[GTALUG] my take on Richard Stallman's contributions

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

[This is nothing to do with the current topic of the propriety or 
wisdom of RMS rejoining FSF board.]

 “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one 
  persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress 
  depends on the unreasonable man.”

  ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman 

I first saw this quotation pinned to Henry Spencer's side of the cubicle I 
shared with him at the University of Toronto.

I think that this is very apt when discussing RMS.

I'm not going to recite the history.  It's available elsewhere and in more 
accurate form than my memories.

>From my standpoint, RMS has been on the right side of many fights.  Even 
when the prospects of success have been low or distant.

The purity and simplicity of his messages (not to mention their repetitive 
nature) have made his ideas understandable.  They have a logical clarity.

He has taken a hard line that has often been or seemed impractical, 
especially annoying pragmatists.

All wins for the side he champions have been provisional.  For example, 
the GPL has not prevented Linux to be "enclosed"; GCC is in the process of 
being supplanted by LLVM.  He/we can never rest.

Many critics argue practicality against purity.  Often convincingly: they 
often are not wrong.  "Open Source" vs "Free/Libre Software" was an 
example.  Evan has been our most assertive representative of this view.

(I certainly let the pragmatic overrule the principled.  For example, I 
used to use MythTV when I got an unencrypted TV signal.  Then everything 
became encrypted (except OTA TV, which we cannot receive).  Now I use 
proprietary devices and streams (Rogers, Netflix, ...).)

Again, we depend on the unreasonable people to protect us.

================================

The reasonable person will use whatever works.  This is exploited to 
steer the reasonable person towards enclosure.

Off the top of my head, the most important things that Stallman did were:

- crystallize a movement

- create a defensive wall for Free Software (the GPL)

- produce GCC and related tools

- create cogent and clear analysis

The GPL has proven important.  It is inconvenient.  But look at how Apple 
has co-opted BSD-licensed software.  Initially I preferred "permissive" 
licenses for things I produce but no longer.