[–]▶ No.910193>>910201 >>910206 >>910235 >>910251 >>910672 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]
He seems to think that as long as they release the source for the GPL'd parts it's fine. I disagree since this is clearly the Extend stage of EEE, but I guess he does have a point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqp9LIl5MH4
▶ No.910201>>910204 >>910206
>>910193 (OP)
he gave up eons ago
▶ No.910204>>910206 >>910853
>>910201
Don't think so, even though I do think he has lowered the amount of effort he puts on it recently. His age and his weight are taking a toll on him for sure.
▶ No.910206>>910211
>>910193 (OP)
>I disagree since this is clearly the Extend stage of EEE, but I guess he does have a point.
SaaS as always been a special matter.
SaaS by itself is and isn't a problem at the same time because SaaS mostly relies on people using the service more than software. Software is less the center of the problem, the problem of SaaS lies in the usage of the service and not in the software it's using. A SaaS that uses non-free or free/libre software as the same outcome for the users of it since it's control relies on the administrators of it. It's still tho positive that free/libre software is used to provide services to the users since the admins gains the four freedoms thank to it.
The EEE isn't a software problem it's a human problem, it's actually a very clever move from google/MS and others since they don't have to maintain compatibility for a lot of platforms and the users don't have to bother about their own PC and that's the danger, not having control of the tools that you use being completely dependent on a 3rd party.
There's also multitude of problems emerging from SaaS but again it's a human related problem and not a software one.
>>910201
I find RMS quite relaxed in this he generally seems to lack sleep time and is a bit out of this world.
>>910204
>he has lowered the amount of effort he puts on it recently.
There as bin internal problem in the FSF shortly the rowe incident as caused a chain reaction and it accentuated with gnu social being EEE and the said EEE was encouraged by some staff (even tho they seemed to have good intentions).
▶ No.910211>>910216 >>910798 >>910920
That pajeet-interviewer doesn't even understand proprietary JavaScript. He initially released the full interview only to his patreons, and in the comments someone said they weren't willing to use Patreon.com
What? Can web services be open source? Why do you need a web service to be open source? You should have control over the software you RUN on YOUR machine. You don't run Patreon on YOUR machine. Please try to understand what free software is all about. I can help if you need explanation.
He're the whole thing, but they derail into politics too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMM6D9vuHkY
>>910206
>seems to lack sleep time
I hope so,'cause he looks like shit.
▶ No.910216>>910220
>>910211
> He doesn't even see the irony
That is amazing.
▶ No.910220>>910221
>>910216
There's no irony. You're just dumb.
▶ No.910221>>910222
>>910220
>don't want to run proprietary js of Patreon
<HURR DURR ITS NOT LIKE YOU RUN IT ITS SERVICE LOL
-50 IQ
▶ No.910222
>>910221
Pajeets are so full of shit, nearly as much as their streets.
He even states:
>Please try to understand what free software is all about.
>I can help if you need explanation.
▶ No.910235>>910251 >>910261
>>910193 (OP)
Richard Stallman is legitimately autistic and even HE is more sensible than most users of this board
Really makes you think
▶ No.910251>>910291 >>910299 >>910545 >>910846 >>910849
>>910193 (OP)
>>910235
>legitimately autistic
At this point I’m convinced that he’s insane. Every fucking interview he does is virtually the same shit over and over again: “muh Linux is just a kernel”, “muh free software isn’t open source”, “muh four freedoms”, etc., etc. He’s literally stuck in his own past.
▶ No.910261>>910294
>>910235
Howso? You don't think users here like freedom?
▶ No.910291>>910357 >>910753
>>910251
The reason he has to repeat these same lessons is because people legitimately do not understand what these lessons are. People do not understand that Linux is a kernel program, not an operating system in itself. People do not understand that the open source development method isn't the ideal that Stallman is advocating. People do not understand that free software is software that respects the users' freedom.
▶ No.910294>>910314
>>910261
The users here really don't care about freedom. They're always bitching about Firefox and Intel while non-ironically using Windows, proprietary games, and smartphones.
▶ No.910299>>910308 >>910309 >>910341
>>910251
>muh free software isn’t open source
This is probably the most retarded recurring thing he says since he simultaneously uses both of these arguments:
• "I don't approve of open source";
• "X is bad because its source code is private."
▶ No.910308
>>910299
Did you know that the open source movement was started specifically to promote an agenda of open development of shared code in direct opposition to his message that freedom is important?
▶ No.910309
>>910299
He does not approve of the IDEA behind open source vs his own. Open Source is a development model; not a philosophy.
▶ No.910310>>910311 >>910314 >>910403 >>910486 >>910876
>be Richard Stallman
>autistic
>obese
>SJW genderfaggot
>eats shit off foot on regular basis
>spends more time arguing semantics than programming
>doesn't realize that (((Microsoft))) will use free software in a bad way (EEE)
linus torvalds is better
▶ No.910311>>910314 >>910342
>>910310
Stallman is not an SJW for the simple reason that he is a free speech absolutist. He might believe something is wrong, but he's never in favor of censoring anything.
▶ No.910314>>910318
>>910310
Linus Torvalds raised an SJW. In many ways that is worse than being one. Also >>910311
>>910294
When it comes to hardware/software, the path of freedom is a hard one to walk.
▶ No.910318>>910330
>>910314
Torvalds might not be on the deep end, but he definitely has his toes dipped into the SJW pool. I knew he was over-hyped when he told ESR he wasn't a fan of the second amendment.
▶ No.910330
>>910318
I blame that more on him being a Eurotard. The language he uses is pretty far separated from the SJW crowd.
▶ No.910341>>910352
>>910299
You can be against software that keeps the source code private and not approve of open source simultaneously, because some open source software can be made into proprietary software.
Open source can be used to outsource development to voluntary developers, while at the same time selling the contributed source code in proprietary form.
Whereas in free software the contributions to the source code will remain available, even when the software gets sold.
▶ No.910342>>910343 >>910344
>>910311
Go read his website; he may have given us the GPL but he's a turbojew through and through.
▶ No.910343>>910345 >>910355 >>910499 >>910854 >>913617
>>910342
Stallman is very OwO
Also this is from June 28, 2003:
>Dubya has nominated another caveman for a federal appeals court. Refreshingly, the Democratic Party is organizing opposition.
>The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.
>Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding. For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms. This will be an advance in public health, compared with the situation today.
>For necrophilia, it might be necessary to ask the next of kin for permission if the decedent's will did not authorize it. Necrophilia would be my second choice for what should be done with my corpse, the first being scientific or medical use. Once my dead body is no longer of any use to me, it may as well be of some use to someone. Besides, I often enjoy rhinophytonecrophilia (nasal sex with dead plants).
▶ No.910344
>>910342
I don't agree with all of his positions, but it doesn't seem very Jewish to pass up making money by putting all your organizations products under free licenses. Even all of his books are GFDL.
▶ No.910345
>>910343
You realize non of this is really all that radical for this place, right?
▶ No.910352>>910371
>>910341
Users are perfectly able to keep their free software to be private. There is absolutely no requirement for contributions to be made with source code in free software. What you can't do is distribute a program binary without also distributing the source code to that binary.
▶ No.910355>>910371
>>910343
Stallman is a "Muh Freedumbs" tier retard who just wants more freedumbs to be available, regardless of what harm it might cause. He does not understand nature, evolution or its rules.
▶ No.910357>>910358 >>910362 >>910371
>>910291
>People do not understand that Linux is a kernel program, not an operating system in itself.
That argument will stop working as soon as Clang will be able to complie Linux. Every other piece of GNU software that was required to build a so-called GNU/Linux OS already has a “non-GNU” alternative.
▶ No.910358>>910362 >>910371
>>910357
There's already a project underway to build patches to make it so that clang can compile the kernel. The only reason why it can't already do so is because the kernel makes use of nonstandard GNU """features""".
Hell, even TCC can compile Linux (or at least a patched version).
▶ No.910362>>910369 >>910371
>>910357
>>910358
Oh, goodie~ I can't wait for my GPL'd kernel to be slower because some BSD-tard has a problem with using a GPL'd compiler. What an advancement that'll be.
▶ No.910369>>910374 >>910380
>>910362
Even children know that GNU’s software sucks. GNU might have a head but he sure doesn’t have hands.
▶ No.910371>>910377
>>910355
umm I actually agree with him to a certain extent
im just surprised that stallman is so l-lewd!
>>910352
This. You dont have to release the source if the software is never released to the public.
but if you release the program, you have to provide source. This BTFOs the CIAniggers.
>>910357
>>910358
>>910362
>Every other piece of GNU software that was required to build a so-called GNU/Linux OS already has a “non-GNU” alternative.
I would actually be in favor of a GNU coreutils replacement. Busybox is under the same copyleft license but is way less bloat. its SOOO tiny and has all the usual utilities. What would be the downside to transitioning everything over to busybox? It seems to work perfectly well on Alpine (well aside from the fact that Alpine doesn't have manpages, but that's Alpine's fault)
▶ No.910374>>910375
>>910369
Proprietary gaymes wouldn't work for one thing.
▶ No.910375>>918109
>>910374
was that meant for me in response to the busybox question? Wouldnt stuff like flatpak remedy this?
▶ No.910377>>910379
>>910371
>What would be the downside to transitioning everything over to BusyBox?
Honestly, is there one other than the license (which doesn't even touch the end user in any way)?
▶ No.910379>>910404
>>910377
>Busybox
>downside
There are none, anon. Busybox is superior.
▶ No.910380
>>910369
GNU sucks because of bloat, that is where BSD excels. GNU is Project managed to the Nein-th degree
▶ No.910383>>910391
A sane version of true is 8kb, stripped. GNU true is 32kb, stripped.
$ du -h ./true /bin/true
32K /bin/true
8.0K ./true
▶ No.910394>>910395 >>910398
>>910391
>not using 0 byte true
A 0 byte executable file returns 0 on linux btw.
▶ No.910395>>910402
>>910394
Oh wait it doesn't. I think I tested the 0 byte executable on some other obscure operating system and then just assumed it would also work on Linux for some reason.
▶ No.910398
>>910394
If you invoke it with a shell such as bash, then yes, it works.
However, assert(execve("./empty", NULL, NULL) == 0) fails. So a zero byte true is of limited use.
▶ No.910402
>>910395
>some other obscure operating system
you mean old UNIX? Here's an explanation from Rob Pike's twitter
https://twitter.com/rob_pike/status/966896123548872705
▶ No.910403>>910425
>>910310
Stallman is an old liberal that unplgged from the system, he is not an sjw, but rather an assange tier actor.
predicted everything wrong with society and computers.
Linus wrote a kernel on his 386 without having to do any research, just implementing ideas that existed for nearly 20 years.
▶ No.910404
>>910379
Any sane method of handling filenames is one.
▶ No.910425>>910472
>>910403
Stallman didn't predict anything. Those very same fears, and the resulting free software were already growing in the early 70's. They just didn't have a long legal document attached, because people were content to simply have free software, rather than impose their will on others.
▶ No.910472>>910482
>>910425
>They just didn't have a long legal document attached, because people were content to simply have free software
Yeah, and how did that work out, Roka?
▶ No.910482
>>910472
It worked quite well. Dr. Dobb's Journal had a very long, successful run. The *BSD projects are also kinda similar, and still around today.
▶ No.910486>>910815
>>910310
>autistic
>obese
>spends more time arguing semantics than programming
>doesn't realize that (((Microsoft))) will use free software in a bad way (EEE)
That's totally uncommon in the LFOSS world.
>the guy who doesn't think you own the computer you bought is better
Hello Linus! Great to see you have found your way to our little dark corner of the internet. I hope you enjoy your stay! You will be pleased to know you that here you can, like the at the LKML tell people to kill themselves without being fired by a pink-haired SJeW.
On a more serious note, I would like to say that while rms is not perfect he has still predicted many bad uses of technology. In 1997 he wrote The Right to Read (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html). 12 years later Amazon remotely deleted copies of 1984 from Kindles: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jul/17/amazon-kindle-1984. And regardless of your views regarding GPLv2 vs GPLv3, BSD vs GPL, and Open Source vs Free Software, you should agree with him that paying in cash protects not only your pirvacy but also your autonomy from banksters anf big government. Ignore him at our peril.
▶ No.910499
>>910343
Yeah, it's best to just to thank him for the GPL and ignore literally everything else he says.
▶ No.910545
>>910251
He repeats that shit because there is an effort to pervert his movement through clever catchphrases. He says this every time he is forced to repeat himself.
Poojeet is mad.
▶ No.910549>>910603 >>910616
GNU is a stupid name and GNU/Linux is even more retarded. I agree with his point that the whole os shouldn't just be called linux, but he should maybe discuss with Torvalds what to call the whole system. Call it even Gnulix or something, I don't care. Just so it's one word, GNU/Linux is so retarded. I thibk it's to late anyway, people will just call it linux anyway
▶ No.910603
>>910549
Happened many years ago. Stallman himself is literally the only one left who keeps interjecting (he has come to call "Gahnoo PLUS Leenucks" though, according to his own words).
▶ No.910616>>910621
>>910549
I don't understand why the name GNU/Linux is retarded given that it is clear and accurate. Stallman proposed the name Lignux in 1992. If anything, we should be calling the system GNU after the GNU OS which is the fundamental part of the OS.
▶ No.910621>>910626
>>910616
>muh le GNU OS
Haven't you heard what everyone else said about replacing all GNU components with other types such as musl, busybox, clang, etc.?
▶ No.910626>>910627
>>910621
The name GNU/Linux only applies to systems that have the GNU OS and the Linux kernel as the fundamental part of the system. The GNU/Solaris system is not a GNU/Linux system. A system with a foundation of Linux/Busybox system is not a GNU/Linux system, the same is true for a Linux/Android system. Alpine Linux is an example of a system that is not a GNU/Linux system.
▶ No.910627>>910631
>>910626
GNU is not an operating system, not unless you added Hurd. Would you consider a pile of GNUshit to be an operating system if it wouldn't boot?
▶ No.910631>>910635
>>910627
GNU has been an operating system since 1983 long before the birth of Hurd.
▶ No.910635
▶ No.910648>>910651
An operating system is "the software that securely abstracts and multiplexes physical resources" (Tanenbaum, 1987). Sure sounds like Linux to me. While we're at it, quotes from The UNIX Programming Environment and The Design of the UNIX Operating System:
>What is "UNIX"? In the narrowest sense, it is a time-sharing operating system kernel: a program that controls the resources of a computer and allocates them to its users.
>The operating system interacts directly with the hardware, providing common services to programs and insulating them from hardware idiosyncrasies. Viewing the system as a set of layers, the operating system is commonly called the system kernel, or just the kernel, emphasizing its isolation from user programs. Because programs are independent of the underlying hardware, it is easy to move them between UNIX systems running on different hardware if the programs do not make assumptions about the underlying hardware.
All GNU programs are userspace and non-essential. Stallman is just using this as propaganda and you idiots are falling for it. Dennis Ritchie, Ken Thompson, Rob Pike and Donald Knuth are happy to call it "Linux." Why aren't you?
▶ No.910651>>910856
>>910648
This. You could theoretically use a bootloader like syslinux as a shell, just passing an `init=<whatever program you want to run>` parameter to the kernel to run your programs, then rebooting.
>inb4 nobody wants to do that
Nobody wants to do that but it illustrates the point that GNU is not strictly necessary.
▶ No.910672>>910695
>>910193 (OP)
Microsoft is trying to take ownership of Linux. It already basically owns the foundation. They are trying to destroy the competition. That's my take on the whole thing. And of course, the whole IoT thing is nightmarish. Microsoft wants to control everything in your life, and they are doing it with Linux because Windows is so shitty that it's unusable for that purpose. The only positive thing about this is that Microsoft is basically admitting that they are incompetent and that Windows doesn't work.
▶ No.910695>>910696 >>910698 >>910726
>>910672
Brand new sensible UNIX-bs free kernel that isn't Windows NT, Linux, XNU or BSD when?
▶ No.910696>>910698
▶ No.910699>>910706
>>910698
>muh 0w0 faggotry
GAY
▶ No.910700>>910706
>>910698
>genode
Show a cap of it running. It doesn't even look like an OS, just an "OS framework".
▶ No.910706>>910707
>>910699
>GAY
Yes I am
>>910700
>just an "OS framework"
it is, and they have recently released a system based on that framework called Sculpt. I'm too brainlet/busy/lazy to actually figure out how to install it right now, but I heard that someone ported QtWebKit (or was it QtWebEngine?) to Genode.
▶ No.910707>>910714
>>910706
>I'm gay
Kill yourself.
>QtWebEngine
WOW I can run a program with 10000000 bugs on an OS with few bugs. Ebin!!!
▶ No.910714>>910717
>>910707
>WOW I can run a program with 10000000 bugs on an OS with few bugs. Ebin!!!
well what is your preferred browser engine?
(note: must be one that can actually load most websites. no links or w3m, as comfy as they are)
▶ No.910717>>910719
▶ No.910719
>>910717
Still a text browser, also not exactly a good one to mention when complaining about bugs
>On 17 March 2017, OpenBSD removed ELinks from its ports tree, citing concerns with security issues and lack of responsiveness from the developers.
and on top of that it looks like its a dead project
▶ No.910726>>910820
>>910695
Never. You will just have to use old computers (and electronics in general) and possibly, at some point, avoid the internet until it's destroyed and abandoned. Then again, I don't think they could possibly kill every distro, so there's that, at least. Most high quality entertainment runs just fine on junk hardware.
The point is that the future will be terrible and you should avoid everything. Develop some asceticism and efficiency right now so you don't have to be part of the problem. You will need the mental fortitude of a Buddhist monk if you want to survive what's to come. The Buddhism is optional, of course. It can be replaced with pure autism, which is what I tend to do. That way you can comfortably live in the past forever, when you're not in public. Unless you have access to autismbux, then you don't have to be in public and your life can be perfect. That way you could even have the time to build your own OS, or just masturbate to anime and get drunk. Whatever you think is more productive. It's subjective.
Can you survive the CIA hell?
▶ No.910753>>910817 >>910856 >>910930
>>910291
>People do not understand that Linux is a kernel program, not an operating system in itself
Linux is the OS since it runs the programs. That's literally CS101 knowledge, mate. Just because POSIX defined an OS to include things such as cp/ls/mv/rm to be part of the OS doesn't mean it actually is. Nobody really cares what POSIX says, people don't actually read these standards. RMS cites POSIX and its literally the only leg he stands on.
So yeah, people understand this "lesson" just fine, they're just sick of this tired rhetoric that convinces absolutely no one. The real term for GNU is user space. GNU software is just a bunch of user space programs, among many others. It only ever makes sense in the context of a software distribution, and from this point on it's clear GNU isn't part of the OS. Otherwise, you'd have to call your disto Linux/X11/KDE/every package you installed. GNU software isn't special in any way and can be completely replaced. You can use Busybox. You can use other libc's. You can do whatever you want, because Linux is the OS and GNU software is completely inconsequential.
▶ No.910798
▶ No.910815
>>910486
>not using the archive
▶ No.910817>>910896 >>910930 >>911009
>>910753
But you can also switch out Linux for another kernel.
▶ No.910820>>910822 >>910825 >>910831
>>910726
>Most high quality entertainment runs just fine on junk hardware.
No it fucking doesn't, just try watching high bitrate 1080p chinese cartoons on trash hardware.
▶ No.910822
>>910820
720p and 1080p make a big difference in terms of playability on old hardware, whereas it doesn't make such a big difference in viewing quality. Especially since anime doesn't include a huge amount of detail most of the time.
▶ No.910825>>910826 >>910831
>>910820
> chinese cartoons is quality entertainment
You deserve the botnet.
▶ No.910826>>910829
>>910825
And you deserve systemd up your ass! UwU
haha
▶ No.910829>>910831
>>910826
I was about to reply but then I realized that would be a wish of good luck coming from you.
▶ No.910831
>>910820
720p is fine for new anime. 480p is more than enough for old anime, though, and I would rather watch them on a CRT anyway. Trying to use old hardware as efficiently as possible is fun as well.
>>910825
Anime is the one true path to enlightenment and freedom.
>>910829
>I was about to reply
And then you replied.
▶ No.910846>>910849 >>910852
>>910251
He's getting old you fucking faggot. At least he has morals, unlike Linus Torvalds.
▶ No.910849
>>910845
Heres a question: Where did u get the inspiration to OwOpost?
>>910251
why would that be "stuck in the past? Did Linux's purpose as a kernel change all of a sudden? Are free software and open source the same now? Are the four freedoms any less relevant?
Keep in mind that 90% of people have no understanding of any of this stuff, so hes trying to spread the message. Its so sad that people dont understand how important software freedom is ;_;
>>910846
>He's getting old you fucking faggot.
this too.
▶ No.910852
>>910846
I would trust Linus more if he abandoned the foundation, but he won't. Apparently he doesn't mind being owned by Microsoft and working with a bunch of Mac users that are exactly the kind of people that you would expect them to be. There is no way he can't see where this is going, so I assume he doesn't care.
▶ No.910853
>>910204
So, who replaces him when he dies? soon
▶ No.910854>>910855
>>910343
How is that last line not making it obvious that he's joking
▶ No.910855>>910927
>>910851
Im not. u are pretending to me me! >_<
thats ok you're doing a good job of it ^_^
>>910854
he's not. https://stallman.org/articles/texas.html
> The next week I phoned to arrange my next visit. Before my trip, they had already been eager for more lectures later. Having missed part of the first series, they would naturally want them sooner than planned. But the the boss said that he would have to think about it.
>"What's the matter," I asked. "Did the design review cancel the project?"
>"No, the project is still on, but as things stand now I'm not sure when we would have time for you."
>I thought about this, and the unexpected size of the check. "I think that you have some other reason, that you aren't telling me, why you don't want to do business with me. Were my lectures unsatisfactory?"
>"No, your lectures were good. It was the people who had dinner with you. Both evenings they were very uncomfortable with you. They said they didn't want to have you around any more."
>"Uncomfortable? But they didn't say so. Did they say why?"
>"One of them said he was upset when you talked about nasal sex with plants." I had actually demonstrated this perverse act with the bouquet on the table, at dinner the night before I was sent home. The plants were dead, although well preserved, so I was performing rhinophytonecrophilia on them.
>That was the end of the conversation, but I never forgot that the worst bunch of cowards I ever met were Texans. I can just imagine them: "Chief, you gotta get that guy away from here! All his crazy ideas are making my head feel strange. Is he a hippy?"
>I have a suspicion that I didn't put them any more at ease when I started the first lecture by leading everyone in a Bulgarian folk dance. Perhaps this raised questions in their minds about my affiliation with foreign powers.
>I have another suspicion. It's hard for me to believe even a Texan would be that worried about preserving the innocence of plants. Perhaps his pious concern was yet another front. But for what? Alas, in the study of alien civilizations, we find many clues but few answers.
▶ No.910856>>911009
>>910651
> This. You could theoretically use a bootloader like syslinux as a shell, just passing an `init=<whatever program you want to run>` parameter to the kernel to run your programs, then rebooting.
You are proving the point of the people who say that Linux is not an OS. Linux is just a component for an OS (a very big and important one though), and you still need to add things to complete it. Even if "things" consists of a just a bootloader. And if you add GNU to Linux it's GNU/Linux, if you add syslinux it's syslinux/Linux. No one said that GNU was somehow sacred and couldn't be substituted. In the same way you could also combine GNU with another kernel, like GNU/Darwin or GNU/Hurd (which I guess would be just the GNU operating system then).
>>910753
> Otherwise, you'd have to call your disto Linux/X11/KDE/every
package you installed.
X11 and KDE are not required for a complete operating system, but you need to add something to Linux to be a complete OS.
> GNU software isn't special in any way and can be completely replaced. You can use Busybox. You can use other libc's.
No one said you cannot, you can also use GNU without Linux. The point is that if and when you combine these exact two together the correct name is GNU/Linux.
▶ No.910876>>911009
>>910310
>I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out. There are 'extremists' in the free software world, but that's one major reason why I don't call what I do 'free software' any more. I don't want to be associated with the people for whom it's about exclusion and hatred.
>Linus
▶ No.910896>>910930
>>910817
But you can switch out GNU for other userspace tools. See Alpine Linux.
▶ No.910920
>>910211
But he is right. Free software is about being able to study, modify, share and use with no limits the software in your PC. You are not running Patreon the same way you aren't running Searx.me. Sure, you can download a copy and run it in your server, but it wouldn't be the same thing.
Websites cannot be free because by design you cannot use the server-side software without an Internet connection or without actually connecting to that very server (unless we're talking about distributed services like Freenet, but that's another thing entirely.)
This is why Stallman used to use Google Maps (until they started requiring JavaScript for it to work.) This is also why DuckDuckGo is the default search engine of IceCat.
>muh JavaScript
JavaScript runs in your browser, which is why it should be free. That's the entire point behind LibreJS - it blocks nonfree JS and allows only free JS to run; whether or not the server-side of the website is free or not is irrelevant.
If Patreon can be used without JS (I don't use it because I don't have a PayPal or bank accounts - I pay and get payed with cash) then it would be an acceptable solution. Though the video should use a libre format or at least be available through a libre platform if Patreon isn't.
▶ No.910927
>>910855
>I have a suspicion that I didn't put them any more at ease when I started the first lecture by leading everyone in a Bulgarian folk dance. Perhaps this raised questions in their minds about my affiliation with foreign powers.
It's a joke you autist fuck. The entire article is a joke. Stallman has a very subtle sense of humor, but he's joking all the fucking time.
There are a lot of joke posts on his blog. There is an entire article about jokes he's come up with.
Hell, GNU, HURD and HIRD are puns. He named his OS, the kernel and the daemons with mutually referencing puns.
▶ No.910930>>910943 >>910954 >>911009
>>910753
Linux is not an operating system by any definition. Nobody talks about kFreeBSD, NT or Darwin because those are not the operating systems, the operating systems are FreeBSD, Windows and MacOS, respectively; and they need both the kernel and the userspace to make an operating system. This is why Stallman insists in GNU/Linux - because he's aware that GNU and Linux are not operating systems by themselves and he wants to give Torvalds credit for his work.
>>910817
>>910896
Exactly why GNU/Linux is important.
Android does not use any of the GNU tools, and it was called "Android" by their creators. Alpine does not use any of the GNU tools and it was given the name "Alpine Linux" by their creators. Stallman and the GNU project made an operating system called GNU and decided to call distributions of said software running on top of the Linux kernel GNU/Linux.
▶ No.910943
>>910930
>Exactly why GNU/Linux is important.
>proceeds to prove otherwise
▶ No.910954>>910983 >>911020
>>910930
So why not just call it GNU? We don't call Microsoft's OS Windows/NT or Apple's OSX/Darwin. Giving Torvalds credit for the kernel is nice, but unnecessary.
▶ No.910983
>>910954
>So why not just call it GNU?
They do. The FSF and rms advocate calling it just "GNU" if you want something shorter than GNU-slash-Linux or GNU-plus-Linux, but they also want to give Linus the credit they believe he deserves so they prefer calling it "GNU/Linux".
▶ No.911009>>911018
>>910817
Then it's obviously not Linux anymore.
>>910856
>X11 and KDE are not required for a complete operating system
Says you. Just because POSIX told people that an OS is a kernel + shell utilities doesn't mean that's what an OS is.
>but you need to add something to Linux to be a complete OS.
That's utter horseshit. Linux is perfectly capable of running programs by itself. In fact, it runs an init program immediately after it boots up. The fact lots of programs depend on stuff like glibc doesn't make GNU part of the OS.
>>910876
He's right. If Microsoft wants to contribute code, let them. Treat them just like you would any other contributor.
>>910930
>Nobody talks about kFreeBSD, NT
The difference between Linux and the BSDs and Windows is huge, mate.
BSD kernel and user spaces are actually on the same tree, they keep in sync with each other. NT is extremely tightly integrated with user space code and has things such as kernel-mode UAC prompts that other programs can't fuck with.
Linux doesn't work like this. It's completely separate from any user space component.
>I refuse to introduce "you can only update the kernel if you also update that other program" kind of limitations.
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1710.3/02487.html
Linux is very much a complete thing unto itself. User space talks to it through stable and well-defined interfaces. Every single program can do the exact same thing and it's not coupled to the kernel in any way.
▶ No.911016>>911024
No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.
Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.
One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?
(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.
Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.
You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.
Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?
If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:
Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.
Thanks for listening.
▶ No.911018
>>911009
>He's right. If Microsoft wants to contribute code, let them. Treat them just like you would any other contributor.
He's saying that because Microsoft pays his salary. They are his owners at this point. Do you really trust Microsoft to do anything good? How?
If you don't hate Microsoft these days, you have no morals. That's my position.
▶ No.911020
>>910954
>We don't call Microsoft's OS Windows/NT or Apple's OSX/Darwin.
That's because we don't generally use the NT kernel for anything else but Windows, nor do we use the XNU kernel for anything else but OSX
We call it GNU/Linux because the distinction is important, because not only is it possible and not uncommon to see Linux used with a non-GNU OS, but we also see the GNU OS using other kernels. GNU/BSD is a thing for example
▶ No.911024>>911076
>>911016
Guys, while a lot of this might be complete autism, I personally think that in this day and age, calling it GNU/Linux actually has some real meaning. There is this little thing called Android, and it uses the Linux kernel, but the rest of the components are non-GNU. Some are even proprietary! However, I have seen normies make the dangerously misleading claim that "Android is Linux!" It technically is, as it uses the Linux Kernel, but it shares nothing else with GNU/Linux distros, particularly their respect for your freedoms.
Because of this, we should say GNU/Linux, so as not to confuse it with the botnet that is Android, or other such projects. By saying GNU/Linux, we make it clear that yes, we are using Linux, but we are also using Free Software.
▶ No.911076>>911094
>>911024
I can download Android right now and work with the source code. How is that not representative of everything that is the GPL?
▶ No.911093>>918118
>Posted May 7, 2018 20:23 UTC (Mon) by jdulaney
Is anyone surprised? RMS is cool with the FSF firing female employees when they report being harassed. This just continues that.
>Posted May 7, 2018 23:08 UTC (Mon) by jerojasro
I've never seen anything about these firings. Could you refer me to news/blog posts?
(I'm neither attacking nor questioning your statement, just curious about when/how this happened, what was the followup, etc.)
guess it was a drama related to libreboot. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libreboot.
> In September 2016 the lead developer announced that the project would leave the GNU Project and in January 2017, Richard Stallman announced that Libreboot was released from the GNU project. The reason for the dispute was allegations from the lead maintainer that FSF had fired a transgender employee because the employee reported gender harassment. The FSF denied these allegations the same day. In April 2017, the Libreboot project removed the accusations from their website, the lead developer apologised for what happened and control of the website was transferred to another contributor.
>Posted May 8, 2018 2:33 UTC (Tue) by geoffbeier
>Is there any way you could link to a source for this? I'd be interested in knowing more about it, and a quick search didn't turn up anything reliable that I could see.
(This isn't meant to be combative at all. I'd like to know more and I couldn't find anything.)
>Posted May 8, 2018 2:48 UTC (Tue) by jdulaney
>I'm sorry, I cannot go into detail, just that I know the people involved and what happened.
LEAH, TAKE YOUR FUCKING MEDS!!
▶ No.911094>>911098
▶ No.911098>>911131
>>911094
That's a bias link. How about a third-party to effectively discern the difference?
▶ No.911131>>913622
>>911098
>That's a bias link
Biased link, not bias link.
▶ No.913617
>>910343
what to see what happens in the salty suite
▶ No.913622
>>911131
This ain't no English class. I am corrected.
▶ No.918109
>>910375
No. Flatpak reduces the dependency on some things, but not the whole userland.
▶ No.918118