Hacker News Reader

So the Free Software movement is oppressive because it is trying to change the software culture from proprietary to free?

Seems like a moot point given that proprietary isn't free to begin with.

Care to explain?

As I read it, it seems a tautology: if one seeks change, it seems obvious that the initial condition has to be different than the target one.

It was oppressive to try to change a culture that called for her to be "retroactively aborted"?

I don't understand what this means.

Can you clarify?