Linus Torvalds' behavior towards Richard Stallman

[asifnaz]

I have found from Linus' interviews and speeches that his behavior is lees then ideal towards Stallman . I respect both of mentioned men but Stallman has bigger role in FOSS .

If there was no GNU there could be no Linux . GNU could have its kernel .

This is what I felt . You can watch documentary " Revolutionary OS " for have a clue what I am talking about

[Paqman]

If there was no GNU there could be no Linux . GNU could have its kernel .


And vice versa. GNU/Hurd is a dead duck, the two systems are now pretty much co-dependent.

[asifnaz]

And vice versa. GNU/Hurd is a dead duck, the two systems are now pretty much co-dependent.

My concern is Linus never gives credit to Stallman

[handy]

They are certainly unhappy bed fellows. Any scratches on each others back are not the results of joyful passion.

[Ctrl-Alt-F1]

I think they're both pretty big egos, but that's generally the case with people as gifted as they (according to me).

[asifnaz]

I think they're both pretty big egos, but that's generally the case with people as gifted as they (according to me).

professional jealousy..???

[akand074]

Perhaps one of those rivalries, where they hate each other professionally, but respect each other simultaneously.

[Spice Weasel]

Regarding the GNU/Linux issue, Linus thinks that RMS is calling the Linux kernel a GNU package, when he's actually referring to distributions that make use of the kernel and GNU userland. They need to sit down, chill, and listen to what each other have to say.

Also: I really want a good GNU/kBSD system. Can't wait for Debian Squeeze.

[conundrumx]

RMS is an egotistical idealist, Torvalds an egotistical pragmatist. As far as who could survive without the other - BSD's tools could easily be adapted to work on Linux if they had to be, and bash is not the only shell there is. I think Linux would have much more luck on its own than GNU.

[asifnaz]

Also: I really want a good GNU/kBSD system. Can't wait for Debian Squeeze.

Do you mean debian squeeze is going to use BSD kernel..???

[Viva]

They don't like each other, that is hard surprising though. They couldn't resist silly digs at each other even in Revolution OS.

[gintovan]

In my opinion they both seem somewhat stuck-up in the interviews that I've seen. Don't get me wrong, I have great respect and admiration for both of those guys, they are awesome!


Do you mean debian squeeze is going to use BSD kernel..???

It's going to have the option, yes.

[Zzl1xndd]

I have found from Linus' interviews and speeches that his behavior is lees then ideal towards Stallman .

The same could be said of RMS opinions of Linus. As others have stated if you took away one then most of the FOSS community wouldn't exist.

RMS also tends to be a Jerk towards anyone that disagrees with him on anything. I don't mean to disrespect the guy or anything but sometime I feel he brings it on himself.

[Simian Man]

Stallman is jealous that Torvalds writes good software.

[asifnaz]

The same could be said of RMS opinions of Linus. As others have stated if you took away one then most of the FOSS community wouldn't exist.

RMS also tends to be a Jerk towards anyone that disagrees with him on anything. I don't mean to disrespect the guy or anything but sometime I feel he brings it on himself.

RMS should be given advantage of being older and pioneer of free software .

[Zzl1xndd]

RMS should be given advantage of being older and pioneer of free software .

So he gets a free pass to be a Jerk cause he was there first? I think not. Not to say Linus hasn't been rude but really.

And when he says stuff like:


Writing non-free software is not an ethically legitimate activity, so if people who do this run into trouble, that's good! All businesses based on non-free software ought to fail, and the sooner the better.

I lose some respect for him.

[cariboo]

Do you mean debian squeeze is going to use BSD kernel..???

There is a debian bsd port coming:

http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/

[psusi]

RMS is an egotistical idealist, Torvalds an egotistical pragmatist.

Bingo. The reason they don't get along so well is because RMS refuses to compromise his principals and dislikes the fact that Linus does so for practical reasons. Linus dislikes the fact that RMS pitches such a fit about Linus sacrificing some freedom for practicality.

[Frak]

Bingo. The reason they don't get along so well is because RMS refuses to compromise his principals and dislikes the fact that Linus does so for practical reasons. Linus dislikes the fact that RMS pitches such a fit about Linus sacrificing some freedom for practicality.
Ninja'd, sir.

[forrestcupp]

If there was no GNU there could be no Linux . GNU could have its kernel .Do you really think that Linus couldn't have made the Linux kernel without GNU? Originally, Linux was a clone of MINIX because Linus didn't like the educational-only license it had. Linux originally ran MINIX software, and it wasn't until later that it moved toward running GNU stuff. Linus could have done whatever he wanted with it. If he wouldn't have chosen the GNU way, GNU would be nothing now, and MINIX software would have advanced to become the modern software that we know today. Without Linux, GNU wouldn't have anywhere near the developer backing that it has today.


Also: I really want a good GNU/kBSD system. Can't wait for Debian Squeeze.
Do you honestly think that BSD is closer to the FSF philosophy than Linux? If you're running from Linux because of FSF philosophy, BSD is the wrong direction.

[koenn]

Bingo. The reason they don't get along so well is because RMS refuses to compromise his principals and dislikes the fact that Linus does so for practical reasons. Linus dislikes the fact that RMS pitches such a fit about Linus sacrificing some freedom for practicality.
This.

An other factor is that they have rather opposing views on software development. GNU (so, Stallman) is the traditional style : small dev teams, strong central management, work according to plan -- "the Cathedral" model. Linux is a bazaar, a large, undefined group of losely coupled devs.
The two styles don't mix well.

As it happens, openBSD (and the other free BSD's probably too) is also pretty much "Cathedral"-style. Guess who else Torvalds tends to pick fights with (or vice versa)

[Spice Weasel]

Do you honestly think that BSD is closer to the FSF philosophy than Linux? If you're running from Linux because of FSF philosophy, BSD is the wrong direction.

Not at all, it was just a random thought that popped in to my head. I prefer the BSD kernel because in my experience it's a lot more stable and powerful but hardware support is not as great.

[jerenept]

Bingo. The reason they don't get along so well is because RMS refuses to compromise his principals and dislikes the fact that Linus does so for practical reasons. Linus dislikes the fact that RMS pitches such a fit about Linus sacrificing some freedom for practicality.

That's the reason why everyone here recommends NVIDIA graphics. It's practiceal, and the proprietary nv drivers are very good, rather than AMD, who opened their hardware specs.

I like Linux, but I use the proprietary blobs because I value practicality as well.

And, I hope someone would do a BSD spin of Ubuntu from Debian/BSD. I like FreeBSD a lot.

[jerenept]

Do you honestly think that BSD is closer to the FSF philosophy than Linux? If you're running from Linux because of FSF philosophy, BSD is the wrong direction.

I prefer the BSD license over the GPL. So, I would move toward BSD because of the FSF's philosophy.

[forrestcupp]

Not at all, it was just a random thought that popped in to my head. I prefer the BSD kernel because in my experience it's a lot more stable and powerful but hardware support is not as great.In that case, I can go along with that. I think it's cool that BSD is getting out there with Debian and Mint. I'll bet the BSD purists don't consider it a real BSD experience, though.


I prefer the BSD license over the GPL. So, I would move toward BSD because of the FSF's philosophy.I can definitely identify with that. My view, though, is that I believe in usability over philosophy, and BSD is less usable for me than Linux.

As far as free licenses go, I kind of like the zlib/libpng license. I just don't like how you bust your hind end putting out open source code only to have a bunch of people take over your project, fiercely criticize your coding methods, and then not get anything better done themselves. It kind of makes me see why people would want to just keep their code closed.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

I see Linus as a beacon of the corporate Linux adoption, while RMS remains the icon of the basement dwelling, forever alone GNU/kernel programmers and Free Software activists. I'm just having trouble identifying with Linus's cause (or identifying it, for that matter), whereas Stallman's ideals and calls to action are clearly laid out, as is the fact that he won't compromise on Software Freedom. He's a true fighter for his cause and I respect him for that. Linus just managed to get a lot of people to contribute to his hobby project. Success isn't the only metric ideas are measured by.

[mips]

Who cares, really?

Neither of them are the be all and end all of Linux & open source.

Think about it, if they both died tomorrow things would just carry on as usual.

[speedwell68]

Try telling someone you use a GNU/Linux based OS and people aren't really sure what you are on about. More people have heard of Linux than have heard of GNU.

[unknownPoster]

Try telling someone you use a GNU/Linux based OS and people aren't really sure what you are on about. More people have heard of Linux than have heard of GNU.

Much to the chagrin of Stallman. Having to say GNU/Linux is just awkward to me. I have no problem with GNU/Linux being used in print/digital media, but when speaking, it's just difficult. I think Stallman's demand for it to be called GNU/Linux is just an attempt to stroke his own ego.

[jerenept]

Much to the chagrin of Stallman. Having to say GNU/Linux is just awkward to me. I have no problem with GNU/Linux being used in print/digital media, but when speaking, it's just difficult. I think Stallman's demand for it to be called GNU/Linux is just an attempt to stroke his own ego.

What other purpose would it be? calling it GNU/Linux doesn't increase adoption, develop software or drivers, or anything. GNU and the GNU toolchain is really not that important in today's Linux. Very little Linux development is done by the people at the FSF (if any)

[Windows Nerd]

I find the two of them kind of funny actually. Not that they make jokes, but how they constantly pick fights with each other over fairly insignificant things. RMS in particular. While I respect both of them, I just find that they spend too much time complaining. Especially RMS. Perhaps you may have noticed by now that I respect Linus much more?

[wilee-nilee]

They are certainly unhappy bed fellows. Any scratches on each others back are not the results of joyful passion.

Lol that is funny handy.;) In two sentences you said what everybody else is trying to say, metaphorically but just as accurate.

[MisterGaribaldi]

I've read someplace (maybe on here somewhere, not sure though) that even Richard has said that GNU Hurd is about dead.

I watched Revolution OS years ago, and I would say Linus is far less an egotist than Richard. That being said, his mail-list rantings have been the stuff of legend.

Linus himself said we should view Richard as the great philosopher and he himself as the engineer. I take it -- and leave it -- at that.

[smellyman]

I find the two of them kind of funny actually. Not that they make jokes, but how they constantly pick fights with each other over fairly insignificant things. RMS in particular. While I respect both of them, I just find that they spend too much time complaining. Especially RMS. Perhaps you may have noticed by now that I respect Linus much more?


I think Linus would like to never say anything. Richard is usually the instigator

[alaukikyo]

GNU and the GNU toolchain is really not that important in today's Linux.

while i agree calling it linux is not a sin.
but GNU toolchain is very important in today's linux most programs and linux is compiled using gcc

[forrestcupp]

What other purpose would it be? calling it GNU/Linux doesn't increase adoption, develop software or drivers, or anything. GNU and the GNU toolchain is really not that important in today's Linux. Very little Linux development is done by the people at the FSF (if any)



but GNU toolchain is very important in today's linux most programs and linux is compiled using gcc

Not only that, but the GNU Project includes a lot of software that is very important, including GNOME. The software in the GNU Project isn't only developed by direct members of the FSF, but also by developers of a lot of projects that have associated their projects with the GNU Project.

I'm not saying that Linux couldn't live without GNU, but in it's current state, you can't really say it's not important at all.

[samalex]

Honestly Linus comes across as being very arrogant in most of the presentations I've seen him give, and if you thought his behavior towards Stallman is crazy go back through the Usenet archives and see his conversations with Andy Tanenbaum. These guys are beyond hateful to one another. OReilly has a paper written on it even - http://oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/appa.html - with some of the messages between the two, but they're all in Usenet via Google Groups and worth a read.

I've never met Linus or heard him speak in person, but I have seen Richard Stallman speak (SXSW 2003 in Austin) and he seems very passionate about his convictions. Though I've never seen it documented as such I think he has Asperger Syndrome which might answer some questions there. Even Sam Williams who wrote Free as in Freedom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_as_in_Freedom:_Richard_Stallman%27s_Crusade_f or_Free_Software) makes this assumption. I can imagine being with Stallman would be like being with Sheldon Cooper :)

At any rate Stallman and Torvalds are intertwined through Linux so whether they like each other or not their work has to co-exist unless there's some major shift that rocks the foundation of Linux as we know it.

[jerenept]

Honestly Linus comes across as being very arrogant in most of the presentations I've seen him give, and if you thought his behavior towards Stallman is crazy go back through the Usenet archives and see his conversations with Andy Tanenbaum. These guys are beyond hateful to one another. OReilly has a paper written on it even - http://oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/appa.html - with some of the messages between the two, but they're all in Usenet via Google Groups and worth a read.

I've never met Linus or heard him speak in person, but I have seen Richard Stallman speak (SXSW 2003 in Austin) and he seems very passionate about his convictions. Though I've never seen it documented as such I think he has Asperger Syndrome which might answer some questions there. Even Sam Williams who wrote Free as in Freedom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_as_in_Freedom:_Richard_Stallman%27s_Crusade_f or_Free_Software) makes this assumption. I can imagine being with Stallman would be like being with Sheldon Cooper :)

At any rate Stallman and Torvalds are intertwined through Linux so whether they like each other or not their work has to co-exist unless there's some major shift that rocks the foundation of Linux as we know it.

Fixed that.

[samalex]

Fixed that.

Fixed :) Thanks --

[Spice Weasel]

I have major respect towards Andrew Tannenbaum for acting that friendly after Linus raged out on him. He made some great points too. (Not on portability. MINIX has only a x86 version now, years later, while Linus' kernel has been ported to loads of architectures, but the kernel has changed a lot since then)

[koenn]

I think Linus would like to never say anything.
que ?

The guy is a gifted flamer and he knows it.

These are 2 famous ones :


I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys

your job is being a professor and researcher: That's one hell of a
good excuse for some of the brain-damages of minix

[samalex]

I have major respect towards Andrew Tannenbaum for acting that friendly after Linus raged out on him. He made some great points too. (Not on portability. MINIX has only a x86 version now, years later, while Linus' kernel has been ported to loads of architectures, but the kernel has changed a lot since then)

I agree... I don't know much about Tannenbaum personally, but he always seemed much more professional in those early corespondents between him and Torvalds. And he did eventually make MINIX open source too, though I often wonder if he could've been where Torvalds is today if he would've open sourced it from day one.

Linus was lucky in that he had someone at his local university in Helsinki give him space on an FTP server to put Linux out there, and he did so right at that crucial time when GNU was taking off and people were starting to migrate towards Unix.

And if Kildall hadn't taken his wife flying for her birthday in 1980 we might've been using CP/M instead of MS-DOS throughout the 80's and 90's and Gates and Microsoft would've just been a footnote in history. Lots of crazy zigs and zags in computer history.

[koenn]

What other purpose would it be? calling it GNU/Linux doesn't increase adoption, develop software or drivers, or anything. GNU and the GNU toolchain is really not that important in today's Linux. Very little Linux development is done by the people at the FSF (if any)
It's not about practical purposes such as increased adoption etc.
I'ts a matter of perspective.

To Torvalds, it's like : I have a kernel. All the rest is third party software. So the system is called Linux.

To Stallman, it's like : We have an operating system. It's called GNU. But it's lacking a kernel, so we use the linux kernel. So the operating system is GNU with a Linux kernel : GNU/Linux


Now compare that to say, Debian/kBSD : It's Debian, with a BSD Kernel.


So, both make sense.

[Spice Weasel]

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD. It's a bit of a mouthful, I know.

[jerenept]

It's not about practical purposes such as increased adoption etc.
I'ts a matter of perspective.

To Torvalds, it's like : I have a kernel. All the rest is third party software. So the system is called Linux.

To Stallman, it's like : We have an operating system. It's called GNU. But it's lacking a kernel, so we use the linux kernel. So the operating system is GNU with a Linux kernel : GNU/Linux


Now compare that to say, Debian/kBSD : It's Debian, with a BSD Kernel.


So, both make sense.

Now, we can't compare that to Debian/kBSD, can we? Because there is Debian Linux and Debian BSD.

There is only one Linux, and there is no confusion as to which "Linux" you're using, unlike the Debian example you give here.

[NCLI]

Linux just sounds better, that's why most people will never call it GNU/Linux.

[koenn]

There is only one Linux, and there is no confusion as to which "Linux" you're using, unlike the Debian example you give here.
It's not whether there could be confusion about "which linux am i using", but rather "which GNU am I using" : GNU/Linux ? GNU/kFreeBSD ? GNU[/Hurd] ? ...

[Spice Weasel]

There is only one Linux, and there is no confusion as to which "Linux" you're using, unlike the Debian example you give here.

That's not true. You can have the Linux kernel, glibc and GNU userland (GNU/Linux) and the Linux kernel with the BusyBox userland and uClibc (???/Linux).

[Frak]

while i agree calling it linux is not a sin.
but GNU toolchain is very important in today's linux most programs and linux is compiled using gcc
Just because it's compiled with gcc doesn't make it important. LLVM/Clang is becoming very mature, and it can now compile a working Linux kernel as well as the large host of other software that can be compiled with GCC. So, what I'm saying is, GCC is starting to become irrelevant to Linux.

[gnomeuser]

He merely treats the awful little dictator with the amount of disdain he is so deservedly has earned.

Any man who stands up and attacks contributors personally the way Stallman has a tendency to do and questions their motives for reasons of furthering his own ideology is a terrible human being. Stallman is such a person.

End of thread.

[saulgoode]

Any man who stands up and attacks contributors personally the way Stallman has a tendency to do and questions their motives for reasons of furthering his own ideology is a terrible human being. Stallman is such a person.

We despise most in others that which we fail to see in ourselves.

[wilee-nilee]

We despise most in others that which we fail to see in ourselves.

Ah but the venom is so much sweeter when you have a clue, if you can look at yourself and get a good chuckle., and nobody actually gets hurt.

Gender specific for these two anima.

[NightwishFan]

In "Tanenbaum-Torvalds" I particularly like this prediction:


Of course 5 years from now that will be different, but 5 years from now
everyone will be running free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5.


:popcorn:

[Spice Weasel]

He's technically right. That's what MOST universities were running at the time. Free GNU sparcstations. For their UNIX machines, anyway.

Home users... not so much. But they don't count, right?

[forrestcupp]

Since KDE isn't a part of the GNU Project, what percentage of a KDE distro is actually GNU? What happens if the rumors become true and GNOME ends up removing itself from the GNU Project?

[phrostbyte]

Linus is a smart guy, but he is somewhat of a smuck. I don't think he really has his heart in the promise of FOSS either.

Stallman is a very controversial figure as well. He has many enemies and haters, more so then most people. People try to decredit and insult him on a regular basis.

[kvant]

He merely treats the awful little dictator with the amount of disdain he is so deservedly has earned.

Any man who stands up and attacks contributors personally the way Stallman has a tendency to do and questions their motives for reasons of furthering his own ideology is a terrible human being. Stallman is such a person.

End of thread.

Very shallow thinking.

[kvant]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNBMdDaYhZA

This lecture by RMS is one of the cleverest things you can waste 75 minutes on.

[gnomeuser]

Since KDE isn't a part of the GNU Project, what percentage of a KDE distro is actually GNU? What happens if the rumors become true and GNOME ends up removing itself from the GNU Project?

GNOME, defacto, isn't a part of the GNU project. The amount of contributions coming from the FSF e.g. is rather limited to a yearly flame from RMS. I am hoping we can make the split official soon.

Regardless with the rise of LLVM + Clang and other projects GNU is facing, for the first time, competition. We are I predict moving towards a future wherein GNU is a mere relic.

LLVM is finding uses in many places on a modern distro, video drivers, the core of e.g. python and mono can use it these days. Clang is making great progress and will soon be able to compile a full distribution. It is an attractive replacement to GCC.

The Linux kernel developers are proposing doing away with Glibc since it's goal to be cross platform is largely pointless (off the top of your head, name one platform besides Linux that uses glibc - no googling) and it hinders deployment and integration of new syscalls. In the process causing us to miss out on performance and other improvements. Also the Glibc maintainer is hell to work with, and he is fond of uttering unhelpful things such as "ARM is worthless". Replacing it is going to be a long term project but I would not be surprised if this does not turn out to be the best course to take (also we have seen what happens when Ingo Molnar gets an idea in the past, progress could be surprisingly fast). Even if glibc stays, the eglibc project seems to gain favor from at least some distribution, simply to avoid having to work with Ulrich Drepper.

With GCC certainly threatened, and glibc looking shaky. What GNU will be left. Small tools. Hardly anything worth note really. Nothing that would substantiate being a core part of a Linux desktop.

[kvant]

GNOME, defacto, isn't a part of the GNU project. The amount of contributions coming from the FSF e.g. is rather limited to a yearly flame from RMS. I am hoping we can make the split official soon.

Regardless with the rise of LLVM + Clang and other projects GNU is facing, for the first time, competition. We are I predict moving towards a future wherein GNU is a mere relic.

LLVM is finding uses in many places on a modern distro, video drivers, the core of e.g. python and mono can use it these days. Clang is making great progress and will soon be able to compile a full distribution. It is an attractive replacement to GCC.

The Linux kernel developers are proposing doing away with Glibc since it's goal to be cross platform is largely pointless (off the top of your head, name one platform besides Linux that uses glibc - no googling) and it hinders deployment and integration of new syscalls. In the process causing us to miss out on performance and other improvements. Also the Glibc maintainer is hell to work with, and he is fond of uttering unhelpful things such as "ARM is worthless". Replacing it is going to be a long term project but I would not be surprised if this does not turn out to be the best course to take (also we have seen what happens when Ingo Molnar gets an idea in the past, progress could be surprisingly fast). Even if glibc stays, the eglibc project seems to gain favor from at least some distribution, simply to avoid having to work with Ulrich Drepper.

With GCC certainly threatened, and glibc looking shaky. What GNU will be left. Small tools. Hardly anything worth note really. Nothing that would substantiate being a core part of a Linux desktop.

Without free (speach) software and GPL there is no GNU/Linux (or Linux, whatever you want to call it). Software freedom is the essence of it, you can make an OS without it, you can call it Linux, but it will be, in fact, just a bad copy of Windows/OS X.

[forrestcupp]

Regardless with the rise of LLVM + Clang and other projects GNU is facing, for the first time, competition. We are I predict moving towards a future wherein GNU is a mere relic.
So if GNU is becoming such a small part of the overall system, why do we need to call it GNU/Linux?


Without free (speach) software and GPL there is no GNU/Linux (or Linux, whatever you want to call it). Software freedom is the essence of it, you can make an OS without it, you can call it Linux, but it will be, in fact, just a bad copy of Windows/OS X.GPL and the FSF don't hold the monopoly on free/libre licenses. There are a lot of compatible licenses that the FSF doesn't have anything in the world to do with. A lot of big projects, like Firefox, create their own customized but compatible licenses, anyway.

[ki4jgt]

Perhaps one of those rivalries, where they hate each other professionally, but respect each other simultaneously.

I don't believe in those. Perhaps they were both misunderstood their entire lives and they don't know how to relate to each other. They're both gifted and have no way to know how to read each other so instead of admitting they have a problem, they simply try to hide it and pretend to be angry with one another.

[Austin25]

The kernel is Linux.
GNU is the software that runs under it.
The system can be called Linux, or anything else, because derived works are allowed under GPL, as long as credit is given, which it is.

[gnomeuser]

So if GNU is becoming such a small part of the overall system, why do we need to call it GNU/Linux?


We don't.

We don't now either for that matter. No more than we'd be forced to call it X11/usr/bin/Linux/etc. to "show respect" for the components which go into making a full distribution.

Which is also why the FSF crowd is pushing so hard for it now, before their legacy is all but obsoleted by superior open technology.

[kvant]

We don't.

We don't now either for that matter. No more than we'd be forced to call it X11/usr/bin/Linux/etc. to "show respect" for the components which go into making a full distribution.

Which is also why the FSF crowd is pushing so hard for it now, before their legacy is all but obsoleted by superior open technology.

You can call it whatever you want, as far as I'm concerned.

Second, what superior open technology are you talking about precisely and what does "open" in that sentence mean? My term "free" in "free software" means this: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Third, why do you hate the FSF and GPL etc. thanks to who (+ Linus and many others) you're able to have your Linux system?

[youbuntu]

I see Linus as a beacon of the corporate Linux adoption, while RMS remains the icon of the basement dwelling, forever alone GNU/kernel programmers and Free Software activists. I'm just having trouble identifying with Linus's cause (or identifying it, for that matter), whereas Stallman's ideals and calls to action are clearly laid out, as is the fact that he won't compromise on Software Freedom. He's a true fighter for his cause and I respect him for that. Linus just managed to get a lot of people to contribute to his hobby project. Success isn't the only metric ideas are measured by.

So true, and so right.

[Supergoo]

I think Stallman has the Ego. Linus Torvald is pretty down to earth

[youbuntu]

I think Stallman has the Ego. Linus Torvald is pretty down to earth

Stallman has the conviction, dedication and the guts to stick to his guns, unswervingly and without bending to people's will. I know he may be hard to "like", but who said you have to like him? (I happen to).

I always love it how he shuts people up with logic, when they come along in lectures, thinking they've planned a question carefully to catch RMS out... and then they trip at the first hurdle, and run away silently.

Good on ya, RMS!

[KiwiNZ]

Linus Torvold's has a sense of business and how to present himself and the product. Yes he has an ego but name a successful person you does not.I can understand his attitude towards RMS.

Richard Stallman is successful at helping Linux stay at 1% for the desktop especially in the Enterprise sector. Yes he has contributed well to Open source, it's a pity he did not learn some
social graces and decorum along the way.

[sydbat]

linus torvold's has a sense of business and how to present himself and the product. Yes he has an ego but name a successful person you does not.i can understand his attitude towards rms.

Richard stallman is successful at helping linux stay at 1% for the desktop especially in the enterprise sector. Yes he has contributed well to open source, it's a pity he did not learn some
social graces and decorum along the way.+ ∞

[TeoBigusGeekus]

... it's a pity he did not learn some
social graces and decorum along the way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ

:lolflag:

[ikt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ

:lolflag:

don't be the video about eating something off his foot
don't be the video about eating something off his foot
don't be the video about eating something off his foot
don't be the video about eating something off his foot

sigh

[3Miro]

I wonder how many people would take this as: "Richard Stallman does disgusting things, therefore, nothing that he ever did or said can possibly be of any significance and we should all abandon the entire FOSS philosophy."

Of course, we can look at this from the other perspective: "I would sooner eat stuff off my foot then use Windows."

How about we objectively learn from this video:
1. don't eat stuff off your foot
2. if you do that or anything disgusting in general, then make sure there are not cameras or other people watching

[Dr. C]

They both have great strengths and weaknesses and in a strange and very paradoxical way complement each other very well. The real beneficiaries of this rivalry are the Free software and Open Source communities.

Take for what has made Linux so successful when compared to BSD? It is the GPL and copyleft licensing. This is what allows companies like IBM to contribute to Linux without their IP being incorporated into the competitive Windows product by Microsoft. Who invented copyleft? RMS.

On the other hand Free Software would have gone nowhere if it had to wait for the idealistic Hurd. The practical Linux saved the day. Let us not forget that it takes a lot less effort to remove the odd "blob" from Linux to create a 100% Free Software kernel than to code the Hurd.

So I respect, appreciate and am very thankful for both and their rivalry.

[forrestcupp]

I wonder how many people would take this as: "Richard Stallman does disgusting things, therefore, nothing that he ever did or said can possibly be of any significance and we should all abandon the entire FOSS philosophy."I think it's pretty hilarious and ignorant that he would do something like that while he was the focus of public attention. But that's definitely not my main problem with RMS.

I also am actually grateful that he is such an extremist because it benefits me. But it's the bullying and forcing that I don't like. "You have complete freedom and liberty just as long as you stay in my cage. Anyone in the world who will not submit to my cage is evil." :)


How about we objectively learn from this video:
1. don't eat stuff off your foot
2. if you do that or anything disgusting in general, then make sure there are not cameras or other people watching
Great points.

[youbuntu]

I don't see how one's personal habits should in any way influence his views or beliefs. He may be autistic, and based upon this, a little extra discretion and tolerance would be nice. I am autistic too, and I care not what people think of it, one single iota. So he has slightly unusual and supposedly "socially unacceptable" personal habits? I put it to anyone that has a problem with that, and cannot see past it, that it is they with the bigger problem.

If all you see is a guy who does "strange" things with his bodily matter, then no wonder the world is in such a mess; intolerance is not a very nice thing, and MUCH less acceptable than the "problem" that caused it. RMS at least stands firm to his cause - you may like or dislike his opinions, but you cannot deny he is wholly and utterly committed to doing good by GNU and the GPL, even if he seems intolerant of compromise.

It's a shallow world, and we have a choice to see past it all and not be quite so shallow, but people choose not to, in order to bolster their "defence" against something with which they disagree.

Intolerance and ignorance are FAR more offensive than strange habits. Would you criticise someone with Tourette's syndrome for swearing? Would you walk out in disgust, mid-sentence with Stephen Hawking, because he could not control his saliva? How dare you judge someone based on such meaningless and irrelevant observations of their physical habits!

[fuduntu]

I don't see how one's personal habits should in any way influence his views or beliefs. He may be autistic, and based upon this, a little extra discretion and tolerance would be nice. I am autistic too, and I care not what people think of it, one single iota. So he has slightly unusual and supposedly "socially unacceptable" personal habits? I put it to anyone that has a problem with that, and cannot see past it, that it is they with the bigger problem.

If all you see is a guy who does "strange" things with his bodily matter, then no wonder the world is in such a mess; intolerance is not a very nice thing, and MUCH less acceptable than the "problem" that caused it. RMS at least stands firm to his cause - you may like or dislike his opinions, but you cannot deny he is wholly and utterly committed to doing good by GNU and the GPL, even if he seems intolerant of compromise.

It's a shallow world, and we have a choice to see past it all and not be quite so shallow, but people choose not to, in order to bolster their "defence" against something with which they disagree.

His personal habits directly reflect on him as a person, and also reflect in his beliefs.

Autism and personal habits are two completely different things. Autistic traits are NOT habits.

He is arguably not committed to doing "good", he is committed to GNU and GPL which alone are neither "good" or "bad". His intolerance of compromise leads his personal belief towards "bad" rather than "good".

[youbuntu]

His personal habits directly reflect on him as a person, and also reflect in his beliefs.

Autism and personal habits are two completely different things. Autistic traits are NOT habits.

He is arguably not committed to doing "good", he is committed to GNU and GPL which alone are neither "good" or "bad". His intolerance of compromise leads his personal belief towards "bad" rather than "good".

Until you're autistic - I am - you are automatically disqualified from any form of judgment regarding how the autistic mind works. How do you separate "habit" from "trait", and how do you plan on demonstrating the difference?

So you've just made the clear and unambiguous statement that his personal habits detract from his beliefs, even when they cannot be assosciated, and are nothing to do with one another? I'd rather invite someone honest and sincere to dinner, habits included, than one who pre-judges without any logic or reason.

His habits are seen as the weak link in an otherwise rather strong chain (beliefs). You hope that people will cave in, and use the fact that he is not "the norm" against him? Do you know HOW damaging a mindset this is to have?

The guy has immeasurable intelligence and guts to stand fast to his beliefs - no matter how wrong anyone may think they are, to him they are right. That is many, many orders of magnitude more admirable as a character trait, than one who dismisses people for not complying to the irrelevancies of social etiquette, to to use it as ammunition against them.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

Without Linux, GNU-based OSes would still be a tight-knit community centred around building on Free software and Free software alone. Linus and his OSI buddies introduced commercialism and greed, degenerating Free Software into "Open source", pirating Mac OS and Windows' GUIs to attract clueless users to push their message along the way.

GNU is Free Software - the 80*24 terminal running Emacs and gcc. The GNU system is simple once you learn it, if you take the time to learn it.

Linux is commercial open source - the corporate workspaces and "desktop-userfriendly" that caters to people who wouldn't know how to pass a keyboard interrupt to a virtual terminal on their on their monolithic desktop environment because they're too busy using proprietary software to watch mass media. It's easy to learn because there is nothing to learn.

[ikt]

The guy has immeasurable intelligence and guts to stand fast to his beliefs - no matter how wrong anyone may think they are, to him they are right. That is many, many orders of magnitude more admirable as a character trait, than one who dismisses people for not complying to the irrelevancies of social etiquette, to to use it as ammunition against them.

That isn't admirable, anyone can mindlessly stick to their beliefs.

For example for a long time I believed that I was actually destined to become a pro wrestler, and I was going to face stone cold steve austin at wrestlemania... there was nothing admirable about holding onto that belief until long after I should have given it up :/

You need to be able to put your beliefs into action and take on-board criticism and work with those issues.

My best example of Richard Stallman is:

In theory, communism works. In theory.

As an example he says:

"The Free Software Movement raises issues of freedom, community, principle, and ethics, which the Open Source Movement studiously avoids."

He is essentially a political figure, he is offering us a better way to live life, and as such his personal life will reflect his beliefs, and thus where we are at.


I'd rather invite someone honest and sincere to dinner, habits included, than one who pre-judges without any logic or reason.

In theory, that's a logical statement. In theory.

Unfortunately in reality the human mind was crafted by evolution not god, and one of the flaws in our brain is that we pre-judge and don't use logic or reason in a lot of thinking, in fact it's actually really hard to use reason and logic, so you'll never find someone who uses 100% logic and reasoning every time they make a judgement.

[jerenept]

Without Linux, GNU-based OSes would still be a tight-knit community centred around building on Free software and Free software alone. Linus and his OSI buddies introduced commercialism and greed, degenerating Free Software into "Open source", pirating Mac OS and Windows' GUIs to attract clueless users to push their message along the way.

GNU is Free Software - the 80*24 terminal running Emacs and gcc. The GNU system is simple once you learn it, if you take the time to learn it.

Linux is commercial open source - the corporate workspaces and "desktop-userfriendly" that caters to people who wouldn't know how to pass a keyboard interrupt to a virtual terminal on their on their monolithic desktop environment because they're too busy using proprietary software to watch mass media. It's easy to learn because there is nothing to learn.

I can guarantee, if the "GNU/Free Software" you speak of was what I was presented with 3 years ago when I started using Ubuntu, I would be using Windows today, never to return to the world of Linux and Free/Open Source software.

[youbuntu]

That isn't admirable, anyone can mindlessly stick to their beliefs.

For example for a long time I believed that I was actually destined to become a pro wrestler, and I was going to face stone cold steve austin at wrestlemania... there was nothing admirable about holding onto that belief until long after I should have given it up :/

You need to be able to put your beliefs into action and take on-board criticism and work with those issues.

My best example of Richard Stallman is:

In theory, communism works. In theory.

As an example he says:

"The Free Software Movement raises issues of freedom, community, principle, and ethics, which the Open Source Movement studiously avoids."

He is essentially a political figure, he is offering us a better way to live life, and as such his personal life will reflect his beliefs, and thus where we are at.



In theory, that's a logical statement. In theory.

Unfortunately in reality the human mind was crafted by evolution not god, and one of the flaws in our brain is that we pre-judge and don't use logic or reason in a lot of thinking, in fact it's actually really hard to use reason and logic, so you'll never find someone who uses 100% logic and reasoning every time they make a judgement.

Anything is possible. Humans cannot even sort themselves out, let alone logically and rationally dictate for CERTAIN, how the universe came about (we like to think we can, but we cannot). You're entitled to think what you do about evolution - as a Christian I believe in God - evidently I cannot "prove" a single thing, but I believe what I do. Neither of us can categorically prove one opinion is right, and the other wrong. Religious debate has to end there, due to forum rules, sorry.

[jerenept]

Anything is possible. Humans cannot even sort themselves out, let alone logically and rationally dictate for CERTAIN, how the universe came about (we like to think we can, but we cannot). You're entitled to think what you do about evolution - as a Christian I believe in God - evidently I cannot "prove" a single thing, but I believe what I do. Neither of us can categorically prove one opinion is right, and the other wrong. Religious debate has to end there, due to forum rules, sorry.

...wut?

[youbuntu]

...wut?

Eh? :)

[jerenept]

Eh? :)

I don't identify with your beliefs and will tirelessly defend my views on the Internet.[/sarcasm]
In other words, do what works for you, and let me do what works for me. Please?

[NightwishFan]

Anything is possible. Humans cannot even sort themselves out, let alone logically and rationally dictate for CERTAIN, how the universe came about (we like to think we can, but we cannot). You're entitled to think what you do about evolution - as a Christian I believe in God - evidently I cannot "prove" a single thing, but I believe what I do. Neither of us can categorically prove one opinion is right, and the other wrong. Religious debate has to end there, due to forum rules, sorry.

When things get deep is when I exit the debate. As far as I am concerned if it is abstract it is not real.

[fuduntu]

When things get deep is when I exit the debate. As far as I am concerned if it is abstract it is not real.

I'm not sure I would call it "deep", but I'm with you, this is where I get off.

UF troll is trolling, I'm not gonna feed him. :D

[RiceMonster]

glossy is really great at making threads an extremely amusing read, gotta say. Don't ever leave, brah.

[ikt]

I'm not sure I would call it "deep", but I'm with you, this is where I get off.

UF troll is trolling, I'm not gonna feed him. :D

Damnit I just saw this, to late now I've already written all this out :(


Anything is possible.

Technically not really, for example it's impossible for a square to be a triangle.



Humans cannot even sort themselves out, let alone logically and rationally dictate for CERTAIN, how the universe came about (we like to think we can, but we cannot).

Is that a rational and logical belief?


I believe what I do.

I'm not saying you can't do that, you can, you're free to believe whatever you want to, but ultimately this goes back to my point about belief in something for the sake of it not being admirable, you know who I have a huge amount of respect for, even as an atheist?

William Lane Craig:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkBD20edOco

His ability to take on criticism, and respond logically and rationally makes him one of the best theologians in the world and it's always a pain to watch him make fantastic responses to atheists I love :(

My specific point wasn't that god did or didn't make us, it was the fact that all of our brains have flaws(things that make us imperfect) in them (that originate from us evolving) so I simply related reality to your ideal situation, as I do with Richard Stallmans ideal situation to my reality.

I could live like him, it would be easy to me as I am already live as a zen minimalist as much as I can, but to go even further would have a considerable negative impact on my life, and his ideals of a better world offer me no solace.


Without Linux, GNU-based OSes would still be a tight-knit community centred around building on Free software and Free software alone.

And this is ideal why?

Who benefits the most from having a tight-knit community of programmers who push away outsides in order to remain tight-knit?

Tight-knit community and arbitrary purist social ideals aside, what is debian?




Linus and his OSI buddies introduced commercialism and greed, degenerating Free Software into "Open source", pirating Mac OS and Windows' GUIs to attract clueless users to push their message along the way

I wasn't aware linus had any involvement with any major GUI software, regarding KDE and Gnome pirating Mac OS and Windows' GUIs.

Also it's not very wise to pull out the whole that software resembles another piece of software I have seen, therefore piracy.

The entire GNU system would be in trouble if that were the case, given that Richard Stallman started the project as "ultimately aiming to be a "complete Unix-compatible software system"[2]."

Who's ripping off who?



The GNU system is simple once you learn it, if you take the time to learn it.

so wut?



Linux is commercial open source - the corporate workspaces and "desktop-userfriendly" that caters to people who wouldn't know how to pass a keyboard interrupt to a virtual terminal on their on their monolithic desktop environment because they're too busy using proprietary software to watch mass media. It's easy to learn because there is nothing to learn.

Yep that's me, I'd rather watch X TV show or play X video game using proprietary ati drivers than pass a keyboard interupt to a virtual terminal, no idea why?

[mikewhatever]

I'm not sure I would call it "deep", but I'm with you, this is where I get off.

UF troll is trolling, I'm not gonna feed him. :D

We need a cannibal troll here ..., perhaps even two.

[forrestcupp]

Until you're autistic - I am - you are automatically disqualified from any form of judgment regarding how the autistic mind works. How do you separate "habit" from "trait", and how do you plan on demonstrating the difference?

Has RMS been diagnosed with autism? I know he said he thinks he's autistic, but has he actually been diagnosed?

Either way, there are murderers who don't get deserved punishment because they plead some kind of psychological disorder. Does that mean we need to just accept their murders because that's just one of their traits?

Anyway, like I said earlier, my problem with him has nothing to do with the fact that he likes to munch on callouses. My problem is with his bullying. He can be as abnormal as he wants, and I don't care. But when he starts trying to bully me and other people, that's not alright.

[MooPi]

Any criticism of RMS should take into account his autistic affliction (Asberger Syndrome) This should explain some of his odder moments and peculiar social behavior. That aside I can only comment that I respect and admire both men for their contributions and devotion to cause. RMS is just a bit more zealous than most.

[3Miro]

The point that I was trying to make is that criticism of RMS is pointless. What difference does it make what kind of person he is? Lets look at his arguments and his contributions to the computer world as a whole. You can make arguments both ways, but what kind of habits he has is completely irrelevant.

[WinterMadness]

stallman can be a jerk to people.

His views on software freedom do have some areas where it seems like it clashes with business interests.

Im not complaining about that, but he refuses to admit it, especially in things like video game source code. He claimed that its art, so its different. However, its not different.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

To the people who claim they'd be using windows if it weren't for Linux: You're welcome to. Unlike Linux, the goal of GNU isn't to promote itself or drive anyone's commercial interests. "Bug 1" was made up by a Linux guy, not a GNU guy. A true GNU user finds confirmation in the ideals of Software Freedom, not user share percentage. In fact, widespread public adoption of GNU/Linux has led to the degeneration of mainstream distro by introducing "user-friendliness" (which should more accurately be called "windows-convert-friendlyness") and proprietary software for people who have no respect for the goals of the Free Software Foundation. And now they seek to undermine the entire GNU effort by turning the GNU part into a footnote, removing it from the name and hiding it as deep as they can.

If you don't like Stallman, GNU and the FSF, please use a non-GNU operating system. If you're using their life's work, please stop acting like jerks towards them, and atleast acknowledge them.

[Random_Dude]

A true GNU user finds confirmation in the ideals of Software Freedom, not user share percentage.

But isn't user share percentage also proportional to the success of a development approach?
What I'm trying to say is that if Stallman wants to prove that sharing the code is the best approach to software development, then he should be interested in percentages.

Putting that aside, because I don't like to compare them. Firstly, because I'm not familiar with their whole biography (as some people seem to be), and second because they both made huge contributions (despite their diferences) and should both be respected for it.

Cheers :cool:

[Ugluk]

GNU software is not substantial and mostly have equivalents under truly free licenses.

Stallman was not relevant when he was programmer, and definitely isn't now. Acting weird and posting strange things definitely don't help.

[danbuter]

My concern is Linus never gives credit to Stallman

That's because Linus is pragmatic and wants his kernel used for businesses, while Stallman is a kook who would be perfectly happy if he was the only person in the world using Linux.

[danbuter]

You're welcome to. Unlike Linux, the goal of GNU isn't to promote itself

If you don't like Stallman, GNU and the FSF, please use a non-GNU operating system. If you're using their life's work, please stop acting like jerks towards them, and atleast acknowledge them.

And this is why it will NEVER be the year of Linux on the Desktop. You're contradicting yourself.

[Tibuda]

What about Stallman's behavior?

[forrestcupp]

"Bug 1" was made up by a Linux guy, not a GNU guy.I don't know how true that is. Shuttleworth has been a pretty big Free Software proponent. I remember in the earlier days of Ubuntu, one of the devs was talking about "open source" and Shuttleworth corrected him and said he prefers the term "Free Software."


That's because Linus is pragmatic and wants his kernel used for businesses, while Stallman is a kook who would be perfectly happy if he was the only person in the world using Linux.

I don't think that's true about Stallman. He thinks that anyone not using GNU is immoral. But if you want to get technical with your wording, Stallman probably wishes there were a better option and that no one had to use the Linux kernel.

[youbuntu]

To the people who claim they'd be using windows if it weren't for Linux: You're welcome to. Unlike Linux, the goal of GNU isn't to promote itself or drive anyone's commercial interests. "Bug 1" was made up by a Linux guy, not a GNU guy. A true GNU user finds confirmation in the ideals of Software Freedom, not user share percentage. In fact, widespread public adoption of GNU/Linux has led to the degeneration of mainstream distro by introducing "user-friendliness" (which should more accurately be called "windows-convert-friendlyness") and proprietary software for people who have no respect for the goals of the Free Software Foundation. And now they seek to undermine the entire GNU effort by turning the GNU part into a footnote, removing it from the name and hiding it as deep as they can.

If you don't like Stallman, GNU and the FSF, please use a non-GNU operating system. If you're using their life's work, please stop acting like jerks towards them, and atleast acknowledge them.

Amen!

You guys could do a lot better for yourselves than slating and deriding the one person who was key in bringing about the majority of the OS which you use and love on a daily basis. RMS is the very roots of GNU, which in itself is the majority of the OS you use.

How many of you have the conviction and dedication to do the same as RMS, dedicating his WHOLE LIFE to a cause which he believes in, and not for profit? I'd guess... not very many at all. What a pity indeed.

Ubuntu is supposedly all about freedom, so I would expect people to be more respectful of those from which the freedom came. If you value your freedom over convenience, it is vital you take the time to learn, and have the grace to give them respect, even if you don't agree with such meaningless piffle as their personal habits or traits. You will lose your freedom eventually, should you not take the time to fully understand why it is important - it is.

[Merk42]

Linus = pragmatic Linux and/or FOSS adoption
RMS = idealistic GNU/Linux and/or FOSS adoption


Intolerance and ignorance are FAR more offensive than strange habits.RMS should be less intolerant of people who choose closed source software.

[fuduntu]

Amen!

You guys could do a lot better for yourselves than slating and deriding the one person who was key in bringing about the majority of the OS which you use and love on a daily basis. RMS is the very roots of GNU, which in itself is the majority of the OS you use.

How many of you have the conviction and dedication to do the same as RMS, dedicating his WHOLE LIFE to a cause which he believes in, and not for profit? I'd guess... not very many at all. What a pity indeed.

Ubuntu is supposedly all about freedom, so I would expect people to be more respectful of those from which the freedom came. If you value your freedom over convenience, it is vital you take the time to learn, and have the grace to give them respect, even if you don't agree with such meaningless piffle as their personal habits or traits. You will lose your freedom eventually, should you not take the time to fully understand why it is important - it is.

Read: GNU/Cult

[youbuntu]

Read: GNU/Cult

Really? In what way is valuing your freedom and the work of others, a cult?

I advise you to visit http://www.fsf.org (http://www.fsf.org/) and notify them of this - they need to take action, as this is bad news.

[MasterNetra]

To the people who claim they'd be using windows if it weren't for Linux: You're welcome to. Unlike Linux, the goal of GNU isn't to promote itself or drive anyone's commercial interests. "Bug 1" was made up by a Linux guy, not a GNU guy. A true GNU user finds confirmation in the ideals of Software Freedom, not user share percentage. In fact, widespread public adoption of GNU/Linux has led to the degeneration of mainstream distro by introducing "user-friendliness" (which should more accurately be called "windows-convert-friendlyness") and proprietary software for people who have no respect for the goals of the Free Software Foundation. And now they seek to undermine the entire GNU effort by turning the GNU part into a footnote, removing it from the name and hiding it as deep as they can.

If you don't like Stallman, GNU and the FSF, please use a non-GNU operating system. If you're using their life's work, please stop acting like jerks towards them, and atleast acknowledge them.

Proprietary software, I think, is often used due to either a lack of a open-source alternative or the open-source alternative is of poor quality in a large number of cases, the rest of course is largely ignorance as well as some choice. The proprietary components I use are due to mainly a lack of a Open-Source alternative, for instance my machine which I got through the college I went to uses a Broadcom BCM-4312 for wireless, unfortunately for me there is no full open-source driver for it, so I use STA out of necessity.

Another point to make is that due to the utilisation of currency, open-source is simply not ideal or impractical for a number of situations. For example, someone trying to make a living in game design/development, the only real way to make a decent income from the game being produced is to sell it. While yes you can do so in open-source but it becomes a serious problem when someone can come along, nab the source code and create a identical or nearly identical clone and provide it for free. There are bills to pay and people need to eat.

[fuduntu]

Really? In what way is valuing your freedom and the work of others, a cult?

I advise you to visit http://www.fsf.org (http://www.fsf.org/) and notify them of this - they need to take action, as this is bad news.

FSF does not value freedom, the FSF values the same sort of lock-in as proprietary software vendors only in reverse. FSF mandates that all software should be free, this in itself is inherently a restriction of freedom.

GNU/Cult represents persons like yourself that troll internet forums in the name of representing "freedom".

Edit: Well I'ma get back off this ride now. Enjoy your trollin.

[RiceMonster]

Freedom the way I tell you!

[Shmantiv_Radio]

Stallman is a creepy old guy.

[Shining Arcanine]

I have found from Linus' interviews and speeches that his behavior is lees then ideal towards Stallman . I respect both of mentioned men but Stallman has bigger role in FOSS .

If there was no GNU there could be no Linux . GNU could have its kernel .

This is what I felt . You can watch documentary " Revolutionary OS " for have a clue what I am talking about

That is not true. He could have used a BSD userland.

[youbuntu]

Proprietary software, I think, is often used due to either a lack of a open-source alternative or the open-source alternative is of poor quality in a large number of cases, the rest of course is largely ignorance as well as some choice. The proprietary components I use are due to mainly a lack of a Open-Source alternative, for instance my machine which I got through the college I went to uses a Broadcom BCM-4312 for wireless, unfortunately for me there is no full open-source driver for it, so I use STA out of necessity.

Another point to make is that due to the utilisation of currency, open-source is simply not ideal or impractical for a number of situations. For example, someone trying to make a living in game design/development, the only real way to make a decent income from the game being produced is to sell it. While yes you can do so in open-source but it becomes a serious problem when someone can come along, nab the source code and create a identical or nearly identical clone and provide it for free. There are bills to pay and people need to eat.

I can relate to that entirely. I think it is maybe the way you come across that has made me think about re-considering such purism. I don't mean to sound arrogant or holier than thou - I suppose I am just an idealist, but I appreciate that noone is being killed in order that wifi drivers be used, eh! :lol:

If only the world could be such utopia, and I think that if we all made a concerted effort to reject corporate control, in force, en masse, it would make all the difference, but obviously people have lives to live, and cannot all be activists. Yeah, I can see RMS has dedicated his entire life to the cause, and on the other side of the coin, I see no reason why we ALL must do the same. Maybe if freedoms were explained and understood in a way that was not perceived as so forceful and intolerant, then progress would advance a little quicker.

Bless RMS, he doesn't have a mean spirit or bad intentions - I do sincerely think that he wants the best for us all, and that is why I hate it when people make shallow comments about him and his ideals, based upon observations of his ticks and habits (unrelated to the cause, entirely). Maybe he is just mis-understood, and maybe I sympathise with his abruptness and terse way of behaving more than most of you, as I have asperger's myself (albeit mildly) and I often struggle to see the world from the perspective of the quote "average man", and think my way IS the right way, even when deep down I should know different. Once people know you are autistic, they DO treat you completely differently - often in a negative way, even if they pretend (badly) that they don't.

I accept each and every one of you for your beliefs, and for your choices in which OS and software you use, be it proprietary or free. There are bigger issues than this in the world, but the issue of corporate dominance and greed is still equally as valid, and must be rejected whenever possible, en masse.

Sorry if I upset you good folks - I don't mean to do that, and I am hopeful we can all have fun discussing, without bickering like children about a subject which, in the grand scheme of life, is pretty tiny. I accept that there will be some name calling and backlash from this post, and I accept that I, as all humans, am a hyprocrite on a daily basis, but I know God still loves me, no matter what, as noone is perfect. I can only say sorry if I do more damage than good for pushing free software in the arrogant manner which I may have put across - that's not good, and I need to change the way I approach it :).

I shall have to go and wash my hands now, hypocrite as I am, as I typed all this using Windows 7 (unavoidable where I am).

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

The FSF isn't forcing anyone into using Free Software. They're offering an alternative to proprietary, commercial software, and that's that. If you like it, use it and acknowledge the fact. If you don't like it, use what works for you. I don't mind people learning the alternatives and choosing proprietary software because it suits them better. What bothers me is people using Free Software, even GNU software, and refusing to give credit where credit is due, then using pathetic excuses like pronunciation and Stallman's personal hygiene habits.

[youbuntu]

The FSF isn't forcing anyone into using Free Software. They're offering an alternative to proprietary, commercial software, and that's that. If you like it, use it and acknowledge the fact. If you don't like it, use what works for you. I don't mind people learning the alternatives and choosing proprietary software because it suits them better. What bothers me is people using Free Software, even GNU software, and refusing to give credit where credit is due, then using pathetic excuses like pronunciation and Stallman's personal hygiene habits.

Complete agreeance here. If you have to use such defence, then that defence is poor.

[KiwiNZ]

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, it's just an Operating System with Applications added. Mr Torvalds and Mr Stallman are just Developers, that's all. To my knowledge neither have been beatified.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, it's just an Operating System with Applications added. Mr Torvalds and Mr Stallman are just Developers, that's all. To my knowledge neither have been beatified.

We get it, you just don't care about the ideals of Software Freedom, and there's nothing wrong with that, we can't all concern ourselves with every issue in the world. But a lot of people that genuinely don't care about this conflict are taking Linus's side while believing themselves to be neutral, because of the misinformation and FUD spread by the Linux/OSI side.

For me, Free Software isn't just something I use to get work done, it's a worthwhile ideal and a cause I want to spend my life on. Mr. Stallman has shown us that it is possible to live a life without proprietary and commercial software, and I think we should follow him.

[youbuntu]

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, it's just an Operating System with Applications added. Mr Torvalds and Mr Stallman are just Developers, that's all. To my knowledge neither have been beatified.

Simplistic way of looking at it, conveniently missing out massive pieces of the picture. Just developers? I would have thought that a person in your position, representing possibly the most well known/popular distro in widespread use, would be a little more clued up as to the history and purpose of various KEY people in the evolution of GNU/linux, no offence.

If Linux is just a kernel invented by Linus, and GNU is just a collection of software which fits around it, promoted and maintained by RMS, you won't have much trouble finding immediate replacements, if you think they are that insignificant, will you?

[KiwiNZ]

Simplistic way of looking at it, conveniently missing out massive pieces of the picture. Just developers? I would have thought that a person in your position, representing possibly the most well known/popular distro in widespread use, would be a little more clued up as to the history and purpose of various KEY people in the evolution of GNU/linux, no offence.

If Linux is just a kernel invented by Linus, and GNU is just a collection of software which fits around it, promoted and maintained by RMS, you won't have much trouble finding immediate replacements, if you think they are that insignificant, will you?

OK

What is it?

A Cruiseliner?

A pseudo-nation of no borders?

A new alternate Universe?

Now let me see, Linux.....the Kernel with is the heart of say Ubuntu with is a Computer Operating System that has, let me think. Applications bundled with it. Now what was it I said? Thats right, "it's just an Operating System with Applications added"

Point of note, RMS does maintain it, he assists with the maintenance. And no one is indispensable both Torvalds and Smallman can easily be replaced as can Gates, Jobs,Ellison and Palmisano

[youbuntu]

OK

What is?

A Cruiseliner?

A pseudo-nation of no borders?

A new alternate Universe?

Now let me see, Linux.....the Kernel with is the heart of say Ubuntu with is a Computer Operating System that has, let me think. Applications bundled with it. Now what was it I said? Thats right, "it's just an Operating System with Applications added"

Point of note, RMS does maintain it, he assists with the maintenance.

If you're trying to glean a negative reaction, in order that you may flex your moderator muscles, I am not your man to react negatively any longer. I am respectful of your opinion, even if it seems a little rushed, simplistic and nonsensical to me.

I still don't see your point - could you try and re-iterate please?

Thanks :)

[KiwiNZ]

If you're trying to glean a negative reaction, in order that you may flex your moderator muscles, I am not your man to react negatively any longer. I am respectful of your opinion, even if it seems a little rushed, simplistic and nonsensical to me.

I still don't see your point - could you try and re-iterate please?

Thanks :)

You are trying to me that Linux in the broader sense is more than a Operating System with Applications added and that my view is simplistic my post was asking what you think it was and was further stating my view that Torvalds and Stallman are not irreplaceable.
But don't turn to the persecution defense again it's getting old.

[RiceMonster]

For me, Free Software isn't just something I use to get work done, it's a worthwhile ideal and a cause I want to spend my life on. Mr. Stallman has shown us that it is possible to live a life without proprietary and commercial software, and I think we should follow him.

The real world is just out the door.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

The real world is just out the door.

I don't like the term "real world", I prefer "AFK". The internet and the software are every bit as real and as important as the rest of the universe.

[pi3.1415926535...]

After watching Revolution OS, I was given the impression that Linus Torvalds was fairly reasonable and that RMS was less so. Though after watching a speech by RMS, it seems as if they both have their own opinions as to where Free Software should be, and are constantly conflicting over that, with neither one being any more reasonable than the other.

[youbuntu]

You are trying to me that Linux in the broader sense is more than a Operating System with Applications added and that my view is simplistic my post was asking what you think it was and was further stating my view that Torvalds and Stallman are not irreplaceable.
But don't turn to the persecution defense again it's getting old.

It seems your dismissive way of thinking could be mis-interpreted as hostile. I don't see this, I just think you don't want to learn about where it all came from, and even if you already do know, which is likely, you just dismiss it as irrelevant. Based upon that premise, I can only surmise that your best option is to remove GNU/Linux of any kind from your computers, and find an alternative which you respect more.

The scope of your replies regarding RMS and LT are way too vague and meaningless to be of any significant substance for a logical debate, sorry.

[KiwiNZ]

It seems your dismissive way of thinking could be mis-interpreted as hostile. I don't see this, I just think you don't want to learn about where it all came from, and even if you already do know, which is likely, you just dismiss it as irrelevant. Based upon that premise, I can only surmise that your best option is to remove GNU/Linux of any kind from your computers, and find an alternative which you respect more.

The scope of your replies regarding RMS and LT are way too vague and meaningless to be of any significant substance for a logical debate, sorry.

I have been involved with Opensource since the early 90's sunshine so don't preach to me and I have probably been more involved than you.

In the last two decades I have seen more things arounds this planet that shows that getting all worked up about a simple Computer Operating system is just plain silly. It's just an OS nothing more.

[Shmantiv_Radio]

The real world is just out the door.

Trying too hard

[jennybrew]

You are trying to me that Linux in the broader sense is more than a Operating System with Applications added and that my view is simplistic my post was asking what you think it was and was further stating my view that Torvalds and Stallman are not irreplaceable.
But don't turn to the persecution defense again it's getting old.

Totally agree and would actually go a few steps further.
I believe it doesnt matter a jot how these two people treat each other as neither are essential to the movement they helped found.
Respect where its due ..but hey lets not engage in the cult of the personality.

[Shmantiv_Radio]

I have been involved with Opensource since the early 90's sunshine so don't preach to me and I have probably been more involved than you.

In the last two decades I have seen more things arounds this planet that shows that getting all worked up about a simple Computer Operating system is just plain silly. It's just an OS nothing more.

If you just consider it to be an OS and have no other attachment to it, why give up your time to moderate on a forum of that OS?

[MooPi]

At the risk of irritating a moderator it is more than an OS. Like the film name infers "Revolution OS". The concept of software that is written freely and used en mass for the sole purpose of liberating the user space from proprietary restriction. Stallman and for the most part open source community has accepted this and embraced the idea. But alas ideas and revolutionary concepts are fickle and dynamic and hard to pin down.

[fuduntu]

i have been involved with opensource since the early 90's sunshine so don't preach to me and i have probably been more involved than you.

In the last two decades i have seen more things arounds this planet that shows that getting all worked up about a simple computer operating system is just plain silly. It's just an os nothing more.

<3

[youbuntu]

I have been involved with Opensource since the early 90's sunshine so don't preach to me and I have probably been more involved than you.

In the last two decades I have seen more things arounds this planet that shows that getting all worked up about a simple Computer Operating system is just plain silly. It's just an OS nothing more.


# Sunshine? Could you be a little more condescending? Do you know my age?

# Opensource? No, it is "Open Source", which has similair but altogether different priorities to free software (come on, you really should know this)

# If it is just a simple computer OS, then I ask you why are you a moderator on a forum, the purpose of which is to promote "just an OS"?



...and I have probably been more involved than you.


Well that's nice for you, I had been under the impression that ALL contributions were valued, no matter the size. Since when did this become some kind of competition? Whilst proving how much your experience surpasses mine (like it matters) in one breath, you attempt to weigh my contributions - of which you have no clue, in the next.

If you care SO little, then please tell me - why are you so involved?

You think you should attempt to belittle me, because it says "moderator" under your username? I am equally entitled to the very same respect that I am sure you would expect of me. "Humanity to others" - maybe you could consider that aspect of the Ubuntu mantra. There are other mods on this forum who show total respect for people at all times - I have had them reprimand me when I needed it (I don't consider myself beyond a telling off or guidance) and they still show dignity and graciousness toward myself & others. Would it hurt to convey your point in a slightly less antagonistic way?

[Dr. C]

It is both an "ideological movement", Free Software, and "a more efficient method of software development", Open Source. Two things are certain: Open Source is heavily indebted to Free Software and Free Software is heavily indebted to "Open Source" so regardless of which camp one is primarily in, one must be very appreciative and highly respectful of the other.

[KiwiNZ]

# Sunshine? Could you be a little more condescending? Do you know my age?

# Opensource? No, it is "Open Source", which has similair but altogether different priorities to free software (come on, you really should know this)

# If it is just a simple computer OS, then I ask you why are you a moderator on a forum, the purpose of which is to promote "just an OS"?



Well that's nice for you, I had been under the impression that ALL contributions were valued, no matter the size. Since when did this become some kind of competition? Whilst proving how much your experience surpasses mine (like it matters) in one breath, you attempt to weigh my contributions - of which you have no clue, in the next.

If you care SO little, then please tell me - why are you so involved?

You think you should attempt to belittle me, because it says "moderator" under your username? I am equally entitled to the very same respect that I am sure you would expect of me. "Humanity to others" - maybe you could consider that aspect of the Ubuntu mantra.

YOU stated this "It seems your dismissive way of thinking could be mis-interpreted as hostile. I don't see this, I just think you don't want to learn about where it all came from, and even if you already do know, which is likely, you just dismiss it as irrelevant. Based upon that premise, I can only surmise that your best option is to remove GNU/Linux of any kind from your computers, and find an alternative which you respect more."

I DO _ NOT need to learn more, I am fully aware of the history , the roots etc of Open source and the Linux Kernel.

And Oh my God I forgot to put a space between two words in a post on a forum, may the grammar police forgive me :rolleyes:

And seems you wish perfection and accuracy the term "Moderator" does not appear under my username. The Moderators do a much harder job here.

[youbuntu]

YOU stated this "It seems your dismissive way of thinking could be mis-interpreted as hostile. I don't see this, I just think you don't want to learn about where it all came from, and even if you already do know, which is likely, you just dismiss it as irrelevant. Based upon that premise, I can only surmise that your best option is to remove GNU/Linux of any kind from your computers, and find an alternative which you respect more."

I DO _ NOT need to learn more, I am fully aware of the history , the roots etc of Open source and the Linux Kernel.

And Oh my God I forgot to put a space between two words in a post on a forum, may the grammar police forgive me :rolleyes:

And seems you wish perfection and accuracy the term "Moderator" does not appear under my username. The Moderators do a much harder job here.

Dude, I politely ask you to avoid further communications with me. This is a polite request, to avoid further conflict. I shall let others become entangled in petty arguments with you - I am unwilling to get myself banned, because I got into a pointless and circular debate with someone who refuses to show any signs of acceptance or tolerance of my opinion. You constantly talk down to me, and that is a shame, because you have only served to put my back up, therefore you would only ever get on the wrong side of me, as it seems you cannot swallow your pride and simply accept another's opinion.

I am sorry that you could not take criticism in the way it was intended - to simply remind you that noone is better than any other. Your reactions are constantly hostile and snappy - I do not feel comfortable talking to you, as you talk down to people as if they are below you. Let it be.

I hold no malice toward you, I simply hope you will see the resentment you cause by the contempt you have for those who do not meet your standards and expectations.

[jerenept]

Dude, I politely ask you to avoid further communications with me. This is a polite request, to avoid further conflict. I shall let others become entangled in petty arguments with you - I am unwilling to get myself banned, because I got into a pointless and circular debate with someone who refuses to show any signs of acceptance or tolerance of my opinion. You constantly talk down to me, and that is a shame, because you have only served to put my back up, therefore you would only ever get on the wrong side of me, as it seems you cannot swallow your pride and simply accept another's opinion.

I am sorry that you could not take criticism in the way it was intended - to simply remind you that noone is better than any other. Your reactions are constantly hostile and snappy - I do not feel comfortable talking to you, as you talk down to people as if they are below you. Let it be.

I hold no malice toward you, I simply hope you will see the resentment you cause by the contempt you have for those who do not meet your standards and expectations.

Weird how this happens to no-one else, and Kiwi is known as a decent and level-headed mod, even in "other forums" *cough*
Now back on topic..... what was the topic again?

[youbuntu]

Weird how this happens to no-one else, and Kiwi is known as a decent and level-headed mod, even in "other forums" *cough*
Now back on topic..... what was the topic again?


Noone else? How is it even possible to account for every single conversation or comment had between himself and any other member...

Okay, back on topic is wise, as my energy for this futile bickering is 0.

[Merk42]

Now back on topic..... what was the topic again?
Person A:{insert object/person/idea} is completely 100% the right way!
Person B: {insert object/person/idea} has some flaws you know?
Person A: No it doesn't! how dare you!

:repeat ad nauseam:

[youbuntu]

:repeat ad nauseam:

I'd rather not :D

[KiwiNZ]

The way I believe best sums up both Torvalds and Stallman is that it is the best way to hinder the advance if anything like Linux , add into the mix Zealots and narcissists and instead of the product being concentrated on, they are, and their whims and philosophies.

[youbuntu]

So, essentially, the best way to hinder GNU/Linux, is to involve the two key contributors to it; the guy who wrote the kernel, and the guy who started GNU and motivated people to build the GNU system around the kernel, therefore completing the OS?

Really? Wow. Novel concept. Kinda relieved you're not in charge of GNU or the kernel dev team :lol: Their "whims and philosopies" are the very core and reason for a totally free OS, and the main reason that you are now blessed with the OS you use - has that point gone unnoticed again?

I'd like to hear your philosopy if I may? I am sure it would be interesting, if you feel theirs is wasted effort.
FWIW, I do actually see your point - maybe it was the way you phrased it?

[TeoBigusGeekus]

To everyone in the thread/forums/world: please be reasonable!

There are people in the world who are hungry, mistreated, jailed for no reason, murdered, raped, etc. and we're wasting our lives defending Torvalds and Stallman.

I care for them as much as they care for me, ie....(you guess it).

[Dr. C]

The way I believe best sums up both Torvalds and Stallman is that it is the best way to hinder the advance if anything like Linux , add into the mix Zealots and narcissists and instead of the product being concentrated on, they are, and their whims and philosophies.

As to what is holding back GNU / Linux on the desktop, I will pace software piracy, particularly the piracy of Microsoft Windows as the primary cause. Not polemics between Stallman and Torvalds or between their respective camps. Microsoft Windows pirates is a huge market for GNU / Linux to go after.

[KiwiNZ]

Isn't the whole idea of Open Source is that it's "Team Effort". The definition of a team "a group of people working together in a coordinated effort".

My experience at CEO and Board Room level, RMS certainly hinders Open Source entry into the Enterprise Market.

[youbuntu]

Gah! done it again :(

http://blog.sironaconsulting.com/.a/6a00d8341c761a53ef0120a623814b970c-pi

[3Miro]

My experience at CEO and Board Room level, RMS certainly hinders Open Source entry into the Enterprise Market.

I don't think anyone in the Enterprise Market should ever even know about RMS. Companies (that are FOSS users) should not work with the community at all. Companies like Red Hat and Canonical should be pushing FOSS in the business word and they should serve as "mediators" between the community and the user-company.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

Isn't the whole idea of Open Source is that it's "Team Effort". The definition of a team "a group of people working together in a coordinated effort".

My experience at CEO and Board Room level, RMS certainly hinders Open Source entry into the Enterprise Market.

And the idea of Free Software is the exact opposite of your "enterprise market", buzzword-compatible commercialisation of that team effort. "Open Source" is just a buzzword used to profiteer off Free Software. It's like antisocial networking, careless cloud computing and digital restrictions management, just another way to make money off other people's work.

[jerenept]

And the idea of Free Software is the exact opposite of your "enterprise market", buzzword-compatible commercialisation of that team effort. "Open Source" is just a buzzword used to profiteer off Free Software. It's like antisocial networking, careless cloud computing and digital restrictions management, just another way to make money off other people's work.

wow....

[forrestcupp]

If you use about any desktop environment other than Gnome, it's a very small percentage of a Linux distro that is actually a part of the GNU project. Just because someone chooses to use a form license that the FSF came up with a long time ago doesn't mean I should give the FSF credit for the software that someone else developed.


And no one is indispensable both Torvalds and Smallman can easily be replaced as can Gates, Jobs,Ellison and PalmisanoNotice Steve Ballmer is not in that list. :)

And I hope that Smallman was a typo, seeing how things like M$ are frowned upon. ;)


Based upon that premise, I can only surmise that your best option is to remove GNU/Linux of any kind from your computers, and find an alternative which you respect more.But that in itself is a pretty shallow statement. I don't use an OS because I respect the people behind it. I use an OS because it does a good job at what I need it to do. I can love using a Linux based OS and hate everyone involved in developing it (not that I do). I mostly use Windows 7 because I have some very important software that has to be run in Windows. By your views, I should remove Windows from my computer because I don't have a lot of respect of Microsoft.

To some people an OS is a philosophy and way of life. To other people, an OS is a tool for getting work done.


Noone else?No one. ;) :D


Isn't the whole idea of Open Source is that it's "Team Effort". The definition of a team "a group of people working together in a coordinated effort".That's one of the key differences between the open source movement and free software. Free Software's focus is not on team effort.

[KiwiNZ]

If you use about any desktop environment other than Gnome, it's a very small percentage of a Linux distro that is actually a part of the GNU project. Just because someone chooses to use a form license that the FSF came up with a long time ago doesn't mean I should give the FSF credit for the software that someone else developed.

Notice Steve Ballmer is not in that list. :)

But that in itself is a pretty shallow statement. I don't use an OS because I respect the people behind it. I use an OS because it does a good job at what I need it to do. I can love using a Linux based OS and hate everyone involved in developing it (not that I do). I mostly use Windows 7 because I have some very important software that has to be run in Windows. By your views, I should remove Windows from my computer because I don't have a lot of respect of Microsoft.

No one. ;) :D

That's one of the key differences between the open source movement and free software. Free Software's focus is not on team effort.

Steve Balmer is his own list :P

[Dr. C]

And the idea of Free Software is the exact opposite of your "enterprise market", buzzword-compatible commercialisation of that team effort. "Open Source" is just a buzzword used to profiteer off Free Software. It's like antisocial networking, careless cloud computing and digital restrictions management, just another way to make money off other people's work.

I run gNewSense 100% Free Software on my server, and appreciate deeply the contributions that big enterprise companies like IBM have made to it.


Isn't the whole idea of Open Source is that it's "Team Effort". The definition of a team "a group of people working together in a coordinated effort".

My experience at CEO and Board Room level, RMS certainly hinders Open Source entry into the Enterprise Market.

Without copyleft there would be no Open Source, and without RMS there would be no copyleft. No RMS means no Open Source to promote to the enterprise.

[fuduntu]

I run gNewSense 100% Free Software on my server, and appreciate deeply the contributions that big enterprise companies like IBM have made to it.



Without copyleft there would be no Open Source, and without RMS there would be no copyleft. No RMS means no Open Source to promote to the enterprise.

Funny, I seem to remember public domain software and other freely available software that wasn't GNU, or blessed by the FSF. I wonder why?

Oh right, I remember now. We had free thinkers before FSF and GNU!

For shame!

[forrestcupp]

Funny, I seem to remember public domain software and other freely available software that wasn't GNU, or blessed by the FSF. I wonder why?

Oh right, I remember now. We had free thinkers before FSF and GNU!

For shame!
That was back when free software really was free.

[Dr. C]

Funny, I seem to remember public domain software and other freely available software that wasn't GNU, or blessed by the FSF. I wonder why?

Oh right, I remember now. We had free thinkers before FSF and GNU!

For shame!

The Free Software philosophy actually does not actually need copyleft, as it is based on ethical and ideological as opposed to economic arguments.

The Open Source philosophy is based on economics and for the most part copyleft is a must. Do you really believe that companies like IBM would contribute to Linux for free if their intellectual property could be incorporated into a competitive propriety product by for example Microsoft?

[cprofitt]

This is a potential minefield I am wandering into... and I do so with the altruistic goal of helping everyone find some ability to get along.


Until you're autistic - I am - you are automatically disqualified from any form of judgment regarding how the autistic mind works. How do you separate "habit" from "trait", and how do you plan on demonstrating the difference?

Using your logic are you not disqualified from any form of judgment regarding how the non-autistic mind works? While it might satisfy your urge to lash out at a person or 'win a debate' the comment does nothing to move the discussion along.


So you've just made the clear and unambiguous statement that his personal habits detract from his beliefs, even when they cannot be assosciated, and are nothing to do with one another? I'd rather invite someone honest and sincere to dinner, habits included, than one who pre-judges without any logic or reason.

His habits are seen as the weak link in an otherwise rather strong chain (beliefs). You hope that people will cave in, and use the fact that he is not "the norm" against him? Do you know HOW damaging a mindset this is to have?

I agree with you... and agree with the other person. Hear me out though before condemning me. His personal habits, because they are not impacting others, should be ignored. I would venture that his habits to sway the opinions of 'business folk'; at the very least they make it possible for his ideas to be easily dismissed. I would prefer that his habits not have that affect, but they do. That is reality.


The guy has immeasurable intelligence and guts to stand fast to his beliefs - no matter how wrong anyone may think they are, to him they are right. That is many, many orders of magnitude more admirable as a character trait, than one who dismisses people for not complying to the irrelevancies of social etiquette, to to use it as ammunition against them.

A great many people have held themselves right. Some like Stallman are harmless while others have done irreparable harm to humanity. Bill Gates held a believe that software was more important than hardware at the dawn of the personal computing era... many thought he was wrong. I wonder how many on these forums admire him? Do they not admire him because he holds different values than they?

To be honest, in the end, Stallman, Torvalds, Gates and even Jobs have all contributed to the FOSS eco system we have before us today. I do not worry about what each thinks of the other. I worry about ensuring that FOSS continues to thrive and we should all find our common ground and do the same.

[Eiji Takanaka]

I thought what i'd do was, I'd pretend i was one of those deaf-mutes

[cprofitt]

You think you should attempt to belittle me, because it says "moderator" under your username? I am equally entitled to the very same respect that I am sure you would expect of me. "Humanity to others" - maybe you could consider that aspect of the Ubuntu mantra. There are other mods on this forum who show total respect for people at all times - I have had them reprimand me when I needed it (I don't consider myself beyond a telling off or guidance) and they still show dignity and graciousness toward myself & others. Would it hurt to convey your point in a slightly less antagonistic way?

You have been borderline condescending, rude and intolerant of others opinions. To be honest I think this thread and the topic is doing more harm than good... to both 'sides'.

[youbuntu]

You have been borderline condescending, rude and intolerant of others opinions. To be honest I think this thread and the topic is doing more harm than good... to both 'sides'.

Therein lies your problem; you see this as "sides", whereas it is about simple acceptance of RMS. If you're scared of a good old fashioned heated debate amongst people who (mainly) remain civil (no, I am not perfect, and hold a LOT of it back to prevent needless bad feeling) then maybe you should opt out of the topic? Not meaning to be rude.

Nothing worth doing, ever got done whilst trying to remain P.C. This is a forum based on Ubuntu; Ubuntu is based on GNU/Linux, which at the very core, is about free speech. If you fail to grasp the very reason for GNU/Linux and the philosophies, then I can understand why you possibly fail to understand that there IS no "point" or "sides" to this, but instead, it is about valuing the giants, upon who's shoulders we all stand.

[pi3.1415926535...]

Is this some sort of intentional example to show what the OP was talking about, somewhat ironic. I believe that RMS and Torvalds both have their merits, and will not know the winner until the end of the fight (metaphorical, though it would be interesting to see it if it was not, who would win?).

[KiwiNZ]

Therein lies your problem; you see this as "sides", whereas it is about simple acceptance of RMS. If you're scared of a good old fashioned heated debate amongst people who (mainly) remain civil (no, I am not perfect, and hold a LOT of it back to prevent needless bad feeling) then maybe you should opt out of the topic? Not meaning to be rude.

Nothing worth doing, ever got done whilst trying to remain P.C. This is a forum based on Ubuntu; Ubuntu is based on GNU/Linux, which at the very core, is about free speech. If you fail to grasp the very reason for GNU/Linux and the philosophies, then I can understand why you possibly fail to understand that there IS no "point" or "sides" to this, but instead, it is about valuing the giants, upon who's shoulders we all stand.

This Forum is about supporting Ubuntu which is a Computer Operating System with addition Applications packaged which has at its core the Linux Kernel. Why do I know this ? I was one of the Founders.

[ikt]

whereas it is about simple acceptance of RMS.

Why do I have to accept RMS?

I might like a windows product but that doesn't mean I have to accept steve balmer.(and his chair throwing behaviour)

[youbuntu]

This Forum is about supporting Ubuntu which is a Computer Operating System with addition Applications packaged which has at its core the Linux Kernel. Why do I know this ? I was one of the Founders.

Please do not see me as an enemy. Let us just agree to disagree, yes? I did politely suggest that maybe you'd save us both stress by avoiding conflict or communication with me, didn't I.

I am not here to cause ANYONE grief, but I do find that you come across as confrontational, and I admit that maybe I do come across as arrogant - that is not my intention, I am simply passionate about the subjects about which I speak. I am wrong a lot, and cannot deny it. All I ask is that you could maybe react in more of a way which doesn't see me as a threat or your enemy - I am neither I promise.

Thanks mate.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

This Forum is about supporting Ubuntu which is a Computer Operating System with addition Applications packaged which has at its core the Linux Kernel. Why do I know this ? I was one of the Founders.

You're saying Ubuntu doesn't include GNU code, particularly the packages commonly defined to comprise, along with the Linux kernel, the "GNU/Linux" operating system?

Run uname -o lately? That command returns the name of your operating system, as it happens.

[ikt]

You're saying Ubuntu doesn't include GNU code, particularly the packages commonly defined to comprise, along with the Linux kernel, the "GNU/Linux" operating system?

It was mentioned why in the movie, as linus said if you want to throw GNU onto linux then does that mean we have to call the linux kernel:

Linux/GNU/Redhat/IBM/Every/Other/Company/or/Organisation/Who/Has/Ever/Contibuted etc

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

It was mentioned why in the movie, as linus said if you want to throw GNU onto linux then does that mean we have to call the linux kernel:

Linux/GNU/Redhat/IBM/Every/Other/Company/or/Organisation/Who/Has/Ever/Contibuted etc

No, that refers to the contributions to the Linux kernel itself. Nobody is questioning Linus' right to name the kernel he designed after himself. The point here is that the kernel is not an operating system by itself - it's only a part of the operating system, which is completed by the various GNU programs such as a bootloader, compiler, standard libraries, etc. And that operating system can boot and work without sun, oracle, adobe et al, but it can't work without Linux, and it can't work without GNU.

[KiwiNZ]

Just for the record , I believe that Richard Stallman is a very clever man that has achieved a considerable amount and has contributed hugely to the Open Source Sector and with out his contribution the advance may will have been at lot less forward.

However what I firmly believe is that there is no place for Pseudo Religion or cult behavior in this industry and when an individual believes he /she is bigger than the project or members of the project believe an individual is bigger than the project then the project is in trouble and the individual needs to either adjust their ways or gracefully go.

[youbuntu]

No, that refers to the contributions to the Linux kernel itself. Nobody is questioning Linus' right to name the kernel he designed after himself. The point here is that the kernel is not an operating system by itself - it's only a part of the operating system, which is completed by the various GNU programs such as a bootloader, compiler, standard libraries, etc.

Still amazed how few people know this.


...there is no place for Pseudo Religion or cult behavior in this industry...

They are your words, noone elses. RMS is sarcastically joking with the "Saint IGNUcius" character he portrays. Being dedicated, does not a cult leader, make.

[KiwiNZ]

You're saying Ubuntu doesn't include GNU code, particularly the packages commonly defined to comprise, along with the Linux kernel, the "GNU/Linux" operating system?

Run uname -o lately? That command returns the name of your operating system, as it happens.

Didn't say that

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

when an individual believes he /she is bigger than the project or members of the project believe an individual is bigger than the project then the project is in trouble and the individual needs to either adjust their ways or gracefully go.

The individual that named a project contributed to by tens of thousands of people after his first name, or the individual trying to make sure his life's work doesn't change course to something he's been opposing all along, without seeking any personal profit or gain from it?

[youbuntu]

The individual that named a project contributed to by tens of thousands of people after his first name, or the individual trying to make sure his life's work doesn't change course to something he's been opposing all along, without seeking any personal profit or gain from it?

Hello, Richard!
^_^

[Dr. C]

You're saying Ubuntu doesn't include GNU code, particularly the packages commonly defined to comprise, along with the Linux kernel, the "GNU/Linux" operating system?

Run uname -o lately? That command returns the name of your operating system, as it happens.

One of the really interesting aspects of RMS is that he has an uncanny ability to be years ahead of his time. Android is a much "Linux" as Ubuntu but it is not GNU/Linux

[youbuntu]

One of the really interesting aspects of RMS is that he has an uncanny ability to be years ahead of his time. Android is a much "Linux" as Ubuntu but it is not GNU/Linux

Never thought of it that way - true!

[KiwiNZ]

The individual that named a project contributed to by tens of thousands of people after his first name, or the individual trying to make sure his life's work doesn't change course to something he's been opposing all along, without seeking any personal profit or gain from it?

So extrapolation of your premise, when Stallman passes away which he wil inevitably do, even he is not immortal, then the FSF movement and GNU must die with him.

[ikt]

The point here is that the kernel is not an operating system by itself - it's only a part of the operating system

Right.



, which is completed by the various GNU programs such as a bootloader, compiler, standard libraries, etc.

And non-GNU programs as well.



And that operating system can boot and work without sun, oracle, adobe et al, but it can't work without Linux, and it can't work without GNU.

You're saying beyond linux and gnu components there are no contributions which help the linux kernel run as an operating system?

edit: Can I just say how hilarious it is that you want to attach the GNU name to something which you said was absolute poison just a few pages ago?


Without Linux, GNU-based OSes would still be a tight-knit community centred around building on Free software and Free software alone. Linus and his OSI buddies introduced commercialism and greed, degenerating Free Software into "Open source", pirating Mac OS and Windows' GUIs to attract clueless users to push their message along the way.

[Dr. C]

So extrapolation of your premise, when Stallman passes away which he wil inevitably do, even he is not immortal, then the FSF movement and GNU must die with him.

No. Saint IGNUcious of the Church of Emacs will exorcise the propriety software from Microsoft Windows machines and they will go into a BSOD. As RMS is mortal we only have a limited time to prepare.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIF5xnkcncI

[Eiji Takanaka]

Dreams are like seeds, even if the dreamer is to perish, the seeds can still continue on.

Censorship nowadays eh? Thats not good dude.

[youbuntu]

No. Saint IGNUcious of the Church of Emacs will exorcise the propriety software from Microsoft Windows machines and they will go into a BSOD. As RMS is mortal we only have a limited time to prepare.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIF5xnkcncI

:lol:

Careful, they'll take you at your very word, and condemn you for saying that.

My eyes ache, from the extended amount of rolling they have to do here ---> :roll:
Let them believe that RMS is meaningless to GNU/Linux - telling them he is not, won't change their minds. You can lead a horse to water (but not a mule, so easily).

[beew]

I must say I find the FSF's way too austere for me. I like my computer hardware to 'just work', I want to get the best out of my graphic card and I want to use wireless without hassels. But I understand where Stallman and co come from and have tremendous respect for their ideal. The world needs such people for their vision, even though vision only indicates general philosophical direction and pertains to the long term while may not be practical to be implemented in the here and now.

Some people here seem to have this notion that corporate adoption is the be all and end all goal, this is a kind of tunnel vision and bias no doubt coming from their own background. I really don't see why the business community should dictate to the rest of us. Besides, many large enterprises users are extremely conservative in their IT procurment and use very outdated software even in the Windows world, there is a disconnection between corporate usage and everyday desktop usage by non corporate users. If big business users are to set the norm the world would still be using Windows NT or older.

Picking on Stallman's personal habit is really below the waist cheap shot. No one would dismiss Michaelangelo's work on the ground that the man never showered in his life.

[Shining Arcanine]

Without copyleft there would be no Open Source, and without RMS there would be no copyleft. No RMS means no Open Source to promote to the enterprise.

Have you ever heard of BSD? It existed long before Richard Stallman started the GNU Project and unlike GPL licensed software, it became something that is truly free:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution

The FSF had no role in it at all.

[pi3.1415926535...]

Does anyone know whether the GNU/Linux superhero logo is scale to actual gnus and penguins. I understand there is a large range of size in penguins.

[youbuntu]

...
Picking on Stallman's personal habit is really below the waist cheap shot. No one would dismiss Michaelangelo's work on the ground that the man never showered in his life.

I laugh when people use this pathetic (and worn) reasoning against RMS, and therefore GNU and the FSF. It's the weakest form of logic and reasoning possible. If you don't want to accept something, then have the guts to SAY so, instead of picking on personal habits. When you tell them they're picking on personal habits, you'll receive the most insane and irrelevant backlash as to why it is all "entirely relevant" - just wait and see!

Insults are far simpler to dish out, than sane, rational logic, and require less foresight.

[beew]

O.k so the church of scientology, worship science.


Huh? Where do you get this from? Guy was a sci-fi writer before he became a guru to avoid paying taxes but that has nothing to do with science.

[Dr. C]

Have you ever heard of BSD? It existed long before Richard Stallman started the GNU Project and unlike GPL licensed software, it became something that is truly free:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution

The FSF had no role in it at all.

Of course I have, but where is BSD in comparison to GNU/Linux when it comes to contributions from for profit corporations that are accountable to the stock markets? We are talking here about the practical (which in business terns means cost effective) Open Source philosophy as opposed to the idealistic Free Software movement. That is the genius of RMS in inventing copyleft. He got those who are legally obligated to not share his values and ethics to work for his cause.

[pi3.1415926535...]

Free speech is something that to be correctly implemented, must be enjoyed by all. This does mean that people are free to disagree and argue. It also means that people are free to hold unjustified beliefs (not referencing anything in these forums).

[youbuntu]

Free speech is something that to be correctly implemented, must be enjoyed by all. This does mean that people are free to disagree and argue. It also means that people are free to hold unjustified beliefs (not referencing anything in these forums).

Anything else is tyranny, of course.

[Eiji Takanaka]

Am i tripping balls or have my last two comments just mysteriously vanished?

How do you go about making an official complaint on this forum?

[KiwiNZ]

Stay on topic and they wont be removed.

Refer Code of conduct

"Thread Drifting/Steering: Please keep discussions on topic."

This thread is on watch and maybe closed with out further warning.

[pi3.1415926535...]

Here (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=48) is where you may make a complaint.

[Eiji Takanaka]

Thanks p13!

[youbuntu]

Cool, let's all keep it.

Kiwinz, what part of Australia are you from?

[pi3.1415926535...]

Kiwi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_(people))
NZ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand)

[youbuntu]

Kiwi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_%28people%29)
NZ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand)

#-o

I thought they were essentially the same?

My bad

[pi3.1415926535...]

That is fine.

[uRock]

Stay on topic and they wont be removed.

Refer Code of conduct

"Thread Drifting/Steering: Please keep discussions on topic."

This thread is on watch and maybe closed with out further warning.Then the next five posts,


Here (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=48) is where you may make a complaint.


Thanks p13!


Cool, let's all keep it.

Kiwinz, what part of Australia are you from?


Kiwi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_(people))
NZ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand)


#-o

I thought they were essentially the same?

My bad
Thread Closed.