[NTLUG:Discuss] RMS's Speach

[kbrannen@gte.net]

Christopher Browne wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:40:06 CST, the world broke into rejoicing as
> Steve Baker <sjbaker1 at airmail.net>  said:
...
> > The most likely scenario is that most of us would be using a Cygwin-
> > like environment under Windoze.  (Is RMS demanding that we call it
> > GNU/Windoze?)
> >
> > But demanding that everyone call it something different (and
> > expecially something as clumsy as GNU/Linux) is just unrealistic.
> > Humans use language as a convenient shorthand for their ideas and
> > all attempts to legislate changes will fail.
> 
> The thing to keep carefully in mind in understanding this is that RMS
> is, above almost all else, an academic.  He "grew up" in one of the
> most academic places possible, the MIT AI labs.
> 
> His attitudes towards credit are entirely consistent with the academic
> usage of this, where it is considered an important ethical issue to
> ensure that the progenitors of ideas are given credit.  _Any_ doctoral
> thesis will begin with a literature study which looks to every
> previous researcher that has a reasonably similar idea to those
> presented in the thesis.  It is not at all uncommon for the giving of
> credit to others to represent 20-30% of the thesis document.

Now that is the best insight into RMS and his "plans" that I've ever read! 
You're right, that would explain a lot.

> 
> Outside of pure academia, people get rather more pragmatic.  "I don't
> care who gets credit, so long as the results are useful."
> 
> That contrast seems crucial to me; RMS is very clearly an academic
> scientist, and gets quite enraged when people break the rules of
> academic credit.  Academic credit isn't so important to you and I who
> don't live in worlds where academic credit is the main currency we
> carry around.

I can agree with him though on copyright (left, middle, whatever. :-)  In
today's world where infomation should generally be freely available,
copyright's major purpose is to authenticate ownership, at least IMHO. 
However, as I understand copyleft, it has requirements in it that I don't
agree with, but with the above insight, it is easier to understand why they
are there.

> 
> The "academic ethic" does explain RMS further; his views on how people
> should get paid fit well with the way the scientific community works
> as opposed to the way the commercial community works.
> 
> Seeing as how not everyone is a scientist, it is not too surprising
> that his positions are at odds with "nonscientific" pursuits...

Which is where most of us live, in the professional non-academic world.

Thanks for sharing your insight!
Kevin