4:34 Perhaps more importantly, MINIX was only available under a non-Free licence: you had to buy a copy of Tanenbaum’s textbook in order to get the licence. Linus wanted something he could use and redistribute freely, and that others could also use and redistribute freely.
Great video! Something from a slightly different sphere in tech would be cool too. Like the making of C or of C++, I've tried learning a tiny bit about it but just learned how ubiquitous it is. Apperently there was B before? It's crazy to me the amount of foresight needed in designing something like this. Also, if you ever reached out to interview some of these legends- I wouldn't be surprised if they were down. I'm not sure if you've watched any of the honeypot documentaries, but your channel is much bigger so if there was any person you wished you could have a conversation with, it may be possible (and we'd love to see parts of it!)
“With software there are only two possibilites: either the users control the programme or the programme controls the users. If the programme controls the users, and the developer controls the programme, then the programme is an instrument of unjust power.” ― Richard Stallman
Your comment reminded me of my early days working with Hp Business basic. We had a custom medical billing program which of course was interpreted code. The first time I found you could stop the program in it's tracks and modify the code and proceed was astounding to me and of course very empowering. Sadly that system had one huge drawback. If there was even the slightest drop in power while doing something like a backup to tape, an entire days work could be lost in an instant. Possible moral, " With loss of great power,comes great humility.😜
A false dichotomy, also known as a false binary or false dilemma, is an informal fallacy that presents a limited number of options as if they were the only options available. This fallacy involves misrepresenting an issue by offering only two options when, in reality, there are more possibilities. The goal of a false dichotomy is to force people to choose between two extremes, often with the intention of presenting a misleading or biased perspective.
@@DocBolle but we have an option that is much near to perfect thanks to Richard Stallman's philosophy and political movement... an ocean of free/open source software and tools in almost every area that we have today is all thanks to him and his followers i don't think any other options could be even near to this level of freedom and power given to all people on earth for free probably extreme isn't always a bad thing we should choose extreme if it is a good thing and we can more or less realize it of course there were and there are people who think that is not a good thing... specially those who make (or want to make) money from proprietary software, but i think that humanity in total benefit much more from free/open source software
I've already commented this in another video of yours like this but I really do love this kind of content, it's great to know the history of how technology got here today, you should do a video on Bill Joy! He had a famous interview where he predicted ai being what it is today about 20 years ago, his life is a great subject. Again, love the content!
Literally watched the first episode about Linux a few hours ago, and this comes out a few hours later 😹 Good thing I subscribed, else I would've missed it 😏
Not to detract from Richards contributions❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ but the first true open source software was the patches that gave us the first hard drive for a personal computer. It was a 5meg hd for the coco in '80. I include the source in assembler free because I new I would not be around to support it's future development. It was also the beginning of the ever famous readme file which was first a readme.bas because we had no word processor. The code was distributed by bulletin board systems which were the precursor to the internet which I also founded. Thanks Rich...I'll buy you a beer if I see you.💕❤️🥰🤗😇,jpk
I wonder where 20 years from now, we'll look at OpenAi and what could have been and instead look at something like facebook's Llama open source code as a beginning for a new era of software.
5:17 Actually, Stallman was not keen on Linux at all. He was working on his own “Hurd” kernel, which was going to be have a “microkernel” architecture, which would supposedly make it much easier to develop, test and maintain. Better than an old-fashioned “monolithic” kernel, like Linux. Well, here we are, about 30 years later, and we’re still waiting for Hurd to reach production quality. Meanwhile, Linux started becoming popular just a couple of years after that initial announcement, and spread to a whole bunch of non-x86 architectures at the same time.
Linus is good at marketing and also a narcissist. Who names a program after himself? Because I can't tolerate narcissism I use freebsd. If GNU were complete, I would have stayed with it.
@@gauravshah89 He didn’t want to name it after himself. He wanted to call it “Freax”. He is certainly no “narcissist”, as the quality of his contributions can attest.
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 That freax story may as well be lie. What matters is that this man has a full goddamn kernel named after him. He also wants the complete system created with GNU and other userland to be named after him as his opposition to the term GNU/Linux shows. He calls the bash as the Linux command line (which in reality is the GNU command line). Linux has no command line. Linus wants to take credit for other people's work as well. He is a narcissist and hence I avoid using the kernel built by him and his cult followers as much as I can.
Remember people - If you use MS Windows or even macOS - YOU DON'T FULLY OWN OR CONTROL THE SYSTEM AND INFORMATION IN IT!!! Microsoft and Apple has the KEYS to your INFORMATION/DATA !
No, The GNU project was not the first widely recognized open source software project, even "as we understand the term today". GNU itself arose from an earlier attempt at open source by Stallman, and the whole impetus for the Manifesto was the legal issues that arose from that attempt. And the practice of sharing and collaborating on software code predates GNU by nearly 3 decades; dating to the first shared language compilers. Do say otherwise is to rob the GNU project of its own motivation, and to ignore the fact that in the US 'copyleft' wouldn't have been possible before a change in copyright law in 1980.
The problem: standing on the shoulders of giants. He could have never built this without the work of people who came before building proprietary software. Additionally, if the code can be freely shared, why charge money for it? and without a profit motive we wouldn’t be where we are today. You can’t even use where we are today as an example because proprietary software/hardware has made it possible to develop free software. If everything had already been free, computers wouldn’t exist.
You're not quite correct. The early years of computing, were a gray area, where, generally, more often than not, software was shared. Stallman came into computing around the time businesses started making things proprietary. Prior to that, the culture of, 'sharing,' was the norm, and implied. The real change was the shift to proprietary code. And it's that shift in the way of doing things, that bothered stallman. The giants were all sharing code and ideas, until the suits came in, and started locking everything down, because they saw an opportunity to exploit for profit, artificial scarcity.
@@sweetdrreemz Without profit motive, the hardware wouldn’t have even existed. Stallman is right about a lot of things. But be weary of those chasing utopia.
@@wlcrutch If I have an apple orchard, and you buy an apple from me, you planting a seed and growing your own apple tree, isn't chasing a, 'utopia.' On the other hand, if I sell you an apple, with a license that says, you aren't allow to grow any apple trees with the apple seeds, that's exploitation by creating artificial scarcity. And for a real world example, Monsanto actually does this. Computer hardware manufacturers were of course, making money by selling hardware. But, again, those giants you speak of, were all sharing code in the early days of computers. It's when proprietary code started becoming a thing, that Stallman was motivated towards becoming a sort of, 'Johnny Appleseed,' if you will. Ideas like, 'Right to Repair,' aren't, 'chasing a utopia,' they are an attempt towards a return to decency and autonomy. Now Bill Gate's Mansion and Steve Job's yacht; those are more akin to, 'chasing utopia.' The rest of us just want decency and the freedom to dictate autonomy in our digital lives; to be free from control and imbalances of power created by proprietary software. And by way of definition, attempting to achieve massive wealth, through exploitation via artificial scarcity, and succeeding, is probably more akin to chasing and achieving utopia.
@@squarerootof2 Nah just a a gross shitty person. We brought him to the school for a talk. I was head of the ACM club. I had to pick him up from the airport and take him everywhere for about a week. He treated people like shit. He talked down to every server when we went out to eat, he left half eaten food everywhere (he stayed at my house), never showered, just took stuff out of my house. He also refuses to use non open source software..himself. But had me or his assistant do everything for him. Make a call, use a map, look something up online for him, etc.
Richard Stallman was meant to be speaking at my school next week, but it unfortunately got cancelled due to some controversial things he said in the past :/
@bitcoinmx Richard Stallman is famously a paedophile; and GNU is not the worlds first anything. Every organization that this pervert associates himself with ends up in failure, because of his filmed interview where he claimed "12 was old enough" and his complete and utter refusal to apologize for or take back what he said. There are actual free and open-source projects without ties to perverts; and there are other open-source licenses which are more free, open, and accessible. (MIT and BSD Licenses are examples) GNU has lost all credibility as a 'reputable' association by continuing to stay connected to Stallman.
@Bitcoin México 🇲🇽 Marvin Minsky was an AI pioneer who went to Epstein's island and may have had sex with a girl there. Stallman got cancelled for saying Minsky may have been unaware that the girl was a sex slave of Epstein and thus he may have thought she was having sex with him willingly
it's a shame that people feel the need to misrepresent Stallman, GNU, and the Free Software Foundation's name by referring to his and their works of Free Software as "open source" software, whose principles Stallman does not align or agree with
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 the open source "movement" was a co-option of the original free software movement. it is designed to take issues of freedom, ethics, and morality out of the equation. the issue of free software is an inherently political and social one, championing for the freedom of its users. because of that, large corporations who develop proprietary software generally don't want to touch the idea with a ten foot pole, so "open source" was devised as a means of taking almost the same exact classification of software, and marketing it in more neutral terms; "open source" does not care about user freedom, it only concerns itself with the practical benefits of "open source" as a development model, i.e. that it is a superior model of software development, but they otherwise do not care about whether or not users have freedom in using it. open source software due to its permissive license can and often is turned proprietary by large corporations who use the software for their needs. in contrast, a license like the GPL is a copyleft license, which guarantees that any copy or derivative copy of the software must always include corresponding source code, in other words, a GPL'd piece of software can not be turned proprietary. so yes, while "open source" and "free software" cover almost the same range of software, their philosophies and motivations are different. one is concerned with user freedom, the other is not necessarily so. it is concerned with its practical advantages, and being marketable to large companies
@@shallex5744 The GPL doesn’t prevent commercialization by large companies, either. And the FSF is quite happy to include non-copyleft licences under its definition of “Free software”. Apart from that, you are just regurgitating the same old Stallman cant. So what exactly is the problem with “Open Source”, again?
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 i didn't say anything about "commercial". commercial and proprietary are not the same thing. there is nothing wrong with commercial software if it is free i didn't say there was a problem with open source software, i said that stallman does not align or agree with its philosophy, so it is wrong to attribute that name to him, which he finds insulting and tells people not to do
Holy Smoke! I have just realized that I have seen Richard Stallman, the man himself, speaking on YT about open-source software and avoiding things like Flash-enabled websites. Thanks for this.
Richard Stallman himself have said he's not the open source father and GNU is not open source, it is LIBRE SOFTWARE. Libre software has the liberty ideology Open source is for practical reasons only.
Lol its wild how much stuff GNU really made. Glibc, gcc, gdb, and all that stuff, they really just made themselves. Like I use them hella but its kinda wierd knowing they were the ones who wrote it all.
It would be cool to hear about how git was made. I'll also second some other comments about it being cool to hear about the the development of some languages like C.
Did you already cover the DEC PDP-11? Never enough PDP-11 (Or DEC) content on RU-vid. Birthplace of Unix, Grandfather to the x86 instruction set, Grandfather to the ISA/PCI-bus, and more.
the original GNU software project and FSF are still around even developing more software than ever given the whole family tree its original works have blossomed into and expanding/revising the terms of the GPL license whenever necessary
5:54 bash and shell are the same thing. bash is just one of the version of the shell, it's also a programming language, and if you write bash in posix compliet way your scripts will be unix compatible, meaning it will most likly run in any other shell. terminal emulator ar just the terminal is a program which shows you the shell and enables you to communicate with the kernel through the shell. There are many different terminals and many different shells available, but some of them are not posix complient, meaning they break compatibility with unix like OSes.
@@acatinatux9601 I don't think I can explain it any simpler, you need some head-on experience for it to click in your own mind. Anyway I can try to reword it once more: The Kernel (the main software in your OS which communicates with perephirals and provides hardware resources to other programs). The Shell - a software which allows the user to communicate with the kernel, it's also ensures that the entered command is synthetically valid and authenticated (allowed to be executed by this user in this exact scenario). A terminal - a program which draws the output of the shell to the screen. It's just a window, mainly provides visual features (like text colors etc). A console - a terminal which was attached to the mainframe. A mainframe (before computers became personal a single mainframe was providing computation to many remote terminals). I gave you some keywords, now if you want to go deeper do your own research.
Linus isn't bad he's just short sighted, he doesn't care about freedom that's never really been his thing, his relationship with software is purely mechanical, he just enjoys creating stuff and getting contributions back, that's all you get with Linus, he has no opinions on proprietary blobs, NSA malware, closed source software, data collection etc he just doesn't care, he's still an asset to the FOSS world but Stallman is a greater one.
Forest, when I saw the title of your video I thought for sure, someone is going to provide a history of DECUS, Dr. Dobs Journal and other freely distributed open source software of the 1970's. But I guess the world didn't exist before you were born.
