Did you just assume my emotional state?
Has anyone mentioned that the joke itself isnāt actually about abortion, but governmentās interference with it? I donāt get whatās so triggering about it. I think the bluechecks are just always out for blood from someone.
Anyway, when I signed up I thought I read some rule about not discussing anything political, which this topic very much is.
Every piece of submitted code?
Has he not? Iām genuinely curious? Considering he thinks that Microsoft contributing to open source is a good thing, hes not the one to care so long as your submitting code.
Maybe heās changed?
While not enough direct quotes here, it seems like heās still pessimistic and distrusting of anything they do.
People are still treating Microsoft like itās 2003.
Since 2012 heās been saying Ubuntu is spyware.
In reference to Microsoft releasing their code under open licenses he replies āWell thatās goodā, he says with respect to the particular programs the release under free licenses that hes āglad about thatā. I donāt think iāve ever seen an instance where he has rejected the idea of people contributing code.
The rest of the clip is actually a pretty good short summary of part of the point, why he says free software and not open source, about why the term open source came about, and about its success in moving people away from the ethical ideas of free software and how they have to work hard for that.
Very interesting. Thank you for that video! That has definitely changed my blunt point of view of Stallman.
Maybe I have been working on old perceptions of RMS
I will have to look more into this. Sometimes his actions seem conflict with the messages heās spreading. His website is out of date, as it reads more of demonizing than āpositive stepsā. In the past, it seems like he has always stood in the way of innovation. But, if he views that certain innovations are infringing on freedoms, then I can see why heād be so passionate.
Thanks again for the video. I will check out more sources and see if the ānew Stallmanā is more appealing and accepting of other organizations.
Heās always going to have strong views on any computing that takes away the users control over there data and computing, I doubt that will ever change its why we have free software today. But I donāt think Iāve seen an instance of your Microsoft so Iām not accepting your code just because your Microsoft, if he did he doesnāt now. Which makes sense since the code is free and thatās his goal.
Heās also not against proprietary software in certain circumstances (within work for example) but obviously thinks fee software is a better answer.
He had what I think has a pretty good interview with lunduke (before the lunduke crazy stuff) as well.
In addition to the page I linked on his governmental views, this clip is also good. It shows his very non Marxist view around money. His views overall may not be fully agreeable with you or others but my main point in one of the previous posts was to identify that Marxist wasnāt the correct place to put him and heās always been an advocate of making money from free software being a great thing.
Bottom line is this mates: The Author is free to express his perceptions in the Community, just as One and All are free to address those perceptions as rebuttal or agreeance based upon their own points of view. And whilst all of the above may be so or not so, the only real matter that is of import is the facts and nothing but the facts.
Whatsoever those facts may be.
P.s.-I did indeed read every single comment before replying. And as logic dictates, the above comment was the absolute utmost of diplomacy upon such.
What irritates me, and why I am extremely liberal with the Mute Thread button these days, is when people suddenly swerve into really aggressive language and tone just because the thread isnāt going the way they wanted and people arenāt willing to sit there and read about their moral/political hangups.
My bad, after the third person sharing the Webster Dictionary definition of censorship, I started to get a little bit irked.
I donāt see how people figure Iām a trans-utilitarian-pink mohawk-communist leftist Sanders sucker because I dislike Stallman overstretching his authority. Thatās the defense now, rather than discuss this, you call someone an outraged SJW, a nazi, or a liberal.
I wrote the OP as a ālol look how dysfunctional the FSF isā. People took it as me screeching like a four year old, apparently.
Well Iāll have you know sir. I used the Oxford dictionary!
Iām not a huge fan of Stallman either, but some of his opinions and criticisms are valid and to the point. Heās worth listening to, in my opinion, even if you disagree with most of what he says.
Googling ādefine censorshipā webster is #1 result.
They have some SEO magic there.
The pinnacle of critical thinking. You donāt have to agree with it in order to think about and consider itās valid and invalid points.
to your excellency
Hint: I now use āyour excellencyā as gender neutral address
Be excellent to each other
Iāve been saying for years now that Richard Stallman is a nutcase.
The problem that Stallman and a lot of his devout followers canāt seem to comprehend is, as a programmerā¦ YOU THE END USER ARE NOT ENTITLED TO SEE A LICK OF SHIT of the code I makeā¦ And just cause I wonāt show you something, that doesnāt mean I have some insidious intent.
The real problem with Open source software as a whole is, you donāt really own the code you are making. A perfect example of this is Oracle with their purchase of Sun Microsystems. Oracle for years has been trying to close the source for all of it and they canāt. They have every right to, but they just canāt. All they can do is rewrite the terms of service, and if you make billions of Dollars (e.g Google) just sue them to oblivion
Open Source is excellent but no one should be forced to Open Source their software or freely give it away. As for Stallmann making a joke about abortion. I mean if you are the only person laughingā¦ Chances are itās not funny.
This definitely, itās worth listening to people, especially if they have a subject in particular they are or beleive themselves to be specialised in I think. As you never know what you might learn, and in most cases you will probably come out with something you didnāt know to begin with.
I agree with a lot of his thoughts in a number of areas, he executes them more so than I do, and I balance my risk more to the more risk side than not, but thatās my preference.
I do think its good we have that kind of view point in free software, it might not go well with current methods of business as much, but the view brought us free software, and I think in many cases it has merit. And for those that donāt think it applies these days, I think thereās still lessons there that are useful, and the views of the āother sideā if your on the open source āsideā are always good to hear as they can open doors to consider that may end up being ones you want to follow down at least partially.
Iāve no idea if what I said makes senseā¦ I hope it does.