采访了定义自由软件的那个人，他说：RMS有自闭症，自由软件不能单一仓库

RMS 的那场公报也是一样。

除了GMPGNU名衔，OSI 的确也摸索过其他GNU系统性的公娱乐业。Simon Phipps （编者同上：Simon Phipps 2009 年转回 OSI，曾多次任职 OSI 副总裁）所来作的实习就曾受到影响到一些标准秘密组织，让他们不允诺名衔许可的专利技术转回其标准，以打造愈来愈加GNU友好关系的周围环境。

然而，这项实习受到了 OSI 赞助大企业的带头对。还在 OSI 时，我就曾遇上过一个赞助大企业竭力立即 OSI 很难在免费标准中所推广GNU。因此，OSI 几乎是很难献身地去追求GNU公娱乐业的。

除了这些，OSI 所来作的愈来愈多的是福音，这的确曾是必要的实习。但随着愈来愈多真诚丰沛的福音五军自组进乡村，OSI 就笨拙黯然失色了。

02

GitHub 只是奉命行公事，GNU理应不靠一般而言车库

OSCHINA： 已经有，GitHub 封锁了受美国政府默许该公司的前苏联开发新人员该网站，这一举措也导致部分GNU新项目的举足轻重 PR、Issue 和 Comment 丢失，对GNU造成不良受到影响。对此，您怎么看？

故公事情节氛围：

2022 年 4 月末，部分前苏联账号被 GitHub 禁用，因这部分前苏联开发新人员所在的该公司遭到美国政府默许。此后后，Quick 和 Nimble 的高级顾问Jenkins Jesse Squires 发译者控诉，因这一举措，多名成就者该网站被封，导致新项目遇上危机。

BP： 这是个有趣的难题。一方面，GNU运动所涌起了一阵“道德名衔”的21世纪，他们一切都是不准GNU应用程序被运用于压迫等不好的用作。我要求过这些名衔，它们或许不可能得逞。在前苏联联邦判决诉讼发行权剽窃的手段就能迫使普京吗？这多么或许就是。

另一方面，美国政府的确有一些普通法上的有效途径去处罚前苏联。这些都仍未通过普通法的系统被无论如何了。那些被 GitHub 不准的前苏联Valve都是与被默许机构有关的，美国政府因为这场战争而默许了他们。

这是美国政府普通法立即 GitHub 去来作的，我们很难去表示任何带头对，正如我们也了解中所国该公司也需在中所国的普通法构建下行公事是一样的。对于 GitHub 来时说，我相信第一次去封禁Valve该网站，这也是一件相当尴尬的公事情。人们第一次来作某件公事，难免就会撒谎。

然而，我可以小规模性下：这件公事对GNU来时说，实际上才就会有什么大受到影响。首先，这些被默许的选用者如果一心日后次成就GNU，他们可以寻求其他第三世界的另一个示例车库，他们的示例将依然是GNU的。其次， 造出于安全和的考虑，我们绝不借此任何应用程序只假定于一般而言网北站上，鉴于假定如此多的其他示例行政当局的平台，我们的可所选择是很多的。因此，GNU乡村才就会受到任何威胁。

要时说 GitHub 真的有啥疑虑，已经有很多Valve都在争论 —— GitHub 的行政正在区域内，他们一心通过日常的行政手段从新项目中所领到愈来愈多权利，这是Valve不一心看到的。 从前接下来，相当多的新项目都开始迁移到其他的平台来时了，显然有那么多的示例行政当局的平台可所选。

03

BSL 不错，但有些公事只有GNU能来作

OSCHINA: 您是如何忽视OpenBSD可见名衔，例如 SSPL 和 BSL 的？或许，愈加多的GNU创企开始倾向于OpenBSD可见，而不是地地道道、无论如何符合 OSD （Open Source Definition）的GNU。您忽视 OSD 就会有过时的那一天吗？您是如何忽视这种周期性的？

故公事情节氛围：

BSL（Business Source License） 是 MariaDB 创建的一种商业活动名衔，一些GNU大企业选用 BSL 运用于迫使阳制造厂商在并未获得许可的小规模性下将其商品以商业活动表达方式备有为阳服务。

某种程度为了可避免阳制造厂商“比方时说”，2018 年，MongoDB 创建 SSPL（Server Side Public License），该协定规定：如果你将商品作为服务备有给他人，则只能引起争议发新布任何修改以及行政层的源示例。

因为不符合“OSD”，该两个名衔大多未通过 OSI GMP，被忽视不是只不过的GNU，而仅是OpenBSD可见（source-available）。

BP： 关于 BSL，我曾经尽力过 MySQLAndrewMariaDB 的创办者 Monty Widenius。BSL 小规模性下，选用 BSL 的应用程序在经过一段等待时间后就会相应地变成无论如何GNU的状态。而 SSPL 就并未这样的借此了。

GNU未必意味着我们的Valve就需过着“教诲”样的家庭。AWS（Amazon Web Services）从 MairaDB 类似于的该公司“占有到了价格低廉”，他们既不成就又不资助，带头而通过运营和售卖系统性服务从GNU应用程序中所获利。 我忽视，BSL 是一个不错的折中所方案，但其他的那些（非GNU）名衔我就没人那么低的评论者了，它们中所的一些或许不打算任何单方面。

一些创业者该公司选用了那些很难维护一定就会GNU的名衔，我忽视这就与GNU不日后系统性了。 GNU乡村要比他们巩固且有力得多！GNU乡村每天再版的示例数量是 MongoDB 和类似于该公司的 1000 倍。

信息化在于，一些大型且低电子技术含量的新项目是大多数该公司仅凭自身力十分困难算是的，而GNU乡村就能。比如时说，运用于磁带和视频压缩的 CODECs 新项目的开发新，有哪家电话供应商一心在实验室花个十亿美元来来作低清磁带，以作为他们下一款平板电脑的主要噱头？并未合伙。而 Jean-Marc Valin 的 the Speex CODEC 在来作，它是GNU的。 （编者同上：Speex是一个声音编码格式，运用于网络电话、网络服务电视台选用的语音编码，以 BSD GNU。）

是哪家平板电脑芯片供应商在研发应用程序运用于 5G 原型系统吗？不是，而GNU的 GNU Radio 在来作。 （编者同上：GNU Radio 是免费GNU的应用程序开发新工具新版本。它备有信号运营和检视的接口，被相当多运用于业余爱好者，学术机构和商业活动机构用来研究和构建网络连接系统。）

IBM 或者其他电脑该公司有来作造出一款操作系统，能像 Linux 一样被运营在如此多样的无论如何相同硬件上吗？并未任何合伙该公司来作到，哪怕只是西南方一点。

04

按规定性是亚太地区疑虑，警惕“non-literal copying”

OSCHINA： 据知，您开设了合伙GNU征询该公司，能时说明介绍一下吗？比如商业活动模式、是否盈利、运作得如何？今日，中所国仍未涌现了一批GNU力，然而大多数人们是缺少相应的GNU专业知识的，关于GNU集中管理您有何论述？

BP： 今天我主要的收入从中就是我的征询业务范围，我管这叫来作“Legal Engineering”。我尽力代理人公杰尼斯事务所和他们的的商品，一旦他们偏偏违带头到GNU应用程序系统性的发行权疑虑。我采取行动在大企业与GNU新项目两者之间，来相互配合两国两者之间，让两者都能令人满意。

同时，我也将这些案例统计数据给代理人，沦为了代理人和应用程序Valve两者之间的公路桥。我仍未有了很多该公司这类疑虑的最终案例，一再时说这让我收入丰厚，我很安慰我能以此谋生，还能在在等待时间来发展自己的新项目。

我也有一些来自中所国的的商品，这些大企业因为在GNU上回头了错路而沦为我的零售商。 实际上，这无疑是中所国大企业的疑虑，亚太地区都是是如此。

而且，该公司们在GNU上遇到的疑虑，并非不靠GNU集中管理就能解决的。最大的疑虑在于， 电子技术人员们给予了 4 年的低等教育，领到了应用程序工程的低等硕士，却并未上过一门叫来作“发行权”的第一课！于是，他们整日忙于将别人包括发行权的示例拆分重组进自己的商品中所，缺少优越性。这是他们的主要实习段落，但他们却对“发行权”这一概念一无所知！

一旦电子技术人员们不知如何下手时，他们就就会独创一下GNU新项目，日在此之后想到写成他们自己的。 很有可能，无形之中所他们就选用了无论如何相同的逻辑学思路来撰写成自己的新项目，尽管他们并未一行示例无论如何相同，选用的语言也不一样，但这仍是抄袭！这被特指“non-literal copying”，判决对这一小规模性早就熟门熟路了，而且还有特定的检测方法，叫来作“抽象过滤华东政法大学”。当然，还有“literal copying”，也就是直接从GNU新项目中所复制粘贴。偏偏，这些电子技术人员所在的该公司就就会沦为我的的商品。

我忽视每合伙中所国大企业都不应前提自家的应用程序Valve都明白该 copy 哪些、应该 copy 哪些。这些专业知识需在该公司层面上补课上了，尽管我忽视这不应是在领到一个软件工程硕士时就不应具备的。

我用英译者给一些该公司体育课，一上就是半天。一些经理还不情愿我守住电子技术人员们这么长三的实习等待时间，但是这往往能够为该公司在效率和普通法方面省下数百万的成本。

该公司内的GNU集中管理还有一个办法： 创建GNU审批委员就会（Open Source Review Board）。在商品的外观设计阶段，就把懂发行权、安全和和按规定性的人有秘密组织，以前提才就会剽窃，即使剽窃也可以避免浪费所来作的实习，来前提交货造出去的示例都是GNU按规定的。

我可以尽力大企业外观设计和运营这一整套按规定过程，当然如果你不只能我的尽力，Linux 基金就会还有个秘密组织也能尽力到你：。

05

澄清！大佬袒露不知不觉，小编听完致歉

之后， Bruce Perens 还造出书起了自己的兄弟姐妹小规模性，其儿子名叫 Valerie，她在加州大学洛杉矶分校伯克利分校出任，三人在独自仍未 30 年了。2000 年，他们的孩子 Stanley 造出生。在 Bruce 倒是，Stanley 是个英雄，他在低中所就所选修了救治和消防课程，并且身体力行。在新冠、叛变、大火中所，Stanley 冲在二线去尽力受伤的警察和民众。

小编用断肠道理告诉大家，有时候确有自己，头上三尺有神明，谨记“编造一张嘴，澄清跑断腿”。

06

见下文：采访始末（英译者原译者）

Q1:

In 2021, RMS attempted to return the FSF, and the OSI Board of Directors had shown their resistance to RMS. (_Response). Was it overact ? Why? Was there any conflict/contradictions between them? What do you think about it?

BP：People tend to polarize around their opinions of Richard Stallman: they either love him or hate him. It's been that way for about 40 years, it's just that more people know about Free Software now. I think the most important part of this issue is that Richard has a disability, and we should make accomodations for disabled people. I have not heard that he has an official doctor's diagnosis of being on the Autism spectrum. But it is obvious to people who know him. He is often unable to understand how people will react to his words and actions, and he can become very upset by people who think differently from him. Richard likes women, but because of his handicap he can be obnoxious to them, it has happened in my presence. But I have never seen it reach the level of violence or forcing. I guess encouraged by the rise of the MeToo movement, Richard was shunned. There has been much injustice toward women, and this must be corrected, and the perpetrators often deserve their shunning. The trouble with shunning is that it is not like a penalty from a court. It is imposed by a mob rather than a jury of people who understand their responsibility and think carefully. It doesn't have any defined ending, and there is not any opportunity for the shunned person to show that they have reformed their actions and to have the shunning end. It doesn't even admit to the possibility of reform, it is just punishment for the sake of punishment rather than as a means of correcting a person's behavior and having them again accepted by society.

So, there is nobody in the mob who says "Richard has had his penalty and we can stop shunning him now". FSF tried to do that, and there was lots of outcry, and in my opinion: not much thinking about what justice would really be. We need to consider opinions carefully: Women need justice, someone's handicap was the cause of the offense. We need to be fair to both the women and the handicapped person.

When the Open Source Initiative issued their opinion, they weren't thinking about that as hard as I would have liked them to. It is very tempting for an organization like theirs to make this sort of statement to take a moment in the spotlight of publicity, and this can actually do harm. I have problems with OSI because I think their continuing acceptance of new licenses as Open Source does damage to the community and fuels a slide toward licenses that are farther from the spirit of Open Source. And yet they continue to do it because without that, they would not be very relevant at all. And perhaps the RMS statement was more of the same. There is one relevant thing that OSI does, which is the work of Simon Phipps in influencing standards organizations to be more accomodating of Open Source by not allowing royalty-bearing patents in their standards. But even this work is restricted by OSI's corporate sponsors, for example when I was in Simon's role, one insisted that OSI not promote its own definition of Open Standards. So, OSI can't even wholeheartedly pursue our own cause. The rest of what OSI does is evangelism, and while that might once have been necessary, they are eclipsed by the very many enthusiastic evangelists we have in the community.

Q2:

Recently, GitHub suspended the accounts of some Russian devs that were sanctioned, which has had a really bad influence on Open Source. It seems like GitHub is losing the open source spirit (or geek spirit) by doing this. To some degree, there are more and more incidents of "geopolitical influence on open source"(also called "the weaponization of open source") in recent years, what do you think?

BP：Well, this is an interesting conundrum. On the one side, we have voices calling for "Ethical licenses" which would prohibit the use of Open Source to oppress people. I have objected to these licenses because they can't be enforced: Are we going to stop Putin by charging him with copyright infringement in a Russian court? That's more than silly.

On the other side, we do have a viable way to discourage Putin with our laws and courts. We can make sure he and his cronies don't profit in our economies, and we can damage the economy of Russia by excluding it. And this was done through real legal mechanisms, not mobs or un-enforceable extensions of Open Source licenses. The developers who were turned away from Github were connected with organizations that the United States sanctioned for bad actions connected with the war. If they contributed to Open Source, their code is still Open Source, and they can find a git repository web site in some other nation.

I think we can't disapprove of Github acting as required by United States law, just as we have to understand that Chinese companies don't have that much opportunity to publicly disregard the law of China. We can disapprove of the law, and work to reform the law if we think it's wrong, but I have no reason to believe this one is wrong and I don't disapprove so far.

I have no doubt that excluding developers was an awkward, first-time thing for github, and that they made mistakes as people often do when they do something for the first time. Of course there has been some discussion about it, but I can assure you this is not a big issue in the Open Source community. For security reasons we never wanted every bit of software on one site, and so there are other git repository web sites and we have lots of choices. And thus the community is not threatened.

What if there really was a problem with Github? We had a problem with a web site that almost all developers used for online discussions recently. The usual thing of the management trying to have more power than any project wanted them to have. In a few weeks, very many projects moved to another web site. Everyone in management at Github knows that we would do the same with them if they were a problem. Gitlab and a dozen others would love to have the business. But I see no reason that projects should move at this time.

Q3:

What do you think about the source-avaible license SSPL and BSL? It seems like more and more open-source startups trend to use source-avaible license, rather than open-source licenses which is suitable for OSD. So, do you think OSD will become an obsolete concept one day? How do you think about this phenomenon?

BP：I helped Monty Widenius (the author of MySQL and MariaDB) with the BSL. Software under the BSL automatically becomes fully Open Source after a time. The BSL text guarantees that. The SSPL offers no such guarantee. Open Source doesn't mean that our developers should take oaths of poverty, like monks, and live on handouts. Amazon Web Services was eating the lunch of companies like MariaDB. [use another metaphor if that doesn't work in Chinese] AWS ran the Open Source software and sold it as a service, without significantly contributing to its development or funding the developers. I thought the BSL was a good compromise. I don't think as highly about some of the other licenses, some are not compromises at all.

There are startups that do that, without a guarantee that the software will eventually become Open Source like that in the BSL. I don't think they are very relevant. The Open Source community is so much larger and more capable than them. We release 1000 times as much code as MongoDB and similar companies every day.

It has gotten to the point that there are some very large or highly technical projects that companies mostly can't do at all if they work alone, that the Open Source community does well. For example the development of CODECs, software for compressing voice and video. Did telephone manufacturers spend a billion dollars in their labs making the HD Audio for new phones, their major selling point? No, that is the Speex CODEC by Jean-Marc Valin, and it's Open Source. Did the cell phone chip manufacturers make the software that they used to prototype 5G systems? No, that's GNU Radio, and it's Open Source. Has IBM or any other computer company made an operating system as capable, that runs on as much different hardware, as Linux? No company ever got close to doing that.

Q4:

As we know, you found an open-source consulting company. Could you please give some details about it, like what is your business model? Does it profitable? How is it going well? Nowadays, China has emerged some open-source strength. However, most of people have insufficient knowledge about Open Source. Would you please share some experience？

BP：I am developing a web business that I can't talk about yet, but I think it will be big. There is still a lot of low-hanging fruit [things that people aren't doing yet that aren't that hard] on the web.

The main way I make money today is my consulting business, which I call Legal Engineering. I help law firms and their customers when they have accidentally infringed on the copyrights of Open Source software. My assignment is always to fix the infringement so that both the company and the Open Source project are satisfied. I always report to a lawyer, and I am the interface between lawyers and software developers. I have successfully resolved this sort of problem for many companies. I am happy to say that it pays well, which I appreciate because it allows me to make a living and still have time left over for my projects.

I am so happy to have Chinese customers! It's too bad that all of those companies became my customers by making mistakes with Open Source, but I get them fixed.

Let's start by saying this is not a China problem. I meet it in every country.

Companies face bigger problems with Open Source than governance. The biggest is that programmers can take an advanced degree in software engineering, spending 4 years or more in college, without having the first class in copyright. And then they spend every day at work combining other people's copyrighted works into a product, which is producing a derivative work. That is a copyright concept that they know nothing about, and it's their main job!

And when a programmer doesn't know how to do something, they might look at some Open Source software that does it, before they write their own version. And they might type in the exact same logic as the software they saw, without typing the same words or writing them in the same language, but that is still copying - it's called non-literal copying, and the courts know it very well and have a method of detecting it called Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison. Or, they might just cut and paste from the Open Source program into their own, that's literal copying. This is how the company they work for becomes my customer.

So, I would like every company in China to make sure their software developers understand what they should, and should not, copy. This has to be taught in companies for now, but I think it should be required for a computer science degree. When I do this in English, it's a half-day training, and managers hate to take programmers away from their work for so long. But it saves companies Millions in wasted work and legal issues.

The next step in governance of Open Source use within a company is to develop an Open Source Review Board. This is a way for software developers to involve people who understand copyright, and security, at the design phase of a product, so that copyrights are not infringed, so that work is not wasted because it turns out to be infringing; and so that when there is a security problem with Open Source, every copy in customer's hands gets fixed. I help companies design and operate this entire process, but if you don't want my help, the Linux Foundation has which will get you started.

About Family

I want to tell a story. I was exhibiting at an amateur radio conference, and I had my wife and son helping out in the booth. People in our community are used to us being very nerdy, and not so well-developed socially. A man walked up and said "Of course I've heard of you from Open Source. But I didn't know you were a normal person with a wife and child!" My wife found that hysterical, and for weeks would say "I didn't know you were a normal person who did..." whatever I was doing at the time. You can imagine.

So, there are things that are more important than my consulting business. My wife is Valerie, and we have been together for 30 years. Valerie works for the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley, where she helps them get the donations that keep the school alive. She's also an author, and recently has been writing about OKRs, a system for understanding business performance, for John Doerr's whatmatters.com . Together we enjoy travel, walks, the Bay area's many restaurants, and camping in our trailer. My son is Stanley, and he's a hero. Here in Berkeley, the high school offers elective classes to be an emergency medical technician, and a fire science class that prepares students to enter a firefighter academy. Stanley doesn't want to spend his time behind a desk, and so he graduated high school with his Emergency Medical Technician license, moved out of our home, and got right to work in ambulances. And this was just the time when COVID started. So, Stanley has taken care of the people in Alameda County, California (around the San Francisco Bay) for all of COVID, fires, riots, taking care of cops who have been shot when the shooter isn't caught yet, providing the medical help to mass vaccination sites in case someone has a reaction to the vaccine. He puts himself at risk to help other people every day. He has finished his training as a Paramedic now, which qualifies him to do more to help sick and hurt people. To do that, he worked in a hospital emergency room, and he's especially interested in cardiology so he appreciated being able to spend time assisting a heart doctor and learning from him.

Edge超越Safari沦为GUI端第二大HTML 写成了GNU应用程序没人申专利技术，带头被索赔该怎么办？ GoogleGNU电子技术惹非议，遭制造厂商集体声援

觉得不错，代为点个在看呀

。

艾得辛效果好吗
杭州看白癜风哪家比较好
石家庄治包皮过长医院
上海治早泄阳痿医院
苏州治疗男科医院