Time to fork the FSF

http://larrythefreesoftwareguy.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/time-to-fork-the-fsf/

by pjhyett • 15 years ago

345 323 15 years ago

larrythefreesoftwareguy.wordpress.com

zalew3• 15 years ago

so... it's perfectly ok to publish tons of linkbaits about 'how steve jobs changed my life' even if they are vague and repetitive boring opinions, but nobody can state his negative views on this occasion. gimme a break. death is sad, but it's good that there are people who had decided to stay out of this bubble.

ineedtosleep• 15 years ago

If it wasn't obvious from the past few days, HN is that bubble. If you don't like the circle jerking about Steve Jobs, come back in a week or two.

zalew3• 15 years ago

the first day I saw this http://i.imgur.com/xlNGD.png, today I took the risk to click HN and was very surprised the frontpage doesn't look like that. when you've heard the news, it's not news anymore.

andrewljohnson• 15 years ago

Here, I'll let someone with much more eloquence than me explain to you why Stallman's diatribe is poorly wrought.

If Stallman had to make a statement emphasizing his dislike of Jobs' influence, he could still have done so respectfully. Consider this; "I didn't share Steve Jobs' vision of computing, and I wish he'd chosen to embrace free software. I'm very sorry that he's gone and we've lost the opportunity to have that conversation. My sympathies are with his family at this time." There's no need to pretend that Stallman liked Jobs, but his post is contemptible.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/10/why-fsf-found...

zalew3• 15 years ago

most of "I also must deliver you the news that Steve is dead, because you obviously didn't hear it in ALL THE NEWS OF THE WORLD" posts are also poorly wrought or could be tldr'd to 'I like my ipod', and those which aren't (mainstream blogs) look like a template written a long time ago. most of them are just linkbaits and karmawhoring.

> he could still have done so respectfully

and the rest of bloggers respectfully chace self-promotion and ad revenue by reposting stuff that has already been said. well, RMS gave them the occasion to continue this nonsense, but at least his view is original.

_delirium3• 15 years ago

It was posted on his personal "politics" mini-blog, which consists of basically nothing but 2-3-line annoyed and not very nuanced statements on various topics. People who read it expect what they get there, and most people don't read it. Here's an example the quality of political cartoons you can also expect...: http://stallman.org/images/cartoon-6.jpg

As can be seen from the Update to that linked article, I think a big part of the problem is that these Web 2.0 "journalists" don't read, so in a game of telephone it's been turned into "FSF head Richard Stallman issues press release saying Jobs sux". If we're going to do that, you could manufacture about 300 scandals from his blog; "FSF head Richard Stallman equates U.S. President to Saddam Hussein!", etc.

Maybe it's still contemptible as it stands, but I think people are either missing or deliberately ignoring the context when evaluating it. I take his "politics" ticker as closer to an IRC chat than a place for carefully thought out statements (that's what his Essays are for). I like that in geek culture we don't have this weird demand for people to be 24/7 ensconced in a professional PR-oriented persona, like a CEO or politician, but allow people like RMS, ESR, and Theo de Raadt to have crazy personal opinions. (Heck, Jobs had some pretty offensive and harmful opinions about science and alternative medicine, and we allowed that.)

Honestly I'm more offended by this level of shameless profiteering with Steve-Jobs-death linkbait. Huffington Post, for example, shat out 188 separate Steve-Jobs-death posts within 24 hours: http://exploreto.tumblr.com/post/11114571981/huffingtonpost-...

drzaiusapelord4• 15 years ago

I hate to say it but that post is impossible. RMS couldnt say it. Most kids on slashdot couldn't either. For better or worse computing atracts the worst asocial and negative people around. This is why every company goes apeshit when hiring new IT. Its difficult to tell in an interview if you're dealing with some kind of aspie misanthrope. I've worked with guys like this, and they are like RMS. Dogmatic zealots with zero people or persuasion skill. If Linus went with BSD instead of the GPL, RMS would have been long forgotten by now. His entire career was impressing a Finnish teenager to use his license.

Joeboy• 15 years ago

Given the hordes of people who seem keen to use Stallman's words against him I think he should perhaps have put a bit more thought into them, but I'm extremely glad he didn't make the kind of bland, wishy washy PR statement you suggest.

ugh6• 15 years ago

Stallman is not some random blogger.

spacemanaki• 15 years ago

Mike Daisey in the NY Times was far, far more eloquent and actually in some ways, even more bitingly critical of Jobs than Stallman:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/opinion/jobs-looked-to-the...

But he was also basically respectful.

divtxt• 15 years ago

EDIT: Already it's own post now: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3084961

Wow! Easily the best Steve Jobs article I've read this week!

For me, this paragraph captures it all:

I spoke with a man whose right hand was permanently curled into a claw from being smashed in a metal press at Foxconn, where he worked assembling Apple laptops and iPads. I showed him my iPad, and he gasped because he’d never seen one turned on. He stroked the screen and marveled at the icons sliding back and forth, the Apple attention to detail in every pixel. He told my translator, “It’s a kind of magic.”

bcrescimanno• 15 years ago

I tweeted earlier that I see RMS as the Fred Phelps (Westboro Baptist Church) of Free Software. He may not have started out this way; but these days he's completely single issue. If you're not doing free software 100% his way; you not only disagree with him but you are actually evil. Not just free software; but free software as RMS defines it(see GNU/Linux) or you're wrong. He's so blinded by his own zealotry that I'd argue that beyond the inner, hard-core "free software circle, he's seen as much of an embarrassment to the notion of free software as Phelps and Westboro are likely seen by other Christians.

I've felt this way a long time about RMS; his comment about Steve Jobs's death was uncalled for--but it really was well-within character. Just like Phelps and Westboro are expected to show up at soldier's funerals to protest, we've come to expect this type of shit from RMS--and I agree with the OP that it's time to stop just accepting it.

[Edit] I want to state that RMS, like everyone, is fully entitled to his opinion and that opinion carries no more or less weight than my own. Moreover, you're completely entitled to agree with him. What I do have a problem with is what the OP described: he doesn't belong at the head of a major organization, nor does he belong at the apex of the free software movement. Beyond my earlier described "inner circle," in the past several years, he's done more to tarnish the image of the free software community than to help it.

learc833• 15 years ago

While I don't always agree with RMS, I think he truly believes everything he says.

I don't think the same of Fred Phelps. I long ago reached the conclusion that he tries to say the most inflammatory thing possible wether he really believes it or not. I have no idea why, but I believe he has some other agenda than just the condemnation of homosexuality.

I've even almost seriously entertained the idea that he is a closet extreme atheist out to discredit theists.

drzaiusapelord4• 15 years ago

Naww, he's just a zealot. The history of religion is the history of zealotry, as well as oppression and violence. Funny how you think he must be an atheist, when he fits the religious zealot profile to a 't.' Phelps fits the character of so many religious leaders who have millions of followers and millions of dollars. Phelps' big issue is that he's poor at monetizing his crazy, unlike other successful bigots like Falwell and Graham.

I'm sick of the conspiracy theories that he must be some kind of secret agent. Bigotry and hatred is typical in religion, especially for homosexuals. Theists need to call him an atheist or a con man to make them feel better about being theists and following the philosophy of 1st century madmen.

kristopolous• 15 years ago

Some think he's just a novel con-artist:

1. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/gro...

2. http://kanewj.com/wbc/

Looks like it equates to fairly decent take-home pay given that he probably works far less than the 2080 full time hours a year for it.

And remember, it's a church, so it's all tax free.

philwelch• 15 years ago

Phelps is the personal embodiment of Poe's Law.

lukifer• 15 years ago

The Hanlon and Occam Razors, when applied to Phelps: he's a deeply closeted gay man who has to keep doubling down on his cognitive dissonance in order to rationalize obsessing over gay sex, even to the point of violently manipulating his own family.

themgt• 15 years ago

The fact is though, RMS, today in 2011, isn't helping the free software movement any more than Phelps is helping Christianity

It's hard to understand the internal reality that either is basing their actions on anymore, but it doesn't change the fact that they both see the world through their own singular vision which they're no longer able to coherently share with others and convince others of - they've taken their premises as axioms and just go around preaching hate to a shrinking choir and offending the rest of us with their actions

If Larry Ellison had just died after his company purposely screwed up MySQL, OpenOffice, Java, Hudson, OpenSolaris ... RMSs comment would still be tasteless and inappropriate

za• 15 years ago

The inflammatory agenda makes sure his group stays alienated from society and within his control.

akmiller• 15 years ago

Fred Phelps is a lawyer and they simply do the things they do to get a violent reaction out of people so that they can then sue those individuals. It's simply about making money in one of the most scummy way possible (far worse than patent trolls even). I thought this was pretty common knowledge but judging by the comments under your post I guess not.

EDIT: With that being said, RMS and Phelps are nothing at all alike. RMS truly believes what he says and that his beliefs are right. Phelps is just an ass trying to elicit violent responses to get money out of people already dealing with horrible tragedies.

orblivion5• 15 years ago

The problem is, RMS is part Fred Phelps, but also part Jesus Christ because he sortof started this whole thing, if my understanding is correct. Just like you got to respect Steve Jobs' accomplishments despite his own personal failings, I think (granted to a lesser extent) we gotta hand it to RMS, despite being a tactless fanatic, his moral compass always steers us toward the ideal for Free Software. And I should note I don't even agree with Free Software as a moral imperative, but freedom gives software more value none the less, and it's good to have someone there to point us in the right direction.

Radim• 15 years ago

   I think (granted to a lesser extent) we gotta hand it to RMS

Why "to a lesser extent"?

I'm honestly curious because from my outsider's perspective (being affiliated with neither Apple nor FSF), RMS is vastly more admirable than CEO of a for-profit company.

The ability to cater to customers and sell them expensive products is precious and certainly good for the shareholders. And, to a lesser degree, even for the customers I guess... but why this worship and e-drama? How can turning huge profits be comparable to FSF's mission -- lofty even if you don't identify with it -- and why are non-shareholders so ecstatic about it? (leaving Job's death aside now, R.I.P. man)

a3_nm• 15 years ago

> Not just free software; but free software as RMS defines it

Trouble is, RMS is the guy who defined free software in the first place. If you want to do something else than what he intends, it's probably better to pick a different term.

loso3• 15 years ago

When I first saw the post by RMS, I tried to hold back my initial desire to simply post "He's an asshole". I tried to take the emotion away from it but found that I couldn't. I couldn't find the right words so I posted nothing.

You posted my exact feelings in a more intelligent way than I ever could have.

RMS and people like him in the free software community is why I have never 100% committed to a free software way of doing things. I do a lot of development in Linux but I do just as much in Windows. Even though I contribute to the open source world in my own small way and see the importance of it, I find myself caring less and less about the philosophy behind it, At least when it comes to the zealots that are involved.

We all know that both Apple and Microsoft have pulled asshole moves before. But I can't help thinking that zealots like RMS would do the same thing if the FSF was in control.

lhnn• 15 years ago

Really, RMS being a dick keeps you from using, developing, and supporting free software?

Your level of support is not that great, then.

Aga2• 15 years ago

The fundamental difference between the ones like Apple/Microsoft and RMS/FSF is that the latter don't seek to be in control in the way the former do. RMS/FSF actually oppose to the idea and instead seek to educate people for the peoples own benefit.

abrimo• 15 years ago

I've attended one of Stallman's talks and it was more of a comedy than anything else. I don't actually take him seriously, he did some great work in the past but the world has moved on.

josephg• 15 years ago

I'm aware of Stallman's advocacy on free software issues, but (completely honest question), what else does the Free Software Foundation do ?

Software is at a point where its basically impossible to make anything useful without opensource software. Proprietary code is a minority in my stack both as a developer and as a user. Proprietary software is often good before opensource software is good, but consistently opensource implementations eventually outpace their proprietary counterparts. We saw this trend first with UNIX -> Linux. Today, just reading this webpage I'm using Chrome (Chromium + WebKit) which communicates via POSIX to the BSD network stack in my kernel (Darwin). The browser has been compiled with either GCC or LLVM. Hackernews is probably hosted on nginx / apache behind varnish or something, running on linux.

In short, I feel like the opensource movement has already won. Aside from RMS's crusade against software patents, how is the FSF still relevant?

tlrobinson• 15 years ago

They've won that battle, but not the war. Servers, databases, frameworks, languages, etc are often open source, but the majority of applications are not.

drzaiusapelord4• 15 years ago

That's the problem, you're the problem if you refuse to accept that the best solution is going to be the freedom for people to sell commercial closed software as well as use open software. The idea that this is a war is exactly why RMS is wrong. The idea that we must win it and we must make everyone use the new hot open license is wrong.

The idea should be to encourage people to use open licenses, and to promote the good of open licenses, not declare war on everything and become some bitter asshole neckbeard when you see guys like Jobs doing well with a slightly different approach.

The FSF doesn't do much. They're little more than negative campaigners "Windows 7 Sins" etc. I'm not sure what its purpose or real world effect is other than to scare middle management from FOSS as much as possible. Stick vs Carrot. FSF is all stick and people have noticed.

whatusername• 15 years ago

Win 2K8, Oracle, MS-SQL, DB2, .NET, WebLogic, WebSphere, C#, etc would all slightly disagree with you.

derleth• 15 years ago

> Aside from RMS's crusade against software patents, how is the FSF still relevant?

"Well, we just beat the tuberculosis into remission, so now all we have to deal with is this metastasising cancer."

Frankly, software patents have the potential to be a lot scarier than copyright ever could be. Anyone working to end them is doing good work.

genieyclo• 15 years ago

rtm would never run HN on Linux :-)

If they haven't upgraded, FreeBSD 7.1 (not sure on the particulars of RELEASE version).

news.arc does not need Apache or NGiNX, but I'm not sure whether HN uses varnish cache.

kragen4• 15 years ago

> I feel like the opensource movement has already won.

We have a really long way to go, still.

The most popular computer platforms in the world are iOS and Android, and their users don't have the practical ability or, in some countries, the legal right to modify the software on them.

Many people communicate with their friends and colleagues through Facebook and Gmail — proprietary software applications that send copies of their most private data to advertising-funded companies in foreign countries. (Unless they live in the US.) Their right to continue communicating with their friends through these media is subject to arbitrary revocation at any moment.

Every day, I run into web sites that don't work unless I install Flash.

And my friend David tells me his startup has just received a patent lawsuit from Lodsys.

I understand that you're happy with this situation (except the patent part), but I'm not.

I want to live in a world where people's communication with their friends, family, and colleagues, and the public, is subject to approval from nobody except the communicating parties.

I want to live in a world where Apple can't surreptitiously log everywhere I go on my own phone, and where I'm not committing a crime if I reprogram the phone to stop anyone who is.

I want to live in a world where I can buy any random piece of hardware at the computer store and plug it in with happy anticipation that it will work with Linux, not dread that I'll have to search all over the web for half-assed reverse-engineered drivers.

I want to never read another fucking EULA, and to never again have to click through without reading it and wonder what rights I've just signed away.

We've come a long way, but we still have a long way to go.

cwp• 15 years ago

Be careful about conflating the Free Software Foundation with the Open Source Initiative. Free software is about distributing source code for moral reasons, while open source is about distributing source code for utilitarian reasons.

I think you're right; if open source hasn't won, it's doing pretty well. But as far as the FSF is concerned that's doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. The FSF isn't going to declare victory until they bring everybody around to their moral point of view.

rimantas4• 15 years ago

  > In short, I feel like the opensource movement has already
  > won. Aside from RMS's crusade against software patents,
  > how is the FSF still relevant?

It's not. Many won't agree, but time will show (or have it already?). Stallman's ideas were born at the time when absolute majority of computer users were also IT guys — and in that context they do make sense. However nowadays computers are just mere tools/entertainment machines for the most of the users. The only concern they have is "does it work", not "can I modify the program". For some reason there are people who cannot accept this shift and get more and more out of touch with reality each day.

DanBC10• 15 years ago

I think you're under-estimating RMS's extremism about 'freeness'.

RMS would say that you booted your machine with an evil closed EFI / BIOS; that there's a bunch of evil non-free drivers; that there's a bunch of evil non-free gui stuff, etc etc.

Chrome was not, to RMS, a valid solution. Note his approach to "browsing the www" - (http://lwn.net/Articles/262570/)

>To look at page I send mail to a demon which runs wget and mails the page back to me.

RMS would say that there is still plenty of work to do to work toward 'free' software. (Mobile phones is something he's keen to open up.)

aaronbrethorst• 15 years ago

Emacs Virgin thing: http://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2009/07/emailing-richard-...

groovy2shoes• 15 years ago

This is the first I've heard of this incident, and I find the comments on that post shocking. That so many people can take RMS's side on that issue is appalling.

RexRollman• 15 years ago

After reading this, all I can say is that some people are too sensitive.

daedhel3• 15 years ago

Or are opportunistic assholes who capitalize on any occasion.

BigCanOfTuna• 15 years ago

Crass and insensitive but in line with everything I've ever heard him profess to believe. He's never strayed from his goal in making great software available to millions of people around the world, and he's never given a shit why it shouldn't or couldn't be done his way...damn, that sounds familiar.

leot5• 15 years ago

Yes, but RMS is simply wrong, here. Jobs has put great software into more hands than RMS ever did. Jobs might well have (indirectly) had an even more positive influence on FOSS by spreading BSD.

(I'm not saying that there isn't a ton of FOSS out there in lots of hands -- but RMS isn't responsible for its being there in the same way Jobs is responsible. Jobs is responsible for the iPhone. RMS isn't responsible for Android.)

saurik• 15 years ago

(BSD != "Free" => Mac OS X != "Open". Jobs "spreading BSD" is therefore irrelevant, and probably explains the downvotes you are receiving, if you or anyone else are at all curious.)

cookiecaper12• 15 years ago

RMS makes no comment about "great software" in the post. He says that Jobs "made computers as a jail 'cool'" (paraphrase), and I think to a great extent that's true -- Apple has always been the most aggressively locked-down computer maker. Although OS X uses several open-source internals and although Apple even maintains some of these (including very important ones, like CUPS and X), they are still in some ways the most "locked down" computer (and consumer electronic) maker out there.

marshray3• 15 years ago

Jobs has put great software into more hands than RMS ever did.

You do realize that Apple has been dependent on GCC to build its products for most of Jobs' second tenure, don't you? Some of that is code that RMS personally wrote.

The GPL license that, again, RMS personally wrote covers the kernel of the Android system. "Great software" that's in "more hands" than Jobs' devices.

Jobs was a slick businessman like Gates. RMS wrote fucking GCC.

Guess who's contribution I value more.

orblivion5• 15 years ago

I don't think Jobs would say anything bad about Stallman if Stallman died first. Because unlike Steve, in Steve's words (vis a vis Bill Gates) Stallman has no taste.

v212• 15 years ago

Jobs knew public opinion, and how to sway it. Stallman is a zealot.

raganwald2• 15 years ago

Actually, Stallman DOES have taste. He lacks a design aesthetic, but that is not synonymous with taste. Taste is about having an internally consistent means of making choices.

The reason people say Microsoft had no taste is that they never said no, they bolted any old thing onto the side of Windows, there never really has been a sense that Windows is this and this but not that.

Stallman has an extremel sharp sense of what free software is and isn't, I'd call that taste with a capital T. Now, if someone were to say it isn't GOOD taste, well, that's a worthwhile conversation to entertain.

Windows, on the other hand... No idea how it is today, but up to XT it absolutely lacked any sense of taste, it wasn't even bad taste, it simply was stuff higgledy piggledy, some things for experts who use the command line, some chrome for newbies, all next together, but never as powerful and flexible as Unix nor as easy as Macintosh, but not even designed for the middle of the road user.

In other words, no taste.

jonhendry2• 15 years ago

It's my understanding that Jobs would turn on a dime and adopt your way of doing something in place of his, IF you could make a compelling enough case for it.

dbbo4• 15 years ago

At the risk of getting repetitive: I think rms was speaking strictly from a utilitarian perspective-- that is, Jobs' absence is overall a good thing for the FOSS movement (even though that might not actually be true, unless Cook is more committed to FOSS than Jobs). I can see how some find his statement tactless, but I'm not offended by it because Jobs was not an important person in my life. That doesn't mean that his life had no value, but his life wasn't more valuable to me than the life of any of the thousands of people who die every day from preventable causes. I honestly don't understand why so many people claim to be sad because Jobs is gone. Why did they feel so connected to a CEO? Steve Jobs was not your uncle. You have no rational reason to be upset over his death, and especially over what a coot like rms says about him. If you're upset enough to "fork the FSF" you're probably suffering from some illusory feeling of connectedness towards Jobs. I don't agree with a lot of what the FSF says, but one single comment made by one single guy is not going to make me turn my back on the whole organization. I will no longer be reading Larry's blog if he thinks this kind of flighty and ostentatious display of disapproval is warranted.

desireco422• 15 years ago

+1 (I especially agree with last part where you question forking FSF)

desireco422• 15 years ago

I am really proud of this downvotes I got for supporting free software :)

EiZei• 15 years ago

Strictly from an utilitarian perspective RMS should keep his big fat mouth shut when someone -especially somebody as popular as Jobs - dies.

dbbo4• 15 years ago

I don't really think popularity is a reason to suppress rms' constitutional rights (he is a US citizen as far as I know), no matter how crazy or alienating his opinions are.

_delirium3• 15 years ago

If you want an advocacy organization with a better ear for public sensibilities and business, that's what the Open Source Initiative was designed for, wasn't it? Why not join them instead of starting yet another organization?

gonzo• 15 years ago

No. OSI was Eric's attempt to hijack the work of RMS. Eric is no better than, and in many ways, much worse than, RMS.

kragen4• 15 years ago

That's more or less how Stallman saw it, but the other dozen or so free-software luminaries that Raymond brought onboard from the beginning didn't see it that way. Stallman was literally the only one on the original Cc: list that opposed the new "open source" movement.

brendoncrawford• 15 years ago

Go ahead... fork it. Then what happens?

Will you travel the world tirelessly promoting free software, speaking at universities and other events for very little money?

Will you maintain a job board, mailing list, hardware database, software directory, year after year?

Will you find lawyers to donate hundreds of hours to write and revise licenses?

Will you hire lobbyists to fight software patents?

Will you tirelessly fight the RIAA, day after day?

When you've done all these things, sign me up.

chrisballinger• 15 years ago

Will you grow a beard that big?

alecco3• 15 years ago

And never mind code. This basher is a complete nobody who seems to profit from open source more than contribute. It's not like the heads of several major FSF projects are banding a revolt.

The sinister anti-Stallman/GNU sentiment on HN is reaching incredibly high levels. Luckily it's mostly nobodies like this big mouth bozo.

drivingmenuts2• 15 years ago

I think Stallman has earned some negative sentiment with that statement. As he is so closely identified with the FSF, regardless of intent, it's inevitable that there would be spillover.

It's not the mission, it's the man we have a problem with. Yes, he's done a lot for Free Software and software in general, most of it good. He has taught us a lot and probably learned a few things.

The next thing he needs to learn is when to keep some of his thoughts to himself. His statement, in no way, advances the cause of Free Software.

potatolicious• 15 years ago

While you do have a point, I disagree strongly with the way you've expressed it. There is no need for name-calling and personal attacks on this board.

Calling someone a "nobody" and a "big mouth bozo" is uncalled for.

viraptor• 15 years ago

There are other people who already do the same, he's not doing all the work by himself. He doesn't want to become the leader either, unless I missed something - he just sees a growing issue and organisation which he cannot identify with anymore. What's wrong with saying that he'd like to see a forked organisation with a leader that does not offend people very often and doesn't use someone's death to push his own ideas?

sgentle• 15 years ago

I don't get it, personally. Yes, Stallman's a loon - although as an aside I think that every good movement needs its loons. Who's going to say "you know what? I believe in Free Software so much that I will use nothing else, and publicly and harshly declare that anyone doing otherwise is a moron and a traitor to the future of humanity"? Anyone who is willing to sacrifice the usefulness of the last 30 years of proprietary tech to make a point has to be a bit barmy. But who else will make that point? All progress depends on unreasonable men.

And I agree that it would be helpful to have a moderate voice in Free Software. I use a Mac - sorry, it's really nice to use and I code a lot. I like my Kindle - sorry, it's better than the others and I read a lot. I live and work with proprietary software, but I believe in Free Software too. WebKit is popular because of Apple and Google. OS X is the most popular BSD, and the most popular consumer Unix. Non-free and free can and have worked together to mutual benefit. Is there anyone out there who can help me walk that line? If Larry is proposing to make that organisation, I would welcome it with open arms.

But what of this Jobs nonsense? Are we so timid and flammable that we can't handle a complex opinion that we don't agree with? Can you not accept that Jobs was a great leader who didn't deserve to die, but that he left a scary, proprietary footprint all over the mobile and tablet space? "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone." is an opinion I don't agree with, but I don't think it's ludicrous, tactless and heartless.

Not everyone has to respect the things I respect, and feelings don't suddenly trump debate because of death. Jobs is one of the hacker community's sacred cows, and we wouldn't accept this level of sanctification on any other topic. I'm sure when Bill Gates or the Dalai Lama dies, there will be posts saying "let's not forget that Windows Vista was awful and religion is the other opiate of Tibet" Will they cause the same outcry?

jpadvo• 15 years ago

The issue is not at all with his opinion. It is that he expressed it in a horrendously, gratuitously crass and offensive way. Here is a transliteration into humane language of what he said:

"My heart goes out to Steve Jobs' family in their time of grief. And my heart also goes to the millions of people who looked up to him as an icon and inspiration. But we need to not get so carried away honoring the dead that we forget the damage that Jobs' work had on the Free Software movement.

His pioneered the software walled garden, which destroys freedom and choice. And he targeted it at people who would not understand what they were sacrificing by giving up their freedoms.

We can only hope that his successors make Apple a more free company, or failing that, are not as effective at spreading it as he was."

Wasn't that better? And it communicated substantively the same thing, but without all the name calling and the seeming glee over the death of another human.

Disclaimer: I typed this on my Macbook Air.

Edit: One more thing to add. Saying "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone" is tripe. Being gone is a euphemism for being dead. The reason we mourn when a loved one dies is precisely because that means they are gone.

Maybe RMS sees a subtle distinction between death and gone-ness in his head. But I promise you that people in grief see absolutely no distinction between the death and the loss of the person they mourn.

sliverstorm2• 15 years ago

It's ironic- it would seem to be RMS who is getting carried away. A great man has died, and all RMS can think about is what this means for the Free Software movement? To me, this discredits him more than anything I have ever heard him say. Software is not more important than life.

Disclaimer: Actively avoids Apple products

forensic4• 15 years ago

>horrendously, gratuitously crass and offensive way.

And?

It's rms. He's the biggest nerd in the world. Nerds are expected to be horrendously, gratuitously crass, offensive and insensitive of people's emotions.

This is like being mad that the sky is blue. Pointless outrage.

cookiecaper12• 15 years ago

>Maybe RMS sees a subtle distinction between death and gone-ness in his head. But I promise you that people in grief see absolutely no distinction between the death and the loss of the person they mourn.

It is not legitimate for the mass of HN to be "in grief" because of Steve Jobs's death. You may be sad, but certainly no grieving period should be necessary for strangers.

Stallman was not overtly disrespectful imo, and there's a solid distinction between "gone" and "dead". "Gone" can mean retired just as well as it could mean dead -- the point is that that person is no longer influential in the circles they were affecting.

rwmj2• 15 years ago

The RMS posting is hardly "horrendously, gratuitously crass and offensive".

gbog2• 15 years ago

> All progress depends on unreasonable men.

This is a very bold generalization grounded on nothing. Once we had rational discussions here.

jessriedel• 15 years ago

Mostly off-topic, but...

>The reason we mourn when a loved one dies is precisely because that means they are gone.

Not true! If I knew my close friend or family member was moving to a remote location such that I'd never see or hear from them again, I'd be sad but it would be a lot less sad than if they died. When someone dies, we don't just mourn the loss of their interactions we us (wouldn't that be a bit selfish?), we mourn the fact that they are aren't experiencing life anymore.

bad_user2• 15 years ago

     Wasn't that better? And it communicated 
     substantively the same thing

Personally I'm tired of people kissing ass and sucking cock, delivering shit in chocolate coating with a cherry on top.

No, that isn't better and it does not communicate the same thing.

Tloewald• 15 years ago

I think better still would be to say nothing.

By completely failing to acknowledge what Jobs did that was positive (even within his own value system) Stallman shows just how clueless he is. To put it another way, Stallman is fine with people being imprisoned in the walled garden of a computer priesthood, so long as the software they don't know how to use is "free".

mrb2• 15 years ago

Loon is NOT an adjective that you can apply to Stallman.

  loon
      n 1: a worthless lazy fellow

He is certainly not that. He founded the GNU project. Authored the GPL. Wrote dozens of open source applications. And overall contributed a lot to free software. Choose your words carefully!

RobAtticus• 15 years ago

Loon is used as slang to mean somebody who is a bit off the wall or crazy, as in that person belongs in the "loony bin" (mental hospital).

snth• 15 years ago

Loon: a silly or foolish person. From my apple dictionary.

balakk• 15 years ago

I always thought loon was a shortened term for "lunatic". Not that I'm calling RMS one.

sliverstorm2• 15 years ago

I am not everyone, but I believe that people deserve a little respect when they pass, even if they antagonized you in life.

There are perhaps exceptions in those who are essentially disgraces to the human race, but in general... Death is the one thing that binds us all. We all share the same destination. Have a little class. Even Gates had something nice to say, and I'm sure if Gates passed first, Jobs would have had something as well.

Death is not a time for bitterness.

jsz0• 15 years ago

I think that every good movement needs its loons.

This is probably true but when they become an embarrassment and a liability it's better to distance yourself from them as much as possible. His latest comments are particularly insensitive but it goes a lot deeper than that. Most of the stuff he writes leaves me with a more negative view of free software. He basically wants people to reject most modern software/technology/services and devote their lives to being as spiritually pure as himself. Never-mind. I'll just use the closed software instead because that's not a commitment I'm willing to make. If everyone in his organization feels that way then it's doomed. He's now an intensely negative force.

wnight6• 15 years ago

> He basically wants people to reject most modern software/technology/services

No. If he wants anything from the average person, instead of for them, it's that they pay attention to the value of their freedom (to keep using your software when the key server goes offline, for instance) now instead of later when it's too late.

> Most of the stuff he writes leaves me with a more negative view of free software.

Of course. You resent what you see as his spiritual purity in rejecting Trojan horse DRMed products that lock you in because you know you aren't capable of going without something you want now for greater gain in the future.

You realize that going with the locked-down answer is as smart as selling your house for the short-term gain, but unlike Stallman, are unable to control your urges. Thus you hate him, and those who can.

Now, we both could be reading more into it than there is, but this is how your over-the-top hatred of a free software programmer comes across.

> This is probably true but when they become an embarrassment and a liability it's better to distance yourself from them as much as possible.

I'm sure you don't put 1/100th of the effort into actually attacking real evil people as you do in knocking down the other teams' supposedly sacred cows.

Or are you on the streets/otherwise fighting for freedom in Bahrain, Egypt, etc, freeing Bradley Manning, stopping censorship, women/children/men/the elderly's rights and all the other good fights, and this is just what's left for Stallman?

How is it that someone on such a high horse lacks perspective?

botj• 15 years ago

Agreed. Without the extreme left, by definition the moderate viewpoint will slider further and further to the right.

gfodor2• 15 years ago

All you really need to do is consider what Steve Jobs would have said about RMS if he were still here when RMS is no longer. At worst, he'd say nothing, at best, he'd say something that would have touched you and made you think deeply about what the two men had in common despite their deep differences.

cookiecaper12• 15 years ago

I upvoted this, but meant to downvote it.

jwhite2• 15 years ago

I upvoted you to encourage you to tell us why you downvoted it.

24bit• 15 years ago

Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The trouble-makers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently.

They're not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status-quo.

You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify, or vilify them.

About the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward.

And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world - are the ones who do!

sabat2• 15 years ago

Note that this does not begin, "Here's the the assholes, the heartless, the tactless, the people who think they are above the rest of humankind, who always know better than everyone else, who must teach us how to think."

RMS has done some admirable things, but he's in dire need of some mental help. Seriously.

spitfire• 15 years ago

In the marketplace of ideas Stallman has a simple remedy for his woes with Apple. Make better software than them.

Go on Richard, I dare you to.

Produce6• 15 years ago

He already does. The only difference in the perceived quality is the learning curve. Learn the *nix way and you will be enlightened. Learn the Apple way and you will remain ignorant (but have lots of time for shopping, cos math is so boring, right?).

rimantas4• 15 years ago

Apple way? You mean the one where OS is unix? The one which comes with perl, php, python, ruby, etc? The one which comes with fee Grapher app?

2muchcoffeeman2• 15 years ago

I love the Apple way. Gave me lots of extra time to pursue other interests. Remember, you rely on a lot of people who aren't good at computers but have other skills.

keyist• 15 years ago

RMS has the FSF and Defective By Design sites as soapboxes if he wished to gain more attention from Jobs's death. This was a post on his political notes page. He did nothing to publicize it.

He didn't post to aggregators or tweet to ask for upvotes (technically it was posted on his Identi.ca account which is linked to his political notes feed, but it got no special treatment).

If some major sites hadn't picked up on it and provided the publicity, most readers would never know. So RMS wrote a politically incorrect opinion on his personal page. Can we move on now?

aquayellow• 15 years ago

And please don't think of forking the FSF because RMS made fun of Steve Jobs if that is what people think he did.

ori_b• 15 years ago

When you're a public figure, you have no personal pages. If it's public, it's part of your image.

v212• 15 years ago

But there's still a distinction between RMS and the FSF.

ugh6• 15 years ago

Hey, you seem to be as clueless about communication as he is.

Tichy3• 15 years ago

What I find more interesting: are you as good at hacking as rms? Or is being better at communication the only thing you can take pride in? I suspect that might be behind all the ranting.

vacri8• 15 years ago

What an excellent way to make your point: with an ad hominem attack!

nimblegorilla2• 15 years ago

While he might not have asked for the publicity, it would be very easy for Stallman to issue a public apology.

nimblegorilla2• 15 years ago

I can't believe there are people who think it was ok for Stallman to call Jobs evil. It was a tasteless attack without merit even in better times.

ubasu• 15 years ago

Relevant pg essay?

http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

cookiecaper12• 15 years ago

OS X would not be possible without RMS.

You have to remember that Stallman was around before Jobs' day -- he was performing real work at MIT when Apple was initially conceptualized. Stallman therefore is apparently less vulnerable to the reality distortion field and does not unduly offer oblations to a guy who was obsessed with shininess at the expense of hacker culture. Jobs went to lengths on many products to prevent tinkering in an age when computing was still very open and very academic, because Jobs didn't want any little peons messing up his perfect devices. Hence Stallman's quip that Jobs made computers as a jail cool.

If you think about this statement from Stallman's perspective it really makes a lot of sense, and I think it is ridiculous that the Steve Jobs hero worship pervades so deeply as to not recognize that Jobs was a control freak even after Apple products were sold and in the possession of customers, and that some people, particular contemporaries of Stallman's stripe, may not have been fond of that. I doubt that the release of the iPhone really did much to persuade that set of people.

drivingmenuts2• 15 years ago

This isn't about OS X. This is about Stallman being effective as the leader of the FSF, which apparently he feels entitles him to say any damn thing he wants, regardless of how tasteless it is. That's not the mark of a leader.

That's the mark of a self-inflated ass.

cookiecaper12• 15 years ago

I didn't find it tasteless. Is it really such a criminal thing to say that you are glad Jobs's influence is gone? Can't reasonable people disagree on that point?

People totally go overboard wrt Steve Jobs, as they do his company, Apple. RMS comes from a time when computers were generally open for tinkering, and Apple strove to make its products impenetrable lest Jobs' pain-stakingly "perfected" designs be gaudied up by consumers. From the original Mac which didn't have expansion slots to today's iDevices that don't allow the consumer to do so much as change the battery, Apple has a long history of tight lock down.

Do you not see how an old-school hacker could be disgruntled by that philosophy? The beliefs and experience of that group runs deep enough that they are not hoodwinked into deifying Steve Jobs because the iMac is the sleekest desktop computer around.

geoka9• 15 years ago

No, this is about the OP blaming Stallman for being glad somebody died because it furthers his cause (the FSF's goals).

Which is clearly not the case. Stallman specifically says that Jobs did not deserve to die and he's not glad that Jobs died.

The OP could have just said that Stallman is not the right person to be the leader FSF because he's often politically incorrect. That's debatable, but understandable.

daedhel3• 15 years ago

I should not say this as it brings nothing to the conversation, but thank you.

This hypocrite Job Mania is making me sick and your opinions expresses pretty well parts of my resentment..

Game_Ender• 15 years ago

Can you point out the way Jobs try to called troll the non iDevice products?

kragen4• 15 years ago

Other related thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3085417

coldnose• 15 years ago

And today is the day /usr/bin/gcc changes from "deprecated" to "deleted". I'm glad something finally pushed me over that hump.

http://clang.llvm.org/

daedhel3• 15 years ago

So it's time to fork the FSF because this guy does not agree with one comment RMS did?

How is this not overreacting in the first place...

vacri8• 15 years ago

To be fair, the author does state it's a 'straw that broke the camel's back' scenario; the punctuation at the end of a long line of disliked behaviour, not just one comment.

tzury• 15 years ago

I fully understand this Larry, and think FSF would have been doing much better if there was someone else at its cockpit.

RMS is a fanatic about free software, like ultra religious people are to their religion.

For instance, for me, being free, means, at first and above all, being free to choose. Being able to install proprietary nVidia driver which does not crash my linux box every half a day, and have this driver built and available for me in my linux distro repository.

Years ago, RMS was a guest of honor in IBM Tel Aviv. These were the days, Linux was something left-field, obscure, that no one wanted to know or hear about it. There were hundreds of developers in the hall who came to hear about the "Gnu/Linux thing" from the Freedom Guru.

All of a sudden, in the middle of his lecture, out of any imaginable context, RMS took of his left shoe, and then the sack, and start rubbing his toes with his fingers while preaching about free software.

Yes, imagine that, a man is playing with his barefoot on a stage, would you remember anything he said? Would you listen to anything he has to say? Or would your brain being busy understanding and categorizing the extraordinary show you are in?

(Those were not the days of youtube and smartphone, I bet if that would have been happening these days, this was the most viewed video on youtube amongst hackers.)

It is sad, but successful open source project does not seemed to get along with RMS at all, see Ubuntu/Canonical as a good example.

mrb2• 15 years ago

I think RMS's statement is completely misinterpreted. Don't forget the first part of the sentence: "I'm not glad he's dead", which literally means RMS is not glad that Jobs died!

"I'm glad he's gone" is only a complaint towards Jobs' influence on personal computing. You may disagree with RMS (I certainly do), and it is certainly an inappropriate comment to make at this time, but this is nothing to make a drama of RMS' comment... Geez people!

Uhhrrr• 15 years ago

I have to flag this for being utterly asinine. If you're really a "free software guy", RMS's statement should not even partially raise an eyebrow.

nohat• 15 years ago

RMS and Jobs seem very similar to me. Both were monomaniacal perfectionists. Both were undiplomatic and unwilling to compromise or cater to unbelievers.

fmadot• 15 years ago

I won't say I am supporting RMS or not. Actually I think Jobs was a man with great talent, but I don't like him. I think most of you overreacted on "I'm not glad he's dead, I'm glad he's gone". RMS expressed clearly that he don't agree with the achievements that Jobs reached in his short life. This is a personal opinion. You can't force everyone to agree with what Jobs has done. After all RMS said "I'm not glad he's gone." That's enough. I think there is nothing to argue for.

skrebbel• 15 years ago

I'm sorry, but - what a nutcase. Silently accepts Stallman's years of nasty comments, cynical attitudes, world-wide conspiracy theories and downright condescension all through. Then Stallman says something unfriendly about god^H^H^H Jobs, and he resigns. Oh, come on.

poink• 15 years ago

This is kind of like wanting a "toned down" PETA. People don't devote their lives to marginalized causes without either having or picking up a twinge of zealotry. If you want those people to stand up for causes you mutually believe in, you have to take the bad with the good.

RMS might not be the best possible Free Software advocate, but I'm glad someone's doing it, and nobody else seems to be volunteering for the job.

ceejayoz• 15 years ago

> This is kind of like wanting a "toned down" PETA.

Is that so horrible a thing? It seems to me groups like the Humane Society have done a lot more for animal welfare than PETA.

chanon• 15 years ago

I agree with this comment by "tom robinson" in the blog post:

To those saying you agree with what RMS wrote: that’s fine, but irrelevant. As a spokesman for FSF he shouldn’t be pandering to his already devout followers, he should be trying to convince others that the ideals of the FSF are worth pursuing, and he’s been doing an absolutely TERRIBLE job of that lately.

Silly campaigns of immature puns, lashing out at people who don’t say “GNU/Linux”, insulting a recently deceased man who much of the world admires, and making otherwise inappropriate remarks on a regular basis is an excellent way to alienate the people you’re trying to win over.

How have these tactics been working out for FSF? I don’t have stats, but anecdotally most new open source projects I come across have rejected the GPL licenses for BSD, MIT, Apache, etc.

Now imagine what FSF could accomplish if they had a spokesman with the skills of Steve Jobs

tommorris• 15 years ago

Wait, isn't there a whole stack of organisations that support FLOSS or the same sort of values as openness that the FSF support other than the FSF already?

Off the top of my head: Apache Software Foundation, OSI, GNOME Foundation, Linux Foundation, Mozilla Foundation, Python Software Foundation, Open Knowledge Foundation, Software Freedom Law Center, Software in the Public Interest, Wikimedia Foundation.

If you feel like you want to throw money, power or sexual favours to the open source community, there are plenty of ways to do it that don't involve RMS or the FSF. Or you could just find some free/open source script or app or library you use and like and chuck the creator $20 and a nice email saying "I really like your code, go buy yourself a pizza and a beer on me".

jsilence• 15 years ago

In other news: Autistic Reporter: Train Thankfully Unharmed In Crash That Killed One Man

http://www.theonion.com/video/autistic-reporter-train-thankf...

jwr• 15 years ago

RMS deserves praise for starting the Free Software movement, but he has been a liability to it for quite some time now. Leaders that start movements are not always fit to lead them when movements grow.

And before you protest — have you met the man in person? If you haven't, you won't understand.

chanux• 15 years ago

Jobs loved what he did and believed in it. RMS certainly is same.

I respect Jobs for `the inspiration` while I respect RMS for what `he offered to the world`.

Tichy3• 15 years ago

I have never heard of Larry, so my guess would be: chance that Larry will found and lead the FFSF (Forked Free Software Foundation) = 0%

AmazingBytecode• 15 years ago

I support open source on a pragmatic level as a way for people to share code so that they no longer have to "re-invent the wheel". Because of this I feel like it's petty and counter-productive for the FSF to refuse to share their "free" software with people because of the way that those people want to use the software. Truly free software should be released to the public without limitations on how and where it should be used.

To clarify: I know that my preferred model ignores the scummy/greedy tendencies of people to leech off work that others have done. However, I'd like for people to think of open source software as a gift given with no strings attached.

mkup• 15 years ago

I think RMS is doing perfect trolling to get more attention to his GNU/FSF/commie stuff.

The net effect is the people talking about RMS, about FSF and GNU. More people get to know about this stuff, more people get involved.

Just a little trolling replaces zillions of bucks spent on advertising, PR etc. Commies don't have money to pay, so they must troll.

---

Just don't spread this hype and don't feed the troll.

wazoox2• 15 years ago

> GNU/FSF/commie stuff.

Bingo, you've just made some tasteless, insulting passing remark. Some sort of reverse-Godwin point. So much for not feeding the trolls.

fletcher• 15 years ago

What Stallman said is just, analytically speaking:

1) I don't like when people die.

2) But this happened to Steve Jobs, unfortunately.

3) However from my point of view he was doing so much damage to the world of software that this is a good thing. Not the fact he died but the fact that we no longer have his influence.

Note: I don't agree. But I don't think it should be a problem to say the above.

It is like if you are the leader of a movement against the practice of killing whales, and there is one guy that kills 100,000 whales every year. If he dies you can legitimately say: "I'm sorry he died, but this is a good thing for whales".

He used the wrong words, the wrong time, and so forth, but the concept is nothing of extraordinary from his point of view. It is important to have the freedom of saying what we want.

gurkendoktor• 15 years ago

Nobody wants to take this freedom away, but it hurts the cause he is supposed to advance, and that's what the posting is saying.

I can't see how mentioning human life and software licensing in the same sentence is ever a good idea if there is a chance that interested non-nerds are reading up on your ideals.

motters• 15 years ago

Although Stallman didn't use a great deal of tact in his statement I agree with his concern overall. Software should serve the user in accordance with the ideal of individual empowerment with technology and not become a sort of jail controlled by a central authority that you have to struggle to break out of. The problem of impersonal computing is by no means isolated to Apple though.

narag• 15 years ago

Although Stallman didn't use a great deal of tact in his statement I agree with his concern overall.

That seems oddly similar to my tl;dr from the article: "Although I agree with his concern overall, Stallman didn't use a great deal of tact in his statement".

thu• 15 years ago

Stallman didn't say he's glad Steve Jobs died. I understand he's glad that Steve's influence on computing stop, as that influence is driving computing in a closed ecosystem.

You can take it in a non-emotional way. A is, in your opinion, a bad thing. If A stops, you're glad. If A stops because of a sad B event, you can be both glad for A to end, and sad for B to occur.

Fice• 15 years ago

As I said already, today's hacker culture is crippled. So called "hackers" here have lost their principles, forgotten the value of freedom, worship the wrong idols. How come an entrepreneur be a hero much more important than any of the researchers who pioneered the modern computer technology? How can the man who worked against the values and principles of the hacker ethic be an idol for so many hackers? There is no real hacker community here on HN, only a flock of spineless ship.

burgerbrain7• 15 years ago

The title "Hacker News" is a lure designed to draw more people in. It would be best if this place went back to it's old and far more honest name "Startup News".

suivix• 15 years ago

I see HN as a more mature version of http://www.reddit.com/r/technology, but with a heavy slant towards discussions about startups. In fact I frequently see the same articles referenced in both places.

Sandman• 15 years ago

While most of the commenters here discuss what Stallman said and what he actualy meant, whether it was distasteful or not, and whether Jobs was a modern day messiah who single-handedly changed the world we live in or just a smart business man with a very good sense of choosing the right people to create the products that he envisioned, I'd like to take a minute to think about what is actually proposed in this article - the forking of FSF. It's quite obvious from the article that the reason the author suggests something like that is not because his views on software freedom somehow differ than those of Stallman, but because he has issues with Stallman himself, or more precisely, with his publicly expressed opinions. He feels that they hurt FSF and free software in general. Isn't then the solution to the problem to, through some electoral process, replace Stallman and put a new figure at the head of FSF? Somebody more tactful, more careful about how they say what they mean (if that's truly the kind of a person memebers of FSF would like to see in charge)? Starting a new foundation with exactly the same goals as FSF, just because you don't like Stallman's public statements, seems pointless to me.

loup-vaillant• 15 years ago

This is a common pattern: (i) someone famous dies, (ii) someone else says something bad about that celebrity, (iii) everyone else is scandalized. Thou shalt not bash the dead.

Now, I don't think Stallman's lines were gratuitously offensive. He was merely clear and concise. He spent no word on niceness, but he spent no word on rudeness either. And by the way, he is factually correct: Jobs was "the pioneer of the computer as a jail made cool, designed [among other things] to sever fools from their freedom" (or, if not the pioneer, at least the most effective apologist).

Now should he have just shut up? Probably not. Every one now is praising Jobs, and that may trigger even more sales for the iPhone and the iPad. Praise Jobs, and soon you will praise Apple's most locked down products. At least a word of caution is needed.

Now I do understand that Stallman knows next to nothing about how not to trigger bad feelings. I do understand that he should work on that. But please, don't be offended by something that most probably wasn't intended to be offensive.

Jarred• 15 years ago

I agree with forking the FSF, but not just having someone whose nice is necessary. It needs to be led by someone who gives a damn about user experience. This is an issue with not all open source applications, but many. It is getting better, but I still prefer Windows or OS X to using Gnome, KDE. I've never needed to use any of the bundled software with Ubuntu (except the settings apps, gedit, and Firefox). It can't just be about open-source alternatives, because most people don't care if something is open or closed source, they care if it gets the job done well.

maximusprime• 15 years ago

Best way to deal with extreme fundamentalists is to ignore them.

He's a joke.

sharmajai2• 15 years ago

Fuck you RMS. I have been and still am a staunch believer in open source, but when I read comments like this from the person who's motto once was that everybody writing software should contribute the source back to the community, not because it delivers better software (due to the more eyeballs resulting in fewer bugs), but because it results in moving software forward quickly by virtue of helping each other out, I agree with the OP, it's time for a change.

Let me tell you something, free software or not, it was Steve Jobs, who told us what forward direction for software actually means, first by making GUI mainstream, then by making capacitive touch mainstream, and lastly by defining what a tablet form factor should and should not be.

If you think Steve's products hamper your freedom, I can argue the exact opposite, it was Steve who taught us ways to make technology more accessible by making groundbreaking innovations in user interfaces, which enables the non geeks of the world to use computers in the first place, I am pretty sure those users will feel more trapped in the command line interface that you envisioned for them, than they feel by not having access to the source of the painting app they have fun playing with on their ipad.

So if you cannot come out the frog hole that you have created for yourself, and give credit where it's due, then maybe you should shut the fuck up.

DanBC10• 15 years ago

>If you think Steve's products hamper your freedom

Try and explain how to boot a MacBookPro from USB stick to someone, and compare that to booting almost any other computer.

Or explain how to dual boot a Mac with OSX and Linux, vs anything else with Windows and Linux.

sharmajai2• 15 years ago

I have heard of many googlers, who use Ubuntu on their macbooks. Besides that is an ability which is not a prerequisite for majority of the computer users. Look I am a Ubuntu (not on a macbook though) user myself, and being a developer love the freedom that it provides, but we have to remember that everybody's requirement of freedom is different, for vast majority of the users freedom means, freedom from spending hours to tinker with something to make it work, things should just work for them, and Steve provided that kind of freedom.

nknight6• 15 years ago

> Try and explain how to boot a MacBookPro from USB stick to someone

You hold down the Option key while booting.

> Or explain how to dual boot a Mac with OSX and Linux

Install rEFIt (comes in a nice, standard OS X installer package), use the nice GUI Bootcamp or Disk Utility apps to make a partition, insert the Linux CD, reboot while holding down C.

If you're incapable of following these instructions, I seriously doubt you can manage to boot from a USB stick or dual-boot Windows and Linux on any typical PC.

astrodust4• 15 years ago

Try and explain how to restore a MacBook from back-ups over the phone to a frantic parent who's just lost their hard drive.

I did that. It took two minutes. It worked flawlessly.

Sometimes to gain more command over your technology you have to give up some theoretical freedom, but that's freedom you'd never have been able to exercise.

An F-16 pilot would find the controls in a typical car so disappointing. Where's the lever to adjust the fuel/air mixture? The GPS waypoints? The brake bias dial? The air pressure indicator? The temperature of the tires? All of these things are theoretically important to driving, but they're not of any concern to someone simply trying to get from point A to point B.

That's all most people using computers are trying to do.

BasDirks• 15 years ago

Stallman is a degenerate.

epo2• 15 years ago

RMS is clearly on the autistic spectrum, probably far enough on it to be regarded as having a 'learning difficulty' in the rather twee PC UK-ism.

There is IMHO, an interesting litmus test where people who share his monomaniacal obsession, or think it 'reasonable', probably have the same issue.

DanBC10• 15 years ago

UK (at least, England, I have no idea what Wales or Scotland do) "Learning disability" is related to IQ. Autism and Asperger's syndrome do sometimes lead to a "Special Educational Need" (SEN). This isn't just language; there's some access to medical services stuff involved.

epo2• 15 years ago

Thanks for that correction.

goodweeds• 15 years ago

If it were RMS who had died, I wonder what Steve Jobs would have said.

tbourdon• 15 years ago

Much worse will be written about RMS when he dies and many will applaud what is written, never mind their contributions to technology had the same scale of impact on society... It's all in the perspective.

endgame• 15 years ago

Oh, give it a rest already. rms was actually pretty tactful. Did people actually read what he wrote?

> Nobody deserves to have to die - not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing.

the_mat• 15 years ago

Many of the comments following that story are deranged, and I mean that in the strongest sense of the word. "Software extremists" like that really exist? There are people who honestly think Steve Jobs was evil? And most disturbingly, there are people who will flat out bash on the reputation of someone who so recently died? Wow. Just wow.

5hoom2• 15 years ago

Stallman & Jobs are both giant figures in the tech world to anyone who knows their history. I would also imagine that anyone who has followed Richard Stallman over the years would be surprised if he hadn't made a statement like this.

He is an outspoken & tireless champion of an incredibly worthy cause he believes is greater than himself (and c'mon, the guys hacking skills are legendary).

Steve Jobs was a uniquely amazing entrepreneur & visionary leader. His impact on the way people everywhere use technology is both profound & undeniable.

Both men are worthy of the deepest respect IMHO, even if their goals were in conflict.

mtraven• 15 years ago

Didn't this fork happen quite some time ago? http://www.opensource.org/ And for pretty much the exact same reasons being given now?

Although some of the people behind that are almost as embarrassing to be associated with as RMS.

December• 15 years ago

I'm so tired of political correctness and "sexism" posts. At times half of this site seems to consist of posts made by people offended by something.

Time to fork the FSF

Related Stories