Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on April 27, 2005 12:24 AM
One of the biggest objections I have to Stallman is how he has distorted the language to his advantage. Once you agree that he represents "freedom", which is an incredibly loaded word in our society, he's practically won the battle, right? Then to argue against Richard Stallman is to argue against freedom, which is obviously what a lot of posters on this board have bought into.
Some of them practically grovel at the feet of this champion of "freedom", which I find nauseating. Right, and Microsoft is going to be our source for "trustworthy computing"!! Stallman and Gates are using exactly the same trick.
But you can see from reading this very article that Stallman is calling for more restrictions on how software is used. Maybe not legal restrictions, but strict guidelines on how the FOSS community should behave. According to him, we had better NOT use proprietary software AT ALL.
Not to mention the restrictions built into the GPL, which often require large software development houses like IBM to consult with lawyers to make sure they're in compliance. The GPL should be properly called a "cooperative software license", not something that represents "freedom". Hey, cooperation is generally a very useful thing, but it ain't the same as freedom!
These are precisely the sorts of tactics that <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0451524934/qid=1114531814/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-6354855-2164666?v=glance&s=books" title="amazon.com">this gentleman</a amazon.com> warned us against.
Re:In other words,
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 27, 2005 12:24 AMSome of them practically grovel at the feet of this champion of "freedom", which I find nauseating. Right, and Microsoft is going to be our source for "trustworthy computing"!! Stallman and Gates are using exactly the same trick.
But you can see from reading this very article that Stallman is calling for more restrictions on how software is used. Maybe not legal restrictions, but strict guidelines on how the FOSS community should behave. According to him, we had better NOT use proprietary software AT ALL.
Not to mention the restrictions built into the GPL, which often require large software development houses like IBM to consult with lawyers to make sure they're in compliance. The GPL should be properly called a "cooperative software license", not something that represents "freedom". Hey, cooperation is generally a very useful thing, but it ain't the same as freedom!
These are precisely the sorts of tactics that <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0451524934/qid=1114531814/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-6354855-2164666?v=glance&s=books" title="amazon.com">this gentleman</a amazon.com> warned us against.
#