diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'docs/social-inertia.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | docs/social-inertia.md | 63 |
1 files changed, 63 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/docs/social-inertia.md b/docs/social-inertia.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..cc8c06e --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/social-inertia.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +--- +Generator: 'texi2html 1.82' +description: Untitled Document +distribution: global +keywords: Untitled Document +resource-type: document +title: Untitled Document +... + +1. Overcoming Social Inertia {#overcoming-social-inertia .chapter} +============================ + +@firstcopyingnotice{{Copyright © 2007, 2009 Richard Stallman\ + {This essay was originally published on <http://gnu.org>, in 2007. This +version is part of @fsfsthreecite} Almost two decades have passed since +the combination of GNU and Linux first made it possible to use a PC in +freedom. We have come a long way since then. Now you can even buy a +laptop with GNU/Linux preinstalled from more than one hardware +vendor—although the systems they ship are not entirely free software. So +what holds us back from total success? + +The main obstacle to the triumph of software freedom is social inertia. +It exists in many forms, and you have surely seen some of them. Examples +include devices that only work on Windows and commercial web sites +accessible only with Windows. If you value short-term convenience +instead of freedom, you might consider these reason enough to use +Windows. Most companies currently run Windows, so students who think +short-term want to learn how to use it and ask their schools to teach +it. Schools teach Windows, produce graduates that are used to using +Windows, and this encourages businesses to use Windows. + +Microsoft actively nurtures this inertia: it encourages schools to +inculcate dependency on Windows, and contracts to set up web sites that +then turn out to work only with Internet Explorer. + +A few years ago, Microsoft ads argued that Windows was cheaper to run +than GNU/Linux. Their comparisons were debunked, but it is worth noting +the deeper flaw in their argument, the implicit premise which cites a +form of social inertia: “Currently, more technical people know Windows +than GNU/Linux.” People who value their freedom would not give it up to +save money, but many business executives believe ideologically that +everything they possess, even their freedom, should be for sale. + +Social inertia consists of people who have given in to social inertia. +When you surrender to social inertia, you become part of the pressure it +exerts on others; when you resist it, you reduce it. We conquer social +inertia by identifying it, and resolving not to be part of it. + +Here a weakness holds our community back: most GNU/Linux users have +never even heard the ideas of freedom that motivated the development of +GNU, so they still judge matters based on short-term convenience rather +than on their freedom. This makes them vulnerable to being led by the +nose by social inertia, so that they become part of the inertia. + +To build our community’s strength to resist, we need to talk about free +software and freedom—not merely about the practical benefits that open +source supporters cite. As more people recognize what they need to do to +overcome the inertia, we will make more progress. + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + +This document was generated by *tonghuix* on *March 25, 2016* using +[*texi2html 1.82*](http://www.nongnu.org/texi2html/).\ |