PotentiallyDestructive

On one hand I think freedom is a basic right that everyone deserves. On the other hand I think complete freedom, without any restriction, leads to mediocrity. If one studies the Video Game Crash of 1983, one easily understands that having a completely free platform that anyone who can program can develop and market on is not a good idea. Atari killed the home video game market because they had no restrictions on how many games were made, the quality of the games, or the content of the games. This leads to a bunch of crappy video games that nobody wants to buy.

I'm a video game lover more than a computer lover. If you give freedom to everyone, you run the risk of over saturation, and death from the inside out. It must be said outright that I think at heart people are good. However, I don't think the masses can really regulate themselves. In a Free Economy we have stock market crashes. In a free society, people will almost certainly over-produce until they've exhausted their food supply. They will then starve to death. I believe for any true society to stand it must be regulated by the best of its kind. On a separate issue, this is why I am for limiting the number of children each family can have. Genocide is wrong, but complete freedom to over-produce is just as wrong. Both totalitarianism and freedom lead to self-destruction.

What does this have to do with Free Software? It describes how I feel about it. I find the software being free, as in money, a plus. I find the software being free, as in freedom, as being, well, interesting to read about but neither practical nor preferable. My fear is that Free Software gives people too much freedom. Again, too much freedom leads to over saturation and mediocrity. So, Free Software will likely lead to the over saturation of software development, mediocrity, and eventually internal collapse of the development market.

When hearing the two sides of Microsoft and Free Software, I feel like I'm hearing Hitler and Stalin in a shouting match. Too much control leads to corruption and self-destruction. Too much freedom for the people leads to over saturation, mediocrity, shoddiness, and eventually self-destruction. There needs to be a middle ground of intelligent and responsible restrictions. I don't honestly feel that Microsoft of Free Software really gives this; as they are two vocal, influential, and potentially destructive extremes.

I guess you've never heard of Red Hat and Novell then!Or perhaps at least, IBM!

It's a glass half full or half empty situation, a matter or perception. What you look at and call over-saturation I call choice. If there are 300 text editors, for example, I use the one that's at hand and if that doesn't fulfill my needs I ask friends and collegues what they recommend and do a little investigation. You could say that the web is over-saturated. But instead of suffering from information overload you choose what want to read.

The reason that free software doesn't fall into mediocrity and shoddiness is that other dynamics are at work. The wish to help other people and in turn to have them help you, to earn respect, and the drive to create something great are some of the reasons why people develop free software. They aren't just putting out something that is just 'good enough'.

The key is interdependence. Or to put it another way, we should consider the effects of our actions on others. The GPL vs BSD debate focuses on opinions of freedom regarding software. The BSD viewpoint seems to be that the fact that the fact GPL restricts people's freedom by having restrictions on putting GPL licenced code into proprietary programs. The GPL viewpoint seems to say this is an intentional lack of a little freedom to ensure a greater amount of freedom: making the code free forever and to anyone no matter who distributes it.

Being free as in money, is merely a by-product of the software being free as in freedom. If you take food as a metaphor for software, proprietary software is highly processed, over packaged, and usually available for a fee. Free software is like picking apples from a tree. You have to go pick it for yourself but it is delicious and good for you. You can even plant the seeds in your own garden to grow your own apple tree.

Thank you for your post. I don't agree with your points but I am thrilled to someone at least thinking it through.

That's a very interesting way to look at it. I like the fruit analogy as well. Analogies help me understand things better. I like your points, thank you.

I guess the hardest thing I have in looking at Free Software is that it almost certainly makes me into a hypocrite it I advocate it. On one hand, to spite how it might seem, I do prefer the concept as far as it applies to computers.

I say things in ways that are insulting less to insult and more to acquire passionate feedback. I am trying to understand Free Software and run it up against other concepts of freedom and society and see if it stands. I apologize if I offend people. It's just, in the past at least, this seems to be the best way to get people to pay attention and bother to respond; although it often does get people to hate me. Which is why, once I get questions answered on things, I usually leave message boards or at least change my screen name to shed any hard feelings.

The reason I feel like a hypocrite is because I don't really see anything wrong with proprietary software so as long as Free Software can still exist. It seems there are many legal battles over these things, which is to be expected. I don't believe freedom, but its clearest and fullest definition should force anyone to share or not share. I feel the creators deserve the right to choose this. If Richard Stallman wants to write GNU and give it to the world, I don't believe anyone should have the right to legally right the software out of existence by trying to restrict it to death. While, on the same note, if someone creates something and does not want others to share; I do see it as disrespectful to force sharing.

To use the classroom analogy; if I want to make cookies, bring them to class, and eat them myself... I don't really want the teacher forcing me to share them with others. However, if someone bakes cookies and wants to share, yay!

I think the idea of sacrificing some freedom to guarantee greater freedom is not only an oxymoron but also a thin line to walk. It may be beneficial now, but it makes me wonder if such policies can turn on the software and eat itself in the future.

Again, I came to computers through video games. As such, considering, I feel like a hypocrite supporting Free Software. Nintendo is my favourite video game company. They support content restriction, hardware lockout, and strict copyright and intellectual property laws. When looking at how Atari, a free platform, killed the market by allowing too much freedom; I have to applaud Nintendo for creating a restrictive system and licensing policy that not only brought video games back from the dead, but also created a marketing system that would not fall in on itself.

Can I ideologically support Nintendo's views as far as the home console video game industry is concerned; while at the same exact time support Free Software and its views on freedom for computers without being a hypocrite?

If not, then I am sad to say that I guess I am in a crossroads of ideologies. I really want to see a line go down the middle between Computers and video game consoles. But I'm not sure a distinction can ever be made. As such, I'm not sure I can ever truly advocate either side of the coin without advocating against the other. And, considering I grew up with Nintendo and video games first, my heart and loyalties is to them.

Can anyone maybe give a way of looking at this that doesn't make me a hypocrite? Thank you.

Just imagine that you are on 1980, and you're growing writing software, learning from friends, sharing ideas, knowledge, code, enjoying your life doing something good for you and society.

And later some just say that you can't continue, that you're not allowed to have a ethical life with your friends, developing comrades and everyone, because the marked has changed.
Free software is a lifestyle and you won't completely understand it, if you keep thinking it is another kind of digital merchandise.

Free your mind :)

But that's just it. I'm a video game player and lover, and a computer user. I don't know how to program. And the only video games I can make are with Game Maker which is proprietary. I need GUIs. I can't just type. And too many people are still working on the basics of the Free Software System to be able to write a bunch of GUIs for people like me right now.

I have made a lot of people angry here, and if lucky, a couple friends. But I am not a people person. I am a video game person, a movie person, and a technology person.

As such, I will not give up Nintendo, DVDs, or Blueray in support of Free Software. I work at Taco Bell for money. Then I come home and play Mario. Then, in the fall, I will go to school to learn how to make movies for my major.

Free Software is a way of life for programers. I have three great passions, in this order, video games, film, and computers. I will not make a lifestyle choice that puts three in priority of one and two.

I don't meen to be offensive but I feel culture shock. I found something free as in money, that worked better than Windows, and likes it. When I heard it was about Freedom I thought, yay freedom, America, good good. But the more I learn the more I feel that I would have to uproot my entire life to life a Free Software life.

I'm not an old person, and I don't have much experience in the world. It was already hard enough to realize that I am homosexual and how Christianity views that. To fallow my heart, trying to find myself, I was forced by cercumstance to open the floodgates of philosophy and understanding. I miss inosence. Ignorance is bliss.

The more self aware I get, the more miserable my life becomes, because I have to keep giving up the things I love to feel like I am a good person. I'm tired of it. In many ways I would love to stop getting smarter, erase the knowledge, and just go back to the obidient little good boy I used to be before I learned any better.

That's why I run my mouth so much. Why can't I, for once, have my cake and eat it too? Why can't I love what I love, be a good person, and have fun?

Why can't I be Gay and Christian? Why can't I love the cultures of Japan and America? Why can't I love Free Software and Nintendo?

I'm sick of doing what's right. Doing what's right makes my life suck. I just want to be happy, and do what I want regardless of if it's, "right," or not. I'm sick of chasing empty dreams that will never come to pass.

I want to have my cake and eat it to, and I want someone to tell me that I can.

Hello! I use XP for gaming, and I don't feel at all guilty about it, nor should I. Neither should you! I love gNewSense: it's "minimalist", neat and clean, and much faster than XP, at least on my machine. I switched to gNewSense about three months ago and use it as my main OS, switching to XP to use the flight simulator, and the odd fps.I feel I support free software in that I use it primarily, and am not shy to extoll it's virtues. I would consider using Cedega for gaming, but that wouldn't "cut" it here, would it, as it's not free. I hear Sabayon is also good, but also not free. So I say, use gNewSense as much as you can, it's a great OS, but "Game On"!

My two cents...

I am a free software advocate and FSF member. I support Free Software with my money, advocacy, and community participation. I try to use only Free Software when possible. However my wireless card doesn't work with Gnewsense. Right now I don't have the money to buy a new card. So I am still using Ubuntu until I can afford to get a wireless card and make the switch. My video card is also not supported fully by Free Software. I can live without 3d rendering for the time being. For me I have the attitude of; Use as much free software as possible. If you are using proprietary consider it a temporary unsatisfactory solution until you can figure out how to do it with Free Software. I need to be this way because I am neither a programmer or wizard. If I didn't do it this way my computer wouldn't be very useful. I am very grateful to the purists who are driving Free Software ever forward to meeting my needs.

i have read some pretty bad posts in my time but this one takes the babbling cake. --shalom