[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Totally OT] Re: Hmmm. A question. Was [Re: Debian is losing its users]



On Friday 04 April 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 11:42:47AM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > On Friday 04 April 2008, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:04:46AM +0200, Ivan Savcic wrote:
> > > > AFAIK, RMS considers only one distribution to be really and
> > > > truly free -- it's the Gentoo based Ututo[1]. He talked about
> > > > this in his talk he held in Belgrade, Serbia.
> > >
> > > I have a problem with this. Debian, in it's default install is
> > > almost assuredly GNU free. And it has the additional freedom of
> > > allowing the user to choose to use non-free software within the
> > > structure of it's packaging system. IMO that is more free than
> > > preventing people from using the software they want.
> > >
> > > .02
> >
> > Another interesting note, from the same RMS talk.  Someone pointed
> > out that people had the freedom to choose so they should be able to
> > choose non-free if they want.  His response?  A person never has
> > the choice to be a slave.
>
> yeah, this is where RMS loses me. Don't get me wrong, I have immense
> respect for him and the work he does. But these kinds of statements
> are really difficult.

I would agree with you.  I know there are people who will starve rather 
than violate their beliefs, but I also wonder what he would do if he 
had a kid to feed and his choice was to program for a company that 
produces closed source software and not having a job.  From what I know 
of his life, I don't think he has ever been in a position where he had 
to make the tough ethical choices like that and I honestly do not think 
he understands such situations.  He has spent most of his life in the 
Ivory Tower and, like the Prince at the start of "The Prince and the 
Pauper," I think he has little understanding of the reality most people 
live on a day-to-day basis.

> I mean, I can think for a while and get what he's saying (I think):
> if a person is in a position where the only choice is to become a
> slave then they have not actually chosen to be a slave, but have
> merely been forced into it somehow.  

Now we're getting into existentialism.  (The more we get off topic, it 
seems, the more interesting things get so I'm sure a topic cop will be 
here any moment.)  You still have a choice, technically.  For instance, 
if someone holds a gun to your head and says, "Torture this suspect," 
some say, "I had no choice," but there is a choice: die as you are, 
with your morals and ethics intact, or violate your own integrity and 
stay alive.  Some, those generally at the lower levels of Piaget's 
Hierarchy of Needs, will say survival is important while those focused 
on the higher levels (focused on self actualization) where, since it's 
a pyramid, there are far fewer people, will say maintaining your sense 
of self and integrity is more important.  Many with religious views 
would agree with the latter as well.

So if it comes to freedom or slavery, you can still choose freedom.  It 
may mean, in a literal choice of slavery, execution or torture, but you 
can still make the choice to not act as a slave.

In software, that would mean you still have the choice to not use closed 
source software.  In my case making that choice would mean 1) Losing 
clients, 2) Having to either do my taxes by hand or hire an accountant 
(who will himself, use closed source software), and 3) No longer 
playing Myst.

I have to wonder about #2.  It would have been interesting to ask RMS 
who does his taxes.  If he pays an accountant to do them and that 
accountant is using proprietary software, I wonder how he'd respond to 
the charge that he's still using closed source by extension...

> I guess an example of this in 
> computing would be if I chose to use 3-d rendering on my system.
> Since I have an nvidia card then I currently have two choices
> (assuming I don't have the $ to go buy a new card):
>
> 1) choose to use the nvidia proprietary drivers
>
> or
>
> 2) choose to not use 3-d rendering.
>
> So in reality, I don't have choice and my decision is forced, hence,
> no freedom. And in that case I can agree with what he says (though he
> should spend more time trying to explain what he means instead of
> just hanging these things out there...).

But you do have a choice: Use 3d or not.  One you make the choice to use 
3D you are making the choice to use closed source.

> But what about a situation where there is a choice between multiple
> open and closed source software packages that each do the job well?
> What if the particular feature set I want is implemented in a
> particular way that I prefer by the closed source option? (or even, I
> just arbitrarily choose the closed source one for no real reason) In
> that case I am not forced to choose the closed source option, it
> merely happens to be the one I choose. I could just as validly choose
> the open source one and contirbute to the project in such a way that
> it suits my preference better (and that is, FTR, what *I* would
> choose). But that is not a case of "slavery" as there are many
> options available to me, I merely have chosen one that he doesn't
> agree with. That's not a slavery situation. But I also agree that
> this is a fairly contrived example.

I think a parallel point is that you pick a FOSS program that you 
prefer, you may make the choice to not modify it.  If you have a choice 
between open and closed source and you pick closed source due to 
features, I think freedom has been preserved, but I'm not up with RMS 
in his Ivory Tower.

I have picked closed source at times.  (Generally all I use closed 
source for, and I've mentioned some of these, is 1) To test my programs 
for my clients on Windows, 2) TaxCut (not needed anymore, have to hire 
an accountant), and 3) To play Myst.  I used to have to use Windows to 
run the manual CD for the vintage car I have and work on, but I wrote a 
Perl script that went through all the files on it and changed the "\" 
characters in URLs to the "/" like they should have been.)  If I can, I 
use open source and have contributed to open source projects and even 
done some of my own FOSS programs.

But I feel it is not slavery and not an abdication of rights or choice 
to elect to use a closed source program.

But then, I'm not living in an Ivory Tower and have a business to run 
and don't get nice speaker's fees for showing up wearing socks and 
talking about my philosophical views.

Hal


Reply to: