[Fsf-friends] Free Software: What does freedom really mean... to whom?

[Raju Mathur]

>>>>> "Fred" == Frederick Noronha <fred@bytesforall.org> writes:

    >> From geert@desk.nl Sun Nov 10 15:12:16 2002 'Free' Software
    >> doesn't mean the same as zero-cost software. It means that,
    >> unlike proprietory software, it gives freedom to its users as
    >> outlined in the GNU General Public License.

    Fred> That's a bit of a myth, Frederic. Free software potentially
    Fred> only gives freedom to those users who are capable of
    Fred> programming, who know how to write code and want to change
    Fred> the source code of a program. For non-technical users this
    Fred> freedom is a nice idea but meaningless. With the rise in
    Fred> users, coders are a diminishing group of people. Normal
    Fred> users may expect other 'freedoms' or values. I think it is
    Fred> time for the programmers community to take this in account
    Fred> and stop the Stallman talk of freedom, free lunch and free
    Fred> beer once and for all. These metaphors are not only
    Fred> confusing but also running out in a time when free software
    Fred> really becomes popular and transcends its original scene
    Fred> where every user by default was a programmer.  It is time to
    Fred> take the non-technical user into account. That's the
    Fred> 'cultural turn' the free software movement is heading
    Fred> towards.

I don't agree that the freedom aspect of free software is less
relevant today than it was, say, 20 years ago.

The freedom aspect of free software has many implications to the end
user.  These include:

- The ability to change the code.  Yes, most users can't program
`hello, world'.  However they can always hire, blackmail, coerce or
beg a coder to change the code for them.  That coder need not have
anything to with the original author of the software.  That is a
freedom.

- The freedom from dependence on one entity for the package.  Whom do
you turn to for security patches?  Who provides updates to your
package?  Who adds the features that you need?  The original
developer?  Do you trust the developer to provide all these in a
timely fashion?  Do you trust his/her ability to make secure software?
Do you trust him to stay alive for the whole period you use the
software?  If MS dies tomorrow who will maintain, update and provide
security fixes for Winduhs?

- The freedom to examine the code or have it examined by a III party
for security weak spots and/or backdoors.

I'm sure there're many I've missed, but these should do for a start.

Regards,

-- Raju

    Fred> Ciao, Geert

    Fred> --------------END OF GEERT's
    Fred> NOTE-----------------------------------

    Fred> Geert, There was another point that I was thinking of, in
    Fred> parallel. Free Software talks about four freedoms. Freedom
    Fred> 0, 1, 2 and 3. Perhaps it would make sense to include a
    Fred> fifth freedom:

    Fred> 	Freedom of users to get access to computing power at a
    Fred> price that does not exclude them simply because they don't
    Fred> have the resources to pay.

    Fred> Tell me if this is being unrealistic....

    Fred> Of course we're not still misconstruing the word 'free' to
    Fred> mean zero-price here. But the fact that GPL'd software is
    Fred> copyable without unfair restrictions on sharing it with your
    Fred> neighbour, surely means that it mostly cannot/will not be
    Fred> priced at astronomical prices, as in the case of
    Fred> proprietorial or non-free software. This may not seem
    Fred> important from a programers point of view. But from a user's
    Fred> point of view, it is. More so in the price-sensitive
    Fred> countries which we live in.

    Fred> As a user myself (who hasn't done a line of code in my
    Fred> life), this issue is something that has been gaining my
    Fred> attention subconsciously and otherwise. It is great that the
    Fred> idealism of the Free Software programmers eggs them on to
    Fred> write world-class software, often (or in many cases) without
    Fred> thinking of financial returns alone. That they share the
    Fred> fruit of their work with others is also great. So is the
    Fred> fact that this helps spread the process for creation and
    Fred> sharing of knowledge. But where does the user fit into this
    Fred> whole project?

    Fred> On another issue, I think that the ideals of Free Software
    Fred> need to be extended to other fields too (including
    Fred> journalism, where the money has become good in recent years
    Fred> in countries like India but increasingly journalists are
    Fred> feeling choked by their inability to express themselves
    Fred> freely).

    Fred> Maybe there is still confusion in understanding the issues
    Fred> involved. But this debate could help.

    Fred> Copying this to others for a wider debate. Flames
    Fred> welcome. FN -- Frederick Noronha * Freelance Journalist *

-- 
Raju Mathur               raju@kandalaya.org      http://kandalaya.org/
                      It is the mind that moves