Free Software Magazine - issue 2!

This article looks at the means of Firefox' recent success, and discusses current efforts and problems of GNOME and KDE to do something similar.

Try to use your Anonymous Gray Matter, and if all goes well you will perhaps reach the conclusion that those interested in contributing GNOME-related articles are going to contact the magazine editors directly.

What would you do, post something like "Me! Pick me! I'm here!" on gnomedesktop.org instead? Ah wait, maybe you would ...

rehdon

Think of RMS as a prophet - sometimes you don't wanna hear the truth, but nonetheless (most of the time) he is right. "Leaders" always have strong opinions, sometimes extremistic views - but often it is necessary to achieve the goals. And often what was an extremistic position 10, 50, 100 years ago is now normal and widely accepted.

rubinstein

If he'd have a grain of prophecy powers he wouldn't have bet on GNU/Hurd, don't you think? ;)

And no, I don't subscribe to the "extremistic position in future" view.

rehdon

> If he'd have a grain of prophecy powers he wouldn't have bet on GNU/Hurd, don't you think? ;)

Mmmhhh, Hurd hurts :-)

We're not talking about free software politics here: on that side, I happen to share some of RMS ideas, in fact they would fit perfectly into a Free Software Magazine context, but that's not the point.

The point is: what of the other political considerations, those I dubbed "world politics"? Do you think they have something to do with free software? Do you think they can help in spreading free software and a free software culture? I don't think so.

So, no matter how interesting RMS's blogs, or the exact percentage of my agreeing with his political commentary (more than I expected, but still ...), I expect that a free software magazine host content about politics only when it concerns free software, or it will risk to alienate people interested in free software who won't be able to distinguish between baby and bath water (to paraphrase your metaphor :).

rehdon

And just when I thought that Stallmanists were on the verge of extinction... ;)

And I call on bullshit on you.

Tough words for someone who's going to defuse a good truckload of bovine fertilizer.

Without a principled ethics and politics, there would not be Free Software at all as we know it today.

I really don't get this. Have you read what I've written above, or are you just randomly picking sentences from your little slogan booklet? I agree on this point, even if I don't share all of Stallman's ideas. I hope you have that clear now, because I don't know how to explain it with simpler words.

Politics is not a separate realm from software. At a time when more and more of our economic, cultural and political output (->hint elections) depend on software, a connection between Free Software and the politics that impede freedom could not be more apropos.

Provided that you amend the above sentence to the politics that impede software freedom, I agree here too (and again, I thought I made that clear enough in my preceding posts ... sigh).

But I'm quite afraid that you really meant the politics that impede freedom, which means that it's right here that the truckload starts to tilt, and the stink grows stronger. Free software is to important to all of us, of whichever political ideas, to use it as propaganda to support the next lider maximo wanna-be in South America (yes, I'm talking about this guy, the latest socialist advocate). There's no way that you're going to convert anyone to revolutionary socialism using free software as an argument, on the contrary, you will definitely scare people away from it. If Stallman is ready to do that to favor his political agenda, to hell with Stallman then: free software is not his little toy to dispose as he wants, even if he had a central role in creating it.

Ultimately, technical excellence will not be enough if they bury us with patents. And freedom to share software will mean nothing if we are all slaves of heartless corporations.

Sure, but they tell me that free software is of little use in Castro's prisons, as well. Let's keep free software free of this kind of politics, shall we?

rehdon

PS On the subject of ethics and software patents: this is what Stallman quoted from an old Gates' speech on the subject of software patents (to show that he was supposedly against patents a long time ago):

If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today. A future startup with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose.

And this is what Gates actually said (my emphasis):

If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today. [...] The solution is patenting as much as we can. A future startup with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose.

Seems that "the prophet" doesn't mind a little manipulation here and there, eh? ;)

The quote is not the same, because he omitted this sentence:

The solution is patenting as much as we can.

You can check for yourself here: http://techrepublic.com.com/5102-22-5577126.html

As Stallman's article was aimed at showing Gates' supposedly hostility to software patents when M$ wasn't as powerful as is now, I can only assume the sentence got axed because it was in the way. Perhaps I'm wrong, if so please show me what I've missed...

rehdon