7 ms·

I feel similarly. While I absolutely can't and won't operate under the severe restrictions that an ideologically pure stance on software freedom ala Stallman wo

I feel similarly. While I absolutely can't and won't operate under the severe restrictions that an ideologically pure stance on software freedom ala Stallman would impose, I'm glad that there are some people, like Stallman himself, who take it to those extremes, tirelessly advocate for improvement and thus move the needle towards a better middle ground for everyone.

leidenfrost 3y ago
It's a lot more understandable if you consider the state of computing he experienced while growing up: Programs were way simpler, and shipping the source code in paper was the de facto way of distribution. It's not like he was a wacko around his peers. He just created what seemed a logical step from that. I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more.
- Gigachad 3y ago
  It’s commonly said that his inspiration was from wanting to improve a printer driver but couldn’t because it was proprietary. I feel like back in the day there would have been so many easy wins for modifications. Like how people used to root Android to add screenshot capability. These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me.
  - ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
    I think you might not be considering personal bugfixes (X interaction is great for the common denominator, annoying to me), long-term support (I want to use my device securely in 2045), or custom features (I want to be able to do X, but only 0.001% of people care so Apple doesn't). I use Android, so I can't be more specific. I have heard the unverified complaint that Apple sometimes slows down old devices as new ones are released, which would be impossible in FOSS. Apple is ultimately going to work in their own best interest. Their particular brand aligns that with the consumer fairly well, but there will be disconnects.
    - Gigachad 3y ago
      I don't really understand this. You plan to single handedly replace the entire OS and security teams to maintain the OS on your phone for a decade? How will you update the kernel when the proprietary driver blobs stop being maintained?
      - kaashif 3y ago
        I imagine their ideal open source phone OS wouldn't include any proprietary driver blobs, but what do I know...
      - ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
        I expect more people than just me are interested in reducing tech turnover or using old tech in the hobbyist space, ie. not single handedly. And yeah, as the sibling says, if we're relying on proprietary drivers, we're not really FOSS- my fantasy world doesn't just apply to Apple. Yes, it would be very hard. But today it is impossible, so very hard is hardly a complaint you can make in comparison. Did my other two examples seem more reasonable?
      - xethos 3y ago
        Perhaps the more generous take is that, with FLOSS software, you don't have to go it alone. My Pinephone Pro will not be running security fixes I write myself. But entirely because of its open nature, it doesn't need to - it will continue to recieve updates for years and years. For once, the hardware of a cell phone is likely to die before the software.
        johnnyanmac 3y ago
        If it gets the support of the right people who know how to write such security software and have an interest in maintaining it, sure. But that's the reason many open source initiatives fall short of proprietary. It's either based on the altruistic whims of a few particular talents, or some company is paying to have them maintain it. And we know the latter is fleeting. The caveat is that sometimes an initiative can be funded by charity or bounty to keep interest, but relying on generosity for 99.99% of projects is a fool's errand.
  - colordrops 3y ago
    People are still rooting Android and adding thousands of modifications to it.
    - lproven 3y ago
      Android is not proprietary. https://source.android.com/ https://source.android.com/ That makes it rather easier...
      - Qwertious 3y ago
        You linked to AOSP, not Android. AOSP doesn't have things like the Google Play Store; the shipped image is substantially different and isn't necessarily open-source just because it contains open-source components - Windows contains BSD networking code but that doesn't make Windows open-source.
        _ea1k 3y ago
        Sure, but the vast majority of those mods and alternative distributions are based on the sources that are available. It is a bit like a Linux distro running Steam. Yeah, there are proprietary bits, but the FOSS part naturally happens on the FOSS parts.
        lproven 3y ago
        You know what the "A" in AOSP stands for, right? :-) All I'm saying is that there's a big difference in jailbreaking an OS when most of the source code of that OS is publicly available for study and experiment. Surely that is not a controversial statement?
    - vinceguidry 3y ago
      You don't root OSes, you root devices. I learned that the hard way when I got a Samsung Z-Fold 4 and learned that the US version isn't rootable.
      - opan 3y ago
  - mikepurvis 3y ago
    There are several OS level things I wish I could change/override on iPhone: ability to share screen during a video call, ability to control how certain Bluetooth devices pair automatically, ability to throttle apps that I know are abusing the CPU and costing me battery.
    - akerr 3y ago
      You can share screen, Shortcuts supports Bluetooth automation triggers, turn off Background Apps or let the CPU race to sleep.
  - trelane 3y ago
    It's "commonly said" because it's true. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt via https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201...
  - sho_hn 3y ago
    > These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. > Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me. If you look at major MacOS or iOS releases, you will often see new features being advertised that were copied from FOSS systems that experimented with them and proved them out often many years beforehand. That is to say: iOS might have the edge on QA, but if you want to have impact and shape the future of how people use computers, contributing in the community is still a good way to do this. And in fact, commercial development tends to rely on this talent pool for survival, as companies do a comparatively poor job in educating new talent. It's where you get people with "job experience" in doing certain things.
  - belorn 3y ago
    When it comes to large sophisticated software the goal is not so much to improve it one self. Rather it is the knowledge that any anti-patterns will be removed by the community if it ever get added. Most of the time the community will not even need to remove anti-pattern from open source projects, since companies know that adding anti-pattern is just wasted developer time.
- fouc 3y ago
  > I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. I feel like this is a bit of a misperception. Does this historically happen?
  - kortilla 3y ago
    Yes, every institution is default dead without constant recruitment of young people to the cause. Most things won’t make it past a generation because everyone fails to focus on how to pass it on. It’s not too late by any means, but it’s looking very bleak for Free software with most kids’ computing being smartphones and cloud services via chromebooks.
    - sodality2 3y ago
      I would not say it's all doom and gloom. I just founded a FOSS/Linux club at my university. There are going to be some kids who are so interested in technology that they go down a rabbit hole of different communities, open source included. I definitely agree that the general trend towards less advanced technology will harm that though (some 18yo's don't even know how files work because they just use Mac's Finder), but some cohort of the generation will _always_ be interested in digging deeper. It perhaps doesn't help that the general attitude of someone in FOSS/tech in general could be perceived by the average person as elitist or exclusionary - I try my hardest to challenge these notions. (Let's see if one of the other founding members of the new club will read this comment)
      - causi 3y ago
        The whole "charging for distribution is fine but charging for development is wrong" thing is what keeps me well away from any kind of involvement with FOSS groups.
        falcor84 3y ago
        I don't believe anyone ever said that you can't charge for development. The only issue is that you're not allow allowed to limit people's right to distribute it. Once you already developed it and have given access to one person, it's up to them whether to pass it forward. It's just like if you tell someone a joke. You can still claim credit for coming up with it, but not to stop its propagation. In particular, you can still make money as a developer by asking for it upfront, whether from an employer, or patrons, or early access, or whatever model. Similar to how Netflix might pay someone upfront to develop a stand-up comedy special
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- gentleman11 3y ago
  Our young people only seem to care about witch hunting for perceived slights without proper evidence. We basically have a mob frothing at the mouth for its next potential target
  - I_Am_Nous 3y ago
    Human history seems to show that all humans love forming into a single mob to attack some perceived "other." This is a habit which has existed since long before the current "mob" of young people, or the internet, or the Boomers... The internet makes it really easy to purity test a community into an echo chamber. Many people willingly subject themselves to these purity tests to fit in and be part of the community, which is also why we see negative communities tending toward a downward spiral (like any of the 4chan communities) as people walk step by step to more extremism in their views. What can we expect when most of the internet is paid for by abusing people's vices. The "whales" of the mobile gaming industry exist in other industries too. The majority of alcohol is purchased by a relatively small percentage of consumers - meaning the alcohol industry's main source of income is people so addicted they drink as much as they can, regardless of consequences. When your money is made because people can't help themselves, that's blood money. It's not surprising that a society which tolerates (and encourages!) companies to pursue blood money would likewise have other moral failings, including a tendency to separate into tribes and attack different tribes.
- garba_dlm 3y ago
  > I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. yes there are; but also not really. due to my age cohort I'm see my self as this "next generation" software scientist/engineer who is aware and believes in FOSS and "liberty minded software"; I suppose most of use are millennials but the whole generation-label stuff is not accurate so maybe in the USA this next gen of people are a bit older but in other poorer countries they're younger??? in any case I think a lot of younger engineers got swayed away from the FSF/GNU ideological stuff by means of 'being pragmatic' which is just a consequence of when the open source movement distinguished itself as different from the free software. I think the impact of this may have something to do with leidenfrost's appraisal that there's no next-gen to pass the torch to. it seems like us millennials do not rally, we don't come together into any kind of social movement or dunno.
- packetlost 3y ago
  > I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. TBH I would put Drew DeVault in this category.
  - safety1st 3y ago
    Ironically Drew DeVault shared this thought about Stallman on his blog earlier this year: > Fuck Richard Stallman and his enablers, his supporters, and the Free Software Foundation’s leadership as a whole. Shame on you. Shame on you. (He uses the word fuck in that post five times.) Drew has done some great work in OSS but he has a history of going after people he doesn't like in a very vicious way. You can't really behave like this and be a leader. A leader needs to unite not divide. For all the criticisms leveled against Stallman he saved most of his vitriol for the enemies of OSS. If everything he wrote had been as personal and expletive-laden as what Drew writes the FSF would not have gotten very far.
    - robotnikman 3y ago
      IMO, a good leader is someone who can set his ego aside and turn the other cheek against such vitriol thrown at them. It seems like Stallman does a good job at this.
    - packetlost 3y ago
      Yeah, I don't know if I would put him in a leadership position, but at least you can trust him to carry forward the FOSS ideals.
- Worldblender 3y ago
  > I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. I wish I can be one of those young people who can be a worthy successor to Richard Stallman. I already am to a great extent, preferring FLOSS whenever possible (with an unfortunate exemption for video games, especially many PC and all console games). My primary issue is now trying to find like people who are also into FLOSS as much as I am, and they're not as common as tech illiterate people are. Maybe someone can advise me on how I can get started (online or local around the Houston, TX area).
  - freedomben 3y ago
    I'm also a big FLOSS advocate to the point where I'll use GIMP and kdenlive (which I feel are great software) even though it would be far, far easier for me to use something non-free. An important thing RMS did was producing good software along with his advocacy. For example, even though it's inferior to vim (joking), it was and is a killer app. What RMS didn't write himself, he helped to drive and organize, and ended up as a force behind some of the most important tools we still use today, like gcc. For RMS it was pretty obvious where the needs were. Today it's much less so, but if you want to make a big difference and start a name for yourself, I would probably look for areas where there aren't great FLOSS options and try to take on one of those. It will be challenging no doubt. My best advice (take with a grain of salt as I'm not the next RMS which is where you want to be), keep preaching the gospel of FLOSS! Help people find and use software (and hardware) that respects their freedom! Pay attention to users that you teach, and identify usability issues that hurt adoption and work to fix them. Be "that guy" that people call when they have a problem and need a solution.
kiba 3y ago
I don't think his position is extreme, just impractical to implement for the time being. Time and time again showed me why free and open source software is important, but they keep lagging behind their competitors in term of funding.
gentleman11 3y ago
Speaking of stallman, the doom community is still alive and going strong all these years later. Dooms source was released under gpl a long time ago and the modding scene is incredible. Check out doomworld some time to see what’s been going on. Unbelievably good level design and mods all over the place, custom source ports everywhere, thousands of maps, etc
Merad 3y ago
Well, RMS tirelessly advocates for his beliefs, but sometimes his beliefs are regressive and outdated. In particular I remember a debate perhaps 8-10 years ago when the gcc team wanted to expose more info from the compiler back end to enable better support for editor integrations and similar tools, because gcc simply couldn't compete with LLVM in that department. IIRC RMS stepped in with a unilateral decision blocking the effort, saying that it wasn't a big deal anyway because editor integration wasn't an important feature. RMS, a guy who (AFAIK) hasn't done any serious coding in 30 years.
- Master_Odin 3y ago
  Decisions like this have definitely ended up harming the movement more than helped ultimately. Him refusing to have gcc support that ended up pushing a lot of people to other compilers (llvm) and have sidelined gcc in many spaces.
- freedomben 3y ago
  I thought it was actually worse than that, that he wanted it to be harder to integrate with so that proprietary software couldn't easily hook in.
globular-toast 3y ago
I just don't understand the severe misunderstanding that results in one thinking that what Stallman advocates would impose severe restrictions. I'd love you to think about what you mean so I can see where you're going wrong. It's honestly that far out from my understanding of reality I can't begin to comprehend what you're thinking.
- dEnigma 3y ago
  If you actually tried and really can't see how living by the gospel of Stallman would impose severe restrictions on how you use your computer then I'm afraid I can't help you. Still, a few examples to illustrate I wouldn't be able to use Word attachments (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html) I wouldn't be able to use Windows (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/upgrade-windows.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/upgrade-windows.html) I wouldn't be able to package useful non-free software for my Linux distro (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html) I would have to call the Linux distro a "GNU/Linux distro" (https://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html) I would have to ideally stop, but at least reduce, my usage of WhatsApp, Facebook, Slack, etc. (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/saying-no-even-once.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/saying-no-even-once.html) These are just all-in-all minor examples I could find in a couple of minutes on gnu.org. I remember reading much more radical takes by Stallman and his companions, but would have to spend more time searching for them.
  - globular-toast 3y ago
    Do you understand there's a difference between advocacy and imposition? Stallman recommends you don't do those things because they all surreptitiously undermine your freedom to use your computer. During the civil rights movement black people were encouraged to not use the buses while segregation was in place. You'd be the guy complaining about how difficult it would be to get around without the bus. Sometimes the way forward involves going back to fix the wrongs of the past. People like Stallman see the world from a higher dimension. He isn't living on flatland like you and me. There is no world where proprietary software and computing freedom can coexist. If there was you can bet Stallman would be advocating the shortest path to such a world.

leidenfrost 3y ago

It's a lot more understandable if you consider the state of computing he experienced while growing up: Programs were way simpler, and shipping the source code in paper was the de facto way of distribution. It's not like he was a wacko around his peers. He just created what seemed a logical step from that. I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more.

Gigachad 3y ago
It’s commonly said that his inspiration was from wanting to improve a printer driver but couldn’t because it was proprietary. I feel like back in the day there would have been so many easy wins for modifications. Like how people used to root Android to add screenshot capability. These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me.
- ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
  I think you might not be considering personal bugfixes (X interaction is great for the common denominator, annoying to me), long-term support (I want to use my device securely in 2045), or custom features (I want to be able to do X, but only 0.001% of people care so Apple doesn't). I use Android, so I can't be more specific. I have heard the unverified complaint that Apple sometimes slows down old devices as new ones are released, which would be impossible in FOSS. Apple is ultimately going to work in their own best interest. Their particular brand aligns that with the consumer fairly well, but there will be disconnects.
  - Gigachad 3y ago
    I don't really understand this. You plan to single handedly replace the entire OS and security teams to maintain the OS on your phone for a decade? How will you update the kernel when the proprietary driver blobs stop being maintained?
    - kaashif 3y ago
      I imagine their ideal open source phone OS wouldn't include any proprietary driver blobs, but what do I know...
    - ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
      I expect more people than just me are interested in reducing tech turnover or using old tech in the hobbyist space, ie. not single handedly. And yeah, as the sibling says, if we're relying on proprietary drivers, we're not really FOSS- my fantasy world doesn't just apply to Apple. Yes, it would be very hard. But today it is impossible, so very hard is hardly a complaint you can make in comparison. Did my other two examples seem more reasonable?
    - xethos 3y ago
      Perhaps the more generous take is that, with FLOSS software, you don't have to go it alone. My Pinephone Pro will not be running security fixes I write myself. But entirely because of its open nature, it doesn't need to - it will continue to recieve updates for years and years. For once, the hardware of a cell phone is likely to die before the software.
      - johnnyanmac 3y ago
        If it gets the support of the right people who know how to write such security software and have an interest in maintaining it, sure. But that's the reason many open source initiatives fall short of proprietary. It's either based on the altruistic whims of a few particular talents, or some company is paying to have them maintain it. And we know the latter is fleeting. The caveat is that sometimes an initiative can be funded by charity or bounty to keep interest, but relying on generosity for 99.99% of projects is a fool's errand.
- colordrops 3y ago
  People are still rooting Android and adding thousands of modifications to it.
  - lproven 3y ago
    Android is not proprietary. https://source.android.com/ https://source.android.com/ That makes it rather easier...
    - Qwertious 3y ago
      You linked to AOSP, not Android. AOSP doesn't have things like the Google Play Store; the shipped image is substantially different and isn't necessarily open-source just because it contains open-source components - Windows contains BSD networking code but that doesn't make Windows open-source.
      - _ea1k 3y ago
        Sure, but the vast majority of those mods and alternative distributions are based on the sources that are available. It is a bit like a Linux distro running Steam. Yeah, there are proprietary bits, but the FOSS part naturally happens on the FOSS parts.
      - lproven 3y ago
        You know what the "A" in AOSP stands for, right? :-) All I'm saying is that there's a big difference in jailbreaking an OS when most of the source code of that OS is publicly available for study and experiment. Surely that is not a controversial statement?
  - vinceguidry 3y ago
    You don't root OSes, you root devices. I learned that the hard way when I got a Samsung Z-Fold 4 and learned that the US version isn't rootable.
    - opan 3y ago
- mikepurvis 3y ago
  There are several OS level things I wish I could change/override on iPhone: ability to share screen during a video call, ability to control how certain Bluetooth devices pair automatically, ability to throttle apps that I know are abusing the CPU and costing me battery.
  - akerr 3y ago
    You can share screen, Shortcuts supports Bluetooth automation triggers, turn off Background Apps or let the CPU race to sleep.
- trelane 3y ago
  It's "commonly said" because it's true. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt via https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201...
- sho_hn 3y ago
  > These days modern software is so extremely sophisticated and refined that I can’t think of anything I could improve for say iOS. > Still love foss, but the idea of “it’s open source, you can improve it yourself any time” has worn off for me. If you look at major MacOS or iOS releases, you will often see new features being advertised that were copied from FOSS systems that experimented with them and proved them out often many years beforehand. That is to say: iOS might have the edge on QA, but if you want to have impact and shape the future of how people use computers, contributing in the community is still a good way to do this. And in fact, commercial development tends to rely on this talent pool for survival, as companies do a comparatively poor job in educating new talent. It's where you get people with "job experience" in doing certain things.
- belorn 3y ago
  When it comes to large sophisticated software the goal is not so much to improve it one self. Rather it is the knowledge that any anti-patterns will be removed by the community if it ever get added. Most of the time the community will not even need to remove anti-pattern from open source projects, since companies know that adding anti-pattern is just wasted developer time.
fouc 3y ago
> I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. I feel like this is a bit of a misperception. Does this historically happen?
- kortilla 3y ago
  Yes, every institution is default dead without constant recruitment of young people to the cause. Most things won’t make it past a generation because everyone fails to focus on how to pass it on. It’s not too late by any means, but it’s looking very bleak for Free software with most kids’ computing being smartphones and cloud services via chromebooks.
  - sodality2 3y ago
    I would not say it's all doom and gloom. I just founded a FOSS/Linux club at my university. There are going to be some kids who are so interested in technology that they go down a rabbit hole of different communities, open source included. I definitely agree that the general trend towards less advanced technology will harm that though (some 18yo's don't even know how files work because they just use Mac's Finder), but some cohort of the generation will _always_ be interested in digging deeper. It perhaps doesn't help that the general attitude of someone in FOSS/tech in general could be perceived by the average person as elitist or exclusionary - I try my hardest to challenge these notions. (Let's see if one of the other founding members of the new club will read this comment)
    - causi 3y ago
      The whole "charging for distribution is fine but charging for development is wrong" thing is what keeps me well away from any kind of involvement with FOSS groups.
      - falcor84 3y ago
        I don't believe anyone ever said that you can't charge for development. The only issue is that you're not allow allowed to limit people's right to distribute it. Once you already developed it and have given access to one person, it's up to them whether to pass it forward. It's just like if you tell someone a joke. You can still claim credit for coming up with it, but not to stop its propagation. In particular, you can still make money as a developer by asking for it upfront, whether from an employer, or patrons, or early access, or whatever model. Similar to how Netflix might pay someone upfront to develop a stand-up comedy special
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
gentleman11 3y ago
Our young people only seem to care about witch hunting for perceived slights without proper evidence. We basically have a mob frothing at the mouth for its next potential target
- I_Am_Nous 3y ago
  Human history seems to show that all humans love forming into a single mob to attack some perceived "other." This is a habit which has existed since long before the current "mob" of young people, or the internet, or the Boomers... The internet makes it really easy to purity test a community into an echo chamber. Many people willingly subject themselves to these purity tests to fit in and be part of the community, which is also why we see negative communities tending toward a downward spiral (like any of the 4chan communities) as people walk step by step to more extremism in their views. What can we expect when most of the internet is paid for by abusing people's vices. The "whales" of the mobile gaming industry exist in other industries too. The majority of alcohol is purchased by a relatively small percentage of consumers - meaning the alcohol industry's main source of income is people so addicted they drink as much as they can, regardless of consequences. When your money is made because people can't help themselves, that's blood money. It's not surprising that a society which tolerates (and encourages!) companies to pursue blood money would likewise have other moral failings, including a tendency to separate into tribes and attack different tribes.
garba_dlm 3y ago
> I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. yes there are; but also not really. due to my age cohort I'm see my self as this "next generation" software scientist/engineer who is aware and believes in FOSS and "liberty minded software"; I suppose most of use are millennials but the whole generation-label stuff is not accurate so maybe in the USA this next gen of people are a bit older but in other poorer countries they're younger??? in any case I think a lot of younger engineers got swayed away from the FSF/GNU ideological stuff by means of 'being pragmatic' which is just a consequence of when the open source movement distinguished itself as different from the free software. I think the impact of this may have something to do with leidenfrost's appraisal that there's no next-gen to pass the torch to. it seems like us millennials do not rally, we don't come together into any kind of social movement or dunno.
packetlost 3y ago
> I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. TBH I would put Drew DeVault in this category.
- safety1st 3y ago
  Ironically Drew DeVault shared this thought about Stallman on his blog earlier this year: > Fuck Richard Stallman and his enablers, his supporters, and the Free Software Foundation’s leadership as a whole. Shame on you. Shame on you. (He uses the word fuck in that post five times.) Drew has done some great work in OSS but he has a history of going after people he doesn't like in a very vicious way. You can't really behave like this and be a leader. A leader needs to unite not divide. For all the criticisms leveled against Stallman he saved most of his vitriol for the enemies of OSS. If everything he wrote had been as personal and expletive-laden as what Drew writes the FSF would not have gotten very far.
  - robotnikman 3y ago
    IMO, a good leader is someone who can set his ego aside and turn the other cheek against such vitriol thrown at them. It seems like Stallman does a good job at this.
  - packetlost 3y ago
    Yeah, I don't know if I would put him in a leadership position, but at least you can trust him to carry forward the FOSS ideals.
Worldblender 3y ago
> I'm just sad that there's no young people to pass the torch for when the time comes and the founding fathers are no more. I wish I can be one of those young people who can be a worthy successor to Richard Stallman. I already am to a great extent, preferring FLOSS whenever possible (with an unfortunate exemption for video games, especially many PC and all console games). My primary issue is now trying to find like people who are also into FLOSS as much as I am, and they're not as common as tech illiterate people are. Maybe someone can advise me on how I can get started (online or local around the Houston, TX area).
- freedomben 3y ago
  I'm also a big FLOSS advocate to the point where I'll use GIMP and kdenlive (which I feel are great software) even though it would be far, far easier for me to use something non-free. An important thing RMS did was producing good software along with his advocacy. For example, even though it's inferior to vim (joking), it was and is a killer app. What RMS didn't write himself, he helped to drive and organize, and ended up as a force behind some of the most important tools we still use today, like gcc. For RMS it was pretty obvious where the needs were. Today it's much less so, but if you want to make a big difference and start a name for yourself, I would probably look for areas where there aren't great FLOSS options and try to take on one of those. It will be challenging no doubt. My best advice (take with a grain of salt as I'm not the next RMS which is where you want to be), keep preaching the gospel of FLOSS! Help people find and use software (and hardware) that respects their freedom! Pay attention to users that you teach, and identify usability issues that hurt adoption and work to fix them. Be "that guy" that people call when they have a problem and need a solution.

kiba 3y ago

I don't think his position is extreme, just impractical to implement for the time being. Time and time again showed me why free and open source software is important, but they keep lagging behind their competitors in term of funding.

gentleman11 3y ago

Speaking of stallman, the doom community is still alive and going strong all these years later. Dooms source was released under gpl a long time ago and the modding scene is incredible. Check out doomworld some time to see what’s been going on. Unbelievably good level design and mods all over the place, custom source ports everywhere, thousands of maps, etc

Merad 3y ago

Well, RMS tirelessly advocates for his beliefs, but sometimes his beliefs are regressive and outdated. In particular I remember a debate perhaps 8-10 years ago when the gcc team wanted to expose more info from the compiler back end to enable better support for editor integrations and similar tools, because gcc simply couldn't compete with LLVM in that department. IIRC RMS stepped in with a unilateral decision blocking the effort, saying that it wasn't a big deal anyway because editor integration wasn't an important feature. RMS, a guy who (AFAIK) hasn't done any serious coding in 30 years.

Master_Odin 3y ago
Decisions like this have definitely ended up harming the movement more than helped ultimately. Him refusing to have gcc support that ended up pushing a lot of people to other compilers (llvm) and have sidelined gcc in many spaces.
freedomben 3y ago
I thought it was actually worse than that, that he wanted it to be harder to integrate with so that proprietary software couldn't easily hook in.

globular-toast 3y ago

I just don't understand the severe misunderstanding that results in one thinking that what Stallman advocates would impose severe restrictions. I'd love you to think about what you mean so I can see where you're going wrong. It's honestly that far out from my understanding of reality I can't begin to comprehend what you're thinking.

dEnigma 3y ago
If you actually tried and really can't see how living by the gospel of Stallman would impose severe restrictions on how you use your computer then I'm afraid I can't help you. Still, a few examples to illustrate I wouldn't be able to use Word attachments (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html) I wouldn't be able to use Windows (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/upgrade-windows.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/upgrade-windows.html) I wouldn't be able to package useful non-free software for my Linux distro (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html) I would have to call the Linux distro a "GNU/Linux distro" (https://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html) I would have to ideally stop, but at least reduce, my usage of WhatsApp, Facebook, Slack, etc. (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/saying-no-even-once.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/saying-no-even-once.html) These are just all-in-all minor examples I could find in a couple of minutes on gnu.org. I remember reading much more radical takes by Stallman and his companions, but would have to spend more time searching for them.
- globular-toast 3y ago
  Do you understand there's a difference between advocacy and imposition? Stallman recommends you don't do those things because they all surreptitiously undermine your freedom to use your computer. During the civil rights movement black people were encouraged to not use the buses while segregation was in place. You'd be the guy complaining about how difficult it would be to get around without the bus. Sometimes the way forward involves going back to fix the wrongs of the past. People like Stallman see the world from a higher dimension. He isn't living on flatland like you and me. There is no world where proprietary software and computing freedom can coexist. If there was you can bet Stallman would be advocating the shortest path to such a world.