Linux laptops, revisited (can any sleep like my PowerBook does?)

Lonnie Olson lists at kittypee.com
Mon Jan 21 12:40:25 MST 2008


Levi Pearson wrote:
> In all seriousness, I really do not intend offense to anyone here, but
> I do think the mindset that I am arguing against is a harmful one.  I
> by no means wish to disparage the work that people put into free
> software.  I've contributed to a couple of projects myself.  I also
> think that promoting free software through conferences and user groups
> is a great thing.  It's just that commercial, proprietary, and
> otherwise 'non-free' software are not evil, and it's okay to use them
> when it makes sense to do so.  Believing otherwise doesn't do anyone
> any good.  Free software should stand on its own merits, not based on
> some pseudo-religious battle between good and evil!

No offense taken, but I think you are missing the "religious" reasoning 
in the Free Software movement.  The Free Software movement reasons that 
every user of software has a right to each of the 4 freedoms outlined below.

     * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
     * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your 
needs (freedom 1).
     * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor 
(freedom 2).
     * The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements 
to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3).

Any user that chooses software that strips them on one of these freedoms 
  is unfortunate.  Software makers that deny these freedoms are not 
"evil", but are unkind people by harming their customers deserved freedoms.

Now, if you don't believe the 4 freedoms are beneficial to our society, 
then I would understand your feelings.  But I get the distinct 
impression that you feel these freedoms are beneficial.  What is wrong 
with educating people about the unkind, freedom restricting acts of 
non-free software developers?

--lonnie



More information about the PLUG mailing list