Re: [-empyre-] fwd .. gnu..

Stahlman has his own personal (and I think narcissistic) reasons for pressing the use of "GNU-Linux." The fact is that whatever RMS wants us to think, "GNU" has a meaning forever linked to free and open source software (FOSS). Stahlman's objections to "open source" are largely semantic; most open source software is released under the GPL (General Public License) or a GPL-derivative license, which means that while you can charge for the program, the source code must also be available freely. So essentially, open source software is free. Why Stahlman thinks developers should *never* charge for their work is beyond me. His is a fascinating but quixotic quest.

But really, the discussion that our wordplay around [new/gnu/knew] has sparked serves to highlight how separate many people try to keep their categories. Does new media == gnu media? Let's not get caught up in a discussion of Stahlman. What is gnu media? Maybe it's Free and Open-Source Artware (FOSA), where "source" isn't limited to code. In a sense, isn't all artwork is free or open source, at least conceptually? Even if you're creating a painting, aren't you pulling code from other painters, adding some of your own code, and recompiling? Surely the commercial end of the art world is a genetic algorithm, producing many small variations, and then breeding the successful children. Is knew media is the bank of genetic code from which we pull?

Such is the evolution of mediums and movements.

- ben

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.