History of FOSS and stuff

[Greg Rundlett]

What I was trying to point out with the comment about the ls command
is that the little things matter.   The common mantra that 'We all
stand on the shoulders of giants', while true, makes it easy to
overlook the fact that bigger accomplishments are themselves standing
on the thousand tiny shoulders of ordinary people.  And, although I
didn't explicitly discuss the history of how the ls command was
written for GNU/Linux (because I don't know those details), I took it
for granted that RMS had a wealth of prior art to draw from.  There is
always a precedent - sometimes obscure, most of the time obvious.
Why didn't RMS use ls code from BSD?  I don't know the details of what
happened, but if it is accurate to say that RMS "re-invented the
wheel" in a clean-room environment to avoid copyright problems, then
that explains it perfectly.  He would have loved to use existing code,
but it was (potentially) tainted with legal encumbrance - meaning he
was prevented from using the code freely.  All the little
things/people matter, and you can't have a free system if any of the
pieces might be non-free.  Although Richard Stallman didn't invent
freedom, he did figure out a way to use the U.S. and international
legal framework to ensure freedom of speech as expressed in computer
language.  It's quite hard to be first at anything.

Thomas Jefferson wasn't the first person to promote public education
(for argument sake, consider it like 'freedom in instructional
speech').  Charlemagne did it in the 8th and 9th century [1][2].
Charlemagne wasn't first, since Plato created the Acedemy in 385 BC
[3].  Plato wasn't first, because he learned from Socrates.  Socrates
wasn't first; etc.

The irony of comparing present-day software freedoms with freedom of
education is how similar the (battle) story lines are.  Take this
quote from a wikipedia article about the sophists of ancient Greece
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophism#Sophists_of_Ancient_Greece):

=== Excerpt about the Sophists ==
"Many of them taught their skills for a price. Due to the importance
of such skills in the litigious social life of Athens, practitioners
often commanded very high fees. The practice of taking fees, along
with the sophists practice of questioning the existence and roles of
traditional deities (this was done to make "the weaker argument appear
the stronger") and investigating into the nature of the heavens and
the earth prompted a popular reaction against them. Their attacks
against Socrates (in fictional prosecution speeches) prompted a
vigorous condemnation from his followers, including Plato and
Xenophon, as there was a popular view of Socrates as a sophist. Their
attitude, coupled with the wealth garnered by many of the sophists,
eventually led to popular resentment against sophist practitioners and
the ideas and writings associated with sophism."

"In comparison, Socrates accepted no fee, instead adopting a
self-effacing posture, which he exemplified by Socratic questioning...
"

=== Modern version ===

"Many of them sold their software for a price.  Due to the importance
of such skills in the litigious social life of the world, vendors
often commanded very high fees.  The practice of taking fees, along
with the vendors practice of questioning the existence and roles of
traditional sharing among hobbyists (this was done to make "the weaker
argument appear the stronger") and calling their own customers thieves
[5] prompted a popular reaction against them.  Their attacks against
Stallman (in fictional comics [6] and theatrical reenactments [7])
prompted a vigorous rotflmao laughter from XKCD followers and Stallman
supporters.  Vendor attitude [8][9], coupled with the wealth garnered
by many of the vendors, eventually led to popular resentment against
proprietary software practitioners and the ideas and writings
associated with intellectual slavery."

"In comparison, Stallman wrote software with four freedoms, adopting
the true American Way [10], which he exemplified by writing the GPL v3
in an open collaborative process.

++++

The GPL was and is a solution to avoid the legal turf wars that plague
software.  It is the solution that (helps) prevent superior technology
(e.g. the TCP/IP stack of BSD) from being marginalized, or locked up,
and eventually forgotten.  When all software is covered by the GPL,
you just write code according to the problem you're trying to solve
without worrying.  Or in other words, software is practiced by
programmers, users and communities (including business, governments
and universities) not lawyers.  Just like education should be
something anyone -- not just monks, or the privileged -- can practice.

I'm glad we're talking about the history of FOSS, because as they say,
those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.  I'm also glad
to think about what the future holds as we continue to see the GPL,
Linux and Free software gain wider acceptance and traction -- in
business and industry, in government, in education, and on desktops,
mobile platforms and devices of all kinds. [11] [12]

-- Greg

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne#Education_reforms
[2] http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/Santiago/histchrl.html
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophism#Sophists_of_Ancient_Greece
[5] http://www.digibarn.com/collections/newsletters/homebrew/V2_02/homebrew_V2_02_p2.jpg
[6] http://xkcd.com/225/
[7] http://www.boingboing.net/2007/10/21/ninjas-attack-richar.html
[8] http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-896171.html
[9] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_cancer/
[10] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/gpl-american-way.html
[11] http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6229131777.html
[12] http://www.linux-foundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment.php