Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
The free software movement:
communist backed 46%
communist-inspired 53%

Votes: 15

 'Free' software must not undermine our Freedom

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Oct 03, 2001
Until recently I thought that Open Source was harmless. After all, who cares if some fifteen year old thinks that the fact that he can program an Operating System in JavaScript (or whatever) makes him 'cool' and 'with it'? I even thought about installing Linux on my Dell machine at home (although by the sounds of this article I was right to be cautious!). Although I knew that Open Source had an extreme element in the so-called 'Free Software Foundation', I thought nothing of it.

In the wake of the tragic events of September the eleventh I have been forced to reassess my attitude.


More diaries by otak
this horrifying tragedy has changed everything forever
An observation:
I am in a rage
jsm is back!
Hey! Are you desperately tedious? Is your life desperately tedious?
America is beset on all sides by those who envy our freedom and prosperity, and, as hard as it may be, we must accept some of the blame for allowing this situation to develop. We have been much too tolerant of those people, both within and without of our borders, who choose to preach hateful speech against our way of life and our most sacred institutions. We have allowed jobless hippies to loot and pillage Seattle. We have allowed pro-Arab organisations to recruit for their murderous Holy War on our University campuses. And we have provided funding and support for Open Source - a group who's avowed aim is the destruction of America's largest software corporations.

Could the resemblance between the attack on the World Trade Centre and this cowardly attack on the foundation of American capitalism be any more obvious? Will we wake up one morning to find the shining towers of American prosperity struck down by the insidious, anti-property, internationalist agenda of the Open Source movement? How many jobs will be destroyed? How many hard-working Americans' lives will be left in tatters? Is it not clear that Open Source is simply a sugar-coating on an assault on America - an attack as vicious as anything that Free Software's Islamist soulmates have been able to muster?

Most disturbing of all is the possibility of a violent attack on America by Free Software 'hackers'. Although the Open Source revolutionaries tactics have so far been peaceful, how long can that they stay that way?

The war on terrorism must begin in America, and it must be a war against the terrorism of ideas as much as the terrorism of guns and bombs. We cannot allow these cowardly 'hackers' to undermine the fabric of our society from their college bedrooms and welfare-sponsored bedsits. I hope that the manifest technical inadequacies of 'free software' will cause this hateful movement to die on it's own, but if it does not I pray that our President has the courage to attack this threat to our freedom as vigorously as he is attacking the other terrorists of this world.


Irresponsible (1.80 / 5) (#1)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 04:37:17 PM PST
>Could the resemblance between the attack on the World Trade Centre and this cowardly attack on the foundation of American capitalism be any more obvious?<

What seemed to be a rather lame parody site has apparently crossed over into an irresponsible site of childish smear tactics.

To accuse an entire SOFTWARE movement--of all things--of perpertrating something akin to the horrific attack on innocent human beings we all witnessed on 9/11 is reprehensible.

It is, in fact, an actually dangerous hate mongering that even if meant as a joke could easily backfire as frightened people try to find explanations and, yes, scapegoats for the monstrous events of late.

This article is irresponsible to the point of being evil. If meant as a parody or humor, it is in exceedingly poor taste and should be withdrawn immediately. If done in earnest, you need help.

I have undeleted this (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by jsm on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 11:58:10 PM PST
and reversed its entirely appropriate zero rating, only to give an example of the sort of harassment of our diary posters which will not be tolerated.

... the worst tempered and least consistent of the editors
... now also Legal department and general counsel,

I'm actually making a serious post tonight: (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by Logical Analysis on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 10:07:18 PM PST
You know, I think there are too many extremists.

With regard to the "free software" issue there are on one hand big companies like Disney, and publishers, and laws like DMCA, people like Hillary Rosen. These people/things/corpations are basically scum that ride on top of the artists, writers, and programmers work. They are not productive. They are just leeches on the back of the creators of the work.

Then on the other hand you have the FSF Commies, like Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen, and the various losers who make up the Debian project. These people are just as disgusting. They would be perfectly happy to abolish copyright entirely (see and are greatly offended that a programmer or author may want to be paid for his work.

I think copyright is a great idea, if implemented correctly. If I write a book I should be able to sell it and make money off it so I can continue writing. If I write a computer program I think I should be able to sell it. And yes, I will have a temporary monopoly over my own work, thanks to copyright, and I think that is okay. I deserve it.

Yet I do think copyright has gotten out of hand. I think anyone who studies the issue would agree that it has been made far more powerful than it was ever intended. While I think copyright protection in it's original form (lasting 28 years max) was reasonable, today it is like a joke. There is NO way that my copyright protections should last longer than my own life!!

I don't think the main motivation of most doers of creative work is to make tons of money. It is more about craftsmanship, beauty, and just doing things right for your fellow man. Yet, these things alone should not be the only reward. Creators should be able to sell their work and profit from it thanks to copyright. This will allow them to continue their work.

I guess you could sort of say it this way -

You will never hear someone say "I am a fulltime GPL programmer." because that is the same as saying "I am homeless penniless programmer." That is because the GPL and other anti-copyright schemes take away the possibility of earning money which allows one to continue working.

But wait, you say, what about Richard Stallman, and uhm, that Michael de Monkeyfucker from Gnome. They work full time on GPL software (I'm sure there are some other people too, but I can't think of any more names)!

THese are the one in a million. Yeah, maybe there is one academic who got a grant, or one Mexican who happens to work for a company that managed to fool some venture capitalists into believing the free software myth, but these guys are the exception to the rule. Even Linus Fucking Torvalds, the creator of the OS, has to work at a "real" job at Transmeta. He couldn't support himself without a real job outside GPL programming.

In summary:
Copyright allows creators to earn money for their work, thus allowing them to continue creating. Famous authors should not be required to work at McDonalds to feed their family. Skilled programmers should not have to work as janitors to pay their rent. They should be able to do full time what they do best: create. Copyright makes this possible.


The real problem is the extremists. The fucking Randroids. The fucking Socialists. The fucking Islamicists. The fucking Pacifists. Their stupid ideologies have blinded them from seeing reality. Ideology ain't worth shit if it isn't consistent with reality. Then it's just dogma.

You got these two groups: Copyright is God, and Copyright is Satan. Both of them are wrong. There is a reasonable path, and it isn't on the fringes.

If you have read this far, then I recommend you go check out this page:
It has an excellent study of Copyright and its history.


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to