Slashdot Mirror
Stallman Suggests Install Fest 'Deals With Devil' Include Actual Man Dressed As Devil (gnu.org)
This weekend's annual LibrePlanet conference, hosted by the Free Software Foundation, prompted a new essay about "install fests" from Richard Stallman:
Install fests invite users to bring their computers so that experts can install GNU/Linux on them... The problem is that most computers can't run with a completely free GNU/Linux distro. They contain peripherals, or coprocessors, that won't operate unless the installed system contains some nonfree drivers or firmware... This presents the install fest with a dilemma. If it upholds the ideals of freedom, by installing only free software from 100%-free distros, partly-secret machines won't become entirely functional and the users that bring them will go away disappointed. However, if the install fest installs nonfree distros and nonfree software which make machines entirely function, it will fail to teach users to say no for freedom's sake. They may learn to like GNU/Linux, but they won't learn what the free software movement stands for.... In effect, the install fest makes the deal with the devil, on the user's behalf, behind a curtain so the user doesn't recognize that it is one.
I propose that the install fest show users exactly what deal they are making. Let them talk with the devil individually, learn the deal's bad implications, then make a deal -- or refuse! As always, I call on the install fest itself to install only free software, taking a strict stance. In this way it can set a clear moral example of rejecting nonfree software. My new idea is that the install fest could allow the devil to hang around, off in a corner of the hall, or the next room. (Actually, a human being wearing a sign saying "The Devil," and maybe a toy mask or horns.) The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user's machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program... Those users that get nonfree drivers would see what their moral cost is, and that there are people in the community who refuse to pay that cost.
They would have the chance to reflect afterwards on the situation that their flawed computers have put them in, and about how to change that situation, in the small and in the large.
Stallman adds that the Free Software Foundation itself would never let a devil near its events. "But given the fact that most install fests quietly play the role of the devil, I think that an explicit devil would be less bad.
"It would convert the install-fest dilemma from a debilitating contradiction into a teaching experience."
I propose that the install fest show users exactly what deal they are making. Let them talk with the devil individually, learn the deal's bad implications, then make a deal -- or refuse! As always, I call on the install fest itself to install only free software, taking a strict stance. In this way it can set a clear moral example of rejecting nonfree software. My new idea is that the install fest could allow the devil to hang around, off in a corner of the hall, or the next room. (Actually, a human being wearing a sign saying "The Devil," and maybe a toy mask or horns.) The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user's machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program... Those users that get nonfree drivers would see what their moral cost is, and that there are people in the community who refuse to pay that cost.
They would have the chance to reflect afterwards on the situation that their flawed computers have put them in, and about how to change that situation, in the small and in the large.
Stallman adds that the Free Software Foundation itself would never let a devil near its events. "But given the fact that most install fests quietly play the role of the devil, I think that an explicit devil would be less bad.
"It would convert the install-fest dilemma from a debilitating contradiction into a teaching experience."
These people are insane.
However, if the install fest installs nonfree distros and nonfree software which make machines entirely function, it will fail to teach users to say no for freedom's sake. They may learn to like GNU/Linux, but they won't learn what the free software movement stands for.... In effect, the install fest makes the deal with the devil, on the user's behalf, behind a curtain so the user doesn't recognize that it is one.
Perhaps, it can demonstrate that compromise and practicality are sometimes necessary in a functioning society and not just a "deal with the devil". Rigidity to an ideology can often be more destructive and counter-productive over the long run. Progress comes from change not stasis.
Stallman adds that the Free Software Foundation itself would never let a devil near its events.
The devil is often in the details; I'm sure some will always be nearby.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user's machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program... Those users that get nonfree drivers would see what their moral cost is, and that there are people in the community who refuse to pay that cost.
Implying that it's unjust and/or immoral for one's work to have tangible value and for one to make money from it. I know that's not what he means by "freedom", but, unfortunately, our society doesn't function on the Honor System.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
While stallman has some rivid values I don't think he's disagreeing with you. He's just wanting the process to call attention to the philosophy more and the consequences of choices in our real world. He's being both realistic and educational by proposing the cute idea of the personified Devil
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I wonder what life would be without RMS and GNU, especially GCC. I would really love to be paying $500 per machine for a compiler, because I believe free stuff is junk. I happily pay MS for Windows licenses, because I know I'm getting a solid product made by the top software company in the world.
Linux is an OS for people too down and out to realize how good commercial software is. Nobody in their right mind would use something that does not need activation and license audits to ensure compliance. /sarcasm
Yes, RMS is a pill... but without him, we likely would be paying by the hour for a cable set-top box to send "E-mails" with a "stamp fee" from our CompuServe accounts.
to help put food on the table of someone who writes software. Free software will always be mediocre and decades behind commercial solutions. Yes, ostentatiously [sic] the word free doesn't necessarily mean no cost, according to RMS, but let's get real, if there is no hindrance to simply copying it, then there is no motivation to pay for more than the cost of the copy. Unfortunately, copying 1s and 0s hardly covers creating them in the first place, and if there is no motivation to create them, then the choices will be mostly limited to hobbyist and hardware manufacturer written software.
And yet people do make a living writing free software. In many cases quite a comfortable one.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
What makes you think it's a niche OS?
It's pretty much everywhere but the desktop. The problem is primarily one of people not believing the inexpensive to free option is actually the better option. That and years of FUD and dirty deals from MS that actually forbid major sellers of consumer desktop and laptop systems from pre-installing Linux making it a less familiar option.