Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by alavrik 5352 days ago
Personal computers have been commodity for at least a decade. In this respect they are no different from modern cars or any other highly computerized equipment. Users do not mess with their car's firmware. The whole point is lost.

Regardless of Stallman's contributions, the whole point of "free software" is no longer relevant. Not even for software enthusiasts -- those who care just use open source.
2 comments
dlitz 5351 days ago
> Users do not mess with their car's firmware.

This canard is completely irrelevant. Free software creates a free market for the maintenance, distribution, support, and modification of software. Users of free software might not make the modifications themselves, but they can hire anyone they want to do perform the modifications. (And, with a popular project, they often won't have to, because someone else has already done so. See, for example, git.)

link
alavrik 5348 days ago
You are essentially talking about various effects associated with choice of the GNU GPL license. I agree with you on that. It is a useful tool.

My point was that the social movement for software freedom is not going anywhere. These are two different things.

According to Stallman, using GPL helps to achieve "software freedom". But many people use it as a tool for achieving their own (project, community, commercial, etc) goals and don't care about Stallman's social movement. See Linus Torvalds for example.

link
wazoox 5352 days ago
> Users do not mess with their car's firmware.

Lately Jaguar recalled 18000 cars because of a potentially lethal firmware bug. I'm pretty sure a common, generalized open-source automotive embedded platform would be a huge enhancement in all respects.

> Regardless of Stallman's contributions, the whole point of "free software" is no longer relevant.

On the contrary. At times when our governments are moving away from democracy and computer software are always more important tools of control and enforcement, Free Software is more critically relevant every day.

link
alavrik 5348 days ago
In this case, there is clearly a disconnect between idealization and the reality.

Today, Stallman's and FSF's real political and social influence is miniscule.

FSF had some impressive achievements in the 90s, but they failed to utilize the social capital efficiently and couldn't catch up with rapid ecosystem changes (e.g. software and computer programming becoming mainstream).

An example of this is tivoization clause in GPLv3 which is a nuisance for businesses and contributes to marginalization of the license.

link
wazoox 5347 days ago
> Today, Stallman's and FSF's real political and social influence is miniscule.

I don't think it to be minuscule among programmers and hackers.

> An example of this is tivoization clause in GPLv3 which is a nuisance for businesses and contributes to marginalization of the license.

I don't see what makes the tivoization clause a nuisance for business. I think it's a misconception, like the idea that software patents are good for anybody but lawyers and trolls.

link