The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out
The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out
Posted Jan 2, 2009 7:56 UTC (Fri) by hppnq (guest, #14462)In reply to: The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out by lxoliva
Parent article: The 2.6.28 kernel is out
If you think exposing that it does is disrespectful, what is your opinion about misleading and trapping people with non-Free Software disguised and promoted as if it was Free?
Statements like these will lead people to think that you care more about your own freedom than that of others. Many people simply thanked Linus Torvalds for the wonderful cake that you want to have and eat too.
If there is one thing Linux has spectacularly helped to accomplish, it is to make the world aware that your problem exists, and can be solved. You would do well to look into this bit of history, not necessarily to change your mission, but certainly your tone.
Posted Jan 3, 2009 19:18 UTC (Sat)
by lxoliva (guest, #40702)
[Link] (3 responses)
How so? It's precisely because I care about others' freedom that I denounce the disguised poison pills added to this otherwise-wonderful cake. If I cared more about mine than about others', I'd clean it up and keep it to myself.
> If there is one thing Linux has spectacularly helped to accomplish, it is to make the world aware that your problem exists, and can be solved.
I perceive two major assumptions in your statement that don't match the history and present that I know.
First, the world is not really aware of software freedom issues. Most people can't even tell hardware from software (if they've ever used a computer, even disguised as a cell phone), let alone understand how the non-Free Software industry manipulates software so as to keep users dependent, divided and helpless.
Second, most of the credit for whatever little awareness there is goes to the GNU project, rather than to the authors of the kernel named Linux. Together, they indeed made for a spectacular combination, and many communities flourished around them. It's hard to tell whether any of them would have got this far by itself.
But the initial author of Linux evidently isn't concerned about the political and social (and my) problems that the GNU project was created to address.
If he was, he wouldn't have released Linux as non-Free Software at first, and he wouldn't later on have turned it back into non-Free Software, by accepting non-Free bits into it, not to mention other dependencies on non-Free Software.
And then, when the community formed around his kernel decided to hide the name of the operating system they combined (*) with it to make it useful, they actually managed to make it *less* likely that people who used the combination became aware of the problem and the ongoing work to solve it.
(*) GNU was a majority of the combination all the way from the beginning, it's still an order of magnitude larger than Linux and the Linux-specific userland programs and libraries developed to work with it, and GNU is still the largest single contributor to the combination, and yes, I do have the data to back up each one of these facts.
How did historical perspective succeed in changing my tone?
Posted Jan 5, 2009 13:04 UTC (Mon)
by hppnq (guest, #14462)
[Link] (2 responses)
It didn't. I don't disagree with you on the observation that Linux (1) contains non-free software. I was making the observation that you disregard the fact that, in order to go from point A to B, it may be necessary to go through C, if only because the herd takes you there.
You are somewhere in the front shouting that we're all stupid cows. And that is just not so clever.
(1) I know what makes GNU GNU and Linux GNU/Linux.
Posted Jan 6, 2009 20:18 UTC (Tue)
by lxoliva (guest, #40702)
[Link] (1 responses)
I can see that people going from A to B might prefer to go through C rather than straight to B.
But that's not a reason for people who are at D, closer to B, to be dragged back to C, just because others haven't even reached C yet. There are other ways to draw the path that doesn't force this detour.
Furthermore, I dispute that it may be necessary to go through this particular C. If some people aren't ready to reach B, it might be better for them to wait a bit, or try to find another path to go through to reach B, than to risk falling in the trap set up in C and getting stuck there.
Posted Jan 7, 2009 0:11 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out
The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out
How did historical perspective succeed in changing my tone?
The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out
The 2.6.28-libre kernel is out
but have to go via Mile End instead: the closure of the Thames loop made
that move invalid in later editions.