Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 02:35:30 +1000 (EST) From: Stephen McKay <syssgm@detir.qld.gov.au> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Cc: syssgm@detir.qld.gov.au Subject: Richard Stallman came to town Message-ID: <199905111635.CAA15685@ren.detir.qld.gov.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Richard Stallman visited my home town yesterday, and I went along to see the renowned zealot of free software. I was expecting to see an imposing figure with a permanent scowl, the result of being on a first name basis with the Almighty, but forced constantly to deal with the ignorant masses. What I saw was a short and hairy, almost unkempt, man who smiled lightly when I made eye contact. He was tired, presumably from an unknown number of previous engagements, and slumped over the desk while waiting for the room to fill. About 30 seats were occupied in the small conference room. Everyone had tea or coffee and were totally ignoring the unlikely looking Saint Stallman while catching up with friends who had unexpectedly heard about the event and conspired to be at the same place at the same time. I had heard about it only by accident, and attending had the flavour of being able to finally watch the rites of some secret society through knowing a friend of a friend. "Can I start now?", asked Stallman. The room fell silent. The organiser, worriedly looking at the wall clock, responded that not all of the registered guests had arrived. But after a bit of wrangling with other supporting staff, and resolving to allow late arrivals to enter, the event officially commenced. The organiser began his introduction, a short piece read from written notes. A tangled and confusing short piece that was so far off the mark that Stallman remarked, "Perhaps you should let me tell the story." Moving onto more solid ground, the organiser listed some awards that Stallman had received, his most recent one shared with Linus Torvalds. After this, Mr Stallman was permitted to speak. He spoke calmly, and unhurriedly. He told of the glory days of MIT, the times of community and collective effort, the simple and effective results of sharing software in an open and free manner. He told of the difficulties he and his group experienced with proprietary software, even when coupled with superior hardware. And he told of the impotent anger he felt when he found someone who had the software he needed, but refused to release a copy, for fear of breaking non-disclosure. During this part of the monologue he mentioned ITS, the "Incompatible Timesharing System" and a colleague and I lost composure and laughed a quick bark of a laugh "Ha!" before realising that nobody else had moved a muscle. Stallman found it pretty odd as well, and said that laughing was OK, and that "hacking is about humour too". I started to wonder what everyone else was thinking. Were they still listening to Saint Stallman the Incredibly Serious, Bearer of GNU the Microsoft-Slaying Sword, and Dweller in the Wilderness? How could they maintain this illusion while he found things in his beard, picked at his finger nails, and had already discarded his worn sneakers so as to better entangle his legs in the chair? So, he continued his talk, describing the history of the GNU project, the GNU manifesto and other things I had heard about before. But what I had not heard was the simple logic behind the history, the version without any mention of "lunatic" or "totally detached from reality". His story was basically along the lines of "This and that event happened. I didn't like it. I couldn't see how anybody would like it. I resolved never to do that to anyone. I started a project designed specifically to counteract these unpleasant events." Well, that's how I see the creation of the GNU project, as I heard him describe it. With enough software in the GNU world he would never have to put up with malfunctioning proprietary software, would never have to submit to NDA conditions, and nobody else would have to either. There was no whining when he explained why what he thought of as the GNU/Linux system should be called the GNU/Linux system. He calmly described the historical timing, the intent of the GNU group, and the way the Linux Kernel fit into the last major gap in the GNU system. Without GNU in the name, he reasoned, nobody will pay any attention to the GNU portion, and nobody will consider the philosophy behind it, and the message would be lost. He was giving out GNU/Linux Inside stickers after the talk, he said, and later I collected a few, though I had to admit that I had no Linux systems, running only FreeBSD, but had been caught up in the experience, and had to have some anyway. After describing the recent successes of free software, none of which should be any surprise to you, the story stopped at the present day, and then it was question time, and he eagerly opened a block of chocolate (fruit and nut, I expect), as perhaps a compensation for skipping the pending evening meal. While the first intrepid questioner tried to ask a question in a way that didn't contradict anything Stallman had expressly stated, my brain worked feverishly. Had not many people on the FreeBSD lists expressed dire warnings about the GPL? What was it I should be asking? I caught his eye and squeaked out my insightful question: "What do you think of FreeBSD?" Could I have asked a more imprecise question? Yes, and you'll get to read that one shortly. "They are misguided," said Stallman, and I was confused enough by his answer overlapping my attempts to construct a better question that I can't report any of his reasoning. I should have brought a camcorder. "But", I said, "some of the FreeBSD people think the GPL is evil. It restricts commerce." This was the even lamer question I warned you about. Was I subconsciously trying to rile the man by using emotive words? Did I want to report "Stallman breaths fire and abuses FreeBSD supporter"? Regardless, he continued with his very gentle rebuttal of the anti-GPL position, using some stats about the growth of pure GPL commercial ventures, emphasising the success of companies which do nothing but support and install GPL software, even, apparently, some in Australia. Luckily others took the heat, lightly applied though it was, off me and asked more questions. The audience was starting to lose its stiffness and perhaps even its worshipping reverence. A young buck asked if, just maybe, that EMACS had become too bloated? Well, nobody held back then, and all were laughing and smiling as Stallman explained that he's now rather careful what he puts into EMACS, and that, really, it's got quite a lot easier to use for users who don't have the time or inclination to become EMACS experts. "Do you ever use vi?", asked another supplicant. His reply was along the lines of "In the church of GNU, vi is not a punishment, it is a penance". I'm not sure if that makes any sense to me, but then, I've never liked EMACS, and use vi every day. Can that have anything to do with it? Calm now, and resolving to ask at least one good question, I asked, "Is there room for two types of free software, GPL and non-GPL, such as BSD?" He responded that all free software is good software. But that he believes the greater good is served by releasing it under the GPL. He added that people should not mistake this with non-GPL being bad. He emphasised that to disagree with Stallman does not automatically make you bad, or make your ideas bad. He went on to reiterate the moral philosophy that underlies his position on software freedom, and his intent to promote cooperating communities of people freely exchanging software and ideas. That's why, he said, you have to put in the part about not being able to make software that is free into software that is not free by modifying part of it. He had earlier brought up the problem faced by most early users of X Windows, who got a binary only version from their particular Unix vendor despite the fact that the base distribution from MIT was free software. They were disempowered despite X being "free", but obviously not "free" enough. "There is no God", he said as part of another answer, and I swear there was a collective "Gasp!", a sharp intake of breath. I was quite surprised as Australia is not known as a particularly religious place, and I've long ago given up trying to bait the occasional visiting Mormon bicycle duo, or upset the composure of Jehovah's Witnesses that wake you at impossibly early hours on weekends. Well, actually he said, "Since there are no Gods, you have to base your moral code on a humanitarian viewpoint and the value of cooperation with your neighbours, rather than religious dictates", or a very similar statement. Yes, definitely plural. "No Gods". "Do you read slashdot?" "No, I don't. I don't use the web, or read any net news. I don't have the time. I travel too much, and my laptop rarely has a good enough connection. I do everything by email." Apparently there are still sites around that will mail you a web page if you mail the URL to the right address. Amazing! Somewhere amongst all this, Stallman explained that the Free Software Foundation does make money, but they don't give him any. Way back when it first got enough money to afford to pay somebody, he had to decide who to spend it on. Obviously not on Stallman, because he could convince Stallman to work for nothing! And so, he hired somebody else. As time progressed and the FSF grew, he decided he would be in a much better moral position if they didn't even pay his air fares and such. So he panhandles his way round the world speaking on free software, eating on other people's expense accounts, and inviting everyone he sees to write free software and dump the proprietary stuff. He claims that the returns from invested awards and prizes are enough to support a modest standard of living, and that's all anybody really needs. Officialdom then officially concluded the official schedule, and some people left. The rest of us bounded up to shake hands (both contact and non-contact hand shaking), and take modest, but not too modest, numbers of GNU/Linux Inside stickers, and try to say something that would get an interesting response. There was an ill defined knot of admirers clustered around Stallman, pushing pet projects, and asking various questions which I thought had already been adequately answered by his presentation. He responded to every one of them with apparent interest, with care and accuracy, and with no hint of having to force himself, or any sign of annoyance. This even though I discovered he was to talk at another venue in just over an hour, and wasn't going to have time to eat or rest. He started to shift from side to side while talking, and this grew into a sort of dance with some shifty foot work, and then he sort of skipped around to the back of the group. After a noticeable time when he did not return to his designated spot, the group folded inside out and he was at the centre again, still moving about, perhaps to keep alert, perhaps to give his limbs some blood. He never lost track of the discussion while manoeuvring, though I was definitely thinking about Monty Python, and whether he'd ever rehearsed for a part. There was an enormous, possibly bronze, or fake bronze if there is such a thing, bust of some military looking type in the corner of the room, and I asked him if he would like a huge bronze statue made of himself. He didn't seem to think that was very likely, or very sensible. To cover for this, I explained my major worry about future software, that hardware manufacturers might collude to squeeze out free operating systems by not disclosing the specifications of new hardware, and waiting for all the old hardware to become obsolete. I pointed at the obvious villainy of Intel's I2O project. He shared some of my concerns and encourages people to vote against undocumented hardware by not buying it, but dismissed I2O as obviously being directed against Intel's chip making competitors, and not directly aimed at us. Now was the thanking and leaving time, and a number of people thanked and left in a tidy and orderly manner. To each he smiled and pronounced "Happy Hacking!" as they departed. Then it was my turn to receive the benediction, and I walked out, somewhat disoriented by the afternoon's spectacle, and watched the rain for a time while waiting for my taxi. So, what is this thing called Richard Stallman? Quirky, yes. Dedicated, yes. How much fun can it be to tell the same story hundreds of times, and get the same old questions hundreds of times. Is he arrogant or paranoid? No. Everything he said was warmly said, and said to motivate. He spreads a message he deeply believes in, and encourages others to believe just as deeply. Richard Stallman is not a madman. He is not the enemy. He has a simple and logical story to tell, about individual and collective freedom, and communities of cooperating individuals. You might conclude that his dream can never be fulfilled, but I believe that you should listen to his message, and consider how you can improve your own life by improving everyone's life. I respect him, and I respect what he has to say. Stephen McKay 1999-05-11 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199905111635.CAA15685>