Holy shit he's actually like that what the fuck hahaha holy crap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1AKIl_2GM
First for RMS > EVERYONE ELSE
>>54387071
>being this new
we wouldn't praise him if he was a normie
what did you think he was like?
fuck off
That was the only creative commons image he could find using Bing Search
>tfw you're a freetard right up until you realize you can make money
If I link the source code in the description of the app, will people actually navigate to it, remove the ads, and install it themselves?
I love /g/ over most boards because everyone else at least partly knows their board psuedo-hero. But stallman is memed so hard that half of them don't know what he sounds like. I also believe that they don't know what he looks like outside of the same 4 pictures jerk memed to death, as in they were expecting the exact same picture and it isn't exactly the same so it must be a different person.
Browsed /vr/ many ages ago and there are some "doom" fucks on there who REPEAT THE MEMES CAPITAL WORDS LIKE THIS to pretend to fit in and have a whole folder of doom pics and have vocal opinions on everything in the game... and have never played it once.
Memes are fucking shit in the long run when you attract these people who literally jerk off to repeating them without having a clue what it is. What I'm trying to say is, please kill yourself
>>54387082
We don't praise him because he's weird and nerdy XD either. We praise him because he shows us that no matter how boring or pointless your dreams/hobbies seem to everyone else you should still follow/do them if you really enjoy them.
>>54387081
/Thread
I don't understand how libre != gratis. If you can copy the source, rebuild and redistribute, isn't the program then gratis? one seems to imply the other.
>>54387303
gratis = it costs 0 dollars
libre = you can do with it what you want
if something is libre, it is probably gratis. If I have software that I am charging, but it is libre, then as soon as I sell 1 copy, that customer can redistribute their copy for free to anyone, anywhere.
gratis does not imply libre, though. If I have a program I am selling, and I am not giving the customer the source code or the ability to redistribute the source code etc., then it is not libre, even if I charge them 0 dollars.
example: adobe acrobat costs 0 dollars, but the source code is not available, and therefore is not libre.
>>54387303
Chrome, steam, windows 10 are gratis right? But are they libre?
>>54387303
a non programmer could pay a programmer to modify some software to better suit their needs. Then the software wouldn't be gratis, but it would be libre.
>>54387360
>>54387372
Retards didn't even understand his question.
>>54387134
Not a chance, but somebody might fork it and put a copy up without ads / with their own ads. Chances of that are kinda low, especially if you get a good following before releasing source or before putting ads
>>54387303
he means you can charge money for open source crapware, meaning it will still be libre but not gratis
>>54387394
the first guy answered it perfectly
>if something is libre, it is probably gratis.
>gratis does not imply libre
>>54387394
I think you don't understand the question mate.
He asked if they imply each other. They don't. If something is libre, it can be made gratis by an owner of that software redistributing it. If something is just gratis and not libre, it will never be libre until the original owner makes it libre by distributing it with all of the freedoms necessary, including the source code obviously.
>>54387137
>What I'm trying to say is, please kill yourself
you make a very solid case
>>54387071
This video should be in the sticky, honestly.
>>54387409
This, the purchaser will just feel shafted if they learn that they paid for something someone else got for free. But that's why they call it a premium.
>be emacs author and biggest contributor
>uses windows for presentation
D R O P E D
R
O
P
E
D
>>54387470
You know what, I agree
>>54387071
Well he's not wrong but Linux is still a broken pos i literally cant use it
>Vulkan support is non existent on AMD
>DX12 Support NEVER EVER
>Shitty freeware clones
>????
Stallman is a spaz
>>54387395
if there was a free fork of audacity or some other similarly expensive software, it would eventually be more popular than the original
>she
>>54387533
>DirectX
>a Windows technology
>on an OS other than Windows
????
>>54387360
>if something is libre, it is probably gratis.
how do you earn a living then? people have kids to feed and desires to fulfill, what's the incentive to program at all?
>>54387533
>i literally cant use it
who cares about some faggot /v/ kiddie
>>54387550
This is what I would expect but how often does that actually happen?
>>54387488
Are you a degenerate poorfag?
What kind of a dejected, plebian, worthless, leech of a hobo posits that "because you pay for something, and if someone else got something else that was similar (read: it is NOT the same item, dumbass) for free, then that changes your previously completed transaction one IOTA?"
Miserable, mooching, freeloading faggot.
The person who received a free copy did not having anything to do with the copy you received. If you "feel shafted" because of what someone else is doing, ESPECIALLY in the realm of ephemeral, digital items that don't effect you in the slightest, then you should just kill yourself right now.
>>54387580
You don't earn a living by making free software. It just doesn't happen. I don't intend to either, I work for a big secret company :)
>>54387619
Anything can be sold, for whatever price is agreed on.
I can, if I choose to, and if I find a willing buyer, sell the rights to insert text into my next post.
If someone sold you a piece of software for download, and you remitted payment and consummated the transaction, that is where the discussion ENDS. They are free to sell the next download to whoever they want, at whichever strike price is made.
THAT is the definition of non-gratis; it means it HAS some price. What's the price? That's to be determined at the point of sale, at market, or what have you.
Libre is something completely different.
>>54387580
Well if no-one is willing to pay you to program then what you're making is probably worthless.
>>54387619
He's just describing how normies would feel.
>>54387580
There are many ways, most of which boil down to "get people to pay you money so that you make software". Either you get someone to hire you to make software (could be piecemeal or a steady employment), or you solicit donations or something.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-source_software
>>54387550
>audacity or some other similarly expensive software
>Audacity is a free open source digital audio editor and recording computer software application, available for Windows, OS X, Linux and other operating systems
Hmm?
>>54387071
>tedx
Fucking dropped
>>54387071
>fight for software freedom requires the same sacrifice as the Battle at Lexington
>GNU plus Linux = American Indepence
>>54387619
I don't really care. Just letting you know how normies would feel as >>54387665 said.
Anyway, your bias on what makes a degenerate poorfag is really off the hoops, man. I am a poorfag but no I don't feel this way about things. It does change the transaction since the marvel doesn't fall on the market, what changes is the valued cost of the service/product as it reflects what the buyer was seeking. Considering this is software and we're talking about ourselves as developers of libre software, I would expect that if I pocketed payment for a service and then I turned around and handed my client's competitor the same exact service for free that my client could have grounds for at least some remmitance in the form of service or refund. Not because they say so but because a market is only possible due to the system in place in which one honors the agreement set forth about the environ.
As for the definition of non-gratis, I can't really say that I agree. Non-gratis implies that the gratis portion is gone. Yes, some price is now implied as well, but non-gratis is specifying a focus on what makes gratis gratis as opposed to what makes it not free, where we are here creating a distinction on libre vs gratis.
Now if you wanted to value the person and the work put in, as it is in academic research, then the distinction would fall on whether or not you value the work this PERSON has just coded for you. Something >>54387619 clearly does not.
What one can afford has less to do with software than anything else we've mentioned. You are probably a Javascript user. That or someone has money and you were molded by it the way batman was molded by his hate. I'd still hug you, though.
>>54387663
One quick question...
do you not see how thick your autism is that you so need to make statements like this?
Worth is determined subjectively.
No one is willing to subject themselves to it.
It must be worthless.
Go back to China, you fucking fob.
>>54387137
Are you saying you don't know Björk?
>>54387495
wonder if he had an autistic fit about it
>>54387533
>>What is a Vulkan and what is an AMD?
>and why should I care about those?
>>What is a DX12?
>and why should I care about that?
>>havent used shitty freeware on linux ever. I think you mean free software?
>most stuff is actually quite good, and for some niches its actually better
so, if you do not need some super specific enterprise stuff (maybe that weird stuff you refereed to in your post), you can work on linux quite well. If you choose not too, fine, thats your decision, but implying no one can, thats just bullshit.
He sounds like a slightly more advanced version of Microsoft Sam.
His goals are noble but how is it supposed to work in reality? If everyone has the right to redistribute the software then basically, now in the times of high-speed internet, the software can only be sold once. Maybe a few times more before someone decides to upload it on the web.
>>54387071
is his shirt non-free?
>>54389629
It doesn't.
What else do you expect from a Bernie supporter? I like GNUman's passion and he most certainly means well, but he doesn't understand how the world works outside of his own bubble.
>>54387604
It never happens because those projects don't release source obviously because they are smarter than you and know it will happen.
>>54387796
Nobody would want to hire you to make the software though, because they can't do whatever they want with the code you make, so it isn't really theirs, making it pointless to hire you.
What it boils down to is that with GPL you don't really own your own code so it's pointless to pay for it.
The reason Stallman has had such a hard time coming up with a word that means "free" in the way he means is because the GPL isn't actually free.
Freedom looks something more like BSD, where you can actually do whatever you want with the source.
With GNUs you lose.
Was the hardware part a stab at nvidia?
kek.
>>54388057
Mongol face
>>54387303
>>54387303
Well look at how Redhat does it. The software is free, but it is so deliberately overconvoluted that only they know how to reliably troubleshoot it. And then they charge for tech support.
>>54387071
Stallman came to my university and he borrowed my phone. I'm not even kidding but you guys won't believe me lol. I also told him I "loved linux" just to see his reaction.
>>54390933
>borrowed my phone
What the fuck for?
>>54390933
I don't care if true or not, but I want full story.
Is he pregnant or something
>>54387360
Why do we need to use Latin (a dead language) to convey these terms?
You wouldn't use sumarian symbols to write a novel so why the fuck would you use Latin in place of English or even Spanish?
i can feel the autism all the way through my screen
>>54392633
holy shit that IS spanish you retard
>>54387145
He isn't praised because he followed his dreams either.
He is praised because he has single handedly coded many of the utils which are now a core part of GNU/Linux. All for free. He'd sleep under desks in computer labs and shit, like a fucking ascetic saint.
>>54392483
He's carrying GNU/Hurd to term
>>54392633
Because the english word free is vague. Free means both having freedom (libre) and no-cost (gratis)
>>54392633
>Why do we need to use Latin (a dead language) to convey these terms?
kekd
>>54389811
Enjoy having your permissive license anally raped, you ignorant slut.
>>54387303
Libre has a broader meaning. For instance ccleaner is gratis but it isn't libre.
>>54387071
>Holy shit HAHA I love when Microsoft or another company fucks my butthole hahaha holy crap
FIFY
>>54390923
It's not really convoluted (centos is almost literally RHEL with a different theme), it's that most companies have legislative or business requirements that the software they use is supported by a third party.
A bank can't go to ASIC and be like "they stole all of our numbers because my cousin didn't know how to set up a firewall on our arch mainframe".
>>54392787
I wonder what it must feel like to be that dedicated to something.
>>54387137
lmao kys cuckboi
>>54393850
I do as well. I only hope to be as passionate about something one day.
>>54387071
hehe
>>54387071
>6:37
he still really salty about linux
>>54394020
That is not subjective, that is a scientific diagram explaining to you laymen how the inner mechanics of an operating system works!
>>54394020
>he freed his kernel linox
>LINOX
Saw him eat something he picked off his toes infront of an audience. I bet he smells like a bag of dead cats.
>>54387303
no program is "libre". "Libre" are the persons allowed that have access to the program, with the degree of that liberty determined by the license.
let me rewrite: software cannot be "free as in libre", free as in libery are the people not the fucking software. And I'm not a slave if I choose to use closed-source software, first because it's a choice, second because 99.999% of the time I don't want to see the source code anyways.
Open source and closed source are the best ways to describe what stallman actually means, he's just trying to inject a ton of ideology into it to say his opponents are against "freedom".
>>54387071
>In 1983 I announced I would develop a completely free software operating system called GNU. In 1992 we had it almost finished but one piece was missing: the kernel. Linus Torvalds in that year freed his kernel LINOX which filled the last gap and [...]
We constitutes an OS for this guy if the kernel is just 'a piece'?
>schools teach non-free software
>It's the same as teaching them to smoke tobacco
this guy is kill in the head
>>54387071
How the fuck does he have such a massive stomach, yet the rest of him looks relatively normal.
He looks like hes carrying twins
>>54394163
N E W
E
W
free software is a convenience, not a right.
>>54392633
Because your language have 1 word for 500 possible meanings
Everything electronic thing TED does is made with non-free software. Irony, the video.
Look at these slides. Trash made in GIMP.
>>54392633
see >>54392798, "free" is a vague term. Free as in freedom or free as in beer?
>>54396687
Get raped and kill yourself, you retarded fucking faggot sack of shit with down syndrome.
Disclaimer: I work for a corporation that works exclusively with proprietary software.
That guy is like Roger Ebert in that South Park episode about tobacco companies.
>creates no value
>talks about being buttblasted
>doesn't realize what he's using his computer for isn't what normal people need to survive
>even though he talks about tech iliterate people he doesn't realize he's a coder and GNU is unusable for casuals
>cries when he doesn't get what he wants
>filled with green goo
>>54396911
Roger Ebert wtf?
That was Rob Reiner.
On topic:
technology in general, the users control it AND it controls the users. They each need each other. The medium is the message, there would be no message without the medium and there would be no medium without a messenger.
>>54388070
>>54387495
>implying the monitor on the left isn't TEDxPOZ and the monitor on the right is his shit?
>implying you could compose a slideshow on emacs.
>>54394224
Intestinal implants.
>>54394253
"Privacy is a convenience, not a right."
God... Wincucks and macfags are so retarded.
>>54387081
Thirded
>>54394020
he's right you know
>>54393850
Wow I didn't even realize I was a slave. I didn't feel like one. What do I do now that I noticed the chain?
>>54387071
He looks like the homeless vietnam vet that's always standing outside of the local walmart with a cardboard sign.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ
MOTHER FUCKER IS A MADMAN!
>>54387071
> he makes GNU way bigger than Linux
>>54387533
>DX support on Linux
What a mongoloid. Are you going to whine it doesn't run Internet Explorer next?
>>54399932
Because GNU includes Shell utils, corelibs, gtk, gcc, GNOME and Linux-libre
>>54394161
>being this retarded
lmao, I bet your facebook friends loved your philosophical musings back in 2008
fuck off and learn how argumentation works, kid
>>54397675
>>implying you could compose a slideshow on emacs.
Well, actually: hhttp://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/non-beamer-presentations.html
>>54396911
who's this jizz wiz
>>54398002
He didn't fucking say privacy u fucking retard, God damn u dirty bitch. Can you not read? Is your Linux font rendering too good to read? Holy fuck stop being a fucking poor ass and pay for the shit that you want u fucking cheapskate, if you can't afford it don't buy it u fuckwit. Don't force developers to live off of breadcrumbs because your life is so shitty that you can't afford good software, go back to using "green is my pepper" u fucking cuck. I agree with u on the privacy shit tho, it should be a right Xd.
>>54401144
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/LInux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
>>54387137
it's what happens when you let reddit take over boards
>>54400618
>>implying his implication is incorrect by implying a method with which an emacs presentation is implied.
>>54387137
I'm the OP and I actually posted this as bait, it was a framegrab from a video posted earlier.
I've been here this whole time, first defending RMS, then jabbing him. It's classic bait and you fell for it.
Meanwhile I'm actually participating for realzy in the actual threads.
>>54401837
>I was only pretending to be retarded
![th[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/qASZitb.jpg "th[1].jpg")