Richard Stallman on OLPC

memshankar writes "In an interview while he was in Hyderabad, India RMS praises for the One Laptop Per Child Project. He is even contemplating making a switch to XO, the flagship machine of the project, from his "old thinkpad". Stallman went on to say that the OLPC laptop has given people a way to use the free BIOS. He is, however dissatisfied with the wireless networking system used in the XO."

Wow

Amazing, if this Stallman person is thinking of getting one then maybe I should too. I wonder what brand of washing powder he uses because I'm not totally satisfied with the softness ( or lack of ) I get with the persil tablets I am currently using.

Give the full story: RMS:Hardware hacker

He is, however dissatisfied with the wireless networking system used in the XO. Since it uses a proprietary technology,| he plans to remove it and use a separate device when he needs to make wireless communication with others.

You imagine the mumbling and grumbling grumbling coming from RMS as he wields his soldering iron over a naked XO.

Re:Give the full story: RMS:Hardware hacker

You imagine the mumbling and grumbling grumbling coming from RMS as he wields his soldering iron over a naked XO.

Better than imagining the moaning and groaning coming from a naked RMS as he wields his iron soldier over an XO.

RMS is never happy

Is RMS ever happy? I am going to start a project "One Puppy per child" and the first one goes to Stallman.

AIBO

Is RMS ever happy? I am going to start a project "One Puppy per child" and the first one goes to Stallman.

The SONY dogbot isn't open sourced, but there is a german one [makezine.com] you can use.

Wha?

He didn't call it GNU/OLPC?

You sure they actually interviewed RMS?

Re:Wha?

But it runs on Linux - Uh, sorry - GNU/Linux.

Essentially, all linux systems are GNU/Linux to RMS (check out the source to configure).

RMS has never claimed the Linux kernel as part of GNU. He uses GNU/Linux to refer to distributions which use all the GNU userland stuff on top of the Linux kernel. It's a pretty reasonable position, actually, except that it ignores some other major pieces that should be in the list, and that a proper list (e.g. GNOME/Xorg/GNU/Linux) would be so unwieldy that it's easier just to say "Linux".

Actually, Linux as RMS uses it really is pretty much just GNU/Linux. I understand he doesn't use X or anything that requires a GUI, just EMACS, GNU Screen and BASH.

Makes sense

I always thought that the XO made sense for RMS. Find another machine that is open source from the hardware to the bios to the OS to the applications. The XO is the only true FOSS device that I know about.

Another FOSS device (phone/computer)

FIC produces a phone that qualifies. The firmware for the GSM is closed, but I believe that's a legal requirement in most areas.

The Neo 1973 & Neo FreeRunner [openmoko.com] are linux ARM computers with full GPS, bluetooth, GSM/GPRS, USB (client & unpowered host) and 480 x 640 touchscreens. The FreeRunner also has two accelerometers and wi-fi. You can buy the Neo 1973 [openmoko.com] now, and the FreeRunner is expected in March or April.

You can (of course) play video, music, and run PDA apps on the devices. You can also view PDFs and the web, use bluetooth keyboards (or bluetooth anything else, for that matter), or do anything that you or someone else cares to port from the desktop, assuming the hardware resources are sufficient.

I've been playing with my Neo 1973 (currently recommended only for people willing to debug, and tolerate alpha level software) for a few weeks, and I'm having a great time with it.

Not only the software is open - you can get CAD files for the case, and schematics as well. There are also i2c, etc. bus standards used so adding new hardware is easy as well, if you're so inclined. Obviously the real market there is for a cottage industry distributing neos with extra hardware built-in, but the hobbyist can experiment at home, too.

Re:Makes sense

Information just wants to be free. Unfortunately, freedom comes with a Cat5 cable.

why?

I've always wondered about articles like this one.

Linus says something about an area he knows nothing about.

Stallman says something a particular product.

dont get me wrong, they are both interesting people, I have some Stallman lectures sitting on my hard drive, and I've actually watched them several times.

When these guys are talking about a topic where they are an authority on the matter, I find their comments to be '+5 insightful', but stuff like this is '+2 interesting' at best.

Re:why?

Stallman says something a particular product.

You can't blame Stallman, he was asked a question and he answered it. And he said he was going to BUY an OLPC and use it in preference to his ThinkPad, a pretty ringing endorsement. But 90% of the posts seem to be about either his comments on the "unfree" wifi driver, or his beard. Again, not his fault for the weird way he is reported.

RMS has a great guru image

Although some people can't see beyond the ends of their politically correct noses in the west and so talk down RMS for his shaggy look, that's not an issue in the guru culture of India. In fact, the picture of RMS in TFA fits in perfectly. You wouldn't trust a "wise old man" dressed in a slimy western business suit and tie.

Kudos to RMS for all his work over the years, and putting up with small-minded criticism.

Re:RMS has a great guru image

Why do you focus on the messenger and not the message?

RMS doesn't care what you think of him -- either you will respect him for his principles, or judge him based on his external appearance. He is smart enough to know which is more important, and assumes you are too.

Blimey...

Next thing you know he'll start using a web browser to view websites [lwn.net]. :O

They're working on a fully Free driver...

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Marvell_microkernel [laptop.org]

The microkernel on the Marvell 88W8388 wireless chip is one of 2 to 4 pieces of non-Free user-modifiable software on the XO laptop. (the others being the EC firmware, and possibly the touchpad and keyboard firmware) This is where we explain what needs to be done to create a Free replacement, who is doing it, and what progress we have made.

I knew it!

Richard Stallman on OLPC

I knew it! I knew that guy had to be on something! But, I thought it would be PCP.

RMS acts as a Role Model

I admire RMS' unmoving stance on Free. Will I emulate it? Certainly not. I believe RMS places himself, consciously or not, as a role model. He sits at an extreme of the Free/Proprietary spectrum, and will continuously push and pull in that direction.

For the rest of us who live in the real world and accept compromises to make our lives more comfortable, he's ridiculous. But that's not the point. The point is that he aims for an ideal that won't be attained by everyone, but that can be strived to.

So the fact that his complaints about the non-free wireless is ridiculous to the rest of us, but it does motivate some to provide a free alternative, and that is his objective.

Re:RMS acts as a Role Model

Even to people who don't highly value freedom, his stand on drivers isn't necessarily ridiculous. There is a pragmatic reason to be skeptical about closed drivers: unauditable/unreviewable code is a security risk [kerneltrap.org].

He does answer his emails

I've sent emails to RMS at GNU in the past and he actually will reply.
He can be dogmatic about his views, but he won't flame you for having
a different opinion. He WILL give you a good argument why HE is right
and YOU are wrong, but in a VERY polite way. (He's like a true politician,
he can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you will look forward to
the trip!).

Re:RMS Proves One Thing....

Actually, I think he is making these remarks in his capacity as the author of and important license, in which case it is quite newsworthy. Or it may be in his capacity as the originator of the "free software" concept, I'm not sure.

In any case, that puts the count of significant accomplishments to RMS's credit at two or three, depending on whether you count GPL as important in its own right or only as the most popular implementation of free software licensing. Not too shabby in either case.

Don't get me wrong, I deeply respect RMS

Actually, I think he is making these remarks in his capacity as the author of and important license, in which case it is quite newsworthy. Or it may be in his capacity as the originator of the "free software" concept, I'm not sure.

Compiler writer, inventor of free software concept, really, not a bad resume at all. But that's the thing about RMS that makes me respect the socialist. The classic Republican retort, that I've used myself, to liberals that want the government to save the world, is, "if its so important to you, then why not do it yourself". And RMS DID just that. He didn't write a petition web site, he wasn't lobbying congress. He said that there ought to be bunch of free tools and he made it happen. He wrote the original gnu compiler, put a lot into emacs, put together the GNU project and the GPL and a whole bunch of things. He's done more for his cause by himself than 99% of most people do for theirs.

I may not agree with his politics, but I deeply respect the man, and yeah, I do donate to the GNU when I can, because, sometimes its better to support people that are just willing to work to make the world better in some way, regardless if it jives with your own half baked sensibilities. The work matters more than the politics, I say.

Re:RMS Proves One Thing....

BSD existed long before GNU. In fact, all GNU did for the most part was hack on BSD tools and release them under a license that effectively forbade the new code from being rolled back in.

True, BSD was around before GNU, but the GNU project didn't touch BSD code for a long time (not for 16 years at least) due to two problems. First, the BSD code was in a legal limbo [wikipedia.org], thanks to copyright problems with AT&T. Using it would be dangerous.

Second, the original BSD license had an annoying advertising clause making it incompatable with the GPL [gnu.org]. This clause wasn't removed until 1999, after Richard Stallman convinced Berkeley to remove it [wikipedia.org]. This finally allowed GPL and BSD code to be mixed. The GNU project was already well established by then.

So, no, the GNU project wrote their software from scratch. They didn't just hack the BSD tools.

Re:Ah, RM "Proprietary is Never Good" Stallman...

Yes, he says proprietary is never good and, you know what? He is right.

Re:Ah, RM "Proprietary is Never Good" Stallman...

I think you misunderstand him. I quote from Why "Open Source" misses the point of Free Software [gnu.org]:

"For the free software movement, free software is an ethical imperative, because only free software respects the users' freedom. By contrast, the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make software "better"--in a practical sense only. It says that non-free software is a suboptimal solution. For the free software movement, however, non-free software is a social problem, and moving to free software is the solution."

I suppose it's O.K. if you don't think freedom is the most important thing—everyone has an opinion and you have every right to disagree. But you should understand that free software has never been about making a good reliable program (although that is often a by-product)—it is about the freedom itself.

As for not using GPLv3, I don't think rms himself would hold that against anybody. As a matter of course, GNU projects will be under GPLv3, but rms has repeatedly said, for example, in the case of Linux, the kernel, it is entirely up to the kernel developers (the strongest statement you have from him is that he hopes that they will decide to upgrade to GPLv3), and as you can see in the list of free licenses [gnu.org] (well, some not), he never held being not copyleft against any license—it's just that when one values freedom, GPL (and admittedly, it's latest version, in FSF's opinion) does the best job of protecting that freedom for everyone (or, the most number of people).