www-commits
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

www/philosophy why-call-it-the-swindle.html


From: Pavel Kharitonov
Subject: www/philosophy why-call-it-the-swindle.html
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 11:40:00 +0000

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Pavel Kharitonov <ineiev>       13/09/25 11:39:59

Modified files:
        philosophy     : why-call-it-the-swindle.html 

Log message:
        GNUnify.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2

Patches:
Index: why-call-it-the-swindle.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- why-call-it-the-swindle.html        25 Sep 2013 02:17:53 -0000      1.1
+++ why-call-it-the-swindle.html        25 Sep 2013 11:39:50 -0000      1.2
@@ -2,8 +2,7 @@
 <!-- Parent-Version: 1.75 -->
 <title>Why call it the Swindle  
 - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
-<!-- begin /server/initial-translations-list.html -->
-<!-- end /server/initial-translations-list.html -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/gnun/initial-translations-list.html" -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
 
 <h2>Why call it the Swindle</h2>
@@ -11,40 +10,111 @@
 <p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
 Stallman</strong></a></p>
 
-<p>I go out of my way to call nasty things by names that criticize them. I 
call Apple's user-subjugating computers the "iThings," and Amazon's abusive 
e-reader the "Swindle." Sometimes I refer to Microsoft's operating system as 
"Losedows"; I referred to Microsoft's first operating system as 
"MS-Dog."<sup>1</sup> Of course, I do this to vent my feelings and have fun. 
But this fun is more than personal; it serves an important purpose. Mocking our 
enemies recruits the power of humor into our cause.</p>
-
-<p>Twisting a name is disrespectful. If we respected the makers of these 
products, we would use the names that they chose … and that's exactly the 
point. These noxious products deserve our contempt, not our respect. Every 
proprietary program subjects its users to some entity's power, but nowadays 
most of them go beyond that to spy on users, restrict them and even push them 
around: the trend is for products to get nastier. These products deserve to be 
wiped out. Those with DRM ought to be illegal.</p>
-
-<p>When we mention them, we should show that we condemn them, and what easier 
way than by twisting their names? If we don't do that, it is all too easy to 
mention them and fail to present the condemnation. When the product comes up in 
the middle of some other topic, for instance, explaining at greater length that 
the product is bad might seem like a long digression.</p>
-
-<p>To mention these products by name and fail to condemn them has the effect 
of legitimizing them, which is the opposite of what they call for.</p>
-
-<p>Companies choose names for products as part of a marketing plan. They 
choose names they think people will be likely to repeat, then invest millions 
of dollars in marketing campaigns to make people repeat and think about those 
names -- usually these marketing campaigns are intended to convince people to 
admire the products based on their superficial attractions and overlook the 
harm they do.</p>
-
-<p>Every time we call these products by the names the companies use, we 
contribute to their marketing campaigns. Repeating those names is active 
support for the products; twisting them denies the products our support.</p>
-
-<p>Other terminology besides product names can raise a similar issue. For 
instance, DRM refers to building technology products to restrict their users 
for the benefit of someone else. This inexcusable practice deserves our burning 
hatred until we wipe it out. Naturally, those responsible gave it a name that 
frames the issue from their point of view: "Digital Rights Management." This 
name is the basis of a public relations campaign that aims to win support from 
entities ranging from governments to the W3C.<sup>2</sup></p>
-
-<p>To use their term is to take their side. If that's not the side you're on, 
why give it your implicit support?</p>
-
-<p>We take the users' side, and from the users' point of view, what these 
malfeatures manage are not rights but restrictions. So we call them "Digital 
Restrictions Management."</p>
-
-<p>Neither of those terms is neutral: choose a term, and you choose a side. 
Please choose the users' side and please let it show.</p>
-
-<p>Once, a man in the audience at my speech claimed that the name "Digital 
Rights Management" was the official name of "DRM," the only possible correct 
name, because it was the first name. He argued that as a consequence it was 
wrong for us to say "Digital Restrictions Management."</p>
-
-<p>Those who make a product or carry out a business practice typically choose 
a name for it before we even know it exists. If their temporal precedence 
obligated us to use their name, they would have an additional automatic 
advantage, on top of their money, their media influence and their technological 
position. We would have to fight them with our mouths tied behind our backs.</p>
-
-<p>Some people feel a distaste for twisting names and say it sounds "juvenile" 
or "unprofessional." What they mean is, it doesn't sound humorless and stodgy 
-- and that's a good thing, because we would not have laughter on our side if 
we tried to sound "professional." Fighting oppression is far more serious than 
professional work, so we've got to add comic relief. It calls for real 
maturity, which includes some childishness, not "acting like an adult."</p>
-
-<p>If you don't like our choice of name parodies, you can invent your own. The 
more, the merrier. Of course, there are other ways to express condemnation. If 
you want to sound "professional," you can show it in other ways. They can get 
the point across, but they require more time and effort, especially if you 
don't make use of mockery. Take care this does not this lead you to skimp; 
don't let the pressure against such "digression" push you into insufficiently 
criticizing the nasty things you mention, because that would have the effect of 
legitimizing them.</p>
-
-<sup>1</sup> Take action against these products:
-<a href="u.fsf.org/ithings">u.fsf.org/ithings</a>, <a 
href="u.fsf.org/swindle">u.fsf.org/swindle</a>,<br>
-<a href="u.fsf.org/ebookslist">u.fsf.org/ebookslist</a><br>
-<a href="upgradefromwindows.org">upgradefromwindows.org</a><br>
-<br>
-<sup>2</sup> <a href="u.fsf.org/drm">u.fsf.org/drm</a>
+<p>I go out of my way to call nasty things by names that criticize
+them. I call Apple's user-subjugating computers the
+&ldquo;iThings,&rdquo; and Amazon's abusive e-reader the
+&ldquo;Swindle.&rdquo; Sometimes I refer to Microsoft's operating
+system as &ldquo;Losedows&rdquo;; I referred to Microsoft's first
+operating system as &ldquo;MS-Dog.&rdquo;[<a href="#f1">1</a>] Of
+course, I do this to vent my feelings and have fun. But this fun is
+more than personal; it serves an important purpose. Mocking our
+enemies recruits the power of humor into our cause.</p>
+
+<p>Twisting a name is disrespectful. If we respected the makers of
+these products, we would use the names that they chose &hellip; and that's
+exactly the point. These noxious products deserve our contempt, not
+our respect. Every proprietary program subjects its users to some
+entity's power, but nowadays most of them go beyond that to spy on
+users, restrict them and even push them around: the trend is for
+products to get nastier. These products deserve to be wiped out. Those
+with DRM ought to be illegal.</p>
+
+<p>When we mention them, we should show that we condemn them, and what
+easier way than by twisting their names? If we don't do that, it is
+all too easy to mention them and fail to present the condemnation.
+When the product comes up in the middle of some other topic, for
+instance, explaining at greater length that the product is bad might
+seem like a long digression.</p>
+
+<p>To mention these products by name and fail to condemn them has the
+effect of legitimizing them, which is the opposite of what they call
+for.</p>
+
+<p>Companies choose names for products as part of a marketing plan.
+They choose names they think people will be likely to repeat, then
+invest millions of dollars in marketing campaigns to make people
+repeat and think about those names&mdash;usually these marketing
+campaigns are intended to convince people to admire the products based
+on their superficial attractions and overlook the harm they do.</p>
+
+<p>Every time we call these products by the names the companies use,
+we contribute to their marketing campaigns. Repeating those names is
+active support for the products; twisting them denies the products our
+support.</p>
+
+<p>Other terminology besides product names can raise a similar issue.
+For instance, DRM refers to building technology products to restrict
+their users for the benefit of someone else. This inexcusable practice
+deserves our burning hatred until we wipe it out. Naturally, those
+responsible gave it a name that frames the issue from their point of
+view: &ldquo;Digital Rights Management.&rdquo; This name is the basis
+of a public relations campaign that aims to win support from entities
+ranging from governments to the W3C.[<a href="#f2">2</a>]</p>
+
+<p>To use their term is to take their side. If that's not the side
+you're on, why give it your implicit support?</p>
+
+<p>We take the users' side, and from the users' point of view, what
+these malfeatures manage are not rights but restrictions. So we call
+them &ldquo;Digital Restrictions Management.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Neither of those terms is neutral: choose a term, and you choose a
+side. Please choose the users' side and please let it show.</p>
+
+<p>Once, a man in the audience at my speech claimed that the name
+&ldquo;Digital Rights Management&rdquo; was the official name of
+&ldquo;DRM,&rdquo; the only
+possible correct name, because it was the first name. He argued that
+as a consequence it was wrong for us to say &ldquo;Digital Restrictions
+Management.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Those who make a product or carry out a business practice typically
+choose a name for it before we even know it exists. If their temporal
+precedence obligated us to use their name, they would have an
+additional automatic advantage, on top of their money, their media
+influence and their technological position. We would have to fight
+them with our mouths tied behind our backs.</p>
+
+<p>Some people feel a distaste for twisting names and say it sounds
+&ldquo;juvenile&rdquo; or &ldquo;unprofessional.&rdquo; What they mean
+is, it doesn't sound humorless and stodgy&mdash;and that's a good
+thing, because we would not have laughter on our side if we tried to
+sound &ldquo;professional.&rdquo; Fighting oppression is far more
+serious than professional work, so we've got to add comic relief.  It
+calls for real maturity, which includes some childishness, not
+&ldquo;acting like an adult.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>If you don't like our choice of name parodies, you can invent your
+own. The more, the merrier. Of course, there are other ways to express
+condemnation. If you want to sound &ldquo;professional,&rdquo; you can
+show it in other ways.  They can get the point across, but they
+require more time and effort, especially if you don't make use of
+mockery. Take care this does not this lead you to skimp; don't let the
+pressure against such &ldquo;digression&rdquo; push you into
+insufficiently criticizing the nasty things you mention, because that
+would have the effect of legitimizing them.</p>
+
+<h3>Footnotes</h3>
+
+<ol>
+<li id="f1">Take action against these products:
+<a href="https://u.fsf.org/ithings";>u.fsf.org/ithings</a>,
+<a href="https://u.fsf.org/swindle";>u.fsf.org/swindle</a>,
+<a href="https://u.fsf.org/ebookslist";>u.fsf.org/ebookslist</a>,
+<a href="https://upgradefromwindows.org";>upgradefromwindows.org</a>
+</li>
+<li id="f2"><a href="https://u.fsf.org/drm";>u.fsf.org/drm</a></li>
+</ol>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -101,7 +171,7 @@
 
 <p>Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2013/09/25 02:17:53 $
+$Date: 2013/09/25 11:39:50 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]