Slashdot Mirror
RMS Talks Net Neutrality, Patents, and More
alphadogg writes "According to Richard Stallman, godfather of the free software movement, Facebook is a "monstrous surveillance engine," tech companies working for patent reform aren't going nearly far enough, and parents must lobby their children's schools to keep data private and provide free software alternatives. The free software guru touched on a host of topics in his keynote Saturday at the LibrePlanet conference, a Free Software Foundation gathering at the Scala Center at MIT.
This is just a headline. Is there a link to an actual story?
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.
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?
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.
Where's the TFA?
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.
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.
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.
yeah. is a bit. here
You don't need a browser when you have emacs.
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
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.
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.
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
"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.
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.
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
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.
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:
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.
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.
Heh. They put him in the "Open Source Development" category. He's going to just love that...
Log in or piss off.
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
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.
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):
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