The rules
I think we MUST create rules for the site. Some of us used to think about community guideline as the rules, but this is creating very unclear situation.
For example, I always thought about community guideline as only
freewill document. I'm sure, some of us will agree with me.
This situation must be clarify.
You've been thinking about the community guidelines wrong. They are the rules.
You are must prove it.
Only moderator or administrator have right to say "the community guidelines are the rules ".
El 19/05/13 20:53, name at domain escribió:
> This situation must be clarify.
Trisquel was made by Rubén Rodriguez Pérez to create a distro that
complies with FSF guidelines. The people that conform the community are
the ones that agree with those principles. The others are not part of
the Trisquel community. They have no right about what is done on
Trisquel forums, web page, mailing list or packages. Their only right is
to have the 4 freedoms to the software.
If you use free software because of its superficial or temporary
convinience, you are not helping free software; you are being helped by
free software. People that help free software are the ones that use it
despite it being less convenient temporarily than using non-free
software. It is a long range investment. It will always cost more
(money, auditability, independence of providers, sustainability, etc.)
in the long run to use non-free software.
I hope I was clear enough. If not, please ask. ;-)
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
"Trisquel was made by Rubén Rodriguez Pérez to create a distro that complies with FSF guidelines. "
So, are you mean "the community guidelines only logical continues of the FSF guidelines"?
Then the community guidelines must be approved by FSF.
Otherwise, this is arbitrariness.
"They have no right about what is done on
Trisquel forums ..."
Sorry, I can't understand your thought. Please, rephrase it.
"use it despite it being less convenient temporarily than using non-free software. It is a long range investment. "
IMHO, this is hard problem. You are need to have precise balance. Otherwise, this is will be sophisticated form of masochism and protectionism.
I don't like protectionism, because I'm prefer fair competition.
El 19/05/13 22:56, name at domain escribió:
> "Trisquel was made by Rubén Rodriguez Pérez to create a distro that
> complies with FSF guidelines. "
>
> So, are you mean "the community guidelines only logical continues of
> the FSF guidelines"?
> Then the community guidelines must be approved by FSF.
> Otherwise, this is arbitrariness.
It was an arbitrarily motivated project for Rubén. We all agreed to
contribute based on his objective...arbitrarily.
> "They have no right about what is done on
> Trisquel forums ..."
> Sorry, I can't understand your thought. Please, rephrase it.
>
The people that make up this community are the ones that agree to
contribute to the objective Trisquel was made for. If (for example)
Apple people would come to decide about our community, they would have
no say on this community and would not be part of the community even if
they would be subscribed to this list because Apple does not share our
objective.
> "use it despite it being less convenient temporarily than using
> non-free software. It is a long range investment. "
>
> IMHO, this is hard problem. You are need to have precise balance.
> Otherwise, this is will be sophisticated form of masochism and
> protectionism.
You have every right to be wrong. I will not restrict you from that. But
most people will not think convictions are either of the adjectives you
have mentioned. Even less about scientifically reached convictions.
If you have reached a high goal, then you will have made an effort that
someone might call masochism. I would think that the shortsightedness of
using non-free solutions is closer to masochism than the conviction to
make the ideal of freedom come true.
> I don't like protectionism, because I'm prefer fair competition.
That is an oxymoron.
You are welcome to have your own convictions. But you may not impose
them on our community just because you are part of this mailing list.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
And what you will do, if I will send the community guidelines to FSF, and then FSF say "some of guidelines not fits well to ideology of FSF"?
"That is an oxymoron."
Why?
"You are welcome to have your own convictions. But you may not impose
them on our community just because you are part of this mailing list."
So, I have no right to say anything on this site, if my thoughts contradict to your convictions, isn't?
El 20/05/13 01:13, name at domain escribió:
> And what you will do, if I will send the community guidelines to FSF,
> and then FSF say "some of guidelines not fits well to ideology of FSF"?
Nothing. I would read what you have to say and what they have to say.
> "That is an oxymoron."
> Why?
I don't like protectionism, because I'm prefer fair competition.
Because they are contradictory with each other.
> "You are welcome to have your own convictions. But you may not impose
> them on our community just because you are part of this mailing list."
>
> So, I have no right to say anything on this site, if my thoughts
> contradict to your convictions, isn't?
You have every right to write what you think. But you are out of
politeness and nettiquette if you work against the objectives of
Trisquel. Why are you here if you do not agree with them?
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
1."Because they are contradictory with each other."
Where is any contradiction? I don't see it. Maybe these words have a different meaning for you? Please give your definition of "protectionism" and "fair competition".
2."But you are out of politeness and nettiquette if you work against the objectives of Trisquel."
I have the same goals as you,IMHO. But I do not like some of your methods of achieving these goals.
3. "Why are you here"
To put things in order in my head.
In the past, I thought there would be a paradise for me, because I will be among like-minded people. But then it turned out that on some issues there is a serious disagreement. Something is wrong. Or am I missing something, or I have come to the wrong place, or do I chose an inappropriate ideology or anything else.
El 20/05/13 13:09, name at domain escribió:
> 1."Because they are contradictory with each other."
>
> Where is any contradiction? I don't see it. Maybe these words have a
> different meaning for you? Please give your definition of
> "protectionism" and "fair competition".
Fair is not competitive. Competitiveness' goal is winning.
Collaboration's goal is everyone's growth. Fairness is not a zero sum
game. Competitiveness is. Zero sum goals are not fair to the looser.
The competitive also protect their their own weaknesses. It is not fair
in that way either. USA is competitive and invades other countries
without the other countries invading the USA. Britain, Germany, Holland,
Spain have done the same things. They are not fair either.
> 2."But you are out of politeness and nettiquette if you work against
> the objectives of Trisquel."
>
> I have the same goals as you. But I do not like some of your methods
> of achieving these goals.
Using and promoting non-free software seldom increase users' freedom.
You are looking for solutions to solve your present problems, with or
without freedom (like the opensource movement does). The free software
movement searches the medium and long term goals of achieving users'
freedom. I don't think those are the same goals. Perhaps they sometimes
use the same methods but they don't have the same goals.
>
> 3. "Why are you here"
> To put things in order in my head.
> In the past, I thought there would be a paradise for me, because I
> will be among like-minded people. But then it turned out that on some
> issues there is a serious disagreement. Something is wrong. Or am I
> missing something, or I have come to the wrong place, or do I chose an
> inappropriate ideology or anything else.
I think you are in the wrong place. Trisquel project does not share your
views.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
I'm thinking of the whole thing for quite a while, trying to figure out whether this is the right place for me or not.
Debian is far away from my views;
I can accept not to recommend non-free software to anyone in this forum. It's also ok for me not to call it a "solution" whenever running proprietary software is the only appropriate choice.
But I don't share the view that there is never a case where running proprietary software is the less bad choice of two evils.
So am I right or wrong in this forum? I don't really know, future will show.
> But I don't share the view that there is never a case where running
> proprietary software is the less bad choice of two evils.
Who does?
El 20/05/13 13:53, name at domain escribió:
> I can accept not to recommend non-free software to anyone in this
> forum. It's also ok for me not to call it a "solution" whenever
> running proprietary software is the only appropriate choice.
> But I don't share the view that there is never a case where running
> proprietary software is the less bad choice of two evils.
I agree with you on this one. There are cases where it would be better
to install non-free software. But it is not as common as most people
would think. Would you please give an example where you consider that it
is acceptable?
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
I can give an example.
I am taking a class whereby tests required for the class REQUIRE flash. Gnash doesn't work. For example, if I attempt to read the online chapters in Gnash there is no text to read. Each chapter also has labs which can be done from home by connecting to the online labs and using Windows XP virtual machines.
So my choice is to use non-free software or fail the class, because every chapter has multiple labs and every chapter has a test in flash.
Additonally, there is a separate prorprietary app which can be used to do the labs instead of doing the labs online, in 32 bits no less. (Ihaven't run 32 bit in YEARS!)
What I would like to see is for them to ditch flash, convert to html5 and at least release the proprietary app in 64 bit. However, even the computers in the class room are all Windows 7.
My main installs are a freed Gentoo, Parabola (which I will be rid of soon - it moves too fast for me), & Trisquel. For the class, I have setup a separate system that has Flash installed as well as the proprietray app which can be used as an alternate to complete the labs. This system is for school work only.
It's really very simple. I WILL NOT FAIL this class due to the fact the class requires non-free software to pass. I mean no offense to anyone here, but I do not care one whit what others may think of my solution to the problem.
On 21/05/13 05:28, nospamhere wrote:
> I can give an example.
>
> I am taking a class whereby tests required for the class REQUIRE
> flash. Gnash doesn't work. For example, if I attempt to read the
> online chapters in Gnash there is no text to read. Each chapter also
> has labs which can be done from home by connecting to the online labs
> and using Windows XP virtual machines.
Are you taking these tests in-class? If you are using their computers,
it does not matter *as much*. But remember that using someone else's
computer is like using a network service - you don't have control of
what happens to your data. The only problem with using a computer for an
exam is that the evidence that you ever completed the exam can disappear
more easily than a paper exam.
This is how I pass a few of my university subjects. However, I always
show my disapproval by submitting feedback at the end of the semester.
Andrew.
Andrew asked:
"Are you taking these tests in-class?"
No, all of the tests are done from home, even the finals.
"But remember that using someone else's computer is like using a network service - you don't have control of what happens to your data."
I am already plotting on this for the next class in the fall. I believe if I get the right adapter, I will be able to at least follow the powerpoints from which the classes are taught using the free system on my netbook. I know for a fact Calligra Sheets will open MIS powerpoint files perfectly.
On 21/05/13 05:28, nospamhere wrote:
> I am taking a class whereby tests required for the class REQUIRE
> flash.
[I wrote:]
> The only problem with using a computer for an exam is that the
> evidence that you ever completed the exam can disappear more easily
> than a paper exam.
I would like to expand a little bit... the problem here is that with a
test that requires proprietary software, the ability to provide evidence
of completing the exam becomes difficult (because you lack the freedom
to control your computing).
In a paper exam, your somewhat unique handwriting, plus being surrounded
by peers and exam monitors makes it difficult to deny that you completed
an exam. See the difference? If you cannot ask for freedom, couldn't you
ask to complete a paper exam?
Andrew.
Andrew said
"the problem here is that with a test that requires proprietary software, the ability to provide evidence of completing the exam becomes difficult (because you lack the freedom to control your computing)."
I don't know where in the world you are, but it doesn't sound like you are familiar with how education works these days in the US. The classes are structured so that everyone passes, because the colleges want to keep those financial aid dollars rolling in. In other words, it would be far more difficult to prove that one had failed, when it is so terribly easy to pass. I don't like it either, because I was always a good student who EARNED the good grades by choice, not becuase college level classes were structured to be this easy.
El 20/05/13 14:28, name at domain escribió:
> I can give an example.
>
> I am taking a class whereby tests required for the class REQUIRE
> flash. Gnash doesn't work. For example, if I attempt to read the
> online chapters in Gnash there is no text to read. Each chapter also
> has labs which can be done from home by connecting to the online labs
> and using Windows XP virtual machines.
>
> So my choice is to use non-free software or fail the class, because
> every chapter has multiple labs and every chapter has a test in flash.
>
> Additonally, there is a separate prorprietary app which can be used to
> do the labs instead of doing the labs online, in 32 bits no less.
> (Ihaven't run 32 bit in YEARS!)
>
> What I would like to see is for them to ditch flash, convert to html5
> and at least release the proprietary app in 64 bit. However, even the
> computers in the class room are all Windows 7.
>
> My main installs are a freed Gentoo, Parabola (which I will be rid of
> soon - it moves too fast for me), & Trisquel. For the class, I have
> setup a separate system that has Flash installed as well as the
> proprietray app which can be used as an alternate to complete the
> labs. This system is for school work only.
>
> It's really very simple. I WILL NOT FAIL this class due to the fact
> the class requires non-free software to pass. I mean no offense to
> anyone here, but I do not care one whit what others may think of my
> solution to the problem.
You have to betray one of the two: your community and yourself or your
university. It is a tough choice. I woul not blame you if you chose
either. Some people would always betray their community because that
would place upon themselves less harm. Some people would press the
university to change its policies but stil comply. Some people would
take a stand even against their own personal interests. It is up to you.
You are your university's victim and not the victimizer. I would
possibly decide between the last two if it were my case.
My 2 cents.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
I am hardly betraying myself in this instance, because the educational system is not within my control. Were the educational system within my control, there would be no proprietary software in it, for NUMEROUS reasons.
I would be betraying myself were I to use the separate system with the proprietary applications for anything other than school. That hasn't and won't happen. I haven't used flash in years and certainly have no plans to start using it now, except as required by this college. As for the proprietary apps within that system aside from flash, I wouldn't be using them at all were in not for these classes.
El 20/05/13 23:32, name at domain escribió:
> I am hardly betraying myself in this instance, because the educational
> system is not within my control. Were the educational system within my
> control, there would be no proprietary software in it, for NUMEROUS
> reasons.
>
> I would be betraying myself were I to use the separate system with the
> proprietary applications for anything other than school. That hasn't
> and won't happen. I haven't used flash in years and certainly have no
> plans to start using it now, except as required by this college. As
> for the proprietary apps within that system aside from flash, I
> wouldn't be using them at all were in not for these classes.
That you are being made to do it or that you do it because you choose to
does not make a difference of whether it is an abuse done onto you or
not. If you are being abused and you decide to comply, you are betraying
yourself. I am not criticizing you for it. I am very sorry that the
school forces you to such an unfair decision.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
I do not betray myself in systems within my control, which is precisely why the systems within my control are 100% free. It's really that simple.
El 21/05/13 07:50, name at domain escribió:
> I do not betray myself in systems within my control, which is
> precisely why the systems within my control are 100% free. It's really
> that simple.
In systems you do not control, you are in control of those that control
those systems. If they under the control of non-free software companies,
you are still betraying yourself if you accept to be under their control.
That you can do everything to prevent your computers being under the
control of non-free software does not mean you cannot do anything about
other people's computers that you have to use. You can protest.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
"In systems you do not control, you are in control of those that control those systems."
Blatantly false. The only person I am in contorl of is myself. I can't prevent others from murdering, or using drugs, or using non-free software, etc.
RMS began creating the free software system on closed, proprietary, non-free systems. Did he betray himself by using a proprietary system? Of course not. He was smart enough to keep his eye on the brass ring. So am I. And because he never lost site of the big picture, the world was improved and everyone now has access to free software.
RMS is no fool and neither am I. It is not a betrayal at all when your only option is non-free software. You keep your eye on the big picture to reach your goals, just like RMS did and don't feel bad at all for doing the right thing in such a situation, just like RMS did.
What a fool he would have been had he told himself, 'well I can't create a free system, because I will betray myself if I use non-free software.' RMS knew better. There is ZERO reason for guilt or shame in following his example.
I am a member!
>Blatantly false. The only person I am in contorl of is myself. I can't prevent others from murdering, or using drugs, or using non-free software, etc.
The whole purpose of free software is to liberate the user from the unjust yoke of the proprietary developer. With software, there are just two possibilities; either the user controls the program, or the program controls the users. If the program controls the users, that means it is a proprietary program, and through this software, the developer wields power and control over what the user can and cannot do to their copy of the code.
>...because he never lost site of the big picture, the world was improved and everyone now has access to free software.
Agree.
>RMS is no fool and neither am I. It is not a betrayal at all when your only option is non-free software.
Disagree. Only a fool would tell himself that using a proprietary version of a program, rather than not using a program at all is a better solution. In virtually every instance it is better to be inconvenienced by not using a proprietary program at all than using it. You can spin it any way you like, but justifying it by comparing your actions to RMS is laughable. RMS used the proprietary UNIX system so that he could reverse engineer it; he did it so that users of computers could be free. The only reason to use proprietary software in any case is for reverse engineering. If you aren't going to make a free alternative to the program, then I don't think your excuse holds water.
>RMS knew better
RMS knew better because there was no free operating system in the first place during the late 1970s/ early 80s. That's why he created GNU - he was engineering freedom from an ugly and disgusting spectre called proprietary software. He had no choice.
ahj said:
"Only a fool would tell himself that using a proprietary version of a program, rather than not using a program at all is a better solution."
Then you agree the smart thing to do, considering my options, is to drop out of college rather than use the propretary software* required to pass the class?
(*Proprietary software includes Flash, in which ALL tests are administered, including finals. Proprietary software also includes Vmware serving up XP virtual machines for ALL labs required for the class.)
I am a member!
Go and do what RMS does - go and use a computer with the flash player on a computer that isn't yours.
But that doesn't mean you should just give up. I implore you to voice your concerns to the university administrators about over-reliance on proprietary software - you shouldn't have to agree to a regressive software EULA in order to pass a course.
Good luck
As I said, I think someone who's in a bad economical situation often can't afford to quit his job because of being forced to use prop. software.
Or:
If my professor at university would have told me: "you have to use this proprietary software for your final theses, because everyone does; otherwise, you will not get your degree and your studies have been in vain."
then I would have used this software, because not making this small exception would have influenced my whole life.
If the Trsiquel community sais: this is a bad attitude and you don't agree with the values of trisquel because of this, then I think I'm at the wrong place.
But I don't know if this is the case. Of course there is no problem if some members disagree with me in this point.
The question is, whether this point of view excludes me from the ideas of the trisquel community.
I don't think it excludes you from the ideals of the Trisquel community. There may be certain (very limited) circumstances in which choosing to run proprietary software is less bad than choosing not to, and you are free to do so if you wish. However, we will never help you to do so.
Ok, last question:
If my collegue at university had the same fate like me (no prop software = no degree) and he had problems running this software, I understand that he can't ask for help in this forum, it's ok for me.
But I personally (not representing the trisquel community) would have helped him, because he had serious reasons and needed my help.
Would this exclude me from the trisquel community?
Some might think my questions are exaggerated, but I just want to know if we don't get into conflict in some important points.
Actually, there is an important situation where this would be a good deed on your part. The thing is, you're not noticing one key point: the university would probably help him/her, but only if he/she uses Windows (which is very sad, to say the least, but it does mean that you are not his/her only hope with regard to using the proprietary program), or alternatively there is some university computer that has the nonfree program installed on it. But if you are preventing this person from being compelled to install Windows or Mac OS X, then you are at least mitigating the harm to him/her being done.
If the person is a user of a nonfree system such as Windows already, you can say, "I'm not a [Windows|Mac] user, but I can show you how to do it on GNU/Linux."
El 20/05/13 14:31, name at domain escribió:
> As I said, I think someone who's in a bad economical situation often
> can't afford to quit his job because of being forced to use prop.
> software.
Perhaps most people think that the job they have is barely enough to
cover their basic needs. The reality is different. You don't have to be
caught in a consumer way of life. Most people can afford to have a job
that pays less and have more freedom by taking that step. Anyone that
can buy any computer has enough money to take a stand. You can always
find examples of this in all boycotts.
> Or:
> If my professor at university would have told me: "you have to use
> this proprietary software for your final theses, because everyone
> does; otherwise, you will not get your degree and your studies have
> been in vain."
> then I would have used this software, because making this small
> exception would have influenced my whole life.
> If the Trsiquel community sais: this is a bad attitude and you don't
> agree with the values of trisquel because of this, then I think I'm at
> the wrong place.
As I answered in another thread about the same situation, I would not
blame you for using non-free software. But if I was in the same
situation I would press the university until they let me use free
software even with the risk of loosing my degree. I would do this even
if I though that a university degree would get me a better job (which I
don't).
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
"Perhaps most people think that the job they have is barely enough to
cover their basic needs. The reality is different. You don't have to be
caught in a consumer way of life."
This is perfectly true, if and only if you make decisions about your own life.
Whenever you're head of a family with children, things are different. Why? First of all, you have to make more money compared to living alone. And:
living a very very simple life will make you different, and at least in germany, separate you from what is called "normal" society..
I don't want my children suffer hostilities because I made an egoistic decision concerning their life.
If you want to: I would give away _a little bit_ of freedom to protect them from harm. I wouldn't give away more freedom because I want to be a good example for them. But here you have to find a balance, and this behaviour would be my way of balancing.
"But if I was in the same
situation I would press the university until they let me use free
software even with the risk of loosing my degree. I would do this even
if I though that a university degree would get me a better job (which I
don't)."
Well, if this is "just a degree", perhaps I would agree with you.
But think of someone who wanted to become a scientist his whole life, who has a vocation, a passion and a dream.
Actually this is the case for me. As a scientist, I can not only live my dream but also contribute to society.
No one has forced me to use non-free software, but if things would have been different, I would have agreed to make this small exception.
Being a scientist I gained my personal freedom and can do good for society, which is much more than I did harm to society and giving away freedom using the proprietary software once.
So, this is of course not "good", but it's the lesser of two evils.
And a scientific university degree means in germany an extreme difference for your economic initial position.
quantumgravity, did you receive my letter?
I am sorry to interrupt the conversation
Sorry I didn't notice it because I only use this email address for forum accounts. will answer it soon!
//edit
answered via mail, didn't use this contact form; think this is ok.
El 21/05/13 05:37, name at domain escribió:
> "Perhaps most people think that the job they have is barely enough to
> cover their basic needs. The reality is different. You don't have to be
> caught in a consumer way of life."
>
> This is perfectly true, if and only if you make decisions about your
> own life.
> Whenever you're head of a family with children, things are different.
> Why? First of all, you have to make more money compared to living
> alone. And:
> living a very very simple life will make you different, and at least
> in germany, separate you from what is called "normal" society..
> I don't want my children suffer hostilities because I made an egoistic
> decision concerning their life.
> If you want to: I would give away _a little bit_ of freedom to protect
> them from harm. I wouldn't give away more freedom because I want to be
> a good example for them. But here you have to find a balance, and this
> behaviour would be my way of balancing.
That sounds as the argument made by the people in the Linux action show
to Richard Stallman about developing non-free software to feed their
kids. Sure it is not the same to develop non-free software to using
non-free software because one is the victimizer and the other is the
victim. It has nothing to do with feeding children but with personal
desire to earn more money.
It is hard for me to believe that having less money is more dangerous
than having more money. I would say they are directly proportional, not
inversely proportional. I do not criticize your decision. But the
arguments you give sound very partial. Perhaps a lot of people live a
much better and healthier life with much less money. That is true in
Ecuador, Germany and any other country that has enough food supply.
>
> "But if I was in the same
> situation I would press the university until they let me use free
> software even with the risk of loosing my degree. I would do this even
> if I though that a university degree would get me a better job (which I
> don't)."
>
> Well, if this is "just a degree", perhaps I would agree with you.
> But think of someone who wanted to become a scientist his whole life,
> who has a vocation, a passion and a dream.
> Actually this is the case for me. As a scientist, I can not only live
> my dream but also contribute to society.
Not having a university degree does not prevent you from being a
scientist. Just apply the scientific method and you become a scientist.
> No one has forced me to use non-free software, but if things would
> have been different, I would have agreed to make this small exception.
> Being a scientist I gained my personal freedom and can do good for
> society, which is much more than I did harm to society and giving away
> freedom using the proprietary software once.
> So, this is of course not "good", but it's the lesser of two evils.
Possibly it is the other way around. Possibly using the most free
software in your capacity helps society much more than contributing to
science. Perhaps it is your preference and your decision. That does not
mean it is a better contribution or even that it is not better for you.
> And a scientific university degree means in germany an extreme
> difference for your economic initial position.
That I could believe. Perhaps being a plummer would pay better. That
usually happens. It is better payed to do phisically tough jobs or
commerce jobs or mining jobs. But getting a better pay is a question of
minor importance because it is superficial. It is better to concentrate
on more profound aspects so the superficial part will solve by itself.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
Let me blunt: your views sound to me from your posts like authoritarian (e.g. fascist or authoritarian socialist) views. I get this impression mostly because you say you don't like democracy (!), but you also say that privacy is not very important and that having a "Big Brother" (a totalitarian figurehead) or limitation of freedom in general are acceptable if it's in the "interest of society". This kind of view is entirely the opposite of free software; either there is a massive mistranslation of your thoughts into English, or you are absolutely in the wrong place and must be having some severe cognitive dissonance.
Or, if you're an authoritarian socialist, maybe you're under the false impression that free software is a socialist idea. It sure is compatible with anarchist and libertarian socialism (I most closely identify as a left libertarian, perhaps a social anarchist), but the type of software that would be compatible with authoritarian socialist ideas is gratis proprietary software, despite what the Cuban government claims. The only reason most proprietary software is not compatible with an authoritarian state is because it means that someone else (e.g. Microsoft) is competing with the state for power, so the only way for software to be compatible with an authoritarian state is for the authoritarian state to take free software and make it nonfree itself, by withholding the source code which may or may not have been modified by the state, e.g. to spy on the users.
Anyway, you are the one who knows your views.
1." your views sound to me from your posts like authoritarian (e.g. fascist or authoritarian socialist) views."
I don't know who I am. Political tests results are very different,from liberalism to totalitarism.
2." I get this impression mostly because you say you don't like democracy (!)"
Yes, I don't like democracy. But on the other hand, this does not mean that I want the one political party has absolute power. Сountry needs a balance. I think U.S. is good example. USA is undemocratic country that very skillfully masquerades as democratic (by the way, the democratic countries does not exist). The U.S. has a highly developed system of checks and balances, which prevents them from sliding into a primitive totalitarianism like North Korea. Other non-democratic countries should follow the example of the United States.
3."but you also say that privacy is not very important"
The Big Brother is a separate issue. I agree to create it, if it would be beneficial to society in the long term.
But there is a big risk that it will break the system of checks and balances within the state. And then the state will go crazy because of absolute power. If the state goes crazy, then this will cause great harm to society.
4."if you're an authoritarian socialist, maybe you're under the false impression that free software is a socialist idea."
By the way, some actions of FSF movement very similar to actions of USSR, IMHO. For example, you also want to create the iron curtain. But, maybe I'm missing something.
El 20/05/13 22:28, name at domain escribió:
> 1." your views sound to me from your posts like authoritarian (e.g.
> fascist or authoritarian socialist) views."
> I don't know who I am. Political tests results are very different,from
> liberalism to totalitarism.
I guess you have to find out before pointing out a position.
> 2." I get this impression mostly because you say you don't like
> democracy (!)"
> Yes, I don't like democracy. But on the other hand, this does not mean
> that I want the one political party has absolute power. Сountry needs
> a balance. I think U.S. are good example. USA is undemocratic country
> that very skillfully masquerades as democratic (by the way, the
> democratic countries does not exist). The U.S. has a highly developed
> system of checks and balances, which prevents them from sliding into a
> primitive totalitarianism as North Korea. Other non-democratic
> countries should follow the example of the United States.
The USA is a primitive totalitarian state. It is managed by very few
people that pull the strings and control congress, the judiciary and the
President (besides other more powerful agencies). The "system" is
mounted so that the people think they have control.
Of course that totalitarian states make small shows about the people
deciding on small issues. But they keep for themselves the big
decisions. And they convince the people that those are the best. So
these totalitarian authorities have nice puppets that front with
diplomats as authorities.
Democracy is the only way the people can satisfy their needs. Of course
I have not seen any country have a democracy. But it is easy to test
where there is more: Where are the people happier with the political
decisions made on the long run?
>
> 3."but you also say that privacy is not very important"
> The Big Brother is a separate issue. I agree to create it, if it would
> be beneficial to society in the long term.
> But there is a big risk that it will break the system of checks and
> balances within the state. And then the state will go crazy because of
> absolute power. If the state goes crazy, it will cause great harm to
> society.
It already does. Totalitarian states show us how they capture criminals
this way. But this is a minor use they give to it. The most usual use is
persecution of political and economical opponents.
> 4."if you're an authoritarian socialist, maybe you're under the false
> impression that free software is a socialist idea."
> By the way, some actions of FSF movement very similar to actions of
> USSR, IMHO. For example, you also want to create the iron curtain.
We are not against the user. We are against those that want to abuse the
user. We do not want people to be captive. We want them to be free. How
is that an iron curtain?
If having convictions is closing doors, having to convictions is living
in the wild. Having convictions is not at all closed. It is a choice of
being faithful to ones own values. But those convictions can change if
there is proof to the contrary.
I do not know about the USSR very much. The USA invaded America with its
own propaganda. So I only have enough information about the USA. But I
do not support authoritarian attitudes. And I do not think anyone here does.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
"I guess you have to find out before pointing out a position."
You got it wrong. I have convictions, but I can't find the political movement precise suitable for me. Because I have my own ideology. My ideology like Frankenstein, created from different parts.
So is everyone else's. You can still find out what kind of ideologies you have.
I KNOW name of the ideology. It is "MY ideology". I can change some parts of it, but I don't want to change my ideology to ideology of liberalism/fascism/anarchism/etc The only question is "how ideology of FSF fits to my ideology?" I'm now trying to find an answer to this question.
Points for discussions:
1. Privacy.
2. Software patents.
3. Using of proprietary software if there is no FLOSS alternatives.
4. The ban on providing information about non-free software. Even if somebody really need it.
5. Spyware nature of almost all non-free soft.
6. Richard Stallman's unwillingness to use a computer that can run Windows(tm). Because he thinks this will advertising Windows.
7. Using of non-free javascripts.
8. Using of "cloud"-basing services.
9. Fair competition with non-free software.
10.Competition between FLOSS projects.
11.Non-free BIOS/microcode.
12.Good ways of protection against digital piracy.
13.Cryptoanarchic FLOSS projects, like Freenet, Bitcoins, etc.
Responding to point 6:
http://www.stallman.org/stallman-computing.html
"I firmly refuse to install non-free software or tolerate its installed presence on my computer or on computers set up for me.
However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them. I will use them briefly for tasks such as browsing. This limited usage doesn't give my assent to the software's license, or make me responsible its being present in the computer, or make me the possessor of a copy of it, so I don't see an ethical obligation to refrain from this. Of course, I explain to the local people why they should migrate the machines to free software, but I don't push them hard, because annoying them is not the way to convince them."
It seems like he won't completely refuse to use computers that contain non-free software, but he would not tolerate non-free software on his computer, or on computers set up specifically for him.
There is no indication that this doesn't apply to Microsoft Windows.
But why then RMS refuse to use OLPC XO? He said he did not want to advertise Windows(tm).
Why he refuses to use a computer that can run Windows?
If he does not like Windows (as expected), he can just refuse to install Windows.
Stallman wouldn't install Windows on his computer or one set up specifically for him, but he wouldn't refuse to use a Windows machine (because it runs Windows) for limited use. RMS: "However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them. I will use them briefly for tasks such as browsing. This limited usage doesn't give my assent to the software's license, or make me responsible its being present in the computer[...]"
It seems like you are thinking about Stallman refusing to install Windows on his computer, and I am thinking about Stallman not refusing to limited use of someone else's [public] computer that contains Windows or other proprietary software?
I am just deducing that he wouldn't refuse to use a Windows computer, just like he would not refuse to use a GNU/Linux distro like Fedora or Ubuntu that contains some non-free software, as long as it is limited usage, and he didn't set it up. "That reasoning is based on the fact that I was not responsible for setting up those machines, or for how that was done. By contrast, if I were to ask or lead someone to set up a computer for me to use, that would make me ethically responsible for its software load. In such a case I insist on free software, just as if the machine were mine."
El 21/05/13 08:30, name at domain escribió:
> I KNOW name of the ideology. It is "MY ideology". I can change some parts of it, but I don't want to
change my ideology to ideology of liberalism/fascism/anarchism/etc The
only question is "how ideology of FSF fits to my ideology?" I'm now
trying to find an answer to this question.
>
> Points for discussions:
> 1. Privacy.
> 2. Software patents.
> 3. Using of proprietary software if there is no FLOSS alternatives.
> 4. The ban on providing information about non-free software. Even if
somebody really need it.
> 5. Spyware nature of almost all non-free soft.
> 6. Richard Stallman's unwillingness to use a computer that can run
Windows(tm). Because he thinks this will advertising Windows.
> 7. Using of non-free javascripts.
> 8. Using of "cloud"-basing services.
> 9. Fair competition with non-free software.
> 10.Competition between FLOSS projects.
> 11.Non-free BIOS/microcode.
> 12.Good ways of protection against digital piracy.
> 13.Cryptoanarchic FLOSS projects, like Freenet, Bitcoins, etc.
So now you are expressing what you really want. You want to know. Why
didn't you say that in the first place? If you want to learn, do not
criticize, ask.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre
copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
El 21/05/13 05:22, name at domain escribió:
> "I guess you have to find out before pointing out a position."
> You got it wrong. I have convictions, but I can't find the political
> movement precise suitable for me. Because I have my own ideology. My
> ideology like Frankenstein, created from different parts.
That is exactly what I said. Find your position and then take a stand.
Don't do it the other way around.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that the U.S. is not a democracy. "Democracy" is a very vague term: it means that everyone has a say in decisions that affect them. It's not as good as it should be, but people in the U.S. do have a say, mostly via local elections (which are far more likely to have an impact than e.g. presidential elections). The problem is that most Americans don't know or think about these far more important elections and instead focus on the President, who in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter that much. Then you have people focusing on preventing one party or the other from winning because they think disaster will come if it is chosen, when what they should be doing is voting for which politician they most agree with (regardless of whether or not that politician has a chance of winning) to show the major parties what the people want.
It is unfortunate that rich people and corporations have so much influence. But it's still a democracy, not a totalitarian regime.
"But it's still a democracy, not a totalitarian regime."
IMHO, most of countries are authoritarian regimes, like USA.
There are only a few countries, who isn't authoritarian. They are totalitarian, like North Korea.
USA is not democracy. Because the true democracy is only when a nurse can command army along with the generals, for example.
Or when any ignoramus have the same authority in physics as a professor of physics. Democratic country will not survive even one week, because the true democracy is sheer idiocy, IMHO.
Democracy is more like mob rule than X person bossing others around [using force?] and the other people having to obey. That situation seems like anarchy. Usually, anarchy leads to tyranny, as a prevailing army (of criminals) dominates citizens, effectively becoming a government, and would likely turn into a dictatorship.
El 21/05/13 09:37, name at domain escribió:
> Democracy is more like mob rule than X person bossing others around
> and others having to obey. That seems like anarchy. Usually, anarchy
> leads to tyrrany, as a mob or army dominates citizens, and probably
> wouldn't be fair or just.
Anarchy is the perfect democracy. Everyone has a say and decisions take
into account everyone's positions. Decisions are taken by consensus.
Tyranny is the opposite. Tyranny is the rule of the few as in all
capitalism or in authoritarian communism.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
Presidente (en conjunto con el resto de socios)
Asociación de Software Libre del Ecuador - ASLE
Av de la Prensa N58-219 y Cristóbal Vaca de Castro
Quito, Ecuador
(02)-600 8579
IRC: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=asle&uio=OT10cnVlJjEwPXRydWU3a
Todo correo que reciba será tratado como información pública, de libre copia y modificación, sin importar cualquier nota de confidencialidad.