Comments by "Winnetou17" (@Winnetou17) on "Richard Stallman Explains Everything" video.

  1. I cannot but nickpick that you say that Stallman is asking things from users. Check 18:10 and especially what he says at 18:40 . He is not asking users do to stuff, he's just doing things for himself the way he sees it they should be done, and encourage others to do the same. Of course, as you say, it's very impractical now for most of the people to live with the same restrictions as Stallman. Hell, I'm posting this from a Windows laptop, because I'm that confortable. However, the more people are aware of this, and see the valor of free software, the more people will get involved in it, and the more it will get to be a reality. No company or current government will do that. Simple people will have to work hard and unite in order to achieve this. So for now we have an OS and several tools which are free. Then some people make another tool or program free. Then some talented people, fed up by Intel's surveillance in their CPUs team up and make a free CPU. And so on. So, don't think too much of the good things that you'll have to give up in order to be pure. Think of the things you can help out (even by just spreading the idea and debate on this topic around) so you and everyone else will have less and less things to give up, in order to live a free life :)
    62
  2. They do. Free software as RMS tells is, DOES NOT mean that it should cost 0$. It's about the freedom to see see/check, modify and (re)distribute the (modified or not) software. By seeing and checking, it means the source code. You can technically see the executable but it takes a massive effort to check it in that form.
    2
  3. Holy crap! An entire 54 reply-long thread and all but one of the comments are totally missing the point! @Torgo I'll answer to you, since at least you honestly said your opinion, argumented it and presented it in a non-flaming way. So, the most important thing: Free software DOES NOT mean the software cost 0$. This is a problem with this label, I really wish Stallman would make an effort to name it otherwise so there's less confusion about this. What RMS is advocating for is the freedom to see/check, modify and (re)distribute the (modified or not) software (though on the redistribution of a paid software is kind of weird). So, just like after you buy a table, you are free to check how it was made, and you can modify it and even sell it. RMS wants to be able to do the same things with the software. Theoretically you could check a program by disassembling it, but the time investment for that is massive. And in most cases illegal also. As a side topic, the means of revenue from software in these cases is complicated. Nothing would prevent someone from buying a software then putting it on piratebay and everyone else getting it for free. For games, I guess that one way of doing would be like John Carmack/Id Software did - make it closed source, and release it as open source several years after. But you still have the privacy concern. Highly specialized software (websites included) usually are already done just for a specific company and the company (aka the customer) does receive the source code too, so there is no problem. Getting back to Stallman, another thing is that (from what I've seen) he's not advocating that others should do like him and impose such enourmous restrictions just to be free. He is just stating at what lengths he (and anyone else) has to go in order to be mostly free. Just so that you can see how bad the situation is. So you shouldn't think about how impossible and impractical (paranoic if you like) it would be to do the same, but how good it would be for more and more people to work, collaborate and contribute to free software so being free is easier and more of a sane/easy choice.
    2