2012 Free Software Award Winners Announced 43
jrepin writes "Free Software Foundation president Richard M. Stallman announced the winners of the FSF's annual Free Software Awards at a ceremony held during the LibrePlanet 2013 conference. The Award for the Advancement of Free Software is given annually to an individual who has made a great contribution to the progress and development of free software, through activities that accord with the spirit of free software. This year, it was given to Dr. Fernando Perez, the creator of IPython, a rich architecture for interactive computing. The Award for Projects of Social Benefit is presented to the project or team responsible for applying free software, or the ideas of the free software movement, in a project that intentionally and significantly benefits society in other aspects of life. This award stresses the use of free software in the service of humanity. This year, the award went to OpenMRS, a free software medical record system for developing countries."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Many developers share that view. Many others do not. Is this really the time and place?
Re: (Score:2)
Many developers share that view. Many others do not. Is this really the time and place?
Really?
The time and place?
This is SLASHDOT!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's a silly thing to say considering it's the developer himself who is free to determine the license he wishes to release his work under. A lot of developers want to release their work under the GPL, and a lot don't. But all are free to license their work as they see fit.
Re:Conditions? (Score:5, Insightful)
GPL doesnt "make the software really free" unless you subscribe to a particular definition of freedom which excludes developer freedom.
Much like liberty doesn't make people really free unless you subscribe to a particular definition of freedom which excludes jailor freedom.
Any definition of freedom that doesn't let me put other people into cages just isn't really freedom.
Re: (Score:3)
GPL doesnt "make the software really free" unless you subscribe to a particular definition of freedom which excludes developer freedom.
Shame you got modded Troll, because you're exactly right. Software Freedom and Developer Freedom aren't the same thing, nor are they obligatorily linked. GPL is about Software Freedom and BSD is about Developer Freedom. There's no better way to explain this than to compare the two licenses.
Of course the WTFPL folks would argue that neither are either.
Re: (Score:1)
You can keep developers free to do whatever they want to users.
Or you can keep users free from the controll of developers.
Without context free is just a useless word (like all the rest of 'em).
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
That's not free software according to the FSF because it is BSD licensed rather than GPL. Also it was 'written solely to undermine freedom'. [ycombinator.com]
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20100806143457345 [groklaw.net]
36:50
What we are entering in upon then is our maturity. It isn't that GNU is finished. GNU, fortunately, is renewed all the time and is becoming renewable. In the same way that there was a moment a few years back when I talked to Leon, and I realized that there were a bunch of young hackers in their late teens who were getting into apps and that's going to have an enormous effect in renewing what was there. We are gonna have a flood of people towards GNU, and that's going to make an immense difference.
It's going to happen everywhere. But Mr. Jobs is investing heavily in LLVM solely so he can stop using GCC, lest the patents somehow leak across the GPLv3 barrier, and we become able to use his claims. Nobody has ever tried before, to build a multi-platform C compiler solely in order to undermine freedom. [laughter] A hardware manufacturer or two has done something here and there -- we had a little bit of BSD interest in non-copyleft compilation -- but here's the man whose selfishness surpasses any recorded selfishness. [laughter/applause]
38:26
It's unfortunate. But writing software is what we do best. And catching GCC with LLVM isn't going to be easy. [?] you know, there's lots to do.
Basically the FSF's objection to LLVM is that it duplicates functionality in GCC and that they don't control it so they can't put it under GPVv6 when an angel reads that out to Stallman in a toejam inspired hallucination.
The strange thing is that bad mouthing competing projects because you don't control them is
Re:So I guess (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not free software according to the FSF because it is BSD licensed rather than GPL.
That's not true. The BSD license is definitely present in the FSF's list of free software licenses [gnu.org].
Re: (Score:2)
I'm reading the link you made, snd the original and plain BSD license _is not_ considered free or compatible with GPL. The modified BSD license, that removes the advertising clause, is considered free but dangerous precisely becuase of the kind of confusion you just experienced.
Interesting bias (Score:2)
2011: Matz (ruby)
2001: Guido van Rossum (python)
1998: Larry Wall (perl)
Rasmus Lerdorf (php) must feel a little left out.
I admire these people (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
nice hippie poster award (Score:1)
Stallman cracks me up.. I just love the paper hippie poster award that he is handing out. It's also funny because besides smiling the recipients look as if they barely want to touch it..
Re: (Score:2)
How about giving them an option to use that for FREE on their terms versus "being given" something by Bill and Melinda that uses power requirements they don't have and expires in 3 years causing them to spend all their Medical Aid money on software, not medicine.
The USA is far to behind for this, and far to ligatuous. It's ironic, because you'd think the USA would benefit form all the Federal interest in Open Medical Redords standards... But in reality, that mandate is going to be so complex, only the big c
Re: (Score:1)
option to use that for FREE on their terms versus "being given" something by Bill and Melinda
I don't quite follow you, but you've piqued my interest... Is there an article you could link to for this concept or an alternative explenation?
Where has the wit and humor gone? (Score:1)
ipython (Score:4, Insightful)
The Ipython notebook, although not an original idea (I think they were inspired by the Sage notebook), is just fantastic. I do a fair amount of exploratory analysis and it's so much better doing it in a notebook than in a standalone script - I get to see all the plots, and document as I go along. Most importantly, it lets me experiment with commands as one would in a regular interpreter shell, but without the clutter of all my faulty commands.
If anyone wants to help open source, I would strongly recommend helping improve ipython, scipy or matplotlib. Fernando Perez pointed out in a recent conference that while on the surface these all seem like excellent, well polished projects, if one looks at the committers, they'll find most commits are being done by 2-3 people (for each project). It's not healthy for it to depend on so few people. As a case in point, the main committer for matlplotlib passed away recently and everyone's nervous about its future.
Re: (Score:2)
As sad as John's passing was to our community, he did an excellent job of passing the torch on before he left us. There was only one unresolved pull request from him (we are still working on it, actually), and he selected an excellent person with almost as many commits as him to take over. Michael Drottenboom has been doing an excellent job, and our developer base has actually grown a bit. Of course, we would love to have some more people involved, but there is abso