[LAU] Some disturbing news

[Louigi Verona]

Hey David!

I don't find your response fair. You have accused me of using strawman
arguments without demonstrating it, but then seem to proceed to enact
strawman arguments that are easy to demonstrate.

1. You claim that I argue that the lack of a sane copyright regulation is
the fault of Stallman because of arguing for freedom, not the fault of the
billions of dollars poured into lobbyism in order to not make it so.

But I have not argued that anywhere.

2. You claim that I am "picking Microsoft as your champion on this list".

I have specifically said that I am not doing that many times already.


So, David, I feel you are arguing with someone else. I don't see you
addressing my position at all, to be honest. And I have already told you in
no uncertain terms that I am an opponent of the current copyright regime.

And you don't need to respond to me if you are not interested in a friendly
discussion. The whole point of a conversation is to understand other
people's points of view. At least this is my goal here, which is why I am
engaging with everybody.




On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:13 PM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hey Set!
>
> Great question.
>
> There are reasons to use FLOSS and not agree with the ethical
> underpinnings.
>
> 1. Some of it is unique and provides capabilities not easily achieved on
> other OS
> 2. I like the system itself, I am used to using it on a daily basis and
> changing invokes a cost
> 3. I like the feeling that I am using something unique (from the POV of
> most people)
> 4. I am largely lucky that most proprietary tools I need work well through
> WINE so I can use the best of both worlds
>
> But also there is a problem that I see in your question: if someone
> disagrees with Stallman's ethics, then it means that there are no other
> possible ethics.
>
> I do support the idea of having free ofcharge and copyright free computing
> systems for the public. I might not agree with the idea that corporations
> are evil and that proprietary has to go, but it does not mean I disagree
> with the need to have publicly available software systems.
>
> So, the latter point is also ethics. It is simply not the extreme position
> that Stallman opts for. In my article I write about free software as a
> moderate philosophy:
>
> https://louigiverona.com/?page=projects&s=writings&t=
> philosophy&a=philosophy_freedoms#4_1
>
>
> So, I think my usage of Linux has a philosophical component to it,
> definitely.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:01 PM, Set Sakrecoer <public at sakrecoer.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Not a bit worried :)
>>
>> Here are the good news:
>> https://monitor.gitlab.net/dashboard/db/github-importer?orgId=1
>>
>> Intense thread though, made me wonder why anyone disagreeing with the
>> ethics of FOSS would use FOSS in the first place? I mean, If I didn't care
>> for the ethics, I could do my stuff on any OS ...
>>
>> Attentively,
>> Set
>>
>> On 2 June 2018 10:00:16 CEST, Will Godfrey <willgodfrey at musically.me.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've just read on The Register that there are discussions between GitHub and
>>> Microsoft, with a possible buy-out by Microsoft. I really can't think of a
>>> worse possibility :(
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-audio-user mailing list
>> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
>> https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Louigi Verona
> https://www.patreon.com/droning
> https://louigiverona.com/
>



-- 
Louigi Verona
https://www.patreon.com/droning
https://louigiverona.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/linux-audio-user/attachments/20180604/c568a9a4/attachment.html>