[vox] [fwd] Stallman on IRC

[Bill Kendrick]

Seen on SacLUG's list:

----- Forwarded message from Jason Turning -----

Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 21:46:35 -0700
From: Jason Turning
Subject: [Lug-nuts] Stallman on IRC

Richard Stallman stopped by and hung out on #berkeleytip for about an hour
today. If you're familiar with Stallman's ideas, nothing really new, but pretty
cool that he came on for an hour. Richard is rmsgnu the chat log. Classic
Stallman, :).


[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:21] <atoulouse>	hello!
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:22] <atoulouse>	welcome
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:25] <HappySmileMan>	Hey rms
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:28] <vsayer>	yea!!
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:31] <vsayer>	hi rms
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:46] <vsayer>	it's an honor
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:09:48] <atoulouse>	it would appear someone else
registered your nick
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:07] <atoulouse>	but judging from your IP I think it's
highly likely you are who you claim to be
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:19] <atoulouse>	D:
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:20] <stu8ball>	Amazing!
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:32] <vsayer>	rms has left the building
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:46] <atoulouse>	hello again!
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:48] <stu8ball>	Back for an encore.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:10:56] <vsayer>	welcome
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:11:10] <atoulouse>	how should we proceed?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:11:22] <atoulouse>	start with questions? do you want to
give a short lecture?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:11:43] <_dfox>	john regan says hi
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:11:58] <rmsgnu>	Hello.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:12:01] <sn9>	rmsgnu: "/msg nickserv identify yourpasswd"
after connecting as "rms" -- btw, welcome, and john said to say hi
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:12:18] <_dfox>	do you have voip software etc
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:12:34] <vsayer>	we're on ekiga...you're welcome to join
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:00] <rmsgnu>	My machine is not set up for Ekiga.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:08] <vsayer>	that's too bad
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:09] <rmsgnu>	Such things take time.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:12] <vsayer>	yeah
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:13] <sn9>	it's ok
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:19] <vsayer>	no worries
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:20] <rmsgnu>	So I don't want to start with a speech.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:28] <rmsgnu>	People can see what I would want to say
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:30] <sn9>	there is a pstn connection, too, via asterisk
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:31] <atoulouse>	May I ask a question, then?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:34] <rmsgnu>	in gnu.org/philosophy/
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:13:49] <rmsgnu>	and in gnu.org/gnu
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:00] <rmsgnu>	I could make an ordinary phone call, of
course.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:18] <rmsgnu>	Is any one who is here NOT also listening
to voice?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:23] <sn9>	me
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:24] <atoulouse>	me
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:28] <_dfox>	me too
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:31] <telaviv>	i'm not listening to voice
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:35] <stu8ball>	me
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:38] <rmsgnu>	I guess IRC is best.  Ok, atoulouse,
please ask
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:41] <_dfox>	sorry. strike that. I am on voice.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:43] <atoulouse>	What is your opinion on FPGAs (Field
Programmable Gate Arrays)? On the one hand, the technology to construct FPGA
chips themselves is locked down pretty tightly with patents, but on the other
hand, the idea of programmable logic to create chips that become anything opens
up great possibilities for open-source hardware.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:14:46] <sn9>	i do have ekiga set up, though, and could
easily join in
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:15:26] <rmsgnu>	I don't care whether hardware is open source.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:15:34] <rmsgnu>	I don't care whether software is open source.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:15:43] <rmsgnu>	I am an activist in the free software
movement.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:15:51] <atoulouse>	I apologize; amend that to free/open
source
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:15:53] <rmsgnu>	I think all software should be free,
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:15:59] <rmsgnu>	meaning respect the user's freedom.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:03] <sn9>	atoulouse: not good enough
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:12] <rmsgnu>	That includes the software that programs
an FPGA.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:15] <HappySmileMan>	atoulouse, I'm disappointed in you :(
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:20] <rmsgnu>	However, this issue doesn't apply to hardware
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:33] <rmsgnu>	when it can only be made in a factory and
is impossibl to change.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:44] <vsayer>	there's nothing like eating jello in hot
berkeley weather and chatting with rms
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:16:57] <atoulouse>	there is progress in making a
toolchain that only uses free software to program the FPGA
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:03] <atoulouse>	and that hits on the point I meant to ask
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:04] <_dfox>	open firmware - such as that in OLPC, for
instance
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:07] <rmsgnu>	I am glad I am not in hot berkeley weather.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:08] <atoulouse>	the FPGA can only be manufactured
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:16] <sn9>	ditto
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:18] <vsayer>	haha
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:19] <rmsgnu>	I am also very glad to hear there is
progress in a free toolchain
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:25] <atoulouse>	but in essence, it is a blank slate on
which you can create your own circuits
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:37] <atoulouse>	i recently implemented a MIPS CPU on one
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:40] <rmsgnu>	for prorgamming FPGAs.  We have needed
that for a long time.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:17:57] <sn9>	i thought there was already a vhdl toolchain
for gnu
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:18:01] <rmsgnu>	People who say that FPGAs "blur the line
between software and hardware"
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:18:07] <rmsgnu>	have the wrong line.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:18:25] <rmsgnu>	If it lives in files and you can copy it
or edit it, it's software.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:18:45] <rmsgnu>	If it is made in a factory and can't be
altered very much, it is hardware.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:18:52] <rmsgnu>	So the FPGA is hardware, and thegate
patter is softwasre.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:19:13] <sn9>	ergo, firmware is software
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:19:27] <atoulouse>	the last abstraction between the
synthesis and the actual putting it on the chip requires secret, proprietary
knowledge of the FPGA, unfortunately
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:19:49] <rmsgnu>	firmware is software, yes.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:20:15] <rmsgnu>	We need to find out the secret,
proprietary knowledge.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:20:32] <rmsgnu>	Perhaps by experimentation on devices
that work.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:20:47] <sn9>	or, on devices that do not
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:02] <telaviv>	may I ask a question?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:05] <atoulouse>	the number of people capable of that
in the world number in the single digit, unfortunately
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:07] <rmsgnu>	It is hard to learn all that much from
studying anything that doesn't work
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:20] <atoulouse>	thanks for elaborating
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:21] <rmsgnu>	unless/until you have something you
understand to compare it with.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:22] <atoulouse>	:)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:27] <sn9>	there is no free software to drive any
specific hardware until there is
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:58] <telaviv>	The FSF's most important project
according to its website is gnash. Although I do see it as a significant
problem I feel the real problem is that as a developer I have no place to turn
to if I want to develop vector graphics and video on a website. Flash has
become the de facto standards in these fields. Last semester a few students
here developed a flash alternative based on SVG graphics. Shouldn't the FSF be
pushing harder to to gi
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:21:58] <telaviv>	ve developers new open options like this
rather than trying to adapt these proprietary formats?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:22:40] <sn9>	that is a question for a VERY long
discussion, telaviv
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:22:42] <rmsgnu>	I think our chance of success in free sw
for flash
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:22:51] <rmsgnu>	is better than our chance of convincing
people to use another format.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:23:00] <rmsgnu>	I developed GNU to be compatible with Unix
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:23:09] <rmsgnu>	rather than trying to convince people to
switch to something different
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:23:14] <rmsgnu>	even if it might have been better.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:23:48] <sn9>	yet, people switched to gnu from things
different
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:23:56] <telaviv>	word there is definetly a lot of
momentum with flash as it is
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:24:07] <rmsgnu>	Now, yes, but why make things harder for
ourselves?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:24:31] <rmsgnu>	GNU is Not Unix, rather than Not Windows.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:24:45] <sn9>	flash seems to be designed in very
free-implementation-hostile ways
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:24:58] <HappySmileMan>	Nowadays basically no-one who
switches to GNU is switching from Unix, and it's still going quite strong
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:05] <rmsgnu>	I do not know anything technically about
Flash.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:11] <atoulouse>	sn9: ActionScript3 is an open standard
last I chcked
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:26] <rmsgnu>	But there are so many Flash animations
that we MUST support playing them
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:27] <sn9>	atoulouse: i'm not referring to the specs
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:30] <rmsgnu>	whthr we like taht or not.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:40] <telaviv>	yeap, it seems to stifle growth too. I
mean if there where an open standard I would imagine all sorts of industries
would be interested in affecting it
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:42] <rmsgnu>	Whether w like the Flash format or not, I
mean.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:25:48] <telaviv>	it seems like in everyones best interest
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:26:36] <_dfox>	rms how long are you going to be in irc?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:26:41] <_dfox>	and anyone in FSC yet
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:26:49] <telaviv>	either way, i think i'm going to try to
make an svg flash and see what happens :)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:27:04] <rmsgnu>	I was planning to stay till the end of
the hour.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:27:58] <sn9>	atoulouse: gnash is an even bigger resource
hog than adobe flash, because adobe optimizes in unmaintainably insane ways
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:28:09] <rmsgnu>	It is true that many people are switching
to GNU from Windows
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:28:19] <rmsgnu>	but the fact that they are not compatible
does not help.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:28:43] <telaviv>	alright rms tell us about hurd. Do you
see this happening anytime soon, and are you happy with the direction its going in?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:28:47] <rmsgnu>	If Gnash takes more resources, we will
just have to live with it,.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:28:54] <atoulouse>	If you had to play devil's advocate,
what do you think of the merits of BSD-style licenses vs. GPL-style? How highly
do you regard the rights of the user to modify their programs vs. the ability
of developers to decidewhere they want their code?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:28:59] <rmsgnu>	Progress on the Hurd is slow.  A few
volunteers are working on it.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:15] <rmsgnu>	But I don't know if they will ever make
it competitive with Linux.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:20] <vsayer>	http://www.theopendisc.com/ (GNU software
for Windows)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:22] <telaviv>	I see
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:27] <HappySmileMan>	Will it (hurd) be built directly
into Emacs or as an optional add-on?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:28] <rmsgnu>	However, in the kernel area, the main
improvement we need is
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:44] <rmsgnu>	support for more I/O devices without
non-free software.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:52] <stu8ball>	device drivers, like any minority kernel.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:53] <sn9>	lol @ HappySmileMan
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:53] <rmsgnu>	The HURD won't help achieve that.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:29:58] <vsayer>	Is Hurd 'Xen'able?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:07] <rmsgnu>	I do not want to talk about "BSD-style"
licenses
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:15] <rmsgnu>	because the difference between the
original BSD license
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:18] <stu8ball>	Xen can run unmodified guests if you
have the right hardware.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:30] <rmsgnu>	and the modified BSD license is very
important.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:42] <atoulouse>	i did not realize, can you elaborate?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:55] <rmsgnu>	See gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:30:57] <atoulouse>	okay
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:31:01] <rmsgnu>	In any case, I suspect the person is
really asking about copyleft.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:31:19] <rmsgnu>	Copyleft is just as necessary as it ever was.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:31:41] <vsayer>	I wanted to test out Hurd on VirtualBox
or Xen once I upgrade to Fedora 11
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:32:31] <vsayer>	I'm sure you could the help testing it out
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:32:35] <rmsgnu>	I can't answer technical qs about HURD.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:32:44] <rmsgnu>	You need to talk with the HURD developers.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:32:53] <telaviv>	What do you think about the microsoft
public license? Do you think what their really doing is helping out FOSS?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:33:05] <rmsgnu>	But the hardest thing the HURD needs is a
major rewrite.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:33:43] <vsayer>	okay
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:34:14] <vsayer>	i'll just share this with everyone:
http://www.superunprivileged.org/hurd/live-cd/
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:34:25] <rmsgnu>	Microsoft wrote many licenses recently.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:34:34] <atoulouse>	why do you think Linux development
eclipsed and far outpaced HURD development?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:34:36] <rmsgnu>	A few of them qualify as free software
licenses.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:35:00] <rmsgnu>	but they are incompatible with GPL, since
Microsoft hates the GPL.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:35:12] <telaviv>	hahaha
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:35:19] <rmsgnu>	The HURD had many problems that slowed
down its development
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:35:30] <rmsgnu>	and Linux was already working.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:36:04] <telaviv>	Do you believe its even worth the time
anymore? are the architectural differences between linux and hurd significant
even in theory?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:36:07] <rmsgnu>	The main HURD developer, Marcus, says the
HURD needs a different microkernel to work well.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:36:31] <rmsgnu>	I don't think that replacing Linux with
the HURD is high priority.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:36:50] <rmsgnu>	What is high priority is replacing the
non-free blobs that Torvalds put into Linux because he did not care about freedom.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:37:13] <telaviv>	I don't know about this? What blobs are
those?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:37:24] <HappySmileMan>	Third party drivers?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:37:34] <stu8ball>	Ian Murdock said a few years ago that
fostering the Hurd developers wasn't a waste of the Debian project's time on
the grounds that they're volunteers and they would have been doing it anyway.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:38:04] <sn9>	there are no third party drivers in the
linux kernel proper, by definition, HappySmileMan
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:38:34] <rmsgnu>	"Blobs" are firmware programs in binary form.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:38:35] <telaviv>	stu8ball: definetly that makes sense, a
lot of great software is just hobby stuff (lolcode ..)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:38:52] <telaviv>	gotcha
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:39:03] <rmsgnu>	They are dressed up as "source code" in
the form of lists of numbers (sometimes thousands of numbers).
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:39:41] <rmsgnu>	Many of the blobs explicitly carry
non-free licenses.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:39:55] <sn9>	there are some drivers in linux that are not
useful unless non-free firmware is used in conjunction, but any such lists of
numbers are almost always rejected for inclusion in the kernel proper
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:40:02] <atoulouse>	assuming those were necessary for some
computers to work, would you say that it is more important for software to be
free than to be usable?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:40:13] <rmsgnu>	This is why we maintain Linux Libre, a
modified version of Linux
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:40:18] <rmsgnu>	in which we delete the blobs.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:40:36] <rmsgnu>	If your hardware won't work without
blobs, get different hardware.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:40:36] <sn9>	i would be interested in a summary diff
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:40:55] <atoulouse>	that avoids the question; if you
cannot replace the hardware, what then?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:09] <atoulouse>	it's an interesting distinction i'd
like to hear your opinion on
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:19] <sn9>	atoulouse: when can one not replace the
hardware?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:21] <rmsgnu>	Why do you think you cannot replace your
hardware?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:34] <atoulouse>	i can barely afford next month's rent
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:44] <telaviv>	haha,
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:47] <rmsgnu>	You can probably find an old computer
that mostly works
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:47] <atoulouse>	but i want to use linux over windows
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:50] <rmsgnu>	without blobs.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:52] <vsayer>	haha
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:58] <atoulouse>	let's say I can't
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:41:58] <sn9>	freedom is not cheap
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:10] <atoulouse>	without those binary blobs, my linux
install may not work
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:20] <vsayer>	there's plenty of free computers at UC
Berkeley
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:22] <rmsgnu>	Linux is just a piece of the system you
could actually use.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:25] <atoulouse>	and i am forced to use Windows, which
I get for $0
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:33] <atoulouse>	(legally)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:51] <vsayer>	still no need for that
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:42:53] <rmsgnu>	The system is mostly GNU.  To call it
Linux is to insult the thousands of GNU developers.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:01] <atoulouse>	sn9, vsayer: I'm talking philosophically
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:01] <vsayer>	agree
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:05] <atoulouse>	right
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:10] <sn9>	it will cost me several hundred dollars to
replace the nvidia in this laptop with ati/amd
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:11] <vsayer>	oh ok
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:13] <atoulouse>	amend linux to "GNU/Linux"
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:13] <rmsgnu>	And you can find a cheap computer
(perhaps not as fast as a new one)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:21] <rmsgnu>	that you can use without non-free software.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:45] <rmsgnu>	This "philosophical question", like many
such, is artificial and unrealistic.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:43:57] <atoulouse>	for me, it's very real, however
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:44:06] <rmsgnu>	No, it isn't real even for you.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:44:12] <rmsgnu>	You are artificially ignoring some options
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:44:17] <sn9>	most cheaper computers require more non-free
blobs, IME
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:44:19] <rmsgnu>	so as to create an artificial problem.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:44:43] <rmsgnu>	I'm talking about USED computers which
are even cheaper than the cheapest new ons,
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:44:56] <sn9>	as am i
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:10] <sn9>	most need non-free blobs of one form or another
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:12] <rmsgnu>	I worked for 25 years to get a machine
with no non-free software
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:21] <atoulouse>	essentially, though, it seems that you
believe that software freedom trumps software usability
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:26] <rmsgnu>	(not even in the BIOS).  If you care
about freedom, you can get there too.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:28] <atoulouse>	an older computer will no doubt be slower
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:34] <atoulouse>	i'm not saying that's negative
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:37] <rmsgnu>	I will not have non-free software on my
computer!
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:39] <atoulouse>	i'd just like that cleared up
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:45:54] <rmsgnu>	I won't give up my control over my computer
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:01] <rmsgnu>	just for some sort of convenience.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:01] <atoulouse>	i see
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:07] <atoulouse>	consider the question answered ;)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:08] <atoulouse>	er
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:09] <atoulouse>	:)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:16] <sn9>	rmsgnu: and that computer is new, not used,
which somewhat runs counter to the point you just made
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:39] <rmsgnu>	There is no contradiction.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:46:42] <telaviv>	rmsgnu: Do still write any software now?
It was really interesting to read about some of your work in SICP
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:01] <rmsgnu>	Sorry, what is SICP?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:08] <stu8ball>	The Lisp book.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:10] <atoulouse>	structure and interpretation of
computer programs
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:10] <rmsgnu>	These days I do not program very much.
No time.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:11] <stu8ball>	Gerry Sussman.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:14] <atoulouse>	written by abelson and sussman
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:19] <atoulouse>	6.001 at MIT
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:23] <atoulouse>	recently retired
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:24] <rmsgnu>	I often do not know a lot of acronyms.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:31] <atoulouse>	well-known for being *the* Scheme textbook
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:47:54] <sn9>	newer hardware is unequivocally easier to
support with exclusively free software than older hardware
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:48:09] <rmsgnu>	I am surprised, but I am not a hardware
expert.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:48:23] <rmsgnu>	I thought there was often a delay in
getting free drivers to
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:48:28] <rmsgnu>	support new hardware.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:48:41] <stu8ball>	I can't see how that works sn9. Surely
with older hardware, more people would have had the time to hack on it.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:48:47] <stu8ball>	yes, what rmsgnu said
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:48:53] <sn9>	stu8ball: more time, but fewer people
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:49:06] <stu8ball>	ah
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:49:14] <stu8ball>	but cumultively over time
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:49:19] <sn9>	even then
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:49:25] <stu8ball>	interesting
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:49:41] <vsayer>	rmsgnu: You seem to have a problem with
Linux and GNU/Linux. Do you have the same problem with FreeBSD and GNU/FreeBSD
or Opensolaris and GNU/Opensolaris?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:49:53] <sn9>	see, hardware manufacturers are getting
slowly on the ball, and cutting free driver development time
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:09] <rmsgnu>	vsayer, I find your assertion rather
offensive.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:15] <vsayer>	no offense
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:22] <rmsgnu>	The system some people call "Linux" is
basically GNU
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:34] <rmsgnu>	with Linux also.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:36] <atoulouse>	FreeBSD and OpenSolaris use GNU as well
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:48] <rmsgnu>	Calling it "GNU/Linux" is fair.  Calling
it "Linux" is not.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:53] <vsayer>	true
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:54] <vsayer>	very true
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:55] <rmsgnu>	See
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:50:58] <sn9>	atoulouse: that is not an accurate statement
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:10] <vsayer>	but do you hold the same for the other
kernels?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:18] <rmsgnu>	So what about the case of BSD?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:20] <atoulouse>	sn9: they use parts of GNU
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:28] <rmsgnu>	The words "use GNU" shows a misunderstanding.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:31] <sn9>	atoulouse: bsd is very careful not to
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:38] <rmsgnu>	They do use some GNU components, but I
would not say they
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:44] <rmsgnu>	are basically variants of the GNU system.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:51:58] <_dfox>	Linux includes in a distribution a lot of
GPL software, but of that set, what is basically FSF is emacs,gcc, development
toolchain, fileutils, sharutils, stuff like that. If I install freebsd I get
the same toolchain
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:17] <rmsgnu>	A lot of people mistakenly identify GNU
with a "toolchain".
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:21] <vsayer>	oh ok
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:22] <rmsgnu>	But GNU is an operating system.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:23] <vsayer>	interesting
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:28] <vsayer>	sure
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:41] <atoulouse>	should the Linux kernel be placed in a
BSD userland, would this qualify as "Linux" without the GNU/, then?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:52:41] <rmsgnu>	It was always meant to be an operating
system.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:53:06] <rmsgnu>	It just happens that programmers are very
familiar with the parts that are tools.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:53:17] <sn9>	i had hoped people here would already be
familiar with rmsgnu's views on all the questions posed so far, but can't win
'em all
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:53:21] <rmsgnu>	If you put Linux into a BSD system, you'd
have BSD/Linux.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:53:44] <rmsgnu>	And if you put the kernel of FreeBSD into
GNU, you get GNU/kFreeBSD.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:53:47] <stu8ball>	There exist Linux-without-the-GNU
systems; some phones use the kernel and a proritary useland.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:53:51] <stu8ball>	userland*
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:54:09] <rmsgnu>	Yes, and there are systems which use GCC
without the rest of GNU/Linux.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:54:10] <sn9>	yes, stu8ball, i have even seen such
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:54:12] <rmsgnu>	But so what?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:54:48] <rmsgnu>	If you use Linux without GNU, you have
something very differnt from GNU/Linux.  The differences are far bigger than
the similarties.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:55:08] <sn9>	correct
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:55:37] <rmsgnu>	What we see is a circular argument that
starts from the assumption "Linux is more important than all the rest of the
system" and is used to support that same assumption as conclusion.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:55:55] <atoulouse>	where do you see free software being
in 10, 20, 30+ years?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:55:58] <rmsgnu>	I don't think that Linux is more
important than all the rest of the system.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:04] <vsayer>	sure
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:06] <vsayer>	agreed
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:07] <rmsgnu>	I also don't think GCC is more important
than all the rest of the system.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:14] <_dfox>	john regan is at the cafe
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:18] <rmsgnu>	I don't think even Emacs itself is more
important than all the rest of the system.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:32] <HappySmileMan>	:O
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:37] <rmsgnu>	and I mean no sacrilege, Emacs forgive me!
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:54] <vsayer>	when was emacs developed...when in 1976
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:54] <atoulouse>	i have fallen already; i use vim
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:56:55] <vsayer>	?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:04] <vsayer>	how many months before vi
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:05] <vsayer>	?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:13] <telaviv>	rmsgnu: Our professor Brian Harvey talks
about the lisp machine as if it was the greatest computing invention of all
time. Do you think there's still some advantage in having in an entire system
written in a single language for easy hacking? Or are the days over when
hacking by ordinary people is a priority anymore?
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:16] <vsayer>	cuz vi is also 1976
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:32] <telaviv>	lol
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:33] <rmsgnu>	The Lisp machine system had good and bad
points
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:57:51] <rmsgnu>	but it was only useful because of special
hardware that could
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:58:03] <rmsgnu>	be programmed in microcode to run Lisp
fast _with type checking_.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:58:27] <rejohn>	hi Richard, all :)
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:58:32] <sn9>	that could be done faster still with an fpga
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:58:44] <telaviv>	that makes sense, python os, as awesome
as it sounds probably would not be feasible
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:58:51] <rmsgnu>	But my machine isn't based on such an FPGA.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:58:55] <rejohn>	I'm at fsc, with an inet connection goin
g up & down
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:00] <stu8ball>	telaviv: cleese.sf.net
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:04] <rmsgnu>	And the system I am running is not
written in Lisp.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:09] <rmsgnu>	When I want to run Lisp, I can do so.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:12] <sn9>	telaviv: a python os might be more feasible
than a perl one
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:41] <atoulouse>	telaviv: you just need to bootstrap
the system, then you could run a really low-level interpreter, probably would
want it to interpret RPython
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:42] <telaviv>	stu8ball: yeap I know about it! I often
wonder if I should contribute to it ...
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:45] <stu8ball>	AIUI the low-level stuff in the Cleese
OS is a subset of Python that compiles to machine code though; not true Python,
and not like the Lisp machines.
[Sun May 17 2009] [14:59:53] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: As tyoiu know from my emails 2 u,
I think the best thing we can do for you today is help you get on VOIP,
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:00:08] <atoulouse>	rmsgnu: where do you see free software
in the coming years and decades?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:00:08] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: dfox told me you said your hw
isn't set up for voip today,
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:00:26] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: so would you like to schedule a
time to try to make that step,
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:00:39] <sn9>	rejohn: he can join by pstn if he chooses
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:00:40] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: & congratulations to you on
getting on IRC.  :)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:01:04] <rmsgnu>	I am going to ask the sysadmins to set up
Ekiga
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:01:11] <rmsgnu>	but other things are higher priority.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:01:40] <sn9>	nickname registration services on freenode
show rms has been on at least twice before
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:01:48] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: what timeframe will yo ask them
to do that?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:01:56] 	 * stu8ball nickserv info'd rms some years ago
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:03] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
Information on rms (account rms):
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:03] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
Registered : Mar 07 00:41:49 2007 (2 years, 10 weeks, 2 days, 21:19:58 ago)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:03] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
Last addr  : n=rms at gnu/rms
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:03] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
Last seen  : Jul 22 20:18:52 2008 (42 weeks, 5 days, 01:42:55 ago)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:06] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
Flags      : HideMail, Hold
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:06] <stu8ball>	random curiosity
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:08] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
rms has enabled nick protection
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:10] <sn9>	[Sun 17 May 2009 03:01:51 PM PDT] -NickServ-
*** End of Info ***
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:36] <rmsgnu>	I cannot promise you when they will work
on kiga.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:02:43] <rmsgnu>	It is not that high priority for me.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:13] <sn9>	that is why pstn access is still needed
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:26] <rmsgnu>	Anyway I decided against using voice
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:30] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: I'm not asking for a promise ;)
Just so I can know the time frame when we might try to schedule uyou back to
talk to BTIPpers on voice ;)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:35] <stu8ball>	rmsgnu: Is it true you deliberately
named POSIX with a "POS" for "Piece of Shit" in it?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:41] <rmsgnu>	because not everyone else here was on voice.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:43] <telaviv>	rmsgnu: so what is the the next big step
for the fsf? New software? Winning some court battle?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:50] <stu8ball>	Given that you're a Lisp hacker I would
assume you'd dislike such standardisation efforts.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:03:59] <stu8ball>	w.r.t Common Lisp
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:09] <rmsgnu>	No, POSIX refers to "portable operating
system interface" with an x.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:23] <telaviv>	haha
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:29] <stu8ball>	I know that's the  _official_ meaning
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:33] <stu8ball>	;)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:34] <rmsgnu>	They were going to call it IEEEIX, which
sounds like a screem of horror.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:34] <rejohn>	who is on voip now?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:50] <sn9>	luckily, "mueslix" is already trademarked
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:53] <rejohn>	telaviv: where are you now?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:55] <rmsgnu>	I figured nobody would actually call it
that and they would instead
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:04:58] <vsayer>	i'm on voip
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:09] <rmsgnu>	call it "a spec for Unix-like systems".
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:17] <telaviv>	rejohn: supposedly studying for finals
in my room :(
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:33] <rejohn>	telaviv: ;)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:42] <rejohn>	vsayer: have we met yet?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:47] <vsayer>	nope
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:48] <rmsgnu>	I never heard that proposed meaning of
POS before today
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:53] <sn9>	rejohn: oops, i forgot to ask rmsgnu what
city he is now in
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:54] <rmsgnu>	and it certainly was not my intention.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:55] <stu8ball>	heh
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:57] <vsayer>	hi rejohn
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:05:59] <stu8ball>	ok
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:00] <rejohn>	vsayer: what city are you in, & where 'd
you hear about btip?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:02] <rmsgnu>	I am in Cambridge.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:23] <vsayer>	I'm in Berkeley, 30 minutes north of FS cafe
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:24] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: ;)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:36] <vsayer>	i heard about it through BerkeleyLUG and BUUG
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:44] <rejohn>	vsayer: how many people in voip now?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:57] <telaviv>	rmsgnu: so which os do you run? BSD? Haiku?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:06:59] <vsayer>	2
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:06] <telaviv>	rmsgnu: linux?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:08] <sn9>	telaviv: GNU
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:13] <atoulouse>	i'd venture a guess and say Debian
GNU/Linux
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:16] <rmsgnu>	I am running a variant of GNU/Linux.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:19] <telaviv>	sorry i meant kernel
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:19] <sn9>	atoulouse: wrong
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:24] <rmsgnu>	It is not a distro I want to recommend.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:37] <rmsgnu>	It is the distro that came with the machine.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:44] <rmsgnu>	I expect to replace it with gNewSense in
a few days.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:46] <stu8ball>	ah, the MIPS lappy?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:51] <sn9>	atoulouse: debian is non-free
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:07:58] <stu8ball>	Pretty cool
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:08:01] <rmsgnu>	What is on my machine is all free
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:08:12] <rmsgnu>	but I don't want to recommend this distro.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:08:15] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: what hw are you using today, &
what hw will you be running at the time you expect to get your voip sw on?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:01] <vsayer>	rmsgnu: is it true that you don't use the
internet on your own computer?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:16] <rmsgnu>	Sorry, I have no interest in talking
about plans for installing Ekiga.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:21] <rmsgnu>	It will get done when it gets done.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:32] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: & Thanks for droppingy by today &
sharing your thoughts with us :)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:37] <atoulouse>	i heard that you run scripts to fetch
webpages and email them to you
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:40] <rmsgnu>	I mostly refuse to talk with net sites
from my computer
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:09:56] <atoulouse>	do you prefer the CLI to X?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:10:01] <rmsgnu>	for personal reasons which have nothing
to do with the ethical issues I am campaigning about.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:10:03] <sn9>	atoulouse: my gf needs such a script, but
none i tried worked
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:10:24] <rmsgnu>	I don't think it is wrong to talk to talk
to whatever site
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:10:39] <rmsgnu>	from your own computer, if you are
willing to talk to it from some other computer.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:11:37] <telaviv>	Is there plans for a GPL 4?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:11:48] <rmsgnu>	I have no plans as yet for a GPL 4.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:11:49] <sn9>	hah
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:12:07] <rmsgnu>	I don't know of a problem which needs fixing.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:07] <rmsgnu>	I guess I will say goodbye now.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:16] <telaviv>	what is a lot of the work you do now?
Every once In a while I hear about an FSF lawyer representing someone in a
court case, but I have to admit the FSF in general is a very mysterious entity
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:18] <telaviv>	alright bye!
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:23] <rejohn>	rmsgnu: bye :)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:25] <Bugz>	rmsgnu: Thanks for coming on!!
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:25] <sn9>	you are always food for thought, rmsgnu
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:36] <rmsgnu>	The FSF's work is pretty clearly shown on
fsf.org.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:46] <rmsgnu>	We have the Free Software  Directory,
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:13:52] <rmsgnu>	we have campaigns of action and protest.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:14:08] <rejohn>	what is the best of the 2 voip #'s to
connect to - ekiga, or darkv?
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:14:22] <rmsgnu>	We also enforce the GPL on
FSF-copyrighted programs.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:14:29] <telaviv>	yeah i guess i've never noticed this before
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:14:35] <sn9>	rejohn: whichever works better for you; they
go to the same place
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:14:41] <rmsgnu>	If you like our work, please join the FSF.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:14:49] <rmsgnu>	Members' dues pay most of the staff.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:01] <telaviv>	sure I would love, thats sounds like
something I can get behind
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:03] <rmsgnu>	(Not me, though; I am a volunteer.)
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:04] <telaviv>	*love to
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:22] <rmsgnu>	See fsf.org if you want to join.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:28] <rmsgnu>	Happy hacking.
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:39] <stu8ball>	bye
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:41] <vsayer>	love to
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:44] <vsayer>	bye
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:49] <vsayer>	thx again
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:53] <telaviv>	thanks!
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:15:57] <telaviv>	bye!
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:16:30] <sn9>	i suddenly can't wait 'til michelle knows
about rms
[Sun May 17 2009] [15:16:53] <telaviv>	I didn't want to ask him the real
question which is, how does he make money as just an activist?

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
-bill!
Sent from my computer