# HG changeset patch # User Glenn Morris # Date 1189053418 0 # Node ID 00a98f1e05404cefce9a953499b1b627cd7d45e3 # Parent 0ef2acf60d43fd9cc4714c340c0c244aedef5689 Move to ../doc/emacs/, misc/ diff -r 0ef2acf60d43 -r 00a98f1e0540 man/gnu.texi --- a/man/gnu.texi Thu Sep 06 04:36:53 2007 +0000 +++ /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 @@ -1,567 +0,0 @@ -@c This is part of the Emacs manual. -@c Copyright (C) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1993, 1995, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, -@c 2005, 2006, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. -@ifclear justgnu -@node Manifesto,, Microsoft Windows, Top -@unnumbered The GNU Manifesto -@end ifclear -@ifset justgnu -Copyright @copyright{} 1985, 1993, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, -2005, 2006, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. - -Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document -under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or -any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no -Invariant Sections, with the Front-Cover texts being ``A GNU -Manual'', and with the Back-Cover Texts as in (a) below. A copy of the -license is included in the section entitled ``GNU Free Documentation -License'' in the Emacs manual. - -(a) The FSF's Back-Cover Text is: ``You have freedom to copy and modify -this GNU Manual, like GNU software. Copies published by the Free -Software Foundation raise funds for GNU development.'' - -This document is part of a collection distributed under the GNU Free -Documentation License. If you want to distribute this document -separately from the collection, you can do so by adding a copy of the -license to the document, as described in section 6 of the license. - -@node Top -@top The GNU Manifesto -@end ifset - -@quotation -The GNU Manifesto which appears below was written by Richard Stallman at -the beginning of the GNU project, to ask for participation and support. -For the first few years, it was updated in minor ways to account for -developments, but now it seems best to leave it unchanged as most people -have seen it. - -Since that time, we have learned about certain common misunderstandings -that different wording could help avoid. Footnotes added in 1993 help -clarify these points. - -For up-to-date information about available GNU software, please see -our web site, @uref{http://www.gnu.org}. For software tasks and other -ways to contribute, see @uref{http://www.gnu.org/help}. -@end quotation - -@unnumberedsec What's GNU? Gnu's Not Unix! - -GNU, which stands for Gnu's Not Unix, is the name for the complete -Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it -away free to everyone who can use it.@footnote{The wording here was -careless. The intention was that nobody would have to pay for -@emph{permission} to use the GNU system. But the words don't make this -clear, and people often interpret them as saying that copies of GNU -should always be distributed at little or no charge. That was never the -intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the possibility of companies -providing the service of distribution for a profit. Subsequently I have -learned to distinguish carefully between ``free'' in the sense of -freedom and ``free'' in the sense of price. Free software is software -that users have the freedom to distribute and change. Some users may -obtain copies at no charge, while others pay to obtain copies---and if -the funds help support improving the software, so much the better. The -important thing is that everyone who has a copy has the freedom to -cooperate with others in using it.} Several other volunteers are helping -me. Contributions of time, money, programs and equipment are greatly -needed. - -So far we have an Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor commands, -a source level debugger, a yacc-compatible parser generator, a linker, and -around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is nearly completed. A -new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled itself and may be released -this year. An initial kernel exists but many more features are needed to -emulate Unix. When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be -possible to distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We -will use @TeX{} as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We -will use the free, portable X window system as well. After this we will -add a portable Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of -other things, plus on-line documentation. We hope to supply, eventually, -everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more. - -GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to Unix. -We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our experience -with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to have longer -file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system, file name -completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and perhaps -eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several Lisp programs -and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C and Lisp will be -available as system programming languages. We will try to support UUCP, -MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for communication. - -GNU is aimed initially at machines in the 68000/16000 class with virtual -memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run on. The extra -effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left to someone who wants -to use it on them. - -To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the `G' in the word `GNU' -when it is the name of this project. - -@unnumberedsec Why I Must Write GNU - -I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I must -share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to divide -the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share with -others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this way. I -cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a software -license agreement. For years I worked within the Artificial Intelligence -Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities, but eventually -they had gone too far: I could not remain in an institution where such -things are done for me against my will. - -So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have decided to -put together a sufficient body of free software so that I will be able to -get along without any software that is not free. I have resigned from the -AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent me from giving GNU away. - -@unnumberedsec Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix - -Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential features -of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what Unix lacks -without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix would be -convenient for many other people to adopt. - -@unnumberedsec How GNU Will Be Available - -GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to modify and -redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to restrict its -further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary modifications will not -be allowed. I want to make sure that all versions of GNU remain free. - -@unnumberedsec Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help - -I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and want to -help. - -Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system -software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them to -feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel as -comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the -sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used essentially -forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The purchaser of software -must choose between friendship and obeying the law. Naturally, many decide -that friendship is more important. But those who believe in law often do -not feel at ease with either choice. They become cynical and think that -programming is just a way of making money. - -By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can be -hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as an -example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in sharing. -This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if we use -software that is not free. For about half the programmers I talk to, this -is an important happiness that money cannot replace. - -@unnumberedsec How You Can Contribute - -I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and money. -I'm asking individuals for donations of programs and work. - -One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU will run -on them at an early date. The machines should be complete, ready to use -systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not in need of -sophisticated cooling or power. - -I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time work for -GNU. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would be very hard -to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not work together. -But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this problem is absent. A -complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility programs, each of which -is documented separately. Most interface specifications are fixed by Unix -compatibility. If each contributor can write a compatible replacement for -a single Unix utility, and make it work properly in place of the original -on a Unix system, then these utilities will work right when put together. -Even allowing for Murphy to create a few unexpected problems, assembling -these components will be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer -communication and will be worked on by a small, tight group.) - -If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full or -part time. The salary won't be high by programmers' standards, but I'm -looking for people for whom building community spirit is as important as -making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated people to devote -their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them the need to make a -living in another way. - -@unnumberedsec Why All Computer Users Will Benefit - -Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system -software free, just like air.@footnote{This is another place I failed to -distinguish carefully between the two different meanings of ``free.'' -The statement as it stands is not false---you can get copies of GNU -software at no charge, from your friends or over the net. But it does -suggest the wrong idea.} - -This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix license. -It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming effort will -be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the state of the -art. - -Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result, a user -who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them himself, -or hire any available programmer or company to make them for him. Users -will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company which owns the -sources and is in sole position to make changes. - -Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment by -encouraging all students to study and improve the system code. Harvard's -computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be installed on -the system if its sources were not on public display, and upheld it by -actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very much inspired by -this. - -Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software and what -one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted. - -Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including licensing of -copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through the cumbersome -mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is, which programs) a -person must pay for. And only a police state can force everyone to obey -them. Consider a space station where air must be manufactured at great -cost: charging each breather per liter of air may be fair, but wearing the -metered gas mask all day and all night is intolerable even if everyone can -afford to pay the air bill. And the TV cameras everywhere to see if you -ever take the mask off are outrageous. It's better to support the air -plant with a head tax and chuck the masks. - -Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as -breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free. - -@unnumberedsec Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU's Goals - -@quotation -``Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can't rely -on any support.'' - -``You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the -support.'' -@end quotation - -If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free without -service, a company to provide just service to people who have obtained GNU -free ought to be profitable.@footnote{Several such companies now exist.} - -We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming work -and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on from a -software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough people, the -vendor will tell you to get lost. - -If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way is to -have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any available -person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any individual. -With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of consideration for most -businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is still possible for there to -be no available competent person, but this problem cannot be blamed on -distribution arrangements. GNU does not eliminate all the world's problems, -only some of them. - -Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need handholding: -doing things for them which they could easily do themselves but don't know -how. - -Such services could be provided by companies that sell just hand-holding -and repair service. If it is true that users would rather spend money and -get a product with service, they will also be willing to buy the service -having got the product free. The service companies will compete in quality -and price; users will not be tied to any particular one. Meanwhile, those -of us who don't need the service should be able to use the program without -paying for the service. - -@quotation -``You cannot reach many people without advertising, -and you must charge for the program to support that.'' - -``It's no use advertising a program people can get free.'' -@end quotation - -There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be used to -inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But it may be -true that one can reach more microcomputer users with advertising. If this -is really so, a business which advertises the service of copying and -mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful enough to pay for its -advertising and more. This way, only the users who benefit from the -advertising pay for it. - -On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and such -companies don't succeed, this will show that advertising was not really -necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates don't -want to let the free market decide this?@footnote{The Free Software -Foundation raises most of its funds from a distribution service, -although it is a charity rather than a company. If @emph{no one} -chooses to obtain copies by ordering from the FSF, it will be unable -to do its work. But this does not mean that proprietary restrictions -are justified to force every user to pay. If a small fraction of all -the users order copies from the FSF, that is sufficient to keep the FSF -afloat. So we ask users to choose to support us in this way. Have you -done your part?} - -@quotation -``My company needs a proprietary operating system -to get a competitive edge.'' -@end quotation - -GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of competition. -You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but neither will your -competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and they will compete in -other areas, while benefiting mutually in this one. If your business is -selling an operating system, you will not like GNU, but that's tough on -you. If your business is something else, GNU can save you from being -pushed into the expensive business of selling operating systems. - -I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many -manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.@footnote{A group of -computer companies recently pooled funds to support maintenance of the -GNU C Compiler.} - -@quotation -``Don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?'' -@end quotation - -If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. Creativity can -be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the -results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for creating innovative -programs, by the same token they deserve to be punished if they restrict -the use of these programs. - -@quotation -``Shouldn't a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his creativity?'' -@end quotation - -There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to maximize -one's income, as long as one does not use means that are destructive. But -the means customary in the field of software today are based on -destruction. - -Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of it is -destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the ways that -the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth that humanity -derives from the program. When there is a deliberate choice to restrict, -the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction. - -The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to become -wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become poorer from the -mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or, the Golden Rule. -Since I do not like the consequences that result if everyone hoards -information, I am required to consider it wrong for one to do so. -Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one's creativity does not -justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that creativity. - -@quotation -``Won't programmers starve?'' -@end quotation - -I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us cannot -manage to get any money for standing on the street and making faces. But -we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives standing on the -street making faces, and starving. We do something else. - -But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's implicit -assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers cannot possibly -be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing. - -The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be -possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as -now. - -Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. It is -the most common basis because it brings in the most money. If it were -prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would move to -other bases of organization which are now used less often. There are -always numerous ways to organize any kind of business. - -Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it is -now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not considered -an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they now do. If -programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice either. (In -practice they would still make considerably more than that.) - -@quotation -``Don't people have a right to control how their creativity is used?'' -@end quotation - -``Control over the use of one's ideas'' really constitutes control over -other people's lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more -difficult. - -People who have studied the issue of intellectual property -rights@footnote{In the 80s I had not yet realized how confusing it was -to speak of ``the issue'' of ``intellectual property.'' That term is -obviously biased; more subtle is the fact that it lumps together -various disparate laws which raise very different issues. Nowadays I -urge people to reject the term ``intellectual property'' entirely, -lest it lead others to suppose that those laws form one coherent -issue. The way to be clear is to discuss patents, copyrights, and -trademarks separately. See -@uref{http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml} for more -explanation of how this term spreads confusion and bias.} carefully -(such as lawyers) say that there is no intrinsic right to intellectual -property. The kinds of supposed intellectual property rights that the -government recognizes were created by specific acts of legislation for -specific purposes. - -For example, the patent system was established to encourage inventors to -disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was to help society -rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life span of 17 years for -a patent was short compared with the rate of advance of the state of the -art. Since patents are an issue only among manufacturers, for whom the -cost and effort of a license agreement are small compared with setting up -production, the patents often do not do much harm. They do not obstruct -most individuals who use patented products. - -The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors -frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This -practice was useful, and is the only way many authors' works have survived -even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for the purpose -of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was -invented---books, which could be copied economically only on a printing -press---it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals -who read the books. - -All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society -because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole would -benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we have to ask: -are we really better off granting such license? What kind of act are we -licensing a person to do? - -The case of programs today is very different from that of books a hundred -years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is from one -neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source code and -object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is used rather -than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in which a person who -enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole both materially and -spiritually; in which a person should not do so regardless of whether the -law enables him to. - -@quotation -``Competition makes things get done better.'' -@end quotation - -The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we -encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this way, -it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it always works -this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered and become -intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other strategies---such as, -attacking other runners. If the runners get into a fist fight, they will -all finish late. - -Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners in a -fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we've got does not seem to -object to fights; he just regulates them (``For every ten yards you run, -you can fire one shot''). He really ought to break them up, and penalize -runners for even trying to fight. - -@quotation -``Won't everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?'' -@end quotation - -Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary incentive. -Programming has an irresistible fascination for some people, usually the -people who are best at it. There is no shortage of professional musicians -who keep at it even though they have no hope of making a living that way. - -But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate to the -situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become less. So -the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced monetary -incentive? My experience shows that they will. - -For more than ten years, many of the world's best programmers worked at the -Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could have had -anywhere else. They got many kinds of non-monetary rewards: fame and -appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a reward in itself. - -Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same interesting -work for a lot of money. - -What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other than -riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they will -come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly in -competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly if the -high-paying ones are banned. - -@quotation -``We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we -stop helping our neighbors, we have to obey.'' -@end quotation - -You're never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand. -Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute! - -@quotation -``Programmers need to make a living somehow.'' -@end quotation - -In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways that -programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a program. -This way is customary now because it brings programmers and businessmen the -most money, not because it is the only way to make a living. It is easy to -find other ways if you want to find them. Here are a number of examples. - -A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of -operating systems onto the new hardware. - -The sale of teaching, hand-holding and maintenance services could also -employ programmers. - -People with new ideas could distribute programs as -freeware@footnote{Subsequently we have discovered the need to -distinguish between ``free software'' and ``freeware''. The term -``freeware'' means software you are free to redistribute, but usually -you are not free to study and change the source code, so most of it is -not free software. See -@uref{http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html} for more -explanation.}, asking for donations from satisfied users, or selling -hand-holding services. I have met people who are already working this -way successfully. - -Users with related needs can form users' groups, and pay dues. A group -would contract with programming companies to write programs that the -group's members would like to use. - -All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax: - -@quotation -Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay x percent of -the price as a software tax. The government gives this to -an agency like the NSF to spend on software development. - -But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development -himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to -the project of his own choosing---often, chosen because he hopes to -use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any amount -of donation up to the total tax he had to pay. - -The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of -the tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on. - -The consequences: - -@itemize @bullet -@item -The computer-using community supports software development. -@item -This community decides what level of support is needed. -@item -Users who care which projects their share is spent on -can choose this for themselves. -@end itemize -@end quotation - -In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the post-scarcity -world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living. -People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such -as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required -tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair and asteroid -prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from -programming. - -We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole society -must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this has -translated itself into leisure for workers because much nonproductive -activity is required to accompany productive activity. The main causes of -this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against competition. Free -software will greatly reduce these drains in the area of software -production. We must do this, in order for technical gains in productivity -to translate into less work for us. - -@ignore - arch-tag: 21eb38f8-6fa0-480a-91cd-f3dab7148542 -@end ignore