Comment redefining freetard (Score 1) 405
"I don't see why my hardware needs free drivers, why should the hardware manufacturers release specifications? I mean free driver available for my such-and-such hardware just sucks in comparison to the proprietary driver. Why would I want the manufacturer to release the specifications for such-and-such hardware?! So foss developers could release more free drivers that suck even MORE?! PFFT!!"
I'm just amazed at the myopia displayed here from the commentards at slashdot every time I browse over. As another commenter pointed out, the guidelines are simply for distros that want FSF approval. There is no effort to force you not to use proprietary drivers or firmware, only an effort to replace said drivers and firmware with equally-functional or better free drivers and firmware so that you don't have to use the proprietary pieces anymore. If free software developers had listened to "freetards" like you, we would have never had a free compiler, free shell, free browser engines, free windowing server, free office suite, or free window managers. Why should we make GNOME, we have motif? Why open up star office, it's already adequate? Why force a free version of X-server that we can alter and improve, we have an adequate burdened version? Why make a free unix kernel replacement, we already. . . ? And so on. This is the shape of Free and Open Source Software. We push and push and push until we have access to all portions of the system. The power must never be taken away from the user. To allow one organization power to pull support at anytime and cripple any part of a free system could be, at its best, very annoying for a few users and, at its worst, disastrous for the whole.
free-tard: (n) A person with intermediate to high technical knowledge of Free Software systems but distinctly unaware of the advantages for all parts of the system to be free.
I'm just amazed at the myopia displayed here from the commentards at slashdot every time I browse over. As another commenter pointed out, the guidelines are simply for distros that want FSF approval. There is no effort to force you not to use proprietary drivers or firmware, only an effort to replace said drivers and firmware with equally-functional or better free drivers and firmware so that you don't have to use the proprietary pieces anymore. If free software developers had listened to "freetards" like you, we would have never had a free compiler, free shell, free browser engines, free windowing server, free office suite, or free window managers. Why should we make GNOME, we have motif? Why open up star office, it's already adequate? Why force a free version of X-server that we can alter and improve, we have an adequate burdened version? Why make a free unix kernel replacement, we already. . . ? And so on. This is the shape of Free and Open Source Software. We push and push and push until we have access to all portions of the system. The power must never be taken away from the user. To allow one organization power to pull support at anytime and cripple any part of a free system could be, at its best, very annoying for a few users and, at its worst, disastrous for the whole.
free-tard: (n) A person with intermediate to high technical knowledge of Free Software systems but distinctly unaware of the advantages for all parts of the system to be free.
