Mercurial > hg > xemacs-beta

comparison man/xemacs/gnu.texi @ 0:376386a54a3c r19-14

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
Import from CVS: tag r19-14
author cvs
date Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:45:50 +0200
parents
children 972bbb6d6ca2
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
-1:000000000000 0:376386a54a3c
1
2 @node Manifesto, Key Index, Glossary, Top
3 @unnumbered The GNU Manifesto
4
5 @unnumberedsec What's GNU? GNU's Not Unix!
6
7 GNU, which stands for GNU's Not Unix, is the name for the complete
8 Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it
9 away free to everyone who can use it. Several other volunteers are helping
10 me. Contributions of time, money, programs, and equipment are greatly
11 needed.
12
13 So far we have an Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor commands,
14 a source level debugger, a yacc-compatible parser generator, a linker, and
15 around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is nearly completed. A
16 new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled itself and may be released
17 this year. An initial kernel exists, but many more features are needed to
18 emulate Unix. When the kernel and compiler are finished, it will be
19 possible to distribute a GNU system suitable for program development. We
20 will use @TeX{} as our text formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We
21 will use the free, portable X window system as well. After this we will
22 add a portable Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of
23 other things, plus online documentation. We hope to supply, eventually,
24 everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more.
25
26 GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to Unix.
27 We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our experience
28 with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to have longer
29 filenames, file version numbers, a crashproof file system, filename
30 completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and perhaps
31 eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several Lisp programs
32 and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C and Lisp will be
33 available as system programming languages. We will try to support UUCP,
34 MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for communication.
35
36 GNU is aimed initially at machines in the 68000/16000 class with virtual
37 memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run on. The extra
38 effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left to someone who wants
39 to use it on them.
40
41 To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the `G' in the word `GNU'
42 when it is the name of this project.
43
44 @page
45 @unnumberedsec Why I Must Write GNU
46
47 I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I must
48 share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to divide
49 the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share with
50 others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this way. I
51 cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a software
52 license agreement. For years I worked within the Artificial Intelligence
53 Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities, but eventually
54 they had gone too far: I could not remain in an institution where such
55 things are done for me against my will.
56
57 So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have decided to
58 put together a sufficient body of free software so that I will be able to
59 get along without any software that is not free. I have resigned from the
60 AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent me from giving GNU away.
61
62 @unnumberedsec Why GNU Will Be Compatible With Unix
63
64 Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential features
65 of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what Unix lacks
66 without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix would be
67 convenient for many other people to adopt.
68
69 @unnumberedsec How GNU Will Be Available
70
71 GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to modify and
72 redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to restrict its
73 further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary modifications will not
74 be allowed. I want to make sure that all versions of GNU remain free.
75
76 @unnumberedsec Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help
77
78 I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and want to
79 help.
80
81 Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system
82 software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them to
83 feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel as
84 comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the
85 sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used essentially
86 forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The purchaser of software
87 must choose between friendship and obeying the law. Naturally, many decide
88 that friendship is more important. But those who believe in law often do
89 not feel at ease with either choice. They become cynical and think that
90 programming is just a way of making money.
91
92 By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can be
93 hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as an
94 example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in sharing.
95 This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if we use
96 software that is not free. For about half the programmers I talk to, this
97 is an important happiness that money cannot replace.
98
99 @unnumberedsec How You Can Contribute
100
101 I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and money.
102 I'm asking individuals for donations of programs and work.
103
104 One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU will run
105 on them at an early date. The machines should be complete, ready-to-use
106 systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not in need of
107 sophisticated cooling or power.
108
109 I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time work for
110 GNU. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would be very hard
111 to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not work together.
112 But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this problem is absent. A
113 complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility programs, each of which
114 is documented separately. Most interface specifications are fixed by Unix
115 compatibility. If each contributor can write a compatible replacement for
116 a single Unix utility, and make it work properly in place of the original
117 on a Unix system, then these utilities will work right when put together.
118 Even allowing for Murphy to create a few unexpected problems, assembling
119 these components will be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer
120 communication and will be worked on by a small, tight group.)
121
122 If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full or
123 part time. The salary won't be high by programmers' standards, but I'm
124 looking for people for whom building community spirit is as important as
125 making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated people to devote
126 their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them the need to make a
127 living in another way.
128
129 @unnumberedsec Why All Computer Users Will Benefit
130
131 Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system software
132 free, just like air.
133
134 This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix license.
135 It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming effort will
136 be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the state of the
137 art.
138
139 Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result, a user
140 who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them himself,
141 or hire any available programmer or company to make them for him. Users
142 will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company which owns the
143 sources and is in sole position to make changes.
144
145 Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment by
146 encouraging all students to study and improve the system code. Harvard's
147 computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be installed on
148 the system if its sources were not on public display, and upheld it by
149 actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very much inspired by
150 this.
151
152 Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software and what
153 one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted.
154
155 Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including licensing of
156 copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through the cumbersome
157 mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is, which programs) a
158 person must pay for. And only a police state can force everyone to obey
159 them. Consider a space station where air must be manufactured at great
160 cost: charging each breather per liter of air may be fair, but wearing the
161 metered gas mask all day and all night is intolerable even if everyone can
162 afford to pay the air bill. And the TV cameras everywhere to see if you
163 ever take the mask off are outrageous. It's better to support the air
164 plant with a head tax and chuck the masks.
165
166 Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as
167 breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free.
168
169 @unnumberedsec Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU's Goals
170
171 @quotation
172 ``Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can't rely
173 on any support.''
174
175 ``You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the
176 support.''
177 @end quotation
178
179 If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free without
180 service, a company to provide just service to people who have obtained GNU
181 free ought to be profitable.
182
183 We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming work
184 and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on from a
185 software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough people, the
186 vendor will tell you to get lost.
187
188 If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way is to
189 have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any available
190 person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any individual.
191 With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of consideration for most
192 businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is still possible for there to
193 be no available competent person, but this problem cannot be blamed on
194 distibution arrangements. GNU does not eliminate all the world's problems,
195 only some of them.
196
197 Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need handholding:
198 doing things for them which they could easily do themselves but don't know
199 how.
200
201 Such services could be provided by companies that sell just hand-holding
202 and repair service. If it is true that users would rather spend money and
203 get a product with service, they will also be willing to buy the service
204 having got the product free. The service companies will compete in quality
205 and price; users will not be tied to any particular one. Meanwhile, those
206 of us who don't need the service should be able to use the program without
207 paying for the service.
208
209 @quotation
210 ``You cannot reach many people without advertising,
211 and you must charge for the program to support that.''
212
213 ``It's no use advertising a program people can get free.''
214 @end quotation
215
216 There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be used to
217 inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But it may be
218 true that one can reach more microcomputer users with advertising. If this
219 is really so, a business which advertises the service of copying and
220 mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful enough to pay for its
221 advertising and more. This way, only the users who benefit from the
222 advertising pay for it.
223
224 On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and such
225 companies don't succeed, this will show that advertising was not really
226 necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates don't want
227 to let the free market decide this?
228 @page
229 @quotation
230 ``My company needs a proprietary operating system
231 to get a competitive edge.''
232 @end quotation
233
234 GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of competition.
235 You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but neither will your
236 competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and they will compete in
237 other areas, while benefitting mutually in this one. If your business is
238 selling an operating system, you will not like GNU, but that's tough on
239 you. If your business is something else, GNU can save you from being
240 pushed into the expensive business of selling operating systems.
241
242 I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many
243 manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.
244
245 @quotation
246 ``Don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?''
247 @end quotation
248
249 If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. Creativity can
250 be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the
251 results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for creating innovative
252 programs, by the same token they deserve to be punished if they restrict
253 the use of these programs.
254
255 @quotation
256 ``Shouldn't a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his creativity?''
257 @end quotation
258
259 There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to maximize
260 one's income, as long as one does not use means that are destructive. But
261 the means customary in the field of software today are based on
262 destruction.
263
264 Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of it is
265 destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the ways that
266 the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth that humanity
267 derives from the program. When there is a deliberate choice to restrict,
268 the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction.
269
270 The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to become
271 wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become poorer from the
272 mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or, the Golden Rule.
273 Since I do not like the consequences that result if everyone hoards
274 information, I am required to consider it wrong for one to do so.
275 Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one's creativity does not
276 justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that creativity.
277
278 @quotation
279 ``Won't programmers starve?''
280 @end quotation
281
282 I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us cannot
283 manage to get any money for standing on the street and making faces. But
284 we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives standing on the
285 street making faces, and starving. We do something else.
286
287 But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's implicit
288 assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers cannot possibly
289 be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing.
290
291 The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be
292 possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as
293 now.
294
295 Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. It is
296 the most common basis because it brings in the most money. If it were
297 prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would move to
298 other bases of organization which are now used less often. There are
299 always numerous ways to organize any kind of business.
300
301 Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it is
302 now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not considered
303 an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they now do. If
304 programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice either. (In
305 practice they would still make considerably more than that.)
306
307 @quotation
308 ``Don't people have a right to control how their creativity is used?''
309 @end quotation
310
311 ``Control over the use of one's ideas'' really constitutes control over
312 other people's lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more
313 difficult.
314
315 People who have studied the issue of intellectual property rights carefully
316 (such as lawyers) say that there is no intrinsic right to intellectual
317 property. The kinds of supposed intellectual property rights that the
318 government recognizes were created by specific acts of legislation for
319 specific purposes.
320
321 For example, the patent system was established to encourage inventors to
322 disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was to help society
323 rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life span of 17 years for
324 a patent was short compared with the rate of advance of the state of the
325 art. Since patents are an issue only among manufacturers, for whom the
326 cost and effort of a license agreement are small compared with setting up
327 production, the patents often do not do much harm. They do not obstruct
328 most individuals who use patented products.
329
330 The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors
331 frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This
332 practice was useful, and is the only way many authors' works have survived
333 even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for the purpose
334 of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was
335 invented---books, which could be copied economically only on a printing
336 press---it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals
337 who read the books.
338
339 All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society
340 because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole would
341 benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we have to ask:
342 are we really better off granting such license? What kind of act are we
343 licensing a person to do?
344
345 The case of programs today is very different from that of books a hundred
346 years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is from one
347 neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source code and
348 object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is used rather
349 than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in which a person who
350 enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole both materially and
351 spiritually; in which a person should not do so regardless of whether the
352 law enables him to.
353
354 @quotation
355 ``Competition makes things get done better.''
356 @end quotation
357
358 The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we
359 encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this way,
360 it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it always works
361 this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered and become
362 intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other strategies---such as,
363 attacking other runners. If the runners get into a fist fight, they will
364 all finish late.
365
366 Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners in a
367 fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we've got does not seem to
368 object to fights; he just regulates them (``For every ten yards you run,
369 you can fire one shot''). He really ought to break them up, and penalize
370 runners for even trying to fight.
371
372 @quotation
373 ``Won't everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?''
374 @end quotation
375
376 Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary incentive.
377 Programming has an irresistible fascination for some people, usually the
378 people who are best at it. There is no shortage of professional musicians
379 who keep at it even though they have no hope of making a living that way.
380
381 But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate to the
382 situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become less. So
383 the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced monetary
384 incentive? My experience shows that they will.
385
386 For more than ten years, many of the world's best programmers worked at the
387 Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could have had
388 anywhere else. They got many kinds of non-monetary rewards: fame and
389 appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a reward in itself.
390 @page
391 Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same interesting
392 work for a lot of money.
393
394 What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other than
395 riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they will
396 come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly in
397 competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly if the
398 high-paying ones are banned.
399
400 @quotation
401 ``We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we
402 stop helping our neighbors, we have to obey.''
403 @end quotation
404
405 You're never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand.
406 Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute!
407
408 @quotation
409 ``Programmers need to make a living somehow.''
410 @end quotation
411
412 In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways that
413 programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a program.
414 This way is customary now because it brings programmers and businessmen the
415 most money, not because it is the only way to make a living. It is easy to
416 find other ways if you want to find them. Here are a number of examples.
417
418 A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of
419 operating systems onto the new hardware.
420
421 The sale of teaching, hand-holding, and maintenance services could also
422 employ programmers.
423
424 People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware and ask for
425 donations from satisfied users or sell hand-holding services. I have
426 met people who are already working this way successfully.
427
428 Users with related needs can form users' groups and pay dues. A group
429 would contract with programming companies to write programs that the
430 group's members would like to use.
431
432 All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax:
433
434 @quotation
435 Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay a certain percent of
436 the price as a software tax. The government gives this to
437 an agency like the NSF to spend on software development.
438
439 But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development
440 himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to
441 the project of his own choosing---often, chosen because he hopes to
442 use the results when
443 @page
444 it is done. He can take a credit for any amount
445 of donation up to the total tax he had to pay.
446
447 The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of
448 the tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on.
449
450 The consequences:
451
452 @itemize @bullet
453 @item
454 The computer-using community supports software development.
455 @item
456 This community decides what level of support is needed.
457 @item
458 Users who care which projects their share is spent on
459 can choose this for themselves.
460 @end itemize
461 @end quotation
462
463 In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the post-scarcity
464 world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living.
465 People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such
466 as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required
467 tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair, and asteroid
468 prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from
469 programming.
470
471 We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole society
472 must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this has
473 translated itself into leisure for workers because much nonproductive
474 activity is required to accompany productive activity. The main causes of
475 this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against competition. Free
476 software will greatly reduce these drains in the area of software
477 production. We must do this, in order for technical gains in productivity
478 to translate into less work for us.