

RMS Talks Net Neutrality, Patents, and More

165 comments