From 2d97ecc2c1ac605ca49e8a866b309daaeb7a831c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: MS Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:53:45 +0200 Subject: Installing the Blog --- talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html | 260 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 260 insertions(+) create mode 100644 talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html') diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b7d7da9 --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html @@ -0,0 +1,260 @@ + + + + + +

+ 41. Avoiding Ruinous Compromises +

+ + + + + + + + + + +

+ 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. +

+

+ 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. +

+ + + + +

+ 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. +

+ + + + + + +

+ 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 + + + 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. +

+

+ 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. +

+

+ 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. +

+ + +

+ 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. +

+ + +

+ Dale Carnegie’s classic self-help book, + + How to Win Friends and +Influence People, + + 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. +

+ + +

+ 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. +

+

+ 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. +

+

+ 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. +

+ + +

+ 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. +

+

+ 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. + + +

+

+ 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 + + additional, secondary + + reasons +to prefer it. +

+

+ 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. +

+

+ 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 + + + Java (formerly) or the Flash runtime +(still), or a nonfree device driver that enables support for certain +hardware models. +

+

+ 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. +

+

+ The issue here is not whether people should be + + able + + or + + allowed + + 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. +

+ + +

+ 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 + + suggesting + + 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. +

+ + + + + + + + +

+ 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. +

+

+ 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. + + +

+
+ -- cgit v1.2.3