----- Forwarded message from Russ Nelson nelson@crynwr.com -----
From: Russ Nelson nelson@crynwr.com Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 21:55:49 -0400 To: linuxers-owner@mm.glug-bom.org Subject: Re: [ILUG-BOM] FW: [OT] - OSS Philosophy Explained X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid
Hi. Would you ensure that my email gets to the mailing list? Thank you. -russ
linuxers-owner@mm.glug-bom.org writes:
You are not allowed to post to this mailing list, and your message has been automatically rejected. If you think that your messages are being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at linuxers-owner@mm.glug-bom.org.
Received: from pdam.crynwr.com ([192.203.178.8] helo=ns2.crynwr.com ident=qmailr) by cc4.tifr.res.in with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1FY7q1-00082w-Ke for linuxers@mm.glug-bom.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 02:09:32 +0530 Received: (qmail 1680 invoked from network); 24 Apr 2006 20:39:20 -0000 Received: from rrcs-72-43-17-50.nys.biz.rr.com (HELO desk.crynwr.com) (72.43.17.50) by pdam.crynwr.com with SMTP; 24 Apr 2006 20:39:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 29917 invoked from network); 24 Apr 2006 20:39:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO desk.crynwr.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Apr 2006 20:39:43 -0000 Received: (from nelson@localhost) by desk.crynwr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id k3OKdg1e029913; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:39:42 -0400 From: Russ Nelson nelson@crynwr.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: 17485.14222.211817.868081@desk.crynwr.com Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:39:42 -0400 To: "Nagarjuna G." nagarjun@gnowledge.org Cc: "GNU/Linux Users Group, Mumbai, India" linuxers@mm.glug-bom.org In-Reply-To: 20060424194645.28609.qmail@desk.crynwr.com References: 20060424194645.28609.qmail@desk.crynwr.com X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.203.178.8 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: nelson@desk.crynwr.com Subject: Re: [ILUG-BOM] FW: [OT] - OSS Philosophy Explained X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on cc4.tifr.res.in X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 (built Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:44:12 +0100) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cc4.tifr.res.in)
Hi. I'm Russell Nelson, a founding member of the OSI board of directors. I travel to Mumbai from time to time, and I would be extremely pleased to address you directly on this matter. Please tell me when is the next Linux-centric conference in Mumbai, and I'll try to wrangle my way there as a speaker. Hopefully they'll have fixed the toy train up to Matheran by then.
Nagarjuna: if you don't see this on the mailing list (because I'm not subscribed to the list) please do me the courtesy of forwarding it to the list.
BCC'ed to the rest of the OSI board.
Nagarjuna G. writes:
This is a reply to the entire thread so far, so not quoting any of them.
I wish to clarify the difference by example, between OSS and <free> (swatantra/mukta/ajadi) software.
Alas, your example is incorrect. Pine isn't open source, as it doesn't use an OSI-approved open source license. Neither is scilab. They both claim that they are open source, but please .... if you want Open Source Software, look for the OSI-Approved trademark. If you don't see it, then you should assume that the software is not open source.
You may take this to be a flaw of the term "Open Source", but do please remember that Microsoft distributes free software. You know, free as in Kingfisher.
Therefore, all <free> software is open source, but not vice versa. So, free software is a proper subset of open source software.
Nope. The mapping of free software to open source software is one to one and onto.
The use of the term 'open source' by the OSI may have created a nice term for the tongue, but at the cost of freedom.
Please see my blog entry: http://blog.russnelson.com/opensource/the-price-of-freedom.html
Still warm off the presses -- I wrote it for you. Custom blogging, in real time.
Still, it is surprising that OSI advocates seldom talk of the values like freedom.
We don't, and we don't tell people why either. But I'll let you in on the secret. Richard appeals to intellectuals by advocating for the concept of freedom. Intellectuals constitute a minority, say 10% of the population. We appeal to the majority by advocating for the value of freedom. The other 90% of the population whom Richard cannot reach will be convinced by the experience of freedom rather than the concept of freedom.
I want to be clear here: the 10% of the population who are intellectuals (which I expect includes most members of glug-bom), are MOST effectively reached by Richard's advocacy. We need him. We do not dismiss him. He says that he doesn't need us, and he asks you to dismiss us by claiming that freedom is not important to us. We prefer to push the experience of freedom over the concept and term "freedom".
Shuzan held out his short staff and said "If you call this a short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now, what do you wish to call it?"
Experienced any freedom lately?
-- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | A computer without Python is Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | like a CPU without memory: 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | it runs, but you can't do Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog | anything useful with it.
----- End forwarded message -----
*chop*
Shuzan held out his short staff and said "If you call this a short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now, what do you wish to call it?"
Experienced any freedom lately?
Why is Russ doing this? Why can't I comment on his blog? Why does he believe that freedom can be traded? Didn't he see those Mastercard ads (as seen on TV)?
I hope everyone who understands Mr Nelson's mail sends a fitting reply to his address with a CC here.
Warm regards,
ah
Hello all,
I recently read Russ Nelson's blog entry: http://blog.russnelson.com/opensource/the-price-of-freedom.html. It is sad one can not comment on it. So I decided to debunk his myths he perpetrates on my Wiki page here: http://hatwar.org/wiki/doku.php?id=wiki:freedompriceless
Hope that the 90% as well as the 10% are able to comprehend it.
Regards,
ah
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 02:52 pm, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
----- Forwarded message from Russ Nelson nelson@crynwr.com -----
From: Russ Nelson nelson@crynwr.com
Hi. I'm Russell Nelson, a founding member of the OSI board of directors. I travel to Mumbai from time to time, and I would be extremely pleased to address you directly on this matter. Please tell me when is the next Linux-centric conference in Mumbai, and I'll try to wrangle my way there as a speaker.
Mr. Nelson what is so complicated about this that you require a whole conference to talk to. Do u think that this list might shred your arguments? or that u wont get the publicity brownie points. Having read your blog I find it disgusting and appaling that one of the founders of the OSI should be talking of trading his freedom and presuming that others do too. One does not trade freedom when one works for someone else. One trades skills in exchange for something of value. The skill may be labour or ability (to sing, dance or even fight). And this trade of skills does not (or should not) prevent the seller from using his skills elsewhere or in any other constructive way. If it does, the buyer is guilty of perperating slavery. The perperator is the buyer and the seller a victim of a con job, assisted by governments and laws. And one needs to fight against this exploitation. The examples in your blog are disgusting and one is not "poetical and allegorical and ambiguous and not at all clear" when discussing freedom or the lack thereof. One states facts and provides logical arguments. Not "winky-wink" lets talk about trading performance for freedom. They are not the same and can never be.
Actually, you'd be surprised by how many people - regular people - are willing to turn a blind eye when their freedom is being taken away just because it's too inconvenient to stand up. Everytime you bribe a cop of govt official, you're trading your freedom for convenience. Everytime you give in to a rickshaw overcharging you, you trade freedom for convenience. Everytime you let an immigration officer photograph and fingerprint you before letting you into that big collection of states in the west, you trade freedom for desire.
Everytime you agree to do a job that you'd rather not do, you trade your freedom for job security. Don't say it doesn't happen, because you can search this list's archives for instances. I remember telling people to stand up to their companies and colleges and the response I get is that I may be able to do that, but they can't. Why? Because they're afraid of losing the little that they have.
People like Amol, Nag, JTD and me can stand up for our freedom because we've been around for a long time, we've tasted freedom, and we've fought to hold on to it. People growing up today in a world where freedom is limited (think Rs500 fine for kissing in public) or taken for granted won't realise how important it is.
What I understood of Russ' post was specifically this difference, and perhaps he wound around a bit, just like, perhaps, I'm doing.
One need is for those who've experienced freedom and the loss of it to fight, and the other is for those who've never experienced the two to experience it first hand and not through the words of others.
search this list's archives for instances. I remember telling people to stand up to their companies and colleges and the response I get is that I may be able to do that, but they can't. Why? Because they're afraid of losing the little that they have.
Well I did that once. Stood up against my college since they were unfairly extorting extra fees from us. I had an entire class with me behind it. The result was that I was personally taken in and was seated in a long board room. I was then grilled by the top brass of my college and then threatened that I would be kicked out if I did anything of this sort (*unionism* they called it) in the future.
I looked towards my classmates for support on this and found that everyone had moved on. I too had to do the same in the end as I didn't want to ruin my entire career, lose a masters degree for the sake of a few rupees.
In the end the college did relent for some reason and we had a bit of a bargain on the extortion fee. But it really didn't feel that good in the end.
I agree with most of what you say. I have never given a bribe my whole life, fought with the authorities (teachers, my managers, seniors) for the right thing and got into trouble for it as well. But your post seems to have missed the crux of the helplessness that a lot of people in India have to go through daily.
We have voluntarily given up some (many?) of our rights for many reasons. Some do it for convenience. Some have no choice as their life or livelihood depends on it. Others are already so much in trouble that they cannot handle anything more. Others worry that they might cause trouble for their family for their individual freedom of choice.
The *little* that you talk about is often someone's entire career, family, daily bread and butter or life.
Siddhesh
Sometime Today, SP cobbled together some glyphs to say:
the right thing and got into trouble for it as well. But your post seems to have missed the crux of the helplessness that a lot of people in India have to go through daily.
The only intention of my post was to state that this problem is not imaginary like Amol and JTD made it seem, but is very real.
-
Amol Hatwar -
Devdas Bhagat -
jtd -
Philip Tellis -
Siddhesh Poyarekar