rms-pavia-doctoral-address.html (17058B)
1 <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> 2 <!-- Parent-Version: 1.97 --> 3 <!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> 4 <!--#set var="TAGS" value="speeches" --> 5 <!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> 6 <title>Pavia Doctoral Address: Innovation Is Secondary When Freedom Is 7 at Stake - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> 8 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/rms-pavia-doctoral-address.translist" --> 9 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> 10 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" --> 11 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> 12 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> 13 <div class="article reduced-width"> 14 <h2>Pavia Doctoral Address: Innovation Is Secondary When Freedom Is at 15 Stake</h2> 16 17 <address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address> 18 19 <div class="infobox"> 20 <p>On September 24th, 2007, Richard Stallman received an 21 <i>honoris causa</i> doctorate in Computer Engineering from the <a 22 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 23 criticizing the overvaluing of innovation as a response to previous 24 speakers at the same event.</p> 25 26 <p>Here is the speech that he gave at the ceremony, transcribed by 27 Alessandro Rubini.</p> 28 </div> 29 <hr class="thin" /> 30 31 <p>Innovation can create riches, and once in a while those riches can 32 lead to general economic prosperity, especially if you don't have 33 neo-liberal economics to impede the result.</p> 34 35 <p>But innovation affects things much more important than riches or even 36 economic prosperity. Democracy was an innovation, fascism was an 37 innovation. Today, in Italy, we see the innovation of placing criminal 38 charges against fishermen for saving people from drowning in the 39 sea <a href="#Note1" id="Note1-rev">[1]</a>. 40 Innovations can directly affect our freedom, which is more important than 41 anything else. Innovation can affect social solidarity, for good or for 42 ill.</p> 43 44 <p>So when we consider technical progress in computers or in software, 45 the most important question to ask is: How does this affect our freedom? 46 How does this affect our social solidarity? Technically speaking, it's 47 progress, but is it really progress in social and ethical terms, or is it 48 the opposite?</p> 49 50 <p>During my career in programming, as computers developed from something 51 used by a few specialists and enthusiasts into something that most people 52 use, there has been tremendous technical progress and it was accompanied by 53 ghastly social and ethical regression. In fact, nearly everyone who uses 54 computers began using them under a social system that can only be described 55 as dictatorship.</p> 56 57 <p>The developer of the program controls what it does. If you use it, the 58 developer controls what you can do, and what you can't do. And controls 59 what it does to you. So that the software that you think is yours is not 60 there to serve you. It is there to control you. Companies such as 61 Microsoft and Apple designed their software specifically to restrict you.</p> 62 63 <p>Windows Vista is primarily an advance in how to restrict the user, which 64 is why we have the badvista.org campaign. And when this is over, outside 65 the building I will offer you stickers from that campaign, if you wish to 66 help teach people why they shouldn't downgrade to Vista.</p> 67 68 <p>Apple designs software specifically to restrict the users. It's known 69 as “Digital Restrictions Management,” or DRM. We have helped 70 protests against Apple just as we helped protests against Microsoft. See 71 the site defectivebydesign.org for more information and for how to 72 participate.</p> 73 74 <p>Google designs software specifically to restrict the user. That's the 75 nature of the Google Earth client: it is made the way it is specifically to 76 restrict the people who use it. Obviously, it's not free software, because 77 free software develops under the democratic control of its users. With the 78 four freedoms—the freedom to run the program as you wish, to study 79 the source code and change it so the program does what you wish, the 80 freedom to distribute exact copies to others (which is the freedom to help 81 your neighbor), and the freedom to distribute copies of your modified 82 version (which is the freedom to contribute to your community)—with 83 these four freedoms the users, individually and collectively, are in 84 charge.</p> 85 86 <p>And therefore free software cannot be designed to restrict the users. 87 To design to restrict the user is only possible when there is a dictator, 88 when someone has power to control what the program will do and what it 89 won't do. When the users have the control, when they can control their own 90 computing, then nobody has the kind of power that would enable him to 91 impose malicious features to restrict users or spy on users or attack 92 users. If you use MacOS or Windows Vista, you are completely at the mercy 93 of that system's developer. Those developers have the power to forcibly 94 change your software in any way they like, whenever the machine is 95 connected to the network. The user no longer has even the chance to say 96 yes or no. The system is one big backdoor.</p> 97 98 <p>But with free software, <em>you</em> are in charge of what the computer 99 will do. So it will serve you, instead of subjugating you. The question 100 of free software is therefore <em>not</em> a technical question, it's an 101 ethical, social and political question. It's a question of the human 102 rights that the users of software ought to have.</p> 103 104 <p>Proprietary software developers say, “No rights, we are in 105 control, we should be in control, we demand total power over what your 106 computer does; we will implement certain features and let you use them, but 107 meanwhile we may spy on you as you use them and we can take them away at 108 any time.” But free software developers respect your freedom, and 109 this is the ethical obligation of every software developer: to respect the 110 freedom of the users of that software. Making proprietary user-subjugating 111 software sometimes is profitable, but it is never ethical, and it should 112 never happen.</p> 113 114 <p>But it will be up to you to make that be true. I, alone, can say these 115 things, but I, alone, cannot make them reality. We must all work together 116 to establish freedom and democracy for the users of software. And this 117 freedom and democracy is now essential to enjoy freedom and democracy in 118 other aspects of life. Right now, some of the biggest Internet service 119 providers in the United States are carrying out political censorship of 120 email. A major organization called <cite>truthout</cite>, whose website 121 you may have seen, truthout.org, is being blocked from sending mail to 122 their subscribers by Yahoo and Hotmail and WebTV. And they have done this 123 for more than a week, despite the complaints from many of the users of 124 those companies. Apparently they think they have gone beyond the point 125 where they have to care what anyone says about them.</p> 126 127 <p>All the forms of freedom that we hold dear are transformed when we carry 128 out the relevant activities through computers. We must <em>re</em>-found 129 these freedoms in such a way that we can depend on them while we use 130 digital technology. An essential part of this re-foundation is insisting 131 that the software we use be under our control.</p> 132 133 <p>Not everyone wants to be a programmer, not everyone will learn 134 personally how to study the source code and change it. But in a world 135 where your software is free, you can, if you feel it necessary, hire someone 136 else to change it for you. You can persuade your cousin programmer to 137 change it for you if you say it's really important. You can join together 138 with other users and pool your funds to hire a programmer. And the simple 139 fact that there are millions of programmers who can study and change the 140 software will mean that if the software is malicious, almost certainly 141 somebody else, who has the requisite skills, will find that and correct it, 142 and you will get the corrected version without any special effort of your 143 own. So we all benefit, programmers and non-programmers alike, from the 144 freedoms that free software grants to us. The freedom to cooperate and the 145 freedom to control our own lives personally. They go together because both 146 of them are the opposite of being under the power of the dictatorial 147 software developer that unilaterally make decisions that nobody else can 148 change.</p> 149 150 <p>Free software has a special connection with universities—and 151 indeed all schools of all levels—because free software supports 152 education, proprietary software forbids education. There is no 153 compatibility between education and proprietary software, not at the 154 ethical level.</p> 155 156 <p>The source code and the methods of free software are part of human 157 knowledge. The mission of every school is to disseminate human knowledge. 158 Proprietary software is not part of human knowledge. It's secret, 159 restricted knowledge which schools are not allowed to disseminate. Schools 160 that recognize this exclude proprietary software from their grounds. And 161 this is what every school should do. Not only to save money, which is an 162 obvious advantage that will appeal immediately to many school 163 administrators, but for ethical reasons as well. For instance, why do many 164 proprietary software developers offer discounts, or even gratis copies of 165 their nonfree software to schools and students?</p> 166 167 <p>I'm told that Microsoft offered a discount to those who wish to accept 168 the shiny new chains of Windows Vista to the employees of this university. 169 Why would they do such a thing? Is it because they wish to contribute to 170 education? Obviously not. Rather, Microsoft and other similar companies 171 wish to convert the university into an instrument for imposing the 172 dependency on the user-subjugating software on society as a whole. They 173 figured that if they get their software into schools, then students will 174 learn to use it, and become dependent on it. They will develop a 175 dependency. And thus after they graduate you can be sure that Microsoft 176 and these other companies would no longer offer them discounted copies. 177 And especially, the companies that these former students go to work for 178 will not be offered discounted copies. So, the software developers push on 179 the schools, then push on arresting society and push it deep into a pit. 180 This is not something schools should do. This is the opposite of the 181 mission of the school, which is to build a strong, capable, independent and 182 free society. Schools should teach their students to be citizens of a 183 strong, capable, independent and free society. And this means teaching 184 them to use free software, not proprietary software. So none of the 185 classes in this university should teach proprietary software.</p> 186 187 <p>For those who will be great programmers, there is another reason why 188 their schools must teach and use free software. Because when they get to 189 the age of 13 or so, they are fascinated with software and they want to 190 learn everything about how their computer and their system are functioning. 191 So they will ask the teacher, “How does this work?,” and if 192 this is proprietary software, the teacher has to say, “I'm sorry, 193 it's a secret, you can't find out.” So there is no room for 194 education. But if it's free software, the teacher can explain the basic 195 subject and then say, “Here is the source code, read this and you'll 196 understand everything.” And those programmers will read the whole 197 source code because they are fascinated, and this way they will learn 198 something very important: how to write software well. They don't need to 199 be taught how to program, because for them programming is obvious, but 200 writing good code is a different story. You have to learn that by reading 201 lots of code and writing lots of code. Only free software provides that 202 opportunity.</p> 203 204 <p>But there is a particular reason, for the sake of education in good 205 citizenship. You see, schools must teach not just facts, not just skills, 206 but above all the spirit of good will, the habit of helping your neighbor. 207 So every class, at every level, should have this rule: “Students, if 208 you bring software to class, you may not keep it for yourself, you must 209 share copies with the rest of the class.”</p> 210 211 <p>However, the school has to practice its own rule; it has to set a good 212 example. So every school should bring only free software to class, and set 213 an example with its software of the practice of disseminating human 214 knowledge while building a strong, capable, independent and free society. 215 And encouraging the spirit of good will, of helping other people. Every 216 school must migrate to free software, and I call on you, those of you who 217 are faculty, or staff, or students of this university, to work together to 218 bring about the migration of this university to free software, completely 219 to free software, within a few years. It <em>can</em> be done in a few 220 years; it requires taking a substantial step each year. Other universities 221 are doing this or have done it, you can do it too. You only have to reject 222 social inertia as a valid reason for going deeper and deeper into the 223 pit.</p> 224 225 <p>For those of you who are interested, after we leave this hall and this 226 ceremony, outside I will have various things from the Free Software 227 Foundation that you might be interested in. And you can support the Free 228 Software Foundation by going to fsf.org and become an associate member. 229 For more information about the free software movement and the GNU operating 230 system, and for where to find the entirely free distributions of the 231 GNU/Linux operating system please look at gnu.org.</p> 232 233 <p>Thank you.</p> 234 <div class="column-limit"></div> 235 236 <h3 class="footnote">Footnote</h3> 237 238 <p> <a href="#Note1-rev" id="Note1">[1]</a> 239 Shortly before Stallman's award ceremony, some Tunisian fishermen who had 240 rescued shipwrecked migrants at sea were <a 241 href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210115214946/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-45439513"> 242 arrested in Italy</a> on charges of facilitating illegal immigration.</p> 243 </div> 244 245 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> 246 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> 247 <div id="footer" role="contentinfo"> 248 <div class="unprintable"> 249 250 <p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to 251 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. There are 252 also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF. Broken 253 links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent 254 to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> 255 256 <p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, 257 replace it with the translation of these two: 258 259 We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality 260 translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. 261 Please send your comments and general suggestions in this 262 regard to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> 263 <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> 264 265 <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of 266 our web pages, see <a 267 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations 268 README</a>. --> 269 270 Please see the 271 <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations 272 README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing 273 translations of this article.</p> 274 275 </div> 276 277 <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to 278 files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should 279 be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this 280 without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. 281 Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the 282 document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the 283 document was modified, or published. 284 285 If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. 286 Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying 287 years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable 288 year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including 289 being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). 290 291 There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers 292 Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> 293 294 <p>Copyright © 2007, 2022 Richard Stallman</p> 295 296 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" 297 href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative 298 Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> 299 300 <!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> 301 302 <p class="unprintable">Updated: 303 <!-- timestamp start --> 304 $Date: 2022/06/13 12:06:57 $ 305 <!-- timestamp end --> 306 </p> 307 </div> 308 </div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> 309 </body> 310 </html>