It's funny how RMS is characterized by his detractors as a fanatic, while at the same time these self same detractors foam at the mouth sounding even more fantatical than he supposedly does.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Richard Stallman Comments On Valve For Linux
Collapse
X
-
-
RMS simply fails to realize that non-free software is *not* unethical. You can't accuse others of being unethical just because they create something that doesn't suit your own needs.
Proprietary software is perfectly ethical and there's nothing wrong with it. Business practices of software vendors can be unethical (like Microsoft). Some EULAs can be unethical (like Microsoft and Apple.) But non-open/non-free software just by itself is not unethical.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostIn the Soviet Union, everything was required to be in the Public Domain, and your work could not be considered private property.
We don't live in the Soviet Union. Stallman wishes we did. Too bad for him.
I agree. When I read what he said, communism was the first thing that came to mind.
Great ideal, but what's wrong with intellectual property? There are obvious reasons for wanting a OS, core applications, and drivers open and free but games not so much.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ownagefool View PostRMS doesn't care about the hardware being free, just the software.
Red Hat didn't just break a billion dollars in annual earnings, it smashed its way pass a billion bucks with a fiscal year gross revenue of $1.13 billion, up 25% year-over-year.
Seriously, Phoronix is nuts. Is everyone here a MS troll? :/
He has no problem with this firmware if the manufacturer decides to burn the firmware into the device. However if the manufacturer instead decides to download the firmware at boot time, well that's a 100% DIFFERENT STORY for some reason that I really just can't fathom.
WHY is it that RMS doesn't care about proprietary hardware and yet they get all in a stink if the hardware manufacturer decides to make a good design decision?
Again I say that RMS's goals are in conflict with reality as we know it.
It JUST SO HAPPENS that I am a BIG fan of Linux and free software. I don't know RMS personally but we have met. We travel in the same social circles and we have dated the same girls. I was offered a job by the FSF but I turned it down. I've been getting paid to write linux software since 0.99pl13. Please don't accuse me of being a MS troll.
Tell us more about why Phoronix is nuts because there are people who ask questions. Yes indeed really we should just all bow down and accept unthinkingly.
Comment
-
Originally posted by FreeBooteR69 View PostIt's funny how RMS is characterized by his detractors as a fanatic, while at the same time these self same detractors foam at the mouth sounding even more fantatical than he supposedly does.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ownagefool View PostRMS doesn't care about the hardware being free, just the software.
Red Hat didn't just break a billion dollars in annual earnings, it smashed its way pass a billion bucks with a fiscal year gross revenue of $1.13 billion, up 25% year-over-year.
Seriously, Phoronix is nuts. Is everyone here a MS troll? :/
Your video system consists of both hardware and software. You see OpenGL or some such as the API, and it's implemented by the video system. On a modern card or an old SGI Onyx, the OpenGL library is just a thin library on top of the hardware. On an older card the OpenGL functionality is coming from software. The demarcation line between the hardware and the software is pretty arbitrary, it depends on what kind of card you have, etc.
What RMS is doing is stepping into that blob of software and hardware and making some pretty indefensible arguments about what should be free and what is irrelevant. Honestly I cannot understand how he can say that proprietary software doesn't matter if it's burned onto a card.
Let me point out that all those arguments RMS made so long ago about the proprietary drivers on the 9th floor Xerox dover, they apply equally to the firmware on your ethernet card, or to the code on the controller processor on your hard drives.
It's really funny that RMS claims to not care about proprietary hardware, when it was proprietary hardware that inspired him to write the GPL!Last edited by frantaylor; 30 July 2012, 12:36 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ownagefool View PostI'm European, so no, thats not true.
Comment
-
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostWhat about the firmware on the cards? It's not free software, it's 100% proprietary.
Your situation doesn't apply for everyone else. Firmware doesn't need to be closed sourced, especially so when you job is to make hardware most other people can't make. Moreso, when your motherboard is probably using the same proprietary software as everyone elses. For the record, you can get distros with non-free firmware.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostHe has no problem with this firmware if the manufacturer decides to burn the firmware into the device. However if the manufacturer instead decides to download the firmware at boot time, well that's a 100% DIFFERENT STORY for some reason that I really just can't fathom.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostWHY is it that RMS doesn't care about proprietary software and yet they get all in a stink if the hardware manufacturer decides to make a good design decision?
Again I say that RMS's goals are in conflict with reality as we know it.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostIt JUST SO HAPPENS that I am a BIG fan of Linux and free software. I don't know RMS personally but we have met. We travel in the same social circles and we have dated the same girls. I was offered a job by the FSF but I turned it down. I've been getting paid to write linux software since 0.99pl13. Please don't accuse me of being a MS troll.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostTell us more about why Phoronix is nuts because there are people who ask questions. Yes indeed really we should just all bow down and accept unthinkingly.
Originally posted by frantaylor View PostLet's talk about NUTS:Last edited by ownagefool; 30 July 2012, 12:34 AM.
Comment
-
Just in case
Just in case anyone is wondering:
I'm an advocate for a computer in which all of the computing hardware is open source. You can keep your secrets about CMOS process control, but all of the firmware, hardware schematics, etc. should be open source.
Why? Because it's REALLY what RMS wants to do. I'd say that he must have been asleep in 6.111 but then I remember that he went to Harvard, not MIT, so he did not have to learn about how hardware works. I just think he hasn't thought through the firmware issues.
A fully open system with all the firmware on all the devices laid bare, is the only way to go. You want to REALLY simulate your server and see where the bottlenecks are? You need it ALL. RMS is stopping halfway.
Comment
Comment