summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html260
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 260 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
deleted file mode 100644
index b7d7da9..0000000
--- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,260 +0,0 @@
-<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
-
-Free Software Foundation
-
-51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor
-
-Boston, MA 02110-1335
-Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
-Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted
-worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is
-preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations
-of this book from the original English into another language provided
-the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and
-the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all
-copies.
-
-ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
-Cover design by Rob Myers.
-
-Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- -->
-
-
- <a name="Avoiding-Ruinous-Compromises">
- </a>
- <h1 class="chapter">
- 41. Avoiding Ruinous Compromises
- </h1>
- <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-9">
- </a>
- <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-4">
- </a>
- <a name="index-GNU_002c-how-you-can-help">
- </a>
- <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate-2">
- </a>
- <a name="index-compromises_002c-avoiding-ruinous">
- </a>
- <p>
- The free software movement aims for a social change: to make
-all software free so that all software users are free and can be part
-of a community of cooperation. Every nonfree program gives its
-developer unjust power over the users. Our goal is to put an end to
-that injustice.
- </p>
- <p>
- The road to freedom is a long road. It will take many steps and many
-years to reach a world in which it is normal for software users to
-have freedom. Some of these steps are hard, and require sacrifice.
-Some of them become easier if we make compromises with people that
-have different goals.
- </p>
- <a name="index-GPL_002c-patent_002dprovisions-compromise">
- </a>
- <a name="index-compromises_002c-GPL-patent-provisions">
- </a>
- <p>
- Thus, the Free Software Foundation makes compromises—even major ones. For instance, we made
-compromises in the patent provisions of version 3 of the GNU General
-Public License (GNU GPL) so that major companies would contribute
-to and distribute GPLv3-covered software and thus bring some patents
-under the effect of these provisions.
- </p>
- <a name="index-LGPL_002c-as-compromise">
- </a>
- <a name="index-compromises_002c-LGPL-and">
- </a>
- <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-3">
- </a>
- <p>
- The Lesser GPL’s purpose is a compromise: we use it on certain chosen
-free libraries to permit their use in nonfree programs because we
-think that legally prohibiting this would only drive developers to
-proprietary libraries instead. We accept and install code in
- <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
- </a>
- GNU
-programs to make them work together with common nonfree programs, and
-we document and publicize this in ways that encourage users of the
-latter to install the former, but not vice versa. We support specific
-campaigns we agree with, even when we don’t fully agree with the
-groups behind them.
- </p>
- <p>
- But we reject certain compromises even though many others in our
-community are willing to make them. For instance,
-we endorse only the GNU/Linux distributions that have policies not to
-include nonfree software or lead users to install it. To endorse
-nonfree distributions would be a ruinous compromise.
- </p>
- <p>
- Compromises are ruinous if they would work against our aims in the
-long term. That can occur either at the level of ideas or at the
-level of actions.
- </p>
- <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-consumer-values-v_002e">
- </a>
- <p>
- At the level of ideas, ruinous compromises are those that reinforce
-the premises we seek to change. Our goal is a world in which software
-users are free, but as yet most computer users do not even recognize
-freedom as an issue. They have taken up “consumer” values, which
-means they judge any program only on practical characteristics such as
-price and convenience.
- </p>
- <a name="index-Carnegie_002c-Dale">
- </a>
- <p>
- Dale Carnegie’s classic self-help book,
- <cite>
- How to Win Friends and
-Influence People,
- </cite>
- advises that the most effective way to
-persuade someone to do something is to present arguments that appeal
-to his values. There are ways we can appeal to the consumer values
-typical in our society. For instance, free software obtained gratis
-can save the user money. Many free programs are convenient and
-reliable, too. Citing those practical benefits has succeeded in
-persuading many users to adopt various free programs, some of which
-are now quite successful.
- </p>
- <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-consumer-values-and">
- </a>
- <p>
- If getting more people to use some free programs is as far as you
-aim to go, you might decide to keep quiet about the concept of
-freedom, and focus only on the practical advantages that make sense
-in terms of consumer values. That’s what the term “open
-source” and its associated rhetoric do.
- </p>
- <p>
- That approach can get us only part way to the goal of freedom. People
-who use free software only because it is convenient will stick with it
-only as long as it is convenient. And they will see no reason not to
-use convenient proprietary programs along with it.
- </p>
- <p>
- The philosophy of open source presupposes and appeals to consumer
-values, and this affirms and reinforces them. That’s why we
-do not support open source.
- </p>
- <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-6">
- </a>
- <p>
- To establish a free community fully and lastingly, we need to do
-more than get people to use some free software. We need to spread the
-idea of judging software (and other things) on “citizen
-values,” based on whether it respects users’ freedom and
-community, not just in terms of convenience. Then people will not
-fall into the trap of a proprietary program baited by an attractive,
-convenient feature.
- </p>
- <p>
- To promote citizen values, we have to talk about them and show how
-they are the basis of our actions. We must reject the Dale Carnegie
-compromise that would influence their actions by endorsing their
-consumer values.
- <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-consumer-values-v_002e-1">
- </a>
- </p>
- <p>
- This is not to say we cannot cite practical advantage at all—we can
-and we do. It becomes a problem only when the practical advantage steals
-the scene and pushes freedom into the background. Therefore,
-when we cite the practical advantages of free software, we reiterate
-frequently that those are just
- <em>
- additional, secondary
- </em>
- reasons
-to prefer it.
- </p>
- <p>
- It’s not enough to make our words accord with our ideals; our
-actions have to accord with them too. So we must also avoid
-compromises that involve doing or legitimizing the things we aim to
-stamp out.
- </p>
- <p>
- For instance, experience shows that you can attract some users to
-GNU/Linux if you include some nonfree programs. This could mean a
-cute nonfree application that will catch some user’s eye, or a nonfree
-programming platform such as
- <a name="index-Java-5">
- </a>
- Java (formerly) or the Flash runtime
-(still), or a nonfree device driver that enables support for certain
-hardware models.
- </p>
- <p>
- These compromises are tempting, but they undermine the goal. If you
-distribute nonfree software, or steer people towards it, you will find
-it hard to say, “Nonfree software is an injustice, a social problem,
-and we must put an end to it.” And even if you do continue to say
-those words, your actions will undermine them.
- </p>
- <p>
- The issue here is not whether people should be
- <em>
- able
- </em>
- or
- <em>
- allowed
- </em>
- to install nonfree software; a general-purpose system
-enables and allows users to do whatever they wish. The issue is
-whether we guide users towards nonfree software. What they do on
-their own is their responsibility; what we do for them, and what we
-direct them towards, is ours. We must not direct the users towards
-proprietary software as if it were a solution, because proprietary
-software is the problem.
- </p>
- <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-distortion-of">
- </a>
- <p>
- A ruinous compromise is not just a bad influence on others. It can
-distort your own values, too, through cognitive dissonance. If you
-have certain values, but your actions imply other, conflicting values,
-you are likely to change your values or your actions so as to resolve
-the contradiction. Thus, projects that argue only from practical
-advantages, or direct people toward some nonfree software, nearly
-always shy away from even
- <em>
- suggesting
- </em>
- that nonfree software is
-unethical. For their participants, as well as for the public, they
-reinforce consumer values. We must reject these compromises if we
-wish to keep our values straight.
- </p>
- <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-uphold-citizen-values-publicly">
- </a>
- <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-beware-of-ruinous-compromises">
- </a>
- <a name="index-FSF_002c-resources">
- </a>
- <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-publicly-upholding">
- </a>
- <p>
- If you want to move to free software without compromising the goal of
-freedom, look at the FSF’s resources area. It lists hardware and
-machine configurations that work with free software, totally free
-GNU/Linux distros to install, and thousands of free software packages
-that work in a 100 percent free software environment. If you want to
-help the community stay on the road to freedom, one important way is
-to publicly uphold citizen values. When people are discussing what is
-good or bad, or what to do, cite the values of freedom and community
-and argue from them.
- </p>
- <p>
- A road that lets you go faster is no improvement if it leads to the
-wrong place. Compromise is essential to achieve an ambitious goal,
-but beware of compromises that lead away from the goal.
- <a name="index-compromises_002c-avoiding-ruinous-1">
- </a>
- </p>
- <hr size="2"/>
-