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