For A Free Digital Society - Richard M. Stallman

Is FOSS, free and open source software, ok to use according to Stallman?

i love how he obsesses over the window and the door that must be open for air circulation lol, jokes aside i have massive respect for this man i first heard of GNU in 1996 when i was a kid, we could of had GNU at home but my mother is a big brand person and chose windows.

some ideas are correct, but sounds like this guy invented e-communism.

Bitcoin is a form of internet voting. So far so good.

I cannot live how Stallman wants me to but I try. I will use free and open source software wherever possible but there is an extreme length people go to which causes a detriment to themselves. For example - I can not complete my University diploma without using Microsoft Windows. I use Gnu/Linux for everything except that and even in Windows I use Libre Office over Word.

I don't think Richard will be happy that this video is here

Stallmam rocking dat 486

holy fuck good content at last

We do not have to accept this video. I saw him live. He supports only free players. All his videos which are not in free format should be removed. We are saved. ❤🎉He is a smart person.

If you buy a RHEL license thus getting access to the source code, you can modify it, and redistribute your modified version for one dollar.

One of the worst things to come out of the software industry over the last decade is SAAS.

So Stallman is syaing those against abortion are "killing women" and as to compensation for artists - govt should take money (taxes) and divide it between artists. So in other words moronic communism. So moronic even USSR didn't have it as artists raked in money trough concerts and record sales. Let me get this straight: some idiot makes some music I never listen to... yet I have to pay for this artist's popularity.

Congratulations you smelly long-haired detached from reality anarchist: you just invented the diametrical opposite of DRM and copyright laws - a different extreme with its own injustices.

Seems like CH Open here is openly breaking the lectures licensing and instead of "CC no derivatives" its relled under "CC Attribution reuse allowed" which, means derivate all ya want. :D

RMS, please stop being a douche nozzle and sign this to paper with the people you make deals with to appear as a speaker and provide a copy of this publicly for everyone to see and read instead of breaching falsely at the beginning and then clearly not even bothering to follow up on how the thing is pushed into Alphabets servers. So we can see your actual economic ties in this horse shit. Makes the whole thing look dishonest.

Since, you're an infuriatingly immorral bigoted twat who thinks his idea of digital "freedom" is the only version that should be allowed. Which, is just as evil as a bunch of surveillance capitalist megacorporations dictating that their "non-freedom" is the only thing that should be allowed.

Unfortunately, or rather perhaps, fortunately; Money talks and bullshit walks here. And despite all your attempts to convice us otherwise, that ain't changing nowhere in this.

"Sen lauluja laulat, kenen leipää syöt".

Hahahaha, RMS thinks Alphabet, Microsoft and Apple aren't doing the same and basically you appear on anything publicly with your name and your face is in those systems.

Too late sucker. :D

I love using Linux with only open source software. (I say what I want, and energe what I want)

Gentoo is a proprietary software, no sir gentoo is choices. To be truly free, you must let people use things you don't like. Just because there us non free things you can emerge should not disqualify it.

Freedom respecters need to respect “digital extraction!”

This man is a global treasure! A flawed hero.

I, in principle disagree with him that cost isn't just as powerful a control as the others he concerned with.

A person earning 2 dollars a day is prohibited from inclusion in the use of anything other than gratis distribution. Money can be made in other ways.

Stallman thinks that every abortion is to save a mother? Abortion clinics will happily abort even in the vast majority of abortions where the mother's life is not in danger at all. Normally, abortion is not like the Trolley Cart Problem, normally you just kill a human being for the convenience of the mother, either to not have to take care if him/her or to have unprotected sex as much as she wants with no consequences except killing a few humans.

Seems like RMS would have trouble defending his view on abortion against someone who is more nuanced and thinks that abortion to save the mother's life is the only kind of abortion that should be allowed. Against this common view his "save the mother's life" argument is moot even though this view still forbids the vast majority of abortions in practice.

When talking about all abortions, why not mention feminists aborting just because they got a son and wanted a daughter? You are in favour ic those too, right? They need addressing too. The reasons for abortion can be as trivial as they can be dire. But abortion is always murder of another human being. We do not think of newborn or pre-born babies to be less valuable than adults just because newborn human babies are arguably less intellugent than even adult pigs, we look at how fast babies grown and the lvel of consciousness they are destined to get. We do not value them purely based on their current conscious, as at that age they are mentally comparable to animals. And we torture and kill those for fun (which is also wrong, it is not ethical to torture and kill conscious beings for fun).

So why do we arbitrarily decide an age where we stop looking to how the human currently is and start looking to what he will be? This is just arbitrary switching of the principles that our ethics are based on according to what suits our convenience. We want to kill humans in the fetus stage but not in their baby stage, but both have sub-adult consciousness not surpassing that of animals. So about babies we say "how they are now does not matter, we may not kill them because they are developing into fully sapient human beings". But about humans in their embryo stage we say "what they are developing into does not matter, we may kill them because they are not sapient right now".

Is what is happening in Ukraine right ? Is freedom a cause that is really worth truly believing in, fighting and contending for, or is it a truly hopeless and a lost cause ?

It is always easy to put a price on another's freedom than on ones own, easy and certainly cheap to denigrade, debase, devalue and disrespect another's life and care even much less for their feelings and thoughts, even the worthy ones than one's own, even if they be unworthy. It's always easy to promote and to advance ones own goals and ones own objectives, and ideals even if they be fairly false, lowly and deplorable than to promote and to advance another's goals and objectives even if they be fairly true, laudable and commendable.

Without freedom there can be no creativity, no room for growth and betterment, and stagnation only leads to moral, which is the same as spritual, mental which is the same as psychological, and material which is the same as physical decay and eventually death of all of the three.

Richard Stallman is a great Human , I think a lot like Him , and I do as He Says My life is lost in Free Software and Hardware Sales and Curation :) QC

Commons

Well thank you Mr Richard, I will now call Linux > GNU/Linux. I didn't know about this fact.
I use all three: Windows, MacOS and GNU/Linux.

I've never heard of this man till today. God bless him and his family and loved ones.

So big tech companies, like other big companies mistreat their users? What a shocker...

is abortion a human right? Can I kill you without consequences ? I can call it post-abortion :) My right to kill each and every human being... This is not only stupid but this is evil.

Imagine having the audacity to say "one more minute" to Richard Stallman

companies that sue their clients should be boykottet until the company goes out of business.

lol open da door for air circulation !

I don't understand his point about Open Source!

CAN anyone summarise the points he said? There should be a blog post to go along with this. Too Many things to remember.

So many things he is saying are right but being in Industry myself, I think he is either to many mushrooms(which is great) or he probably watched a lot of noddy as a child. This seems like Utopia. I have so many questions. So many questions.

This is my we make our own decentralized irrevocable DNS and run our own servers. That leaves only the ISP or the network access itself. Doubtful they want to shut the raw internet down completely. Mesh networks for the win in dense enough populated areas could still work even then.

Free market NOT some person deciding and imposing what they think best on everyone. So voluntary payment is a much better system. And many artists today first publish enough to build interest for free on the net and then make money by Patreon special access, live performance, enhanced collections etc. It might also be possible to do some decentralized NFT based financing. Many possible choices that enhance freedom across the board. Blockchain makes attribution easy.

I absolutely can build an internet voting system backed by blockchain that is every bit and more safe than doing your banking online. That really isn't hard and it is totally wrong to claim that hardware boxes from multiple vendors much loss passing paper around. It is absurd to not support this superior solution.

Anything that is going to server you better over time needs to track what you do and spend time on over time. Think personal assistant. Now ideally that functionality needs to be on computers we control and not part of what some business sells to make money. The same is true with speech to text. It should not sent my audio to some business to do what could be done on my own machine.

We do not need the State at all. It is the main initiator of force which means it is the largest criminal organization. You cannot both say we need a strong state and that we must keep them ignorant of what you just claimed they should be able to rule over. The position is inconsistent.

I have every right to have geolocation on for my own extended mind's benefit.

can you imagine how frustrating it must be to have been warning people for years that this censorship and oppression would happen and yet idiots would rather just use windows and facebook

I respect the main issue of freedom, but I am a bit disgusted with his extreme support of chopping up and killing babies in the womb, his animosity to anti-abortion has really reminded me of why I stopped liking him.
He says people who are against killing babies are killing women,! What an extreme stupid stance., unfortunately, I guess nobody is perfect, but at least refrain from extreme positions especially when it means chopping and killing human babies in the tummy of their mothers.