[pp.int.general] Why Free Software misses the point

[Boris Turovskiy]

Hi Ole,
> Yes, it can be really annoying when sometimes almost religious people
> put forward the statement: "This is proprietary software; it is bad, and
> you should not use it". It is particularly annoying because it is not
> even an argument, but simply a statement.
>    
You summed up my problems with FSF better than I ever could:)
> I am not religious. (I was blessed by Saint IGNUcius, but I still prefer
> vi over Emacs.) While about 99,5% of all the software I use is free or
> open source, I do not mind using proprietary software, if it fits my
> needs. But I prefer to use free or open source software because of the
> freedoms I get here.
>    
Funny you should say that - to quote from Mr. Stallman's article: "A 
pure open source enthusiast, one that is not at all influenced by the 
ideals of free software, will say, “I am surprised you were able to make 
the program work so well without using our development model, but you 
did. How can I get a copy?” This attitude will reward schemes that take 
away our freedom, leading to its loss. The free software activist will 
say, “Your program is very attractive, but I value my freedom more. So I 
reject your program. Instead I will support a project to develop a free 
replacement.” If we value our freedom, we can act to maintain and defend 
it."
So if you say that you wouldn't mind using proprietary software if it 
fitted your needs you firmly place yourself in the "open source" camp 
which Mr.Stallman attacks;)

> For example: I do not use Skype because of security. Being closed-source
> we simply do not know what it does behind the scene. It could be
> scanning your system for torrent files and uploading the results to
> anti-pirate groups, without the user knowing. I do not use MS-Windows
> for the same reasons, but also because I do not like everything being
> different than on all other operating systems, for no good reason.
>    
I support that argument completely. But the fact is that you don't have 
to proclaim any kind of "sacred essential freedoms" to make such a 
argument; it is completely rational, and anybody can understand what is 
wrong with those problems (not anybody would care, sure, but as you 
said, it is enough to make an informed decision).

Best regards,
Boris