paritybit.ca

Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.
Log | Files | Refs | README | LICENSE

commit cec4d4fae316d3f4571268a9fc5fa79d348983cf
parent 7662e1f5a90cb2efa7211b23b9fa2482d03df725
Author: Jake Bauer <jbauer@paritybit.ca>
Date:   Mon,  8 Nov 2021 03:38:51 -0500

Draft of latest blog post

Diffstat:
Mpages/blog/free-software-is-an-abject-failure.md | 6+++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/pages/blog/free-software-is-an-abject-failure.md b/pages/blog/free-software-is-an-abject-failure.md @@ -78,8 +78,8 @@ Simply put, Stallman uses the exact structures which he criticized as justification for his actions. He uses these existing systems in what he clearly deems is the "right" way and yet criticizes the way others use it as wrong. GNU, the GPL, and seemingly the entirety of Free Software as it stands today are all -based on at least one of the same premises upon which Stallman says proprietary -software is also based. +based on at the same premises upon which Stallman says proprietary software is +also based, and which he rejected in _Why Software Should Be Free_. To be frank, the Free Software movement comes off as both a "cult of personality"—worshipping Richard Stallman and his teachings, as well as a "cult @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ a more open, permissive license, you are considered unethical. In an article where [Linus Torvalds criticizes the GPLv3](https://web.archive.org/web/20211108043329/https://www.linux.com/news/why-torvalds-sitting-out-gplv3-process/), -he even says: +Torvalds even says: > "I think the GPLv3 is expressly designed to not allow [the meeting between > open source and free software people]. Exactly because the FSF considers us