I use a Lemote machine which has a free initialization program and a free operating system. One other advantage of this machine is that Windows has never supported it.
I do not have a preferred GNU/Linux distro. I recommend all the
I've chosen not to have any preferences among those ethical distros.
But I am not in a position to judge them on other criteria:
even to try them all would be a lot work that I have no need to do.
I formerly used an OLPC. I stopped because the OLPC project made their machine act as a platform for running Windows, so I did not want to appear to endorse it. However, it seems that the results I worried about, millions of children running Windows on the OLPC, have not occurred.
I occasionally use X11 for tasks that need graphics, but mostly I use a text console. I find that the text console is more efficient for the bulk of the work I do, which is editing text.
I spend most of my time editing in Emacs. I read and send mail with Emacs using M-x rmail and C-x m. I edit the pages on this site with Emacs also, although volunteer helpers install the political notes and urgent notes.
I never used Unix (not even for a minute) until after I decided to develop a free replacement for it (the GNU system). I chose that design to follow because it was portable and seemed fairly clean. I was never a fan of Unix; I had some criticisms of it too. But it was ok overall.
Why I coined the name POSIX.
I have several free web browsers on my laptop, but I generally do not look at web sites from my own machine, aside from a few sites operated for or by the GNU Project, FSF or me. I fetch web pages from other sites by sending mail to a program that fetches them, much like wget, and then mails them back to me.
The most powerful programming language is Lisp. If you don't know Lisp (or its variant, Scheme), you don't appreciate what a powerful language is. Once you learn Lisp you will see what is missing in most other languages.
When you start a Lisp system, it enters a read-eval-print loop. Most other languages have nothing comparable to read, nothing comparable to eval, and nothing comparable to print. What gaping deficiencies!
Lisp is no harder to understand than other languages. So if you have never learned to program, and you want to start, start with Lisp. If you learn to edit with Emacs, you can learn Lisp by writing editing commands for Emacs. You can use the Introduction to Programming in Emacs Lisp to learn with: it is free as in freedom, and you can order printed copies from the FSF.
The programming languages I use are Lisp and C. They are also my favorite languages. However, since around 1992 I have worked mainly on free software activism, which means I am too busy to do much programming. As a result, I have not had time or occasion to learn newer languages such as Perl, Python, PHP or Ruby.
I read a book about Java, and found it an elegant further development from C. But I have never used it. I did write some code in Java once, but that was the island in Indonesia.
By contrast, I find C++ quite ugly.
I skimmed documentation of Python after people told me it was fundametally similar to Lisp. My conclusion is that that is not so. When you start Lisp, it does `read', `eval', and `print', all of which are missing in Python.
I firmly refuse to install non-free software or tolerate its installed presence on my computer or on computers set up for me.
However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them. I will use them briefly for tasks such as browsing. This limited usage doesn't give my assent to the software's license, or make me responsible its being present in the computer, or make me the possessor of a copy of it, so I don't see an ethical obligation to refrain from this. Of course, I explain why they should migrate the machines to free software, but I don't push them hard, bcause that would be counterproductive.
Likewise, I don't need to worry about what software is in a kiosk, pay phone, or ATM that I am using. I hope their owners migrate them to free software, for their sake, but there's no need for me to refuse to touch them until then. (I do consider what those machines and their owners might do with my personal data, but that's a different issue. My response to that issue is to minimize those activities which give them any data about me.)
That reasoning is based on the fact that I was not responsible for setting up those machines, or for how that was done. By contrast, if I were to ask or lead someone to set up a computer for me to use, that would make me ethically responsible for its software load. In such a case I insist on free software, just as if the machine were mine.
Skype is another kind of exception. Using Skype to talk with someone else who is using Skype is encouraging the other to use nonfree software. So I won't use it under any circumstances.
I do not use social networking sites. They are inherently inconvenient for me. That doesn't mean I think they are all unethical. Some are, some are not. Social networking sites raise their own set of ethical issues, completely different from the ethical issues of distributing software (free vs proprietary).
I have a Twitter account called rmspostcomments, but I never post on Twitter. I use it to log in on other sites to post comments on articles. Any other Twitter account that claims to be mine is an impostor.
The rms account on identi.ca repeats the political notes from this site, but I do not post on it directly.
Aside from those two, any account on a social networking site that says it is mine is an impostor.
I do not post on 4chan. Occasionally I have answered questions for interviews for 4chan, but any account there that says it is me is an impostor.
As for Facebook and Google+, I reject them on principle because they require people to give their "real names". I am proud to identify myself when stating my views; I can afford to do that because I am in a fairly safe position. There are people who rationally fear reprisals (from employers, gangsters, bullies, or the state) if they state their views. For their sake, let's reject any social networking site which insists on being told a user's real name.
Google+ says it will offer to hide the user's real name, but demands people prove an "established identity" or provide ID. I am suspicious of this requirement, but not sure what it will mean in practice.
Every product with Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) is an attack on your freedom.
Therefore, one should not buy or tolerate any product with DRM handcuffs unless one personally possesses the means to break the handcuffs. For instance, don't use encrypted DVDs unless you play them using DeCSS or another comparable free program. And never use a Bluray disk unless you find a way to break its handcuffs.
Return to Richard Stallman's home page.
Please send comments on these web pages to rms@gnu.org.
Copyright (C) 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 Richard Stallman
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.