Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
GNU is Not Unix

Interview: Ask Richard Stallman What You Will 480

Richard Stallman (RMS) founded the GNU Project in 1984, the Free Software Foundation in 1985, and remains one of the most important and outspoken advocates for software freedom. He now spends much of his time fighting excessive extension of copyright laws, digital restrictions management, and software patents. RMS has agreed to answer your questions about GNU/Linux, how GNU relates to Linux the kernel, free software, why he disagrees with the idea of open source, and other issues of public concern. As usual, ask as many as you'd like, but please, one question per post.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Interview: Ask Richard Stallman What You Will

Comments Filter:
  • GNU/Hurd (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mrflash818 ( 226638 ) on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @01:24PM (#46347385) Homepage Journal

    Please share your vision for where you would like to see GNU/Hurd, and GNU software over the next 25 years, and what people would be doing with it.

  • by Warbothong ( 905464 ) on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @02:05PM (#46348009) Homepage

    So how would a 100% GPL developer operate in a small business settings?

    The same way most other people in the world do: get paid for your time.

    Plumbers don't spend months installing pipework in the hope that someone might pay them at the end of it. They also don't lock the valves away and hold the key to ransom in an attempt to force such payment. They also don't meter your usage of the pipes they installed and cut you off if you don't pay (water utilities charge you for *fresh* water, but they don't charge you for recirculating the same stuff through your pipes).

    Why should software developers think any differently?

    PS: I get paid for writing Free Software, I have done at several companies. It's not difficult.

  • Re:Denommus (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gIobaljustin ( 3526197 ) on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @02:27PM (#46348295) Homepage

    His opinions on those things are a lot more insightful and a lot less emotion-driven than most people's half-baked, freedom-hating opinions.

  • Ample Evidence? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @07:12PM (#46351889)

    The only contemporary mention (Josephus) of Yeshua ben Yosef is known to be falsified. Nazareth probably didn't exist then. Arguments for the existence of such a man rely on the "principle of embarrassment", that is, that certain aspects of the narrative would be embarrassing to the early church and so are more likely to be factual. No unbiased person could uphold such a thing as evidence, and this is the only field of knowledge where it might be admitted as an argument.

    I can only wonder what you must believe if that is what you call "ample evidence".

If graphics hackers are so smart, why can't they get the bugs out of fresh paint?