
Why Richard Stallman Doesn’t Matter - smacktoward
https://maffulli.net/2019/10/17/why-richard-stallman-doesnt-matter/
======
alfonsodev
I've stopped reading at > He has mental issues ...

I don't know if it's true and already public, but how can you write that
publicy about someone, you must be a profesional to diagnose someone and still
that's very personal information.

Even more, he's acusing Stallman of being "poorly socialized because nobody
taught him manner", so revealing somone mental issues publicy must make him
very well socliazied and good manerered.

~~~
giancarlostoro
That's a bit harsh. I'm ok with people saying he's eccentric. But outright
saying he has mental issues, that's quite the accusation.

~~~
kome
having mental issues is not an accusation tho... why would it be? let's not
reiterate the stigma. we should be more aware and tolerant of mental issues
(or neurodiversity, if you prefer the sjw world).

~~~
alfonsodev
how I see it, it's not a stigma, but also we shouldn't trivialise it randomnly
diagnosing people, the risk of trivialising is that when someone has real
issues we won't take them as seriously because anyways we all have "mental
issues" *or so says people that disagree with you)

------
Spooky23
This guy just doesn't get it.

> That’s because Stallman’s world was and still is, stuck in the 80s:
> computers are physical devices that users can own and keep in their homes.
> For that use case, the four freedoms, the definition of source code and
> installation tooling introduced in GPLv3 made a lot of sense. Nothing else
> seemed to matter to him. The decision for the Linux kernel not to adopt
> GPLv3 wasn’t considered a problem and it was often downplayed by FSF
> leadership.

...

> Folks closest to the FSF community were so myopic about completing GNU for
> Stallman’s laptop that nobody did anything about the big picture. I never
> heard anyone at the FSF ask what it means for a digital society that
> Facebook has been legally using free software to develop algorithms that
> modify human behavior. Quite the opposite, the problem was javascript in the
> browser for apps like Gmail.

The copyleft movement/FSF was always consistently focused on working within
the legal framework of copyright. That's important, because the Supreme Court
decided in the 1960s and 1970s that turning over custody of information to a
third party essentially abrogates your rights/expectations to privacy. (See:
Third party doctrine)

Does that make sense? Not to most modern technology practitioners. But there
is _nothing_ that you can do (outside of contract and market forces) to ensure
control of information that you place in custody of a third party. Those
"1980s" principles matter because that is the only thing that the law
recognizes. When the law evolves and figures out how to deal with "virtual"
custody of information, those same principles will be applied.

~~~
jabvigWe
Yes, and the FSF does have something to say about facebook. Don't use it
[https://www.fsf.org/facebook](https://www.fsf.org/facebook). And afaik, they
are working on writing more about this issue.

Also, RMS is just not paying attention to his own laptop:
[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/03/facebo...](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/03/facebook-
abusing-data-law-privacy-big-tech-surveillance)

~~~
shadowgovt
"Just don't use" for what is arguably the world's most successful
interpersonal networking system is a pretty vacant suggestion.

Might as well recommend people stop using roads and sidewalks because of the
environmental hazards they create.

~~~
Spooky23
It's necessary advice given Facebook's practices and the lack of meaningful
regulation to mandate certain practices.

There are many occupations where you are strongly advised to not use Facebook,
or may expose yourself to significant financial, career or security risk if
you do so.

------
elteto
"For over 30 years, Stallman has been a tireless advocate of a world that
hasn’t mattered for the past 15 years."

I think that, if anything, the exact opposite is true after Snowden's
revelations.

~~~
new_realist
Spying in the name of national security and viral software licenses are
unrelated. Further, as another point of irrelevancy, Open Source predates, is
more popular than, and is more influential than Free Software.

~~~
saon
You're right. But you have to recognize it is because corporations recognized
they can commodify tons of their code to reduce costs and improve code quality
and security. The linux foundation has dozens of multi-million-dollar partner
corporations, whereas the FSF has maybe 5000 contributing members globally.
But those corporations have no reason to guarantee that your computer will do
what you want it to do, and many reasons to guarantee that it will do what
they want it to do. This is a pervasive norm now, especially on hackernews
where the demographic is primarily entrepreneurial web-only devs.

Before deriding free software, ask yourself, who benefits from being able to
read the source code of a program that restricts what ebooks you can read?

------
hpoe
Let's keep in mind that beyond just his tireless efforts to advocate for Free
Software Stallman also built almost all of the GNU toolset.

Let's put aside his politics and views on licensing and what we have is a
genius developer who single handedly has done more to advance computing with
the GNU tool set and the distribution thereof than anyone else in the past 30
years. Without Stallman for example there would be no Linux as we know it
because you'll notice most of the actual tools that allow you to do things on
Linux are GNU tools written by Stallman.

Regardless of his views on how society and software should interact he still
is one of the most important figures in the history of computing and deserves
some respect and appreciation for that.

------
astine
Stallman founded the FSF at a time when people licensed their software from
companies and as a result didn't truly own the machines that they used. We've
transitioned to a time where people don't even own most of the hardware they
use and have given up ownership of most of their data. So yeah, the situation
has gotten a lot worse and the specific focus on software is less relevant
than it used to be.

------
bitL
One moment of weakness and you see all the people that ever hated you out for
your blood with vengeance. Humanity won't ever progress if we stick with this
ugly algorithm...

~~~
Santosh83
Particularly odious considering these very same people did not have the guts
to publish their criticism when he was seen as unimpeachable. It would've had
more seeming validity then, and now just seems like an attempt to flog the
dead horse, even if some genuine points are present.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
I've talked about how out-of-touch Stallman seems to be for years, and I'm not
the only one.

~~~
Santosh83
Out of touch in _certain_ areas (as you point out in your other comment)
doesn't mean you cease to matter or be relevant. Much of what he speaks about
is still very much relevant the way I see it: non-Free software, lack of
control over your device, the largely non-free javascript, the disadvantages
of locked down platforms like Facebook, Kindle etc. I don't see how "Stallman
no longer matters" holds up. At the same time I'm not saying he has to head
FSF or be the only voice. Of course not. It would be good to see a new face
take over if only because Stallman has fought the fight for decades and it is
unfair to keep expecting him to lead from the front till he drops dead.

~~~
shadowgovt
Nobody's stopping him from speaking. The FSF, MIT, and portions of the GNU
maintainer community have simply aligned on the meme "He doesn't speak for
us." As they may.

------
firasd
I don't think his philosophy is irrelevant in the era of cloud computing. For
example, 'The Right to Read' is an allegory about textbooks, but I realized
that the fact that my old laptop can run Netflix (since the PC & browser
support general computing!) while many smartphones and 'smart tvs' of the same
vintage can't, makes the concept relevant today-- perhaps more than ever:
[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-
read.en.html](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html)

That said, this post makes some salient points about how Stallman's personal
habits & interests have overly narrowed down the issues he focuses on.

------
CodeArtisan
>Nobody at the FSF cared about cloud or mobile

Stallman back in 2010 about SaaS

[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-
really-s...](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-
serve.html)

Also,

[https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-
gpl.html](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html)

"We don't see any sensible way to address the SaaSS problem with license
conditions on particular programs. Even to write a legal condition to
distinguish between SaaSS use and non-SaaSS use would be a challenge, and if
we had that, we don't see anything that the program's license might require in
the SaaSS case that would correct the inherent wrong of SaaSS. Thus, our
solution to the problem of SaaSS is simple: refuse to use services that are
SaaSS."

~~~
shadowgovt
Unfortunately, that's not a solution; that's throwing up one's hands and
ignoring the issue with extra steps.

Refusing to put pieces on the field means the other players can move without
your input. They did, and now whether the OS on my machine is open is somewhat
irrelevant because the things that provide services I care about won't talk to
it unless I'm running closed-source blobs they control.

~~~
AstralStorm
It still matters, as you will have options to build open replacements, ignore
lock in. Hardware and firmware are bigger problems, as per cryptographic
signing and legal framework to prevent breaking these solutions.

------
antoineMoPa
I agree in general, but saying "Nobody at the FSF cared about cloud or mobile"
is not true [1][2].

[1]
[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.com...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.computing.richard.stallman)

[2] [https://www.networkworld.com/article/2200967/software-
cell-p...](https://www.networkworld.com/article/2200967/software-cell-phones-
are-stalin-s-dream-says-free-software-movement-founder.html)

~~~
antoineMoPa
Actually, the articles are from 2008 and 2011, so maybe the author is right
(maybe no one cared in 2005).

------
PhasmaFelis
I respect Stallman for everything he's accomplished, but I don't understand
how anyone saw him as an authority on modern Web issues given his public
stance on using the internet. [https://stallman.org/stallman-
computing.html](https://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html)

He's never owned a cellphone--any cellphone, not just a smartphone. His
preferred way to use the Web is to email the URL to a service which emails him
the site, which he reads in Lynx. He'll use a GUI browser when he has to, but
he never does a Google search, because Google asks him for a CAPTCHA (because
he's connecting through Tor) and the CAPTCHA doesn't work (because he refuses
to run JavaScript).

Those may be reasonable choices for an individual, but treating him like a Web
authority is like hiring a traffic engineer who's never driven a car.

------
vectorEQ
opinion opinion opinion, it's nice 'moot point' was in bold. i stopped reading
there and took it as a summary of the article. don't care about stallman nor
FSF, but this article seems a sad attempt at making any kind of point. Much
negativity in the first few scentences makes the writer seem exactly the kind
of person he's trying to describe. :')

~~~
PhasmaFelis
> _i stopped reading there and took it as a summary of the article. don 't
> care about stallman nor FSF_

So you didn't read the article and you don't understand any of the things that
it's discussing, but you want us to know that you think it's bad?

------
mrighele
> All around him, not a single voice could argue strongly enough about the
> Google issue that later would become the *-as-a-service loophole and cloud
> issue.

Not an expert in the matter, but isn't this loophole exactly what the AGPL [1]
is about ?

Maybe we can argue that to be effective it should be the default instead of
regular GPL, but I have never seen people being too fond of it, though things
may change now that developers have become more sensitive to the matter.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Affero_General_Public_Lice...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Affero_General_Public_License)

------
goatinaboat
Every nonentity lining up now to put the boot into RMS

------
w3mmpp
Without Richard Stallman, no linux as complete OS, no gcc, no emacs and
hundreds of other libs/software.

Stefano Maffulli: make a list of what you brought to the world and compare
with what he did and then ask this same question for yourself. I assure you,
it'll be revelatory.

~~~
rimliu
Yeah, nobody else could/would do it. Just nobody. How do people get these
ideas, that some guy is solely responsible for the progress of the human race?

------
CrackerNews
The author of this article, Stefano Maffulli, claims to be the leader of the
Italian chapter of the FSF during the mid 2000's. Besides the personal attacks
on Richard Stallman, it's clear that his perspectives on software freedom
diverged from Stallman's and the FSF's around that time (after the release of
GPLv3).

Maffulli definitely does not help his point by attacking Stallman's and the
FSF's position. Maffulli does have a point in that the scope of software
freedom has greatly expanded and has come under even greater attack than
before (through the rise of mobile and the cloud), and there needs to be
organizational efforts made to resist it. I don't see how either of their
perspectives are mutually exclusive.

One point Maffulli should have emphasized more and elaborated upon is how FOSS
actually ended up being the "most perfect shackles that society has ever had."
The only thing to say anything about that is a video that the phrase is linked
to. If he had attacked Stallman and the FSF less and focused more on the crux
of his arguments, then he would have a much more meaningful and impactful
article.

------
enriquto
This is such an eloquent exposition of the exact opposite of my thoughts! It's
been a long time since I've had that deep connection with something I read. It
feels strangely great.

~~~
gsaga
You should try meeting up with him. Let us know how that went via HN.

------
HeWhoLurksLate
This article hurt to read.

~~~
bitL
If you weren't given right to read it, you wouldn't have been hurt! See?

------
Saad_M
I don't agree 100% with the author, but I do wholeheartedly agree that the
relevance of FSF movement definitely peaked after the ratification of GPLv3.
After which, the relevance and political visibility of the movement has
decreased significantly as we moved from PC/Laptops being our primary
computing device to smartphones.

~~~
sramsay
I remember Stallman's obsession with "TiVoization," and I remember wondering
if that was really the most pressing thing on the horizon at the time. I also
find the claim that the goal of the FSF became "completing GNU for Stallman’s
laptop" credible.

But I kept wondering what the future of the GPL could be under new leadership?
Would a GPLv4 be even less congenial to a company like Apple (that is
systematically trying to remove any trace of the GPL from its entire stack)?
Or would it try to make some concessions toward the Linux kernel and the
LLVM/clang project (for example)?

edit: missing word

~~~
AstralStorm
It still is an issue. Can you run your own software on the phone? How about
its modem chip?

How many closed drivers and services are necessary then, because documentation
is not provided and firmware is cryptographically signed?

Services have a problem related to copyright assignment and another due to
lock in switching costs, but it's not something a software license can fix
easily.

And whether protocols are copyrightable is somewhat of an open question.
Others are fighting for open protocols and standards - and still losing.
(Mozilla Foundation for example.)

------
werber
I used to be very adamant about free software and I reached out to stallman a
while ago, the interaction wasn’t great, I think this author crossed a line
discussing his mental health, not cool. But my life has been a lot easier
since giving up on digital purity

------
carlsborg
Richard Stallman rocks.

------
smkellat
Hindsight is very distorting. It was not inevitable 10 years ago that we would
get to _this_ point now.

------
dpq
The point of the author being? Since he has poor manners, or Asperger's
syndrome, or he lacks vision to lead the free software movement into the
future, then it's okay to plant news stories, coat them with outrageous not-
technically-lies and perform character assassination on him?

------
m31415
From the conclusion

> the FSF needs to focus on the algorithms that change people behavior

Is this satire or does the author really want the FSF to engage in mind
control? This is such low-effort tripe and obvious personal attack.

------
AstralStorm
Why does criticism of Richard Stallman matter then to the author if the man
himself doesn't?

(Yes, this is allegiation of riding on coattails. Steffano Maffuli of
OpenStack matters even less.)

------
brodouevencode
Not sure why this is flagged. Not saying that I wholly agree with the author
but there are interesting and relevant points to be made here.

~~~
wglb
Sometime articles or comments get flagged because it is clear that it will
lead to lots of flamewars, even if the article is valuable.

------
antsoul
If only the author knew about GNUnet...

~~~
mdszy
This GNUNet?

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Gn...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Gnunet-
gtk_0.10_under_arch-gnulinux.png/800px-Gnunet-gtk_0.10_under_arch-
gnulinux.png)

~~~
dependenttypes
The interface has been different for quite a while now.

------
computerex
Who the hell is this idiot and why is this horseshit being posted here?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUnet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUnet)

Literally everything in that article is unsubstantiated. I can't find one true
fact in there.

~~~
badcede
"open source marketer and community manager"

