Stallman Was Right(twitter.com)
twitter.com
Stallman Was Right
https://twitter.com/snowden/status/1798728673698443638
77 comments
We need regulation, laws and enforcement, enough with ethics.
Stallman basically preached a Communist manifesto where the tech workers should own the means of production/compute. Communism became popular in the early 20th century because people were scared of a feudal-capitalist future that didn't come to pass --yes, partly because of Communism. However, Big Tech has managed to build exactly that kind of feudal/rentier capitalism without regulation, without oversight and with full market control.
In the end, I don't think Stallman was right wrt the tools needed to stop that future; the GPL was embraced (and then undermined) by Big Tech and became irrelevant. By actually commoditizing the base platform layers, OSS probably enabled the massive cloud/application behemoths on top. More importantly, OSS was useful as a pseudo-competitor to the monopolists --remember when in them midst of the Microsoft-DOJ fracas, MS kept bringing up Linux as its nemesis? how did that turn out? what percentage of Azure are Linux machines? what Big Tech behemoth does NOT run on OSS these days?
But, to his credit, the future that Stallman warned us about did come to pass; his diagnosis was correct, but not the cure he prescribed. The internet is now run by feudal lords that extract rents from anyone trying to work or live on it.
Stallman basically preached a Communist manifesto where the tech workers should own the means of production/compute. Communism became popular in the early 20th century because people were scared of a feudal-capitalist future that didn't come to pass --yes, partly because of Communism. However, Big Tech has managed to build exactly that kind of feudal/rentier capitalism without regulation, without oversight and with full market control.
In the end, I don't think Stallman was right wrt the tools needed to stop that future; the GPL was embraced (and then undermined) by Big Tech and became irrelevant. By actually commoditizing the base platform layers, OSS probably enabled the massive cloud/application behemoths on top. More importantly, OSS was useful as a pseudo-competitor to the monopolists --remember when in them midst of the Microsoft-DOJ fracas, MS kept bringing up Linux as its nemesis? how did that turn out? what percentage of Azure are Linux machines? what Big Tech behemoth does NOT run on OSS these days?
But, to his credit, the future that Stallman warned us about did come to pass; his diagnosis was correct, but not the cure he prescribed. The internet is now run by feudal lords that extract rents from anyone trying to work or live on it.
Those things you mention are necessary, but without ethics, we can't say no. I want that power.
I pulled out of all clouds when it comes to my personal stuff recently (including streaming stuff, I just store music, movies and shows locally like I did 15 years ago). I didn't realize I missed the simplicity so much. Just back up your stuff every now and again and you're fine, no fees, no syncing, no requirement for a connection. Offline first. Storage is cheap as chips now so there's not much of a barrier for I imagine most people.
I never stopped. ;D Renting nerfed media forever always sounded like a bad deal to me. I'll own everything and be happy.
Whilst not owning isn’t ideal before streaming most people still rented movies at blockbuster et al rather than buying.
And for TV we had reruns either on primary channels or for older content on the various basic cable “syndication” channels.
And for TV we had reruns either on primary channels or for older content on the various basic cable “syndication” channels.
Well, now renting can cost more than buying the actual physical movie :)
Eh… unless you are subbing to every streaming service out there it’s not. A new BluRay release is circa £20-30, DVDs are cheaper and also get actual discounted.
When it gets really expensive is when you have kids at which point Disney+ which is £7.99 pays for itself in about a day.
When it gets really expensive is when you have kids at which point Disney+ which is £7.99 pays for itself in about a day.
Oh I meant cinema movies before they end up on streaming sites. The Dune 2 BluRay had cost 1 less than to borrow and stream it. Might be different from country to country but that was really an eye opener for me. Okay the stream was 4k the BluRay not, thats maybe the only point for the stream, but really that price, incredible.
The problem is that it’s very hard to do so either legally or affordable and often both.
Then do it illegally. And having storage is cheaper than having subscriptions.
That’s fine, point still holds if you aren’t going to contribute to a discussion consider if it’s worth replying in the first place.
I disagree, 192kpbs music and DVD quality movies and shows are fine with me and the disk space requirements are low. Classics are dirt cheap and ripping them is trivial.
Getting hard copy content is getting quite difficult and very expensive, that may work for “classics” especially if you can get them 2nd hand. But the amount of new content that isn’t released on anything but digital media is very significant.
DVDs of new movies are £10-15 in the UK still, shows are much more than that if they even get a DVD or a non-digital release to begin with.
Unless your content consumption is low it’s going to cost many multiples than what even paying for 2-3 streaming services does per year.
DVDs of new movies are £10-15 in the UK still, shows are much more than that if they even get a DVD or a non-digital release to begin with.
Unless your content consumption is low it’s going to cost many multiples than what even paying for 2-3 streaming services does per year.
I get music and DVD's from thrift stores and my local eBay equivalent. So yeah there's definitely a cutoff.
You're right, the newer stuff is difficult if not impossible to get a physical copy of. I just don't bother. I go see a movie in theaters every now and again but I'm 500% done with modern streaming platforms.
You're right, the newer stuff is difficult if not impossible to get a physical copy of. I just don't bother. I go see a movie in theaters every now and again but I'm 500% done with modern streaming platforms.
That’s perfectly fine but when a monthly streaming charge is the same as a single DVD movie it’s poses a very different calculation for most households.
When you are looking to get content for children it becomes even harder and more expensive.
When you are looking to get content for children it becomes even harder and more expensive.
The library is also a great source of DVDs.
Technically illegal to rip from a library DVD and having movies in a library is very much as US thing.
Having movies in a library is definitely not a US only thing.
Here in my European country, most if not all libraries carry movies on DVD and Blu-Ray, including the very latest releases.
I'm pretty sure the same goes for most European countries.
People threw Stallman under the bus just because he is a bit of a creep and maybe unfunny and certainly looks like an ogre. But he was always right. His contributions to OSS cannot be understated.
If by a "bit" of a creep you mean it's common knowledge in CSAIL that when he was around women were encouraged to keep plants at their desk to ward him off...
Not something said about many people who are "a bit" if a creep. He can still be right and a massive creep/harasser
Not something said about many people who are "a bit" if a creep. He can still be right and a massive creep/harasser
> women were encouraged to keep plants at their desk to ward him off
Hay-fever? Arachnophobia? Chlorophilitis? What are the plants for??
Hay-fever? Arachnophobia? Chlorophilitis? What are the plants for??
krapp(3)
Archive.today sites work for twitter links: https://archive.is/Q2dZJ
He was right about licenses with compilers as well.
There's a whole subreddit dedicated to this, r/StallmanWasRight
Ha, Ha, but seriously; Stallman has been right from the very beginning and people have forgotten what the movement he started has delivered to the World in terms of egalitarian access to Computers and Software. Much of the developing world would have been shut out of this revolution if it weren't for his uncompromising and forceful viewpoints.
I think a lot of this generative AI is going to be like fiber deployment in the late 90s.
The movers and shakers are paying top-dollar for improvements that will have a brief shelf-life. Just as the googles and facebooks were able to buy dark fiber for pennies-on-the-dollar in the early 00s, some other upstart is going to bargain AI tools and talent from the adobes and openais of the world for a similar discount.
That is to say, adobe is most likely doing this to train models that will put their current customers out of business. They probably think they're cutting-out the middleman for a better margin, but this seems like a greedy bet that could easily go sideways.
That is to say, adobe is most likely doing this to train models that will put their current customers out of business. They probably think they're cutting-out the middleman for a better margin, but this seems like a greedy bet that could easily go sideways.
The beatings will continue until people actually modify their buying behavior on the basis of concerns like privacy and autonomy.
Right now nobody cares, where "cares" is defined as "alters buying behavior." If you don't alter your buying behavior in response to this stuff you don't "care."
Right now nobody cares, where "cares" is defined as "alters buying behavior." If you don't alter your buying behavior in response to this stuff you don't "care."
I agree with you, but..
If the world's largest window manufacturer added a clause that they could send employees to your home to look through your windows at any time, day or night, the government would likely step in and put a stop to it. I don't see how this is any different. We have privacy laws and consumer protection agencies. They are failing us.
If the world's largest window manufacturer added a clause that they could send employees to your home to look through your windows at any time, day or night, the government would likely step in and put a stop to it. I don't see how this is any different. We have privacy laws and consumer protection agencies. They are failing us.
The government wants to use the data collected by these giant corporations. At least in the US, third-party doctrine allows for the govt to snoop on people--esp useful if they want to go after opponents.
That's because we have a well established sense of a boundary between your home and the rest of the world. Your home is private property.
We basically threw that away in computing in exchange for ease of use.
We basically threw that away in computing in exchange for ease of use.
Hahaaha! “Windows” is the absolute PERFECT analogy for this. Microsoft Windows.
Yep. The solution is government regulation. Vote with your votes, not your wallet. (The latter is just pain for ephemeral gain, if any gain at all. Laws are actual gains.)
I feel like it would take years and much debate for most governments to step in to be honest. Just think of the stock market if the largest window manufacturer has an unprofitable quarter!
perhaps, you might even argue, this is an area where government regulation may be able to do some good.
That's what Doctorow calls "a cartoonish vision of markets in which “the customer is king” and successful businesses are those who cater to their customers." In reality, the capitalists also don't care, _when they can get away with it._
"To understand whom a platform treats well and whom it abuses, look not to who pays it and who doesn’t. Instead, ask yourself: who has the platform managed to lock in? "
etc:
https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2024-04-22...
"To understand whom a platform treats well and whom it abuses, look not to who pays it and who doesn’t. Instead, ask yourself: who has the platform managed to lock in? "
etc:
https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2024-04-22...
> Right now nobody cares, where "cares" is defined as "alters buying behavior."
You're assuming equivalents exist which don't have the downsides but to have the same upsides. They don't. When there's no viable alternative people are just forced to do things they don't like.
You're assuming equivalents exist which don't have the downsides but to have the same upsides. They don't. When there's no viable alternative people are just forced to do things they don't like.
Pixelmator on macOS is decent.
If people are not willing to make trade-offs or sacrifices, this also means they don't care enough for companies to listen.
If people are not willing to make trade-offs or sacrifices, this also means they don't care enough for companies to listen.
In what world do you live in that you think it's impossible for the market power dynamics to be unfair and exploitative?
That's not what I mean. What I mean is that at least some people have to stand up to that unfairness and exploitativeness.
When blacks protested bus segregation in the South, they boycotted the busses. That meant they had to walk. It worked.
It would be a better more just world if people did not have to make these kinds of sacrifices to be heard, but we don't live in a utopia. We live in a messy real world full of people being assholes and broken systems.
In this case the sacrifice is not having to walk in searing heat in the summer while being jeered at by racist assholes. The sacrifice is having to learn a new image editor.
We can do this.
When blacks protested bus segregation in the South, they boycotted the busses. That meant they had to walk. It worked.
It would be a better more just world if people did not have to make these kinds of sacrifices to be heard, but we don't live in a utopia. We live in a messy real world full of people being assholes and broken systems.
In this case the sacrifice is not having to walk in searing heat in the summer while being jeered at by racist assholes. The sacrifice is having to learn a new image editor.
We can do this.
> That's not what I mean. What I mean is that at least some people have to stand up to that unfairness and exploitativeness.
How much is "some"? Lots of people bought Affinity products, despite them lacking some critical features that folks need. And now Affinity had been bought by another company that will likely take it the way of Adobe. None of this ever stood a chance of dethroning Adobe before, and it certainly won't now. What percentage of the users do you realistically expect should be willing to risk their income over this, and for how long?
How much is "some"? Lots of people bought Affinity products, despite them lacking some critical features that folks need. And now Affinity had been bought by another company that will likely take it the way of Adobe. None of this ever stood a chance of dethroning Adobe before, and it certainly won't now. What percentage of the users do you realistically expect should be willing to risk their income over this, and for how long?
> If people are not willing to make trade-offs or sacrifices, this also means they don't care enough for companies to listen.
"If you won't make sacrifices, you don't care enough". Nope. Some people care deeply and still need software that monopolized their workflow. It doesn't matter how much they care, if the VFX company they work in uses the Adobe Suite, it will not re-train all staff and rewrite all the work that's been done (plugins, assets) for the Adobe Suite.
I myself work in an adjacent industry - video games. Some 3D tools are as ancient as the civilizations they are named after and Blender has surpassed them in many ways. So much so that recently in AAA games, people have started using Blender a significant amount and many companies now allow a choice. But this is still impossible in many workflows. Game companies have written many plugins and integrations with their pipelines for the ancient software, they have hired staff qualified in this software. There is a very significant cost to switching that is beyond what is possible even for large studios, which I won't name, but I'm sure they made some of your favorite games.
"If you won't make sacrifices, you don't care enough". Nope. Some people care deeply and still need software that monopolized their workflow. It doesn't matter how much they care, if the VFX company they work in uses the Adobe Suite, it will not re-train all staff and rewrite all the work that's been done (plugins, assets) for the Adobe Suite.
I myself work in an adjacent industry - video games. Some 3D tools are as ancient as the civilizations they are named after and Blender has surpassed them in many ways. So much so that recently in AAA games, people have started using Blender a significant amount and many companies now allow a choice. But this is still impossible in many workflows. Game companies have written many plugins and integrations with their pipelines for the ancient software, they have hired staff qualified in this software. There is a very significant cost to switching that is beyond what is possible even for large studios, which I won't name, but I'm sure they made some of your favorite games.
Stallman is always right if you're willing to wait long enough.
Stallman is still right, almost 100% of the time, sadly. And looking at the direction and trends of big enshittification all GAFAM/BigTech corproations are going he will be even more right in the future.
Very True.
I still remember when the first iPhone/Android device came out looking for a setting to share my phone storage via SMB/NFS which is almost the first thing you do on a laptop/desktop and not finding any but that you have to pay to buy some app which will allow you to do it. It was then that i realized something very fundamental has changed in the computing services paradigm and for the worse. Services which were taken for granted from the OS were no longer available and every OS feature has been made into an "app for sale", something which was unthinkable when i started off in this industry in the early nineties. And then the "Cloud" happened and finally the users lost all control over data and software services.
I still remember when the first iPhone/Android device came out looking for a setting to share my phone storage via SMB/NFS which is almost the first thing you do on a laptop/desktop and not finding any but that you have to pay to buy some app which will allow you to do it. It was then that i realized something very fundamental has changed in the computing services paradigm and for the worse. Services which were taken for granted from the OS were no longer available and every OS feature has been made into an "app for sale", something which was unthinkable when i started off in this industry in the early nineties. And then the "Cloud" happened and finally the users lost all control over data and software services.
[deleted]
https://youtu.be/ErwS24cBZPc
Apple imagined a future where 1984 wouldn't be like 1984.
Apple imagined a future where 1984 wouldn't be like 1984.
We all misunderstood that advertisement, Jobs issue wasn't the oppression it was that he wanted to be on the other side of the screen, directing a gleaming glass and steel dystopia rather than the dusty one pictured.
Behold the iphone and app-store paradigm: "A garden of pure ideology, where every worker may bloom, secure from the pests of contradictory and confusing truths" indeed.
Behold the iphone and app-store paradigm: "A garden of pure ideology, where every worker may bloom, secure from the pests of contradictory and confusing truths" indeed.
*still
Of course he was! Doesn't mean that his proposed solution worked (or will ever work, though fingers are crossed).
Ironically that Twitter link won't work for me unless I switch browsers and sign up for an account. Or is that the joke?
Terrible that the privacy fronted for twitter (Nitter) is no longer maintained. Archive.today seems to work though: https://archive.is/Q2dZJ
Nitter's developers were not the problem. Xitter changed the rules. But thank you for the working link.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I wish we could stop with the deification of this creep as though he was the only person arguing that proprietary software has concerns.
Sober take, though the ad hominem wasn't needed.
you can just go around calling people creeps now for being neurodivergent?
You can just go around excusing creepy behavior as "being neurodivergent?"
As far as I know, the only person who has diagnosed Richard Stallman with anything is Richard Stallman, and I doubt he has even an honorary doctorate that would qualify him to make such a diagnosis. Maybe he is neurodivergent, maybe he isn't. If he were, that wouldn't excuse his behavior, as plenty of neurodivergent people don't act the way he does. It's not a "get out of social consequences free" card.
And honestly, if Richard Stallman is so neurodivergent that he isn't capable of interacting with people in a reasonable way, despite being middle aged and no doubt having been told about his behavior many, many times, he shouldn't be in the position he's in.
As far as I know, the only person who has diagnosed Richard Stallman with anything is Richard Stallman, and I doubt he has even an honorary doctorate that would qualify him to make such a diagnosis. Maybe he is neurodivergent, maybe he isn't. If he were, that wouldn't excuse his behavior, as plenty of neurodivergent people don't act the way he does. It's not a "get out of social consequences free" card.
And honestly, if Richard Stallman is so neurodivergent that he isn't capable of interacting with people in a reasonable way, despite being middle aged and no doubt having been told about his behavior many, many times, he shouldn't be in the position he's in.
He's 71, he's not middle aged, but yes, he should know better at his age.
https://gavinhoward.com/2023/11/how-to-fund-foss-save-it-fro...