[okareaman]

From what I can tell, RMS asserts we have the right to inspect the source code of the software that runs on our machines. What is the source of this right? Is it a universal human right? A self-evident inalienable right? Did RMS want to hack a printer one day and found he couldn't so he made up a right for us? Why are people who ship closed software evil? For someone who goes around moralizing and judging others, RMS always seemed to me on shaky ground. Does he have a better way for programmers to earn a living for their hard work besides writing closed software for companies to sell? He comes off to me as a crank and a scold on a power trip to control people.

[betwixthewires]

Well, the reasoning is that the machine is our property, our resources are used to run it, so we should be able to decide what runs on it. We can, of course, waive that right on a per case basis and run proprietary software, but we shouldn't, or at least we should be wary of it and avoid normalizing it.

If you decide you will not run any software on your machine who's source is unavailable to you, that is your right. It's your property.

[okareaman]

Yes and if RMS doesn't like Apple Computers he doesn't have to use them. It's not his business if I decide Apple Computers are acceptable to me.

[betwixthewires]

Okay, but that's not his point. His point is companies that prevent you from running what software you want to run are violating the rights of people.

[passivate]

I don't know if you know this - all rights are made up. To the extent that we can convince others to adopt/agree to them, they can be considered universal, but otherwise they don't mean anything. It remains to be shown, but I would imagine plenty of people would be on-board with having the right to inspect inner workings of things they purchase - including firmware/software as most products have become heavily or completely reliant on software. I think there is a role for commercial proprietary software in our society and so I don't agree with the mission of FSF, but I respect anyone willing to fight for their beliefs.

[okareaman]

> I respect anyone willing to fight for their beliefs

So do I, but I disagree with moral judgement and shame being used as a weapon in that fight. I look forward to the day when RMS and his acolytes make a more convincing case and provide an alternative system that would allow us to inspect all source code, which I think is a goal to strive for.

[thinkingemote]

you could have left out the last half of your paragraph and gotten a much better discussion.

Many people really don't know what Freedom actually means. The rights and origin of Freedom with computing should be understood. Is it a natural common law extension of property, for example?

But that last half was just highlighting that you are not after a discussion or answers to your questions, and that it was just rehashing the same old points.

[okareaman]

I realized that later after my comment went into negative point territory, but couldn't edit it. I apologize for attacking the character of RMS because I don't know him. What I am reacting against is being told I am wrong for running proprietary software, no matter who says it.