Re: [Fsfe-uk] Bill Gates to get a knighthood?

[Philip Hunt]

On Monday 26 January 2004 12:50 am, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-01-25 21:33:09 +0000 Philip Hunt <address@hidden> wrote:
> > While it could be argued that this doesn't matter, because a
> > knighthood is merely a symbolic title, I feel it is important
> > because people will tend to think of Gates in an undeservedly good
> > light,
>
> I doubt that. Every time a computer is crashed by his firm's software,
> the opposite seems to happen.

Indeed so, but Gates with a knighthood is likely to be more respected 
than gates without a knighthood; indeed that's the whole point of
the honours system.

> However, what does this have to do with us? Although you do not say it
> directly, I think you may want us to start some sort of campaign
> against this.

I think it is disgusting that Gates is honoured. Thousands of people 
have done more to advance computing than he has, for example the people
who invented compilers, word processing, windowing systems, object
oriented programming, tcp/ip, the Web, email, etc.

What has gates and his company invented, apart from innovative methods
for vendor lock-in and other ways of eliminating freedom? Nothing.

(Actually, I exaggerate. They invented Microsoft Bob. What a great
success that was.)

> I would rather we all spend time productively working on
> free software, campaigning against dodgy decisions on patenting and
> using the benefits it brings to highlight Gates's basic errors.
>
> Please play the ball, not the man. If Gates does eradicate spam and
> viruses properly within two years, like he said on the news today,
> without removing yet more freedom,

Expecting Gates not to remove freedom is like expecting dung beetles
not to eat shit. 

-- 
Phil Hunt, address@hidden