His opinion’s supposed to change because of Mr. Jobs’ death? When you stand for a movement, it’s kind of hard to drop your beliefs merely out of respect for the dead. Of course, it was a tactless remark, but hardly representative of the FSF, as this was posted on Richard’s personal blog.
There are communists, socialists, republicans, Christians, etc. etc. in our group- if we disagree with a few of them on a personal basis, I hardly think that’s a sign we should reformat the whole community around FSF. Sure, Richard has a lot of influence from a historical standpoint, but how much leverage does he have over the Foundation as a whole? I thought it was community governed.
Tactless, uninsightful, and unencouraging, yet true remarks from RMS. Mr. Jobs did plenty of good, but it’s no secret that he didn’t like the GPL or what it stands for.
I don’t think this made Steve an enemy of freedom, however- maybe someone who misunderstands it in the digital context, but not someone whose primary goal was to debilitate computers and restrict their role in daily life.
While “marketability” of RMS is very much debatable (actually, can probably be proven to be “negative” , there is only so much I’d want to see of “marketability” in the first place.
For instance, modern social studies can show you how you can influence people into buying something by following certain patterns in your advertising, even if they have no need for a particular product at all. While manipulation is all “good” and “smart” for companies chasing profits, I don’t think it’s a morally right thing to do.
It’d still be up for debate about whether FSF needs better advertising, but I’d rather see a push for stopping manipulative advertising instead! FSF at least gets that right: “free software might not be the greatest software around, but it’s free, and that’s why you should want it”. That’s why I, at least, am in on the ride.
The overblown tributes to Jobs are distasteful to someone who thinks Jobs’ actions have had a large negative impact on society. I’ve heard things like “This is the passing of a God”, and “Jobs is our generation’s John Lennon”. RMS’ statement is restrained, somewhat respectful, and probably closer to the truth than the overblown tributes.
Fork the FSF? Apparently that requires more credibility than ESR and Bruce Perens combined (which is a lot).
I love my MacBook Pro – best hardware ever – and I admire Steve Jobs, but RMS is right. He (rms) might be a tasteless prick, but he’s right and these sorts of reactionary calls each time he opens his mouth are nonsense. RMS won’t live forever, either, but for now, you kinda need an extreme personality as a counter-balance and he fits the bill.
The FSF was already forked: http://opensource.org/
His opinion’s supposed to change because of Mr. Jobs’ death? When you stand for a movement, it’s kind of hard to drop your beliefs merely out of respect for the dead. Of course, it was a tactless remark, but hardly representative of the FSF, as this was posted on Richard’s personal blog.
There are communists, socialists, republicans, Christians, etc. etc. in our group- if we disagree with a few of them on a personal basis, I hardly think that’s a sign we should reformat the whole community around FSF. Sure, Richard has a lot of influence from a historical standpoint, but how much leverage does he have over the Foundation as a whole? I thought it was community governed.
Tactless, uninsightful, and unencouraging, yet true remarks from RMS. Mr. Jobs did plenty of good, but it’s no secret that he didn’t like the GPL or what it stands for.
I don’t think this made Steve an enemy of freedom, however- maybe someone who misunderstands it in the digital context, but not someone whose primary goal was to debilitate computers and restrict their role in daily life.
I do not agree.
While “marketability” of RMS is very much debatable (actually, can probably be proven to be “negative”
, there is only so much I’d want to see of “marketability” in the first place.
For instance, modern social studies can show you how you can influence people into buying something by following certain patterns in your advertising, even if they have no need for a particular product at all. While manipulation is all “good” and “smart” for companies chasing profits, I don’t think it’s a morally right thing to do.
It’d still be up for debate about whether FSF needs better advertising, but I’d rather see a push for stopping manipulative advertising instead! FSF at least gets that right: “free software might not be the greatest software around, but it’s free, and that’s why you should want it”. That’s why I, at least, am in on the ride.
The overblown tributes to Jobs are distasteful to someone who thinks Jobs’ actions have had a large negative impact on society. I’ve heard things like “This is the passing of a God”, and “Jobs is our generation’s John Lennon”. RMS’ statement is restrained, somewhat respectful, and probably closer to the truth than the overblown tributes.
Fork the FSF? Apparently that requires more credibility than ESR and Bruce Perens combined (which is a lot).
@Paul Cutler: You are kidding right?
I’m sorry Paul but IMO Stallman sentence although cold is correct.
I love my MacBook Pro – best hardware ever – and I admire Steve Jobs, but RMS is right. He (rms) might be a tasteless prick, but he’s right and these sorts of reactionary calls each time he opens his mouth are nonsense. RMS won’t live forever, either, but for now, you kinda need an extreme personality as a counter-balance and he fits the bill.
Go Pack! 6-0