edbarx wrote:In other words, he may be a good guardian of software freedom in terms of the parameters he has set. But he is no longer a young man and is probably not the best person to fully comprehend how the freedom of the users of computers/devices can be compromised in the age of accelerating changes we are living in.
Therefore, discredit him as his ideas are obsolete...
It is an unfounded
assumption the claim that being old also implies one's ideas are necessarily obsolete. It is also a taken for granted, the conviction that old people cannot understand the world around them, and cannot therefore, properly respond to its newer necessities.
Younger people necessarily have less experience which makes them more prone to repeat the mistakes of their predecessors. Therefore, the optimum, if it exists, doesn't belong to being young or old, but it rather belongs to a position, where one is determined to learn from the past mistakes of others, while at the same time, evaluates the situation to change strategy accordingly.
Both mental aptitude and experience are necessary, other than that, it would be a path full of failures.
You, my dear, just nailed it. Bravo!
somebodyelse wrote:As we age, our minds become less open to new things and less flexible. This is known and scientifically established. I meant no disrespect to him. Only that he is very good at defending the problem in terms of the parameters he has set. He may be less able to reimagine those parameters as the issue changes over time.
But we still have the freedoms he set. We can look at the code, run it as we wish, modify it and distribute our modified copies. This is essentially still being able to produce a new system that doesn't use systemd.
Our freedoms aren't at risk as you make they seem. Problem is, we (as a community) can't make smart decisions for the vast majority times when there's a vote, and this is IMO what happened with systemd's addoption. Is anyone willing to create another init system (and whatever elese systemd does) just to avoid systemd? Just as systemd's developers did? Because this is how things go on Linux: "I don't like this one little thing so I'll create an entire new big thing". This is effort wasting, and this is part of why we haven't taken off as a desktop sytstem, because there are thousands of choices, dozens of package formats and package managers, dozens of sound systems, display managers, etc. Thousands of people repackaging things that should work on a standards: one and improved/fast pacakge format and package manager (say, pacman); one audio system; one Xorg or Wayland or Mir, not the three; one (and the best) init system; one module controler; etc. As long as we ALWAYS create new things because we don't like the existing ones (instead of improving them), we're never going to stop having "systemds" all around us. We still have the freedom to create new things, nobody needs to stick with systemd. But are we going to improve it or create a whole new "systemd" because we don't like what's out there?
buntunub wrote:Probably. Again, I really don't think Stallman cares about a software project so long as its free with an LGPL license attached. As much as the systemd haters and conspiracy theorists like to think that Red Hat/Poettering have some ideas to subvert GNU/Linux, I find it hard to find any truth to it so long as the code is open source and can be freely modified by anyone who cares to do that. What you should worry about is what seems to be the blind trust that major distros have in it though. When all is said and done, systemd is a software project, just like any other LGPL software project, but Debian shoving beta quality software on Stable users is quite another issue entirely, and that is where I take issue.
I agree with you almost completely.
The LGPG license, as per gnu.org, should be used only in a few cases.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-li ... reLicenses
GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 3 (#LGPL) (#LGPLv3)
This is the latest version of the LGPL: a free software license, but not a strong copyleft license, because it permits linking with nonfree modules. It is compatible with GPLv3. We recommend it for special circumstances only.
TonyVanDam wrote: Stallman is all about freedom, yet not aware of some of the freedoms being taken away by using systemd.
Like which ones?
TonyVanDam wrote: I smell both contradiction & BS in Stallman's recent statements.
Please explain these thoughts
- and I'll give an info, just after it'll be ready for testing...
