Comment Re:first post! (Score 5, Funny) 270
Java browser, eh?
I don't see a reference to RMS saying nobody should have kids - do you?
Stallman made the statement in the radio show described in the first link. If you want more evidence of his anti-children position, here's a more well-known example.
I was excited about WinRT (not to be confused with Windows RT...yeah, I know) during Windows 8's development and was considering porting a project, but after evaluating Windows 8, the lack of features in the APIs, annoying interface decisions, and confusing hardware fragmentation made it an easy decision not to bother. Microsoft's alleged refusal to promote ARM-only apps, when it needs all the apps it can get, re-affirms that decision. Windows 8 is a non-starter as a development platform.
It's one thing to have some Larry Wall style eccentricities, but Stallman hurts any movement he attaches his name to because of his extremist views. He believes, for example, that programmers should not expect to be paid for their work and that it's more important that non-free software disappear than it is for someone's children to be fed (he also believes nobody should have children). He's also made vile statements about what he calls "voluntary pedophilia", claiming that it should be legalized.
The annoying part is that in nearly every Stallman discussion, people will say things like, "You may not agree with everything he says, but we sure need someone like him who always sticks to their guns!" No, we don't. He's hurting the movement.
GNU was an interesting philosophy when it was started, but it's not as if it was the only open source ideology or that other open source movements wouldn't have taken hold. This isn't to diminish GNU so much as it is to diminish Stallman's glorified role in history among computer geeks and lessen the movement's reliance on a crazy person.
I don't take issue with the shutdown since Megaupload was being used as a gigantic, unregulated store for pirated content, and that does take money away from content creators. Instead, I go out of my way to purchase independent content to support artists outside of the mainstream system, and any mainstream content I do want gets purchased digitally, which ultimately contributes to a lessening of relevance for the traditional distributors represented by the MPAA. Home film releases come out out sooner and sooner after their theater runs, and streaming services like Netflix are so popular on living room devices that Microsoft claims video streaming surpasses game-playing in terms of hours of usage on the Xbox 360. Whatever traditional structure the MPAA is protecting has already been supplanted by legal mediums.
In other words, Megaupload isn't necessary--the fate of the traditional movie industry has already been sealed by companies who embraced the internet.
How is this countersuing or fighting back? This is an outright offensive move. The only "consensus" otherwise is among Slashdot posters who are STILL trying to portray Google's acquisition of Motorola as purely defensive. For some reason, Google can absolutely do no wrong here, whatsoever, at all, ever. Why? Because they use Linux?
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
