Good show, great guest, too bad the conversation didn’t go to another place. Where you might ask? I don’t know. Still, great effort guys, you brought a heavy hitter. I can’t wait for next week’s show and a return to a more familiar show with news, and content the way you use to do it. As for the criticism, well, don’t take it too serious, Bryan, keep doing what you do man, you are 50% the reason why I tune into this show week in and week out.

Season 21 here we come!

 Wups. That should have been “weigh in on”. Every time I post something I mess something up and don’t see it until after I post it.

Jerkface response:

http://www.techbroil.com/2012/03/stallman-vs-lunduke.html

FYI Jerkface is the blogger

Ok.. I’ll agree.. Capitalism is not very smart and you are correct; it was a bad idea!  Communism isn’t much better but the Chinese seem to be doing quite well..don’t you agree?  Capitalism does not reward ability…it rewards ruthlessness and the willingness to sell out your neighbors in order to get ahead. 

Actually, I’m just playing Devil’s Advocate…  But I do keep an open mind and refuse to be blinded by the Red, White, and Blue.

 Agreed. I’ve eaten beans and rice for weeks before and it was my fault, but I ate. I take full responsibility even though I have a physical health handicap.

Bryan’s issue is that his greed (truly from daughter or whatever) is making him blind to the fact that he can make money at free software, AND write the software that he wants to write. I think it’s the feeling of being shoehorned and working for someone else that he fears as well, and I applaud him for working for himself. I think that is the other biggest side of freedom we’re missing in the “free” world, besides software. There are solutions, and I don’t blame Bryan for feeling this way, because once you’ve had a taste of freedom… but knowing is half the battle as G.I Joe and the Transformers used to say. Execution is usually the easy part. I hope he takes this not as an insult, but just a fellow human pointing out his error.

Foolish reply. You just defined greed as getting money from people who willingly pay you for a service because they find that service worth their money (and “their money” equals “their labor”).

So two types of labor are exchanged under mutually beneficial conditions and with mutual consent and you talk about greed? You somehow think the labor of the pig farmer that Brian buys his meat from is worth more than Brian’s labor behind a PC?

Even worse, you want to inhibit the above action under the flag of Freedom???

Fools, I am so glad the world is nut run by people with RMS’ and your philosophy.

I don’t understand you guys, you keep on insisting that RMS is right when he says closed source software is bad (mmmkay). Yes, if you agree upon that, RMS is right, Bryan is wrong. Bryan would also agree upon that much…

But Bryan’s point is that closed source software is not bad and argues why it isn’t RMS does not even argue anything, he considers his statement “closed source software is bad” as an unchangable fact and then start to discuss from there.

Why discuss if you are not willing to change your mind?

Yes, nice story but could you explain exactly what is bad about proprietary code. Many people here hold “proprietary code is bad” as some kind of religious mantra without (just like religion) no evidence at all that it is true. How is saying ”proprietary code is bad” different from saying “Apple is the best brand” or “Jesus will return someday.”

You are a fanboy, you do not require evidence for your stance, you uphold your standards solely because you feel you belong to a large group of like-minded people and that feels good. But that is not evidence.

You don’t agree? Tell me specifically how proprietary code is hurting people and taking away their freedom. And while you do that, keep in mind that everybody has the freedom to decline the use of proprietary code.

Yes, RMS has the freedom to decline using proprietary code, he should never be forced to use it, nobody should, just as nobody should be forced NOT to use it… and that is exactly what RMS wants. An anti-freedom stance if you ask me.

 You make a lot of assumptions and back them up only with insults.
I did indeed require evidence, for any stance that I take. Here is a lecture that may help. But knowing what I see of you so far… well as you said above you don’t understand us by your own admission. That isn’t our fault. But you’d have to want to first. But then you’d have to admit you were wrong. Hint… all of us who are for free software weren’t originally.. and had to accept we were wrong. Yes, even Richard.
http://fsfe.org/freesoftware/transcripts/rms-fs-2006-03-09.en.html

How does it hurt? Let me count the ways… let me ask you this, is software good? If so, then keeping something good out of the hands of those that could benefit makes that action unethical. It makes it… bad. Here’s a little homework to undo the mountains of dogma you’ve tasted. http://www.gnu.org/gnu/the-gnu-project.html

Yes, I know he’s an atheist, but by the way, Messiah will return.

Does this show and shows like it generate money for kids to eat? If not, stop making it, as no one would pay for these episodes had they not had the exposure enabled by the freedom to watch it. If the guy on the left does make money from this show, then he should eat his words (or feed children with them), as it proves that freer methods of distribution work and could be improved upon if society as a whole was given the liberty to do so. If I had paid for this episode, I would like my money back. But with current software models, that’s not usually an option.

 I think you a very unethical, just like RMS. You believe that it is right to take away the freedom of creators which is to sell their stuff under their own conditions.

I think you and RMS are dangers to society, if you would be allowed to make the law you would force creators to create under YOUR terms.

Such a thing would take all motivation out of creating which would stop the motor of this very economy. This is certainly not what I would list under freedom.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the GPL, I love free software, I use it all the time, I think it is moral and nice and it helps humanity but the world is not a better place if we take away peoples right to create under their own terms.

Please, create under the GPL, create creative commons content but do it if you think it is best for you. I would never ask of anyone to create under the terms the someone else asks of him. I my book, working under someone else his terms is called slavery.

Claiming free software is good and everything that evolves from this “moral” priniciple is good leads to paradoxes such as “slavery is freedom” and “forcing is freedom.” Such doubletalk never helped anybody, let alone the world and is economy.

By the way, I think this was a brilliant show and Bryan, I love it that you stood up for your ideas. At points such as this it just too easy to play the nice suck-up guy just to please listeners and/or create the chance that RMS will come on the show again. But you didn’t do that (you never do that and I appreciate that most about the show). Even though RMS is overwhelming and sharp you managed to get at the hidden heart of his statements. Good job.

I think this interview really showed what RMS is all about and that is why I listened to it in the first place.

 I never said it was right to take away anyone’s freedoms. Stop putting words into my mouth and judging me, as you’ve said you don’t understand me so you only publicly make yourself look foolish.

I don’t want to make the law, but abolish it because it isn’t fair. We are not allowed ot make software under our terms currently on the same playing field. The law promotes proprietary software, so it ISN’T fair to our freedom. Pot, meet kettle.

You know little about what motivates people child. That and, you think you understand or just can’t comprehend how people make money off of free software. And it would stop the oppressive motor, and in turn allow for a much better one that isn’t fond of collapsing… look around you. I don’t call that freedom.

Proprietary licences are slavery and subjugation. Copyleft merely seeks to cancel copyright. and I will ask others to use a libre license. They don’t have to, and I don’t have to and will not use their software or support it. Or, do you think “I” should be forced to?

The only double talk is proprietary proponents speech seeking to confuse the issue.

At 56:29 The guy was like WTF, Seriously. LOL

But you would use the law to force devellopers to release theor software under your terms instead of their own?

Is that freedom? You call that ethical?

I don’t know what your profession is but if you were a pig farmer enforcing the gpl on you would be like saying: You should let our best pig bread and gove the children away. Is that not taking away effort from the farmer?

By the way, I love open source software, I use Arch Linux, encrypt everything, now the ins and outs of TOR and I really believe that open source software contributes to my freedom.

I also understand that profits can be made by support and by adds (although the last one usually comes with tracking so I’d rather pay.)
GPL software rules, it taught me everything about computer and privacy. I will tell my kids about it and I always try to convince my friends to be privacy aware.

Would I want to obtain it from someone who would rather use another license but is somehow forced by law to use the GPL? Hell No! My freedom should never be at the cost of someone else’s.

I agree with Ayn Rand: I will never live my life for another man and never ask another man to live for me.
In other words, never be forced, never force. Would I sacrifice a leg for my wife? Yes I would, out of pure selfishness because I can’t live without her. Would I ask her to do the same? Never. Same holds true for licensing: If I would code, would I release GPL software? Perhaps! Would I ask anyone to do the same? No, pick your own license and I will see if I agree with it.

Richard Stallman acts quite rude in this interview.  Even during the times when Brian tries to find some common ground with him, Stallman uses it as an excuse to correct Brian’s wording or  otherwise attack his description of the idea he is trying to purvey.  

tl;dr:  Dude needs to lay off the caffeine!

“But I’m not talking about that; that’s a different issue.”

“Live Free or Die” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Free_or_Die

Bryan,

I actually agree with your reactions on the show…I made the judgment
of “this dude is a tool” and “this dude is crazy” way before you did so
when you made the judgment it just made me laugh because the dude is a
crazy tool.

He doesn’t care if people make money…he wants them to make “free”
software regardless if they go broke and lose their homes, families,
etc. He talks about ethics…his statements are so unethical it begs the
question if he even knows the meaning of the word.

His opinion of everything should belong to everyone is…wait for
it…EFFING STUPID!!! When I write code or when I make art it is MINE…I
may release it to the public for free but the fact that I made it should
be recognized so they know who to appreciate for making it. It isn’t a
case of ego either, it is a case of without at least credit and
gratitude why would anyone make anything…ever!

I want all of my software, games and etc. to be open but whether they
are open to allow me to put them on whatever platform I want…as many
times as I want or if they are open to the point of source I don’t
really care. I want the experience to use/play my stuff to be easy,
enjoyable and not platform specific. I couldn’t care less if I was given
the source for it or not AND that is the opinion of at least 90% of the
planet who use software/games of any kind. We don’t care how it is
released as long as it works and is enjoyable. I care if I can put it on
Linux, Android, Windows, etc or not but whether I get source or not…in
my opinion, that is a stupid argument he has.
 
I also like Creative Commons much more than GPL. GPL is good for open source license but if you care about protecting yourself and your creation in any way at all…GPL is a horrible option. In GPL if you release something commercially and someone takes it and distributes it in a warez channel they have the right to do that…that makes it a stupid license commercially.

RMS is advocating a boycott of proprietary software, which is extreme,
but isn’t much different from the Boston Tea Party. Today many of us use
proprietary software as much as an18th century Bostonian drank tea, but
they still stood in the cold on a December morning and threw that s#^t
overboard to send a message.

I don’t understand why Brian can’t understand rms. Brian seems like a pretty smart guy, if he woke up in the morning and couldn’t program anymore he would find another way to make a living and support his family. If one day you have a crisis of conscience and find what you are doing for a living as morally wrong I would believe that you would make sacrifices in order to change your situation.

I mean you WOULD find a boycott reasonable in the first sentence.

Food for thought.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/the-missing-20th-century-how-copyright-protection-makes-books-vanish/255282/#.T3dP4kT9WRc.twitter

The difference between genius and nutcase is rather slim i would say.  Maybe it would work in utopia