This bacteria is cancer for the FSF

hooktube.com/watch?v=jskq3-lpQnE

epic
youtube.com/watch?v=umQL37AC_YM

>he was angry that his audience didn't all speak 100% english.

Not quite. He was in Brazil and asked if they want him speak Spanish or Engliish since he can't uma delicia. They said English but didn't understood a thing and asked him to switch to Spanish midway. He still handled it like a bitchy child throwing a tantrum though.

Based

Attached: Capture.png (989x390, 42K)

holy shit based rossman

NO WAY THE MADMAN

The FSF and Stallman don't understand that moral reasons alone aren't enough for people to switch to free software. You need an incentive, in this case good software. If they'd stop screeching and start making good FOSS anyone would use it. See Mozilla/FF in its heyday. Stallman's claim that software which is free is always superior to proprietary software even if it doesn't even work is ass-backwards.

Basically this. Most freetard software is inferior to the proprietary equivalent and the FLOSS software that is successful is because it is genuinely good.

Jow Forums is shit enough without threads like this.

The actual OP is garbage but its a valid discussion topic to be had.

pollack

redditor

He is straight up just too annoying to be a successful leader for the FSF.

>harsh high pitched nasal voice
>pube beard
>autistic, impossible to speak with

This concept would be popular with many more people if it wasn’t being pitched by such an annoying piece of shit. We deserve a better figurehead not this.

Attached: 1533053730940.png (832x1328, 1004K)

I actually started watching Rossmann because of that comment.

ITS GEE EN YOU NOT GAHNOO AND ITS LIN EUX NOT LINOCKS, AND ITS NOT GUHNOME ITS NOME. Stallman has fucking ruined pronounciations.

>autistic, impossible to speak with

this 10000k times.

Attached: 55dx30n_f.jpg (159x207, 12K)

the difference is free software can be improved by anybody, proprietary software can only be improved by its proprietor, who often also chooses to make the software worse at your expense. if there is free software that you'd like to use that has some issues then consider addressing the issues yourself, or asking a friend to fix them, or hiring someone to fix them

>just write it yourself lol
>just hire a developer lol
Do you not see how terrible and impractical these things are for most people?

>if there is free software that you'd like to use that has some issues then consider addressing the issues yourself, or asking a friend to fix them, or hiring someone to fix them
Or you could just use the better proprietary counterpart.

>just give up your freedoms and let us take over your computer lol
>also pay us for that and watch these ads lol
do you not see how intrusive and unethical these things are for most people

proprietary software is often expensive and restricted to run on a proprietary platform that the user may not have access to or may not want to use

Literally 0 (zero) proprietary software I use has ads and there is literally nothing wrong with paying for software, even your chucklefuck toe dirt eating freetard guy agrees.
Also, how the fuck does proprietary software "take over your computer" exactly?

>proprietary software is often expensive
So?

>restricted to run on a proprietary platform
No shit, software developers are going to focus on the OS with 90% marketshare.

>the user may not have access to or may not want to use
So?

>"there is literally nothing wrong with paying for software"
>complain about having to pay or do work to improve free software
cool story bro, the difference is free software can't really gouge you on price, whereas proprietary developers do that shit all the time and you can't do anything about it, if someone can't afford it then they're screwed

>Also, how the fuck does proprietary software "take over your computer" exactly?
if the you don't control the program then the program controls you

>So?
do you really not believe that for many the proprietary counterpart may not be usable or better, for the reasons i described, or for others?
>No shit, software developers are going to focus on the OS with 90% marketshare
and their lives will be difficult the whole way, monopolies are not desirable for anyone but the monopolist

A license for a couple hundred dollars is hardly comparable to hire a developer to write something you clueless retard.
Also, why the fuck should I care if some poorfags can't afford a license for software? Not to mention the fact they could just pirate it.
Also, I don't feel controlled by the proprietary software. It does exactly what I want it to do and if it doesn't I uninstall it. This is what freetards such as yourself don't understand and is exactly why it will never become mainstream.

>do you really not believe that for many the proprietary counterpart may not be usable or better, for the reasons i described, or for others
Yeah, I really believe that. No one wants to run some inferior garbage just because "m-m-muh freedoms!".

>and their lives will be difficult the whole way, monopolies are not desirable for anyone but the monopolist
Software developers seem to be getting by fine and you're a retard if you think Microsoft has a monopoly on desktop operating systems.

>lol developers are too expensive to hire just illegally download your software
>Also, I don't feel controlled by the proprietary software. It does exactly what I want it to do and if it doesn't I uninstall it. This is what freetards such as yourself don't understand and is exactly why it will never become mainstream.
no, what NEETs like you don't understand is that if your company paid thousands of dollars for business software then "lol just uninstall" isn't an option, it has to work, and if the software is proprietary and the vendor decides to fuck it up and put unwanted features and break things then you have no recourse but to waste even more money and time trying to sue them. with free software this doesn't happen, you bring the software to another vendor and say "here fix this"

if you don't agree that being proprietary will ever be something that makes it inferior then there is no point in talking to you, enjoy your spying, botnets, DRM, ads, forced cloud integration, etc

>spying, botnets, DRM, ads, forced cloud integration
Maybe stop using/looking at shitty proprietary software then?

Do you not see the irony in preaching about "m-m-muh businesses!" while whining about paying for software? Also, the reason it doesn't happen with free software is because no fucking business uses free software for most of their operations and even if they did just """""""bring it to another vendor""""""" you're now going stuck maintaining your own fork of the fucking thing.

ok, where is the proprietary software that lets people freely study, modify, redistribute the source code?

>spying, botnets, DRM, ads, forced cloud integration
>w-w-where is the source code?
Pic related.

Also, the reason its closed source is so they can sell it, and as I said, there is literally nothing wrong with this.

Attached: mtgp.jpg (1600x1064, 382K)

>[Deleted]
Why?

the point is the other vendor can maintain the fork and provide support, with proprietary software this is not an option
>whining about paying for software
the only person here doing that is you
>no fucking business uses free software for most of their operations
according to who? microsoft? didn't they make a big deal recently about how they use linux?
except it isn't because they could easily sell free software, but they don't do this, the reason it's proprietary is because they want to assume control of your computer
most proprietary software is even worse, go take a look at all the trash on itunes, play store, download.com, etc

>they could easily sell free software
No you couldn't. Some guy would just compile it and release it for free, not to mention how retarded it is to invest millions into the development only to allow all your competitors access to it for free. Literally no chance of a competitive advantage, so there is therefore even less incentive to produce quality software to win consumers over, which is why freetard shit is garbage.

>other vendor can maintain the fork and provide support
And that would cost a lot more money than just paying a license retard.

>the only person here doing that is you
Literally where?

>according to who?
Oh yes, look at all the businesses running LibreOffice, Firefox, GIMP,

There is no investment. They're simply not part of the economy.

So what you're saying is that it is literally worthless?

no. free software is very important.

actually this thread was opened to point how this ritchie dumbass stalman is a nemesis for free software.

>Some guy would just compile it and release it for free
he should be able to do that and there is nothing wrong with that because turns that isn't what gives the software its value

>not to mention how retarded it is to invest millions into the development only to allow all your competitors access to it for free
1) your competitors likely can't do shit with it because software it takes time and money to actually learn what a large codebase is doing and how to make use of it
2) if they could figure that out easily then you made a bad investment, sucks but it happens
3) a competitor figuring out how to provide a better service than you at a lower price is exactly what SHOULD be happening all the time in a free market, trying to stifle that is the act of a monopolist

>Literally no chance of a competitive advantage
the only place where you have that is with microsoft, if your shit gets popular they just embrace extend extinguish you out of business, no incentive to even bother trying to innovate on their platform

this thread basically proves to be true

Who is not a nemesis for free software?

he's a purist
which is useful to have, but there also really needs to be a figure that can actually act as a public face and push things

unfortunately, Stallman is a literal autist (if undiagnosed AFAIK, but that's probably just because of when he grew up), and is going to be absolutely shit at really convincing the common person on the street to follow
doubly so when their fucking wifi doesn't work because most ordinary randos ended up getting a laptop with some retarded-ass broadcom chip that's not supported by b43 or whatever the current driver these days is

and I think he'd be a fuckton more useful for the cause if he still wrote software
it's not like he wasn't a good programmer either, he deliberately left his programming day job to go do advocacy

see above
literal autism

see, Stallman came from a really different era and environment, where the hardware was the product, and the software was just the shit you needed to get it working and actually do the shit you needed the machine to do, the people Stallman worked with typically just wrote patches for whatever and even shipped 'em back to the company or other universities, and things like sources and schematics were provided with the machines or easy to get otherwise
the concept of software as a straight up standalone product has always been anathema to him as a result, which is one of the reasons he talks about hiring programmers to maintain shit over actually selling software

really, this story sums up damn near all of why Stallman's beliefs are the way they are
oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch01.html
the tl;dr is that proprietary software got in the way of him doing work and because it was proprietary, he couldn't just go fix it himself

Basically this. No matter what you say to freetards they just can't seem to comprehend that 99% of people do not give a flying fuck about "muh freedom" and want something that just werks, which as I said is why it will never be viable.
Why don't you fucks make something better instead of spending all day whining about muh proprietary software opressing poeple? In your their own words
>if there is free software that you'd like to use that has some issues then consider addressing the issues yourself

I can't even be bothered to write a proper reply at this point because its like talking to a brick wall and your post illustrates a complete lack of understanding of basic economics.

>And that would cost a lot more money than just paying a license retard.
then ask the vendor to lower their price
>Oh yes, look at all the businesses running LibreOffice, Firefox, GIMP,
many do, actually

no, it is you who doesn't understand the economics of software
>I can't even be bothered to write a proper reply
please don't, i really am not interested in reading yet another 2000 word marketing statement on why bill gates should own and control all software

>which is useful to have, but there also really needs to be a figure that can actually act as a public face and push things

quite contrary... he starts fights with everyone ruins partnerships, scares and makes peoples run away.

>then ask the vendor to lower their price
>just set the price lol
You really have no idea how the world works. NEET by any chance?

>many do, actually
Far fucking less than the proprietary equivalent.

>a freetard talking about economics of anything

Attached: 1472651649155.jpg (380x254, 22K)

>You really have no idea how the world works.
i'm sorry that you're so used to dealing with abusive proprietary companies that strong-arm you and tell you to either pay up and get lost, but in the real world price negotiation is an actual thing
>Far fucking less than the proprietary equivalent.
[citation needed]

>in the real world price negotiation is an actual thing
No shit retard, but you can't just go up to a vendor and say "yeah lower the price thanks" when the amount it would have to be lowered by to compete with just buying proprietary licenses wouldn't cover the cost of one developers yearly salary. That's just common sense.

>[citation needed]
Its true and you know it, what's the point of being in denial and hiding behind "g-g-give sources!"? Regardless this is what I found in a couple of minutes:
datanyze.com/market-share/office-suites/libreoffice-market-share
netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx
reuters.com/brandfeatures/venture-capital/article?id=40869
statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market-share-of-windows-7/

>>You really have no idea how the world works.
Don't know about that, some companies have tricks to their proprietary software. For example, Autodesk. Autodesk probably doesn't care if (you) illegally download their software because, you would learn how to use an Autodesk program, which could get you in a company, and this is where the company HAS to pay the license (and where Autodesk gets their money or else).

They speak Portuguese in Brazil.

That was exactly the problem you brainlet.

Hey, just jumping in to say that bacteria is plural, if you're only referring to one person, the singular form is bacterium. Just keep it in mind for the future. Thanks!