1 |
yavor |
1.4 |
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> |
2 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.75 --> |
3 |
|
|
<title>The Future of Jiyuna Software |
4 |
|
|
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> |
5 |
ineiev |
1.13 |
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/rieti.translist" --> |
6 |
yavor |
1.4 |
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> |
7 |
|
|
<h2>The Future of Jiyuna Software</h2> |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
<p>Keynote Speech |
10 |
|
|
by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/"><strong>Richard |
11 |
|
|
Stallman</strong></a></p> |
12 |
taz |
1.1 |
|
13 |
|
|
<pre> |
14 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
(Transcript) |
16 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
Date: 21 April 2003 |
18 |
|
|
Venue: Seminar Room, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry |
19 |
|
|
(RIETI), (Annex 11th Floor, 1121 Ministry of Economy, Trade and |
20 |
|
|
Industry (METI)) |
21 |
|
|
</pre> |
22 |
|
|
<p> |
23 |
|
|
Mr. Richard Stallman, GNU Project: I am going to speak about free |
24 |
|
|
software and, first of all, its ethical, social and political |
25 |
|
|
significance, and secondly, something about its economic consequences. |
26 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
27 |
|
|
<p> |
28 |
|
|
Free software is a matter of freedom. The English word |
29 |
|
|
“free” does not make this clear because it has two |
30 |
|
|
meanings. In your language, fortunately, you have two different |
31 |
|
|
words. So, if you say jiyu na sofuto, it is very clear that you are |
32 |
|
|
not talking about the price, you are talking about freedom. So, I urge |
33 |
|
|
you, always use your unambiguous word and not our unclear word when |
34 |
|
|
you are talking about free software in Japanese. |
35 |
|
|
</p> |
36 |
|
|
<p> |
37 |
taz |
1.1 |
The reason for having free software is very simple: to live in freedom |
38 |
|
|
and, in particular, to be free to treat other people |
39 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
decently. Nonfree software says that you are helpless and divided. It |
40 |
taz |
1.1 |
says you cannot even tell what the program does; you are supposed to |
41 |
|
|
take the developer's word for it; and often they will not tell you |
42 |
|
|
what it really does. And if you do not like it, you cannot change |
43 |
|
|
it. Even if the developer made his best sincere effort to make the |
44 |
|
|
program useful, nobody is perfect. I could write a program, and you |
45 |
|
|
might find it halfway good for what you want. Perhaps I wrote it for |
46 |
|
|
somewhat different purposes, not the same as your purposes. Nobody can |
47 |
|
|
anticipate everything. Perhaps I did it the way I thought was best, |
48 |
|
|
but you have a better idea. Nobody can always get everything right. |
49 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
50 |
|
|
<p> |
51 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
With nonfree software you are stuck. You have to take it the way it |
52 |
|
|
is. You have to suffer with it. And most important with nonfree |
53 |
taz |
1.1 |
software, you are forbidden to share with other people. Society |
54 |
|
|
depends on people helping each other. It is useful to live with |
55 |
|
|
neighbors who will help you when you ask for help. Of course, not |
56 |
|
|
always, nobody is forced to help another person, but if you are |
57 |
|
|
friends with people, often they will help you out. So, of course, we |
58 |
|
|
had better help other people if we want them to help us. |
59 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
60 |
|
|
<p> |
61 |
taz |
1.1 |
So what is it like when someone says you are prohibited from helping |
62 |
|
|
someone else? Here is this useful knowledge, and you could help your |
63 |
|
|
neighbor by sharing it, but you are forbidden to share with other |
64 |
|
|
people. This is attacking the bonds of society, dissolving society |
65 |
|
|
into isolated individuals who cannot help each other. |
66 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
67 |
|
|
<p> |
68 |
taz |
1.1 |
Free software is the contrast to this. Free software means that you |
69 |
|
|
have four essential freedoms. Freedom zero is the freedom to run the |
70 |
|
|
program for any purpose, in any way that you want to. Freedom one is |
71 |
|
|
the freedom to help yourself by studying the source code to see what |
72 |
|
|
the program does and then changing it to suit your needs. Freedom two |
73 |
|
|
is the freedom to help you neighbor by distributing copies to |
74 |
|
|
others. And freedom three is the freedom to help build your community |
75 |
|
|
by publishing an improved version so others can use your version |
76 |
|
|
instead, so others can get the benefit of your help. With these |
77 |
|
|
freedoms, the users control the software they use. If these freedoms |
78 |
|
|
are lacking, then the [software] owner controls the software and |
79 |
|
|
controls the users. |
80 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
81 |
|
|
<p> |
82 |
taz |
1.1 |
We all know that computers do not make decisions themselves |
83 |
|
|
really. They do what people told them to do. But which people told |
84 |
|
|
them what to do? When you are using your computer, can you tell it |
85 |
|
|
what to do, or is someone else telling it what to do? Who controls |
86 |
|
|
your computer? This is the question of free software. The freedoms in |
87 |
|
|
the definition of free software, freedoms zero, one, two and three, |
88 |
|
|
the reason why these are the freedoms that matter is because these are |
89 |
|
|
the freedoms necessary for citizens to control their own |
90 |
|
|
computers. You need freedom zero in order to be able to do whatever |
91 |
|
|
job you want with your computer. You need freedom one so that you can |
92 |
|
|
make the software do what you want it to do. If you do not have |
93 |
|
|
freedom one, you are stuck; you are a prisoner of your software. |
94 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
95 |
|
|
<p> |
96 |
taz |
1.1 |
But not everybody is a programmer. If we had just freedom one, then |
97 |
|
|
programmers could change the software to do what they want. But if |
98 |
|
|
each programmer had to make his changes personally, we would not |
99 |
|
|
really have much control. We would be limited to what each of us, |
100 |
|
|
individually, could do. Non-programmers would get no benefit at |
101 |
|
|
all. That is why freedom three and two are crucial, because freedoms |
102 |
|
|
two and three allow a group of users to work together and make the |
103 |
|
|
software do what they jointly want. So you are not limited to changing |
104 |
ineiev |
1.11 |
it individually, personally. |
105 |
|
|
<span class="gnun-split"></span>You and 50 other people who want the same |
106 |
taz |
1.1 |
thing, you can get together. If two or three of you are programmers, |
107 |
|
|
they can make the changes, and then they can distribute it to all the |
108 |
|
|
rest of you. You could all put money in and pay a programmer to make |
109 |
|
|
the changes you want. Your company could pay a programmer to make the |
110 |
|
|
changes your company wants. Then if you publish the improved version, |
111 |
|
|
everybody can use it. Thus, all of society gets control over what its |
112 |
|
|
software does. |
113 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
114 |
|
|
<p> |
115 |
taz |
1.1 |
Free software is a method, a democratic method, for deciding the |
116 |
|
|
development of software. But it is democratic in an unusual way, |
117 |
|
|
because we do not hold an election and then tell everybody what to |
118 |
|
|
do. Nobody tells people what to do in the free software community; |
119 |
|
|
everybody makes his own decision. But what happens is this: If many |
120 |
|
|
people want the software to improve in that direction, many people |
121 |
|
|
will work on changing it, so the software will develop rapidly in that |
122 |
|
|
direction. If a few people want the software to develop in that |
123 |
|
|
direction, a few of them will make an effort, so it will develop |
124 |
|
|
slowly in that direction. If nobody wants it to develop in that |
125 |
|
|
direction, it will not. By each of us deciding what we are going to |
126 |
|
|
do, we all contribute to what happens and to deciding which direction |
127 |
|
|
the software will develop. |
128 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
129 |
|
|
<p> |
130 |
taz |
1.1 |
So society collectively has control over how the software will develop |
131 |
|
|
overall. But you, individually, or any group or company can decide how |
132 |
|
|
to develop it themselves. The result is that free software tends to do |
133 |
|
|
what users want, instead of what the developers want. |
134 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
135 |
|
|
<p> |
136 |
|
|
People often ask, “If everybody is free to change the software, |
137 |
|
|
what does that do for compatibility?” Well the fact is, users |
138 |
|
|
like compatibility. It is not the only thing they like. Sometimes, |
139 |
|
|
certain users want an incompatible change because it has other |
140 |
|
|
benefits, and if so they can do it. But most users want |
141 |
|
|
compatibility. The result is most free software developers try very |
142 |
|
|
hard to be compatible. Guess what would happen if I made an |
143 |
|
|
incompatible difference in my program and the users did not like |
144 |
ineiev |
1.11 |
it. |
145 |
|
|
<span class="gnun-split"></span>Some user would change the program and make it compatible, and |
146 |
yavor |
1.4 |
then most users would prefer his version. So his version would become |
147 |
|
|
popular and mine would be forgotten. Now, I do not want that to |
148 |
|
|
happen, of course. I want people to like and use my version, so I am |
149 |
|
|
going to recognize this in advance and I am going to make my version |
150 |
|
|
compatible from the beginning because I want people to like it. So in |
151 |
|
|
our community, the developers cannot resist what the users want. We |
152 |
|
|
have to go along or the users will go where they want and leave us |
153 |
|
|
behind. |
154 |
|
|
</p> |
155 |
|
|
<p> |
156 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
But if you look at nonfree software developers, the ones who are very |
157 |
taz |
1.1 |
powerful, they can impose incompatibility and they are so powerful |
158 |
|
|
that the users cannot do anything. Microsoft is famous for this. They |
159 |
|
|
make an incompatible change in a protocol, and then the users are |
160 |
|
|
stuck with it. But it is not just Microsoft. Consider WAP, for |
161 |
|
|
instance. WAP contains modified versions of ordinary Internet |
162 |
|
|
protocols, modified to be incompatible, and the idea was they would |
163 |
yavor |
1.4 |
make these telephones and they would say “they can talk on the |
164 |
|
|
Internet”, but since they did not use the ordinary Internet |
165 |
|
|
protocols, the incompatibility would be imposed on the user. That was |
166 |
|
|
their plan. It did not work, fortunately. But that is the danger you |
167 |
|
|
face when the users are not really in control: Somebody will try to |
168 |
|
|
impose incompatibility on the users. |
169 |
|
|
</p> |
170 |
|
|
<p> |
171 |
taz |
1.1 |
Free software is primarily a political, ethical and social issue. I |
172 |
|
|
have explained that level of it. It also has economic |
173 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
consequences. For instance, nonfree software can be used to create |
174 |
taz |
1.1 |
very rich companies, where a few people collect money from everyone |
175 |
|
|
around the world, and those few get very rich and other people are |
176 |
|
|
deprived. There are many countries (Japan is not one of them, I guess) |
177 |
|
|
where the people who can afford a computer usually cannot afford to |
178 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
pay for the nonfree software, for permission to use the nonfree |
179 |
|
|
software. So in those countries, nonfree software as a system creates |
180 |
taz |
1.1 |
tremendous deprivation. But in any country, money is squeezed out of |
181 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
most people and concentrated to a few who become very rich by nonfree |
182 |
taz |
1.1 |
software. With free software, you cannot do that. You cannot squeeze a |
183 |
|
|
lot of money out of people, but you can do business with people as |
184 |
|
|
long as you are providing them with a real service. |
185 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
186 |
|
|
<p> |
187 |
taz |
1.1 |
Free software business already exists. In fact, I started a free |
188 |
|
|
software business in 1985. I was selling copies of GNU Emacs. I was |
189 |
|
|
looking for a way to make money through free software. So I said, |
190 |
yavor |
1.4 |
“Pay me $150, and I will mail you a tape with the GNU Emacs text |
191 |
|
|
editor.” People started paying me, and I mailed them tapes. I |
192 |
|
|
made enough money to live on. I stopped this because I started the |
193 |
|
|
Free Software Foundation, and it seemed appropriate for the Free |
194 |
|
|
Software Foundation to start distributing GNU Emacs. I did not want to |
195 |
|
|
compete with the Free Software Foundation, so I had to find a |
196 |
|
|
different way. For several years, the Foundation made enough money |
197 |
|
|
this way to pay several employees, including programmers. So actually, |
198 |
|
|
if I had done it myself, I would probably have become comfortably well |
199 |
|
|
off by selling copies of free software. |
200 |
|
|
</p> |
201 |
|
|
<p> |
202 |
taz |
1.1 |
After that, I started another free software business where I would |
203 |
|
|
make changes on commission. |
204 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
205 |
|
|
<p> |
206 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
With nonfree software, you cannot change it. You are a prisoner of |
207 |
taz |
1.1 |
the software. So you either use it exactly as it is or you do not use |
208 |
|
|
it at all. With free software, you have those two choices, but you |
209 |
|
|
have another choice also, actually many different choices. You can |
210 |
|
|
make changes, bigger or smaller, in the program and use the modified |
211 |
|
|
program. |
212 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
213 |
|
|
<p> |
214 |
taz |
1.1 |
Now, if you are personally a programmer, you could make the changes |
215 |
|
|
yourself. But suppose you are not a programmer. Then, you can pay a |
216 |
|
|
programmer to make the changes for you. For instance, if this ministry |
217 |
|
|
is using a program and people conclude this program does not work the |
218 |
|
|
way we really want, you could easily spend some money to pay a |
219 |
|
|
programmer to change it to do what you want. This is the kind of free |
220 |
|
|
software business that I was doing for several years in the 1980s. (I |
221 |
|
|
could have kept on doing it, but I received a big prize and I did not |
222 |
|
|
have to do it anymore.) |
223 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
224 |
|
|
<p> |
225 |
taz |
1.1 |
Nowadays there are many people making a living this way. I recently |
226 |
|
|
heard from somebody in South America who said that he know 30 people |
227 |
|
|
there who are making a living this way. South America is not among the |
228 |
|
|
technologically most advanced parts of the world, but this is already |
229 |
|
|
starting there. In 1989 or 1990, I believe, a company was started to |
230 |
|
|
do this kind of business, and that company was started by three |
231 |
|
|
people. In several years it had grown to 50 people, and it had been |
232 |
|
|
profitable every year. They could have kept on doing it, but they got |
233 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
greedy, and so they started developing nonfree software, and later on |
234 |
taz |
1.1 |
they were purchased by Red Hat. |
235 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
236 |
|
|
<p> |
237 |
taz |
1.1 |
Anyway, the free software business is a new way of doing business that |
238 |
|
|
does not exist in the proprietary software world. So people often |
239 |
|
|
wonder how would free software affect employment. Suppose every |
240 |
|
|
computer user had freedom. Suppose, therefore, that all software were |
241 |
|
|
free software. In other words, if you have the program, you have the |
242 |
|
|
freedom to run it, study it, change it and redistribute it.What would |
243 |
|
|
that do to employment in the information technology field? |
244 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
245 |
|
|
<p> |
246 |
taz |
1.1 |
Well, of all the employment in the field, a small fraction is |
247 |
|
|
programming; and most programming is custom software, software being |
248 |
|
|
written for one client. That is perfectly okay; as long as the client |
249 |
|
|
gets the source code and gets the full rights to control the software |
250 |
|
|
once he has paid for it, then this is legitimate. In fact, it is free |
251 |
|
|
software for the client who has it. [Thus, only the programming |
252 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
which is not client-specific is really nonfree.] |
253 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
254 |
|
|
<p> |
255 |
taz |
1.1 |
So of this fraction that is programming, most of that is custom |
256 |
|
|
software; software to be published is a small fraction of a small |
257 |
|
|
fraction of the total [IT sector employment]. |
258 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
259 |
|
|
<p> |
260 |
taz |
1.1 |
So, what would free software do? It might eliminate this tiny fraction |
261 |
|
|
of the employment, but maybe not. Because while the possibility of |
262 |
|
|
paying these programmers by restricting the users would go away, there |
263 |
|
|
would be a new possibility instead of supporting programmers who would |
264 |
|
|
be paid to make improvements and extensions in free software. So will |
265 |
|
|
we lose more jobs or gain more jobs? Nobody knows. It is impossible to |
266 |
|
|
tell. What we do know is that the decrease in employment in the IT |
267 |
|
|
field is limited to this small fraction of a small fraction, which is |
268 |
|
|
programming for publication. The rest would continue the way it is |
269 |
|
|
now. So it is clear that there is no problem for employment. |
270 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
271 |
|
|
<p> |
272 |
taz |
1.1 |
What about another issue people sometimes raise: Could we possibly |
273 |
|
|
develop enough software and make it free? The answer is obvious |
274 |
|
|
because we already are. The people who ask this question are like |
275 |
|
|
asking could airplanes really stay up? Well, I flew in one. Probably |
276 |
|
|
all of you have flown in airplanes too. I think they can stay up. In |
277 |
|
|
free software today, we have hundreds of people, maybe thousands, |
278 |
|
|
getting paid to develop free software. But we have over half a million |
279 |
|
|
volunteer developers of free software working part time and not |
280 |
|
|
getting paid and developing a lot of software. |
281 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
282 |
|
|
<p> |
283 |
taz |
1.1 |
So in fact, free software business is not necessary for free software |
284 |
|
|
to do its job. Free software business is very desirable. The more we |
285 |
|
|
can develop institutions that funnel funds from users to free software |
286 |
|
|
developers, the more free software we can produce, the better we can |
287 |
|
|
produce it. So it is certainly desirable, but it is not crucial. We |
288 |
|
|
have already developed two entire operating systems, two graphical |
289 |
|
|
user interface desktops and two office suites that are free |
290 |
|
|
software. |
291 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
292 |
|
|
<p> |
293 |
taz |
1.1 |
People are creatively looking for ways to fund free software, and some |
294 |
|
|
[ways] work and some do not, as you might expect. For instance, last |
295 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
summer, there was a product that people had liked but was nonfree |
296 |
taz |
1.1 |
called Blender, and the business decided it was no use supporting this |
297 |
|
|
or selling this anymore. They discontinued it. But the developers did |
298 |
|
|
not want it to be discontinued, so they negotiated a deal: If they |
299 |
|
|
could raise $100,000, they could buy the rights and make it free |
300 |
|
|
software. So they went to the community, and in a few weeks they |
301 |
|
|
raised the money. Blender is now free software. This suggests that |
302 |
|
|
maybe we can raise money from the community in the same way to make |
303 |
|
|
specific extensions. |
304 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
305 |
|
|
<p> |
306 |
taz |
1.1 |
A programmer who has a name, a reputation for ability, could go to the |
307 |
yavor |
1.4 |
community and say, “If people put up this much money, I will do |
308 |
|
|
the work.” He does not have to do the work entirely himself. He |
309 |
taz |
1.1 |
can employ other programmers working with him, and this is how you |
310 |
|
|
would get started. Before you have a name, before you could go to the |
311 |
|
|
community on the strength of your own reputation, you could be working |
312 |
|
|
as an apprentice for other programmers. They raise the funds, they |
313 |
|
|
supervise the work, but by doing this, eventually you develop a |
314 |
|
|
reputation too, and then you can go and get clients. |
315 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
316 |
|
|
<p> |
317 |
taz |
1.1 |
There are also, of course, legitimate roles for government funding in |
318 |
|
|
developing useful software, just as governments fund scientific |
319 |
|
|
research designed to be of use to the citizens, and even just for the |
320 |
|
|
sake of human curiosity, but certainly to be of use for the citizens, |
321 |
|
|
for the public. It is equally legitimate for governments to fund the |
322 |
|
|
development of software that is going be of use to the public, and |
323 |
yavor |
1.4 |
then when it is done, hand it off to the public and say, |
324 |
|
|
“Everyone can now use and improve this. It is human |
325 |
|
|
knowledge.” Because that is what free software is really |
326 |
|
|
about. It is human knowledge, knowledge that belongs to humanity, to |
327 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
all beings. A nonfree program is restricted knowledge, knowledge that |
328 |
yavor |
1.4 |
is kept under control by a few, and other people cannot really have |
329 |
|
|
access to it. They can only use it barely on sufferance. They can |
330 |
|
|
never have the knowledge. |
331 |
|
|
</p> |
332 |
|
|
<p> |
333 |
taz |
1.1 |
For this reason, it is essential that schools use free software. There |
334 |
|
|
are three reasons why schools should use exclusively free |
335 |
|
|
software. The most shallow reason is to save money. Even in a |
336 |
|
|
developed country, schools never have enough money, and so the use of |
337 |
|
|
computers in schools is held back. Now, if the schools use free |
338 |
|
|
software, then the school system has the freedom to make copies and |
339 |
|
|
redistribute them to all the schools and they do not have to pay for |
340 |
|
|
permission to use the software. So the school system can thus install |
341 |
|
|
more computers, make more facilities available. In addition, the GNU |
342 |
|
|
plus Linux operating system is more efficient than Windows, so you can |
343 |
|
|
use an older, less powerful, cheaper model of computer. Maybe you can |
344 |
|
|
use a second-hand computer that somebody else is getting rid of. So |
345 |
|
|
that is another way to save. That is obvious, but it is shallow. |
346 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
347 |
|
|
<p> |
348 |
taz |
1.1 |
A more important reason for schools to use free software is for the |
349 |
|
|
sake of learning. You see, in the teenage years, some students are |
350 |
|
|
going to want to learn everything there is to know about the inside of |
351 |
|
|
the computer system. These are the people who can become good |
352 |
|
|
programmers. If you want to develop a strong programming capacity, |
353 |
|
|
people prepared not just to work as part of a big team in a rather |
354 |
|
|
mechanical way, but people who will take the initiative, do big |
355 |
|
|
things, develop powerful, exciting programs, then you need to |
356 |
|
|
encourage the impulse to do that, whenever a kid has that impulse. So |
357 |
|
|
it is important to provide facilities and a social milieu that |
358 |
ineiev |
1.11 |
encourages this kind of learning to develop. |
359 |
|
|
<span class="gnun-split"></span>The way to do this is the |
360 |
taz |
1.1 |
schools should run free software, and whenever a kid starts wondering, |
361 |
yavor |
1.4 |
“How does this actually work?” the teacher can say, |
362 |
|
|
“This is done by the Fubar program. You can find the source code |
363 |
|
|
of the Fubar program there. Go read it and figure it out, see for |
364 |
|
|
yourself how this works.” Then if a kid says, “You know, I |
365 |
|
|
have got an idea for how this could be better,” the teacher |
366 |
|
|
could say, “Why not give it a try? Try writing it. Make the |
367 |
|
|
change in the Fubar program to change this one feature.” |
368 |
|
|
</p> |
369 |
|
|
<p> |
370 |
taz |
1.1 |
To learn to be a good writer, you have to read a lot and write a |
371 |
|
|
lot. It is the same if you are writing software: You have to read a |
372 |
|
|
lot of software and write a lot of software. To learn to understand |
373 |
|
|
big programs, you have to work with big programs. But how can you get |
374 |
|
|
started at that? When you are beginning, you cannot write a big |
375 |
|
|
program yourself, not and do a good job, because you have not learned |
376 |
|
|
how. So how are you going to learn? The answer is you have to read |
377 |
|
|
existing big programs and then try making small changes in |
378 |
|
|
them. Because at that stage, you cannot write a big program yourself, |
379 |
|
|
but you can write a small improvement in a big program. |
380 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
381 |
|
|
<p> |
382 |
taz |
1.1 |
That is how I learned to be a good programmer. I had a special |
383 |
|
|
opportunity at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. There was a |
384 |
|
|
lab where they had written their own operating system, and then they |
385 |
yavor |
1.4 |
used it. I went there and they said, “We would like to hire |
386 |
|
|
you.” They hired me to improve the programs in this operating |
387 |
taz |
1.1 |
system. It was my second year of college. At the time, I could not |
388 |
|
|
have written an operating system myself. I could not have written |
389 |
|
|
those programs from zero, but I could read them and add a feature and |
390 |
ineiev |
1.11 |
then add another feature and another and another. |
391 |
|
|
<span class="gnun-split"></span>Every week I would |
392 |
taz |
1.1 |
add another feature to some program. By doing this many, many times, I |
393 |
|
|
developed my skill. In the 1970s, the only way you could get that |
394 |
|
|
opportunity was to be in a very special place. But today, we can give |
395 |
|
|
that opportunity to everyone. All you need is a PC running the |
396 |
|
|
GNU/Linux system with the source code, and you have this |
397 |
|
|
opportunity. So you can easily encourage Japanese teenagers, those of |
398 |
|
|
them who are fascinated by computers, to become good programmers. |
399 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
400 |
|
|
<p> |
401 |
taz |
1.1 |
I have a friend who was a high school teacher around 1980, and he set |
402 |
mattl |
1.3 |
up the first Unix machine in a high school. He then mentored the high |
403 |
taz |
1.1 |
school students so that they learned to become good |
404 |
|
|
programmers. Several of them were very good programmers with |
405 |
|
|
reputations by the time they graduated from high school. I am sure any |
406 |
|
|
high school has a few people who have that talent and will want to |
407 |
|
|
develop it. They just need the opportunity. So that is the second |
408 |
|
|
reason why schools should use free software exclusively. |
409 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
410 |
|
|
<p> |
411 |
taz |
1.1 |
The third reason is even more fundamental. We want schools to teach |
412 |
|
|
facts and skill, of course, but also good moral character, which means |
413 |
|
|
being prepared to help other people. That means the school should say |
414 |
yavor |
1.4 |
to the kids, “Any software that is here, you can copy it. Copy |
415 |
|
|
it and take it home. That is what it is here for. If you bring any |
416 |
taz |
1.1 |
software to school, you must share it with the other kids. If you are |
417 |
|
|
not willing to share it with the other kids, do not bring it here, it |
418 |
|
|
does not belong here, because we are teaching kids to be helpful to |
419 |
yavor |
1.4 |
each other.” Education of moral character is important for every |
420 |
taz |
1.1 |
society. |
421 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
422 |
|
|
<p> |
423 |
taz |
1.1 |
I did not invent the idea of free software. Free software began as |
424 |
|
|
soon as there were two computers of the same kind, because then people |
425 |
|
|
using one computer would write some software, and the people using the |
426 |
yavor |
1.4 |
other computer would say, “Do you know anything to solve this |
427 |
|
|
problem?” and they would say, “Yes. We wrote something to |
428 |
|
|
solve this problem. Here is a copy.” So they started exchanging |
429 |
taz |
1.1 |
the software that they had developed, so that they could all develop |
430 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
more. But in the 1960s, there was a trend to replace it with nonfree |
431 |
taz |
1.1 |
software, a trend to subjugate the users, to deny users freedom. |
432 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
433 |
|
|
<p> |
434 |
taz |
1.1 |
When I was in my first year of college, I got to see a moral example |
435 |
|
|
that impressed me. I was using a computer facility, and at this |
436 |
yavor |
1.4 |
facility they said, “This is an educational institution, and we |
437 |
|
|
are here for people to learn about computer science. So we will have a |
438 |
taz |
1.1 |
rule: any time software is installed on a system, the source code must |
439 |
|
|
be on display so people can read it and learn how this software |
440 |
ineiev |
1.11 |
works.” |
441 |
|
|
<span class="gnun-split"></span>One of the employees wrote a utility program and he |
442 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
started selling it as nonfree software. He was not just selling |
443 |
yavor |
1.4 |
copies the way I was doing; he was restricting the users. But he |
444 |
|
|
offered the school a copy at no charge, and the people in charge of |
445 |
|
|
the computer facility said, “No, we will not install this here |
446 |
|
|
because our rule is the source code must be on display. If you will |
447 |
|
|
not let us put the source code of this program on display, we just |
448 |
|
|
will not run your program.” This inspired me because it was a |
449 |
|
|
willingness to renounce a practical convenience for the sake of |
450 |
|
|
something more important which is the mission of the school: |
451 |
|
|
education. |
452 |
|
|
</p> |
453 |
|
|
<p> |
454 |
taz |
1.1 |
The lab where I worked at MIT was an exception though in the 1970s due |
455 |
|
|
to the fact that we had an operating system that was free |
456 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
software. Most computers were using nonfree operating systems at the |
457 |
taz |
1.1 |
time. But I was inspired by the example that I saw there and I learned |
458 |
|
|
to live in that way. I learned the way of life where you will teach |
459 |
|
|
your knowledge to others instead of keeping it all for yourself. Then |
460 |
|
|
this community died in the early 1980s. At that point, I started the |
461 |
|
|
free software movement. I did not begin free software. I learned the |
462 |
|
|
free software way of life by joining a lab where people already |
463 |
|
|
practiced it. What I did was to turn this into an ethical and social |
464 |
|
|
movement, to say that this is a matter of choosing between a good |
465 |
|
|
society and an ugly society, between a clean, kind, helpful way of |
466 |
|
|
life where we have freedom, and a way of life where everybody is in |
467 |
|
|
bondage to various empires that conquer them, where people believe |
468 |
|
|
they have no practical choice but to give up their freedom. |
469 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
470 |
|
|
<p> |
471 |
|
|
Theoretically speaking, on the one hand people say, “Oh, nobody |
472 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
forces you to use that nonfree software. Nobody forces you to use |
473 |
yavor |
1.4 |
Microsoft Word.” On the other hand, you have people saying, |
474 |
|
|
“I have no choice.” So practically speaking, it is not a |
475 |
|
|
situation of individual choice. Yes, it is true, if you are determined |
476 |
|
|
to be free, determined to reject it, you can do it, but it takes a lot |
477 |
|
|
of determination. When we started 20 years ago, it took tremendous |
478 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
work to use a computer without the nonfree software. All the |
479 |
yavor |
1.4 |
operating systems for modern computers in 1983 were proprietary. You |
480 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
could not get a computer and use it, except with nonfree software. To |
481 |
yavor |
1.4 |
change this, we had to spend years working, and we did, we changed it. |
482 |
|
|
</p> |
483 |
|
|
<p> |
484 |
taz |
1.1 |
For you, today, the situation is easier. There are free operating |
485 |
|
|
systems. You can get a modern computer and use it with free software, |
486 |
|
|
exclusively with free software. So nowadays, instead of a tremendous |
487 |
|
|
sacrifice, you just have to make a temporary, small sacrifice, and |
488 |
|
|
then you can live in freedom. By working together, we can eliminate |
489 |
|
|
that sacrifice. We can make it easier to live in freedom. But for that |
490 |
|
|
we have to work. We have to recognize freedom as a social value. |
491 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
492 |
|
|
<p> |
493 |
taz |
1.1 |
Every government tries to get its work done inexpensively, and every |
494 |
|
|
government agency has a specific job to get done. So when government |
495 |
|
|
agencies choose their computers, they tend to look at narrow, |
496 |
|
|
practical questions: How much will it cost, when can we have it |
497 |
|
|
running, and so on. |
498 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</p> |
499 |
|
|
<p> |
500 |
taz |
1.1 |
But the government has a larger mission, which is to lead the country |
501 |
|
|
in a healthy direction, one that is good for the citizens. So when |
502 |
|
|
government agencies choose their computer systems, they should make |
503 |
|
|
this choice so as to lead the country to free software. It is better |
504 |
|
|
for the economy of the country because the users, instead of paying |
505 |
|
|
merely for permission to run the software, will be paying people in |
506 |
|
|
the local area to improve it and adapt it for them. So in instead of |
507 |
|
|
all draining away to Redmond, Washington, the money will circulate in |
508 |
|
|
the region, creating employment locally instead of filling |
509 |
|
|
somebody's pockets. But more important, it creates a way of life |
510 |
|
|
where the country and the people are independent and free. |
511 |
|
|
</p> |
512 |
|
|
|
513 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> |
514 |
yavor |
1.4 |
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> |
515 |
|
|
<div id="footer"> |
516 |
taz |
1.1 |
|
517 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to |
518 |
|
|
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. |
519 |
|
|
There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> |
520 |
|
|
the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent |
521 |
|
|
to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> |
522 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, |
524 |
|
|
replace it with the translation of these two: |
525 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality |
527 |
|
|
translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. |
528 |
|
|
Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard |
529 |
|
|
to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> |
530 |
|
|
<web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> |
531 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
<p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of |
533 |
|
|
our web pages, see <a |
534 |
|
|
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations |
535 |
|
|
README</a>. --> |
536 |
|
|
Please see the <a |
537 |
|
|
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations |
538 |
|
|
README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations |
539 |
|
|
of this article.</p> |
540 |
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to |
542 |
|
|
files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should |
543 |
|
|
be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this |
544 |
|
|
without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. |
545 |
|
|
Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the |
546 |
|
|
document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the |
547 |
|
|
document was modified, or published. |
548 |
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. |
550 |
|
|
Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying |
551 |
|
|
years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable |
552 |
|
|
year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including |
553 |
|
|
being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). |
554 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers |
556 |
|
|
Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> |
557 |
taz |
1.1 |
|
558 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
<p>Copyright © 2003 Richard M. Stallman</p> |
559 |
taz |
1.1 |
|
560 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" |
561 |
jturner |
1.6 |
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative |
562 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p> |
563 |
taz |
1.1 |
|
564 |
ineiev |
1.12 |
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> |
565 |
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
<p>Updated: |
567 |
taz |
1.1 |
<!-- timestamp start --> |
568 |
ineiev |
1.14 |
$Date: 2013/02/28 17:09:42 $ |
569 |
taz |
1.1 |
<!-- timestamp end --> |
570 |
|
|
</p> |
571 |
|
|
</div> |
572 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</div> |
573 |
taz |
1.1 |
</body> |
574 |
yavor |
1.4 |
</html> |