Rant about RMS

snarkout · Post by **snarkout** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 4:03 pm

Jza wrote:
Vogateer wrote:I've seen no examples of programmers making money selling software under the GPL.
How many programmers have you seen failing selling software under GPL?

The number of projects that fail or lack maintainence because users are, in general selfish, greedy and think Free=gratis is fairly high. Shorewall is what vogateer was looking for, I'm pretty sure. Linuxrouter was another well known case. Google for cypherfunk if you want another very recent case. Hell, look at openBSD - they were spamming mailing lists "demanding" money for all the work they put into openssh. It's basically impossible to pay for *all* of the software you use in the F/OSS world, but many people who use free software (the guy from Jak Attak for instance said he would never pay for software in an episode of his shutdown podcast) think they should *never have to pay for software.* This is a fucked POV, IMO, but the case is that most people who actually do migrate from windows/mac to linux do so because it means their wallets are fatter for doing so.

Vogateer · Post by **Vogateer** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 4:21 pm

I think it was one of those two, Snarkout. I do remember the word "greed" being used pretty frequently on his page declaring that he was ending his work on the project or something along those lines. It's nice to have confirmation that my memory hasn't become faulty and started making stuff up to fill in the gaps.

Unfortunately that's one of the problems with the Unix philosophy of do one thing and do it well is that you end up with thousands of programs. It's hard to contribute to even a few of them without either contributing a minuscule amount to each project, or to pick a favorite and contribute to that project. With the latter approach a project like amaroK gets great support and the guy handling the library on paper sizes gets nothing. Hard to come up with a good solution.

Jza · Post by **Jza** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 4:27 pm

Vogateer wrote:I've read about a few, though honestly I can't remember their names right now. There was a guy who tried to make some sort of firewall software, and he was pretty bitter about not making money selling that free software.

So, do you have any examples of someone who has made money selling free software, or are you going to continue dodging the obvious fact that the reason so very few even try to sell free software is because it isn't feasible.

Well let me see, most people that write LAMP sites, do make money and they do release it under GPL. The sites cost thousands of dollars and they make a good living. Most of this are web designing shops and their margins are the same as any other web designing shop.

They also provide the source code on their JSP and even their .NET sites. So the clients can modify it. Sometimes this even beneficial to them because most things their clients can do themselves.

If you mean boxed software, well I know a couple of people that post some modifications of Asterisk to implement IVR's under the GPL. The product cost nearly 400 USD and you get the source code when you pay for it, as well as the implementation service.

Linspire is a company that pay programmers to make GPL products which are also free like Lphoto, Lsongs and an enhaced version of GAIM. Not all the company is GPL, but he guy in charge of the product earn his living writting GPL code. Same thing with Ximian.

Tsuroerusu · Post by **Tsuroerusu** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:26 pm

Jza wrote:Same thing with Ximian.

I think you mean Xandros, Ximian was the company Novell bought before buying SUSE.

Jza · Post by **Jza** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:34 pm

No I mean Ximian, back when they were in Boston and Mexico City. Most of the money came from services, contracts they did with Sun to port Gnome to Solaris 9. Also some other contracts to provide support for systems.

ubergeekinc · Post by **ubergeekinc** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:41 pm

It was a painful show to listen too - even before Linc attempted to ask his questions.

I was thinking before that point that RMS style of talking (and forcing others to do the same) came right out of the Jargon file's Hacker Speech Style. Knowing, before the interview, that RMS can be a rather strong and difficult personality was still surprised at his lack of ability to use his personality and charm to win minds to his cause rather than rude interruptions and domineering tactics.

Being a new regular listener of TLLTS (great show guys!) for the last 6 months, I believe that Linc and RMS do not share the same beliefs when it comes to Free software. So when Linc began to ask his questions (which I don't recall him being allowed to finish) RMS should have used wit and charm to win a convert to his cause rather than allowed the argument that ensued. It may have worked - maybe not - but it certainly would have impressed the listeners. The onus is not all on RMS of course - as he was a guest on the show. But when I put myself in Linc's place I wonder how he did not loose his cool and ripe the guy a new one (which to Linc's benefits, he didn't).

BTW - I revere RMS as a founder behind the GNU license(s) as well as the FSM (and FSF), but also wonder if a more charismatic leader would help the cause more.

Jza · Post by **Jza** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:45 pm

I had this conversation in my Local LUG a year ago. The conclusion was:

No I dont want to sleep RMS, so I dont need him to be pretty to make a decision if I am free or not.

Hope it helps.

Vogateer · Post by **Vogateer** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:46 pm

Jza wrote:No I mean Ximian, back when they were in Boston and Mexico City. Most of the money came from services, contracts they did with Sun to port Gnome to Solaris 9. Also some other contracts to provide support for systems.

These examples of Ximian and customizing a LAMP site are more accurately classified as selling services or making custom software than selling Free Software. We know you can make money selling support services. We know you can make money making custom software. Still, it seems nobody is selling free software in these cases, they are selling a service of setting up a drupal site or something along those lines. That might fall into the custom software category, but they are still not selling Free Software. I believe Linspire still sells proprietary software on top of their GPL software they support, and they also sell services in the way of being able to buy other proprietary software at a discount. I still don't see any of these qualifying as selling Free Software.

ubergeekinc · Post by **ubergeekinc** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 5:56 pm

Jza wrote:I had this conversation in my Local LUG a year ago. The conclusion was:

No I dont want to sleep RMS, so I dont need him to be pretty to make a decision if I am free or not.

You are right - 'pretty' has nothing to do with it. 'Professional' should. I think 'Free' has gone past the fringe outsiders from two decades ago and into the boardroom. This doesn't mean ties and clean-cut (which certainly doesn't describe me) - but this should mean a intellect backed by a strong charismatic personality.

Have an idea, 'Free', and a meeting with some ties - interrupt them, tell them that they have confused their questions with or that they are not making sense - and see how far that leader gets with the argument that Free is the only moral answer to software in that organization. I can think of better paths to success than how RMS handled the questions last show.

I believe in the FSF and I believe that RMS has helped it reach as far as it has into the corporate server room but I also believe its time for him to step aside. His methods only hurt the cause.

Tsuroerusu · Post by **Tsuroerusu** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:25 pm

ubergeekinc wrote:I believe in the FSF and I believe that RMS has helped it reach as far as it has into the corporate server room but I also believe its time for him to step aside. His methods only hurt the cause.

Remember that RMS does not care how popular GNU/Linux or other free software is, what he cares about is the freedom.

Jza · Post by **Jza** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:33 pm

ubergeekinc wrote:I believe in the FSF and I believe that RMS has helped it reach as far as it has into the corporate server room but I also believe its time for him to step aside. His methods only hurt the cause.

Maybe you should Join FSF and help with your new methods.

snarkout · Post by **snarkout** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:48 pm

ubergeekinc wrote:...but this should mean a intellect backed by a strong charismatic personality.

Crap. That doesn't describe me at all.

ubergeekinc · Post by **ubergeekinc** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 7:23 pm

Tsuroerusu wrote: Remember that RMS does not care how popular GNU/Linux or other free software is, what he cares about is the freedom.

True.

chuck · Post by **chuck** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:50 pm

Vogateer wrote:
Jza wrote:No I mean Ximian, back when they were in Boston and Mexico City. Most of the money came from services, contracts they did with Sun to port Gnome to Solaris 9. Also some other contracts to provide support for systems.
These examples of Ximian and customizing a LAMP site are more accurately classified as selling services or making custom software than selling Free Software. We know you can make money selling support services. We know you can make money making custom software. Still, it seems nobody is selling free software in these cases, they are selling a service of setting up a drupal site or something along those lines. That might fall into the custom software category, but they are still not selling Free Software. I believe Linspire still sells proprietary software on top of their GPL software they support, and they also sell services in the way of being able to buy other proprietary software at a discount. I still don't see any of these qualifying as selling Free Software.

But the point that RMS was making was that selling custom software to a company, provided you pass on the four freedoms to that company, is selling Free software. Just because you do not apply the GPL to the software that you sell the company does not make it any less Free.

Now if you develop code and only provide the binary to the customer, that is a bad thing in RMS' eyes.

Post by **dann** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 12:25 am

What I came away from the whole experience was that I was not prepared for the interview with RMS. Coming off the the episode of LUG Radio with ESR I was very interested in discussion on how the GNU + Linux Community can hope to achieve more widespread adoption without having to sacrifice too many of the values that have brought us to the state FOSS is in right now.

As pointed out in the interview and in this thread many times, RMS is not interested in market share but in keeping with the 4 freedoms. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to then see that my line of questioning in no way fit the interview. RMS would say no way to anything that may restrict any of the 4 freedoms and declare that they have no place in the Free Software Movement.

While he may come off as cold and brash, at no point do I think RMS intended to insult anyone. When he stated I was confused, I felt he meant that my line of questioning had no place in his philosophy so why bother asking at all? If my question poses a violation to any of the 4 freedoms th what other way can he answer than pointing out my question is ethically wrong?

RMS can explain to us why he believe DRM is wrong and why the Free Software Movment strongly support the anti-tivo clause; but to debate an opposing viewpoint is going to get us no where. RMS is not going to debate the issue because according to him, there is no issue to debate. If it violates the four freedoms then it is wrong. I respect him for that and applaud that he lives his live according to the values he believes.

thelinuxlink.net

Rant about RMS

Painful but interesting.