update RMS articles

1 files changed, 310 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-pavia-doctoral-address.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-pavia-doctoral-address.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ad9f57
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-pavia-doctoral-address.html
@@ -0,0 +1,310 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.97 -->
+<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
+<!--#set var="TAGS" value="speeches" -->
+<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
+<title>Pavia Doctoral Address: Innovation Is Secondary When Freedom Is
+at Stake - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+ <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/rms-pavia-doctoral-address.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
+<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
+<div class="article reduced-width">
+<h2>Pavia Doctoral Address: Innovation Is Secondary When Freedom Is at
+Stake</h2>
+
+<address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address>
+
+<div class="infobox">
+<p>On September 24th, 2007, Richard Stallman received an 
+<i>honoris causa</i> doctorate in Computer Engineering from the <a 
+href="https://web.archive.org/web/20111004234138/http://www.unipv.eu/on-line/Home/Ateneo/Organidigoverno/Rettore/articolo1229.html">University of Pavia</a>, Italy. Stallman began by 
+criticizing the overvaluing of innovation as a response to previous 
+speakers at the same event.</p> 
+
+<p>Here is the speech that he gave at the ceremony, transcribed by 
+Alessandro Rubini.</p>
+</div>
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+<p>Innovation can create riches, and once in a while those riches can
+lead to general economic prosperity, especially if you don't have 
+neo-liberal economics to impede the result.</p>
+
+<p>But innovation affects things much more important than riches or even
+economic prosperity.  Democracy was an innovation, fascism was an
+innovation.  Today, in Italy, we see the innovation of placing criminal 
+charges against fishermen for saving people from drowning in the 
+sea&#8239;<a href="#Note1" id="Note1-rev">[1]</a>. 
+Innovations can directly affect our freedom, which is more important than  
+anything else.  Innovation can affect social solidarity, for good or for 
+ill.</p>
+
+<p>So when we consider technical progress in computers or in software,
+the most important question to ask is: How does this affect our freedom?  
+How does this affect our social solidarity? Technically speaking, it's 
+progress, but is it really progress in social and ethical terms, or is it 
+the opposite?</p>
+
+<p>During my career in programming, as computers developed from something 
+used by a few specialists and enthusiasts into something that most people 
+use, there has been tremendous technical progress and it was accompanied by 
+ghastly social and ethical regression.  In fact, nearly everyone who uses 
+computers began using them under a social system that can only be described 
+as dictatorship.</p>
+
+<p>The developer of the program controls what it does.  If you use it, the 
+developer controls what you can do, and what you can't do. And controls 
+what it does to you.  So that the software that you think is yours is not 
+there to serve you.  It is there to control you. Companies such as 
+Microsoft and Apple designed their software specifically to restrict you.</p>
+
+<p>Windows Vista is primarily an advance in how to restrict the user, which 
+is why we have the badvista.org campaign.  And when this is over, outside 
+the building I will offer you stickers from that campaign, if you wish to 
+help teach people why they shouldn't downgrade to Vista.</p>
+
+<p>Apple designs software specifically to restrict the users.  It's known 
+as &ldquo;Digital Restrictions Management,&rdquo; or DRM.  We have helped 
+protests against Apple just as we helped protests against Microsoft.  See 
+the site defectivebydesign.org for more information and for how to 
+participate.</p>
+
+<p>Google designs software specifically to restrict the user.  That's the 
+nature of the Google Earth client: it is made the way it is specifically to 
+restrict the people who use it.  Obviously, it's not free software, because 
+free software develops under the democratic control of its users.  With the 
+four freedoms&mdash;the freedom to run the program as you wish, to study 
+the source code and change it so the program does what you wish, the 
+freedom to distribute exact copies to others (which is the freedom to help 
+your neighbor), and the freedom to distribute copies of your modified 
+version (which is the freedom to contribute to your community)&mdash;with 
+these four freedoms the users, individually and collectively, are in 
+charge.</p>
+
+<p>And therefore free software cannot be designed to restrict the users.  
+To design to restrict the user is only possible when there is a dictator, 
+when someone has power to control what the program will do and what it 
+won't do.  When the users have the control, when they can control their own 
+computing, then nobody has the kind of power that would enable him to 
+impose malicious features to restrict users or spy on users or attack 
+users.  If you use MacOS or Windows Vista, you are completely at the mercy 
+of that system's developer.  Those developers have the power to forcibly 
+change your software in any way they like, whenever the machine is 
+connected to the network.  The user no longer has even the chance to say 
+yes or no.  The system is one big backdoor.</p>
+
+<p>But with free software, <em>you</em> are in charge of what the computer 
+will do.  So it will serve you, instead of subjugating you.  The question 
+of free software is therefore <em>not</em> a technical question, it's an 
+ethical, social and political question.  It's a question of the human 
+rights that the users of software ought to have.</p>
+
+<p>Proprietary software developers say, &ldquo;No rights, we are in 
+control, we should be in control, we demand total power over what your
+computer does; we will implement certain features and let you use them, but 
+meanwhile we may spy on you as you use them and we can take them away at 
+any time.&rdquo;  But free software developers respect your freedom, and 
+this is the ethical obligation of every software developer: to respect the 
+freedom of the users of that software. Making proprietary user-subjugating 
+software sometimes is profitable, but it is never ethical, and it should 
+never happen.</p>
+
+<p>But it will be up to you to make that be true.  I, alone, can say these
+things, but I, alone, cannot make them reality.  We must all work together 
+to establish freedom and democracy for the users of software. And this 
+freedom and democracy is now essential to enjoy freedom and democracy in 
+other aspects of life.  Right now, some of the biggest Internet service 
+providers in the United States are carrying out political censorship of 
+email.  A major organization called <cite>truthout</cite>, whose website 
+you may have seen, truthout.org, is being blocked from sending mail to 
+their subscribers by Yahoo and Hotmail and WebTV.  And they have done this 
+for more than a week, despite the complaints from many of the users of 
+those companies.  Apparently they think they have gone beyond the point
+where they have to care what anyone says about them.</p>
+
+<p>All the forms of freedom that we hold dear are transformed when we carry 
+out the relevant activities through computers.  We must <em>re</em>-found 
+these freedoms in such a way that we can depend on them while we use 
+digital technology.  An essential part of this re-foundation is insisting 
+that the software we use be under our control.</p>
+
+<p>Not everyone wants to be a programmer, not everyone will learn
+personally how to study the source code and change it.  But in a world 
+where your software is free, you can, if you feel it necessary, hire someone 
+else to change it for you.  You can persuade your cousin programmer to 
+change it for you if you say it's really important.  You can join together 
+with other users and pool your funds to hire a programmer.  And the simple 
+fact that there are millions of programmers who can study and change the 
+software will mean that if the software is malicious, almost certainly 
+somebody else, who has the requisite skills, will find that and correct it, 
+and you will get the corrected version without any special effort of your 
+own.  So we all benefit, programmers and non-programmers alike, from the 
+freedoms that free software grants to us.  The freedom to cooperate and the 
+freedom to control our own lives personally.  They go together because both 
+of them are the opposite of being under the power of the dictatorial
+software developer that unilaterally make decisions that nobody else can 
+change.</p>
+
+<p>Free software has a special connection with universities&mdash;and 
+indeed all schools of all levels&mdash;because free software supports 
+education, proprietary software forbids education.  There is no
+compatibility between education and proprietary software, not at the
+ethical level.</p>
+
+<p>The source code and the methods of free software are part of human
+knowledge.  The mission of every school is to disseminate human knowledge.  
+Proprietary software is not part of human knowledge. It's secret, 
+restricted knowledge which schools are not allowed to disseminate.  Schools 
+that recognize this exclude proprietary software from their grounds.  And 
+this is what every school should do.  Not only to save money, which is an 
+obvious advantage that will appeal immediately to many school 
+administrators, but for ethical reasons as well.  For instance, why do many 
+proprietary software developers offer discounts, or even gratis copies of 
+their nonfree software to schools and students?</p>
+
+<p>I'm told that Microsoft offered a discount to those who wish to accept 
+the shiny new chains of Windows Vista to the employees of this university.  
+Why would they do such a thing?  Is it because they wish to contribute to 
+education?  Obviously not.  Rather, Microsoft and other similar companies 
+wish to convert the university into an instrument for imposing the 
+dependency on the user-subjugating software on society as a whole.  They 
+figured that if they get their software into schools, then students will 
+learn to use it, and become dependent on it.  They will develop a 
+dependency.  And thus after they graduate you can be sure that Microsoft 
+and these other companies would no longer offer them discounted copies.  
+And especially, the companies that these former students go to work for 
+will not be offered discounted copies.  So, the software developers push on 
+the schools, then push on arresting society and push it deep into a pit.
+This is not something schools should do.  This is the opposite of the
+mission of the school, which is to build a strong, capable, independent and 
+free society.  Schools should teach their students to be citizens of a 
+strong, capable, independent and free society.  And this means teaching 
+them to use free software, not proprietary software.  So none of the 
+classes in this university should teach proprietary software.</p>
+
+<p>For those who will be great programmers, there is another reason why
+their schools must teach and use free software.  Because when they get to 
+the age of 13 or so, they are fascinated with software and they want to 
+learn everything about how their computer and their system are functioning.  
+So they will ask the teacher, &ldquo;How does this work?,&rdquo; and if 
+this is proprietary software, the teacher has to say, &ldquo;I'm sorry, 
+it's a secret, you can't find out.&rdquo;  So there is no room for 
+education.  But if it's free software, the teacher can explain the basic 
+subject and then say, &ldquo;Here is the source code, read this and you'll 
+understand everything.&rdquo;  And those programmers will read the whole 
+source code because they are fascinated, and this way they will learn
+something very important: how to write software well.  They don't need to 
+be taught how to program, because for them programming is obvious, but 
+writing good code is a different story.  You have to learn that by reading 
+lots of code and writing lots of code.  Only free software provides that 
+opportunity.</p>
+
+<p>But there is a particular reason, for the sake of education in good
+citizenship.  You see, schools must teach not just facts, not just skills, 
+but above all the spirit of good will, the habit of helping your neighbor.  
+So every class, at every level, should have this rule: &ldquo;Students, if 
+you bring software to class, you may not keep it for yourself, you must 
+share copies with the rest of the class.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>However, the school has to practice its own rule; it has to set a good
+example.  So every school should bring only free software to class, and set 
+an example with its software of the practice of disseminating human 
+knowledge while building a strong, capable, independent and free society.  
+And encouraging the spirit of good will, of helping other people.  Every 
+school must migrate to free software, and I call on you, those of you who 
+are faculty, or staff, or students of this university, to work together to 
+bring about the migration of this university to free software, completely 
+to free software, within a few years.  It <em>can</em> be done in a few 
+years; it requires taking a substantial step each year.  Other universities 
+are doing this or have done it, you can do it too.  You only have to reject 
+social inertia as a valid reason for going deeper and deeper into the 
+pit.</p>
+
+<p>For those of you who are interested, after we leave this hall and this
+ceremony, outside I will have various things from the Free Software
+Foundation that you might be interested in.  And you can support the Free 
+Software Foundation by going to fsf.org and become an associate member.  
+For more information about the free software movement and the GNU operating 
+system, and for where to find the entirely free distributions of the 
+GNU/Linux operating system please look at gnu.org.</p>
+
+<p>Thank you.</p>
+<div class="column-limit"></div>
+
+<h3 class="footnote">Footnote</h3>
+
+<p> <a href="#Note1-rev" id="Note1">[1]</a>
+Shortly before Stallman's award ceremony, some Tunisian fishermen who had 
+rescued shipwrecked migrants at sea were <a 
+href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210115214946/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-45439513">
+arrested in Italy</a> on charges of facilitating illegal immigration.</p>
+</div>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are
+also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken
+links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+        replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+        We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+        translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+        Please send your comments and general suggestions in this
+        regard to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+        &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+        <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of
+        our web pages, see <a
+        href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+        README</a>. -->
+
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing
+translations of this article.</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+     files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+     be under CC BY-ND 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2007, 2022 Richard Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2022/06/13 12:06:57 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
+</body>
+</html>