Some come to me and say, “but dude, we should give recognition to the kernel and say GNU/Linux”, and I tell them I don’t care about the kernel, am not saying GNU/Linux every time, it’s way too long and doesn’t roll off the tongue. Plus “Linux” sounds nerdy af, like, “blip bop kernel source code 00101000 10100100”, while GNU’s all about freedom, what really matters, being all like “am not your proprietary crap” repeated ad infinitum through the recursive acronym that is GNU, that’s proper big brain stuff right there rather than technical gibberish about a kernel.


This one paragraph abode is very tongue in cheek of course, but I still mean it though.

I’ve spent a few years arguing for GNU/Linux or even just GNU on reddit, mostly in r/linuxmasterrace, and I was pleased to get quite a few upvotes every now and then, in a place where you can find people that will say things like “I make a point of never saying GNU/Linux, it’s called Linuuux!!!111!”

Here’s some comments I still can hardly believe got upvoted :

68 points! - https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/d01jb1/richard_stallman_is_giving_a_talk_at_microsoft/ez5tv3t/

35 points! - https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/5vivqm/stallman_id_just_like_to_interject_for_a_moment/de2k344/

13 points! - https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/iyds65/no_richard_its_linux_not_gnulinux/g6enrjc/

14 points! (this copypasta works well it seems) - https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/jh0tb9/the_real_os_king/g9vra1r/

14 points! - https://old.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/bu2yh8/i_use_gnu_btw/ep7hy91/

And many more but with less upvotes or less interesting.

  • Armand_Raynal@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    The recursive acronym idea behind the name GNU is nice tho.

    It’s true that Linux has a nice ring to it, but GNU ain’t that bad and it can be pronouced “new” or spelling the letters, or even “gannooo” if you really want to x)

    Linux has gain so much more recognition from being the only name ever used by big corps the media, because like open source … copypasta time :

    spoiler

    Calling it by the name of the original project or by the name of the kernel has implications.

    Linux, the kernel, as the name of the whole system, is a pro corporate term that says our system is defined by running a particular kernel and it was started in 1991 by a CS student for fun.

    GNU, the original name of the project to create a full libre system for PC, that is, a system assembled from numerous libre software that respect’s the user’s freedom by giving him absolute control over his hardware, say that our system was started in 1984 by people who thought you, I and everybody else deserved to be able to use their computers on their own terms rather having to comply with the conditions of something like microsoft.

    Also by calling it Linux you refer to all system running the Linux kernel. Is that what we are about? I don’t know about you but stuff like android and chromeos, that does not interest me.

    By calling it GNU you refer to all libre systems in general. So our distros, and stuff like debian/kfreeBSD and the BSD distros -just like what people mean when they say “install linux” in general for instance-, unless you specifically want to exclude those distros then GNU/Linux makes sens.

    A kernel really isn’t a good way to define our libre system. It’s assembled from numerous libre software projects to make a full system that respect our freedom, that’s what defines our system, GNU.

    Businesses only use the terms “linux” and “open source”, so they have much more exposition, but there’s no point in using those terms unless you have the same agenda as businesses like microsoft who says it loves “linux” and “open source”. Libre software and GNU are the original, freedom referring, on point, and shorter terms.

    An example on the top of my mind is people saying “linux all the things!”, they really mean “free everything!”.

    Open source also introduces a confusion with people thinking it’s all about being able to read the source code. The open source definition is clear on that, modifications and sharing the modified versions must be allowed. It’s pretty much the same things as the 4 freedoms of the Libre software definition, it really is just a corporate friendly rebranding of Libre software.

    If a kernel is what defines our system, does windows becomes one of our beloved distros if microsoft decide to make Linux their kernel with all the rest basically the same? That kinda is what chromeos is with google instead of microsoft, which isn’t far from macos, and that’s surely not what we are about here.

    Words control ideas, ideas control people.

    spoiler

    The war is ideological and it started by creating and popularizing words, really newspeak, to allow corps that leverage proprietary software to talk about libre software without having a stroke. Words control ideas, ideas control people.

    People can only believe that microsoft loves “”““linux””“” if they don’t know what “”““linux””“” is because obfuscated behind a purely technical term, instead of the original, ideologically charged term, GNU.

    Same thing for open source. The definition is basically the same as libre software, but it’s a new term. Why? To avoid saying free as in freedom and replace it by “source” and “openness” … It even introduced a new ambuigity, now a lot of people believe that “open source” means that it’s just about the code source being available …

    By replacing the original, ideologically charged lingo, by corporate newspeak, they paved the way for revisionism :

    https://youtu.be/fJA9eiUktcA

    Listen to that, a despicable piece of propaganda meant to put into the heads of people who never heard of GNU nor even linux before, a little and simple bullshit narrative that completely bury the true origins, the true story of libre software, and its original goals.

    I don’t know about y’all, but my system wasn’t started in 1991 by a cs student for fun, and it’s not about being free of charge and surely not either about running a specific kernel, my system was started in 1984 by people who thought I and everybody else deserved freedom, deserved to control the hardware we bought.

    So I don’t mention the kernel personally if am somewhere where I know people will understand me by referring to the system by only “GNU”, like here. I don’t care about running a specific kernel, I care about my system obeying me, I care about freedom.