Yes, this is a good option. I view Stallman's writings the way I view most polemics. While they're useful in understanding the roots of an idea and challenging the way things are, they often aren't practical. If everybody had to use a computer the way Stallman does, they probably wouldn't use computers.
The benefit accessibility, which unfortunately often relies on non-free software, provides is of great value to many people.
Stallman has the privilege of an education from MIT where he learned the ins-and-outs of computing and is able to function efficiently with this knowledge. I have friends who have to work for subsistence wages who simply wouldn't have the time nor the energy to learn everything about how to use fully free software, and they get huge benefits from using the Internet.
My mute brother often uses proprietary voice assistance software to speak that locks him into Apple's platform. He doesn't care. The benefits of him being able to communicate efficiently far outweigh the cost in terms of both the cost of the software and the "dangers" of using proprietary software. Admittedly, I'd like it if I could modify the source code, but it's better than starting from scratch.
Even his stance on cell phones ignores the concerns of many people. I don't know where Stallman lives, but I'm betting it's a pretty safe area for him. He can live without a cell phone because the likelihood that he will need to call 911 when he's out and about is low. Constant tracking is bad, but being assaulted is worse.
All that being said, I wish more software was free. It'd lead to more eyes on the software everyone is using which would probably improve it a lot in terms of functionality, security, and performance. It's hard for one person or a small group of people to have expertise in every area that a good piece of modern software requires.
I think this is an uncharitable reading of the page. rms' stance doesn't ignore the concerns of people, because it isn't a proclamation telling how people should live; it's just a description of how he lives.
The only parts that proscribe are the sections about DRM, and even those are not "you should sacrifice yourself to oppose DRM" but "only buy DRMed content if you can break it", which is more a personal advice than a moral commandment.
In general, rms doesn't tell software users they are bad people for using proprietary software or for allowing tracking; he's just alerting people about the dangers of doing so. His criticisms are usually solely directed at software producers and at the organizations that track people.
Fair enough. I think he comes across as looking down on people who use proprietary software, but you're right - the page is just about how he computes.
The benefit accessibility, which unfortunately often relies on non-free software, provides is of great value to many people.
Stallman has the privilege of an education from MIT where he learned the ins-and-outs of computing and is able to function efficiently with this knowledge. I have friends who have to work for subsistence wages who simply wouldn't have the time nor the energy to learn everything about how to use fully free software, and they get huge benefits from using the Internet.
My mute brother often uses proprietary voice assistance software to speak that locks him into Apple's platform. He doesn't care. The benefits of him being able to communicate efficiently far outweigh the cost in terms of both the cost of the software and the "dangers" of using proprietary software. Admittedly, I'd like it if I could modify the source code, but it's better than starting from scratch.
Even his stance on cell phones ignores the concerns of many people. I don't know where Stallman lives, but I'm betting it's a pretty safe area for him. He can live without a cell phone because the likelihood that he will need to call 911 when he's out and about is low. Constant tracking is bad, but being assaulted is worse.
All that being said, I wish more software was free. It'd lead to more eyes on the software everyone is using which would probably improve it a lot in terms of functionality, security, and performance. It's hard for one person or a small group of people to have expertise in every area that a good piece of modern software requires.