[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: State of the GNUnion 2020

From: Alexandre François Garreau
Subject: Re: State of the GNUnion 2020
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 23:49:30 +0100

Le samedi 22 février 2020, 21:49:13 CET Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss), le sam. 22 févr. 2020 12:22:55 -0800, a 
> > On 2020-02-22 01:50, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Really, not including the next generations in a project is running
> > > the
> > > risk of the project just dying with its leaders.
> > 
> > Project "liveness" is not the ultimate value. If nobody is found who
> > will maintain it the way it ought to be, then let it die.
> Sure.
> But what will rather happen is that the new generation will just rewrite
> another program, possibly without caring about making it free software.

So what? it still can be run.  If people value freedom, they should prefer 
the free one, to which they could contribute and get live again, if they 
need to.  But prefering the non-free one is a problem of moral philosophy, 
of personal misjugment to prefer not to be free…

> > I suspect that these initiatives to have inclusion of regardless
> > experience are driven by project zeal, and envy of popular projects.
> It's not a question of envy, but of making sure that on the long term
> we still have a free operating system.  If we don't include the new
> generation, and alongside teach it why we need free software.  The new
> generation may just not care about picking up the task, we may then grow
> old in a world with non-free software.

The issue is that non-free software, software proprietariness at all, 
exist at all… If it didn’t whatever we would do, whatever whoever would 
do, software would stay free, by default.

There is already non-free software.  So the solution is not anything 
technical, it is not something positive.  We don’t have to “do something 
more” to “bring people to write more free softwares”.  We have to make 
non-free software *disappear*.  Stop being written.  Stop to be used.  
Until the point where, with time, all proprietary software gets lost, 
rewritten, useless, unrunnable, or reverse-engineered.

This is a negative act, not a positive one.  It it a negative act *on 
others*, and not on ourselves (if it was positive, it would be).  So it is 
a collective action, not an individual one.  So it is about politics, not 
about technique.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]