Paul Greidanus wrote:

quoted text
>

> Hi Richard,

>

> I've been marginally following the discussion on OpenBSD and FSF and

> of the noise related.

Speaking of FSF.. What if I want to start MY OWN foundation that

guarantees 7 freedoms, or 2 freedoms according to my personal opinion

and philosophy on freedom? And what if I wanted to call it FSF because

according to ME, that was free software? That is my personal opinion

only, of what freedom is. Rather instead of it being called FSF, it is

called by my sur name... the Stallmanist Foundation or the Stallmanism

Philosophy. It is NOT the 'free software foundation' since it is only a

personal opinion. It is not a 'strawberry plant' just because I think

raspberries look just like strawberries in my personal opinion.
Mary's freedom might be different than Jane's freedom.. so one girl's

free philosophy might not be the same as another's free philosophy.
The free software foundation shall not be called free software

foundation.. it shall be called Stallmanist Foundation and the

philosophies are to be outlined as Stallmanism.. not free software. Make

this change immediately in communications and conversation. Do not call

any GNU software 'free software' please, everyone.
If anyone sees the term 'free software' being used, please correct them

and make a big point about it being incorrect and unethical.

One must call it Stallmanism, truthfully and ethically.
For more info,  see GNG (gng is not gnu, and gng is not gng).

  http://z505.com/gng/stallmanism.htm
> I'm curious how you can recomend an OS, like gNewSense that only runs

quoted text
> on non-free hardware, that

> has required non-free software to be used in it's creation?  Every

> time you buy a product from Intel, a portion of that money goes to

> companies like Cadence and Mentor Graphics.  Now this is non-free in a

> monetary sense, but there are also ethical freedom implications.

>

> There are tools that can replace these non-free programs, like gEDA,

> which can be used to build processors and components, like are

> available on opencores.net and opensparc.net. (I don't know about

> these as far as free..)  Currently Ubuntu works on ultraSparc-III,

> while gNewSense does not.  This is telling people that they need to

> support non-free software, to even use your free software recomendations?

>

> I do understand that hardware is more difficult and expensive to copy

> and distriubute then software, but ethical objections should not be

> limited by difficulty.  

Trees in the forest are free.. no one said that trees had to be owned by

some government.. they are ours, if we put up a FTF (free tree foundation).
If I take a tree, and turn it into a table.. this table will last me 20

years before it needs a repaint or re-varnish.
Much more free than software. No charging for the table. Only charge for

the gas it took to get the table from Point A to Point B. Do not

purchase tables from your store. It is unethical because you do not

receive tree seeds nor should you pay for proprietary wood that doesn't

even tell you which trees they used to build the table. Only pay a

consultant for shipping the table TO YOU.. not for the table itself.
See also

http://z505.com/gng/ftf.htm