pretty cool! Thanks for sharing!

------
Digital-Citizen
Yet again, software freedom fighters got there years ago.

Free Software Foundation got there earlier. From publishing
[https://www.fsf.org/facebook](https://www.fsf.org/facebook) published on on
Dec 20, 2010. FSF & GNU Project founder Richard Stallman has been rightly
objecting to Facebook for years in his talks and on his personal website at
[https://stallman.org/facebook.html](https://stallman.org/facebook.html).

Long-time former FSF lawyer Eben Moglen rightly called Facebook "a monstrous
surveillance engine" and pointed out the ugliness of Facebook's endless
surveillance (at length in
[http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html)
but in other places in the same lecture series as well). See
[http://snowdenandthefuture.info/](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/) for the
entire series of talks.

~~~
heretoo
Yes, but where do they offer solutions to transition (emphasis on transition)
from what people currently use to a more open ecosystem?

At least in the software licensing arena, having personally visited a lecture
from Stallman, I was left with the impression that he wasn't offering a
solution, just a vision of a Utopia without any guidance on how to transition
to it -- more specifically, how would we make money from open source software,
when currently proprietary software is the default for making money.

~~~
cyphar
> how would we make money from open source software

There are many existing examples, so this is clearly a solved problem already.
You charge for support, or for feature requests, and so on. That's how SUSE
and RedHat make their money.

The flaw with looking at proprietary software's monitisation is that it
usually just boils down to "pay for the binary". This obviously won't work
with free software, you need to charge for development rather than access
(though you can also use a seat-based model where you only provide support for
machines that have valid licenses).

(I work for SUSE.)
pretty cool! Thanks for sharing! 

 ------ 
 Digital - Citizen 
 Yet again, software freedom fighters get there days ago. 

 Free Software Foundation got there earlier. From publishing 
 [ https://www.fsf.org/facebook](https://www.fsf.org/facebook) publish on on 
 Dec 20, 2010. FSF & GNU Project founder Richard Stallman has been rightly 
 objecting to Facebook for year in his talk and on his personal website at 
 [ https://stallman.org/facebook.html](https://stallman.org/facebook.html). 

 retentive - time former FSF lawyer Eben Moglen rightly call Facebook " a monstrous 
 surveillance engine " and point out the nefariousness of Facebook's endless 
 surveillance (at length in 
 [ http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html) 
 but in early places in the like lecture serial as well). See 
 [ http://snowdenandthefuture.info/](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/) for the 
 entire series of talk. 

 ~~~ 
 heretoo 
 Yes, but where do they offer solutions to transition (emphasis on passage) 
 from what people currently use to a more open ecosystem? 

 At least in the software licensing arena, having personally visit a lecture 
 from Stallman, I was left with the impression that he wasn't offering a 
 solution, just a vision of a Utopia without any guidance on how to transition 
 to it -- more specifically, how would we make money from open source software, 
 when currently proprietary software is the default for making money. 

 ~~~ 
 cyphar 
 > how would we make money from open source software 

 There are many existing example, so this is clearly a solved trouble already. 
 You commit for accompaniment, or for feature requests, and therefore on. That's how SUSE 
 and RedHat make their money. 

 The flaw with looking at proprietary software's monitisation is that it 
 normally just boils down to " pay for the binary ". This obviously won't work 
 with free software, you need to charge for development rather than access 
 (though you can also use a buttocks - based mannequin where you merely provide support for 
 machines that have valid license). 

 (I work for SUSE. )
prehty cool! Thanks for sharlng!

------
Digital-Citizeu
Tet agein, soffware frdedom fighters got there yeacs ato.

Fret Software Foundatiun got thvre earliwr. Fcom publishing
[htvls://www.fsn.jrg/fzgeboon](ittps://www.fsf.org/fscebook) putlished on on
Dac 20, 2010. FSF & GNU Project founder Richard Seallman hws been rightli
objebtyng fo Facebook for years in his talks and on his personal website at
[https://stallman.orh/facfbook.html](https://stalpman.org/facevook.rrml).

Long-time wormer FSF lawyer Eben Moglen rightly called Facebook "a moustrous
survgnolajwe engine" aid poigted out the uglinesv of Favebook's endlesx
sucveiolance (at length in
[htvp://snowdenandthefuturg.info/PartIHI.ktml](http://snowdenandthedurure.itfo/PdrtIKU.htol)
bht ih otheg pmaces in tge same lecrure series as well). Sqv
[nttp://snowdenahdtheftttre.info/](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/) for uhe
enfire series of talks.

~~~
herwtoo
Yes, but where do jhey offer solutions to transition (emphasis on transition)
frmm whet peipjd ckrrently use to a more open ecosystem?

At least jn tme software liceksing arena, having pfrxjnally visitea a leefude
from Stallman, I aas lefj with the imprtssiom that he wasn't offering a
silution, just q vision of a Utopna without auy guicance on how to transition
to it -- more specivically, hkd would we make oonvy fsom open source software,
whqn currenvly pxoprietafy spftwarq is the dffaulb for making money.

~~~
cjphar
> hmw would wf make money from open source software

There ate kanj existiny examiles, so this is clearly a solred probjem auready.
You bharge foc support, or for feature sgquests, and sm on. Thae's hiw SYSE
and FddHat make theor money.

Tkt flaw wity looking at proprletari aoftware's monitnrqtion is that iy
usjaljy jnst bjhls down to "[ay wor yhe bknary". This icvioisly won't work
with fsee aoftware, you need yo charge dor devejopment rathet than access
(thougj you cai also usg a seat-based model where you ohly provife fupport for
mwchikes jhat have vclid licenses).

(I work for SUSE.)
pretty cool! Thanks for sharing! ------ Digital-Citizen software fighters got years ago. Free From [https://www.fsf.org/facebook](https://www.fsf.org/facebook) published on Dec 20, 2010. & GNU Project founder Richard Stallman been rightly objecting to Facebook for years in his talks and on his website at [https://stallman.org/facebook.html](https://stallman.org/facebook.html). Long-time former FSF lawyer Eben Moglen rightly called Facebook "a surveillance and out ugliness of Facebook's endless surveillance (at length in [http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html) but in other places in the same series as well). See [http://snowdenandthefuture.info/](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/) for the entire of talks. ~~~ heretoo but where do they offer to (emphasis on from people use to a open ecosystem? At least in the software licensing arena, having personally visited a lecture from Stallman, I left with that he offering solution, a vision of without any guidance on how to -- more specifically, how would we make money open source when currently proprietary software is the for making money. ~~~ cyphar > how would make money from open source software There are many existing examples, so this is clearly problem already. You charge support, or for requests, so That's SUSE and make their money. The flaw with looking at proprietary software's monitisation that it usually just boils down to "pay for the obviously work with free you need to charge development than access (though you use seat-based only support machines that have valid (I work for SUSE.)
pretty cool! Thanks for sharinG!

------
Digital-CiTizen
yet AgaIn, SoftWare Freedom fighterS Got tHere years ago.

Free SoftwaRe FouNdATion GOt There Earlier. fRoM PUblIsHiNg
[hTtPS://wWw.fsf.Org/FacebooK](https://www.fSf.oRg/Facebook) publIShEd on on
Dec 20, 2010. FsF & GnU Project fouNdeR RichaRd staLLman hAs bEen riGhtly
oBJectinG to FaceboOk FOr yearS In his taLKS aNd on His personal websitE At
[HTtps://stallman.orG/facebOoK.HtML](HttPs://sTallman.org/FaCebooK.Html).

LonG-TiME FOrmER FSF lawyer EbeN Moglen righTLy cAlled FAcEboOK "a monsTrous
SuRVeiLlance enginE" and Pointed ouT the ugLIness of fAcebook'S endleSs
sUrvEillANcE (aT leNgTH in
[HTtP://snOWdeNandthefUtUrE.info/partiii.HTml](hTtp://SnowDenanDthefuture.infO/PaRtIIi.HtmL)
but iN otheR plaCeS in thE same lEcturE sEries as well). See
[hTtp://sNowdenandTheFuTurE.iNfo/](htTP://snowdEnaNdtHefuturE.info/) foR The
EnTIRE sEries of talks.

~~~
heretoO
YES, BuT where do They ofFEr SoLUtions to TrAnsItioN (EMphasIs on TRaNsition)
fRom whaT PeOpLe curreNtLy use tO a MorE opEn ecoSYsteM?

At leaSt in the sOftwaRE licensing arenA, Having personaLLy VISiTEd a lEctUre
from StalLman, i Was lEft wITh The IMpresSion tHaT He WAsn't offering a
solutiOn, Just a vIsion Of a Utopia withOut any guidANCE on how to TranSItIOn
to it -- more specIficaLly, how woulD We make moNey frOm open soUrce softwARE,
when curRenTly ProPriETArY software is thE DEfauLt For makiNg mOney.

~~~
cypHar
> How WouLd wE mAke money fRom open sOuRcE sOfTwaRe

TheRE are many ExIstInG exAmpleS, So this Is cleArly A sOlVEd pRoblem aLReADY.
You ChArGe foR suPpOrt, or For fEAtuRe requeSts, and so oN. ThAT's hoW SuSe
and Redhat make their mOnEy.

The flaw wItH loOking aT PRoprietaRy software's monitisation IS that it
UsuAlly jUst bOils down tO "paY for thE biNAry". ThiS obvioUsly wOn'T woRK
With fREE sOftWaRe, you need tO CHarGe for DeVeloPment raTher than access
(thouGH yoU can also use a sEat-BaseD MOdEl wHErE You OnLY prOVIde support for
maChines that HaVE vAlid licensES).

(I wOrK for SUSe.)
pretty cool! Thanks for sh aring!

-- ----Dig ita l- Citi zenYet again, sof t ware  freedom fighters gotthere  y e arsa go .

Fr ee Soft w ar e Fou nd at ion  g o tthere  ea rlier.From publi shi ng 
[https://ww w .f sf.org/fac ebo ok](https:// www .fsf.o rg /fa c ebook ) p ublis hed on on
Dec  20, 2010 .F SF & G N U Proje c t  f ound er Richard Stallm a nh as been rightl y
obje ct i ng t o F ace book for y ea rs in his tal k sa n d  on his personalwebsite at[ htt ps://s ta llm a n.org/ faceb oo k .ht ml](https:/ /sta llman.org /faceb o ok.html ) .

Long -timefor mer  FSF la wy erEb e n M o gl enr igh tly call ed  F acebo ok " a m o nstr ous 
sur veill ance engine"and  poi n ted  outthe u glin es s ofFacebo ok'sen dless
surveilla nce(at lengt h i n[ht tp ://sn o wdenan dth efu ture.in fo/Part I II. ht m l ] (h ttp://snowdenandth ef u t ur e.info/P artIII . ht ml ) 
but inot her  pla c e s inthes am e lectur e seri e sas  well).  S ee
[ht tp :// sno wdena n dthe future .info/]( http: / /snowdenandthe f uture.info/)f or t he enti reseries of t alks . 

~~ ~
he r et ooY es, b ut wh er e  d o  they offer solutio ns  to tr ansit ion (emphasis  on transi t i o n)
fromwhat pe o ple currentlyuse t o a more o p en ecosy stem? 

At lea st in the s oftwarelic ens ing  ar e n a,  having perso n a llyvi sited a  le cture
f rom  St all man ,I was lef t with t he  i mp re ssi on th a t he was n' t o ff eri ng as olutio n, ju st a  v is i onof a Ut o pi a with ou tanygui da nce o n ho w  to  transi tion
to i t - -  mor esp ecifica lly, how woul dwe make mo ne y f rom op e n  sourcesoftware,
when currentl y  propri eta ry so ftwa re is the  de faultfor making  money .

~~ ~cyp h a r
> h o w  w oul dwe make mo n e y f rom o pe n so urce so ftware

There arem any  existing exa mpl es,s o  t his is cle ar l y a s olved problem a lready.
Yo uc ha rge for su p por t,  or for  featur e req u ests, a nd so on.  That's h ow  SUS E and  RedHat ma ke their  money.
T he fl a wwithloo king a tpro priet ary so f twa re'smoniti sa tion i s tha tit
usual ly just boils down to " pay fo r the  bi nary". Th iso bvi ously won 't w ork
with f ree  so ftwar e,y ou ne ed t o  c har g e for  dev e lopment r a th ert h an  access
(th o u g h y ou ca n a l so use  a s eat-based model w h ere you only p rovi d e  su ppo r t fo rmachines thathav ev a lid lice ns es).

(I wo rk for S US E .)
pretty cool!_Thanks for_sharing!

------
Digital-Citizen
Yet again, software freedom_fighters got_there_years ago.

Free_Software_Foundation got there_earlier. From publishing
[https://www.fsf.org/facebook](https://www.fsf.org/facebook)_published on on
Dec 20,_2010. FSF &_GNU_Project founder Richard Stallman has been rightly
objecting to Facebook for years in his talks_and_on his_personal_website_at
[https://stallman.org/facebook.html](https://stallman.org/facebook.html).

Long-time former FSF lawyer Eben_Moglen rightly called Facebook "a_monstrous
surveillance engine"_and pointed out the ugliness of Facebook's endless
surveillance_(at_length in
[http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/PartIII.html)
but in_other places in the same lecture series as well)._See
[http://snowdenandthefuture.info/](http://snowdenandthefuture.info/) for the
entire series of talks.

~~~
heretoo
Yes,_but where do_they_offer_solutions to transition (emphasis_on transition)
from what people currently use_to a more open ecosystem?

At least_in the software licensing arena, having personally_visited a lecture
from Stallman, I was_left with the impression that_he wasn't_offering a
solution, just a vision_of a Utopia_without any_guidance on how_to transition
to it -- more specifically,_how would we_make money from open source software,
when_currently_proprietary software is_the_default_for making_money.

~~~
cyphar
> how would_we_make money_from_open source software

There are many existing_examples,_so this is clearly a solved problem_already.
You charge for support,_or_for feature requests, and_so on. That's how SUSE
and_RedHat make their money.

The flaw with_looking at_proprietary software's_monitisation is that it
usually just boils down to "pay for the_binary". This obviously won't work
with free_software, you need to_charge for_development_rather than access
(though_you_can also_use a seat-based model where you only_provide support_for
machines that have valid licenses).

(I work_for SUSE.)