Libre Graphics Meeting
Keynote Announcement: Dr. Richard Stallman
https://libregraphicsmeeting.org/2025/news/2025-05-06_0002-keynote-announcement-richard-stallman
On Wednesday, May 28th at 19:30, Dr. Richard Stallman will deliver a keynote on Free/Libre Software and Freedom in the Digital Society at Libre Graphics Meeting.
See the details in the linked announcement regarding admission to the talk.
I also included a personal note on the decision, as I received mixed feedback.
--Lasse
David Revoy
@lgm ... and Libre Graphics Meeting is now dead to me. 😩
四
@davidrevoy I firmly believe that open source needs a full refreshment from the original “guard”, and I’d hate to see all the far more positive (not all old guard are bad people nor have done anything bad, but it’s time for a refresh) people get dragged down because of them.
Thank you for being one of the positive voices in open source. We can all contribute, big and small, to a friendlier and more helpful environment.
翠星石
David Revoy
@tirifto @lgm Hey Tirifto! It's already well documented ( eg. https://drewdevault.com/2023/11/25/2023-11-26-RMS-on-sex.html ) and I have my own reasons and my own negative history with the FSF because of him.
LGM deliberately chose to praise something with this invitation. Just something I don't want to waste my time on or be associated with anymore. So I'm moving on.
Tirifto
@davidrevoy @lgm Why? I understand you’re not a fan, but this seems quite harsh. :gutkato_scivola:
翠星石
翠星石
Alexandre Oliva
Matt Wilcox
@graphicore @lgm @halla @celesteh @federicomena @doctormo More practically and usefully: Why put yourself in the situation of “picking a side” on a clearly controversial issue, where multiple orgs have seen enough to officially cut ties, when there are surely many other people who could enjoy a spotlight and benefit the actual topic - without the risk? Why choose to do this? Pragmatically, does the move make sense?
Lasse Fister
@lgm @halla @celesteh @federicomena @doctormo
I’m following this discussion.
Can you explain to me where https://stallmansupport.org is so wrong. Is it completely wrong or just partially? And vice versa, is the “report” completely right?
I also had the impression the “report” was written in a manipulative language and publishing it anonymously doesn’t support it either.
I’d be interested in a discussion that is not so emotionally loaded, and I’m open to arguments. I see and get to feel that you are upset.
翠星石
LucKey Productions
@Suiseiseki The open source definition is an almost exact copy of the Debian Free Software Guidelines. GNU accepts free software require "that you change the name of the modified version [or] remove a logo", which the DFSG and OSD do not (seem to) allow for. One might therefor argue open source is in fact more strict in demanding freedom of the software as a whole than free software is.
https://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html#not_just_code
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html#packaging
Note that the three organisations disagree on the approval of several licenses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_and_open-source_software_licenses#Approvals
翠星石
翠星石
LucKey Productions
@Suiseiseki The problem is that it is vague, and can be stretched to the point of calling things (for instance) libre games while all the media is nonfree, or all of a program's icons. Despite it being unusable without. It can then reasonably be claimed the assets get in the way of the complete piece of software's freedoms, but often gets called free software anyway. It is the FSF definition - not the DSFG - that explicitly allows for some leniency here.
This is another implication that "free software" focuses mainly on free source code, instead of programs as a whole. In part because that makes monetization easier. Exactly what you accuse "open source" of; that the focus is on profit rather then freedom.
A name is not media, and sometimes ties in with the copyright holder(s). That's a different issue. For instance when the word "Team" is appended to the name of the project to represent a collective author.
tyil
@federicomena@mstdn.mx @lgm@post.lurk.org If you read that "report" and got to the conclusion RMS is an evil person, you didn't do any research into its references. I would highly suggest you do, and also to read up on the texts posted by those in defense of RMS.
Only accepting one side and condemning anyone who dares to reach a different conclusion simply makes you a tool of abusers, if anything. Its ironic, yet very sad and dangerous, that those who consider themselves the empathic and tolerant side have no empathy for other views or tolerance for disagreement.
Federico Mena Quintero
@lgm "After reviewing the complaints and the defense, I concluded that the concerns lacked substantive weight."
This is what enables abuse. If you read https://stallman-report.org/ and still think that, you are abetting abuse.
tyil
@mattwilcox@mstdn.social @graphicore@post.lurk.org @lgm@post.lurk.org @halla@kde.social @celesteh@lgbt.io @federicomena@mstdn.mx @doctormo@floss.social
While you consider it practical and useful to never question an angry mob hellbent on destroying lives of others, it is not very humane. A decent human being will generally not just condemn people for any unproven, unsubstantiated claim.
Just because a topic is controversial, doesn't mean you should just accept the status quo. On the contrary, because it is controversial you should engage with it. This is perhaps the best way to grow your personal mind as a human being, for it forces you to really think about hard topics and build your own opinion.
Foregoing individual thought makes you nothing more than an obedient fool.
tyil
@mattwilcox@mstdn.social @graphicore@post.lurk.org @lgm@post.lurk.org @halla@kde.social @celesteh@lgbt.io @federicomena@mstdn.mx @doctormo@floss.social The real question is why they're emotionally attached to the destruction of the lives of others. Once you realize their one desire is to completely and utterly eradicate people who disagree, you will see that pragmatism is not going to be a desirable outcome in the long run.
Inviting the objectively greatest force for free software to an event that has "libre" in the name cannot possibly be an "offensive" take. Without RMS, LGM would not even have existed in the first place. The people who want to cancel him cannot be reasoned with, and you should never ever cave into the demands of psychopaths like them.
I don't argue we need to convince those people of anything, I'm arguing you shouldn't let them convince you of anything. Don't listen to their hateful and unjustified criticism. Don't cave in to their sick demands. Ignore them if you must, but fight them if you can. The future of free software and to a large extent the free societies we live in depends on it.
Matt Wilcox
@tyil @graphicore @lgm @halla @celesteh @federicomena @doctormo Or to put it another way; arguing people into other viewpoints isn’t a one step process. Often by arguing you just reinforce their position if they’re emotionally attached to it. So, you have to find a way to achieve the practical thing first (end an undesirable action) and then work on persuading them to your side. Not try pounding a nail harder.
Matt Wilcox
@tyil @graphicore @lgm @halla @celesteh @federicomena @doctormo Oh I agree with you. But persuading others to change viewpoints isn’t achieved through only one method, and to me it seemed unlikely head on challenges were going to work here. So; I took the other tactic. If people can be persuaded to change their choices for personal impact reasons, it’s a start that may soften them to consider the _actual_ reasons.
tyil
@KaiserKitty@clubcyberia.co @mattwilcox@mstdn.social @graphicore@post.lurk.org @lgm@post.lurk.org @halla@kde.social @celesteh@lgbt.io @federicomena@mstdn.mx @doctormo@floss.social "Pragmatism" is most often used as an excuse to be a terrible person. In almost any case it can be substituted for intellectual laziness.
KaiserKitty
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.