GNU释义

GNU释义
        本文版权为 Free Software Foundation, Inc. 所有, Copyright (C) 1985, 1993 

        Permission is granted to anyone to make or distribute verbatim copies 
        of this document, in any medium, provided that the copyright notice and 
        permission notice are preserved, and that the distributor grants the 
        recipient permission for further redistribution as permitted by this 
        notice. 

        任何人在拿到这文件的同时便受予他透过任何媒体，复制与传播本文章一字不变 
        的复本的权利，前题是本版权宣告与授权声明必须保留不动，而且散播者必须受予 
        接受者如同本声明一样再次传播的权利。 

        Modified versions may not be made. 

        本文不允许更改。 

        The GNU Manifesto 
        ***************** 
        GNU 释义 
        ******** 

        The GNU Manifesto which appears below was written by Richard 
        Stallman at the beginning of the GNU project, to ask for 
        3 participation and support. For the first few years, it was 
        updated in minor ways to account for developments, but now it 
        seems best to leave it unchanged as most people have seen it. 

        『GNU 释义』一文乃是由 Richard Stallman 在 GNU 计画刚开始进行时 
        所撰写，以争取其它人的加入及支持。在刚开始的几年，为了记录计画 
        的发展，本文有些许的修订，但是现在看来最好保持目前最多人所看过 
        的版本而不再做修订。 

        Since that time, we have learned about certain common 
        misunderstandings that different wording could help avoid. 
        Footnotes added in 1993 help clarify these points. 

        从那时起，我们慢慢熟悉不同的用字可以避免某些特定的误解。在 1993 
        年所增加的注解可以澄清这些疑点。 

        For up-to-date information about the available GNU software, 
        please see the latest issue of the GNU's Bulletin. The list is 
        much too long to include here. 

        想获知 GNU 软体的最新动态，请参考最新版的 GNU's Bulletin。这份 
        列表因为太长，所以在此不引用。 

        What's GNU? Gnu's Not Unix! 
        ============================ 

        什麽是 GNU ? GNU 是 Gnu's Not Unix! 的缩写。 
        ============================================ 

        GNU, which stands for Gnu's Not Unix, is the name for the complete 
        Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it 

        away free to everyone who can use it.(1) Several other volunteers are 
        helping me. Contributions of time, money, programs and equipment are 
        greatly needed. 

        GNU，Gnu's Not Unix 的缩写，是我正在写的一个与 UNIX 相容的软体系统， 
        9目的在於我能够自由的把此系统给想要用它的人。(1) 有好几个自愿者在帮我的忙。 
        我们非常的需要（希望）您也能够贡献时间、金钱、程式或者是机器来参加此计画。 So far we have an Emacs text 
        editor with Lisp for writing editor 
        commands, a source level debugger, a yacc-compatible parser generator, 
        a linker, and around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is 
        nearly completed. A new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled 
        itself and may be released this year. An initial kernel exists but 
        many more features are needed to emulate Unix. When the kernel and 
        compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system 
        suitable for program development. We will use TeX as our text 
        formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will use the free, 
        portable X window system as well. After this we will add a portable 
        Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other 
        things, plus on-line documentation. We hope to supply, eventually, 
        everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more. 

        到目前为止我们已经有了一个利用 Lisp 当巨集命令的编辑器，一个原始码层 
        次的除错器，一个 yacc 相容的语法分析程式产生器，一个联结器，和大概 35 个 
        公用程式。有一个 shell （命令解译器）已经几乎完成了。一个新的、具可携性的、 
        有最佳化功能的Ｃ编译器已经可以自我编译而可以在今年发表了。有一个初期的核心 
        但是需要更多的特性以模拟 UNIX。当核心和编译器都结束後，我们就能够传播一个 
        适合发展程式的 GNU 系统。我们会使用 TeX 当我们的文字排版器，但是也正在撰 
        写一个 nroff。我们也会用免费的、具可携性的 Ｘ 视窗系统。之後我们会加一个 
        有可携性的 Common Lisp、一个 Empire 游戏、一个试算表、和其他各式各样的东西， 
        以及线上的文件。我们希望最後能提供普通 UNIX 系统所能提供的每一件有用的东西， 
        甚至还要更多。 

        GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to 
        Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our 
        experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to 
        have longer file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system, 
        file name completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and 
        perhaps eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several 
        Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C 
        and Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will 
        try to support UUCP, MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for 
        communication. 

        GNU 一定能够执行 Unix 的程式，但是不会和 Unix 完全一样。我们会根据我们 
        在其它作业系统的经验来改进所有可以增加便利性的地方。特别是我们计划拥有较长 
        的档名、档案版本号码、一个不怕当机的档案系统，或许还要有自动档名补全、与终 
        端机无关的显示支援、可能最後还要有一个以 Lisp 为基础的视窗系统，可以使好几 
        个 Lisp 程式和普通的 Unix 程式能共同分享一个萤幕。C 和 Lisp 都将会成为系统 
        的程式语言。我们会设法支援 UUCP，MIT Chaosnet，及 Internet 的通讯协定。 

        GNU is aimed initially at machines in the 68000/16000 class with 
        virtual memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run 
        on. The extra effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left 
        to someone who wants to use it on them. 

        GNU 最初的目标是在有虚拟计忆体，68000/16000 系列的机器上发展，因为这样的 
        环境是最容易发展程式来实现 GNU 的机器。剩下来让 GNU 能在其它较小的机器执行的 
        工作，将会留给那些希望能在这些机器上使用 GNU 的人。 

        To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the `G' in the word 
        `GNU' when it is the name of this project. 

        为了避免令人不悦的混淆，请各位提到此计划的名字 `GNU' 时务必要把 `G' 的音 
        发出来。 

        （译者注：gnu 查字典是非洲的大羚羊，Ｇ不发音。） 

        Why I Must Write GNU 
        ==================== 

        我为什麽一定要写 GNU 
        ==================== 
        I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I 
        must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to 
        divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share 
        with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this 
        way. I cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a 
        software license agreement. For years I worked within the Artificial 
        Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities, 
        but eventually they had gone too far: I could not remain in an 
        institution where such things are done for me against my will. 

        我认为『如果我喜欢一个程式的话，那我就应该分享给其他喜欢这个程式的人』 
        这句话是一个金科玉律。软体商欲个别击破使用者，使他们同意不把软体和他人分享。 
        我拒绝以这种方式破坏使用者的团结。我的良心使我不会签下一个不开放的合约或是 
        软体授权合约。我在 MIT AI 实验室对抗这种趋势和其他的冷淡好几年，但是最後事情 
        糟糕到：我没办法待在一个处理事情的方法与我的意愿相违的机构。 

        So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have 
        decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I 
        will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I 
        have resigned from the AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent 
        me from giving GNU away. 
        为了我能继续使用电脑而不蒙羞，我决定要集合一足够量的自由软体以使我能够 
        不使用那些没有自由的软体。我离开 AI 实验室为的就是不给 MIT 有任何法律上的藉 
        口来阻止我把 GNU 送给其他人。 

        Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix 
        ==================================== 

        为什麽 GNU 将会和 UNIX 相容 
        =========================== 

        Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential 
        features of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what 
        Unix lacks without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix 
        would be convenient for many other people to adopt. 

        Unix 并不是我理想的系统，但是它也不会太差。Unix 基本的特性似乎是蛮优良 
        的，而且我想我能够在不牺牲原有特性之下加进 Unix 缺少的地方。况且一个和 Unix 
        相容的系统可以让较多的人容易接受。 

        How GNU Will Be Available 
        ========================= 

        GNU 将要如何让他人取得 
        ====================== 

        GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to 
        modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to 
        restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary 
        modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all 
        versions of GNU remain free. 

        GNU 不是公开的，毫无约束的软体（public domain）。我们将会允许每一个人 
        修改及传播 GNU，但是绝不允许传播者对他传播的程式再加进其他的限制。也就是说， 
        不允许将修改後的程式占为己有。我希望能确定 GNU 所有的版本皆能保持自由。 

        Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help 
        ======================================= 

        为什麽有很多程式设计者愿意帮忙 
        ============================== 

        I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and 
        want to help. 
        我发现有很多程式设计者对 GNU 感兴趣而且愿意帮忙 。 

        Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system 
        software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them 
        to feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel 
        as comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the 
        sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used 
        essentially forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The 
        purchaser of software must choose between friendship and obeying the 
        law. Naturally, many decide that friendship is more important. But 
        those who believe in law often do not feel at ease with either choice. 
        They become cynical and think that programming is just a way of making 
        money. 

        很多程式设计者对系统软体的商业化感到不悦。这可能使他们赚更多的钱， 
        但是一般而言这使的他们有与其他的程式设计者冲突的感觉而非大家都是同志的 
        感觉。程式设计者对友谊的最基本表现就是把程式分享出来；而当前的市场运作 
        基本上禁止程式设计者彼此之间视为朋友。软体购买者必须在友谊和守法之间做 
        一选择。自然地，有很多选择了友谊比较重要。但是那些相信法律的人常常没办法 
        安心的做下任一选择。他们变的愤世忌俗且认为写程式只不过是赚钱的一种方法而已。 

        By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can 
        be hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as 
        an example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in 
        sharing. This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if 
        we use software that is not free. For about half the programmers I 
        talk to, this is an important happiness that money cannot replace. 

        透过撰写及使用 GNU 而非私有的程式，我们可以热情的对待每一个人并且遵守 
        法律。此外，GNU 更是一个激发与集结大家和我们一起分享的典□及号志。这样子 
        能够给我们一种和谐的感觉，这感觉是我们为那些不自由的软体工作所不能得到的。 
        大概有一半和我谈过的程式设计师认为这是一个金钱所不能替换的、很重要的快乐。 

        How You Can Contribute 
        ====================== 

        你能够如何贡献 
        ============== 

        I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and 
        money. I'm asking individuals for donations of programs and work. 

        我请电脑制造商捐献机器及金钱。我呼吁个人贡献程式与精力。 

        One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU 
        will run on them at an early date. The machines should be complete, 
        ready to use systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not 
        in need of sophisticated cooling or power. 

        如果你贡献机器的话，你可以期待的一个结果就是 GNU 可以早点在你提供的 
        机器上面执行。机器必须是完整的、马上可用的系统，可以在住宅区内使用，而且 
        不需要复杂的冷却及电力系统。 

        I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time 
        work for GNU. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would 
        be very hard to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not 
        work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this 
        problem is absent. A complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility 
        programs, each of which is documented separately. Most interface 
        specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each contributor 
        can write a compatible replacement for a single Unix utility, and make 
        it work properly in place of the original on a Unix system, then these 
        utilities will work right when put together. Even allowing for Murphy 
        to create a few unexpected problems, assembling these components will 
        be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer communication and 
        will be worked on by a small, tight group.) 
        我发现有很多的程式师渴望为 GNU 贡献部份□暇的精力。对大部分的计画而言， 
        如此部份的、分散的工作非常难以协调；大家独立写的各部份可能没办法合在一起 
        工作。但是就取代 Unix 的特定任务来说就没有这个问题。一个完整的 Unix 系统 
        包括了上百个工具程式，每一个程式都分别有所描述。大部分的界面规格都因 Unix 
        相容性的缘故而是固定的。如每一个贡献者能够写一个某个 Unix 工具的相容替代品， 
        让它在 Unix 下能正确的取代原来程式的工作，那麽这些工具集合在一起时便能正常 
        工作。即使允许 Murphy 再制造一些出乎意料的问题，把这些部份组合起来仍然是件 
        可行的工作。（系统核心的工作就需要较密切的沟通，且只有一群紧密的小组能够参加） 

        If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full 
        or part time. The salary won't be high by programmers' standards, but 
        I'm looking for people for whom building community spirit is as 
        important as making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated 
        people to devote their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them 
        the need to make a living in another way. 

        如果有人贡献金钱，那麽我就能够请几个全职或临时的人。以程式师的标准 
        来说，这薪水不是很高，但是我要找的是那些认为建立团队精神和赚钱一样重要 
        的人。我认为提供奉献的人另一种维持生计的方式，是使他们能够全心全力投入 
        GNU 工作的一种方法。 

        Why All Computer Users Will Benefit 
        =================================== 

        为什麽所有的电脑使用者都会受益 
        ============================== 

        Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system 
        software free, just like air.(2) 

        只要 GNU 一写好，每个人都能够自由的取得优良的系统软体，就像空气一样。(2) 

        This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix 
        license. It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming 
        effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the 
        state of the art. 

        这不只是仅仅省下大家一笔 Unix 的版权费而已。这更意味著大家可以避免白白 
        浪费掉重复设计系统的工作。这省下来的力气可以转而投入现有科技水准的提升。 

        Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result, 
        a user who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them 
        himself, or hire any available programmer or company to make them for 
        him. Users will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company 
        which owns the sources and is in sole position to make changes. 

        每一个人都能取得完整的程式码。因此，需要更改系统的使用者总是能自由的 
        自行修改之，或雇用任何能够胜任的程式师或公司来替他做这件事。使用者不再 
        需要看某一个拥有原始码的程式师或公司的脸色，且在修改程式这件事上，他是 
        处於独立不受影响的地位。 

        Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment 
        by encouraging all students to study and improve the system code. 
        Harvard's computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be 
        installed on the system if its sources were not on public display, and 
        upheld it by actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very 
        much inspired by this. 

        学校将能够透过鼓励所有的学生学习及改进程式码的方式提供更富教育性的 
        环境。哈佛的电脑实验室曾经有这样一个政策：不允许一个不能公开展示原始码 
        的程式安装到系统里面，而且拒绝安装某些程式以展示贯彻的决心。我从这件事 
        得到不少启发。 

        Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software 
        and what one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted. 
        最後，谁该拥有这个系统软体的顾虑及谁被允许或不允许运用这软体做什麽事 
        的限制都会解除。 

        Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including 
        licensing of copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through 
        the cumbersome mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is, 
        which programs) a person must pay for. And only a police state can 
        force everyone to obey them. Consider a space station where air must 
        be manufactured at great cost: charging each breather per liter of air 
        may be fair, but wearing the metered gas mask all day and all night is 
        intolerable even if everyone can afford to pay the air bill. And the 
        TV cameras everywhere to see if you ever take the mask off are 
        outrageous. It's better to support the air plant with a head tax and 
        chuck the masks. 

        为了使使用程式者付费，包括授权数量，必须透过累赘的机制来测量使用者 
        需要为哪个程式付出多少钱，总是使社会付出大量的成本。而且只有警方能使每 
        个人都遵守之。考虑一个必须用很高的成本制造空气的太空站：对每呼吸一升空气 
        收费可能蛮公平的，但是成天带著空气记录器的口罩是无法忍受的，即使每个人 
        都有能力付空气费。而且到处都是监视器监视你是否为了逃避计费而拿掉呼吸罩， 
        是非常侮辱人的。倒不如拿开呼吸罩改收人头税。 
        Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as 
        breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free. 

        拷贝大部份或部份的程式对一个程式师而言是和呼吸一样自然且有益的事。拷贝 
        软体应该要这麽自由。 

        Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU's Goals 
        ============================================== 

        就GNU 的理想而言，一些容易澄清的反对意见 
        ======================================== 

        "Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can't 
        rely on any support." 

        "You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the 
        support." 

        『如果它是免费的话就没有人会用它，因为这表示他们没有任何协助可以 
        依赖。』 
        『你必须对程式收费，用来支持提供支援所需之费用。』 

        If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free 
        without service, a company to provide just service to people who have 
        obtained GNU free ought to be profitable.(3) 

        如果有人宁愿花钱买有售後服务的 GNU 而非免费得到没有服务的 GNU ，一家 
        专门为那些免费拿到 GNU 的人提供服务的公司应该会很赚钱。(3) 

        We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming 
        work and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on 
        from a software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough 
        people, the vendor will tell you to get lost. 

        我们必须辨别程式支援和仅做售後服务方式上的不同。前者是软体公司所不能 
        依靠的。如果没有足够多的人和你有相同的问题，软体公司可能会让你陷入无助 
        之地。 

        If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way 
        is to have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any 
        available person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any 
        individual. With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of 
        consideration for most businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is 
        still possible for there to be no available competent person, but this 
        problem cannot be blamed on distribution arrangements. GNU does not 
        eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them. 

        如果你的事业需要倚靠支援，唯一的方法就是准备好一切所需的原始码和工具。 
        然後你可以聘请任何一位可以胜任的人来解决你的问题。你不须任由某人摆布。 
        就 UNIX 而言，原始码的价钱让大部分的企业无法考虑这种作法。用 GNU 的话 
        这就很容易了。但是还是有可能找不到可以胜任的人的情况，但是这个问题 
        不能怪罪传播的方法。GNU 并没有解决世界上所有的问题，只是其中的一部份而已。 

        Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need 
        handholding: doing things for them which they could easily do 
        themselves but don't know how. 

        同时，对电脑一无所知的使用者须要帮助：为他们做一些他们自己能轻易做到， 
        但不晓得如何做的事。 

        Such services could be provided by companies that sell just 
        hand-holding and repair service. If it is true that users would rather 
        spend money and get a product with service, they will also be willing 
        to buy the service having got the product free. The service companies 
        will compete in quality and price; users will not be tied to any 
        particular one. Meanwhile, those of us who don't need the service 
        should be able to use the program without paying for the service. 

        这样子的服务可以由专门维修的公司提供。如果使用者真的宁愿花钱买一个有 
        售後服务的软体，他们也将愿意为免费得到的软体买些服务。这些服务公司会在 
        品质和价钱上竞争；使用者将不会受限於特定的一加公司。同时，我们这些不须要 
        服务的人也能够自由的使用程式而不须要花钱在服务上。 

        "You cannot reach many people without advertising, and you must 
        charge for the program to support that." 

        "It's no use advertising a program people can get free." 

        『没有广告的话你就没办法让很多人知道你的东西，而你必须对程式收钱以 
        支持广告经费。』 

        『广告一个别人可以免费得到的程式是没有用的。』 

        There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be 
        used to inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But 
        it may be true that one can reach more microcomputer users with 
        advertising. If this is really so, a business which advertises the 
        service of copying and mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful 
        enough to pay for its advertising and more. This way, only the users 
        who benefit from the advertising pay for it. 

        有多种形式免费的或很便宜的传播媒介可以用来让不少的电脑使用者知道 
        像 GNU 之类的事。可是刊登广告可以触及更多微电脑的使用者可能是真的。如果是 
        这样的话，一个刊登广告提供拷贝及邮购 GNU 的事业应该可以赚的远超过它所投资 
        的广告费。在这种机制下，只有从广告中获益的使用者才须要为之付费。 

        On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and 
        such companies don't succeed, this will show that advertising was not 
        really necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates 
        don't want to let the free market decide this?(4) 

        另一方面，如果很多人透过朋友拿到 GNU，而上述的事业没有成功，这就显示 
        了 GNU 并不须要借助广告来传播。为什麽自由市场的拥护者不想要让自由市场决定 
        这件事？(4) 

        "My company needs a proprietary operating system to get a 
        competitive edge." 

        『我的公司需要一个专属的作业系统才能够较有竞争力。』 

        GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of 
        competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but 
        neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and 
        they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this 
        one. If your business is selling an operating system, you will not 
        like GNU, but that's tough on you. If your business is something else, 
        GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of 
        selling operating systems. 

        GNU 将会把系统软体移出竞争的领域。你将无法在这方面占有优势，但同样的 
        你的对手也无法在这方面胜过你。你和他们会在其他方面竞争，而在这方面互相 
        获益。如果你的事业就是卖作业系统，你大概不会喜欢 GNU，不过这会很为难你。 
        如果你的事业是其他方面的话，GNU 可以让你省下研发作业系统所需要的昂贵经费。 

        I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many 
        manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.(5) 

        我希望能见到 GNU 的发展受到许多制造商及使用者的支持，以减低双方的 
        花费。(5) 
        "Don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?" 

        『难道程式师不应该从他的创造力获得回报吗？』 

        If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. 
        Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society 
        is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for 
        creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be 
        punished if they restrict the use of these programs. 

        如果有甚麽事值得回报的话，那非贡献社会莫数了。创造力可以是一种对社会 
        的贡献，但是必须以社会能够自由使用其结果为限。如果程式师因写出创新的程式 
        就应得到报酬的话，同理如果他们对这些程式的使用设限的话，他们也该受罚。 

        "Shouldn't a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his 
        creativity?" 

        『难道程式师不能为他的创造力要求回馈吗？』 

        There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to 
        maximize one's income, as long as one does not use means that are 
        destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today 
        are based on destruction. 

        希望工作有所报酬，或是使自己有最大的收入并没有什麽不对的，只要不要用 
        破坏性的手段就可以了。但是在现今软体领域内常用的手段却都是以破坏为依归的。 

        Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of 
        it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the 
        ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth 
        that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate 
        choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction. 


        限制一个程式的使用□围，以从使用者身上获取金钱是具有破坏性的，因为 
        那些限制减少了程式的应用□围。这减少了人类能由此程式所得到的财富。如果 
        可以任意的设限，其恶果就是任意的破坏。 

        The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to 
        become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become 
        poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or, 
        the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if 
        everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one 
        to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one's creativity 
        does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that 
        creativity. 

        一个好公民不会用这麽有破坏性的手段来致富的原因是，如果大家都这样做的 
        话，我们会因为彼此的互相攻击而变的更穷。这是不变的真理，或者说是金科玉律。 
        因为我不愿见到每个人都藏私的後果，所以我认为这样做是不对的。特别是，想要 
        由创造力获得回馈的欲望，大致而言并不能作为剥夺全世界的整个或部份创造力的 
        正当理由。 

        "Won't programmers starve?" 

        『难道程式设计师不会因此而挨饿吗?』 

        I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us 
        cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making 
        faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives 
        standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something 
        else. 

        我可以回答说，没有人被强迫当程式师啊！我们一般人没办法站在街上扮鬼脸 
        就可以赚钱的。但是我们也并非注定要选择一辈子站在街上扮鬼脸，然後挨饿。 
        我们能做其他的事。 
        But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's 
        implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers 
        cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing. 

        可是这种回答是错误的，因为它认同问题本身隐含的假设：如果程式师没有 
        软体的所有权的话，没有人会付程式师一毛钱。在大家的认知里，这好像是用二分法 
        分开的。 

        The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be 
        possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as 
        now. 

        让程式师不会挨饿的真正原因是他们仍然可以靠设计程式赚钱。只是没有像 
        现在那麽多罢了。 

        Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. 
        It is the most common basis because it brings in the most money. If it 
        were prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would 
        move to other bases of organization which are now used less often. 
        There are always numerous ways to organize any kind of business. 

        限制软体的拷贝并不是做软体生意的基本条件。这常被视为基本条件的原因是 
        因为这样子赚的钱最多。如果这种方法被禁止，或者被客户拒绝的话，软体事业 
        就会用其他现在比较少用的方法。世上永远有很多种方法来组织任何一种事业的。 

        Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it 
        is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not 
        considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they 
        now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice 
        either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than 
        that.) 

        在此新的环境中，程式设计可能不再像现在有这麽高的利润。但是这不是用来 
        反对这种改变的理由。没有人认为销售员目前的薪水是不公平的，如果程式师赚 
        一样多钱，那也不是一件不公平的事。（事实上，程式师仍然可以赚比这样多很多 
        的钱。） 

        "Don't people have a right to control how their creativity is 
        used?" 

        『难道人没有权力控制自己的创造力该如何运用吗?』 

        "Control over the use of one's ideas" really constitutes control over 
        other people's lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more 
        difficult. 

        "控制自己思想的运用" 实际上包含了控制他人的生活; 而且通常会使的他人的 
        日子更难过。 

        People who have studied the issue of intellectual property rights 
        carefully (such as lawyers) say that there is no intrinsic right to 
        intellectual property. The kinds of supposed intellectual property 
        rights that the government recognizes were created by specific acts of 
        legislation for specific purposes. 

        像律师等，仔细研究过智慧财产权问题的人认为，实际上智慧财产权并非固有的 
        （天生的）权力。政府所认同的那种智慧财产权是为了特定的目的而透过特别的 
        立法程序创造出来的。 

        For example, the patent system was established to encourage 
        inventors to disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was 
        to help society rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life 
        span of 17 years for a patent was short compared with the rate of 
        advance of the state of the art. Since patents are an issue only among 
        manufacturers, for whom the cost and effort of a license agreement are 
        small compared with setting up production, the patents often do not do 
        much harm. They do not obstruct most individuals who use patented 
        products. 

        举例而言, 专利制度是为了鼓励发明者公开他们的发明的详细内容而设的。他的 
        目的是为了帮助整个社会，而不是发明者。在那时候 17 年的专利有效期相对於科技 
        的进步是相当短的。因为专利权只是制造商之间的问题，而且对他们而言，签一个 
        专利合约的负担，和量产比较起来可以说很小，所以专利权对他们而言通常不会有 
        什麽伤害。他们没有妨碍到使用专利产品的个人。 

        The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors 
        frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This 
        practice was useful, and is the only way many authors' works have 
        survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for 
        the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was 
        invented--books, which could be copied economically only on a printing 
        press--it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals 
        who read the books. 

        古时候并没有智慧财产权的概念，有一段很长的时间在非小说的领域里面，作者 
        常常引用他人的作品。这种行为是非常有用的，而且这也是很多作者的作品能够 
        部份被保留下来的唯一途径。智慧财产权系统原是设立来鼓励创作的。在智慧 
        财产权原先发明的领域（书籍）内，只有印刷公司才能很经济的大量复制的情况下， 
        它并没有什麽害处，并且没有妨碍到大部份的读者。 

        All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society 
        because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole 
        would benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we 
        have to ask: are we really better off granting such license? What kind 
        of act are we licensing a person to do? 

        所有的智慧财产权只不过是社会所给予的权限，因为不管这样子的想法是否正确， 
        一般认为给予这个权利可以对这整个社会有所帮助。但是在每一种个别状况下， 
        我们必须思考：我们给予这些权利後真的变的更好了吗？我们到底允取了什麽□围 
        的授权？ 

        The case of programs today is very different from that of books a 
        hundred years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is 
        from one neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source 
        code and object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is 
        used rather than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in 
        which a person who enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole 
        both materially and spiritually; in which a person should not do so 
        regardless of whether the law enables him to. 
        以今日程式软体的情况而言，是与一百年前的书籍的情况迥然不同的。拷贝一个 
        程式最简单的方法就是向邻近的人索取；一个程式有本质互异的原始码与目的码； 
        以及一个程式是拿来用的，而不是用来阅读与娱乐。这些事实结合在一起形成了 
        一个特殊的情况：那就是一个人如果强行施用智慧财产权的话，就会对整个社会 
        造成伤害，不论是在物质上或者是精神上。所以一个人不应该这样做，不管法律 
        允不允许他这麽做。 

        "Competition makes things get done better." 

        『竞争可以促进进步』 

        The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we 
        encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this 
        way, it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it 
        always works this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered 
        and become intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other 
        strategies--such as, attacking other runners. If the runners get into 
        a fist fight, they will all finish late. 

        竞争的典型例子就是赛跑了：透过给予胜利者奖品，我们鼓励大家跑快一点。 
        资本主义就是这样运作的，而且这种机制做的不错；但是他的支持者却犯了 
        一个错误，就是假设这种机制永远是可行的。假设竞跑者忘了给奖品的功用， 
        而只求胜利的话，无论如何，他们可能会使用其他的手段 — 如，攻击其他的 
        跑者。如果赛跑变成了一场拳架的话，那大家都会花更多的时间才会到达终点。 

        Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners 
        in a fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we've got does not seem 
        to object to fights; he just regulates them ("For every ten yards you 
        run, you can fire one shot"). He really ought to break them up, and 
        penalize runners for even trying to fight. 

        在道德上，专属软体与秘密软体就相当於拳架中的跑者。我很难过的说，目前 
        发现的唯一调停者好像并不反对打架；他仅仅节制他们而已（"你每跑十码， 
        可以踢一下"）他真的应该把他们架开，然後惩罚那些甚至是意图打架的跑者。 

        "Won't everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?" 

        『会不会因为没有金钱上的诱因而让大家都停止写程式了呢？』 

        Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary 
        incentive. Programming has an irresistible fascination for some 
        people, usually the people who are best at it. There is no shortage of 
        professional musicians who keep at it even though they have no hope of 
        making a living that way. 

        实际上，有很多的人即使没有任何的酬劳也愿意写程式。写程式对某些人而言 
        具有著难以抗拒的吸引力，通常是那群很精通写程式人。就如同从来不缺乏坚持 
        这种原则的专业级音乐家，即使这样做几乎不可能维持他们的生计。 

        But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate 
        to the situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become 
        less. So the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced 
        monetary incentive? My experience shows that they will. 

        但是虽然这个问题常常被问到，却不是实际上会发生的状况。付费给程式师的 
        状况不可能会消失，只是会变少而已。所以正确的问题应该是，有人愿意为一个 
        较少的酬劳写程式吗？我的经验告诉我真的有人愿意。 

        For more than ten years, many of the world's best programmers worked 
        at the Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could 
        have had anywhere else. They got many kinds of non-monetary rewards: 
        fame and appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a 
        reward in itself. 

        有超过十年的时间，很多世界级的顶尖程式设计者在 MIT 的人工智慧实验室 
        工作，所获得的报酬却远低於在别处所能得到的。他们得到了很多非金钱上的 
        回馈，例如：名誉和激赏。而且创造也很有趣，乐趣本身就是一种报酬。 

        Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same 
        interesting work for a lot of money. 

        然而，当出现了一个既有乐趣，又能赚大钱的工作机会时，大部份的人就离去了。 

        What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other 
        than riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they 
        will come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly 
        in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly 
        if the high-paying ones are banned. 

        这个事实显示了人还是会为了财富以外的东西写程式；但是如果有个赚大钱的 
        机会，那他们就会期待、争求它。薪资低的组织的竞争力一定比薪资高的组织差， 
        但是如果禁止高薪政策的话那就不一定较差的。 

        "We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we stop 
        helping our neighbors, we have to obey." 

        『我们非常迫切的需要程式员。如果他们要我们停止帮助邻近的夥伴的话， 我们就要遵从他们』 

        You're never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand. 
        Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute! 

        你永远不会迫切到必须遵从这种要求的地步。记住一句话：宁愿花几百 
        万来做防御工事，也不愿进贡一分钱。(millions for defense, but 
        not a cent for tribute!) 

        "Programmers need to make a living somehow." 

        『程式设计师也要设法维持生计啊!』 

        In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways 
        that programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a 
        program. This way is customary now because it brings programmers and 
        businessmen the most money, not because it is the only way to make a 
        living. It is easy to find other ways if you want to find them. Here 
        are a number of examples. 

        短程而言，这是真的。无论如何，程式师还有很多不需要贩卖软体使用权也可以 
        维持生计的方法。贩卖软体使用权是目前普遍的方法是因为它帮程式师和商人赚最多的钱，而不是因为他是维持生计的唯一方法。如果你愿意找其他方法的话也很容易。 

        这里就有几个□例： 

        A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of 
        operating systems onto the new hardware. 

        一个制造出新的电脑系统的制造商，要负责出移植作业系统到新机器的钱。 

        The sale of teaching, hand-holding and maintenance services could 
        also employ programmers. 

        教学、软体维修等服务也需要程式师。 

        People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware, asking 
        for donations from satisfied users, or selling hand-holding services. 
        I have met people who are already working this way successfully. 

        有新点子的人，可以把他们的程式以 freeware 的形式流出，然後要求满意的 
        使用者捐献，或者是提供支援服务等。我已遇过用这种方法闯出一片天地的人了。 

        Users with related needs can form users' groups, and pay dues. A 
        group would contract with programming companies to write programs that 
        the group's members would like to use. 

        有相同需求的使用者可以组成使用者组织，然後缴会费。一个团体可以和 
        程式设计公司签合约，写一些该组织成员有兴趣使用的软体。 

        All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax: 

        各种的发展可以由软体税的基金支持： 

        Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay x percent of the 
        price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency 
        like the NSF to spend on software development. 

        假设每个买电脑的人都要加付售价的ｘ％作为软体税。然後政府把这 
        笔钱交给一个类似 NSF 的组织来负责软体的发展。 

        But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development 
        himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to 
        the project of his own choosing--often, chosen because he hopes to 
        use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any 
        amount of donation up to the total tax he had to pay. 
        但是如果电脑购买者对软体的发展有所贡献的话，那他可以减税。他可 
        以自己选择要贡献哪个计画—通常选那些他最希望能够做到的计画。减 
        税可以依贡献程度减到抵消掉全部的税为止。 


        The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the 
        tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on. 

        而软体税率可依总纳税额决定，其比重可以由纳税人投票决定。 

        The consequences: 

        * The computer-using community supports software development. 

        * This community decides what level of support is needed. 

        * Users who care which projects their share is spent on can 
        choose this for themselves. 


        这样的结果是: 
        * 电脑的使用者团体支持软体的发展。 

        * 此团体决定该有什麽样程度的支援。 

        * 那些关心自己需求的计画的使用者可以参加该计画的进行。 

        In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the 
        post-scarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to 
        make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities 
        that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten 
        hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, 
        robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be 
        able to make a living from programming. 

        长远来看，免费的提供软体是迈向不虞匮乏的世界的一步骤，在那世界里没有人 
        需要为了生计而辛勤的工作。在每个星期花了固定的十小时做些必要的工作，如立法、 
        家庭会议、修理机器人和探索小行星後，大家会有时间从事些有趣的活动，例如写 
        程式。那时候就不须要靠写程式来过活了。 

        We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole 
        society must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this 
        has translated itself into leisure for workers because much 
        nonproductive activity is required to accompany productive activity. 
        The main causes of this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against 
        competition. Free software will greatly reduce these drains in the 
        area of software production. We must do this, in order for technical 
        gains in productivity to translate into less work for us. 

        我们（利用现有的科技）已经大量减少了达到目前生产力所需要的工作量， 
        但是只有其中的一部份转化成工作者的□暇，因为要达到有生产力的活动 
        往往伴随著很多没有生产力的活动。主要的肇因是官僚式的繁文褥节对竞 
        争的纠葛。自由软体的观念在软体的生产上可以大大的减少这些羁绊。为 
        了使科技对生产力的增益能实质上减少我们的工作量，我们必须这麽做。 

        ---------- Footnotes ---------- 

        (1) The wording here was careless. The intention was that nobody 
        would have to pay for *permission* to use the GNU system. But the 
        words don't make this clear, and people often interpret them as saying 
        that copies of GNU should always be distributed at little or no charge. 
        That was never the intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the 
        possibility of companies providing the service of distribution for a 
        profit. Subsequently I have learned to distinguish carefully between 
        "free" in the sense of freedom and "free" in the sense of price. Free 
        software is software that users have the freedom to distribute and 
        change. Some users may obtain copies at no charge, while others pay to 
        obtain copies--and if the funds help support improving the software, so 
        much the better. The important thing is that everyone who has a copy 
        has the freedom to cooperate with others in using it. 

        (1) 这里的用字太粗心大意。本意是说，没有人必须为 "可以" 使用 GNU 系 
        统而付费。但这里所用的文字却没有将这点说明清楚，所以一般被解释成 GNU 软体的 
        传播只能索取一点费用或甚至是免费的，这并非本意；在本文稍後有提到出现以 
        软体传播服务赚钱的公司的可能性。後来我就知道必须小心的区分 "free" 这个 
        字当 "自由" 跟 "免费" 时的使用。 "Free Software" 是指使用者可以自由散播 
        及更改的软体。有些使用者也许是免费拿到他们的软体，也有些是付费的 -- 如 
        果这些款项是用来支源软□的改进是更好的。重要的是，任何拥有软体的人有自由 
        与其它使用它的人合作。 

        (2) This is another place I failed to distinguish carefully between 
        the two different meanings of "free". The statement as it stands is 
        not false--you can get copies of GNU software at no charge, from your 
        friends or over the net. But it does suggest the wrong idea. 

        (2) 这又是另一个我没能仔细区分 "free" 这个字两种不同意思的地方。这段 
        叙述本身所代表的意思是没有错的 -- 你可以透过你的朋友或从网路上，免费取得 
        GNU 的软体。虽然这真的给了错误的观念。 

        (3) Several such companies now exist. 

        (3) 几家像这样的公司已经存在。 

        (4) The Free Software Foundation raises most of its funds from a 
        distribution service, although it is a charity rather than a company. 
        If *no one* chooses to obtain copies by ordering the from the FSF, it 
        will be unable to do its work. But this does not mean that proprietary 
        restrictions are justified to force every user to pay. If a small 
        fraction of all the users order copies from the FSF, that is sufficient 
        to keep the FSF afloat. So we ask users to choose to support us in 
        this way. Have you done your part? 

        (4) 虽然 Free Software Fundation 本身是慈善团体而非公司，但基金会靠 
        传播软体的费用来筹募经费。如果『没有人』选择由 FSF 订购软体，则基金会就 
        无法运作。但这也不是限制每位使用者付费。如果有一小部份的使用者跟 FSF 订购， 
        则足够使基金会免於财务的困境。所以我们希望使用者以这种方式来支持我们。 
        你做了你的工作了吗？ 

        (5) A group of computer companies recently pooled funds to support 
        maintenance of the GNU C Compiler. 

        (5) 一些电脑公司最近集资赞助 GNU C Compiler 的後续发展