Re: [tlug] OT: Linux is Libertarian! (was "about iphone")

[Raedwolf Summoner <raroofu@example.com>]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
> If there is such a thing as "communism"....

It is all in the semantics, isn't it, Stephen. I have been in countries that had so-called "communist" governments and I have had friends who have escaped such countries (both Latin-American friends from Cuba and and Nicaragua with whom I share a common language, and east European friends). The "worker" was in control there much as the "trees" are in control in a "green" government. Of course, someone has to wield all that power -- on their behalf, of course!  :)  I cannot think of a better term than pathological for the type of control those poor workers endure/d. Is/was it "communism"? It certainly purports to be. Beyond that, I cannot say. You're probably right, though, that in reality it isn't, and I would add that it really isn't possible, which you seem to be implying here. Which is why every communist government has become extremely oppressive.

> Pull my chain, will you? You'll regret that! :-)

Uh-oh. This isn't one of those flush now chains I've pulled, is it?
 
> But the pathology in question is not Linux or open source, it's GNU,

See, now you've already lost me. The only thing I "know" about GNU is that "GNU is Not Unix". I'm afraid you are entering into a philosophical debate with an unarmed man, to admit the obvious.

> pretty disgusting to me (eg, he believes that laws to protect children
> of any age from pedophiles are anti-freedom and should be repealed,
> search for "paedophile" in his blog).

You are, of course, referring to the inimitable Richard Stallman. I've read some of his interviews. Linux Format had one recently. They didn't get into the really kinky stuff. I do know that I've seen enough from him to understand that he is pretty far out. I am not a programmer and don't get into this enough to realize/understand the discrepancies you have pointed out.

Btw, is that GNU symbol (the goat's head?) supposed to represent the devil?

> You're the one who left out (faux) libertarianism, by not
> distinguishing between open source and free software as philosophies.

I thought that by distinguishing between "free as in beer" and "free as in speech" that I had that covered. I do know enough about this to know that a good way to get real open source types apoplectic is to not make this distinction. The LXF editors pointed out that in the interview with Stallman, in every instance that they failed to make [the ritual obsequy to] the distinction, he would immediately insert it for them.

--Ralph Sumner

---

What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out