Stallman and GNU/Linux, was Re: [Sussex] BBC Video Downloads

[Nic James Ferrier]

Steve Dobson <steve at dobson.org> writes:

>Nic Ferrier said:
>> I don't think there was any concern about himself being
>> sidelined. When I've been in conversations with him I've seen him get
>> most cross about people describing Linux as an operating system, which
>> it is not, it's a kernel. Unfortunately, people persist in that
>> delusion. I suspect that most LUGs should really be called GUGs for
>> example.
>
> No, Linux is both the name of the kernel and the OS that runs on it.
> It is because that is the way people use the word.

No. You're wrong and so are the people that use it that way.


> English is a living language.  Words change their means all the time.
> Back in the 1920s calling a man "gay" was not a comment on his sexual
> orientation.  If you don't like the way English evolves then go speak
> Latin.  That's a dead language, it hasn't changed much (if at all) in
> a couple of hundred years or so.

You're right, it is a living language and usage changes. But that
doesn't mean it's completly anarchic. Professionals have the right to
try to force back the meaning of words. 

We are doing this with some success with "hacker" for example. Many
people still only understand the pejorative sense of "hacker" but,
because of a campaign of hackers, we are getting the media to
understand the true complexity of the word. The BBC now use "malicious
hacker" where once they would have used "hacker".

It's the same with Linux. It's the same because, to us, there is a
useful distinction to be made between the kernel and the operating
system. Where there is a useful distinction to be made it is useful to
make the distinction. Mostly, the general public and the media do not
understand this distinction, but they will once we've explained it
enough - just as they now begin to understand the difference between
someone who breaks into computer systems and cross compiles a c
library for fun.


> Nic Ferrier wrote:
>> Many people maintain that this is a falsehood. That measured in many
>> different ways the GNU contribution is large but not overarching. If
>> you use KDE and not GNOME for example, the amount of GNU software on
>> your system is relatively small.
>
> I disagree.  While a Gnome or KDE use may not be using the GNU tool set
> much directly the scrips that boot the computer and start the graphical
> environment up make have use of them.

I'm affraid this is a matter of fact, unless you're going to introduce
lexiographical realativism again.

GNOME is part of the GNU system. KDE is not.

And just because you compile something with GCC and automake it
doesn't make it a GNU program. A GNU program is blessed by Dr Stallman
and included in the GNU distribution.


> The move to the web is just another form of centralised computing.  
> Computing culture runs in cycles sometimes favouring centralisation (of
> which the web is just one form) or individual computing.  Both have their
> advantages and disadvantages.  If you want to get the best out of computing
> then you need to use both.

I disagree with you again. The web is about distribution. In that
sense it is about decentralization. Processing moves to where it is
most convieniant for the consumer (the consumer of the processing
power - not consumer in a capitalism sense).

-- 
Nic Ferrier
http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk   for all your tapsell ferrier needs