| So, I'm reading the linked article by RMS about Service as a Software Substitute (SaaSS) [1] which is one of the reasons why they object against GitHub Copilot. The key argument why as SaaSS is ethically wrong is because it denies control over a computation that I could do on my own. > "The clearest example is a translation service, which translates (say) English text into Spanish text. Translating a text for you is computing that is purely yours. You could do it by running a program on your own computer, if only you had the right program. (To be ethical, that program should be free.) The translation service substitutes for that program, so it is Service as a Software Substitute, or SaaSS. Since it denies you control over your computing, it does you wrong. (emphasis mine)" I don't find that argument very convincing because it implicitly assumes that there is no alternative translation program that I could run on my own computer. However, if there is an alternative, then a SaaS offers me choice. I can run a program on my own computer, e.g., if I am concerned about data privacy, or service reliability. The downside is that I have to install and maintain the software on my computer. Or, I could use an external service. The upside is that the barriers of use are minimal. Of all the articles by RMS I have read so far, I find this one the least convincing. [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s... |