my take on Richard Stallman's contributions
[This is nothing to do with the current topic of the propriety or wisdom of RMS rejoining FSF board.] “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman I first saw this quotation pinned to Henry Spencer's side of the cubicle I shared with him at the University of Toronto. I think that this is very apt when discussing RMS. I'm not going to recite the history. It's available elsewhere and in more accurate form than my memories.
From my standpoint, RMS has been on the right side of many fights. Even when the prospects of success have been low or distant.
The purity and simplicity of his messages (not to mention their repetitive nature) have made his ideas understandable. They have a logical clarity. He has taken a hard line that has often been or seemed impractical, especially annoying pragmatists. All wins for the side he champions have been provisional. For example, the GPL has not prevented Linux to be "enclosed"; GCC is in the process of being supplanted by LLVM. He/we can never rest. Many critics argue practicality against purity. Often convincingly: they often are not wrong. "Open Source" vs "Free/Libre Software" was an example. Evan has been our most assertive representative of this view. (I certainly let the pragmatic overrule the principled. For example, I used to use MythTV when I got an unencrypted TV signal. Then everything became encrypted (except OTA TV, which we cannot receive). Now I use proprietary devices and streams (Rogers, Netflix, ...).) Again, we depend on the unreasonable people to protect us. ================================ The reasonable person will use whatever works. This is exploited to steer the reasonable person towards enclosure. Off the top of my head, the most important things that Stallman did were: - crystallize a movement - create a defensive wall for Free Software (the GPL) - produce GCC and related tools - create cogent and clear analysis The GPL has proven important. It is inconvenient. But look at how Apple has co-opted BSD-licensed software. Initially I preferred "permissive" licenses for things I produce but no longer.
I love that George Bernard Shaw quote. In my life, I try to be as unreasonable as possible. My wife probably would not mind if I would dial that back a bit. My quote is not quite as much fun. "Fight for the things that you care about, but do it in a way that will lead others to join you." Ruth Bader Ginsburg I think the challenge we have is leadership, drawing other people in a constructive direction. In that dimension, I suspect appointing RMS to a board is likely a mistake. Maybe not so much an outrage, but I feel it is not the right thing for either party. I have not been following closely enough to have a strong conviction on that point. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 9:36 AM D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
[This is nothing to do with the current topic of the propriety or wisdom of RMS rejoining FSF board.]
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”
― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
I first saw this quotation pinned to Henry Spencer's side of the cubicle I shared with him at the University of Toronto.
I think that this is very apt when discussing RMS.
I'm not going to recite the history. It's available elsewhere and in more accurate form than my memories.
From my standpoint, RMS has been on the right side of many fights. Even when the prospects of success have been low or distant.
The purity and simplicity of his messages (not to mention their repetitive nature) have made his ideas understandable. They have a logical clarity.
He has taken a hard line that has often been or seemed impractical, especially annoying pragmatists.
All wins for the side he champions have been provisional. For example, the GPL has not prevented Linux to be "enclosed"; GCC is in the process of being supplanted by LLVM. He/we can never rest.
Many critics argue practicality against purity. Often convincingly: they often are not wrong. "Open Source" vs "Free/Libre Software" was an example. Evan has been our most assertive representative of this view.
(I certainly let the pragmatic overrule the principled. For example, I used to use MythTV when I got an unencrypted TV signal. Then everything became encrypted (except OTA TV, which we cannot receive). Now I use proprietary devices and streams (Rogers, Netflix, ...).)
Again, we depend on the unreasonable people to protect us.
================================
The reasonable person will use whatever works. This is exploited to steer the reasonable person towards enclosure.
Off the top of my head, the most important things that Stallman did were:
- crystallize a movement
- create a defensive wall for Free Software (the GPL)
- produce GCC and related tools
- create cogent and clear analysis
The GPL has proven important. It is inconvenient. But look at how Apple has co-opted BSD-licensed software. Initially I preferred "permissive" licenses for things I produce but no longer.--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
participants (2)
-
D. Hugh Redelmeier -
Warren McPherson