Does it work for me

[Alan Pope]

Martin,

On 9 June 2010 18:16, Martin Owens <doctormo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan, I know you've been burned by the FSF and by other people who bang
> on about Free Software.

I have no issue with people who 'bang on' about free software, I do it
myself often enough. What I do have issue with is people thinking it's
the only way, and anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly deluded.

> I can't help how badly other people have
> communicated to you, but your not helping improve that so long as your
> position is that you revel in principle having a culture that is
> ignorant of software ownership and the social and political fall out.
>

I am somewhat incredulous that you think these people have
communicated _to_ _me_. These are worldwide campaigns which have done
the FSF no help whatsoever. DDOS Apple Genius bar or spamming Amazon
with the word 'swindle' sound like adult, coherent plans for world
domination of Free Software to you? To me they are childish insular
and short-sighted.

> I sometimes think that there is a set of people who have been scared by
> bad FSF communication and have taken it upon themselves to valiantly
> oppose all idealism as useless. Refusing to talk about noble ideals
> isn't noble, refusing to consider the future isn't clairvoyant.
>

I'm perfectly willing to accept the idea of a utopian future where all
software is Free. Meanwhile back on planet earth in 2010 that's not
the case, and won't be the case for some time. I'm doing my bit, but
just because I'm not doing it the way you, Danny or the FSF wants
doesn't make my contribution any less valuable or worthwhile.

Patronising me in this way doesn't do anything to fix that point of view.

> I'm not saying you should throw away your gadgets, just consider the
> cost of it. If the cost is acceptable then fair enough, but you won't
> even talk about the cost as if it didn't exist. How unfair of you to
> disempower people by holding back what you know.
>

Again, I have a different approach and different definition of
'success'. I think someone running Ubuntu and donating to free
software authors is a bit of a success. Not enough for you? Sorry,
tough.

> That's nice but economics is not this issue although it's helpful if we
> have good economics for industrial revolution, I'm sure donations will
> help, but do they pay the bills?
>

My point was merely to illustrate that there are people moving in the
free software direction - when presented with working software.
Whether that model is sustainable financially I don't know, it's not
something I have considered.

> Your apparently as absolutely apposed to mentioning it as
> the FSF is absolutely apposed to using proprietary software. There needs
> to be more nuance and less blank and white thinking.
>

Nope, I'm not opposed to mentioning it. I merely don't see it as top
of the list.

> They don't care because we don't speak up, rail roading has hurt you
> obviously and that's why it's not effective or right to communicate like
> that. Forgive the socially awkward people, they tried and failed to
> explain things in a way that isn't absolute and grandiose.
>

I don't need to speak up. She's already using free software whether
she knows it or not.

> Social and political implications go hand in hand with technical
> function, you can't separate one from the other just because you don't
> feel like thinking. What a world we have made for ourselves out of such
> a culture.
>

Again.. meanwhile back in the real world, I'll carry on doing my
little bit. Not good enough for you, fair enough, lets agree to
disagree.

Cheers,
Al.