Re: [PATCH] manual: Remove warning in the documentation of the abort function

[Samuel Thibault <samuel dot thibault at gnu dot org>]

Alexandre Oliva, le sam. 12 oct. 2019 13:54:17 -0300, a ecrit:
> On Oct 11, 2019, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@gnu.org> wrote:
> > Alexandre Oliva, le ven. 11 oct. 2019 21:24:36 -0300, a ecrit:
> >> then it wouldn't be the case that one could change it to express any
> >> idea whatsoever, or to serve any function one could conceive of.
> 
> > Which doesn't mean it backs free speech more than anything else
> 
> No, no, the argument is precisely that *because* it appears to back
> anything the way you pointed out, it can be concluded that it actually
> stands for freedom, free speech specifically.

But my point is that it's not *specifically* about free speech.  Going
the way you suggested, anybody could argue anything and introduce any
kind of not-so-related things in the libc manual, and thus actually
*blurrying* the point of free software.

> You'll notice that the four freedoms even enable software to be used to
> build censorship systems.  That doesn't mean the four freedoms are for
> censorship,

But your reasoning *can* go that way. If you didn't mean your reasoning
to go that way, you'll have to understand that it is a meaningless
reasoning.

> It is quite disturbing and worrying to find out that some Free
> Software supporters do not realize that it does, or even reject that
> it does :-/

I am not rejecting that it does.  What I mean is that you can not claim
that free software is about freedom of speech in particular, because
that's just one of anything that free software allows.

Samuel