Great interview 4 Gamix, but where's the freespire info Pat?

[snarkout]

I'm not referring to anyone in particular - I was just adding my .02 to this conversation. I don't espouse linux as being anything but an alternative, honestly. Not a single person I know, or have so far helped migrate away (at least partially) from windows cares at all about freedom - they care about no spyware, no viruses, and no evil empire breathing down their necks - the latter being a very distant third place. Free as in beer actually seems to turn a lot of people off - they assume it must be crap if people are giving it away, or it might be illegal somehow. I have seriously heard "...and this is legal???" several times when showing people how easy it is to install software from repos.

[Tsuroerusu]

Either you don't understand the point or refuse to. First of all you said it was over two years ago you bought this card so your at the moment financial situation is irrelevant. The point is that you choose to use the closed source driver. What if printers, sound cards, bridge chipsets, capture cards, etc etc etc all started to come with closed source drivers? What if all those drivers outperform the open source drivers to the degree that the video card drivers do? Would it still be so easy to rationalize using them if it wasn't just the one or two it is now?

I meant to say my current economic situation doesn't give me the option to change graphics cards.

The scenario you are picturing are largely irrelevant, because we do have Free drivers for a lot of hardware, and if the computers of the future plan to lock shat down, I will just keep using what is available in a Free solution, for example I looked at what options were available for motherboards, VIA has GPLed drivers for GNU/Linux, and they were released a long time ago and has made it into the mainline kernel, and works great, so even when I need upgrade my current hardware, I can get an AMD64 chip and a VIA motherboard and it would work with something like Ututo which is an FSF-blessed GNU/Linux distro.

How old are you? Do you understand abstract thought and philosophical debate?

I am 17, thank you. If you knew me personally, you would know that I have very very strong opinions on stuff, and a strong will too, age has nothing to do with anything in this space. That's another thing I love about Free Software is that it makes sure there is no discrimination on people who use computers, for example you couldn't make an apartheid-style license and classify it as Free Software, and thank goodness for that I say.

[hellonorman]

How old are you? Do you understand abstract thought and philosophical debate?

Do you have any manners? We're all friends here. We have spirited debates here, but we don't insult each other. Coming in here and being an ass isn't going to win you any points.

Personally I think you're wrong.

That's fine. Tell me why you think that.

Explain to me why it's only possible to have 1 of 2 positions. People have their own personal ideas as to how much inconvenience theyre willing to bear in order to support an ideology. Mine may be different than yours, but it doesn't make it any less valid. I choose to run as much open source software as possible, but on one system I use closed video card drivers. To me it's worth it.

I don't really care what a persons position is as long as it's consistent and a little logical thought went into arriving at it. It seems innocuos enough to compromise on only a proprietary video driver but is it still innocuos if more and more closed source drivers are involved? That was the question I posed.

How many ways can I ask it and still have Tsuro write post after post that doesnt address it? I didn't intend to insult him but I'm trying to figure out if he doesn't understand what I'm saying(like maybe he's real young) or if he is purposely avoiding.

[Gomer_X]

How many ways can I ask it and still have Tsuro write post after post that doesnt address it? I didn't intend to insult him but I'm trying to figure out if he doesn't understand what I'm saying(like maybe he's real young) or if he is purposely avoiding.

If you say there are only 2 possible opinions, and he has a 3rd opinion, maybe he's not the problem? Perhaps your thinking is too narrow?

We need narrow minded people like Bill Gates and Richard Stallman to show us what the extremes are, but unfortunately most of us fall somewhere between those extremes.

When it comes down to it IT'S JUST SOFTWARE! People are more important than ideologies.

[Tsuroerusu]

I don't really care what a persons position is as long as it's consistent and a little logical thought went into arriving at it. It seems innocuos enough to compromise on only a proprietary video driver but is it still innocuos if more and more closed source drivers are involved? That was the question I posed.

How many ways can I ask it and still have Tsuro write post after post that doesnt address it? I didn't intend to insult him but I'm trying to figure out if he doesn't understand what I'm saying(like maybe he's real young) or if he is purposely avoiding.

Let's just put my opinion, which I also have tried to explain to you a few times now, this way: I won't use a computer where most of the drivers for Linux, if there are any, are proprietary, absolutely not! Like you know, the graphics industry is developing new stuff very quickly and since Intel is coming out with a new microprocessor architecture that might have very good Linux support with Free drivers for the graphics, and maybe have a graphics system that doesn't suck, what's so wrong about waiting for that? It did take RMS a few years to get the GNU C Compiler running good you know, and if he and the FSM wrote a C compiler I would presume it was because no Free alternatives were available.

[hellonorman]

How many ways can I ask it and still have Tsuro write post after post that doesnt address it? I didn't intend to insult him but I'm trying to figure out if he doesn't understand what I'm saying(like maybe he's real young) or if he is purposely avoiding.

If you say there are only 2 possible opinions, and he has a 3rd opinion, maybe he's not the problem? Perhaps your thinking is too narrow?

We need narrow minded people like Bill Gates and Richard Stallman to show us what the extremes are, but unfortunately most of us fall somewhere between those extremes.

When it comes down to it IT'S JUST SOFTWARE! People are more important than ideologies.

I gave him the two possibilities to entice him to answer the question. I see now he is young and probably doesn't have a lot of experience in really exploring his opinions to their logical conclusion in an abstract manner.

How about you...how do you reason where to draw the line? I'll say it again. It seems kind of easy to compromise at just using a closed source video driver. But what if slowly but surely more and more closed source drivers come to be? What if these drivers outperform the open source drivers to the point that it makes sense to use them? Is it the freedom or simply the alternative that's important? What if the alternative slowly erodes that freedom which is more important then?

I'm asking sincerely. I am still in the process of exploring these things in my own mind. But at this point it seems hypocritical to be so strongly against proprietary things except in this or that case because it's inconvenient.

[Gomer_X]

How about you...how do you reason where to draw the line? I'll say it again. It seems kind of easy to compromise at just using a closed source video driver. But what if slowly but surely more and more closed source drivers come to be? What if these drivers outperform the open source drivers to the point that it makes sense to use them? Is it the freedom or simply the alternative that's important? What if the alternative slowly erodes that freedom which is more important then?

The nVidia binary driver (I believe) is closed because in the current market, they have to keep their source closed in order to survive. I refuse to argue this point because it's been done over and over. Refer to the other arguments, and listen to the Zack Rusin interview again.

I can't fault nVidia for trying to make money, and I can't hate them for not conforming to my personal beliefs. It's the market that must change, and it's not nVidia's job to change it.

Beating people over the head with ideology will not change the world. Converting everyone at nVidia to the Free Software(R) religion wouldn't make them open their drivers, unless they were willing to change their products as well. It would be nice to have a high end 3D card with open drivers, but I don't think it can happen now.

I'm sure the next time I buy a graphics card I will pick one from someone who distributes open drivers. I'm not going to throw away my nVidia card and buy a new one with open drivers, and I can't see how using a driver for the card I already have makes a difference.

I see no reason whatsoever to believe that closed source drivers will increase because of nVidia. It's not going that way now, and has been going the other direction for the past 10 years (at least).

[hellonorman]

I wasn't asking if you thought the nvidia driver should be open sourced. I also haven't forced any ideology on anyone.

There's two ideas at work here. Is libre software the most important thing or is just that there's an alternative to windows. And if libre software is important how do you logically draw the line at exceptions. Notice that these are questions of philosophy and logic and that neither is me advocating what you should think.

It's a very basic question with a very basic premise. If your view is that it's not a big deal to use a closed driver because it works well and it's only that one. Would your view change if it wasn't just that one?

My goodness such resistance to a simple question. It really makes me think that there is not much logic involved in choosing to use a closed driver but rather rationalization. People don't like their rationalizations questioned and a logical person wouldn't be so threatened by a question.

[Gomer_X]

There's two ideas at work here. Is libre software the most important thing or is just that there's an alternative to windows. And if libre software is important how do you logically draw the line at exceptions. Notice that these are questions of philosophy and logic and that neither is me advocating what you should think.

What you are advocating is that there are only 2 possible ways to think. If you can't get past that basic logical fallacy, there is no way to proceed. You're saying that only extremes exist. I disagree.

It's a very basic question with a very basic premise. If your view is that it's not a big deal to use a closed driver because it works well and it's only that one. Would your view change if it wasn't just that one?

I choose to use one closed driver because in that case it's the best solution. It doesn't nullify the work that I and everyone else have done to promote freedom. I don't agree that one closed source driver will spawn other closed source drivers. The reality is that things are going the other direction.

My goodness such resistance to a simple question.

Again, it's the classic "why did you kill your wife" question. To answer the question is to admit that your premises are true. I believe the question itself is wrong and resist it because it can't be answered.

[hellonorman]

No not extremes. The fact that it's only one driver is a common theme. It's logical to ask if it wasn't just the one driver if your view would change. If you use the fact that it's only one driver than you are implying that you are committed to libre software and understand that you are making an exception in this one case. It's logical to ask if your view would change if there were more cases.

I'm tired of repeating myself ad nauseum. There's no logical fallacy to the question. The question doesn't back you into a corner. The question merely asks for you to explain the logic of your decision. The resistance to it is mind boggling and I don't really care anymore.

[Chess]

I'll take a stab at this, Hellonorman.

I think I understand the point you are trying to convey. It seems to me that you trying to figure out the extent to which some users will use proprietary or closed drivers or software. On the one hand, you have folks like RMS, who take the stance that free and open source solutions must be used in all cases. No exceptions, even if this means foregoing a more convenient or more useful alternative. On the other hand, you have folks who simply say they will use the best solution available for the given problem, and the usage of Linux in general is just that it's an alternative to Windows. The issues behind free and open source software are not that relevant to this latter group.

However, I think you can have a middle ground that is not inconsistent. I'll call these folks the "case-by-case" people. I think I fall into this category. I understand the free and open source issues, I think, at least as best I can. In a perfect world, there would be equivalent free and closed solutions to every problem and in such perfect world, I would choose the free solution every time because I like to think I "get it."

Unfortunately, we do not live in that world. There are times when we must make choices. If a particular choice is free, great; if a particular choice is closed, well, that sucks, but I'll use it. The nvidia driver is one example. Flash, java, and multimedia codecs are another example. Right now, my kids like to use various educational websites that use Flash for their games. I could use the free flash player that is being developed, but it doesn't work so well. Or, I could use the macromedia flash player, which is closed, but works great. I opt to use the macromedia player because it works better and I have no problem with that. I would rather expose my kids to Linux at an early age yet still let them visit those websites. It's the best overall solution for me.

However, in other cases, I will act differently. I have used this example before. My laptop came with a mini pci wifi card that I was able to get working just fine with a windows driver using ndiswrapper. However, this particular laptop could also use a different card by Intel that had open source drivers (ipw2200). I stopped using a perfectly good card and bought an extra Intel ipw2200 card solely because of the existence of the open source drivers. I wanted to support Intel's decision to open those drivers.

Is that inconsistent? Maybe. But I don't think it makes me a hypocrite because I recognize that sometimes, for me at least, a free and open solution either is not available or does not work well. But I also don't think that makes me a "bad Linux user" by failing to be 100% free and open source. Being able to do everything I need and want to do in Linux, using a combination of free and closed solutions, allows me to _actually use_ Linux as my primary operating system, and allows me to do things like my Linux Reality podcast to hopefully help other users try out Linux.

I guess I see myself as more pragmatic than idealistic. Maybe that's a fault. But at least I'm using Linux every day and learning more about it.

[hellonorman]

Chess I have lost my enthusiasm for this discussion. But thank you for your well thought out and insightful post. Best of luck with your podcast.

[Gomer_X]

I'm tired of repeating myself ad nauseum. There's no logical fallacy to the question. The question doesn't back you into a corner. The question merely asks for you to explain the logic of your decision. The resistance to it is mind boggling and I don't really care anymore.

I tried to use small words.

Sorry.

[Gomer_X]

However, I think you can have a middle ground that is not inconsistent. I'll call these folks the "case-by-case" people. I think I fall into this category. I understand the free and open source issues, I think, at least as best I can. In a perfect world, there would be equivalent free and closed solutions to every problem and in such perfect world, I would choose the free solution every time because I like to think I "get it."

That explains it really well. People live in a real world where decisions are not black and white.

As Snarkout pointed out, people choose Linux for a lot of different reasons. Choosing Linux for some other reason than freedom is still choosing Linux, and still promotes freedom.

One decision that is not 100% in keeping with all free software principles does not destroy all freedom.

[hellonorman]

One decision that is not 100% in keeping with all free software principles does not destroy all freedom.

LOL. You have to understand the question silly.