Comments by "Lawrence D’Oliveiro" (@lawrencedoliveiro9104) on "The Making of GNU: The World's First Open-Source Software" video.

  1. 4:34 Perhaps more importantly, MINIX was only available under a non-Free licence: you had to buy a copy of Tanenbaum’s textbook in order to get the licence. Linus wanted something he could use and redistribute freely, and that others could also use and redistribute freely.
    34
  2. Prophets are not necessarily people you can get along with personally.
    29
  3.  @shallex5744  The GPL doesn’t prevent commercialization by large companies, either. And the FSF is quite happy to include non-copyleft licences under its definition of “Free software”. Apart from that, you are just regurgitating the same old Stallman cant. So what exactly is the problem with “Open Source”, again?
    6
  4. 5:17 Actually, Stallman was not keen on Linux at all. He was working on his own “Hurd” kernel, which was going to be have a “microkernel” architecture, which would supposedly make it much easier to develop, test and maintain. Better than an old-fashioned “monolithic” kernel, like Linux. Well, here we are, about 30 years later, and we’re still waiting for Hurd to reach production quality. Meanwhile, Linux started becoming popular just a couple of years after that initial announcement, and spread to a whole bunch of non-x86 architectures at the same time.
    5
  5. I don’t understand what exactly Stallman disagrees with. If you look at the Open Source definition, what is there that goes against his philosophy?
    5
  6.  @gauravshah89  He didn’t want to name it after himself. He wanted to call it “Freax”. He is certainly no “narcissist”, as the quality of his contributions can attest.
    4
  7. Stallman was responsible for the “POSIX” name, too.
    4
  8.  @gauravshah89  You “may as well be a lie”. You like BSD, fine. Don’t try demonizing Linux, or Linus.
    2
  9.  @gauravshah89  You are seriously out of touch.
    2
  10.  @shallex5744  You mentioned “large corporations”. What do they have to do with it, if is not “commercial”?
    1
  11.  @shallex5744  If you have no problem with “commercial”, what exactly was your objection to “corporations”?
    1
  12.  @shallex5744  So in what way does “Open Source” dilute away from that?
    1
  13.  @shallex5744  See, there you are, just regurgitating Stallman again.
    1