FSF's Stallman branded a hypocritical liar

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Mickey Mouse, Dec 18, 2007.

  1. Mickey Mouse

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    More bitchiness resulting from comments made by the "Free Software
    Foundation"'s Stallman.

    OpenBSD founder Theo de Raadt responds to inferences made by Stallman, by
    stating;

    "Richard, you are wrong. You said very clearly in your interview that the
    ports tree contains non-free software. It does not. It is just a scaffold
    of Makefiles containing URLs, and an occasional patch here or there.

    You are just plain wrong. And you are not enough of a man to admit that you
    are wrong.

    I may be unfriendly at times, but you are a power-misusing hypocritical liar
    who attacks projects that try harder than any others to only make free
    software available."
    Mickey Mouse, Dec 18, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    On Dec 18, 1:06 pm, "Mickey Mouse" <> wrote:
    > More bitchiness resulting from comments made by the "Free Software
    > Foundation"'s Stallman.
    >


    What do you expect all of us to do about it?

    Forsake Linux or OpenBSD in favour of Micro$oft products?
    peterwn, Dec 18, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mickey Mouse

    impossible Guest

    "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Dec 18, 1:06 pm, "Mickey Mouse" <> wrote:
    >> More bitchiness resulting from comments made by the "Free Software
    >> Foundation"'s Stallman.
    >>

    >
    > What do you expect all of us to do about it?
    >
    > Forsake Linux or OpenBSD in favour of Micro$oft products?


    Oops, you woke up the nixNazi.
    impossible, Dec 18, 2007
    #3
  4. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    On Dec 18, 2:47 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >
    > Oops, you woke up the nixNazi.


    I thought they were supposed to be commies, not fascists.
    peterwn, Dec 18, 2007
    #4
  5. Mickey Mouse

    impossible Guest

    "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Dec 18, 2:47 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >> "peterwn" <> wrote in message

    > news:...
    >>> On Dec 18, 1:06 pm, "Mickey Mouse" <> wrote:


    >>>> More bitchiness resulting from comments made by the "Free Software
    >>>> Foundation"'s Stallman.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> What do you expect all of us to do about it?
    >>>
    >>> Forsake Linux or OpenBSD in favour of Micro$oft products?

    >>
    >> Oops, you woke up the nixNazi.

    >
    > I thought they were supposed to be commies, not fascists.
    >


    "They"? Don't flatter yourself.
    impossible, Dec 18, 2007
    #5
  6. Mickey Mouse

    Fierce Guppy Guest

    peterwn wrote :
    > On Dec 18, 2:47 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Oops, you woke up the nixNazi.

    >
    > I thought they were supposed to be commies, not fascists.


    Yes, that's right. Dead opposites like what Black Power is to the
    Mongrel Mob.

    --
    email: fierce,guppy@paradise,net,nz
    Fierce Guppy, Dec 18, 2007
    #6
  7. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > More bitchiness resulting from comments made by the "Free Software
    > Foundation"'s Stallman.
    >
    > OpenBSD founder Theo de Raadt responds to inferences made by Stallman,
    > by stating;
    >
    > "Richard, you are wrong. You said very clearly in your interview that
    > the ports tree contains non-free software. It does not. It is just a
    > scaffold of Makefiles containing URLs, and an occasional patch here or
    > there.
    >
    > You are just plain wrong. And you are not enough of a man to admit that
    > you are wrong.
    >
    > I may be unfriendly at times, but you are a power-misusing hypocritical
    > liar who attacks projects that try harder than any others to only make
    > free software available."


    Stallman is fanatical....lost the plot years ago....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Dec 18, 2007
    #7
  8. On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:03:22 +1300, thingy wrote:

    > Stallman is fanatical....lost the plot years ago....


    I don't think so.

    What he is doing is following the idea that people should be free to
    download, use, modify, and redistribute software as they want, and that
    all modifications that they make to publicly distributed software should
    be likewise made available.

    He has not changed his basic premise. His interest is in the freedom of
    software. Hence the organisation he is a part of is the Free Software
    Foundation.

    I applaud his vision.


    --
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer

    "The IT industry landscape is littered with the dead
    dreams of people who once trusted Microsoft."
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Dec 19, 2007
    #8
  9. Mickey Mouse

    impossible Guest

    "Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC)" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:03:22 +1300, thingy wrote:
    >
    >> Stallman is fanatical....lost the plot years ago....

    >
    > I don't think so.
    >
    > What he is doing is following the idea that people should be free to
    > download, use, modify, and redistribute software as they want, and that
    > all modifications that they make to publicly distributed software should
    > be likewise made available.
    >
    > He has not changed his basic premise. His interest is in the freedom of
    > software. Hence the organisation he is a part of is the Free Software
    > Foundation.
    >
    > I applaud his vision.
    >


    Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him to
    business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on a
    skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    something of a loon -- hence the OP.
    impossible, Dec 19, 2007
    #9
  10. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    On Dec 20, 6:46 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >
    > Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    > religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him to
    > business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on a
    > skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    > something of a loon -- hence the OP.


    mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.

    Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.
    peterwn, Dec 19, 2007
    #10
  11. On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:55:13 -0800, peterwn wrote:

    >> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    >> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him
    >> to business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on
    >> a skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    >> something of a loon -- hence the OP.

    >
    > mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >
    > Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.


    Stallman's driving imperative is not "business and economic" - it is the
    desire to see software freely available for all to use and to modify as
    they please.

    Those who are opposed to such an idea of *course* will label him as a
    "loon".

    All that does is confirm that his idea is getting out there.


    --
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer

    "The IT industry landscape is littered with the dead
    dreams of people who once trusted Microsoft."
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Dec 19, 2007
    #11
  12. Mickey Mouse

    impossible Guest

    "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Dec 20, 6:46 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    >> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him
    >> to
    >> business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on a
    >> skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    >> something of a loon -- hence the OP.

    >
    > mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >


    When did Linus Torvald's start working for Microsoft?

    > Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.
    >


    Enjoying the koolaid, I see:

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=M3jjDnS5dB8&feature=related
    impossible, Dec 19, 2007
    #12
  13. Mickey Mouse

    impossible Guest

    "Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC)" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:55:13 -0800, peterwn wrote:
    >
    >>> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    >>> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him
    >>> to business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on
    >>> a skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    >>> something of a loon -- hence the OP.

    >>
    >> mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >>
    >> Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.

    >
    > Stallman's driving imperative is not "business and economic" - it is the
    > desire to see software freely available for all to use and to modify as
    > they please.
    >
    > Those who are opposed to such an idea of *course* will label him as a
    > "loon".
    >
    > All that does is confirm that his idea is getting out there.
    >
    >


    Let's let readers judge for themselves:

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=M3jjDnS5dB8&feature=related
    > --
    impossible, Dec 19, 2007
    #13
  14. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    peterwn wrote:
    > On Dec 20, 6:46 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    >> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him to
    >> business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on a
    >> skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    >> something of a loon -- hence the OP.

    >
    > mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >
    > Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.
    >
    >
    >


    Actually he is....he's a fanatic and as usual for fanatics he will see
    no alternatives to his ideal......

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Dec 19, 2007
    #14
  15. Mickey Mouse

    whoisthis Guest

    In article
    <>,
    peterwn <> wrote:

    > On Dec 20, 6:46 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    > >
    > > Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    > > religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him to
    > > business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on a
    > > skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    > > something of a loon -- hence the OP.

    >
    > mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >
    > Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.


    Perhaps destruction then
    whoisthis, Dec 19, 2007
    #15
  16. Mickey Mouse

    thingy Guest

    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:55:13 -0800, peterwn wrote:
    >
    >>> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    >>> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him
    >>> to business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on
    >>> a skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    >>> something of a loon -- hence the OP.

    >> mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >>
    >> Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.

    >
    > Stallman's driving imperative is not "business and economic" - it is the
    > desire to see software freely available for all to use and to modify as
    > they please.
    >
    > Those who are opposed to such an idea of *course* will label him as a
    > "loon".
    >
    > All that does is confirm that his idea is getting out there.
    >
    >


    I oppose the idea that ALL software needs to be "free"...It should not
    be compulsory to follow his model....the freedom should be to follow
    your own business model for your software, consumers are then free to
    choose an Open source model or go proprietary (or mix) as suits their
    needs.......The problem with Stallman is he cannot accept that some
    vendors and consumers are perfectly happy to deal with each other via a
    paid for closed source model....

    Where I take great exception to in the proprietary market is that they
    purposefully lock in customers/consumers and lock out
    competition....Open source has this one huge advantage, you can pick and
    choose, inter operate and move with no false walls at your whim as a
    user.....that part of Stallamn's vision I greatly approve of.

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Dec 19, 2007
    #16
  17. Mickey Mouse

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <>,
    thingy <> wrote:

    > Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    > > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:55:13 -0800, peterwn wrote:
    > >
    > >>> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    > >>> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds him
    > >>> to business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism on
    > >>> a skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    > >>> something of a loon -- hence the OP.
    > >> mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    > >>
    > >> Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.

    > >
    > > Stallman's driving imperative is not "business and economic" - it is the
    > > desire to see software freely available for all to use and to modify as
    > > they please.
    > >
    > > Those who are opposed to such an idea of *course* will label him as a
    > > "loon".
    > >
    > > All that does is confirm that his idea is getting out there.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > I oppose the idea that ALL software needs to be "free"...It should not
    > be compulsory to follow his model....the freedom should be to follow
    > your own business model for your software, consumers are then free to
    > choose an Open source model or go proprietary (or mix) as suits their
    > needs.......The problem with Stallman is he cannot accept that some
    > vendors and consumers are perfectly happy to deal with each other via a
    > paid for closed source model....
    >
    > Where I take great exception to in the proprietary market is that they
    > purposefully lock in customers/consumers and lock out
    > competition....Open source has this one huge advantage, you can pick and
    > choose, inter operate and move with no false walls at your whim as a
    > user.....that part of Stallamn's vision I greatly approve of.
    >
    > regards
    >
    > Thing


    The issue I have with free software is where is the incentive to make it
    good software.
    If we assume that because the software is free then it relies on a
    support model so they can pay the people programmers, so at this point
    there is more incentive to ensure the software remains difficult to
    use/configure than to make it support free too.

    If software becomes free and does not need support then where are the
    programmers going to work ?, will software become an amateur thing ?
    Already we see software development falling further behind hardware
    development, will this trend continue ?
    whoisthis, Dec 19, 2007
    #17
  18. Mickey Mouse

    impossible Guest

    "whoisthis" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > thingy <> wrote:
    >
    >> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC) wrote:
    >> > On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:55:13 -0800, peterwn wrote:
    >> >
    >> >>> Stallman's "vision" is not what makes him a fanantic. It's his
    >> >>> religious-like devotion to open-source fundamentalism, which blinds
    >> >>> him
    >> >>> to business and economic realities. In pressing this fundamentalism
    >> >>> on
    >> >>> a skeptical world, Stallman has also developed a reputation for being
    >> >>> something of a loon -- hence the OP.
    >> >> mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >> >>
    >> >> Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.
    >> >
    >> > Stallman's driving imperative is not "business and economic" - it is
    >> > the
    >> > desire to see software freely available for all to use and to modify as
    >> > they please.
    >> >
    >> > Those who are opposed to such an idea of *course* will label him as a
    >> > "loon".
    >> >
    >> > All that does is confirm that his idea is getting out there.
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >> I oppose the idea that ALL software needs to be "free"...It should not
    >> be compulsory to follow his model....the freedom should be to follow
    >> your own business model for your software, consumers are then free to
    >> choose an Open source model or go proprietary (or mix) as suits their
    >> needs.......The problem with Stallman is he cannot accept that some
    >> vendors and consumers are perfectly happy to deal with each other via a
    >> paid for closed source model....
    >>
    >> Where I take great exception to in the proprietary market is that they
    >> purposefully lock in customers/consumers and lock out
    >> competition....Open source has this one huge advantage, you can pick and
    >> choose, inter operate and move with no false walls at your whim as a
    >> user.....that part of Stallamn's vision I greatly approve of.
    >>
    >> regards
    >>
    >> Thing

    >
    > The issue I have with free software is where is the incentive to make it
    > good software.
    > If we assume that because the software is free then it relies on a
    > support model so they can pay the people programmers, so at this point
    > there is more incentive to ensure the software remains difficult to
    > use/configure than to make it support free too.
    >


    With proprietary distros like Suse, Novell, Ubuntu -- there's no question
    but that the companies servicing these products have an incentive to make
    Linux more reliable and easier to use/configure. No different from Windows
    in that sense. And the same can be said of enterprise applications produced
    by the likes of IBM and other reputable outfits. In so far as these
    applications utilize open-source components, developers have a strong
    incentive to help fine-tune them so as to make their propritary
    contributions more profitable.

    However, Stallman considers all the software I'm describing here to be
    "non-free". And he continually rails against it.

    > If software becomes free and does not need support then where are the
    > programmers going to work ?, will software become an amateur thing ?
    > Already we see software development falling further behind hardware
    > development, will this trend continue ?


    Stallman does not seem to have given any thought whatsoever to how software
    is, or ought to be, produced. And in that sense he expressly distinguishes
    himself from the open-source movement, which he criticizes as having a
    non-free "development model" equivalent to that of Microsoft or anyone else.
    Stallman isn't the least bit interested in the realities of software
    development (like compensating developers) -- only in the freedom of users
    to do with it as they please.
    impossible, Dec 20, 2007
    #18
  19. On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:19:52 +1300, thingy wrote:

    >> mmm, sounds like something out of the Micro$oft propaganda department.
    >>
    >> Unlike Bill Gates, Richard is not seeking world domination.

    >
    > Actually he is....he's a fanatic and as usual for fanatics he will see
    > no alternatives to his ideal..


    Why should he compromise his ideal of seeing all computers running Free
    software and only Free software?

    If *he* of all persons does not hold to that standard, then who will
    provide the vision and drive to the Free Software movement which *he*
    started?


    --
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer

    "The IT industry landscape is littered with the dead
    dreams of people who once trusted Microsoft."
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Dec 20, 2007
    #19
  20. On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:52:55 +1300, whoisthis wrote:

    > The issue I have with free software is where is the incentive to make it
    > good software.


    There seems plenty of incentive to provide extremely high software.

    Look at, for example, Linux, KDE, The Gimp, Apache, PostgreSQL, Audacity,
    OpenOffice, Evolution.

    All of that software is very good indeed, and all of that software is
    being actively developed and refined, or being actively maintained.

    Are you suggesting otherwise?


    --
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer

    "The IT industry landscape is littered with the dead
    dreams of people who once trusted Microsoft."
    Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC), Dec 20, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mickey Mouse

    Is the FSF Linux's biggest enemy?

    Mickey Mouse, Jul 29, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    552
    Chris Wilkinson
    Aug 1, 2007
  2. Mickey Mouse
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    414
    BrianM
    Sep 18, 2007
  3. Adam
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    446
    Jasen Betts
    Aug 9, 2008
  4. impossible

    Nixophiles at their hypocritical best

    impossible, Oct 17, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    760
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Oct 20, 2008
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Cisco Settles With FSF

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 21, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    328
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    May 21, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page