Free Software
As many people are aware, I'm an avid supporter of Free Software.
"Free?! Why the hell wouldn't everyone like free stuff?"
No. Not THAT kind of "free" (most of the time, anyway).
The "Free" in "Free Software" stands for the freedom its users have to share, distribute, modify, study, reverse engineer, and use it virtually any way they wish (as long as it doesn't violate the terms of the Free Software license).
If you use a Proprietary Operating System (such as Microsoft® Windows®) or a piece of Proprietary Software (such as Adobe® Photoshop®), you DON'T necessarily have the right to share the software with your friends, family, co-workers, colleagues, or ANYONE--even yourself. You DON'T necessarily have the right to install it on as many computers as you want. If you find a piece of Proprietary Software that doesn't work exactly the way you'd like it to, you DON'T have the right to change it. And even if you did, you wouldn't be able to share your changes with anyone else.
One of the prime reasons behind the Proprietary Software model is money. If a private corporation holds control over what you can do with your software, and WHEN you can do it, then they have complete control over the task you're set out to do with the software. If you incorporate computers into your day-to-day life, then this private corporation (that doesn't care about you) has complete control over those aspects of your day-to-day life. You're essentially licensing what you can and can't do in your life--from communicating with friends and colleagues, to managing your bank account, to creating art, to publishing Web pages, to just about anything. As long as there is control over what you can and can't do with hardware that you have purchased, then there will always be the continuous effort to get more money from you.
Just think. It takes many hours for a programmer (or team of programmers) to write software. However, once the software is written, it's written. There are no more man-hours for which to pay. However, an infinite number of copies of the software can be sold at virtually any price by the company that employed the programmer (or programmer team). Yes, this is a clever way to make money, but it's dishonest and unjust. These people might as well be ripping the wallets right out of their consumers' pockets and returning them shredded--sans money.
It isn't a coincidence Microsoft has so many billions.
With Free Software, on the other hand, we don't have these issues. Software is written, and the users of the software are free to do virtually anything they wish to do with it, as long as they guarantee others these same freedoms.
"Great!"
Yes, it is great, but without someone enforcing this paradigm of software development and usage, what Good™ is it? If nobody enforced the Free Software licenses that went along with Free Software, then these licenses might as well not exist. The Free Software Foundation steps in here.
The Free Software Foundation also puts through a great deal of collaboration effort to see to it that there is Free Software available for people to use. If it weren't for the Free Software Foundation, I doubt I'd even be writing in this LiveJournal. In fact, I doubt LiveJournal would even exist. The Free Software Foundation is what started it all.
It was founded in 1984, and its primary mission was to write a complete and free operating system--the GNU (guh-NEW: GNU's Not UNIX) Operating System. Many people today use this operating system, only instead of being a complete operating system, a good portion of it is being used on top of a different operating system kernel. The "kernel" is the part of the operating system that tells the rest of the software how to talk to the hardware. It also sets up scheduling and other low-level tasks.
The kernel that is in wide use today that people are using with the GNU Operating System is called "Linux" (LIH-nuhx). Many people, however, confuse the operating system's kernel with the entire operating system, and end up calling the whole operating system "Linux". In actuality, they are using the GNU Operating System on top of the Linux Kernel. Therefore, it's appropriate to say they are using the GNU/Linux Operating System.
Okay. Enough about all of that. Down the the point. I think that, if this has affected you at all, you should consider using Free Software and a Free Operating System. If you do this, then NOBODY holds any right to tell you what you can and can't do with your computer but YOU (well, and your government, but that's for another discussion).
It would also be a Good Idea™ to apply for associate membership with the Free Software Foundation to show your support for their cause--and to help make sure they're still around in the future. Since they're a non-profit charity, all funds they receive go towards keeping the FSF operational. That's right, virtually all of the work that goes into all of this is "volunteer work".
There are many benefits that come with associate membership. You can take a look at what the FSF offers to its associate members at http://member.fsf.org/benefits.html.
Security Level: Public
"Free?! Why the hell wouldn't everyone like free stuff?"
No. Not THAT kind of "free" (most of the time, anyway).
The "Free" in "Free Software" stands for the freedom its users have to share, distribute, modify, study, reverse engineer, and use it virtually any way they wish (as long as it doesn't violate the terms of the Free Software license).
If you use a Proprietary Operating System (such as Microsoft® Windows®) or a piece of Proprietary Software (such as Adobe® Photoshop®), you DON'T necessarily have the right to share the software with your friends, family, co-workers, colleagues, or ANYONE--even yourself. You DON'T necessarily have the right to install it on as many computers as you want. If you find a piece of Proprietary Software that doesn't work exactly the way you'd like it to, you DON'T have the right to change it. And even if you did, you wouldn't be able to share your changes with anyone else.
One of the prime reasons behind the Proprietary Software model is money. If a private corporation holds control over what you can do with your software, and WHEN you can do it, then they have complete control over the task you're set out to do with the software. If you incorporate computers into your day-to-day life, then this private corporation (that doesn't care about you) has complete control over those aspects of your day-to-day life. You're essentially licensing what you can and can't do in your life--from communicating with friends and colleagues, to managing your bank account, to creating art, to publishing Web pages, to just about anything. As long as there is control over what you can and can't do with hardware that you have purchased, then there will always be the continuous effort to get more money from you.
Just think. It takes many hours for a programmer (or team of programmers) to write software. However, once the software is written, it's written. There are no more man-hours for which to pay. However, an infinite number of copies of the software can be sold at virtually any price by the company that employed the programmer (or programmer team). Yes, this is a clever way to make money, but it's dishonest and unjust. These people might as well be ripping the wallets right out of their consumers' pockets and returning them shredded--sans money.
It isn't a coincidence Microsoft has so many billions.
With Free Software, on the other hand, we don't have these issues. Software is written, and the users of the software are free to do virtually anything they wish to do with it, as long as they guarantee others these same freedoms.
"Great!"
Yes, it is great, but without someone enforcing this paradigm of software development and usage, what Good™ is it? If nobody enforced the Free Software licenses that went along with Free Software, then these licenses might as well not exist. The Free Software Foundation steps in here.
The Free Software Foundation also puts through a great deal of collaboration effort to see to it that there is Free Software available for people to use. If it weren't for the Free Software Foundation, I doubt I'd even be writing in this LiveJournal. In fact, I doubt LiveJournal would even exist. The Free Software Foundation is what started it all.
It was founded in 1984, and its primary mission was to write a complete and free operating system--the GNU (guh-NEW: GNU's Not UNIX) Operating System. Many people today use this operating system, only instead of being a complete operating system, a good portion of it is being used on top of a different operating system kernel. The "kernel" is the part of the operating system that tells the rest of the software how to talk to the hardware. It also sets up scheduling and other low-level tasks.
The kernel that is in wide use today that people are using with the GNU Operating System is called "Linux" (LIH-nuhx). Many people, however, confuse the operating system's kernel with the entire operating system, and end up calling the whole operating system "Linux". In actuality, they are using the GNU Operating System on top of the Linux Kernel. Therefore, it's appropriate to say they are using the GNU/Linux Operating System.
Okay. Enough about all of that. Down the the point. I think that, if this has affected you at all, you should consider using Free Software and a Free Operating System. If you do this, then NOBODY holds any right to tell you what you can and can't do with your computer but YOU (well, and your government, but that's for another discussion).
It would also be a Good Idea™ to apply for associate membership with the Free Software Foundation to show your support for their cause--and to help make sure they're still around in the future. Since they're a non-profit charity, all funds they receive go towards keeping the FSF operational. That's right, virtually all of the work that goes into all of this is "volunteer work".
There are many benefits that come with associate membership. You can take a look at what the FSF offers to its associate members at http://member.fsf.org/benefits.html.
Security Level: Public