Freedom in your Computer - R. Stallman

[idollar]

Listen to this. It may change your and other's life:

Freedom in your computer and in the net (Richard Stallman)

Happy Hacking !

- I keep this book as one of my treasures

DSCF1907.jpg (299.99 KiB) Viewed 4939 times

DSCF1906.jpg (216.16 KiB) Viewed 4939 times

[matt3o]

I watched it live. It is indeed very inspiring and I mostly agree with him... but rather unrealistic. Have you seen the distro you should actually use? http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

[idollar]

I watched it live. It is indeed very inspiring and I mostly agree with him... but rather unrealistic. Have you seen the distro you should actually use? http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

Lucky you ! I saw him years ago at the Uni. This is how I have got the signed version of emacs
I will review the URL that you have sent, no question about it.

Why do you say unrealistic ?

[seebart]

very interesting, thanks for the link!

[idollar]

There is a Spanish saying that that could be translated as "to demonstrate movement start waking."
With this link I just hope that some people that was not fully aware of the path start walking it

[idollar]

BTW: any news about Soarer ?

[matt3o]

Why do you say unrealistic ?

So many problems. The 100% really free linux distros are just a 9, none of them mainstream. Meaning that many software won't be available or will need local compilation. Not even debian is considered "free" by Stallman.

Apart from that... not even Linus Torvalds is able to release binaries for Linux. So you have to rely on the maintainers. Not to mention the static vs shared libs mess.

Linux will be (and already is) the most used OS if you sum up mobile devices+servers+routers+TVs+embedded devices+etc... but on desktop? We are faaaar away. Even farther from a TRUE free OS.

[andrewjoy]

I think his view is something to aim for even if we may never reach it, and the closer we get to it the better.

And "linux" is not an OS, its a kernel you build the OS around. You have to talk about distros like arch redhat and so on.

And let me tell you, my life in IT support would be far simpler if everyone used arch linux and installed it themselves, i could happily say RTFM and know that the manual is going to be there and correct . What we need is all the big linux distros with the money to join together and push one distro as a true desktop OS.

[idollar]

I like this discussion. Please continue. This was my goal.
Anything better than apple or microhorror.

I bought a macbook 15inch some years ago that ended with a debian. I decided that never again

My only problem with a (pseudo)free distribution (debian) was finding the right hardware.
But I found a shop cycling distance from home (http://www.lap-works.de) selling lenovo Laptops from companies that leased them.
I am typing with a X201 that costed me <300eurs (less than a 4704 ) that works like a dream. With the advantage that I can hold the second-hand hardware in my hand before paying for it. I even found a unit with US ANSI ! Yes, indeed, it is no mechanical, but one cannot have everything ...

If anyone is interested in me checking something for them, it is just a matter of sending me a PM.

[andrewjoy]

good move on the X201, IBM/Lenovo the best for linux IMO. my x61 is going strong , need me more ram ssd and a new screen for it tho marks on it but hey it was cheap. Possibly a good time to mod it with the high res screen from the tablet version

[idollar]

good move on the X201, IBM/Lenovo the best for linux IMO. my x61 is going strong , need me more ram ssd and a new screen for it tho marks on it but hey it was cheap. Possibly a good time to mod it with the high res screen from the tablet version

Actually, I bought a x203 new. I use it at home only. Too expensive to travel with it around. The x201 is my all-day-with-me-laptop. I do not like tablets. You cannot keep the screen without fingerprints

[matt3o]

And "linux" is not an OS, its a kernel you build the OS around. You have to talk about distros like arch redhat and so on.

there you go. I was expecting this so badly.

[idollar]

ERC is also in the near. If you do not like what you find, you can always walk to MediaMark. It is 100m away.

If you pass by Frankfurt on the A5 you may want to do an stop over these shops. They are some 45kms driving south from Frankfurt.

[matt3o]

there's basically no decent CAM software for linux (not hobbyist level at least). 3D is basically limited to Blender. Video editing (at the hobbyist level) is so buggy that is unusable.

linux (sorry andrewjoy, GNU/Linux) is the best platform ever for software development at any level, especially low level dev and web dev (where all the tools are native and not porting).

[idollar]

there's basically no decent CAM software for linux (not hobbyist level at least). 3D is basically limited to Blender. Video editing (at the hobbyist level) is so buggy that is unusable.

We are getting there ...

I am not an expert in blender at all, but what I have seen works. Again, I have seen little as I do not know about CAM. BUT ... and it is a big cappital BUT, you can always solve the bugs yourself or ask others to do it. With proprietary software you cannot do it. You are tight. You are an slave of the company that wants to suck all from you.

I do not know the reasons for Soarer to keep his source code. They are for sure anything but getting money from us. All the contrary. Many users are benefiting from the code. BUT, what happens if a new feature is needed ?
This is why I use TMK and I am even thinking of doing something from scratch.

I am not sure if you have follow my need for LEDs need here and here. I needed some extra functionality and I simply added it. This cannot be done with proprietary software.

It is a moral issue. You may benefit from devil, but this does not means that it is good not moral. It will actually empower it.

Free is not Gratis. I rather put my money into something that benefits society than only a subset.

[idollar]

The above is somehow linked to what Stallman says in the video on at 14min 00sec

[matt3o]

We are getting there ...

it's 15 years that we are getting there...

I am not an expert in blender at all, but what I have seen works.

oh yes, it works... but where are the alternatives? rhino, 3dsmax, zbrush and even smaller ones like metasequoia...

It is a moral issue. You may benefit from devil, but this does not means that it is good not moral. It will actually empower it.

you are preaching to the converted

[andrewjoy]

I agree with i$ on this, just because its free to modify and use how you see fit does not mean it has to be "free" as in monetary cost. For example i am happy to pay to support things that i use. And in the business world the licence cost is usually cheap anyway its the support you pay top dollar for.

And think of it this way, if the customer can go anywhere for support if the software is licensed under the GPL then you better get your arse into gear and support it properly and do a good job or you are going to lose a customer.

Meanwhile in the propriety world you are locked in no matter how crap they are.

Don't get me wrong there are problems, there is hardly any support for new games ( steam os may help a little but i don't see it going mainstream any time soon). And for some reason idiotic managers in the IT world think software licence under the GPL is evil and insecure, hell most of them look at you dumbfounded when they ask what licence the software is under and you say GPL.

[idollar]

We are getting there ...

it's 15 years that we are getting there...

I meant that we were getting to the ethical aspect of it. One have to define his/her own moral. That's the key.

Regarding the preaching; not at all my intention. Just to share ideas to make people's gray matter move.

[matt3o]

Regarding the preaching; not at all my intention. Just to share ideas to make people's gray matter move.

I believe you got me wrong on this. It's a saying. Meaning that my thought about OSS is the same as yours.

[idollar]

Regarding the preaching; not at all my intention. Just to share ideas to make people's gray matter move.

I believe you got me wrong on this. It's a saying. Meaning that my thought about OSS is the same as yours.

We are fully in sync Matt.
ACK

[andrewjoy]

Regarding the preaching; not at all my intention. Just to share ideas to make people's gray matter move.

I believe you got me wrong on this. It's a saying. Meaning that my thought about OSS is the same as yours.

We are fully in sync Matt.
ACK

We can change your name to alice and bob

[idollar]

We are fully in sync Matt.
ACK

We can change your name to alice and bob

Another example of comm-oriented comms and re-transmissions.
Isn't it alice

[andrewjoy]

Anyway back on topic, i think we all must agree that the big S has done many good things for the *nix world and he should be commended for that.

Oh and if you are interested in the story of this kind of thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rPPqm44xLs

Interesting indeed.

[Muirium]

We are getting there ...

it's 15 years that we are getting there...

So true. Keep the candle burning. But seriously, the chances of free software (in Stallman's terms) taking over the mass market and liberating the world… nope. Even the closed desktop is dying. People's phones, and whatever billion+ units form factor is next, aren't exactly headed in his direction.

There will always be some who care. As there always has been. But most people seek the very opposite of comprehensive knowledge of the workings of their computer. All the more as as every human on earth comes to use them as communications devices and entertainment.

[Halvar]

From a developer standpoint, I basically find it OK to close-source good software to make money off it. Almost all the greatest PC, tablet and phone software programs, in any category, are closed source, and most of the advances in software are driven by commercial companies, because IMO closed-source licensing for money is still the only way for a company to protect a really big investment in software development. What I do hate are the developments in "trusted computing" where hardware/software is clearly designed against the interest of the users. There's a good blog post by Cory Doctorow on this development: http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html .

I do have a lot of respect for the open source software that is out there, and I think the way open source software should work, that everyone can use and build on the work of others and gives something back by contributing, is a great one in some areas, but doesn't work and will never work as well as closed-sourced licensed software in others. Linux on the desktop will happen when Microsoft loses his advantage -- more drivers, more software, better user experience for non-technical users. Which will probably never happen as long as MS has enough money to develop it.

It's kind of like in pharmaceutical research -- finding and developing new drugs is unbelievably expensive, and it would of course be wonderful if it could all be done by public research and without patents, but in fact the most efficient way to advance in pharmaceutical research and working drugs for many diseases has been to let big "evil" companies invest heavily and protect their investments for some time. Which still means that there is lots of research in all areas of science that is shared for free, with public funding, and there should be.

[idollar]

There will always be some who care. As there always has been. But most people seek the very opposite of comprehensive knowledge of the workings of their computer. All the more as as every human on earth comes to use them as communications devices and entertainment.

Let me propose that we stop thinking about what the others are doing and we position ourselves. Each of us, regardless of what the rest is doing, we can decide. This is what it counts.

It is like buying from big organisations in the internet (if you translate the previous as "amazon" you may not be wrong). You can do it, it is convenient, even cheap. But ask all the souls running through these corridors with very limited rights and low rates. The fact that you do not see them, does not means that they does not exist. We are responsible of our acts, independently of what the others do.

[Halvar]

In some areas, I just want to use the best software there is. Open source is a bonus, but not the only factor.

[idollar]

From a developer standpoint, I basically find it OK to close-source good software to make money off it. Almost all the greatest PC, tablet and phone software programs, in any category, are closed source, and most of the advances in software are driven by commercial companies, because IMO closed-source licensing for money is still the only way for a company to protect a really big investment in software development. What I do hate are the developments in "trusted computing" where hardware/software is clearly designed against the interest of the users. There's a good blog post by Cory Doctorow on this development: http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html .

I do have a lot of respect for the open source software that is out there, and I think the way open source software should work, that everyone can use and build on the work of others and gives something back by contributing, is a great one in some areas, but doesn't work and will never work as well as closed-sourced licensed software in others. Linux on the desktop will happen when Microsoft loses his advantage -- more drivers, more software, better user experience for non-technical users. Which will probably never happen as long as MS has enough money to develop it.

You mean "free software" don't you ?

It's kind of like in pharmaceutical research -- finding and developing new drugs is unbelievably expensive, and it would of course be wonderful if it could all be done by public research and without patents, but in fact the most efficient way to advance in pharmaceutical research and working drugs for many diseases has been to let big "evil" companies invest heavily and protect their investments for some time. Which still means that there is lots of research in all areas of science that is shared for free, with public funding, and there should be.

1.- Most of the pharma use public money in the form of subsidies for their studies.
2.- If this studies are so important for the human kind , it is the OBLIGATION of the governments to ensure that the benefit goes to their clients (the people). Thus, why not investing public money in research ? There is no need to do any business case, if the big pharmas continue investigating, there is profit behind.

[idollar]

It is getting too political for this forum. I will stop here.
I hope that you understand the reasons. Do not get me wrong, I will read any answer but I will refrain from answering. This is not the place to talk about morality of the pharma industry.

I think I fulfilled my objective of making brains move