www/philosophy rms-kernel-trap-interview.html

[Therese Godefroy]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Therese Godefroy <th_g> 17/07/28 08:25:29

Modified files:
        philosophy     : rms-kernel-trap-interview.html 

Log message:
        s,non-free,nonfree,

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/rms-kernel-trap-interview.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.3&r2=1.4

Patches:
Index: rms-kernel-trap-interview.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/rms-kernel-trap-interview.html,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -b -r1.3 -r1.4
--- rms-kernel-trap-interview.html      28 Jul 2017 12:17:03 -0000      1.3
+++ rms-kernel-trap-interview.html      28 Jul 2017 12:25:29 -0000      1.4
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
 enough to speak with me at length, discussing his first contact with
 computers, his time in the AI lab, the current state of the GNU Hurd,
 his current role in the Free Software Foundation, the problems with
-non-free software, and much more. The following words offer much
+nonfree software, and much more. The following words offer much
 insight into how we got here, and what challenges we still face.</p>
 
 <h3>Background</h3>
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@
 
 <h3>The GNU Project And The Free Software Foundation</h3>
 
-<p><strong>JA</strong>: The story of your encounter with non-free
+<p><strong>JA</strong>: The story of your encounter with nonfree
 printer software in the early 80's is very well known. This incident
 ultimately resulted in your founding the GNU Project in 1984, and the
 Free Software Foundation in 1985. You have remained quite active in
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: Software patents. The Digital
 Millennium Copyright Act. The broadcast flag. Cards with secret
-specifications. Non-free Java platforms.</p>
+specifications. Nonfree Java platforms.</p>
 
 <p>In other words, organized efforts by people with power to put an
 end to our freedom.</p>
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: Free software and open source
 are the slogans of two different movements with different
 philosophies. In the free software movement, our goal is to be free to
-share and cooperate. We say that non-free software is antisocial
+share and cooperate. We say that nonfree software is antisocial
 because it tramples the users' freedom, and we develop free software
 to escape from that.</p>
 
@@ -244,15 +244,15 @@
 you call it&mdash;if, that is, the distro you're using really is
 free. But the only free GNU/Linux distro I know of is UTUTO. Most
 versions of the GNU/Linux system are not entirely free software. All
-the commercial distributors put in non-free software. And then there's
-Debian which keeps all the non-free software clearly separated, but
+the commercial distributors put in nonfree software. And then there's
+Debian which keeps all the nonfree software clearly separated, but
 does distribute it. And those who sell Debian GNU/Linux often add a
-few non-free programs as a &ldquo;bonus&rdquo;&#8230; They invite you
+few nonfree programs as a &ldquo;bonus&rdquo;&#8230; They invite you
 to think it's a bonus you're getting that your freedom is no longer
 complete.</p>
 
 <p>If you happen to be running a version of GNU/Linux which doesn't
-have the non-free software, then the situation is not materially
+have the nonfree software, then the situation is not materially
 changed by the name you use. But the situation we're likely to find
 ourselves in five years from now depends on what we teach each other
 today.</p>
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: Many of the programs you were the original
 author for are key components of much software development today (free
-and non-free alike), such as the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), the
+and nonfree alike), such as the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), the
 GNU symbolic debugger (gdb), and GNU Emacs. All of these projects have
 remained under constant development over the years. How closely have
 you followed the many projects you've started, and how do you feel
@@ -418,56 +418,56 @@
 
 <p>That was ages ago.</p>
 
-<h3>Non-Free Software</h3>
+<h3>Nonfree Software</h3>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: What is your reaction to tools such as gcc,
-gdb and GNU Emacs being used for the development of non-free
+gdb and GNU Emacs being used for the development of nonfree
 software?</p>
 
-<p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: Any development of non-free
+<p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: Any development of nonfree
 software is harmful and unfortunate, whether it uses GNU tools or
 other tools. Whether it is good or bad, in the long term, for the
 future of computer users' freedom that one can use these tools to
-develop non-free software is a question whose answer I could only
+develop nonfree software is a question whose answer I could only
 guess at.</p>
 
-<p><strong>JA</strong>: How do you react to the opinion that non-free
+<p><strong>JA</strong>: How do you react to the opinion that nonfree
 software is justified as a means for raising dollars that can then be
 put into the development of completely new software, money that
 otherwise may not have been available, and thus creating software that
 may have never been developed?</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: This is no justification at
-all. A non-free program systematically denies the users the freedom to
+all. A nonfree program systematically denies the users the freedom to
 cooperate; it is the basis of an antisocial scheme to dominate
 people. The program is available lawfully only to those who will
 surrender their freedom. That's not a contribution to society, it's a
 social problem. It is better to develop no software than to develop
-non-free software.</p>
+nonfree software.</p>
 
 <p>So if you find yourself in that situation, please don't follow that
-path. Please don't write the non-free program&mdash;please do
+path. Please don't write the nonfree program&mdash;please do
 something else instead. We can wait till someone else has the chance
 to develop a free program to do the same job.</p>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: What about the programmers&#8230;</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: What about them? The programmers
-writing non-free software? They are doing something antisocial. They
+writing nonfree software? They are doing something antisocial. They
 should get some other job.</p>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: Such as?</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: There are thousands of different
-jobs people can have in society without developing non-free
+jobs people can have in society without developing nonfree
 software. You can even be a programmer. Most paid programmers are
 developing custom software&mdash;only a small fraction are developing
-non-free software. The small fraction of proprietary software jobs are
+nonfree software. The small fraction of proprietary software jobs are
 not hard to avoid.</p>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: What is the distinction there?</p>
 
-<p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: Non-free software is meant to be
+<p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: Nonfree software is meant to be
 distributed to the public. Custom software is meant to be used by one
 client. There's no ethical problem with custom software as long as
 you're respecting your client's freedom.</p>
@@ -540,7 +540,7 @@
 they're not going to.</p>
 
 <p>It's inconsistent and future to subject millions of people to the
-loss of freedom that non-free software imposes, just so that a tiny
+loss of freedom that nonfree software imposes, just so that a tiny
 segment of society will have better paying jobs, when we're ignoring
 all the rest of society with their lousy jobs.</p>
 
@@ -579,7 +579,7 @@
 freedom as Unix does not.</p>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: Do you believe that free software has caught
-up with non-free software?</p>
+up with nonfree software?</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: To a large extent, but not
 totally.</p>
@@ -622,22 +622,22 @@
 trying to only use free software to utilize&#8230;</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: To connect to a server that's
-running non-free software?</p>
+running nonfree software?</p>
 
 <p>I don't feel I need to refuse to connect to a server that is
-running non-free software. For that matter, I won't refuse to type on
-a computer that's running non-free software. If I were visiting your
+running nonfree software. For that matter, I won't refuse to type on
+a computer that's running nonfree software. If I were visiting your
 house for a little and you had a Windows machine, I would use it if it
 were important for me to use it. I wouldn't be willing to have Windows
 on my computer, and you shouldn't have it on yours, but I can't change
 that by refusing to touch the machine.</p>
 
-<p>If you connect to a server that runs non-free software, you're not
+<p>If you connect to a server that runs nonfree software, you're not
 the one whose freedom is harmed. It's the server operator who has lost
 freedom to the restrictions on the software he runs. This is
 unfortunate, and I hope that he switches to free software; we're
 working to bring that about. But I don't feel you have to boycott his
-site until he switches. He isn't making you use the non-free
+site until he switches. He isn't making you use the nonfree
 software.</p>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: Back to my earlier question, as a specific
@@ -655,7 +655,7 @@
 
 <h3>The Workplace</h3>
 
-<p><strong>JA</strong>: What if your job requires you to use non-free
+<p><strong>JA</strong>: What if your job requires you to use nonfree
 software?</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: I would quit that job. Would you
@@ -670,14 +670,14 @@
 <h3>Embedded Applications</h3>
 
 <p><strong>JA</strong>: Embedded applications have become more and
-more prevalent in society. Is it possible to completely avoid non-free
+more prevalent in society. Is it possible to completely avoid nonfree
 software and still remain in-touch with current technologies?</p>
 
 <p><strong>Richard Stallman</strong>: I don't know if it is possible,
 but if it is not, that is something we need to change. Once an
 embedded system can talk to a network, or users normally load software
 into it, its software needs to be free. For instance, if it uses
-non-free software to talk to the network, you can't trust it not to
+nonfree software to talk to the network, you can't trust it not to
 spy on you.</p>
 
 <h3>SCO</h3>
@@ -824,7 +824,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2017/07/28 12:17:03 $
+$Date: 2017/07/28 12:25:29 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>