Conversation

@Joe_0237 >If we refused to use proprietary software or hardware in the beginning, it would have been prohibitively expensive to write the first free software.
Computing hardware wasn't proprietary in very beginning - as the one who used the hardware was the one who made the hardware.

In the days of vacuum tubes, you even could give the manufacturer a visit and ask them how the tubes were made and they probably wouldn't hesitate to show you (although they may have asked for a tour fee).

Hardware only really started getting proprietary into the transistor era, due to patents on transistors.

Originally, all software was free software and was distributed in source code form (whether that was in machine code, assembly or a higher level language), as otherwise it wasn't practical to use.

Even in early arrangements where the computer filled a room and was rented and not sold (although at least most of the charge was for maintenance), all the software for the computer was provided in source code form, for the users to use and edit and the manufacturer would thank you if you sent them improvements.

Unfortunately, eventually computer companies began to fall under the control of suits, who could only see money (whether real or a mirage), who en-masse demanded that the software only be published in binary form (which at the time became possible to do, as increasing numbers of computers shared the same instruction set) and that the source code not be distributed to anyone without a NDA - although at the same time, a fair amount of software remained free.

Unfortunately, not long after that, copyright law was amended to make computer programs fall under copyright law, meaning that software was made automatically proprietary unless the copyright holder(s) made an active effort to make it free.

Even at that stage, there wasn't any problems if one had old copies of a free OS running on an older computer like the PDP-11 - unfortunately such free OS's like the Incompatible Timesharing Systems turned to dust once the computer line was discontinued, available computers broke and no-one capable of fixing them was around anymore (usually because proprietary companies had hired away all the hackers to make proprietary computers/software - this happened at MIT), as ITS was written in assembly and machine code (and emulation was usually too slow/difficult to be practical at that time).

Richard Stallman realized that the world was in this sad state and realized that it needed a free OS again, just like how it was at the start - GNU (he also made sure to make it portable, learning from past mistakes).

>Still today, if you insist on completely open hardware or nothing, you simply can't have anything.
I mean, you can write yourself a nice small SoC in verilog and run it on an iCE40 FGPA and plug that into display and input hardware, manufactured from free designs, which is really minimally proprietary, albeit quite inconvenient and slow.

>Where I am: I use only #freesoftware and standard Linux with non-free blobs so I can use WiFi on my laptop. I won't buy NVIDIA for example.
I only use free software on my computers, down to the BIOS and have opted for a decent 802.11n Wi-Fi card that works without blobs.

I won't buy recent nvidia, but surprisingly very old nvidia is more freedom respecting than most GPUs from ATI or AMD thanks to nouveau.

>Someday things will be better.
I wish.

>Also I play one time purchase proprietary games. Because there is no moral issue with them IMO.
There is always moral issues with proprietary software, even if it's just a game, although one time payment for a perpetual rent is indeed less scummy than what many game companies do now.

I would argue that it isn't moral to pay such malware authors for the malware they have published, as that funds such malicious behavior, although you still put yourself into a bad moral position even if you don't pay and go for an unauthorized copy - as you can't legally share that with your friends after all, or modify it.

Public

Notices

Feeds