[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The basic fact about the free software movement and the problem, the

From: Rui Miguel Seabra
Subject: Re: The basic fact about the free software movement and the problem, the solution
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:12:21 +0100

You're a troll.

On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 11:42 -0700, Snuffelluffogus wrote:
> The basic fact about the free software movement is that it is
> split into two camps --
> 1. The libertarians, who are excessively pro-business and 
> in particular pro-corporate, who often have corporate jobs
> and often proclaim free software is a free ride for business
> interests, therefore good. The libertarians are responsible
> for adding numerous business- and government-friendly packages to Linux.
> Libertarians are enthusiastic about making Linux competitive with
> Windows to the point of making it look-and-feel almost identical.
> The motto of a libertarian is "might makes right" or the equally
> ugly phrase "one dollar one vote". Libertarians would argue
> endlessly against a public license that prohibits
> large firms from using free software.

No Free Software prohibits large firms from using it.
Rule N. 0 for Free Software is:
  0. Run the program, for any purpose.

You still haven't understood this basic fact.

> 2. The anarchists, who want to tear down big business because
> it's a frankenstain monster that abuses workers, consumers,
> and governments and who thus prefer small firms, if any firms
> at all.

This seems to be you, and not anarchists. You launched a flamed thread
against Free Software because it allowed big business to exploit a

> Anarchists are more likely to talk about how free software 
> empowers individuals

Free Software empowers the user. The user need not be an individual, the
user can perfectly be any business, from small to big.

>   and they would never, as a rule, use M$ software.

as a rule, I don't use proprietary software. It's not only Microsoft
who's doing evil business practices.

> Anarchists would not mind seeing a public license that prohibits
> large firms from using the software. 

Huh? THis goes against the basic rule of Free Software.

> And this is a loss for Linux. Linux is no longer the David against Goliath
> but seems to be Goliath's sidekick. Thus the public has less and less 
> inclination to use Linux and free software as time goes by.

Linux is only a kernel originally created by Linus Torvalds.

I suspect, though, that you're thinking of the operating system best
known as GNU/Linux and it's several variants (like Red Hat, Debian,

This operating system is being used exponentially more, so I think
you're pulling numbers out of your top hat.

I seriously doubpt it is a Goliath sidekick, since the only sides around
here are those that want to destroy Free Software because it empowers
the user rather than ONLY the producer, and those who don't want it.

> The solution to this problem is to dump the GPL and instead
> use a non-corporate license that specifically prohibits companies
> over perhaps 5 people from using the software, on pain of
> lawsuit. To ensure compliance, software should be written with
> a kind of pinger that accesses a server ; if the ping comes from
> a known-to-be-corporate site e.g., then the server software 
> tells the program to shut down.

Troll. This is precisely what _would_ prevent business from using Free
Software instead of the GPL which empowers individual persons and
business alike and without distinction.

That restriction would make it not be Free Software.

Get out of here you stupid troll. It's too hot for your brains to work.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]