Re: [fsf-community-team] Terminology. GNU/Linux

[Edward Cherlin]

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 17:56, Simon Bridge <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 15:33 -0800, Edward Cherlin wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 07:41, Don Saklad <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > When using the term GNU/Linux in advocating important principles, Boston 
>> > City Hall people fail to comprehend the term. Would any of you kind folks 
>> > have any hints, tips or pointers?...
>
> Well, since they have used it, my feeling is to let it rest for a bit.
> Leave it up to our enemies to point out that this is not what they
> actually mean. Then we can respond that this is what they *should* mean!

I believe that Don meant to say he used the term, and was met with
blank incomprehension. Correct me if I am wrong, Don.

> It may be possible to leverage the gaff later.
>
> But then, I tend to be sneaky - this is politics after all.

I don't. But that's because I view the triumph of Free Software as
inevitable. The network effect of software freedom, including public
standards without patent encumbrances, is much stronger than the
effect for nonfree software. Also, once we have GNU/Linux with Sugar
education software in the hands of a billion children, it is all over
for our opposition.

I can supply numerous examples in the Boston/Cambridge area and
elsewhere where Sugar is taking hold in public and private schools, in
education schools, in the research agenda, and in the political
discussion. For example, Mitt Romney, before his ideological
conversion from relatively liberal (for a Republican) MA Governor to
antediluvian Presidential candidate, called for OLPC XOs for all MA
schoolchildren.

> It is
> important, however, to check that the gaff does not put gnu/linux in a
> bad light. BCH must be clearly trying to use gnu/linux as an example of
> the kinds of values they think are important - and here I have missed
> the original reference.
>
> This is important - remember that your statements will be quoted in
> "sound-bites" - the "important principles" in the above quote actually
> needs to say what principles - it needs to succinctly say in what way
> BCH is misunderstanding - and this is quite an art form.
>
> The ethics of tricking and maneuvering someone into doing the right
> thing is pretty thorny.

I don't find it so, since I see no need to do it.

> Remember, we support vendor lockin where we are
> locking the user in to freedom.

That is true, but it is non-vendor lockin.
-- 
Edward Mokurai (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) Cherlin
Silent Thunder is my name, and Children are my nation.
The Cosmos is my dwelling place, the Truth my destination.
http://www.earthtreasury.org/