What is Digg?11 Comments
- frase, on 12/18/2008, -0/+7The truth is that the term "open source" /does/ avoid the issue of freedom. Since the FSF is about freedom - not just the practical benefits of said freedom - Stallman is quite entitled to point out this distinction and discourage use of the term in relation to himself and the FSF.
- smotpoker, on 12/18/2008, -1/+7I get why he quibbles over "semantics" so much and do not blame him (though I admit that I find it a bit frustrated and hard to follow at times).
This is how I see it: Stallman has meticulously crafted a set of rules and protocols on which to base his life and direct his interests. These principles are rooted primarily in freedom and sharing/generosity. He is agenda is not just to make software free but to make the world a better place through logical debate and setting examples.
When people diminish his efforts and agenda to get commercial support or some form of "legitimacy" (such as was the case when the term "open source" was coined), they are essentially subverting the hard work and planning he invested for so many years. He doesn't just want free software to be mainstream, he wants the underlying principles of altruism and freedom to.
When people continually try to contort, redefine and euphemize his software/ideals to attain mainstream success, they essentially undermine it all. It is like a David vs Goliath thing. David doesn't want Goliath and the Philestines to realize that shepherds are a non-threat they can exploit for personal gain; he wants to convince everyone that he can (including the exploiters) that the beliefs and principles they have been forced to live by are fundamentally flawed and even immoral.
RMS is trying to set an example with his own actions and at the same time create/promote a model that proves of the feasibility of his beliefs. I think most people would be a bit perturbed when their own fundamental beliefs and best-intended efforts are constantly diminished or misrepresented. - tuxchick, on 12/18/2008, -0/+4Well said. RMS uses words precisely, and offered a clarification. The article author (an editor in chief, no less) needs to accept corrections a little more graciously. There was no malice in it.
- kd420, on 12/18/2008, -0/+3I am tempted sometimes to say "Oh come on, you know what we mean". The only reason I respect his argument is because there needs to be someone who protects freedoms as adamantly as he does. Though it seems like semantics now, he essentially constructed a Bill of Rights for software freedom. When people say he is being picky, it reminds me of people complaining Ron Paul is being picky about following the Constitution. Once you let a little slide it builds up really fast.
Unfortunately even Linux users (myself included) really only care about the free (as in beer) part of software freedom and that it is open source. I am just lucky that there are others making sure that people don't forget the principles that the free software movement is based on. - depro9, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2Stallman is correct.
- hamobu, on 12/18/2008, -0/+2RMS is 100% correct. I would use Free software over proprietary even if it were inferior in quality (which is isn’t) The idiot author of the article simply does not get it. He says that the whole thing is "to bring down Microsoft". Well that is not true. It is also about bringing down Apple and RIAA. Stakes are bigger than just which OS will have biggest market share. We are talking about who has the right to control your computer and your information.
- coldkill3r, on 12/19/2008, -0/+1Ah, I see his point now. Thank you for clarifying.
- daftman, on 12/18/2008, -1/+2You seems to be full of hate about something that you don't understand.
Open source just simple mean you can see the source code. It's stupid and pointless and lack any freedom that RMS stands for. Just because you can see the source code doesn't mean you can't be sued from copyright infringement when you use the source code in your software or even compile it to run on your machine.
I guess ignorance do cause hatred.
Instead of disputing his point you chose to insult him. May be you're one of those idiots who split over from 4chan. - YodaJones, on 12/19/2008, -1/+1Yawn.
- coldkill3r, on 12/18/2008, -6/+4Wow...why is he so hung up over semantics?
- YodaJones, on 12/18/2008, -6/+1I get it that Stallman has been an amazing force in the "Free Software" movement, and that is a good thing. But dude, you are all hung up on syntax and you look like some ***** old Grateful Dead hippie survivor from the '60's. TIP: Get a haircut (seriously) and take a long hot shower (after the haircut). Go to the GAP or JC Penny's and get some pants and a shirt. Oh yeah, and put the ***** pot down, you are sounding like a old record and the needle is stuck. If these simple things are beyond your morales then step aside and let us get a new evangelist for the cause.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is