No announcement yet.

The FSF Is Re-Evaluating Its Relationship With The GNU

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    FSF separating from GNU is a huge problem. FSF has been collecting funds in behalf of GNU, and there is no way to separate funds intended for GNU from funds intended for other FSF initiatives. If the FSF suddenly breaks that arrangement do they keep monies donated for GNU? For those people who have recurring donations, will they be properly notified that future donations no longer benefit the GNU project?

    Maybe even more frightening is that FSF holds copyright on a large portion of the GNU project's software. RMS surely didn't predict that FSF would end up being hostile towards GNU, and a lot of eggs are in that basket.

    As much as I may disagree with some of RMS's stances and statements, this whole thing is BS and can only have negative consequences.


    • #32
      Originally posted by libv View Post
      Free and open source software... Nothing to do with being open or free, or providing technical advancements. It's all just political wrangling, either driven by self-aggrandisement and corporate/financial advancement, everywhere.
      It's exactly how it looks out to the rest of the world. In general population's perception, both GNU and FSF will look even more of a joke than they already do.


      • #33
        Originally posted by IreMinMon View Post

        It's exactly how it looks out to the rest of the world. In general population's perception, both GNU and FSF will look even more of a joke than they already do.
        In GPL 4 the major "freedom" is that the source code wont contain a word someone could feel being triggering or offensive. Also code made by bad white men can not be included. 4 Freedoms will be redone:

        1. Diversity is Freedom.
        2. Unoffensive is Freedom.
        3. Freedom is not freedom.
        4. White man bad.

        ROFLMAO, I actually feel very entertained observing what the crazies do.


        • #34
          If there's a new foundation to keep GNU running, I'll start supporting it with money I pulled out of FSF. The fact that they have the gall to even think of posting such statements makes me sick. If they don't want FSF be represented by rms, they should not try to unperson him.


          • #35
            Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
            "Statute of limitations" and "burden of proof" are two of the highest costs of freedom and equality because they work both ways in this regard. That's how "innocent until proven guilty" works.
            Hear, Hear! Let this advice save the 21st century from becoming another dark ages.

            What I'm learning during all of this is that we need a statue of limitations on how long it's acceptable to quote people on the internet for and how we need to set a limit on far back should we be allowed to go to dig up dirt on another.
            That's not a statute of limitations, that's an unconstitutional/insane mandate forbidding the study of history.

            However, you were completely on the right track with "statute of limitations." I said recently that quotes more than 20 years old should not be admissible in things like this. "20 years" is just a ballpark, a place to start the conversation.

            I mean there is a statute of limitations on most things, not including murder. There should be a statue of limitations on offensive, constitutionally-protected speech at least.

            There are laws against stalking and harassment. Why don't they apply if you can find some offensive quote?

            And before one more idiot lectures me on some XKCD article, look around you. Do you like witch hunts? Randall Munroe is a genius and amusing, but he really phoned it in that day when he helped half the internet reach a neutral stance on lynch mobs.

            I also think this calls for "civil" (gotta put that in quotes) disobedience. If society dumps political correctness and starts saying random offensive things, they can't cancel everybody. These rules are always applied indiscriminately, these Codes of Conduct ARE themselves discriminatory. If you think that's silly, read "When Geeks Collide" by Meredith L. Patterson. She puts it far better than I ever could.

            This Social Justice Inquisition needs to become part of history, Right Now.


            • #36
              The should be more concerned about Gates' meetings with Epstein post-conviction. But sure, let's look at RMS.


              • #37
                Oh look, free software just died. I was never a big fan of FSF, but now that it's dead I feel kinda sad.

                If only it died peacefully I'd be ok with it, but no, it got converted into a propaganda mouthpiece for the social justice warriors. That's fuckin awful.


                • #38
                  More GNU folks calling for RMS to not be the head of the GNU -
                  Michael Larabel


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Michael View Post
                    More GNU folks calling for RMS to not be the head of the GNU -
                    20 people out of hundreds. Just in the GNU Hurd project are 20 users registered:
                    Yet only one signed that statement.

                    It's ridiculous.


                    • #40
                      In this thread: Lots of hysterical whining about people exercising their right to free association by choosing not to associate with someone.