What has the FSF accomplished?

Honest question, I don’t know a whole lot about the FSF. Heard the announcement from RMS and a snippet on the dangers of webapps and such. But do they introduce solutions to these issues regarding proprietary software or mostly point fingers and tell us what’s dangerous to use?

What’s your favorite FSF contributions?

@fruechtchen
link
86M

as far as i know everything GNU related is from the FSF. For instance emacs, glibc (probably the most used libc in linux), gcc, etc.

However, for many of these things interesting alternatives exist nowadays. for instance glibc has not really a good code quality. See for instance https://drewdevault.com/2020/09/25/A-story-of-two-libcs.html

@fruechtchen
link
26M

to be honest, i don’t have a favorite FSF contribution.

@je_vv
link
6
edit-2
6M

Oh, come on, all of a sudden GNU and FSF are the bad guys/gals?

Linux wouldn’t even exist if GNU wasn’t there in the 1st place (not sure about FSF, but might be). And the so worth OS (Open Source) wouldn’t even exist without the Free Software freedom definitions. I do believe nothing has harmed the Free Software in general more than the Open source, and its pragmatism that freedom is not what matters, but code quality through open inspection is.

I feel like OS as a whole, which is pretty lucrative now a days, are taking advantage of the RMS situation, to once and for all get rid of FS, and the FSF with it. Which, to me, it’s a bad move for everyone. Please keep in mind who are the big contributors of the Linux Foundation, and who owns RedHat?

And for the FSF itself, do you remember which organization has been fighting against abusive laws promoted by the US government/senate, and others? Which organization has been battling DRM and such evil to the user practices? Which organization has been trying at least to defend internet neutrality, and also keep internet protocols as user friendly and not as bloated of DRM like stuff? which organization has legally accompanied users when fighting for their rights to get reimbursements from vendors which only selll HW with windows inside and deny the right for reimbursement (specific to Europe?), which organization has also accompanied the right to repair movement, and finally which organization has been trying to communicate and educate people about SW which respect users vs. SW which doesn’t respect users?

On reddit, and even here on Lemmy, there had been several posts about FSF, and GNU SW (remember discussion about browsers talking about icecat for example, gcc, and so forth)? What about the 4 freedoms GPL and ohter derivative licenses try to protect (not just LGPL)?

I mean, all of sudden the GNU org and the FSF org are evil, non contributing and being parasites?

This remind me of several movements, that though having some good intentions, what they end up doing in practice is way more harmful than what they originally tried to fix or deal with… Going against GNU and FSF, as organizations, and also against the concepts and principles behind them, because of an individual, or group of individuals doesn’t make sense to me. So now what? the freedoms for the user from free SW don’t matter?

Go for the individuals as much as you’d like (hopefully basing your arguments on facts and evidence you can verify and rely on), but please don’t attack the principles, and hopefully the organizations defending/protecting them.

@linkert
creator
link
4
edit-2
6M

There is no one in this post claiming the FSF or the GNU project is evil?

Only an examination of what the FSF does.

@fruechtchen
link
26M

i didn’t say the FSF and GNU are now bad. i respect their contribution and agree that they have created useful things.

so in short: i don’t attack the principles.

@not_a_cop
link
46M

aside from what’s already said, do you use programs like ls,grep,sed,cat,etc? all of those are part of coreutils and unless you’re using alpine or android, all Linux distros use GNU’s version.

I’m sure you’ve heard about bash, emacs and gpg.

When compilers used to cost hundreds of dollars, GCC was released entirely for free.

The G in GNOME, the G in GIMP and the G in GTK are all the same and stand for GNU.

Do you think having full control over software you buy is a necessity? guess who popularized this idea.

if you want to see how much stuff depends on GNU’s utilities, just remove a single package called glibc and use your computer.

You can find a list of software associated with GNU here:

https://www.gnu.org/software/software.html

@Blattstruktur
link
16M

In my opinion, it is a very good thing to see diversification. GNU was a project to get a fully free operating system, and thanks to that project we have that now. From now there is time to develop new solutions and to choose between them freely. It can, in my opinion, be partly contributed to the FSF and GNU that there are now other solutions like musl, which are also free.

@ufrafecy
link
19
edit-2
5M

deleted by creator

@linkert
creator
link
56M

Okok, the GPL of course. How did I not think about that? ;)

Last release was 2007 - what else tangible have they produced?

@newhoa
link
9
edit-2
6M

They also enforce their licenses and have a legal team to enforce violations of those licenses. They enforce violations on their copyrighted code, but I think also provide legal assistance to others using their licenses if their code is abused.

Edit: info on that

I believe they also fund the development of the GNU project (GCC, Bash, C Library, coreutils, etc). They maintain the copyrights to that software as well.

@k_o_t
admin
link
26M

also provide legal assistance to others using their licenses if their code is abused

damn, that’s pretty cool, didn’t know about this, i wonder what’s the track record outside of europe and north america for that tho…

@flufficat
link
6
edit-2
3M

deleted by creator

@uhoh
link
46M

Hell yeah, the invention of copyleft!

“Libre software” means software that respects users’ freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.

In particular, four freedoms define Free Software:

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose.

Placing restrictions on the use of Free Software, such as time ("30 days trial period", "license expires January 1st, 2004") purpose ("permission granted for research and non-commercial use", "may not be used for benchmarking") or geographic area ("must not be used in country X") makes a program non-free.

The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs.

Placing legal or practical restrictions on the comprehension or modification of a program, such as mandatory purchase of special licenses, signing of a Non-Disclosure-Agreement (NDA) or - for programming languages that have multiple forms or representation - making the preferred human way of comprehending and editing a program ("source code") inaccessible also makes it proprietary (non-free). Without the freedom to modify a program, people will remain at the mercy of a single vendor.

The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.

Software can be copied/distributed at virtually no cost. If you are not allowed to give a program to a person in need, that makes a program non-free. This can be done for a charge, if you so choose.

The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits.

Not everyone is an equally good programmer in all fields. Some people don't know how to program at all. This freedom allows those who do not have the time or skills to solve a problem to indirectly access the freedom to modify. This can be done for a charge.
  • 0 users online
  • 5 users / day
  • 5 users / week
  • 6 users / month
  • 43 users / 6 months
  • 854 subscribers
  • 51 Posts
  • 109 Comments
  • Modlog