Comment on January 23rd, 2007.
I think I feel that the FSF’s position is consistent — they care about being able to behave ethically in society, by being able to agree to share the programs and code they receive.
In contrast, whether it makes sense to tie yourself up in a system that is controlled by a company (but where you run free code) is a strategic question, not an ethical one, and the FSF’s never claimed to be about solving those. It might suck for you in all the ways that Ethan describes, but you’re not made to behave unethically by being part of such a system.
- Chris.
Comment on February 2nd, 2007.
FSF’s conception of freedom is very, very code-centric. As soon as you start talking to them about governance, community, data, etc., their eyes sometimes glaze over. I’m going to write next week (hopefully) about how RMS’s freedoms are no longer sufficient, and the SL situation is a prime example.
Comments can contain some xhtml. Names and emails are required (emails aren't displayed), url's are optional.