Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

http://richard.stallman.usesthis.com/

by rdp • 14 years ago

322 224 14 years ago

richard.stallman.usesthis.com

kayoone• 14 years ago

This has been on here a couple of times already.

I respect his Setup, but i think if your not the founder of the Free Software Movement, this is a bit extreme ;)

waferbaby• 14 years ago

That's what I thought, that it's been posted before.

why-el2• 14 years ago

It's awesome how small this entry is compared to what other developers would describe as their setup.

schraeds2• 14 years ago

He isn't a developer, he is a front man for a decades old movement.

noarchy• 14 years ago

How do you define "developer"? The man has certainly written his share of code, and has contributed it to the community. I don't know how he has made his living, over the years, but I bet he's been paid to develop at some point.

ordinary• 14 years ago

On the other hand, "mail is what [he does] most of the time". I don't mean to belittle his achievements, I'm generally a fan of Stallman, but if that's really the case, then maybe we should call him a manager, rather than a developer.

upthedale• 14 years ago

Richard Stallman's Computer Setup from 2 years ago

schraeds2• 14 years ago

And I bet he is still waiting to find a laptop that his free and open to replace is yulong

lunarscape3• 14 years ago

He won't have to wait long. Yeeloong have a quad-core Loongson-3A 13.3" laptop on the way.

BrainInAJar• 14 years ago

I'm surprised he even compromises on the CPU instead of using OpenSPARC or something

mino• 14 years ago

Not a very appealing setup in 2012.

kprobst2• 14 years ago

Not a very appealing setup, period.

Argorak2• 14 years ago

Practically? No. From the ultra-geek perspective? Yes.

maxer• 14 years ago

derek sivers almost has a comparable setup on the software end

http://derek.sivers.usesthis.com/

kprobst2• 14 years ago

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I was on HN but it seems I wondered into Reddit or Slashdot. Let me amend my point of view: "I loooove Richard Stallman and I totally dig his choice of computing platform. I would never dare to say otherwise"

aquinn2• 14 years ago

He runs a modern full featured gnu/linux distribution like a lot of people, just rarely boots into the desktop.

sek• 14 years ago

Well, not the best way to expand your horizon.

When he would use things like the iPad from time to time, he would understand that convenience is the biggest threat to open source. Nobody cares how free Stallman's device really is. When he would speak for better open source devices, he would actually make progress. Right now is Shuttleworth advancing the free software movement to be accessible for everyone.

Reminds me of these ultra leftists, who declare their own government and live without electricity and fresh water. What do they achieve in the big picture? They do this just to feel better themself.

Linus Torvalds is the man who made everything possible. Google/Facebook would never have existed with a Hurd kernel and Git is now the big accelerator of open source. Stallman started it, but what did he achieve significant in the last 20 years?

thurn• 14 years ago

Google and Facebook would never exist the way they do today without the free software movement. Both of them rely on a huge stack of open-source technology. Stallman's ideas are what makes it possible for a college kid to run a web startup today essentially for free.

lazerwalker• 14 years ago

I think sek's post was more along the lines of "but what has he done for me lately?"

Right now, for every piece of open software that has enabled all kinds of world-changing good things, there's a dozen situations where open software is not a viable solution when compared to the closed alternatives for a wide variety of reasons, unless you're explicitly choosing to use only open software as a show of support for an ideological cause. What frustrates me about Stallman is that he spends his time lecturing people about why they're bad people for not using open software, instead of actively working to make open software a more appealing solution more of the time.

pooriaazimi7• 14 years ago

But... (open source != FSF)

   Stallman's ideas are what makes it possible for a college kid to run a web
   startup today essentially for free.

With lots and lots of limitations the GPL license imposes on him... I think the world would be a better place with less GPL and more BSD/Apache/... - He did great things, but many of his ideas are old and frankly, ridiculous.

I submitted this link a while back that has a great discussion about what people think of GPS's limitations: 'Why you should use a BSD style license for your Open Source Project' http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3402346

dalke8• 14 years ago

As the FSF would point out, the free software movement is different from open source. If there was no free software movement, or a prohibition on GPL'ed software, then Google could have used other open source tools (eg, *BSD) instead.

One serious concern in the FSF seems to be that a large, programmer-centric company like Google could rewrite most free software, should the license not be compatible with the business model. Eg, the recent brouhaha on a non-GPL replacement for BusyBox and a comment about Google's goal of "reducing the amount of GPL software in user-space for Android devices."

_delirium2• 14 years ago

I don't think there's anything new there conceptually; Stallman is quite aware that convenience is one way that proprietary software wins over users, because that was also true in the 1980s. What benefit would there be if RMS used an iPad? He's not a UI designer for any GNU software, so he doesn't really need to do it for field research. The main software he's involved with at all (mainly GNU Emacs these days, afaik) is not really targeted at the same demographic as the iPad anyway.

Aloha• 14 years ago

What of BSD? The stack /can/ be the same even.

middayc• 14 years ago

So what, he can use whatever He wants.

What's wrong with doing things "just to to feel better"? Or is it only OK when you consume more to feel better, not consume less to feel better?

(not to even start with "what did he achieve ..in 20 y")

igorgue• 14 years ago

"Stallman was responsible for contributing many necessary tools, including a text editor (Emacs), compiler (GCC), debugger (gdb), and a build automator (gmake)." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

Ignorance is incredible sometimes. We own both, Stallman and Torvalds a lot. I'm pretty sure Torvalds would tell you that he wouldn't make Linux without Stallman's work, in fact that's why Linux is GPL.

apaitch• 14 years ago

Open source software and free software are two different things, and Stallman is an advocate for the latter (as well as the former). I think that's an important point, and one which people tend to miss.

onli• 14 years ago

>When he would use things like the iPad from time to time, he would understand that convenience is the biggest threat to open source.

I remember him saying that. Sorry, about FOSS, of course.

bkirwi• 14 years ago

Saying Torvalds 'made everything possible' is technically true, but a bit misleading. If there was no Linux kernel, the free software project would have taken much longer, but without the GNU userspace the kernel would have been not much more than a curiosity. There's still more GNU code in your average Linux distro than anything else.[0]

People forget how much impact the lunatic fringe have on the rest of us. Before the free software movement, it would have seemed insane for a company to give away their code for free -- there was no precedent for it. When you shift the extremes, you also change what counts as being 'moderate'. Would anyone have taken Canonical's business model seriously twenty years ago?

TL;DR: We need people like Stallman to make the rest of us look less crazy.

[0] http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html

elwin• 14 years ago

I don't think RMS could advance the Free software movement by using a more normal setup. There are already plenty of people who think open source is sort of cool, and install it on their MacBook Pros when it's convenient, and sometimes help develop it. And they're better at making Free software accessible for everyone than RMS could be. They don't need his help. He contributes more by disturbing our perspectives in a way that no one else does.

gioele• 14 years ago

> Linus Torvalds is the man who made everything possible.

Not to detract from the men, but he used the GNU C Compiler to compile its kernel, as well as the GNU bash shell, the GNU linker and so on...

Since its inception, the free software movement created a network of hackers and GPL programs that was well established by the time Torvalds started its kernel. Without that network, Linux and many other "groundwork" programs would not even been possible in the first place.

tikhonj5• 14 years ago

Actually, I can't help thinking a much larger issue is marketing and fashion. Nobody except a few large proprietary software companies (Apple, Microsoft) have enough leverage to market heavily to average consumers. Most people do not make heavily researched, purely rational decisions about what to buy: they just get whatever they saw in an ad or whatever is in the store. In both cases, thanks to the obscene amount of money Apple and Microsoft put into distribution and advertising (as well as some monopolistic behavior), the most readily available computers run either Mac OS or Windows. Ubunutu is, in large part, successful because they at least have some marketing. If they managed to get Ubunutu laptops into stores, people would probably buy them. But then Microsoft would go out of its way to crush them (witness the Linux netbooks of a little while ago).

Stallman did write some brilliant software some time ago. Now, unlike Linus, he is concentrating on social issues of free software rather than on programming. And his advocacy has doubtlessly increased the use of the GPL, which has had some very concrete beneficial effects. For example, my understanding is that WebKit is largely free because it was originally forked from KHTML.

Xuzz• 14 years ago

That's true for WebCore (the WebKit rendering engine), yes. But WebKit itself, actually, is BSD licensed and released just because Apple decided to release it. (About a year or so after WebKit was first publicly released, though, I think.)

rat872• 14 years ago

"When he would use things like the iPad from time to time, he would understand that convenience is the biggest threat to open source. Nobody cares how free Stallman's device really is. When he would speak for better open source devices, he would actually make progress. Right now is Shuttleworth advancing the free software movement to be accessible for everyone."

I'm pretty sure he understands in his rude comments after Job's death he said: “Steve Jobs, the pioneer of the computer as a jail made cool, designed to sever fools from their freedom, has died. and "Jobs saw how to make these computers stylish and smooth. That would normally be positive, but not in this case, since it has the paradoxical effect of making their controlling nature seem acceptable."

I think Stallman knows he just don't care much about it for personal use. The FSF does list

    Gnash — the free software Flash player
    Free software replacement for Skype
    Free software video editing software
    Free Google Earth Replacement
    Help GNU/Linux distributions be committed to freedom

as top priorities people should donate time and money too.

The distros and stuff like android is where a lot of ease of use stuff happens and that is why the FSF lists ( Help GNU/Linux distributions be committed to freedom) and a 100% foss android named replicant under the under the reverse engineering priorities list .

rudiger• 14 years ago

You have to give the guy some credit; Stallman believes in the free software movement, fights for it, and refuses to compromise his rights or values.

ldesegur• 14 years ago

Richard Stallman is to software what Jean-Paul Sartres was to philosophy during his time and still now. JPS like RMS was living through his convictions and ideas to the point of refusing the Nobel prize because it would have tinted his motivations. RMS would do the same without any questions. Don't get them wrong: these people are not fanatic, they are just living and breathing a cause they started for a good reason. It takes courage not to give up to consumerism from corporates who try to milk everyone for the goal of making money and definitely not for bringing better living to our lives. Apple, Google, Facebook, they have a simple goal: $$$. When I see a guy talented and proficient like RMS defending his cause on a 9" OLPC, that takes guts.

Czarnian6• 14 years ago

Don't get them wrong: these people are not fanatic, they are just living and breathing a cause they started for a good reason.

AKA Fanaticism. He's become an inflexible, computerized hermit. His dogmatic adherence to a demonstrably untenable principal of "freedom" has relegated him a permanent state of pre-1995 digital stasis.

He's not principled, he's dogmatic. At best, he's a cautionary tale demonstrating the state of the world if he had his way.

syawaworht• 14 years ago

I don't mean to belittle RMS's achievements, but as a general point, I don't think that simply adhering to conviction is courageous. It's the easy way out. It's the way that doesn't address the greys in reality, for the sake of simplicity of what you believe in. You are not tested in your decisions, because you have already refused to make any.

Estragon• 14 years ago

  > RMS would [refuse a Nobel] without any questions.

What's the difference between a Nobel and a MacArthur Genius grant?

http://tech.mit.edu/V110/N30/rms.30n.html

bluekeybox2• 14 years ago

Don't forget that Sartre supported Stalin (and that Orwell despised him for that).

The more I live, the more I realize that old men without or with messed up sex lives are not to be trusted as gurus or guides in life.

It's the Pied Piper of Hamelin all over again.

mhurron• 14 years ago

Which by and large hurts his position if that is to be held up as what it takes to follow the free software movement.

slowpoke5• 14 years ago

Quite the contrary. It shows that something is severely wrong and in dire need of improvement if you need to go to those lengths to be able to run entirely on Free Software. Someone who wants to run only Free Software should not, by any means, have to rely on a 9" netbook from a single, Chinese manufacturer. It should be easy to buy hardware that is open, just as much as it should be a non-issue to run Free Software. Actually, it should always be the preferred solution.

jorgecastillo• 14 years ago

Don't take this the wrong way but I personally feel that the GPL is not a free software license, I feel it's a community software license. BSD is a free software license, BSD code is truly yours, you want to create a proprietary fork you can do it, you want to create a GPLed fork you can do it, you want to expand the BSD code base you can do it. One thing I really love about BSD licensed code is that I feel like I own it, best of all this doesn't stop anyone else from feeling the same.

slowpoke5• 14 years ago

>you want to create a proprietary fork you can do it

Why should you be allowed to take away the Freedoms of others? The one thing the GPL restricts is your Freedom to restrict the Freedom of others. That's the foundation of copyleft: your rights stop where mine begin, and that includes being granted the four Freedoms of software as defined by the FSF.

In an ideal world, we would not need the GPL. Everyone would have realized already that it is in no one's prolonged interest to make proprietary software, and it would be frowned upon to do so. We would have implicit CC-BY (or -Zero) for everything and be done with it. No more copyright and licensing crap.

baddox3• 14 years ago

It comes down to how to define "freedom" for free software. RMS's is a very pragmatic (and in my opinion counterintuitive) definition: it just means that no one can conceal the source code. It's counterintuitive to me, because I would consider the maximum freedom being akin to public domain software: anyone would be able to do literally whatever they want with the software, including redistributing it without distributing the source code.

corford• 14 years ago

They're both free, just with different goals. The GPL gives freedom to the user of the software, the BSD license gives freedom to the developer of the software.

Shamanmuni4• 14 years ago

The same argument could be said about slavery. You are told you have freedom, but you don't have the freedom to enslave other people. A society which admits slavery is more free in the sense you say. But, really, would you feel OK with it? I believe that society's well being is more important than absolute personal freedom. The GPL reflects that, so I support it, and we really shouldn't care about petty arguments about which one is "more free".

tikhonj5• 14 years ago

For everybody to have maximal rights, you have to prohibit taking away others' rights. The GPL just codifies this: we give you the right to use this however you like as long as you don't take that right away from others.

You can draw a parallel to physical goods: everybody has the right to do whatever they want with whatever they've bought. However, this does not translate to being able to sell that thing to somebody else while restricting what that person can do with it. You do not have the right to restrict what people do with things you used to own.

mike-cardwell3• 14 years ago

He has to compromise at some point. He can refuse to stick non-free software on his computer, but he can't refuse to benefit from the use of non-free software in the computers of the cars and planes that he uses for travel, and he can't refuse the non-free software that was used in the manufacture of many of the products he uses every day.

Shamanmuni4• 14 years ago

So, what's your point? That he shouldn't fight for free software because it's difficult? Imagine the world in the 80's, when there wasn't a free as in freedom OS; rms knows about compromise when there are no alternatives, he just doesn't want a non-free OS in a non-free computer when there are free alternatives. We usually call it coherence.

tikhonj5• 14 years ago

First, his main argument is that the user of software should have the right to inspect and modify that software. So just benefiting indirectly from proprietary software does not seem a contradiction: his--and the user's--freedoms are not infringed by using things that may have been manufactured with proprietary software.

Secondly, he does not believe that certain classes of software (like in your microwave) need to be free because they are basically part of the hardware. I imagine that if he owns a car, it only has low-level control software for the engine which is basically the same but not, say, a proprietary GPS system.

In planes it is again not an issue: he doesn't own the plane, so even if it had fully free software he would not benefit. I imagine if he ever did get a plane, he would want one with free software, but that isn't particularly pertinent since he will never buy a plane.

So the things you pointed out are not infringements of his rights--they're infringements of the rights of the manufacturer or the plane company. Stallman tries to persuade people like that to stand up for their rights, but that is all he does.

DanBlake2• 14 years ago

Does he have the same moral reservations for other devices in his life?

ie; what car does he use and own? All (modern) cars accept software updates which is his definition of a computer. Most modern televisions, dvd players, routers and even some microwaves/refrigerators can take firmware updates also.

Genuinely curious about the above - Not being a troll, just wondering how far the man really takes his beliefs. Does he stop at the most publicly noticeable devices ( laptop/cellphone ) or does he go all the way.

julian37• 14 years ago

Does he have the same moral reservations for other devices in his life?

Yes, as far as I know.

ie; what car does he use and own? All (modern) cars accept software updates which is his definition of a computer.

I am pretty sure he doesn't drive, but this is what he had to say on the topic:

So, what about cars? Free cars would mean you are free to modify them and redistribute copies. Well, as for the modification, you are free to do that-lots of people modify and customize their cars. But when it comes to redistributing copies, the fact is we don’t have the technology to do it. There is no automatic car copier. Cars, today, are like books before the Xerox machine-the only feasible way to make copies was with a special factory. Copying your car is so hard that it makes little practical difference whether you are allowed to do this. Perhaps someday, through nanotechnology perhaps, a car copier will be developed. Then a Free Car Movement will be necessary.

Source: http://www.resonancepub.com/rstallman.htm

Lagged2Death• 14 years ago

Does he have the same moral reservations for other devices in his life?

Do you have perfect moral consistency in everything you do? I don't. I'd guess that it's not even possible, let alone human nature.

lmkg• 14 years ago

My understanding of his position is that he does not consider firmware to be independent software. The arguments by which he came to be in favor of free software do not apply to firmware.

The reason that he promotes free software is because software is capable of being free, that is, it is logistically realistic that people freely copy, modify, and distribute it. From this, he extrapolates that there is a right to copy, modify, and distribute software. If would be physically capable of modifying the code, but is legally prevented, then that is a restriction on his rights.

Under his reasoning, it also does not apply to firmware. Because it is so tied to the underlying hardware, it's not really possible to copy or modify it in any useful way. It is certainly free, in the monetary sense, but there are no useful results of doing so. Therefore, closed software does not restrict your rights in a meaningful or non-trivial sense.

Note that this is just my interpretation of what I've read of him, and I don't follow the Free Software thing that closely so I could be mis-interpreting key points.

feralchimp2• 14 years ago

The saddest part of all this is that kids will read it and think "this is what 'sticking to my principles' is going to get me, so fuck it."

RMS used up his "I was there when" cred a long time ago. He's now the demented grandparent no one has the heart to tell to STFU when he yells at the TV. And yet simultaneously, one of the greats.

dasil003• 14 years ago

Show some respect son. Seriously.

feralchimp2• 14 years ago

I did. Seriously.

hackermom• 14 years ago

"Hey, I'm a geek; it's my job to make things difficult for myself."

8ig8• 14 years ago

The Lemote link was broken when I was reading the article. This may be the updated link?

http://www.lemote.com/en/products/Notebook/2010/0310/112.htm...

andrewflnr• 14 years ago

I guess, that's the same one I came down here to post. Looks like it might be a pretty neat little machine.

nabilt• 14 years ago

I am curious to know what cloud services he uses if any. I'm researching alternatives to proprietary/hosted software for some of my important data so I can avoid the privacy and security issues. Some of the services I would like to replace are GMail/Calendar/Contacts, Lastpass, RescueTime. Any suggestions?

elehack• 14 years ago

I don't think he uses any, particularly since he is only connected to the internet 2-3 times a day.

He uses Emacs for all his mail and, presumably, contact management. Last I knew, he was still using RMail, not even something newer like Gnus.

iso8859-1• 14 years ago

I don't really think he uses any, that would be kind of against the whole concept, since all those cloud providers have their own API.

S4M• 14 years ago

Hey! That might be the set up I was looking for in order to hack on my clojure project during a 14 hours flight I will be taking in couple of months. At least it's not gonna take battery.

brudgers• 14 years ago

>"Once or twice or maybe three times a day I connect and transfer mail in and out. Before sending mail, I always review and revise the outgoing messages. That gives me a chance to catch mistakes and faux pas."

I consider that a practice worthy of adoption.

JoshTriplett• 14 years ago

Sadly, this didn't actually provide the details of the most interesting bit of this setup: a separate system that receives URLs via email and emails back a text version of the webpage, which allows integrating browsing into an almost entirely offline batch-processing setup.

there• 14 years ago

He probably e-mails his assistant to do it, just like he speaks out against cell phones but will just ask to borrow someone else's.

http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/10/27/rms-cell-phones

Edit: according to http://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html he does use normal web browsers from time to time and even has a Twitter account for posting comments on websites. For text articles, his script probably just runs something like "lynx -dump" on the URL and e-mails it back.

jrockway• 14 years ago

RMS said he would ask someone nearby for a phone, not necessarily a cell phone. Landline phones don't use software, they're a microphone connected to some wires. But you can't exactly carry one around with you.

Not sure why John Gruber cares about this, but...

crististm• 14 years ago

When this link appears on HN I make a quick diff on two things and none of them change: what Stallman uses and what the comments are (I can make a bet I'll see comments about his mail forwarded web pages). And there are also comments about how GPL is restrictive and BSD is not...

But hey - this guy has principles and sticks to his guns. I respect him for that and I don't give a dime if he uses a one inch display on a PC with 64K of RAM

INTPenis• 14 years ago

Incidentally same computer I have.

Linux siguran 3.1.0-1-loongson-2f #1 Tue Jan 10 15:20:55 UTC 2012 mips64 GNU/Linux

It's fun for a hobby because it feels like the old days of Linux when you had to patch and compile a lot to get things running.

Of course my other computers are macs, this is just for the commute to work on some hobby stuff.

brunomiranda• 14 years ago

Very narrow minded in my option. There's a reason why people prefer an iPad over a Lemote Yeelong. There is more to life than principles. I do respect his opinion but if he would like to continue to make a difference in the open software community he could stop spending so much time in email and concentrate on technology advancements and how to promote open source.

herf• 14 years ago

Wonder if this netbook has open source hard disk firmware?

reedlaw• 14 years ago

Are there really no other fully free systems available on the market by now?

aquinn2• 14 years ago

The bios seemed to be his only sticking point about not using other hardware. Maybe something like coreboot might fill that need now?

prtamil• 14 years ago

5 years back when Mr.Stallman worried about Privacy,Free Software I used to think he is nuts.. Now with SOPA/PIPA scenario its nuts to not listen him. So now i'm following his advice i will never move my data to Cloud.....

g3orge• 14 years ago

This is from Jan 23, 2010. It's probably not his current setup.

xbryanx• 14 years ago

I love that Sears was the most likely seller, when I did a product search for the Lemote Yeeloong.

mark_l_watson2• 14 years ago

Some comments on the other posts here: I often find people to be most interesting and potentially valuable to communicate with when I don't totally agree with them. I don't agree with some of Richard's positions but acknowledge his huge contributions. I believe that he deserves some positive karma every time I use Emacs, gcc toolchain, various GNU utilities, and software and services built using GNU software (Google, Twitter, many libraries and applications, etc.) His knowledge, talent, and works are broad and deep in scope. It is interesting to hear so much dislike for the guy, but people have the rights to their opinions.

spenrose• 14 years ago

Stallman reminds me more of Steve Jobs than anyone else does:

   - 70's wunderkind
   - simple, clear belief about what computing should be
   - realized his vision, creating permanent improvement enjoyed directly or indirectly by every computer user
   - uncompromising in his determination to control his environment

Personally I believe he has some major blind spots -- so did Jobs. The failure of this community to hold him in comparable regard is just that, a failure.

paulhauggis4• 14 years ago

"70's wunderkind"

It's obvious he hasn't updated the technology in his house since the 70s. I still can't believe how he is browsing the web.

"simple, clear belief about what computing should be"

He pushes his own version of freedom upon the world at the expense of their freedom.

"uncompromising in his determination to control his environment"

Exactly. Personally, I'm glad he is becoming less and less relevant. Stallman is nothing more than a software dictator.

yummyfajitas3• 14 years ago

Could you explain how Stallman is a "software dictator", or how his own version of freedom comes at the "expense of their freedom"?

jballanc• 14 years ago

To understand Stallman, I highly recommend one read up on the history of Lisp Machines. Wikipedia's page is actually fairly decent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_machines

In particular, I think this passage give some key insight into how Stallman developed his philosophy:

> Around this time Symbolics (Noftsker's company) began operations – it had been hindered by Noftsker's promise to give Greenblatt a year’s head start, and by severe delays in procuring venture capital. Symbolics still had the major advantage that while 3 or 4 of the AI Lab hackers had gone to work for Greenblatt, a solid 14 other hackers had signed onto Symbolics. There were two AI Lab people who did not get hired by either: Richard Stallman and Marvin Minsky. Stallman, however, blamed Symbolics for the decline of the hacker community that had centered around the AI lab. For two years, from 1982 to the end of 1983, Stallman worked by himself to clone the output of the Symbolics programmers, with the aim of preventing them from gaining a monopoly on the lab's computers.

atomical• 14 years ago

Seeing larger developers using a really small computer with a really small screen is similar to seeing a basketball player driving a compact. It makes you wonder... Why?

yabai• 14 years ago

Stallman...the uncompromising philosopher! 'Gotta love 'em!

davidcollantes• 14 years ago

It is a pretty crappy setup (just my humble opinion), but if he is happy with it...

MikeOnFire• 14 years ago

Walking the talk is a big thing with RMS.

Richard Stallman's Computer Setup

Related Stories