Skip navigation

jc4_01.jpg

Casi a las 8 de la noche del jueves, en el Foro de la Virginia Tech University la capacidad esta casi completa. Los estudiantes -Muchos de ellos de las ciencias computacionales- han venido a escuchar al GURU, al guia espiritual Richard Stallman el gran creador del movimiento GNU/Linux. (Junto con Tornal Linux)

El sitio web de la Universidad se referia a el como “La leyenda” y que es inegable esto por su influencia en el desarrollo de Software. Richard Stallman lanzo la Free Software Foundation por las fechas de 1985 y ha creado el borrador mas reciente de la licencia GPL. El solo hecho de ser Stallman provoca opinion muy fuertes entre seguidores y adversarios, pero que importa, su nombre tiene un peso enorme dentro de todo lo que contenga un procesador.

Les dejo parte de las preguntas y respuestas que dio Richard Stallman a los alumnos del Virginia Tech, me tome el tiempo de traducirlo con ayuda del Mr.Santana, espero les guste:

Developer: Soy un desarrollador de Software, yo creo algo y alguien lo compro y lo distribuye libremente, como puedo sobrevivir?

Stallman: No lose, hay miles de maneras en las que puedes sobrevivir, como por ejemplo conseguirte un empleo [Una gran carcajada]. Tu pregunta esta llena de cosas que tu asumes y no tienen sentido. Estas asumiendo que vas a vivir de un software en particular. Pero yo no veo la necesidad en eso. Por que yo conozco a mucha gente que desarrolla Software libre y les pagan por hacer otras cosas. cuales son las otras cosas? quien lo sabe? tal ves ellos son chef, y algunos de ellos son recolectores de basura y algunos otros les pagan por escribir Software.

Developer: No cree usted que esta violando la perfeccion del sistema de crear Software, para Developers, poniendo las cosas en su contra?

Stallman: No. Yo solamente estoy insistiendo en la libertad para los usuarios de las computadoras. Al contrario me agradan los programadores que desean hacer mas dinero, eso no es tan importante como respetar la libertad de los otros usuarios. De hecho, desarrollar software que no sea libre es un ataque a la sociedad y espero que no quieras hacer eso, y espero que nadie pueda hacer eso. De verdad espero ver que el Software comercial desaparezca completamente, por que es una practica antisocial.

Developer: Pero la libertad viene con responsabilidades. De un lado esta la libertad y del otro lado estan los derechos de la gente que crea el contenido del Software.

Stallman: [Agitandose]: No, no, no, ellos no tienen el derecho de subyugar a otros. Los desarrolladores de Software no tienen el derecho de quitar la libertad a los demas. Y es por eso que el Software comercial o no-libre es completamente anti-etico y no deberia de existir. Es por eso que yo trabajo en el Software libre. Les daremos el Software libre y tu Software comercial fracasara. [Risas y aplausas de la audiencia].

Developer: Hay una falacia fundamental en lo que estas diciendo, yo no tengo nada en contra de que tu escribas Software Libre-

Stallman: Pero yo si tengo algo en contra de ti escribiendo Software comercial. [Muchas risas de la audiencia] Tu subyugas a la demas gente! Tu quieres mantenerlos divididos y sin obtener ayuda.

Developer: Entonces es tu palabra contra la mia, y obviamente –

Stallman: Bueno, obviamente nadie puede convencer a nadie – ellos mismos crearan sus propias conclusiones. Si hubiera un discurso acerca del software libre, yo daria la razon a eso.

Las otras preguntas de la audiencia fueron, en gran parte, preguntas no discuciones. Alguien le pregunto algo usando la frase “Open Source” y se nego a contestar por que el objeta acerca del termino Open Source. “Pero quizas quiere reformular tu pregunta” dijo. Alguien mas pregunto una cosa que envolvia el termino “Propiedad Intelectual”, y Stallman aclara la nocio de la “Propiedad Intelectual”.

Muchas de las preguntas revelan el entendimiento y apoyo a la posicion de Stallman. La sesion de preguntas y respuesta duro mucho, hasta que Stallman tuvo que llamar a un fin, aun con muchas manos levantadas en el foro con mas preguntas.

NOTA: Bueno, creo que ya me canse de traducir les dejo la otra parte de la entrevista a Stallman en Ingles, mil disculpas pero tengo chamba en Softtek 😀 cualquier duda o comentario con gusto lo respondere y no sean tan criticos con mi Ingles, me esfuerzo 😀

Continuar leyendo el resto de la entrevista

Stallman Interview: GPL, Debian, Promoting Free Software

Afterward, many students gather around Stallman, asking him to autograph their copy of his book. One student asks him to sign a Bad Vista sticker, which he declines. Several groups ask to have their picture taken with him, lining up and smiling for a historic photo.

The GNU dolls aren’t selling too well tonight, so Stallman decides to drop the price from $20 to $15, shouting out the new, lower price to the hangers-on. Still, there are few takers.

As the students drift out, Stallman sits down with me for an interview. On a one on one basis, he’s thoughtful, with little of the bluster evident in the Q&A period.

Q: The Free Software Foundation has taken an activist stance against DRM, particularly in its support of the Defective by Design campaign. What outcome do you hope to produce by this? We hope to organize the public to visibly condemn and reject DRM, so that we will discourage companies from trying to inflict it on us.

Q: How do you see GNU/Linux evolving in the next 5-10 years? What sort of developments do you see happening, both for developers and in the marketplace?

I’m afraid I can’t answer that – I have no idea. I’m not particularly good at foretelling the future. And I have to say, it’s not a question that’s tremendously important to me. Because the [GNU/Linux] system already does the things that I want to do. So the question of its further development almost doesn’t matter to me directly, personally. I want it to develop in ways that will satisfy the users, but I’m not necessarily an expert in what they need.

Q: There’s disagreement in the GNU/Linux community about the GPL, with some developers – notably Linus Torvalds – opting for Version 2, and others moving ahead with Version 3. Do you have a sense of where this impasse is headed?

No, I can’t predict. I see a lot of people have switched to GPLv3 so it seems to be a success in that sense. But the purpose of GPLv3 is to defend users’ freedom better. And in that sense, every time a program moves to GPLv3 it gets the benefit of our improved defense of a user’s freedom. And when a program doesn’t move to GPLv3, then users don’t get that benefit.

So it’s unfortunate for those who use Linux the kernel, that their freedom will not be defended by GPLv3. In particular, they may become victims of Tivoisation. And there will be no way to stop it. Except that they themselves will have to understand that should reject those systems.

Q: Are you happy with the GPLv3 adoption to date? Is it proceeding as you hoped?

That question would make sense if this were a business trying to be a success. But that’s not what it is. GPLv3 is not something we did because we hoped it would be a success, it’s something we did to do something about problems that had arisen in the use of free software. Therefore, as long as some important programs are still under GPLv2, we can’t protect their freedom better.

So we need to convince the developers of Linux to move to GPLv3. That is, it needs to be done, but we in the GNU Project can’t convince them because they don’t agree with us and don’t listen to us. So someone else will have to convince them.

Q: Is there any area in which proprietary software and GNU/Linux software can meet in the middle, and work together or–

I don’t know what you mean by “can.” Practically speaking, various proprietary programs run on GNU/Linux – it’s not ethical. Proprietary software shouldn’t exist. So yes, free and non-free software can co-exist the same way that free people and slaves can co-exist. But that’s not a desirable state of affairs.

Q: You once said “the prospect of charging money for software was a crime against humanity.” Do you still believe this?

Well, I was not distinguishing the two meanings of free. It took me a few years after I started the Free Software movement to clearly, without exception, distinguish those two meanings. Even in 1985 I still hadn’t seen that.

Q: Which two meanings?

Free, in regard to freedom, and free, meaning gratis. So I see nothing wrong with charging money for a copy of a program. However, I do see something wrong with denying the user of a program the essential freedoms, after he’s gotten his copy, whether he’s gotten it by paying for it, gratis, or however he got it. Once he’s got his copy, he should have his four freedoms.

So the way I put it back then was a result of not seeing clearly the distinction of the two meanings of the word free. And I think now that it was a mistaken way to put it. What I should have said is, ‘Making a program proprietary is an injustice.’

Q: As you look back on your advocacy for Free Software, is there anything you would have changed?

Yeah, there are some things I would have done differently. I would have worked more closely with Debian in the early years. And I would have compromised on certain technical issues which turn out to not to have been so important. And I would have tried to keep a closer relationship, and I hope that way they would have never started non-free software.

With hindsight you can sometimes see it would have better to have done something differently. But that doesn’t mean it would have been possible for me to have seen it before.

Q: One of my favorite quotes of yours is, “I’m always happy when I’m protesting.” Why do you think this is?

Being at a protest is like being at a party. It’s tremendously exhilarating.

(Richard Stallman’s appearance was sponsored by Students for Free Culture at Virginia Tech and the Association for Computing Machinery at Virginia Tech)

——————–

Entrevistando desde ItManagement


3 Comments

  1. Hi there!

    I’m new to this forum and just wanted to say hi. So Hi!

    bye!

  2. Que tal Flitticroxoca. Muchas gracias pro la visita, pero andas medio perdido. Primero no es foro, segundo no esta en Ingles. Si quieres presumir tu Ingles puedes ir a yahoo chats y ahi puedes encontrar muchos como tu.

    Gracias por al visita 😀

  3. Free software is an ‘ideology’ above everything. Issues like user-friendliness hardly matter. I know men who have stuck to the free software movement since 1996. There was no or little GUI back then, still these men ‘believed’ in their ideology- the ideology of empowering the masses in the digital world. One document that makes all the difference between free software and open source is the GPL. I recommend every young software engineer to read this.


2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. By State of the Movement… « Ventures on 12 Ene 2009 at 12:17 pm

    […] to make all lecture notes, syllabi and course materials free and open to the public. Meanwhile, the giants of the Free and Open Software movement looked on with that wistful mixture of love and pity that […]

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: