Shamar @Shamar@qoto.org
Joined May 2019
@dataKnightmare@octodon.social
Brian #Kernighan is going to talk at Turin during the Festival della Tecnologia.
Shamar
boosted
@Wolf480pl also this:
"To launch a taboo, a group has to be poised halfway between weakness and power."
... I think says a lot about our current epoch.
Shamar
boosted
@Wolf480pl from Graham's essay:
> "The age of consent fluctuates like hemlines."
This is true even across countries in the present, let alone across history. But pointing out this obvious fact is one of the crimes Stallman was deplatformed for.
@alexcleac@mastodon.technology
It's like with kidnapping.
If you pay the ransom, you incentivize future ones.
Shamar
boosted
We're trying to defend #FOSS from patent trolls. Please help us: https://www.gnome.org/news/2019/10/gnome-files-defense-against-patent-troll/
Shamar
boosted
@d599f84e Then I respectfully submit that you are not finding because you do not seek.
#Communion is way more requesting than #Communism!
Gentile Professoressa... non posso autorizzare Edmodo a profilare psicologicamente mia figlia.
Ehm... no.
Usually forks are backwards compatible at the instant they are forked. So people using version 3 of X will be able to use version 0 of X' if X' is a fork of X.
Even if the GPL text was on a free license (and it's not), any project adopting GPLv3+ right now could NOT migrate to the "Stubborn Public Licence" that is a fork of it.
And no code under SPL could be linked to GPLv3+ code.
That's why it's so important to consider, for people using #GPLv3+ or #AGPLv3+ or #LGPLv3+ if they still trust #FSF!
Because if not, they should move to a GPLv3-only or whatever, before GPLv4 is out.
Unfortunately, a fork of GNU GPL is unlikely to count as a new version of it.
So whatever is GPLv3+ when GPLv4 will be published will become GPLv4 too.
If it states "Big international corporation can do whatever they like with this code", there's nothing you can do about it.
(but obviously it won't be stated so clearly... they will just put a couple of new holes)
These are different issues, though.
Technically speaking, GNU is mostly crap (with some very interesting exceptions, IMHO).
And sure: diversity is a strategic value even on technological stuffs.
Yet GNU GPL is under the copyright of FSF. And without RMS, it will be turned inside out in the next release.
If you think this is a good question to ask, send it to rms@gnu.org
But again, we are mixing different issues.
Even if RMS was the worst sex criminal in the world, people around him covered him for years enabling his crimes against several victims.
And these people are now censoring people who defend him?
Don't be naive: this is all a power game internal to #FSF and those who controlled the lynching crowd are now going to control FSF.
You'll see that FSF people will start to talk of #FLOSS, than #FOSS then finally just #OSS.
All will be clean and nice and #business friendly.
Including #GPL v4.
"Witches" were not lynched for their race, @hhardy01
As I said before, the main issue with #RMS is that he doesn't belong to any of the minorities that fill the remorse of #US people.
He isn't a person of colour...
He isn't a woman...
He isn't gay... and so on.
Lynching is an act done by a mob that is independent by the reasons they use to justify themselves.
And obviously we are not talking about a physical lynching.
Yet it WAS lynching.
And it WAS for what he wrote.
A plain violation of his human rights (apparently supported by #FSF) by a crowd of cowards that will never admit to themselves that they have been manipulated by the channels they use to communicate.
For more on this, please refer to https://qoto.org/web/statuses/102974129783762338
You look confused.
Are you stating that we should count people contributions by lines of code?
Actually that's a very #OpenSource / #US #corporate thing to do: developers are just well educated slaves that should do what managers cannot do by themselves (without ever wondering WHY managers cannot manage to learn programming by themselves, actually).
If so, why was #RMS lynched for what he WROTE?
OTOT, if the #Politics and #Ethics of #FreeSoftware have are relevant, like it or not, #Stallman has been fundamental to DEFINE Free Software in the last 40 years.
That was not a movement.
That's mainly academy.
Surely, there were #hackers before #RMS. And surely there will be hackers after him.
That's quite obvious, and adds nothing to the discussion.
But before GNU GPL, #FreeSoftware was not a movement with an ethics and an identity.
Usually I argue that #RMS focused #FreeSoftware on the wrong core value: among hackers, #freedom is ancillary to #curiosity, which is the core value of our ethics.
But arguing that RMS was irrelevant to Free Software growth and successes is ridiculous.
Also, focusing on the content of the censored mail is totally missing the point.
The mail was NOT in conflict with #GNU Kind Communications Guidelines or any other Code of Conduct.
Thus it was #censored for its content. From the #FSF.
#Free Software Foundation.
Censoring mails to frame the narrative of the whole movement.
The fact is, before 1983 #FreeSoftware was NOT a movement.
It was just the usual way to distribute code that was instrumental to turn very expensive machines from weird furnitures to useful computers.
Back then software was #free as in beer because the actual product was the hardware.
#RMS realized that software is #knowledge and it must be kept free.
I was on the #Pascal camp.
Used #TurboPascal for 5 years at school. I used to love it, actually.
The world DDoS me right now.
Too many interesting things for a Monday's morning...
What does the FSF censor during the Richard Stallman lynching?
Joined May 2019
