On Dec 13, 2007, at 5:15 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 09:30:28PM +0100, Marc Balmer wrote:

quoted text
>> while we do provide a free operating system,

>> http://www.gnu.org/software/for-windows.html

>> makes it total clear that you are a hypocrite and a liar.

>

> And makes it total clear that you are the hypocrite and a liar.

>

> Choice quotes from that page:

>

> 	Microsoft Windows is a clear and instructive example of non-free

> 	software.

>

> 	Using free software on Microsoft Windows (or any non-free

> 	operating system) is the first step towards freedom, but it does

> 	not get you all the way there.

>

> 	So the next step is to replace Windows with a free operating

> 	system such as GNU/Linux[1].

>

> 	However, on this page we're concerned with the first step.

>

> [1] Now I see why you have such animosity towards this page...

RMS claims that OpenBSD does not meet his criteria as a recommendable

free operating system since the userland ports infrastructure contains

references to non-free software.  As your choice quotes demonstrate,

Richard Stallman, the FSF and the GNU project advocate the use of non-

free operating systems.  They go so far as to provide binary

executables on their own official servers.
It doesn't get any more hypocritical than that.
---

Jason Dixon

DixonGroup Consulting

http://www.dixongroup.net