Slashdot Mirror
Linus Not The Father Of Linux, According to Report
MrIrwin writes "According to this article on Yahoo, Linus is not the real father of Linux and Open source software is really just code nicked from other sources. " Groklaw has done a dissection of the press release. It's a press release by the Alexis de Toqueville Institution, who gets funding from MSFT, as well as believes that US IT troubles are because of free software. Oh, and terrorism works better because of open source, and the "Star Wars" program was a good idea.
.....and seeing as how they have such close ties to MS, perhaps they could run a study as to how Microsoft came to be born.
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)
TFA also mentions that Kenneth Brown (braindead author of the book about the study) interviewed RMS, but I fail to see any references to GNU/Linux in the write-up. I call shenanigans. Is it April 1st?
And finally, cheers to Hemos. There five times as many links in the editorial insert than there are in the actual submission. Someone buy this man a beer.
Acutal out loud laughter. I don't think that I need any more proof that Microsoft feels very threatened when I see puff pieces like this.
There are so many studies on the same topics that the public never hears about, what good is the information in the few that the media choose to cover?
They're obviously trolling. Don't feed.
Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.
Interesting how the whole report seems to be one big straw-man argument.
(i.e. claiming the other is saying something they're not, and then showing that it is false)
Their straw-man seems to be the idea (which noone, of course, has claimed) that Linux somehow was created in a vacuum.
From there they proceed to show how Linux was (*shock*) a clone of Unix!
(Probably leaving out the fact that there are literally dozens of them.)
The Yahoo! article ends with a mention about this guy's (from AdTI) upcoming book. It sounds to me as if his claims are nothing more than a publicity stunt, generating interest in his book.
De Tocqueville was a late French Enlightenment writer who traveled America and wrote in praise of American civil society, as opposed to French (which after having just gone throught the first revolution, and the dictatorship of Napolean, was looking pretty shitty.)
Anyway, it's way too early in the morning for me to pull out a page reference, but one of the major themes in his _Democracy in America_ is that American society functions well due to the large number of volunteer organizations that Americans joined in, fire departments, sewing circles, sports clubs, free publications and that sort of thing. These things raise community awareness, and allow the democratic process to work, since he believed that it would fall apart if all democracy was was everyone voting their own pocketbook.
Anyway, I'd say the Free Software movement in America is certainly a continuation of that civic spirit.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Mod story -1 Troll.
/. for chrissakes.
Jesus Christ, posted on the front page of
Next story::
Tinfoil hats, snazzy wardrobe accessory or anti-M$oft mind-control device?
Or::
Bill Gates wants to control your fridge with NT4.0.
[/rant]
Don't park drunk, accidents cause people.
I've wondered aloud why Microsoft had pulled the rug out from underneath SCO, and now it's obvious. They're going to start using these idiots, and probably others, to spread the same stupid message.
Get used to it, folks, it's not going to get any better anytime soon. That's good news, too, since the credibility of this sort of stuff has been mostly destroyed by Darl's loud mouth.
Do you have ESP?
While you cannot group all open source programmers and programs together; many are rigorous and respectful of the intellectual property rights, while others speak of intellectual property rights with open contempt.
Here's one immediate problem with the way this guy thinks - the two groups of programmers he mentions are not mutually exclusive as he implies. One can speak out about the problems with IP rights and still be respectful and careful about not violating them.
The article lost all credibility when they used the word, "invent" to describe the process by which software is created.
Software is developed, not invented. This is also one of the main reasons that the patent world is all screwed up.
Oh well...
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
people have chosen to scrupulously borrow or imitate Unix.
I guess he's saying this to contrast the way Microsoft unscrupulously imitated CPM/DOS, Lotus 1,2,3, Macintosh, WordPerfect, Stac . . .
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
_Star Wars_ was a good idea. The same way successive U boat campaigns against the British were a good idea, the same way Sherman's march to the sea was a good idea. IOW, hit them in the wallet or flatten their production capability. Because of the great debate on Star Wars and the intransigence of the Reagan administration on the issue, the Sovs had to take it as something plausible, and thus we were able to force them to divert funds and resources to a possible chimera.
It doesn't matter whether you think Star Wars can work now or not, it's been almost 20 years since it was first proposed, so the reality now has no bearing on then. For what it was used to accomplish, Star Wars was a great idea.
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
And Honda cars are a 'stolen product' because they have steering wheels and gearshifts just like Fords.
Linux started out as a Minix clone. Though it is more than that now, it's roots lie much closer to Andy Tannenbaum than they do to the Finn.
... not using a single line of Tannenbaum's available, but not open source or free, source code.
... that is to say, partially true, but also not really correct, and an overall mischaracterization of the effort (an OS written completely from scratch, not copied from another) and the goal (a usable, free UNIX-clone, not a usable, free, specific-UNIX-implimentation clone).
There is nothing to "admit." Linus wrote Linux as a i386 replacement for MINIX (which only ran on 80286 machines) because he wanted a UNIX he could use and play with on his hardware. He wrote the entire thing from scratch
Anyone looking at the old Tannenbaum book (which has the source code to MINIX in it) and the early Linux kernel code can easily tell they were written independently of each other. Anyone, that is, without an anti-free software agenda and ax to grind...
Calling Linux a MINIX clone is about as accurate as calling Linux an AT&T Sys V or generic UNIX clone
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
You are assuming that there is a direct profit. This is a wrong assumption. The book and the report are least likely to break even. The profit will come from several well known companies (not just MSFT) which finance this institution and will not appear on the books as a product of this "research"
That is quite likely true. Nevertheless, financially bankrupting the author for his libellous actions would discourage others from throwing themselves on the grenade for MSFT and friends...which is exactly how the law is intended to function in these cases.
I would frankly nail the libellous sons-of-bitches to the wall, profit or no.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
I love the Linux Mainframe comparison, they compare Linux on an IBM mainframe to Windows 2003 Server on a dual Xenon server. Then cite the Linux machine as having a higher TCO becuase of the cost of the mainframe, the power bill, the maintenance contract, etc.
Or how about the Windows vs. Linux report that does not put a cost on the security breaches and malware attacks on Windows systems?
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
I have experienced, on many occasions, the burn of a scrutinous pedant seeking to demerit my efforts. In this particular case K. Brown is deliberately misunderstanding Linus' "invention of Linux". Linus has never claimed to be the father of open source nor has he ever claimed to be the father of the POSIX standards upon which *NIX-like operating systems are built. As Linux has achieved a mild popularity those in the public who are not familiar with the history of computing have begun to associate Linus with the invention of *NIX-like operating systems since they only know of one: Linux. They have associated Linus with the inception of open source software because they are ignorant of the origins of software and only know of one open source arena: Linux.
Linus is being attacked because of common perception built upon a basis of ignorance. This is a common tactic used to discredit and undermine support for anyone who stands at the forefront of a collection of ideas which challenges the established financially successful, and often monopolistic, "powers-that-be".
If this even bothers Linux, if he even takes more than a few moments out of his day to be concerned with it, then I can empathize with him. For his sake I hope he takes the higher road: ignore it and concentrate on what he does best.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
To karma whore for a little and quote the article
While you cannot group all open source programmers and programs together; many are rigorous and respectful of the intellectual property rights, while others speak of intellectual property rights with open contempt."
But just because you think software patents are evil doesn't mean that you're breaking the rules with your stuff. It just means that you have an idology, and possibly a big mouth. Open source code depends on people obeying the rules on IP. Saying that linux is an unlicensed or "stolen" dirivitive work based on Unix is an awfully big claim to make without showing a line of code. I think this guy is either an idiot, or trying to capitalize on the mess with SCO. Obviously there are people that read this stuff.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
If you RTFA, you'll see there's a whole lot of conditionals in there. AdTI might be a bunch of idiot sheep, but I bet they have a halfway competent legal department that would make them stop short of anything that could get them sued. And we don't know the sources. I mean, I could go find a bunch of conspiracy mags and websites and use them as a source to write a press release that says "Surgeon General might be controlling minds with flu shots". Heck, I have my "sources". And I didn't make any accusations, just threw the idea out there. I'm pretty sure the surgeon general can't sue me for that. (The government can throw me in Guantanamo Bay, but that's different).
What Linus _should_ do is write a well-thought-out rebuttal and get it into the major news outlets to let everyone know how ridiculous these claims are. This is one of the few times when something ridiculous does merit a response. If it was from some wacko on Usenet, sure, ignore it, no one will care. But rebutting their claim and providing solid proof will help publically discredit this istitute, which is exactly what is needed.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
Yes. This is sort of like saying one architect stole a building design from another because it has four sides and a roof.
I think that is entirely the point. Linux was also written from scratch[1] but based upon UNIX design and philosophy[2]. It (Linux) looks similar to UNIX but it's an entirely different OS.
The analogy is entirely apt. Microsoft got its big break by selling a CP/M knockoff. Linux is a UNIX knockoff. So what? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Perhaps somebody should release a whitepaper: "Bill Gates is not the father of MS-DOS". Could equally well follow that up with "Bill Gates is not the father of MS-Windows".
[1] Pedant Points: Linus says that the early (never distributed) versions of Linux contained Minix code but all that code was removed before the first ever public release.
[2] More Pedant Points: Some people might say Linux was based on Minix design, but Linus early on said he wanted to follow POSIX specs. So Linux is more correctly a POSIX wannabe.
I don't think Linus should bother. As it is, everyone who matters can see how ridiculous that is. If Linus places a rebuttal in major news outlets, it'll give credibility to these people (or at least more public controversy, as they will post a response themselves, then Linus will have to reply, and this will continue to go on fueling publicity for Brown's book). They WANT people to take them seriously and reply. They're powerless if we don't.
Really...I'd just rather see Linus's usual witty replies in a board somewhere, definitely not in a major news outlet. It won't give them fuel to their campaign and I'll be able to laugh, perhaps as much as I laughed after reading their press release.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
Your post begins with some promise, pointing out the dubious intellectual heritage of key AdTI fellows, but then... somehow makes the leap into generalisations about conservatives?
Not to belabour an obvious point, but... Not everyone who is stupid is a conservative, and not every conservative is stupid. You aren't helping your cause (whatever that is), by picking up some limp hack, and shaking him about as an example of the "Evil Neocon".
In an attempt to paint all conservatives with the AdTI brush, you have made the same error that AdTI makes -- taking a shallow understanding of a concept, and make inflamatory generalisations about a group.
As both a conservative and a supporter of software Libre, I find your persistent rantings both tiring, and comical. Surely all "liberals" can't be as shallow as you are? If you are going to continue searching for examples of "Neocon" evil, at least try to come up with some examples worthy of disdain, instead of derision.
-- -pjk Perry Kundert perry@kundert.ca http://kundert.2y.net
There is a creative process involved with writing software, but its no more invention than the act of writing music is called "inventing music".
Music is "composed".
Software is "developed".
There's nothing "inventable" about software.
Unless you think Hayden should have took out a patent on the "Symphony"
"Collection of music that is played by many musicians such that music is broken into theme, counterpart, resolution in 1 to multiple parts. Music is group together to form a sound picture which is then used to inspire both performer and audience. It includes the following elements:
1) White pages with black dots on them to represent exact musical score
2) Wood or metal instrument which is plucked or blown to create sound
3) Sound in claim #2 is used in accordance with claim #1 to produce sound that has coherence
4) Each musician has a slightly different copy of the music
5) The claims in #4 when performed in exact time increments produces sound variations that are impossible with a single instrument.
6) Additional performer (known as conductor) will stand and wave arms
7) Said conductor in claim 6 will wave arms in unique motion depending on type of time in part 5 above such that there is a distinct way of waving arms according to number of beat in measure
8) As music is broken into movements, time may be taken to give audience a rest. Audience may leave to get drinks in the lobby at this time.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
majority of corporations, which are run by people, are slow to wakeup to the realization that most of us /.ers know. In time, the truth will be self-evident, and is becoming so for more and more. As this quote says.
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
I believe it's only a matter of time. It doesn't mean we're complacent, we still have to continue our efforts at debunking the FUD.
Scientia et Potentia
But we really don't need a Microsoft link to demonstrate the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's grotesque ideological bias. While the think-tank positions itself as an independent, libertarian research group designed to "study, promote, and extend the principles of classical liberalism: political equality, civil liberty, and economic freedom," they function, more often than not, as a shill for Big Business and the far political right.
AdTI is a fellow-traveler of neoconservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and shadowy groups like the "Defenders of Property Rights," with whom they are aligned as part of an anti-Clean Air Act hit squad ironically misnamed the Cooler Heads Coalition. These are the folks who have been grinding out the industrialist propaganda which has allowed the Bush Administration to roll back environmental laws a couple of decades.
The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute can always be counted upon for a convenient white paper discounting the risks of tobacco smoking or in favor of vastly expensive weapons programs of dubious utility.
It's tough to source the funding of private institutes, but the folks at Media Transparency have taken a stab at AdTI. Big sugar daddies include the Bradley Foundation, which gives away millions each year to attack social programs and support the privatization of government services. There's also the John M. Olin Foundation, which has lavishly funded a host of robber baron nonprofits over the years.
So it's no surprise that the Alexis de Tocqueville Institiute -- which seems to exist to provide a moral compass for the richest and most powerful interests in the West -- should be seen to carry water for anti-Open Source reactionaries. What's bad for big business must be bad for the nation. Linux must be discredited before it causes more distress for the market planners at Microsoft.
The only freedom being defended by groups like AdTI is the feedom to buy what the Establishment is selling. And at a price they decide.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
Also:
MICROSOFT DEFEATS STACKER (Disk Compression) BY:
- Fraud: Microsoft incorporates the Stacker code, even the comments. MS lawyers drag out their defense of the suit against them until Stacker is bankrupt, then settle when the company has been forced out of business.
Also, you didn't use the term "M$" and refrained from calling their employees "cockmasters" which, I must say, is somewhat of a rarity on Slashdot when discussing Microsoft. So bravo, AC. Excellent job. A lot of my Microsoft-loving acquaintances will find the URL to this post in their inbox very soon.
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
Quote from this publication:
"many are rigorous and respectful of the intellectual property rights, while others speak of intellectual property rights with open contempt."
Since when is speaking with contempt of something wrong? Does that make you a "software pirate"? Let's see how these guys define "intellectual property" in a previous publication about intellectual property theft linked by Slashdot:
"Today, intellectual property is not just patents, copyrights and trademarks, it is processes, techniques, methodology and talent; described by many experts as intellectual capital."
This apparently means that:
1. My talents are the property of my employer because the value of my talents is part of the capital valuation of the company on the market. If I leave that constitutes intellectual property theft.
2. If intangible capital valuation on the market decreases because someone else is doing the same things better or cheaper than you that constitutes intellectual property theft (instead of competition).
I do not know what they are trying to promote, but it surely is not freedom or competition. This conception of intellectual property is based on a fundamental misconception of the value of knowledge. It is also a great threat to freedom and world peace.
In a close sourced patented world of the AdTI's making, Henry Ford makes a car with 4 circular wheels and 100 years later, we're arguing about whether the car should have 3 or 5 square wheels.
Unix is a 30-year-old idea because Unix is a 30-year-old good idea... enough said.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.