Is the FSF Linux's biggest enemy?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Mickey Mouse, Jul 29, 2007.

  1. Mickey Mouse

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    Who funds the Free Software Foundation?

    Are they an unrepresentative clique of ideologues motivated by self
    interest?

    Do they encourage the growth of Linux by embracing innovation and expansion
    into new market segments?

    Why does Linus have reservations about GPLv3?
    Mickey Mouse, Jul 29, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mickey Mouse

    Peter Guest

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > Who funds the Free Software Foundation?


    Whoever funds FSF probably don't consider themselves answerable to you.

    > Are they an unrepresentative clique of ideologues motivated by self
    > interest?


    Of course not. They are representative of themselves.

    > Do they encourage the growth of Linux by embracing innovation and
    > expansion into new market segments?


    Maybe, but their stated goal is freedom in software.

    > Why does Linus have reservations about GPLv3?


    What's wrong with that? Can't you accept that different people can have
    differing opinions?



    Peter
    Peter, Jul 29, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > Who funds the Free Software Foundation?


    Memberships and sales so it appears. Turnover about 3/4 million USD -
    would be less than a tycoon's petty cash account, and assets about the
    same - doubt you could buy a corporate jet for that.

    >
    > Are they an unrepresentative clique of ideologues motivated by self
    > interest?


    Perhaps some would view it in this light. One could attach the same
    comment to Auckland International Airport, Helen Clark's government,
    SCO, Bruce Hucker's Auckland City Council, the Maxim Institute, etc,
    etc. Others would view it in a different light such as freedom, 'breath
    of fresh air', Kibbutz-like etc

    >
    > Do they encourage the growth of Linux by embracing innovation and
    > expansion into new market segments?


    I do not think the FSF even supports Linux (referring to the kernel as
    distinguished from the constellation of software sometimes incorrectly
    called Linux). Their objectives I think would be more like a co-op,
    that is members and supporters collaborate to craft tools they have a
    need for and are interested in. Humanity is welcome to share the good
    works but should contribute something back.

    The works in question are definitely not there to be monetised by IT
    tycoons, nor to benefit toll collecting trolls who live under bridges.

    If you mean 'embracing' as in 'embrace, extend, extinguish', then
    definitely not.

    >
    > Why does Linus have reservations about GPLv3?
    >


    Different philosophical outlook. Given the frailties of human nature
    that is not at all surprising.

    One could perhaps view FSF as just another stall in the large
    co-operative open-source bazaar - the one that has many stalls - run by
    all sorts of people from the meek to the mighty (Richard Stallman, Linus
    Torvalds, Andrew Morton, Pamela Jones, Eben Moglen, Roy Schestowitz,
    etc, etc) - even multiple bazaars around the world. Such outfits run
    completely differently from Fortune 500 cathedrals with their bishops,
    deans, chapters, canons, crucifiers, acolytes, choirboys, vergers, etc.
    all in a strict hierarchical order.
    peterwn, Jul 29, 2007
    #3
  4. Hi there,

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > <snip>


    The FSF is not Linux' biggest enemy, but sad little anonymous
    FUD-packing children like you don't pose much of a threat either.

    Don't you have anything more fulfilling in life to do, like
    collecting your toe-jam?

    --
    Kind regards,

    Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia.
    "Maybe politicians should ask the people whether
    or not they wanted all these wars"...
    Chris Wilkinson, Jul 29, 2007
    #4
  5. Mickey Mouse

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    news:46ac4c22$...
    > Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >> Who funds the Free Software Foundation?

    >
    > Memberships and sales so it appears. Turnover about 3/4 million USD -
    > would be less than a tycoon's petty cash account, and assets about the
    > same - doubt you could buy a corporate jet for that.


    The newest information I have been able to find is from 2005 on the Charity
    Navigator website - it would seem they don't extend their source code model
    to their financial accounts;

    Revenue
    Primary Revenue $674,349
    Other Revenue $114,105
    Total Revenue $788,454

    Expenses
    Program Expenses $540,838
    Administrative Expenses $64,201
    Fundraising Expenses $92,900
    Total Functional Expenses $697,939

    Excess (or Deficit) for the year $90,515

    Net Assets $892,021

    Located separately, current financial patrons would appear to include Cisco,
    EMC, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Nokia and Sun.
    Mickey Mouse, Jul 29, 2007
    #5
  6. Mickey Mouse

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in
    message news:46ac593d$...
    > Hi there,
    >
    > Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >> <snip>

    >
    > The FSF is not Linux' biggest enemy, but sad little anonymous
    > FUD-packing children like you don't pose much of a threat either.
    >
    > Don't you have anything more fulfilling in life to do, like
    > collecting your toe-jam?


    Well I can't expect everyone to be up to debating the issues, as evidenced
    by your "contribution".
    Mickey Mouse, Jul 29, 2007
    #6
  7. Mickey Mouse

    peterwn Guest

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    > news:46ac4c22$...
    >> Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >>> Who funds the Free Software Foundation?

    >>
    >> Memberships and sales so it appears. Turnover about 3/4 million USD -
    >> would be less than a tycoon's petty cash account, and assets about the
    >> same - doubt you could buy a corporate jet for that.

    >
    > The newest information I have been able to find is from 2005 on the
    > Charity Navigator website - it would seem they don't extend their source
    > code model to their financial accounts;
    >
    > Revenue
    > Primary Revenue $674,349
    > Other Revenue $114,105
    > Total Revenue $788,454
    >
    > Expenses
    > Program Expenses $540,838
    > Administrative Expenses $64,201
    > Fundraising Expenses $92,900
    > Total Functional Expenses $697,939
    >
    > Excess (or Deficit) for the year $90,515
    >
    > Net Assets $892,021
    >
    > Located separately, current financial patrons would appear to include
    > Cisco, EMC, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Nokia and Sun.


    This is quite a reasonable spread of sponsors across the IT spectrum.
    Interestingly, these total amounts are less than the annual income and
    net worth respectively of *one* second or third level manager in a
    typical large multinational company, especially when backdated stock
    options are taken into account. The salaries of the two top EFF
    employees are on a par with those of rather minor employees in a large
    organisation.

    Now the sponsor lists and payrolls of certain Washington DC beltway
    think tanks would make quite interesting reading if the figures could be
    obtained.
    peterwn, Jul 29, 2007
    #7
  8. In article <1185696405.498873@ftpsrv1>, Peter <> wrote:
    >Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >> Who funds the Free Software Foundation?

    >
    >Whoever funds FSF probably don't consider themselves answerable to you.
    >
    >> Are they an unrepresentative clique of ideologues motivated by self
    >> interest?

    >
    >Of course not. They are representative of themselves.
    >
    >> Do they encourage the growth of Linux by embracing innovation and
    >> expansion into new market segments?

    >
    >Maybe, but their stated goal is freedom in software.
    >
    >> Why does Linus have reservations about GPLv3?

    >
    >What's wrong with that? Can't you accept that different people can have
    >differing opinions?


    Not from the heaps of messages that mr mouse has posted. Some of them
    disagree with his dogma, and are therefore, wrong :)
    Don't feed it and it will go away. :)

    Thanks
    Bruce Sinclair, Jul 30, 2007
    #8
  9. Hi there,

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in
    > message news:46ac593d$...
    >
    >> Hi there,
    >>
    >> Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >>
    >>> <snip>

    >>
    >>
    >> The FSF is not Linux' biggest enemy, but sad little anonymous
    >> FUD-packing children like you don't pose much of a threat either.
    >>
    >> Don't you have anything more fulfilling in life to do, like
    >> collecting your toe-jam?

    >
    > Well I can't expect everyone to be up to debating the issues, as
    > evidenced by your "contribution".


    The issue is that some kernel devs are not as happy about some
    aspects of the draft GPLv3 as they could be. You have taken that
    and twisted it by suggesting their disagreement makes them
    enemies.

    Find me one link where either the FSF or Linus or anyone else
    of importance in the Linux world has declared the other to be
    a bona fide enemy and I'll concede. Until then you're just a snide
    little anonymous usenet FUD-packer coward and windbag...

    --
    Kind regards,

    Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia.
    "Maybe politicians should ask the people whether
    or not they wanted all these wars"...
    Chris Wilkinson, Jul 31, 2007
    #9
  10. Mickey Mouse

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in
    message news:46af08af$...
    > Hi there,
    >
    > Mickey Mouse wrote:


    >> Well I can't expect everyone to be up to debating the issues, as
    >> evidenced by your "contribution".

    >
    > Find me one link where either the FSF or Linus or anyone else
    > of importance in the Linux world has declared the other to be
    > a bona fide enemy and I'll concede. Until then you're just a snide
    > little anonymous usenet FUD-packer coward and windbag...


    Well, if you choose to remain in denial holding up the FSF as an elite
    organisation beyond reproach or examination, then I can't force you to open
    your eyes.

    From the Chambers online dictionary;
    enemy 1 a person who is actively opposed to someone else. 2 a hostile nation
    or force, or a member of it. 3 an opponent or adversary. 4 a person or thing
    that opposes or acts against someone or something

    It is clear that the FSF do not share Linus' vision of how and where he
    would like to see Linux headed, as evidenced by postings concerning GPLv3.
    The FSF do not represent Linux or Linus, but are instead pushing Stallman's
    own neo-political agenda.

    'I hate it how the FSF thinks others are morons and cannot read or think for
    themselves. Any time you disagree with the FSF, you "misunderstand" (insert
    condescending voice) the issue. _Please_ don't continue that idiocy.
    Disagreement and thinking that the FSF is controlling and putting its
    fingers where they don't belong is _not_ misunderstanding. It's just not
    "blind and unquestioning obedience".'

    'And it's _fine_ to even be in it "just to make a quick buck". We do want
    all kinds of input. I think the community is much healthier having lots of
    different reasons for people wanting to be involved, rather than
    concentrating on just some specific reason. For some it's the technology.
    For some it's the license. For some it's just a thing to pass boredom.
    Others like to learn. Whatever. It's all good!'

    'And then the FSF has the gall to call themselves the "protector of
    freedoms", and claim that everybody else is evil. What a crock.'

    'Yet it's what the GPLv3 tries to shove down our throats in the name of
    "freedom".'

    'And this is again the same *disease*. You claim that I "misunderstood" the
    "spirit of the GPL".'

    'Any language attempts to make it appear otherwise are just sophistry.'

    'Rms calls it "tivoization", but that's a word he has made up, and a term I
    find offensive'

    'The fact that you are unable to even apparently fathom this fundamental
    issue, and that the FSF thinks that they own the definition of "freedom" is
    _your_ problem. You're acting like some Alice-in-Wonderland character,
    saying that your
    definition of words is the only one that matter. And that others are
    "confused". Read up on your humpty-dumpty some day.'

    http://kerneltrap.org/node/8382
    Mickey Mouse, Jul 31, 2007
    #10
  11. Hi there,

    Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in
    > message news:46af08af$...
    >
    >> Hi there,
    >>
    >> Mickey Mouse wrote:

    >
    >
    >>> Well I can't expect everyone to be up to debating the issues, as
    >>> evidenced by your "contribution".

    >>
    >>
    >> Find me one link where either the FSF or Linus or anyone else
    >> of importance in the Linux world has declared the other to be
    >> a bona fide enemy and I'll concede. Until then you're just a snide
    >> little anonymous usenet FUD-packer coward and windbag...

    >
    > Well, if you choose to remain in denial holding up the FSF as an elite
    > organisation beyond reproach or examination, then I can't force you to
    > open your eyes.


    Mr Twist strikes again. Where, o where, did I state anything about
    my opinion of the FSF? You're a pathological liar. Its little wonder
    you hide behind a cowardly nym.

    Just to enlighten you I find the FSF and its most ardent supporters
    to be just that little too closed-minded on the definition of free.
    For example NVidia's Linux graphics driver is a must have on my
    openSUSE system, and it works very well for me. Its provided free
    of charge, if not in source form - thats fine by me, but not to
    the likes of the FSF.

    > 'The fact that you are unable to even apparently fathom this fundamental
    > issue, and that the FSF thinks that they own the definition of "freedom"
    > is _your_ problem. You're acting like some Alice-in-Wonderland
    > character, saying that your
    > definition of words is the only one that matter. And that others are
    > "confused". Read up on your humpty-dumpty some day.'


    I could suggest you go see a shrink to work out why you have to put
    a misleading twist on everything you post to usenet.

    > http://kerneltrap.org/node/8382


    Is that the best you can do? I already know Linus and the FSF do not
    see eye to eye. As I see it GPLv3 will be adopted by some distros,
    not by others. As a user I will still be able to choose which I use.

    --
    Kind regards,

    Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia.
    "Maybe politicians should ask the people whether
    or not they wanted all these wars"...
    Chris Wilkinson, Aug 1, 2007
    #11
    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. Parko

    Sleeping with the enemy?

    Parko, Apr 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    416
    Parko
    Apr 3, 2004
  2. Ingo Amtor

    Soundtrack of "Natural Enemy"

    Ingo Amtor, Jul 11, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,362
    Ingo Amtor
    Jul 11, 2004
  3. Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor

    REVIEW: "Know Your Enemy", Honeynet Project

    Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor, Aug 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    615
    Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor
    Aug 3, 2004
  4. Mickey Mouse

    FSF's Stallman branded a hypocritical liar

    Mickey Mouse, Dec 18, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    129
    Views:
    2,481
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Cisco Settles With FSF

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 21, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    323
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    May 21, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page