He's a fat, pedophile sympathizing, necrophile sympathizing, incest sympathizing, toe-cheese-eating, neckbearded, communist prick, with one of the most homosexual-sounding voices I've ever heard. So how the fuck is GPL shitware alt tech?
And how dare I question your cult leader?! #Triggered
Other urls found in this thread:
gnu.org
opensource.apple.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Tell that to Brazil. If you can find any survivors.
What's "alt tech"?
I doubt you read his personal site but if you ever did you would see he's somewhat skeptical of identity politics.
It doesn't matter, because identity politics is not what SJWism is all about. It's also about engaging in, enabling, and encouraging degeneracy, and Stallman loves himself some degeneracy.
His favorite writer, Greg Egan, is relevant here.
Greg Egan believes all races and sexes should be treated equally. He also joked about C+= over a decade before /g/ did.
Even if you don't like either of them I think it's a good idea to distinguish between identity politics social justice and autistic social justice.
Who gives a shit, I use the software and stand behind the FOSS principles, everything else is meaningless. His opinions on gender equality etc mean nothing to me nor what he does in his personal time.
There is no FOSS+ or feminism FOSS or whatever, even if there was I do not care, they can't make me not use the software and SJW faggots like you won't stop me either.
wtf I love software freedom now
Try harder Micro$oft proprietary botnet shill
It is
The GPL is still perfect.
You just like FOSS because it's free as in price, and is therefor essentially gibs, making it irresistible to niggers, like you. Truly free (as in freedom) software is BSD-licensed, MIT-licensed, or similarly licensed.
It depends on the variety of SJWism. There's so much doublethink in that shit that even SJWs eat their own sometimes.
I don't use anything from Micro$oft except for Windows 7 on my gaming PC, and even then, it can't be part of a botnet because I disabled both its ethernet and wifi adapter drivers. The only shill here is you and the rest of the toe-cheese-eater's cult.
absolutely nothing wrong with that!
If you don't like Stallman, you're not my friend.
Software freedom, or no software at all!
Whimps and posers, leave the hall!
Yeah, up until it gives you black death...
This.
Software is one of the few things opinions where Stallman's opinions hold water. I get the impression he doesn't do that much research on certain subjects. But still, he does have support for some SJW organizations like BLM.
How do his opinions on software hold water?
Large corporations have the money to do security audits on open source projects, but they're often turned off by FOSS because they can't make money with it. So they go to FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and other permissively licensed open source projects, to sponsor security audits and code contributions, because they can use the code from those projects to make money by creating a proprietary fork or configuration of it. Just because software is proprietary does not automatically mean that its developers had a malicious intent. What a software developer's intents are vary from one software developer to another, and if corporate, the business model of that particular corporation. Business models can vary significantly; for instance, Apple's business model is based in selling things, while Google's is based in data mining. A company whose business model is based in selling things is more likely to have your best interest at heart (though there are some exceptions, like Electronic Arts, but the exceptions do not make the rule).
Apple is, in some sense, more trustworthy than Google, but it really does matter that they're a proprietary software company. It means they aren't transparent.
The reason they're interested in keeping you secure is not that their terminal goal is your security. Their terminal goal is getting your money. Getting your money is easier if they appear secure. Appearing secure is easier if they actually are secure.
But when their software is proprietary it all too often boils down to "just trust us, you dumb fucks". They only want to be secure to the extent it helps them appear secure. If the most cost-effective way to appear secure doesn't involve real security you're not going to get real security.
That said, security isn't the only reason to reject proprietary software. It's not even Stallman's primary reason for insisting on free software. If you want to judge whether his opinions on software hold water, figure out what they are first. gnu.org
What is PRISM?
Something that has more to do with services than with software, right?
Proprietary software is inherently anti-ethical to a free society. If this is the case, then any business model that promotes the distribution of any kind of proprietary software is therefore equally anti-ethical to a free society; proprietary software is malicious to the users' freedom. This is the point of free software. Open source source software is a different ideal so it is not good to associate the ideals of open source to Stallman.
CONFIRMED: Stallman was potion
I don't think necrophilia is wrong, provided the deceased gave consent in their will or something before their death at least.
There's nothing wrong either with incest or consensual pedophilia or hebephilia.
...
I can't imagine Soc Jus separated from identity politics.
That's like classical liberalism separated from individualism or communism separated from collectivism.
Stallman's brand of social justice is "fuck identity, treat everyone the same way".
Ohhhh, I get it.
The Nazi brand of communism is "Fuck equality, kill the degenerates!"
The Soviet brand of capitalism is "Fuck private property, we want a state economy!"
He isn't actually an SJW(his version doesn't resemble SJWism), but calling him that makes him sound bad?
Not all of Apple's software is proprietary. In fact, the base for macOS and iOS is actually open source, and you can see it here: opensource.apple.com
Also, there's more room for genuine security with a company whose business model is based in selling things, as good security can get in the way of datamining.
I was not saying that Stallman's primary reason for insisting on free software was security, I was saying that free software is prone to being inferior to plain open source software in regards to security, because people act like it's so great and flawless just because Stallman approves of it, and it's not.
He's not a SJW, by most (but not all) definitions. But he is in favor of social justice, by most (but not all) definitions.
Classical liberalism is closeted cultural marxism. Social justice is open cultural marxism.
You said "How do his opinions on software hold water?", so I assumed you were talking about Stallman's opinions. If you weren't, then it's good and legitimate criticism. It's good criticism of a lot of free software supporters, but bad criticism of Stallman.
Stallman says that free software is often inferior to proprietary software, and his standard set of arguments for free software takes that into account.
I'm criticizing both Stallman and his cult at the same time, because his cult always bases their opinions off of his. If he weren't around, neither would his cult.
I don't know who asserts or implies such an idea. I know for a fact that any given software is constantly and consistently in a state of development. Software that respects the users' freedom is no different to this. Free software that is intended to be "secure" is constantly needing work as flaws are detected over time.
Who says that software freedom implies perfection?
Here's what tends to happen with free software projects:
This is a story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody. There was an important job to be done (auditing source code, bug fixes, etc) and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about that, because it was Everybody's job. Everybody thought Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have.
Stopped reading. Ever heard of OpenSuse or Redhat using/creating GPL licensed code. They are worth Billions.
The user isn't the only one that matters, the developers matter too. A permissive license, like the MIT license, grants both users and developers the freedom to do whatever they please with it. The GPL is biased in favor of the user, while proprietary licenses are biased in favor of the developer. Permissive licensing is software egalitarianism.
And you'd be surprised by how many people are mindless enough to think that just because something is copyleft licensed automatically means that it's perfect...
this image really rattles my bone
The user who lives in freedom is responsible for the software running on their own computer. If that individual is happy to rely on other people and absolve personal responsibility, that's their own choice; these users shouldn't feel entitled when the software (that they didn't take responsibility for) doesn't live up to their full standards.
I think the user is the only one that matters. If the software is running on the user's computer, then it is the user who matters. I believe the act of distributing proprietary harms the users who accept the terms of proprietary software. I don't care about egalitarianism, I care about users who are allowed to share in a free society.
I would say these users are confused about the nature of software. I will personally always choose free software because that freedom means I can choose to develop that software to my idea of perfection.
Just the act of distributing proprietary software is harmless. I could create a simple "Hello World" script, and distribute it under a proprietary license. If I gave you a copy, it'd do you no harm, because it's just a freaking "Hello World" script!
If it weren't for the developers, the user wouldn't have any software to use in the first place, so the developers definitely matter. A truly free society means that developers can create as they wish, and users can use their creations as they wish. Egalitarianism matters because it benefits EVERYBODY, and not just entitled little pricks like you.
Proprietary software contains restrictions that are harmful to a free society. These restrictions mean that individuals who choose to accept them are forbidden to control the software; it is the owners of proprietary software who control the software and forbid the users to control it. Users who choose to accept proprietary software are restricted to share the software with friends. The only way the user can get back the freedom is to reject the proprietary software - rejecting these software means they no longer have to be bound under these restrictions.
I agree that if it wasn't for the developers, users wouldn't have software in the first place. This fact does not justify the restrictions that developers apply to the users of the software. Users cannot live in freedom whenever they choose to accept proprietary software. This is a fact, it cannot be argued.
OP is mad stallman Sodomizes Jack-off Whores
He fired a faggot from libreboot. Many keks were had, he can't be SJW fam.
He has severe autism, eats shit off his feet, was a Bernie supporter, and has NEVER actually installed GNU/Linux himself in his entire lifetime. And people STILL defend him. Not to mention he is a hack in every definition of the term. Taking credit for the success of the Linux kernel itself, not to even mention the most popular Linux distrobutions, Android, embedded distros like DD-WRT.etc do not even use a single piece of GNU software. For fucking hells sake, he isn't even the first person to come up with the idea of free software. He probably needed help from his lawyers just to write the GPL.
I do not understand why people hold this fat Jew in such high regard. He's a narcissist like any other Jew, taking credit for the work of his white colleagues. You can like the GPL and use the GNU OS, but for fucks sake, RMS is certainly NOT a role model I would surely want to strive to become. The sad thing is that for many people here, he actually is.
You're not really restricted from sharing proprietary software, because you can always grab a copy of it from and/or upload it to places like PirateBay, and there's not really anything anybody can do to stop you. But, a good torrent user would reward the developers for their efforts by purchasing the software... unless it's from Electronic Arts, in which case, a good pirate wouldn't even give them a cent. Fuck EA and their bullshit.
Also, you can always reverse engineer proprietary software, if you want to.
Developers don't make their software proprietary to "take away your rights", there is no conspiracy. They do it to make money, because if it was free software then nobody would have to pay. If a developer thinks they can make money off of their software, they're more likely to try to innovate, because they'll personally get rewarded. It's like how a dog or cat will do tricks for you in exchange for treats.
If by "somewhat" you mean he very much agrees with them.
A couple of years ago he linked an article titled something like "In gaming terms, straight white man is the easiest difficulty setting" or something like that and everyone flipped their shit when I pointed it out.
Finally some logic and reason in this thread! Except for the Jew part, because saying all Jews are narcissists who take credit for other peoples' work is like saying that all white people are racist - it's not true. Aaron Russo was a Jew, and he blew the whistle on the Rockefellers!
This.
Tbh Stallman is an old, irrelevant meme at this point. The “interjection” is just cringier every time someone posts it. He’s a Bernie-Sanders-supporting kike also. Linus or Terry needs to be on the sticky.
You're right, they do it to fuck over customers who want to disable the embedded telemetry data-mining, or those who want to make software interoperable (e.g. MS Office), or those want to keep their old software running on a newer OS, or those who want to fix an annoying bug. Because that way they create dependence.
This is an absolutely bogus argument. Proprietary software is just as prone as free software to 'piracy'.
With software, you make money from services built around it, not selling copies that can be replicated for less than a penny.
You don't have to pay for proprietary software either; you just 'pirate' it.
I bet you think servers and bandwidth are free, and that the average computer user has enough of a brain to compile software
If you have a problem with telemetry, block it with host lists and/or inbound/outbound firewalls. It's that simple.
Proprietary software is prone to a different kind of piracy though; it's more likely to be left untouched, whereas free software is more likely to contain modifications. Piracy itself is not sustainable, and really should only be used for boycotting shitty companies like EA, or as a "try before you buy" thing.
SJWism is about shutting down debate in favor of harassment, deplatforming, violence and so on, hence the W. Degeneracy is just degeneracy.
SJWs fight for degeneracy, and they shut down debate because they know they can't win. They harass normal people, deplatform normal people, and behave violently towards normal people. They hate normal people and love degenerates.
Great post.
Stallman has some qualities, but is far from a perfect role model.
As I said, you have to be delusional if you expect to make a living from selling public goods (software is a public good). You're supposed to make money from downloads, or from writing patches, or you know, some shit that can't be replicated for $0.001.
so simple people keep finding more IP addresses and domains every passing day for Wangblows.
Being racist is not a bad thing user, being prejudice is. And exceptions are not rules. Most Jews are scum
Why don't you go use a BSD if you're such a cuck homo?
SJW is the reason pedo is illegal. gtfo chans you illiterate redpiller
i do agree that GNU software is autistic garbage, but it's still better than lots of other things. there isn't much good software out there in the first place today
You can make money off of just about anything, even a big steaming pile of shit (seriously, farmers and gardeners love buying shit), and shit is a public good. Software, on the other hand, is not necessarily so. You can't patent or own copyrights to shit, but you can for a video game (which is a form of software).
Just blacklist all traffic with a firewall that uses deep packet inspection, and whitelist the traffic that you want to allow through it. That way, nothing can phone home unless you manually allow it to.
False.
The term "Gender" was literally coined by a pedophile. How's that for a redpill? Get out you sick fuck
Prejudiced, you fucking illiterate.
The Sabbatean Frankist sect of Jews, which is actually closer to Satanism than Judaism, gives all Jews a bad name. The Rothschilds, Rockefellers and their stooges are Sabbatean Frankists. Shabbatai Zevi, the founder of Sabbateanism, was a man of pure evil. He said that "since we cannot all be saints, let us all be sinners". His successor, Jacob Frank, who claimed to be a reincarnation of him, was even worse. Judeo-Christian values say things like "Don't cheat on your spouse", and "be honest", so Sabbatean Frankists do the opposite: regularly having orgies and lying their asses off. They funded, more or less, every war since the French Revolution. They killed the Czar of Russia because he knew about them and their evil tricks, and empathetically kept them from interfering with the American Civil War... Sabbatean Frankists hate all the other Jewish sects. As far as I'm concerned, they're not even Jews - they're just Satanists. Try not to negatively stereotype Jews just because Satanists like to lie and claim to be Jews.
Sauce?
I know the SJWs are the reason why being a pedo is illegal with their Sexual Revolution bullshit, but I mean pedo as in the sexual attraction to, or engaging in sexual acts with, a pre-pubescant child. So, for instance, if someone is attracted to a 16 year old, I don't think it's very pedo, especially if the age difference is only 2 or 3 years. But if someone is attracted to a 4 year old, then that's pedo.
So literally the only decent elected official in the federal government? I'm not seeing the problem here.
1/2
This is very low bait.
You're wasting my time user you should feel bad.
Responding for newfags.
His views on that varied greatly on the subject.
A lot of people/detractors often mentions that but most of the time he speaks about it it's in another country where the sexual consent of age isn't 18 (like in some of the states of the USA but) but between 14/16 years old.
Yes he's ok about necrophilia for people who allow such shit before dying.
I don't see the difference between this and people who give their dead body to students to be dissected (beside the obvious degeneracy).
Yes that too has long there's no offspring born from the .relationship.
And your point besides him being autistic to infinite level.
Isn't it ironic that the proprietary software developers call us communists? We are the ones who have provided for a free market, where they allow only monopoly.
-RMS
I can't disagree that his voice is particular.
Please learn about what are cult leaders before saying this.
youtube.com
Not only he's skeptical but he has other beliefs that aren't compatible with it such has freedom of speech for example.
This
Another cuck license bait.
This
Another bait.
Please show where it is specified that a company can't sell or make a services with FLOSS software ?
History shows that it's just 99% of the time.
One of the biggest example is MINIX IN THE INTEL ME.
And they sell what ? part of their software is opensource an guess what the users have even less freedom than windows users.
Datamining provided by free services, services that works on what ? oh yes opensource software.
I guess AGPL would be handy in this case. it wouldn't change the fact that google would still mine people but at least we would have the source code of their system an replicate it on a smaller level.
Complete bullshit, a company is made first for making a living and a profit the quality of services that you give too people is normally tied to that but since the end of the 90s quality doesn't mean crap, there's only crap that is sold now and younger people can't see that it's crap since they only know that.
Software is a public good. It's non-excludable and non-rivalrous, just like music. All you need is the first copy.
Lrn2Wikipedia illiterate
2/2
This
I'm sure seeing some source code so that I can compile and verify that it's the same binaries.
wut ?
Listen m8 I don't agree or agree with RMS one some things but it's not because I just trust him utterly like a retard, I read that license and the GPLv3 is the most neutral license that exist compared to any other.
Why neutral ? and in what sense ?
I say neutral because anyone can do anything with it has long has you don't directly fuck people to the ground.
It's neutral in the actions that we can do with it.
You decide to insert malware or spyware in it ?
Fine has long has you share the source and let people modify and compile it, to the contrary of permissive licenses like the MIT or BSD if someone adds malware or spyware in those you need to fucking pray the gods if the source isn't released.
This
Yes
Yes
And so ?
Torvalds is angry about debian for not being simple to install and configure and I don't go full retard against him.
I wonder why:
It's not like he perpetuated a whole way of computing thanks to autism.
It's not like he resolved important pieces of theoretical computing for AIs.
It's not like he literally BTFO the symbolic team to himself in the 80s.
Where did you heard that ?
When he says say GNU/linux and not linux ?
Dude it isn't even his fucking name it's simply because GNU use the free software methodology and Linux uses the Open source one.
Now I know that I've been baited nice work fortunately your bait only works on ignorants,
Android isn't a Linux distro or a gnu one it's google and it's exceptionally a bad operating system even tho the linux kernel is in it and even Torvalds complains about that.
DD-WRT uses part of the GNU Operating system.
There were some people in the 80s from the video game side, I won't call their ideas free software since their ideas were to much communistic to be freedom friendly
Socially he isn't a good role model, technically he is tho.
samefag
3/2
Actually you are in most cases that's why some non-free software are called sharewares and other aren't.
Annnnd still illegal meaning you can be prosecuted for doing so or downloading it.
implying there's never going to be any filtering but ohhh wait it's already done for music and vids I wonder how much time left for other content.
I despise EA too but I'm not being a hypocrite, I simply don't by unethical software.
Ok user I'm going to reverse engineer that 500MB software
Give me 2millions$ month and a team of 100 people that aren't pajeet tier and in maybe 2 years I'll start to have results.
Actually that's the whole thing about it they take away your rights so that you can legally or technically enforce them.
Of course there isn't it's just business, just like all the spyware that Microsoft added to windows it's just datamining business and they have good relations with the NSA thanks to that.
And still people don't pay shit on youtube or google chrome which is using open source software.
Everything in computing for normies has already been done there's only optimization left and if there's some so called innovation it's generally to add these function and put people in the cloud where there's no freedom.
Dude re-read the post and try to know the stance of RMS on underage sex.
Searx John Money
This
He wasn't decent he did know about the cheating of his group and he didn't denounce it.
What decent shit has Bernie actually done?
Yeah and despite all that his opinion is still worth more than yours. So why haven't you killed yourself yet? Nobody will miss you you useless fucking statistic
Nobody will miss the fat kike after he's dead either. Stallman is his own worst enemy and a dead weight on all his projects
Bernie only learned about it afterwards.
Plus, if he denounced Hillary and Hillary lost (as she did anyways), all the blue-haired Rachel Maddow-watching Hillary lovers ("muh female president!" > class warfare) would have blamed Bernie (which they do regardless) and that would have been the end of class based leftism for a lot of people (I think it would have lived on, but it's not a "safe bet" politically). On the other hand, this shows that Bernie was willing to compromise on principles and made him look weak, so that lost him a good amount of support.
There was no winning move. The morals of the story are "even well-intentioned politicians make political calculations" and "fuck Hillary".
Do you even know what that word means, newfag? Seeing as you're triggered over superficial trivia which don't mesh with your hugbox's stringent moralizing (who the fuck cares what his opinions on incest are? who cares about the beard?), you're very similar to SJWs. Stallman is concerned with actual issues like information freedom and material well-being.
>>>/reddit/
I wouldn't even say that either. What I say is look at the logic (the message). For me, it is clear and easy to understand that users deserve freedom in the software we use. All this other shit about toe jam and autism is meaningless, it is ad hominem.
It's a question of interpretation, for me I consider the freedom part too be mostly related to the technical side of computing and I refer to it to people because they are themselves technically related to their computer.
The whole social side that RMS puts first was for communities to be created and that worked too, but when I refer to the community first instead of the technical side to normies I get a less good response and support, people need to see what they have to gain first and not the community(sadly that wasn't the case 20 years ago I guess the new generation was brainwashed into extreme individualism and narcissism), it's a shame that most devs don't understand both sides of this we could have avoided such horrible software like ME/PSP android etc.... and a lot of useless community conflicts.
I agree
Bernie had no intention of actually being president
k
He did, but the DNC tried really hard to cuck him.
If Trump did the same shit; it would be on CNN 24/7.
Read a book.
He definitely is a commie, real good friends with the Cuban dictatorship.