How I do my computing -- stallman

 http://www.stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

 

I use a Lemote machine which has a free startup program and all free software. Since the processor is a variant of MIPS, Windows does not support it.

I formerly used an OLPC. I stopped because the OLPC project made their machine act as a platform for running Windows.

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 most of the changes.

I have several free web browsers on my laptop, but I generally use my own machine only to talk with a few sites operated for or by the GNU Project, FSF or me. I will 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 programming languages I use are Lisp and C. They are also my favorite languages. However, since around 1992 I have been very busy with free software activism, too busy to do much programming. As a result, I have not had time to learn newer languages such as Perl, Python or Ruby. I recently did read a book about Java and found it interesting to compare with C.

I firmly refuse to install non-free software or tolerate its installed presence on my computer or on computers set up for me to use.

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 utterly 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 possessor of a copy of it, so I don't see an ethical obligation to refrain from this. Of course, I explain that they should migrate the machines to free software.

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 let them get any of my personal data.)

That reasoning assumes I was not responsible for setting up those machines or for how it 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.

I do have a twitter account called rmspostcomments. I use it to log in on some web sites to post comments on articles, but I do not post on twitter. 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.

As for Facebook or Google+, I reject them on principle because they require people to use their "real names". I am proud to identify myself when stating my views, but I can afford to because I am in a fairly safe position. There are people who rationally fear reprisals (from employers, or bullies, or the state) if they state their views. Let's reject any social networking site which has that requirement!

Of course, Facebook is bad for many other reasons as well.

I believe that one should not buy or tolerate any product with Digital Restrictions Management unless one personally possesses the means to break the DRM chains. I do not have a copy of DeCSS, so I do not buy or rent encrypted DVDs, or even accept them as gifts. You shouldn't do so either, unless you have DeCSS or another free program to play them with. DRM is an attack on your freedom, and all the companies involved in making the products are coconspirators.