Originally posted by ownagefool
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Richard Stallman Comments On Valve For Linux
Collapse
X
-
Where is that site which listed the reasons for wanting F/OSS, pointing out why one would care more about the license for the software on a laptop than a microwave?
I think its pretty relevant here.
F/OSS has far greater practical relevance for tools than for games.
If some part of a game was made into a general library, for some reason, then the importance of the license for that would instantly increase.
And what if the save data is some proprietary data? The worse that can happen is that you lose it, and its not important (as opposed to work related material)
I don't think RMS would requite artists to hand out the PSD-files with all the layers intact (because otherwise you can't change it as easily), or otherwise refuse to look at it.
Nor refuse to sit in a car that was designed using proprietary CAD-software.
Just like a car or a painting, games are an end-product. It just happens to be digital.
* B.t.w, This might actually also push for better open source GPU drivers
Comment
-
Originally posted by z1lt0id View PostI could see them releasing the majority of the client, just remove the DRM information from the code maybe.
After the obvious MS issue, again they won't want to give their code to the likes of EA with origin. Of course, in time competitors will be able to reproduce all this anyway, so maybe they'll be able to convinced at a later date that the likes of EA aren't a big when you consider the client will only be a GUI with a bunch of API calls anyway. Still, I suspect this argument will only be possible after you see 1 million online Linux players, which may never happen. Time will tell though, maybe Gabe really has drunk the open source kool-aid.
I don't think RMS would requite artists to hand out the PSD-files with all the layers intact (because otherwise you can't change it as easily), or otherwise refuse to look at it.
Still if you want to make the argument that Valve should open source anything, you should specifically focus on the arguments pertaining to how it would benifit them, as opposed to how it would benefit you. I thoroughly believe it would benefit them to have their platform completely ubiquitous, which I believe open sourcing (or just providing APIs) could help with, and I also believe that their games and engines are now vehicle for promoting the steam platform, which is why they're are rumors that both their upcoming games are either going to be fairly cheap or free. There are potential negatives of course, and unless you can understand those, there is very little use trying to convince valve at all.
I imagine the people in charge of making such decisions are fairly smart, thus it'd be useless to attempt a dialogue with them without a resonably tailored non-bias argument.Last edited by ownagefool; 29 July 2012, 09:35 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by wizard69 View PostThis just highlights how stupid this guy can be! Many of these games take substantial amounts of cash to develop and as such the developers have no chance of paying the bills if they don't use some sort of rights management. In fact if people tried to take Stalmans advice there wouldn't be a games industry at all.
In any event im happy that the concept of open source is wide enough that many license can fill a developers needs. Frankly I can not see any wisdom at all in offering software with a GPL license attached. One doesn't want to be associated with such lunacy.
Stallman is a really smart individual, no doubt about it
from whats he's usually saying, id say he is an utopist and therefore has a rather naive view of the world(geniuses tend to be naive) thus belives anyone can do anything just for fun
nothing wrong with that, utopia is a good goal, its just so far away
Comment
-
Originally posted by gens View Postjust what i was gonna say, maybe not that extreme thou
Stallman is a really smart individual, no doubt about it
from whats he's usually saying, id say he is an utopist and therefore has a rather naive view of the world(geniuses tend to be naive) thus belives anyone can do anything just for fun
nothing wrong with that, utopia is a good goal, its just so far away
In Stallmans world, new development would probably be cheaper too as people wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel every 5 minutes. You could use whatever was already good, and build on that. This would be near utopic for software quality and delivery times, but those attempting to make a living from releasing your own apps for a priced shared amoung a large number of people would probably suffer the conseqences of that. In this world, Microsoft probably couldn't exist as the company they are, Redhat would flourish, and both Operating Systems would probably be better than they are.
It probably wouldn't be all the catastrophic. Most people professional programmers are probably hired by companies or do contracting work for specified fees, but it'd be interesting times for a select few. We don't live in his world though.
P.S. I'm a 'professional programmer', and I'd love to coast of my work forever. I like have the potential to do that, but I also accept that in my own mind open source is superior. I'm sorta a hypocrite, and definitely not a member of the church of Stallman. I just don't like to see people disagree with the man when they don't seem to fully understand his view points. Personally I feel anyone who supports open source should have a strong understanding of his opinions, even if they don't agree with them 100%.Last edited by ownagefool; 29 July 2012, 10:01 PM.
Comment
-
rms contradicts himself, or something...
RMS wrote emacs (the modern one that runs on Linux, not the old ones that ran on Multics and ITS) on HPUX, and he used the proprietary HP C compiler, and the proprietary HP linker, to produce his free software that originally ran only on proprietary operating systems.
He says that it is okay for free software to ride on the coattails of proprietary software and take advantage of proprietary technology because it works toward the goals of free software.
And here we have Valve announcing that they want to host their proprietary software on a free operating system. In exchange for the privilege, they promise to help diagnose and fix Linux bugs, and to make suggestions on what can be done to Linux to make it a better platform.
We have here a vendor who is willing to make contributions to Linux and is ALSO taking considerable risk by bringing their software catalog to the platform, and RMS is going to talk trash about them???
And recently we had to be subjected to Linus Torvalds lambasting Nvidia because they have the unmitigated gall to treat all of their customers in the same manner.
Is there something in the water or what?
Or maybe RMS, Linus and Mitt Romney have the same PR advisor???Last edited by frantaylor; 29 July 2012, 09:58 PM.
Comment
-
Linux/gnu is not just an OS, this is a cult you are joining. It is a way of life. You must study the FOSS philosophy, and then go around and spread it to others, trying to convert them and save them. Any software that does not adhere to the FOSS philosophy will be considered evil and boycotted. Any hardware that does not adhere to the FOSS philosophy will be considered evil and boycotted. There are our demands, and it is in the best interest of corporations to join us, or face the consequences.
amidoinitrite?
Comment
-
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostRMS wrote emacs (the modern one that runs on Linux, not the old ones that ran on Multics and ITS) on HPUX, and he used the proprietary HP C compiler, and the proprietary HP linker, to produce his free software that originally ran only on proprietary operating systems.
He says that it is okay for free software to ride on the coattails of proprietary software and take advantage of proprietary technology because it works toward the goals of free software.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostAnd here we have Valve announcing that they want to host their proprietary software on a free operating system. In exchange for the privilege, they promise to help diagnose and fix Linux bugs, and to make suggestions on what can be done to Linux to make it a better platform.
We have here a vendor who is willing to make contributions to Linux and is ALSO taking considerable risk by bringing their software catalog to the platform, and RMS is going to talk trash about them???
Originally posted by RMSNonfree game programs (like other nonfree programs) are unethical because they deny freedom to their users. (Game art is a different issue, because it isn't software.) If you want freedom, one requisite for it is not having nonfree programs on your computer. That much is clear.
However, if you're going to use these games, you're better off using them on GNU/Linux rather than on Microsoft Windows. At least you avoid the harm to your freedom that Windows would do.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostAnd recently we had to be subjected to Linus Torvalds lambasting Nvidia because they have the unmitigated gall to treat all of their customers in the same manner.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostIs there something in the water or what?
Or maybe RMS, Linus and Mitt Romney have the same PR advisor???
...and who gives a crap about Mitt Romney? - a US politician whom has nothing to do with software / FOSS / or linux
Comment
-
Originally posted by boast View PostLinux/gnu is not just an OS, this is a cult you are joining. It is a way of life. You must study the FOSS philosophy, and then go around and spread it to others, trying to convert them and save them. Any software that does not adhere to the FOSS philosophy will be considered evil and boycotted. Any hardware that does not adhere to the FOSS philosophy will be considered evil and boycotted. There are our demands, and it is in the best interest of corporations to join us, or face the consequences.
amidoinitrite?
Comment
Comment