[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy words-to-avoid.html
|
From: |
Richard M. Stallman |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy words-to-avoid.html |
|
Date: |
Sat, 21 Apr 2018 14:15:52 -0400 (EDT) |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Richard M. Stallman <rms> 18/04/21 14:15:52
Modified files:
philosophy : words-to-avoid.html
Log message:
(Sharing (personal data)): New item.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.246&r2=1.247
Patches:
Index: words-to-avoid.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html,v
retrieving revision 1.246
retrieving revision 1.247
diff -u -b -r1.246 -r1.247
--- words-to-avoid.html 1 Jan 2018 06:22:02 -0000 1.246
+++ words-to-avoid.html 21 Apr 2018 18:15:51 -0000 1.247
@@ -104,6 +104,8 @@
|<span class="gnun-split"></span><!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM --> “<a
href="#SellSoftware">Sell software</a>”
|<span class="gnun-split"></span><!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM --> “<a
+ href="#SharingPersonalData">Sharing (personal data)</a>”
+|<span class="gnun-split"></span><!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM --> “<a
href="#SharingEconomy">Sharing economy</a>”
|<span class="gnun-split"></span><!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM --> “<a
href="#Skype">Skype</a>”
@@ -393,14 +395,12 @@
gasoline that your car burns today versus another drop that it burned
last week.</p>
-<p>Do we want people to think of writings (software, news, any other
-kind) as a commodity, with the assumption that there is nothing
-special about any one story, article, program, or song? Should we
-treat them as fungible? That is the twisted viewpoint of an
-economist, or the accountant of a publishing company. It is no
-surprise that proprietary software would like you to think of the use
-of software as a commodity. Their twisted viewpoint comes through
-clearly
+<p>What does it mean to think of works of authorship as a commodity,
+with the assumption that there is nothing special about any one story,
+article, program, or song? That is the twisted viewpoint of the owner
+or the accountant of a publishing company. It is no surprise that
+proprietary software would like you to think of the use of software as
+a commodity. Their twisted viewpoint comes through clearly
in <a
href="http://www.businessinsider.com/former-google-exec-launches-sourcepoint-with-10-million-series-a-funding-2015-6";>this
article</a>, which also refers to publications as
“<a href="#Content">content</a>.”</p>
@@ -414,32 +414,38 @@
they may see such restrictions as natural.</p>
<p>
-It also encourages the acceptation of “streaming”
-services, which use DRM to perversely limit listening to music so that
-it fits the assumptions of the word “consume.”</p>
+It also encourages the acceptance of “streaming” services,
+which use DRM to perversely limit listening to music, or watching
+video, to squeeze those activities into the assumptions of the word
+“consume.”</p>
-<p>
Why is this perverse usage spreading? Some may feel that the term
sounds sophisticated, but rejecting it with cogent reasons can appear
-even more sophisticated. Others may be acting from business interests
-(their own, or their employers'). Their use of the term in
-prestigious forums gives the impression that it's the
+even more sophisticated. Some want to generalize about all kinds of
+media, but the usual English verbs (“read,” “listen
+to,” “watch”) don't do this. Others may be acting
+from business interests (their own, or their employers'). Their use
+of the term in prestigious forums gives the impression that it's the
“correct” term.</p>
<p>
To speak of “consuming” music, fiction, or any other
-artistic works is to treat them as products rather than as art. If
-you don't want to spread that attitude, you would do well to avoid
-using the term “consume” for them. What to use instead?
-We prefer specific verbs such as “listen to”,
-“watch”, “read” or “look at”,
-since they help to restrain the tendency to overgeneralize.</p>
-
-<p>When it is absolutely necessary to generalize about all kinds of
-works and all media, we recommend “experience” or
-“give attention to” for an artistic work or a work to
-present a point of view, and “use” for a practically
-useful work.</p>
+artistic works is to treat them as commodities rather than as art. Do
+we want to think of published works that way? Do we want to encourage
+the public to do so?</p>
+
+<p>Those who answer no, please join me in shunning the term
+“consume” for this.</p>
+
+<p>What to use instead? You can use specific verbs such as
+“read,” “listen to,” “watch” or
+“look at,” since they help to restrain the tendency to
+overgeneralize.</p>
+
+<p>If you insist on generalizing, you can use the expression
+“attend to,” which requires less of a stretch than
+“consume.” For a work meant for practical use,
+“use” is best.</p>
<p>See also the following entry.</p>
@@ -1120,6 +1126,18 @@
<!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM -->
<!-- GNUN-SORT-BEGIN-KEY -->
+<h3 id="SharingPersonalData">“Sharing (personal data)”</h3>
+<!-- GNUN-SORT-END-KEY -->
+<p>
+When companies manipulate or lure people into revealing personal data
+and thus ceding their privacy, please don't refer to this as
+“sharing.” We use the term “sharing” to refer
+to noncommercial cooperation, including noncommercial redistribution
+of exact copies of published works, and we say this is <em>good</em>.
+Please don't apply that word to a practice which is harmful and dangerous.</p>
+
+<!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM -->
+<!-- GNUN-SORT-BEGIN-KEY -->
<h3 id="SharingEconomy">“Sharing economy”</h3>
<!-- GNUN-SORT-END-KEY -->
<p>
@@ -1330,7 +1348,7 @@
<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2018/01/01 06:22:02 $
+$Date: 2018/04/21 18:15:51 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
- www/philosophy words-to-avoid.html,
Richard M. Stallman <=