Stallman is just promoting ideals.

The real world needs both free and non-free, but he's just there to keep non-free from taking over because that is what people tend toward because of greed and what they know.

>>29340175 (OP)
I like the idea of GNU, it's an alternative to the entire Unix operating system that can have varying components, like GNU/Linux. Although there aren't many different kernels out there right now to need to make that distinction.

He's mostly mocked for his extreme ideals but in general I think people respect his work (writing emacs, GNU, gcc, etc).

But isnt software just like "physical items" a product which the company have certain patents on etc?Although im enjoy alot of gratis(free of charge)software,not neccecarily open source tho

"When users don't control the program, the program controls the users. The developer controls the program, and through it controls the users. This nonfree or “proprietary” program is therefore an instrument of unjust power. "
-Richard Matthew Stallman
"https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html"

>>29340578
"A program is free software if the program's users have the four essential freedoms:

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this."

>>29340603
"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children."
-Richard Matthew Stallman

>>29340603
So I guess Stallman doesn't use the internet at all as he doesn't have access to the source code of every single website ever.

I also suppose he doesn't have a bank account as he doesn't have access to the source code of the software the banks use and can't modify it to his desires.

>>29340410
For me, it's "what have you done lately?"
And in comparison to Linus, he hasn't done that much.

File: 1353814291301.jpg-(119 KB, 707x646, 1098234324.jpg)

He's a nasty, crazy, impatient, tactless, loud, overconfident, useless, assburger-ridden man-child.

Anyone who listens to him lacks that ability to discern intelligent life.

>>29340662
Doesn't he download emails and websites news with wget?

I'm unsure of his use of banking.

He lacks a professional personality we all despise. Strangely enough, as much as people absolute hatred for suits and celebrities who constantly smile even when they have nothing to smile about. We have grown so indoctrinated that many people will not accept or listen to opinions of others who do not follow the stereotype.
For example: Eben Moglen has relatively the same beliefs as richard stallman, but he wears a suit so no one mines. Same with Bruce Perens and many others.
You will also see this phenomena with pictures of people having fun. If the group having fun (playing video games, eating pizza, drinking) are stereotypical models, 4chan refers to how awesome and great they are and you will never be as awesome or great. The same activity featuring regular looking people will be widely ridiculed and be referred to as virgin betas who will never experience life.

>>29340704
But he can't read the source code that created that page he downloaded in wget. So therefore he is using software that violates his own definition of freedom.

He's an extremist nutjob that doesn't understand that the world can't run entirely on free software...

File: 1353814568801.gif-(1.93 MB, 500x281, 1350332033218.gif)

>>29340662
Hell if I know.
>>29340643
I don't agree with him, but it's being taken too far because of his position. He just thinks the evidence brought forth isn't sufficient and that the argument rethinking. I doubt he actually intends to have sex with children. At least, I hope not.
>>29340666
He has done a lot, in the form in the form of a philosophical aspect. Also, Linus has done a lot, but it was RMS that started the GNU project. Go look up why Linus made the Linux Kernel.
>>29340685
Picture is related to you.

>>29340685
Or they post on 4chan...

You just described 90% of the population here. lol

>>29340780
That really depends on the website. I think his interest would be more on the kind of server that runs said website. Is it apache? well I imagine that is better in his eyes than anything related to microsoft.

But seriously, how can't the world run entirely on free software? stressing the word can't.

>>29340662
>right click
>view page source

>>29340666
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/
these are all gnu software projects.

File: 1353814785920.jpg-(927 KB, 1920x1080, gaben_1920x1080.jpg)

>>29340175 (OP)
I don't think fancy forms of commercial software, ie for """consumers""" like video games lend themselves to the GPL. At least not initially, companies have been known to release source years down the road. Also the highly featured, "prosumer" & creative software that people use to make a living. These almost have to be proprietary to stay at optimal quality, I know people will disagree on this.

Operating systems, web standards, infrastructure in general. I'm all for these things being free as in freedom.

My 2c

>>29340844
You're an idiot

>>29340840
Practically everything runs on Apache or another open source web server. Very few sites actually use IIS.

There is a lot of software that practically can't be free just because of how specific it is or security reasons...

>>29340685
I fucking lold at that image

>>29340873
>Also the highly featured, "prosumer" & creative software that people use to make a living. These almost have to be proprietary to stay at optimal quality

This is true, there are no good free image/video editors at all, while Adobe is the king of them.

There are a lot of shit proprietary ones though... *cough*sony vegas*cough*

>>29340662
Stallman does not care what software other people use on their servers. Since that is the banks computer. Not his own. However, he would suggest to the bank to switch to free software if the opportunity arised

>>29340887
>because of how specific it is or security reasons...

But free software means the client is the one that has freedom over it, meaning that, if you were an enterprise that bought software the source code would be given to you and then you'd be able to: modify it, share it alike, or do whatever you want with the software you just bought.

>>29340887
>security reasons
That is the fucking stupidest thing I have ever read

>>29340666
>And in comparison to Linus, he hasn't done that much.

Lol. He has done more than you could ever accomplish. He was the ONLY original hacker to stick with the principles, without him pioneering the idea of software freedom and articulating the GPL, corporations would have subverted linux and every other important free software long time ago.

The idea of free software and the idea that copyrights and patents are immoral and unnecessary never occurred to me before I read his writings, the same could be said for many others.

It's because of him the Eben got into free software and it's because of fsf that strong encryption was legalised in the US, without that there would be no e-commerce.

He got linus to GPL linux, without that any corporation (M$) can use embrace, extend extinguish to scrub linux out long time ago.

he may have some flaws but nobody is perfect. but he is by far the most important man of the computer age.

>>29340643
I think that was a reference to "Consensual sex", and the outcome of the "associated psychological damage" of the alleged "victim".

Societies where this is NOT an issue, there is no issue, except with the external populations which "frown on it", and call it "pedophilia".

Hawaii 14 is the age of consent. Thus, it isn't pedophilia. 10-12 in Thailand... and that is encouraged by the law... The damage is solely "rape", or in "social outcasting", not the "action of consensual sexual relations".

Though, I don't agree with massive age-spans, that is simply MY opinion, and should only effect MY life.

>>29340943
A lot of companies do offer source code licenses, but they can't distribute it as it costs a metric fuckton to create a lot of software...

If you want good software to be made developers need to get paid. Yes, even open source developers get paid. How else do you think the largest Linux Distros stay non shit...

>>29340949
You're an idiot

>>29341002
*affect

>>29340917
avidemux and gimp

>>29340643
personally from a male standpoint i would have loved to fuck older women when i was younger and i dont think it would have effected me at all.

>>29341027
Both are nowhere near as good as Premiere Pro and Photoshop

File: 1353815291958.png-(197 KB, 1543x1200, 1337360239074.png)

I can't in one sentence

>>29341006
i really dont understand what security reasons there would be, like national security or something?

>>29340873
we disagree on this.
it's a catch twenty two situation, few developers want to write code for a market that doesn't have a majority share, but until there's software userz aren't encouraged to switch.

open source competition is sufficient for professional usage, we're just dealing with corporate inertia.

also see steamonlinux - source2 opensource will open the market up

>>29341006
a source code license is not the same that free software. You are buying software, that means (and even software engineering teach that) The source code is included too,and it should mean no extra fee.

Giving away source code after selling a system does mean that developers get paid.

I don't see where you're trying to go, since all you seem to say is that free software can still produce money to pay developers.

Even people working by themselves could be hired to add a specific function to a free software project so it would be perfect for an organization.

>>29340980
Meh.

>>29341056
are you going to infer that lightworks is not a professional video editor?

Stallman thinks a world can exist where there is no secrecy.

Stallman's core beliefs are there flawed, therefore all of his beliefs stemming from this are inherently invalid.

You can't have a world where all software is free, where companies and individuals can't protect what they create, and where it's the 70s at MIT again and life is good.

The latter, of course, being the actual dream RMS is chasing with all of this foolishness, but will never ever have it again, so he became vindictive towards all software companies who hired away his friends and left him behind to be alone and angry.

>>29341160
>Stallman thinks a world can exist where there is no secrecy.

false. software that is not published is not required to have its source released.

you are perfectly allowed to keep secrets, what you are not allowed to do is use non-free software to enslave users.

>>29341160
strawman.
Stallman never said that. Or anything like it.
You are creating an argue for stallman, then arguing your created argument. Not what stallman actually said.
I'm not sure what you are saying is malicious or idiotic. I'm going to assume your just an idiot and not an asshole. So,I suggest that you study more

>>29341213
>enslave

Get back to me when you actually know what it's like to be a slave to anything in your first-world life, you drama queen.

>>29341235
>strawman

Didn't read the rest of your comment, because I know that everything you say in every topic which starts with this word is ignorant and invalid.

>>29341263
nevermind then. Your just an asshole

>>29341247
>Get back to me when you actually know what it's like to be a slave to anything in your first-world life, you drama queen.

I would have you know that I was born and raised in a under-developed country and I know full well what it is like to be a slave. You on the other hand probably never left your first world country and thought it sounds so cool and hardcore to talk about how others never knew slavery.

>>29341247
go back to your second world

>>29341213
Actually he's right, Stallman supports things like Wikileaks and the dispersal of information the government wishes to keep secret. He also wants companies to reveal all of their proprietary hardware and software.

These are secrets, and Stallman can't stand not being allowed to have something. He's like a child. If you've ever seen him throw one of his temper tantrums, you'd see why so many people disregard him.

>>29341316
Any links?

>>29341307
So, supposedly, you grew up with the notion of physical slavery. And you feel that, having experienced this first-hand, that comparing this to using a piece of software with no source code available is equivalent.

Get off the fucking internet, kid. You probably grew up in a middle-class American home and decided using software that everyone else was using just wasn't cool enough for you, so you took up the nearest internet politics you could find to feel important and accepted by someone.

>>29341316
>Stallman supports things like Wikileaks and the dispersal of information the government wishes to keep secret.

>He also wants companies to reveal all of their proprietary hardware and software.


The world is not entirely constituted of corporations and governments you know.

Having those two declare their secrets doesn't mean anyone is anti-secret. Just like crushing ants doesn't make one pro-killing.

>>29341316
personally i believe we should have the right to know the information our government is withholding. information on soldiers whereabouts (or other bullshit reasons to conceal information) should not be on documents until the aftermath.
same goes for hardware and software.

>>29341316
No. Stallman has publicly said many times that if you develop software for a corporation or for yourself and keep it in house. Its perfectly acceptable for you not to release the source. Its when you try to DISTRIBUTE the software the sources should be required.
is political agenda concerning the support of organizations such as wikileaks is because he believes the citizens have the right to know the activities of the governments that they support, elect, and pay for.
Stallman also supports things such as TOR and PGP because stallman is a very active defender of privacy.
The two are completely seperate issues.

>>29341402
Sexing up a parrot is more impressive than anything the Finnish have ever done.

>>29341365
>>29341365

None of this relates to any point being made, this is just ad hominem.

can anyone point me to a video where he gets ridiculed or someone makes a correct statement that makes RMS look silly?
I would like to see him pissed off

File: 1353816309470.jpg-(57 KB, 600x726, finland-600x726[1].jpg)

>>29341431
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/hayha.html

Nice try, Stallman.

>>29341416
people like you are children who don't understand how the world works.

how do you realistically think our country could be safe if every enemy and criminal knew the locations of every military base, every piece of hardware we had, every personnel manifest, every deployment, every requisition, etc?

How about we just give detailed plans to terrorists on how and when to attack a military base for weapons and to kill our soldiers.

His only flaw is that he doesn't believe in God.

>>29341433
Nope, it is 100% relevant.

All of you jokers keep saying that proprietary software "enslaves" you. You don't realize how ridiculous and melodramatic you sound when you make such a childish comparison.

Here's you a tip: don't use software you don't like. Other people, however, can use whatever they like. Stop trying to "enslave" them with your own minority beliefs.

>>29341465
you should read my 'childish. statements again

>>29341460
>Killing Soviets
>Impressive
LET'S ONLY GIVE ONE OUT OF EVERY TEN MEN A GUN AND JUST RUSH, WE BEST ARMY.

RMS is my hero.

File: 1353816590617.jpg-(366 KB, 525x3900, 134632048230.jpg)

Enjoy your shackles, care of RMS!

>>29341465
Security by design > security by obscurity
If that hardware actually was secure, it wouldn't matter if people knew about it.
Allowing people to be complacent with inferior security that relies upon obscurity slows progress and keeps thing, ultimately, insecure.

>>29341465
did you not read

>>29341513
The link given was 1 guy. Just 1, who killed 505 people with a sniper.

Without a scope and completely on his own.

>>29341550
While I don't like acting as if a license is better through having fewer words, didn't we already establish how much superior the BSD license is?

>>29341572
I'm well aware of the White Death, didn't have to check the link to know you'd bring him up.
Again though, killing Soviet recruits is not impressive.

>>29341553
What advantage does it gain to give someone access to source code which enforces some form of security? If a flaw is found, the vendor can fix it. Until then, the lack of source makes it infinitely harder and more time-consuming for bad people to figure it out.

It's like handing your car keys to random people and hoping you don't come across the one who will drive away in it.

>>29341572
xX_N0sc0p3_420_50Vi3T_K!LLA_Xx

>>29341604
have you heard of a disassembler. it only takes time and the right motivation

>>29341604
>the lack of source makes it infinitely harder and more time-consuming for bad people to figure it out.
You have no idea what your talking about.

>>29341633
I have not only heard of a disassembler but I use them. I've reverse-engineered code for everything from ARM and x86 to Z80 and 6502.

For something as complex as encryption, reverse-engineering could take you weeks if not months to fully understand what the code is doing.

>>29341659
Spoken as a true non-programmer.

>>29341661
you realize that everyone can tell that your lying and have no idea what you are talking about, right?

File: 1353817046458.jpg-(136 KB, 800x533, 1209823423.jpg)

This is still my favorite.

>>29341604
>if a flaw is found, a vendor can fix it
This is correct, but you and I both know that is not what happens, generally speaking. Looks at windows.
By having the source and design open to people, you allow more people to actually find those flaws. By finding as many flaws as possible, the company is forced to either (1) have to deal with the security exploits that arise or (2) actually fix them.
Letting the "bad guys" know helps to force people to actually fix security flaws.

>>29341572

>muh white death
>muh winter war

Russians were ill-prepared and ill-equipped, most of them were conscripts, armies were ill-supplied and military equipments badly maintained.

There is no thing magical about finnish that makes them 10x better than russian at fighting.

>>29341704
No, they realize that you're the one who has no idea what you're talking about, which is why you have trouble with simple words like "your" and "you're."

>>29341604
>It's like handing your car keys to random people and hoping you don't come across the one who will drive away in it.
Not having access to source code is akin to trusting a random, hard to inspect box that magically fits into a door to be a safe lock, from a security perspective.

You needn't be surprised if that box only was "snake oil" security, and a simple device -analogy to a screwdriver/magnet/...- would open it.

>>29341661
then you already know 'infinitely harder' is only weeks to months

>>29341550
>>29341550

>a license that ensures freedom in an inherently non-free legal ecosystem is longer than one that doesn't

Who would have thunk it.

>>29341720
this argument has now entered youtube comments tier.

>>29341731
When you buy a safe to store your money, weapons, documents, etc, do you call the vendor and ask them for blueprints so that you can be sure it's constructed safely?

Even if you had access to these blueprints, would you even have any idea how to read them? Most people wouldn't.

However, now every safecracker in town knows how to get into your safe.

>>29341752
yea i always found it funny that people think theyre so smart because they can point out the most common grammatical errors

>>29341771
SUPER SPOILER OMEGA PROTIP: You can look up things about safecracking on youtube.
Most safes use effectively the same mechanism. The difference between a good safe and a bad safe is tolerances.

>>29341783
I have to be this smart, because I have to be able to write code properly.

When you don't even have a mastery of the English language, that kind of puts you at a disadvantage from the get-go. I mean, you can't even put an "h" on "yeah" nor an apostrophe in "you're."

GNU was impressive. Emacs is obselete unless you already know it. Promoting freedom is always relevant. His talks all follow the exact same pattern and need some amount of variation. He needs a better website. We like Wozniak's eccentricity but Stallman's total lack of social nous make us see his as a negative.

>>29341810
omgz u know teh secret..!11

Come on, all encryption uses the same basic technique too. Breaking it is another story, however. Same with breaking into a safe. If you don't know what's beneath the steel, you have a much harder time figuring out how the fuck to get it open.

ITT:
>rms discussion
>pedophilia in relation to rms
>Software licensing
>some guy who doesn't know anything about security tries to tell us why a black box is good

>>29341821
now youve gone full retard. apostophe's have nothing to do with coding nor does spelling. look at a list of unix commands for god sakes; cp, mv, ls, fuck those extra letters

>>29341874
>why a black box is good
Haven't read the thread but since when is /g/ against abstraction?

>>29341845
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_lkYQ88kv0
also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity

>>29341874
In summary, proprietary hardware and software will never go away. You're like racists and biggots who fight against gay marriage. You're never going to get your way. Stop telling people what to do, crawl back in your holes, and let people use good software which isn't outdated open-source bug-ridden junk.

>>29341821
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/yea

>>29341892
The point of this is that you questioned my ability to disassemble code, which is something I've been doing for numerous years. It's something I can do rather quickly for older processors and software (such as DOS), but that takes a reasonable amount of time for modern software. I know what it takes to do this kind of thing, and to say that a "hacker" has just as easy of a time with closed-source software as he does open-source is simply ridiculous.

By pointing out your inability to even type, it proves to everyone that you can't question my ability when you yourself obviously don't know how to do it.

>>29341771
>When you buy a safe to store your money, weapons, documents, etc, do you call the vendor and ask them for blueprints so that you can be sure it's constructed safely?
I think I'd generally trust 3rd parties *if* they could have examined the internals of the safe.

If they just claim it's safe 'cause it looks sturdy, no, I'm not going to trust that in the least.

> However, now every safecracker in town knows how to get into your safe.
Of course! If you know the lock mechanism, the key must be irrelevant, right?

>>29341996
actually no i did not, i just backed the guy you tried to insult with your faggotry spelling competition

I saw him in person and everything which is said about him is true.

>>29341720
"hur, hur, now I will attack his spelling!"
your such a stupid faggot. I'm not claiming to be the best developer in the world at all. However, no one who is a developer talks like you do, a lot of what you say just does not make any sense or is so unnecessarily ambiguous. That is how I can tell that you are not a developer, but a kid with wikipedia open.
for example "for something as complex as encryption" (what sort or type of encryption? encryption is a very blanket term which could cover a wide variety of software) "reverse-engineering could take you weeks!" (what sort of reverse engineering are you referring to?)
I can kinda get an idea of what you were trying to say because the previous topic was a disassembler. Still, no one would respond in this way if they knew what they were talking about.

Since, in my lack of ability, I can create a more coherent sentence then that. I know that you certainly do not reverse-engineer or develop anything.

>>29342021
Yes, the key is mostly irrelevant, once the safecracker knows where to drill and what mechanisms to move.

It's like with lock-pickers. Each brand/model of industrial-quality lock has its own characteristics. Once you know that particular lock, you can get it open easy. But you have to figure it out first. If you had a diagram of what's inside that lock, it would be way easier to know how the tumblers work.

>>29342038
What exactly is said about him?

File: 1353817992375.jpg-(57 KB, 645x430, rms1339615412795.jpg)

Along with Frank Brown, Fred Montegue, Randall Munroe, Noam Chomsky, Jacque Fresco, and my father, he's one of my heros.

>>29342045
>I can create a more coherent sentence then that
>then that

Get out of here.

He's weird as fuck.

He's done a lot of good work for the IT world.

I respect his ideals but they're a bit extreme for me to subscribe to completely. We need the OPTION of free software for the sake of choice.

>>29342061

Well first off at the begining of any speech he always starts with "Linux is really GNU +Linux".

He had good intentions but took it way too far

>>29342098
People often take extreme views with a more reasonable middle ground being their end goal.

>>29342081
Furthermore, your insistence on accurate grammar on an image board rather then the context of the message just proves your a wild faggot whom everyone hates and no one will ever love.

Have you people even read his book?

The guy is vindictive towards all proprietary software companies, because one of them tried to tell him he could have their source code anymore. He threatened to walk into their building with a bomb and blow them up once.

Everything he does is based on a grudge against the software industry for destroying his hacker community at MIT by hiring them away and not letting them share their code with him.

File: 1353818349346.gif-(955 KB, 500x375, cheerios.gif)

>>29342113
>Linux OS

Credibility: in a similar place to these Cheerios.

>>29342183
> He threatened to walk into their building with a bomb and blow them up once
hes a badass, we get it

>>29342183
I have read his book, no where in it does it say he threatened to bomb anyone.

>>29342312
You didn't read his book.

File: 1353818758219.png-(99 KB, 247x248, 1275137231211.png)

I find that most anti-GNU/free software individuals are usually people who potentially have something to lose by the widespread adoption of free software.

>muh insecurity
>muh games
>muh inconvenience
>muh unethical software dev job

You proprietary faggots make me sick. Always spreading cheek to receive non-free cock 24/7 without compromise.

I'll be here computing in freedom, while you sperglords can keep playing your video games inside digital jails, bought by the wages of a 30K/year proprietary code monkey peasant.

>but the GPL RESTRICTS my freedom BSD STRONG!! :DDDDD

Then why the fuck are you living a democracy where the rule of law is complex and comprehensive, inherently restricting many of your 'freedoms'??

Fuck off to Somalia, because that country is free as the BSD license.

It's like the average pro-proprietary supporter in this thread has the intellectual capacity and cognitive complexity of a paramecium.

You know what? Why don't you suck my dick, because that's what you do every time you use a proprietary program.

This thread gave me AIDS

>>29342173

>misspelled "you're"
>no comma between "hates" and "and"
>you fail

>>29340785
what movie is that gif from? >daniel craig

File: 1353818910402.jpg-(29 KB, 640x480, 2010-04-28-134028.jpg)

>>29342317
Yes I did. I own Free as in Freedom and I own Just for fun by torvalds. I have also read the dotCommunist manifesto and the cathedral and the bazaar.
I dont have it offhand, but here is a picture of my torvalds book.
That is my bear.

>>29342381

Here's an idea. It's just an idea, I mean, it might not even work.

If you don't like proprietary software, don't use it.

I know, I know, you have to use proprietary software at the end of the day. There are no industry-standard open-source applications available in any field. All open-source does is back-end server technology, and even that isn't on par with what proprietary software can and is doing.

But it's okay, you can be mad if open-source hasn't lived up to what you hoped after all these decades. I would be mad too if what I believed in so much had failed everyone this badly.

>>29342317

0/10

>>29342183
and the problem there is...

What did you expect him to do... walk away from years of hard work, when they "legitimately" stole his work fair and square. (Corporate ownership, via, you invent it at work, then work owns the rights to it.)

They tricked him into working... used him under the ploy of "yea, you and your biddies get it free, the world does.. until it is good enough to take from you and sell, for us."

Ok, the bomb thing was over the top... but it was a rage-threat, not serious. Like when someone yells, "Im gonna kill that nigger" a the TV screen football game.

But I digress. Business needed money, and he was not providing it, but he wasted a lot of money developing this shit, using their resources. Stuff he would not have been able to develop alone, in a basement, on a commidore vic-20.

It is all corporate theft. The things we fight the most for, are things which effect us the most. You, obviously have no issues, and thus, will never have real balls or purpose, other than being another person's bitch. Just saying... You won't. Not until someone unjustly sours you.. like me.

>>29342381
Take your copypasta elsewhere.

File: 1353819025817.png-(24 KB, 450x450, babbysfirsttroll.png)

>>29342429

>>29342384
9 minutes, 2 elementary spelling mistakes found

>>29342446
You didn't read his book either.

Stallman TOOK Gosling's code to make Emacs. It wasn't the other way around. When Gosling when proprietary, they told Stallman to remove what he stole. He raged so hard that he could have killed anyone near him for weeks.

This happened on at least two other occasions, where Stallman took code and was asked to stop later, further enraging him.

In fact, he set out to destroy Symbolics by cloning their software. Originally he was stealing it directly out of the source code until they locked him out. Then afterward he cloned it based on the documentation.

These days, you know as well as I do that Stallman would be in court for cloning their software identically and giving it awya.

>>29342429
>I know, I know, you have to use proprietary software at the end of the day.

Try again nigger.

100% libre all day everyday.

>industry standard

Ooooohh, "INDUSTRY STANDARD" :DDDDDDDDDDDD

Buzzwords are about as useful as my dick hair.

Fuck off.

>>29342429
the only proprietary software i use is on my phone, because i have yet to find a better alternative. i do think free software is above par with that of proprietary

>>29342447

Not even copypasta, 100% OC

>confirmed for asspained

>>29342561
Okay, tell me open-source applications accepted, or even used, in any field.

Video editing? 3D modeling? No, not Blender, it crashes constantly. Audio editing? Not audacity, it's a child's toy. CAD? Image editing? No, not GIMP, it's too primitive.

Seriously, tell me one area of industry where open-source applications are dominant.

>>29342561
>100% libre all day everyday.
Even Stallman uses proprietary software. Confirmed for idealistic teenager that doesn't really understand the views he claims to support. Supporting Stallman is the techy equivalent to supporting the environment.

>>29340175 (OP)

I love Stallman. I've read lots of his essays, as well as Free Software, Free Society.

Everything he says makes sense if you read his writing; there's just too much to explain when he's in interviews for people to really get a good hold of where he's coming from.

>>29342604
the internet

>>29342624
The internet is not a single piece of software.

Stop avoiding the question. I'm talking about industry applications.

>>29342604
>blender
>crashes constantly
Well that's the first time I've heard that one

>>29342060
I'm obviously talking the case where you *can't* do the analogy to drill ("brute force").

The other case is already broken from the start, especially in a software/computer context, and we can disregard it entirely.

Even with a safe, the point of it existing despite drilling is the chance or certainty that someone would come by and see the *person* doing the drilling, or the hole or other effects caused by that action, after all. No such fucking chance on closed source software running on some computer.

>>29342604
The funny part of your post is that Blender, audacity and Gimp are used constantly in professional use.

>>29342648
dont change your question

>>29342604
papa johns

>>29342661
Your point is irrelevant because you're refusing to acknowledge the comparison of physical damage to a safe to the damage done by an attacker.

Intrusions to systems are almost always discovered eventually. That is the damage. Whether the code was open-source or proprietary, it doesn't change how the discovery of intrusion would be made.

It's funny to watch people try to pick apart my perfect analogies with little details that don't make any sense in terms of technology.

>>29342648
TCP/IP is open and standardized, no proprietary bullshit there

>>29342648
LAMP

>>29342741
Inferior to MAMP.

>>29342674
No they aren't. Neither is OpenOffice.

These are substandard programs which people try to implement in place of professional applications. Sometimes they make it work, but usually they just cost the company lots of money when they either a) switch to the proprietary stuff anyway, or b) buy expensive translations software to convert the formats they need.

>>29342755
>openoffice
well no shit a deprecated software isnt used

>>29342384
There shouldn't be a comma in between the words "hates" and "and" in his sentence. Le fuck off.

>>29342753
Yet a shittonne of people use it

File: 1353819833739.jpg-(145 KB, 900x600, 102398124.jpg)

Okay nerds, it was nice proving that open-source software is irrelevant and that proprietary software will always exist and always be better.

I have to get up early in the morning for my job, where I write code that enslaves you more and more. Have fun secretly using it, which everyone knows you do, since open-source applications are all so awful.

>>29342710
Papa Johns pizza in the house

>>29342604
I use blender all the fucking time and it has never crashed, not even on my x60.
Also, LightWorks.
Furthermore, Just outright rejecting something like GIMP is absurd. Especially when it blows most commercial photo editors out of the water. Like paint.net and corel

>>29342604

>Okay, tell me open-source applications accepted, or even used, in any field.

Ever heard of GROMACS? GNU Octave? SPPARKS? Probably not, because you think "industry application" means shit tier consumer-oriented crapware.

Go away, people with real jobs are using free software in complex fields because it gives them the freedom to change, modify share and distribute knowledge, the hallmark of science and destiny of software.

File: 1353819971611.png-(427 KB, 710x750, Your brain on GNU.png)

He's insane, and props up his diluted version of freedom, while at the same time advocating denying liberty in the context of economics.

Software freedom for a sane person is the freedom to make a passive (or active) agreement with a software creator to use their software, and then following through with your side of the contract. Stallman is quite strange in that he is actually against proprietorship over software, meaning that in a world run by him, it would not be acceptable to say that software you've made can't be used or distributed in a certain way.

>>29342615
Even Stallman uses proprietary software. Confirmed for idealistic teenager that doesn't really understand the views he claims to support. Supporting Stallman is the techy equivalent to supporting the environment.

>ITT: projection

Why do you hate yourself?

>>29342853
So he's a technological Marxist?

>>29342867
>yfw he's right, and you have nothing to counter

>>29342755
You should really look into latex and emacs, both of which are examples of open-source technologies that far surpass anything that is available in the proprietary world.

The main issue with FOSS software is that most of the community is unwilling to deal with what they see as "dirty capitalists" (or the FOSS equivalent phase) which means that their software stays forever stuck in the world of people who "know" about it.

Additionally, companies like Apple like to get design patents on many, many things, and so restrict what the FOSS community can do in terms of features.

However, both of the things listed above are examples of leftist though ruining things, so in tl;dr form: more freedom = generally better software.

His ideals are OK, but the ways he enforces it is just asshole-y.

>>29340175 (OP)
He deeply cares about things most people dont care at all about and really doesn't convince me to me or most other people to care.
He is a popular topic because he is one of the few "Tech extremist" out there. And he has a sense of humor

I think his ideals are a little bit too far, or maybe I just don't understand them properly.

From what I gather, he believes that proprietary software should not exist.

Personally, I'm fine with it existing, but I also think that it's important to have free alternatives. I also think that we should not base our lives around software that doesn't respect your freedom and privacy (eg: facebook).

he's the PETA of computing freedom. He does more harm to his cause than good.

>>29342999
well he doesn't kill 99% of those he claims to help

>>29342591
You're funny. Too bad I saw the exact same thing in a different thread a couple of days ago.

>>29343025
Could have been his own words

>>29343025

Too bad you can't prove it.

Faggot

>>29343067
Can you prove it's OC? No? Thought not.

>>29343219
I tried to find it on the archive
I think he wins this one

>>29343219

How about searching a supposed copypasta string of text in google?

If you saw the string in a previous thread, it should have been indexed in the installgentoo.org cache.

>how new are you?

I'm getting a big whiff of unerageb& angsty teen in this thread.

>>29343314
Try deodorant