What sends noobs running back to Windows?

[rambo919]

How about this: What sends noobs running back to Windows? Richard Stallman.

[RollyShed]

Looking on the book shelf at the Shed this morning (tidying up?) and what should I see but "Almost Everybody's Personal Computer Book" Jamieson Rowe, pub 1984, 160 pages.
Amongst other things a nice picture of an Apple II which I had one of plus PDP-8 and earlier computers. How to care for your computer and a cartoon of a smoker dropping ash on his. There is a little bit, very little, on BASIC. It discusses 8 bit and those "wow" 16 bit machines.
Definitely no mention of MS.

[DPM]

How about this: What sends noobs running back to Windows? Richard Stallman.

He was mostly right though.

[rambo919]

How about this: What sends noobs running back to Windows? Richard Stallman.

He was mostly right though.

The problem is his insistence on being ideological.

He goes off the rails and demands all kinds of impractibilities.

[DPM]

The problem is his insistence on being ideological.

And that's where he was mostly right because he foresaw in which general direction corporations as well as governments would steer if unchecked.

He goes off the rails and demands all kinds of impractibilities.

The thing is, "practicability" and "no ideology" are buzz words by companies to get a pass on user-hostile anti-features. Like, why is it that Linux in secure boot mode needs signing by Microsoft? Why is it that recent Lenovo laptops have trouble installing Linux? Don't even get me started on the situation with smartphones, with Apple as particularly bad example where you can't even have GPL'ed software in the iOS store without violating the GPL (additional restrictions issue).

[antikythera]

The problem is his insistence on being ideological.

He goes off the rails and demands all kinds of impractibilities.

I firmly believe GNU and FSF is imploding anyway due to his outdated views and expectations stifling it. The fact they are effectively enabling RMS to behave as he does doesn't help their cause.

https://thenewstack.io/why-almost-every ... cancelled/

OSI and Creative Commons are more relevant these days

[DPM]

https://thenewstack.io/why-almost-every ... cancelled/

I think that unrelated sh*tstorms revolving around quotes taken out of context should be firmly ignored, and the whole cancel culture is just toxic. Raymond was totally right with his well-known essay "why hackers must eject SJWs".

[rambo919]

And that's where he was mostly right because he foresaw in which general direction corporations as well as governments would steer if unchecked.

Sure but just being right about where something is headed is not the same as being right about what to do about it.

The thing is, "practicability" and "no ideology" are buzz words by companies to get a pass on user-hostile anti-features.

Perhaps but in I am not a company doing that. Even the devil is right sometimes the problem is his angle.

Like, why is it that Linux in secure boot mode needs signing by Microsoft? Why is it that recent Lenovo laptops have trouble installing Linux? Don't even get me started on the situation with smartphones, with Apple as particularly bad example where you can't even have GPL'ed software in the iOS store without violating the GPL (additional restrictions issue).

That has nothing to do with practicality, those are simply dishonest measures to nudge users towards preferred business partners. In fact these are highly impractical measures as implemented.

[antikythera]

I think that unrelated sh*tstorms revolving around quotes taken out of context should be firmly ignored, and the whole cancel culture is just toxic. Raymond was totally right with his well-known essay "why hackers must eject SJWs".

So ignore the fact he's a well known sexual predator with abhorrent viewpoints? okay...

[rambo919]

I firmly believe GNU and FSF is imploding anyway due to his outdated views and expectations stifling it. The fact they are effectively enabling RMS to behave as he does doesn't help their cause.

It's a general human problem, someone gets a high position socially and it goes to his head. He is not necessarily wrong (about whatever it is, was or will be next time) but the way he expresses himself is highly arrogant.

Torvalds has the same problem but does try to improve now and then. I think a lot of that has to do with the positive influence from his wife which is something RMS does not have.

[DPM]

So ignore the fact he's a well known sexual predator

Has he been convicted? And I mean, in a real court, not via Twitter sh*tstorm and allegations? If not, I'll stick with "innocent until proven guilty" which is a fundamental concept of the Western system.

with abhorrent viewpoints?

Taken out of context. Plus that he later had an article in his blog where he had changed his opinion on censentual child intimacy, and that's because he had spoken with a lot of people in the field, such as psychologists, and learned that even with consent, that still leaves damage. Which is exactly why children cannot legally consent in the first place.

So do you want to condemn someone for opinions he once held? You don't grant people the right to learn? Once wrong, always wrong no matter what? Then I just hope you never erred in your whole life because surely, you wouldn't grant that right to yourself, either.

[DPM]

Sure but just being right about where something is headed is not the same as being right about what to do about it.

When Stallman said on the usenet in the 80s that some free Unix was around the corner, people laughed him off. Then BSD got going by the end of that decade, and Linux since the 90s. Before that, stuff was AT&T property. No open source Unix. Linux would have suffered the same "embrace, extend, destroy" tactics that e.g. Microsoft uses over and over if it had not been for the GPL.

[MurphCID]

I cannot deny that he has made critically valuable contributions to our community. However, he, like so many "evanglisists" has jumped the shark, and is now a toxic and polarizing person. Plus his comments on social issues place him in the "odd" category. He needs to go back to developing GNU and STFU.

[rambo919]

Plus his comments on social issues place him in the "odd" category.

More like cemented him there.

He always was odd.... people should have figured that out when he tried to start making singing hymns to GNU a thing....

[MurphCID]

Plus his comments on social issues place him in the "odd" category.

More like cemented him there.

He always was odd.... people should have figured that out when he tried to start making singing hymns to GNU a thing....

Point. Also at some point evangelism becomes dogma, becomes "The One True Faith" and then you end up calling people heretics....

[DPM]

Sure he is odd. So what? My litmus test for whether his evangelism is toxic, what if he had his way all along? Who would have control then? Well, it's not him. It's the users everywhere, such as me. That's why his evangelism is odd, but not toxic.

Compare that to how things are going where companies like Microsoft, Google, or Apple have their say: control is transferred away from the user and to them. Apple in particular is even more odd than Stallmann (has fans camping in front of stores?!) and transfers control away from the user. But that's OK because unlike Stallman, it makes billions of profit. Microsoft sending countless perfectly working PCs to the landfill with Win 11 is also not regarded as toxic, but the damage for the planet is far greater than anything Stallman has ever done.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...then you end up calling people heretics....

Hairy ticks?

[towanie]

Apple in particular is even more odd than Stallmann (has fans camping in front of stores?!)

I agree with everthing else, but this example it's the consumer making that somewhat questionable decision. Not that Apple isn't delighted and continues to take advantage of the situation and even promotes it.

The reality is that humans are emotional beings and are much more engaged by sensationalized news and gossip, than on cold rational facts that aren't so easy to digest, even when it's in their best interest to react on them. That said, I highly doubt most people would want to "run back to Windows" over Richard Stallman. Same way a lot of people continue to buy from [insert company] that is (or has been) known to do [insert shady stuff in here]: Nike, Volkswagen, Apple, Hugo Boss, Nestle...

[Hoser Rob]

...The thing is, "practicability" and "no ideology" are buzz words by companies to get a pass on user-hostile anti-features. Like, why is it that Linux in secure boot mode needs signing by Microsoft?...

The reason for secure boot is that a number of Windows users, undersatandably, do not want someone to be able to be able to boot their computers witha Linux live USB and have access to all their data. Those users are the ones who wanted it.

[Hoser Rob]

The problem is his insistence on being ideological.

He goes off the rails and demands all kinds of impractibilities.

I firmly believe GNU and FSF is imploding anyway due to his outdated views and expectations stifling it. The fact they are effectively enabling RMS to behave as he does doesn't help their cause.

https://thenewstack.io/why-almost-every ... cancelled/

OSI and Creative Commons are more relevant these days

True, and good article there.

Yes, RJS is an idiot. I've seldom heard a more idiotic manifesto than "information wants to be free". Information doesn't want anything.

Being anti corporate with Linux is a bit silly, go ahead if you want but you are still going to rely on the Linux Kernel Project, which is heavily sponsored by some very big companies. Microsoft has been one of them for years.

There are good reasons these companies like Linux for their servers etc. They like open standards. If they're having a problem with some software module in a Windows network and that module has some of MS's undocumented 'features', MS tech support will not tell them what the module does or give them the specs, they'll just suggest they downgrade it. If this happens it means that that company's IT support staff have a system they can\'t actually support. They don't like this very much.