Slashdot Mirror
RMS Blasts Sun's Open Source Patent Licensing
cdlu writes "RMS takes Sun to task on its recent announcement that it is releasing 1,600 patents to the open source community. Among the major points, the license the patents are released under doesn't apply to patents, and Sun has not promised to not sue anyone using the technology within free software projects."
release item, then create license that doesn't cover item in question, sounds right.
Just very RMS. ;-)
Elmo knows where you live!
for a moment I thought he was mad because they said Linux instead of GNU/Linux.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
I think it's a great thing Sun has done for the community, regardless of the feelings some people have for them. It's definitely got a positive spin on it, and hopefully will result in more open source software.
Last year IBM took a significant step forward in cooperation with the free software community, by offering blanket licenses for 500 of its patents to all free software developers. This does not cover all of IBM's software patents, which must number in the thousands. And there are other areas where IBM does not yet cooperate with the free software community--they have not provided the necessary information to port a free BIOS to ThinkPads, for instance, and they are still pursuing Treacherous Computing. Nonetheless, this is a real step. Recently Sun made an announcement that superficially seems similar. It said that Sun had given us "free access to Sun OpenSolaris related patents under the Common Development and Distribution License." But those words do not really make sense. The CDDL is a license for the copyright on software, not a policy for licensing patents. It applies to specific code and nothing else. (Copyright and patents have essentially nothing in common in the requirements they impose on the public.)
So what has really happened here? Reading the announcement clearly, I think that it doesn't announce anything at all. It simply describes, in a different and grandiose way, the previously announced release of the Solaris source code as free software under Sun's idiosyncratic license, the CDDL. Outside Solaris, few or no free software packages use that license--and Sun has not said it won't sue us for implementing the same techniques in our own free software.
Perhaps Sun will eventually give substance to its words, and make this step a real one like IBM's. Perhaps some other large companies will take similar steps. Would this make free software safe from the danger of software patents? Would the problem of software patents be solved? Not on your life. Neither one.
We can be quite sure that not all large patent holders will do this. In fact, there is one company with lots of patents that surely won't take such a step. That is Microsoft, which says it is our enemy. Microsoft would love to make useful free software effectively illegal, and has plenty of money to pay lawyers to use whatever avenues governments provide them.
But the danger is not only from those that specifically consider us their enemies. It also comes from patent holders that are the enemy of everyone. These are the patent parasites--companies whose sole assets are patents, and whose only business is threats. Patent parasites don't really produce anything, they only suck the blood of those who do. As regards their choice of victims, they have the scruples of a mosquito, so you're only safe if they don't think you're worth biting.
Consider, for instance, the company founded by ex-Microsoft executive Myhrvold, which cheerfully says it is spending $350M to buy up patents (not specifically in software) so it can go around threatening and bullying everyone else. Of course, these parasites don't like to describe their activities in such terms. Much as the mafia, when it threatens to attack local businesses unless they pay, says it is charging for "protection", Myhrvold's company prefers to say it is "renting out" the patents. It expects this investment in what we could call the "patent protection racket" to pay off handsomely. For that to occur, lots of people have to get bitten.
The danger of software patents is not limited to free software, which is why the opposition to software patents is not limited to free software developers. Everyone involved with computers, aside from the megacorporations, must expect to lose. For instance, proprietary software developers are much more likely to be the victims of patents than to have a chance to use patents for aggression. Although I don't think proprietary software is ethically legitimate, it is a fact that developers of proprietary software are in the same danger from patents, and many of them know it.
Then think of all the software that is neither free nor proprietary: private-use software, software developed for and used by one client. Most software is pri
Basically, RMS argues that the Sun announcement offers 1600 patents for CDDL (their license for OpenSolaris) and doesn't clearly state that they are opening their portfolio to all free software licenses.
If they do that: Great. If they don't: That's not so good, Al.
Join the Free Software Foundation
Its a TRAP!
What difference would it make if Sun "promised" to not sue free software projects "using" those patents? Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a mere promise wouldn't hold up in court, anyway.
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
Thanks for your input! Now I understand everything.
Love, RMS
How about the Open Source community just not immediately trusting gifts given?
There seems to be this view that if someone offers a gift, then being suspicious of their motives is bad.
Slashdot commentators are very bad at analogies, so I won't break that tradition with this one:
Various charities, such as greenpeace etc, are very wary about companies wanting to talk to them and/or give them gifts. Because often the companies then turn around and claim they are 'working with' greenpeace etc, without actually doing anything.
This is more like looking a trojan horse in the mouth.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
It's just that Sun's "gift" seems too much like a Trojan horse (no, not the virus kind).
What truly scares me is the lack of long-term thinking among some open source projects that I keep track of with regards to the CDDL. The best example I can give is that I was reading the forums over at the ReactOS project; and OpenSolaris was mentioned. IIRC, No-one in the entire thread (which was about using some of OS in ROS) mentioned the patent angle...and given that ROS could easily be shut down over it, that omission alarmed me.
OpenSolaris (Or any CDDL project) is a torpedo waiting to sink any GPL project whose members happen to think about looking at CDDL code.
RMS is right on this, and he should be; he crafted the GPL during the days when reading AT&T code carried similar considerations.
Sun (the celestial body) rises in the east, and sets in the west.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
Now now, RMS can be a windbag once in a while, but on occasion he's been proven to be right. The revolution takes all kinds, soldier, and this guy (and the FSF) has gotten us pretty far.
I'm personally not a big fan of the Sun-MS and I guess that's my personal bias. They've done their share of good for the OSS movement, but have also done some incredibly damaging things to OSS as well. They're one of those wait-and-see types.
If the Chief GNU is barking at something, I'm willing to bet there's something there that's at least worth investigating. To borrow from your allusion, some gift horses come with nasty surprises.
software patents are the major threat to anyone in the software business who doesn't have a 7 figure bank account. And he is not allowing any distracting moves (such as open-sourcing Solaris) to change his fight against them.
What is the point of open-sourcing Solaris (read free as in freedom) if we can't be sure of using the code that has been "opened" to further the open-source movement? Sun must open its software patents in order to do this.
Well Troy accepted the horse and they where not so happy for it afterwards. Not all 'gifts' are equal.
I know this will come as a surprise to you, but simply calling someone zealot doesn't automatically invalidate his arguments.
I can see you surprised face now and here you stutter the word argument?
You see, there is an article linked in the news story and in this very linked article RMS explains in great detail why he thinks Sun didn't do what it should have done and what he thinks Sun actually did.
Now of course you don't have to agree with RMS` reasoning, but please, do yourself and us all a favor and the next time at least try to read the article before you comment and if you disagree try to bring up some arguments and try to reason why you think someone is wrong.
Looking forward to your next, well reasond post,
AC
Funny how few people have actually looked at what IBM is really providing. I fail to see (for example) how useful a patent for a tamper proof set screw will be useful to opensource programmers, nor how licensing patents set to expire in a year or two is really being as gracious as IBM would like people to think.
RMS takes Sun to task...
Later on, he gave IBM a stern talking to, and then towards the end of the article, he gave Microsoft a vigorous tongue lashing. Also, mosquitos, as a species, were maligned.
Seriously guys, the trash talk is getting embarrassing...
Last year IBM took a significant step forward in cooperation with the free software community, by offering blanket licenses for 500 of its patents to all free software developers. I never thought I'd say this...but RMS seems to be taking things a little lightly. I don't buy the whole "IBM releases software patents" news. The 500 patents are a drop in the bucket. Releasing patents and receiving praise for such action is (and yes, this is hyperbole) like releasing a few slaves whilst chaining most of them and then being hailed an emancipator.
RMS is one of the greatest allies of free software. He has stuck firmly to the principles he believes in. He has dedicated his life to evangelizing free software. He is in no small part responisble for the GPL and GNU/Linux. Can you say the same about yourself?
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
Somewhat similarly, Sun honcho Jonathon Schwartz posts these comments about IBM's patent assignments to the OSS movement in his blog:
ps. You've got to love IBM's ability to play the community. Going through some of the patents they "donated" to the open source community a few weeks back, it looks as if they all, curiously, seem to be due for payment - and thus potential expiration - this year. Were they destined for the bit bucket (turns out IBM is among the largest patent expirers in the world, along with its largest issuer).
And some of the patents have nothing to do with open source software - my favorite in the heap is this one.
I have no problem with the world according to Richard Stallman as long as compliance is voluntary.
As a software creator I am free to choose to release the software for free and I am free to demand payment for my software. On the other side of the coin, consumers are free to accept my terms or not.
Oh wait, we already live in that world. So what is his beef with people making decisions for themselves?
Those are Sun's patents.
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
RMS doesn't mind things not being GPL, in fact in many circumstances he supports it. He openely supported making the Ogg codecs BSD/MIT style licensed for instance. What he is blasting is Sun pretending do to one thing (give patents use rights to open source community) while actually doing another thing (promising not to sue Solaris developers)
Proper punctuation in the string is left as an excerise to the reader. Besides, it's a frickin joke.
I see no "blasts" in this "taking to task" by RMS. Why exaggerate his "annoyance" to FUD? Ah...of course...this is /. and fud-slinging is the norm...
longest journey beginning with a single step
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. So long as that step is in the right direction.
zeal sometimes does as much harm as good
You mean like zealously opposing anything RMS says without offering a shred of reasoning one way or
the other about what he actually said? (and I'm guessing without reading the article either)
Unfortunately I see it as a gimmick.
Let's look at Sun's Open Source strategy:
You can take OpenSolaris source code and modify it. You cannot take OpenSolaris patented concepts and place them into other works OSS or otherwise. If things pan out for Sun that means they will have a large developer base dumping code into Solaris, which will make Solaris better and more competitive. Sun basically just improved Solaris with no R&D by leveraging the OSS community. It appears, as of now, that Sun is in this for free skilled labor and nothing else. They are trying to have their cake (revenues from Solaris) and eat it to (no competing products resulting from Open Solaris concepts because of patent issues). The open code without the freedom from patents is like saying "Hey, developers, help me make a buck off this OS by contributing your code for free."
It doesn't take a zealot or a great deal of common sense to notice this. I say let Sun do it, and when they don't attract the huge developer base they hoped to attract maybe they will rethink their OSS approach.
Be Safe! Sleep with a Marine. Semper Fi!
Since when is a copy-and-paste of the article "insightful?"
If Sun didn't have a patent on big, heavy purple servers, I'd be whacking a moderator with one right now.
I agree -- said another way, the GPL is exactly how RMS wants it. If Sun were to make a license exactly how RMS wants it, it would be identical to the GPL. If it's not, it's suboptimal, and RMS complains. QED.
It's pretty obvious that RMS will complain about every license that's not the GPL, just because if it were enough like it for him to not complain, whoever came up with the license wouldn't have bothered and would just have used the GPL instead.
(Yes, that entire post was just an excuse to use the phrase "QED." Sorry.)
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
how come nobody has brought up the fact that for a large corporation like sun it is gonna take some time to release source code and free up the patents for solaris. im sure there is mounds of paperwork that has to be done for them to accomplish this. so i would say people are jumping the gun in questioning suns motives because they came up with there own license, and have only released a small amount of code.
Good things come to those who wait
...that every post criticizing RMS thus far has been modded as Troll or Flamebait? Every Single One?
Some of them are trolls, but come on...is RMS a sacred cow now?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Only with an Open Source zealot can he look a gift horse in the mouth, and after inspecting each and every gold cap, yell at the giver for not putting in platinum with extra dental service for life like he want
No, the giver of the horse would have a contract stipulating that the receiver could only run the horse in certain races at selected racetracks on specific dates. All decided at the discretion of the "gift giver".
Trolling is a art,
Sun is sitting on a bunch of patents that they are not using for anything. Kudos to them that they want to see them taken somewhere by somebody. When was the last time you gave somebody a computer that cost you bucks back in the day but is now a door stop?
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Oh wacky, wacky Richard.
You had me with the "my software is free, just share your code with me too" line.
You had me with the "complete UNIX toolset, we just need a kernel" idea.
You lost me with the "now all code should be free without exceptions" bit.
After that, I stopped caring what you thought about the APSL and the BSD license, and still don't care what you think about the CDDL.
A brilliant engineer you are, but please stop playing the pundit on all technology issues that run counter to your ideas. Clearly, the GPL isn't for everyone... try to remember that.
bash-3.00$ uname -a
SunOS panda 5.10 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2
I think that's where the Fodus come from.
It's the "Java Desktop System".
Only with an Open Source zealot can he look a gift horse in the mouth, and after inspecting each and every gold cap, yell at the giver for not putting in platinum with extra dental service for life like he wanted.
Let's break it down for you. To use your analogy, Sun gives itself a gift horse, and shows it to the open source community.
Sun: "see all these gold teeth?"
Open Source Community: (shrugs) "They're OK I guess..."
Sun: "I'll let you take a closer look at these teeth, study them, and improve upon them by redesigning/refactoring them, and improving the manufacturing process if you sign up for our special license!"
Open source community: "Oh, so we can look at the design of the teeth, think about how we've managed our own horse's teeth, and contribute our best ideas and work hard to improve your horses, is that it?"
Sun: "Of course, won't that be fun?"
Open Source Community: "So, does it work both ways? I mean, we can then think about how you've implemented your horse's gold teeth, and maybe use some of the ideas to improve our own horse's teeth, right?"
Sun: (confers with lawyers, who violently signal a negative response) "Let's not worry about that for now, the main thing is, you can all work hard to make our horse healthy, strong and more popular than ever, and won't that be fun?"
Open Source Community: "So, we are supposed to take up a new hobby, improving your horse's teeth, right? That's cool, we like programming... But just to be clear, are you saying you won't sue us if we use some of the ideas to improve our own horses teeth?"
Sun: (glances at lawyers, who give him dirty looks and pantomime a slicing motion across their throats) "I'm not sure what you're getting at here, and I really don't know what you expect from us. Come on, this is offered in good faith, so just trust me, OK?"
Open Source Community: "Well, that is certainly a great offer, but I think I'll pass for now. I mean, it sounds like a blast and all, but I've got my hands full taking care of my own horses. But hey dude, listen, take care and good luck with it, aight?"
lots of idiots on this board simply saying "RMS is teh l4m3 lololol." Most people seem not to have read the article. Sun is just doing what Apple did with Darwin, and "giving" the right to use Solaris code for Sun's (and Solaris users, yes) benifit, while preventing the code from being used elsewhere, and sailing under the open source flag. If they want to do that, fine, but I am glad to see RMS complain.
I have freaks! I did something right...
Given that the "blast" against SUN is independent of the GPL I don't see that you have a point. But if you did have a point I'm sure it would be a good one.
Note that in the article in question RMS uses the GPL only in way of comparison. He doesn't care one iota what license you use in so much as the license you do choose provides the same freedoms as the GPL. In this instance what he is saying is that SUN is crowing about their "gift" of software patents when in actual fact the gift is really a poisoned pill. Consider that he compares SUN's patent release to IBM's, note that IBM's release has nothing to do with the GPL EXCEPT that the patent license grant is GPL compatible.
As well, since others have also noted the difficiencies in the CDDL and the "patent grant", it's not like RMS is out on a limb alone.
Lastly, RMS may indeed be a zealot but thank Allah he is because it means there's someone making sure that the things that need watching are watched. In the meantime you can continue on your merry way secure in the knowledge that you don't have a clue.
Sure information wants to be free, but how much are you willing to pay for the packaging?
Whenever RMS is mentioned in an article, some variation of the same old GNU/Linux joke comes up, and invariably gets modded up. This is getting way more tiring than RMS's own harping on adding the GNU/ to Linux. What if we just STFU about it, okay? We know the good man is a dork, now. Let's pay some attention to his points instead; some of them may be worth listening to and even have some importance.
Have you ever actually READ anything RMS wrote, or do your form your opinion of him based solely on slashdot comments? He has supported many other licenses in the past, and does NOT trash people solely for not using the GPL. What he DOES do, is take people to task for being shady with what they are doing. A good example is the KDE/gnome issue a few years back. His concern was with the QT license being incomptible with the GPL, which was being used with KDE. In this case, he's pointing out how Sun's doing something sneaky while trying to pretend they are doing the Right Thing (tm). He's not blasting them for their license, he's blasting them for acting like they are doing something they aren't.
It's easy to ignore what he says, because he's obviously nuts. But, attacking the speaker instead of the argument is a logical fallacy ( ad hominum ).
Often, he's right about things, and this is one of them. Sun is a hardware company, not a software company. they're trying to get the foss community do their software maintenance for them, so they can continue to sell their hardware. They're not, in this case, particapating as equal partners with the foss community ( any more than apple is ), they just want our help with their code.
Sitting Walrus Blog
It's just as bad as the same old tired "BSOD!!!LOL!!11" type joke that gets posted in almost any article involving Windows.
I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
You're behind times... its about TERRORISTS not COMMUNISTS today.
Did anybody expect that Stallman would not blast anything that wasn't the GPL?
He's a zealot. That means its his way or no way. Rathewr than praising the steps in the right direction, he chooses to blast that its not his license.
Isn't there a Chinese saying about the longest journey beginning with a single step?
Stallman really needs to understand that his zeal sometimes does as much harm as good to his cause.
Did anybody expect that Stallman-haters would not blast anything that wasn't total gushing praise from Stallman?
They are zealots. That means its their way or no way. Rather than thanking Stallman for highlighting serious issues in Sun's "donations" (the fact that the patents are apparently released under a license meant for copyrighted materials, which pretty much makes it useless for determining what rights you have to use those patents, and the fact that Sun's gesture seems to benefit their particular OSS community at the expense of the rest of us) they choose to blast Stallman for not creaming in his pants over Sun's tossing the OSS community a bone.
Stallman-haters really need to understand that their zeal sometimes does as much harm as good to their cause.
Jay (=
...for your open source contributions that help him undercut your wage.
IBM understands it...you're not winning a war by IBM playing 'nice' with the opensource community. A company will do whatever is profitable. At the moment, IBM get's free code and great PR out of a few token gestures. They they outsource any actual development work to [insert current outsource country here] which use your freely given code to lower their development costs. RMS argues that there is enough money to be made in the service markets to sustain your wages...well, guess what...IBM has been making a pretty spectacular play for that service market for quite some time now...and it's taking your freely given software and using it to increase it's market penetration. Do you really think that 'small developer X' will be able to compete with IBM in the service market? But it's ok, RMS will be safe because he can always make a living on the tour circuit.
Brilliant strategy guys, see you in the soup kitchen line.
Would it be too severe a blow to your anti-RMS zealotry to point out that there are nearly 30 non-GPL licences that he likes?
There it goes...I have been saying it all along. Sun has always been untrustworthy. Take NFS for example. Didn't they do that dirty trick of relasing the NFS specs only to sue everybody else that implemented the protocol? Or what about StarDivision? They bought out that poor company only to distribute its product under the dubious OpenOffice guise. And what about the dirty money they have dumped into Gnome and X.Org? Yet another trick to infiltrate the opensource community with patent ridden software! But with this disgusting CDDL (which was approved by that evil OSI -- obviously they got kickbacks) the cup has runeth over. It is clear that Sun is trying to infiltrate the open source community with their evil patents as they have done dozens of times before. So, I propose:
1)Everybody stop using NFS. If it comes from Sun, it can't be good.
2)Dump OpenOffice now! It is just another trojan horse of theirs.
3)Dump GNOME! Besides, when there is KDE, who needs it?
4)Dump X.Org. It has been touched by evil. Can't be too carefull with these matters.
5)Do not write applications using Java. Java is evil. There are god knows how many of these no-good Sun patents in there. Sun can pull the carpet under your feet at any time.
6)Burn every machine that has this dispicable Sun logo on it. It may infect your trustworthy intel and ibm servers which have served you so well in the past.
Often, he's right about things, and this is one of them.
I'd say that he's obviously nuts, in the sense that Martin Luther King was obviously nuts: they both have a single issue that they care passionately about, to the exclusion of all other considerations.
Both were/are right. Both were personally offensive enough that some people are still unwilling to forgive them, or accept their positions.
Today, we know that, however offensive MLK and his followers may have been, the Dream in his ``I have a Dream'' speech was worthwhile. There are still way too many people who've never forgiven MLK for being unpopular, and for proving them wrong in their racism.
As time passes, it becomes more and more clear that RMS is dead on in most of his positions, and the people who say otherwise are beginning to open themselves up to comparisons with MLK's detractors, who are generally a nasty bunch.
See what I've been reading.
Only with an Open Source zealot can he look a gift horse in the mouth, and after inspecting each and every gold cap, yell at the giver for not putting in platinum with extra dental service for life like he wanted.
"Beware geeks bearing grifts."
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
That's what I thought.
His way or no way.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
You bring up a very good point. The same jokes keep getting modded up. Thank god the "Soviet Russia" jokes have been dying off, but it seems that new "jokes" are taking its place. The "Funny" mods should have some kind of "group check" system, so that every "Funny" point is agreed on by 3 or 4 mods. It'd make the really funny stuff stand out, and the lame jokes die off. Or so I hope.
Elmo knows where you live!
Do you a little deal, we stop harping on about GNU/RMS when others on this forum stop using M$, Micro$soft or Windoze. Deal?
Sun: Hey y'all, here's some stuff and here's the license.
Open Source Community: The license does not sync with our philosophy. No thanks.
Free Software Community: This license is blasphemy in our collective holy eyes! Cast thee away from our presence!
Everyone walks away, life goes on.
I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
Mr. Stallman doesn't seem upset with Sun so much as with the whole problem of software patents (which is a much more sensible position.)
Let me say it again for those who won't read the article - IT DOESN'T MATTER whether or not Sun releases these patents. ANYBODY with a patent and no sense of ethics can do incalcuable damage to the free software movement. Even if sun broadened it's release to include all open source licenses, 1,600 is just a few leaves in a forest. And personally I wouldn't consider Sun's hands to be the most dangerous. Suppose Microsoft hires itself a few proxies with big patent portfoilos to sue every small to medium size open source project they can find, and all users they can track down? Sun's patent release doesn't do ANYTHING about that problem, and that is the real problem here.
Sun is unlikely to do anything so rash - they don't dominate the market and can't affort to become the next SCO in public relations. Microsoft can, and it can even more so afford for hired flunkie companies to be reviled.
Patents are far and away the most dangerous threat to open source software. But, to be a bit fatalistic, I think if the large corporations get serious about killing open source, nothing will save it. If nothing else, they could try to buy some laws making giving away software for free illegal, because it is unfair competition. The biggest problem with enemies is that they are your enemy. They will not stop until you are dead, and how you die is of no importance. The specifics don't matter - the fact someone wants you dead is enough to seal your fate unless you can either change their minds or force them to back off. I don't know how open source can do either, at least in the US, where money is everything.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
I really won't worry about this until I hear a big name other than RMS/St. IGNUcious/Mr. Free Software is not Open Source/Linux is really "GNU/Linux" say that this is a problem.
RMS doesn't want to make any concessions. The Open Source community does, and gets taken seriously. RMS does not do that, and does not get taken seriously.
It is sad, he is so extreme he is even losing credibility with OSS supporters as myself. I trust Linus Torvalds still.
Here is an example of the FSF being pig headed. GCC vs EGCS. EGCS was a free version of GCC taken up by Cygnus (a commercial company). EGCS was better about adding needed patches than GCC was, and was the only usable alternative for a while until the mainstream GCC incorporated the patches.
RMS and the FSF need to play ball. That is how stuff gets done in the Real World.
I still support the FSF and RMS' pro-software freedom stances, but I think a change in tactics is in order.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Anyway, let's see:
- hear about lame joke
- post endlessly on
/. - ???
- PROFIT!!!
I'll go back to my corner now....People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
it becomes more and more clear that RMS is dead on in most of his positions
That's unsurprising, they're not all that far from the positions of most of the academic and free/open/whatever-you-call-it sodtware communities.
But you can't generalise from that to arguing that because many (or most) of his positions are correct, all of them are correct. And it's not fair, reasonable, or useful to imply that people who disagree with him are doing so because of his behaviour. It's also possible that he's simply mistaken about some things... it's been known to happen, why, he's even changed his position on occasion.
the people who say otherwise are beginning to open themselves up to comparisons with MLK's detractors
Uh, OK... "I've stopped beating my wife, too".
[i]Although I don't think proprietary software is ethically legitimate,[/i]
Oh, and you were so close to writing something that I might at least partially agree with..
I am the maverick of Slashdot
Being a good communicator is not just about being right. It is also being able to STFU about the little things to improve the SNR.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
RMS != MLK
It's kind of annoying that Sun decides that nearly EVERYTHING should be done through ifconfig. It's got about 4 different invocation types depending on what you're trying to do...
First you gotta plumb the interface. Then you might enable DHCP or BOOTP with it. Then you might use it to configure trunking or fail-over.
GAAAH.
Linux did one thing right with networking. Different commands that control different interfaces.
iwconfig handles wireless auth and behavior.
ifconfig handles address binding and state.
dhclient handles DHCP control.
some other kernel tools control trunking and packet shaping. etc.
Instead of one hideously long man page. (Shudder)
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
"know the good man is a dork, now. Let's pay some attention to his points instead; some of them may be worth listening to and even have some importance."
Having lost touch with reality generally lowers your credibility considerably. I've had the interesting experience of meeting RMS once. His coding prowess speaks for itself but the man has the social skills of a gnat.
If something is said he doesn't agree with he won't debate it, he'll deny it. (I was the only person dressed in a suit at a programmer's society meeting he did his little saint speil at, since I'd just come from work. I asked how you answer when someone says GNU/Linux is not user friendly. He simply denied the problem existed, and tried to make me feel stupid for asking it. In other words his solution to user support is the classic RTFM. In any case, to him I was obviously someone evil in a suit).
In short this is not a man you want speaking as the advocate for your favourite cause. All he'll do is put people off side and do more harm than good. I have little time for him as a speaker and feel he should go back to coding, which he's very good at.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
I didn't know it was restrictive to Apple... I thought it was like the Moz or Apache license.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Classic, shitty-father attitude. "I put the food on the table and you kids don't even go get summer jobs! blah blah blah!"
Just like the "God" believers. "But God gave you all of this! You MUST love him! Agape!"
Father = God = Asshole. You are an asshole.
I can forsee the response: "I don't care if you think I'm an asshole." Just like everyone's dad: "I don't want to be your friend, I'm just doing what's right, being a good parent."
When you do someone a "favour" or give a gift, you don't ask for anything back. That's what a favour is. Doing something for someone without any hope of any return. Fathers, God, assholes like you, do their "favours," but then demand retribution.
You see it nowadays where guys will call sending their kids to university an "investment," from which they hope to see a "return." They're bound up in some vicarious obsession and expect their kids to throw their time and effort into this cesspool of narcissism. Treating your kids' lives as a means rather than an end, yeah, that passes Virtues 101.
If you don't treat people as an end in itself, they're going to treat you as a means too. So when you want the "open source community" to create wealth for you, don't be surprised when it turns right back and spits in your face. You're not moral, so now neither are they.
"People who have given us their complete confidence believe that they have a right to ours. The inference is false, a gift confers no rights." - Nietzsche.
They have one thing in common: they're both single-minded about an issue. And they're both right.
Ok, they've got just two things in common: they're both single-minded about an issue, and they're both right. And, they're unpopular because of those things.
Right! They've got just three things in common: they're both single-minded about an issue and they're both right and they're unpopular because of those things. And, they face a lot of ad hominem attacks.
Four! They have only four things in common! They're both single-minded about an issue and they're both right and they're unpopular because of those things and they face a lot of ad hominem attacks. And ...
See what I've been reading.
So I have to suffer through crappy jokes modded up to +5 because some slashbot says 'M$'? You've got a future as the leader of an oppressive military regime...
Already there dude, already there.
Sometimes the soviet russia jokes are actually funny... uh.. in Soviet Russia.
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
perl -pe 's/(\w+)/GNU\/$1/sg;'
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
As far as supporting other licenses, it seemed to me like he complained about all of them because I was looking at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html#TOC
- Why You Should Not Use the Library GPL for Your Next Library
- The X Window's Trap
- The Problems of the Apple License
- The BSD License Problem
- The Netscape Public License Has Serious Problems
- The Problems of the Plan 9 License
- The New Motif License
- Free But Shackled - The Java Trap
Each of those articles is complaining about a different license, up to and including the LGPL! Considering that that list comprises almost all Free Software/Open Source licenses around (except Apache, MIT, and Artistic, as far as I can tell), I was just saying that it's pretty darn likely that any new license would make that list too."[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
And everytime that happens, there is always someone whining about it and he gets modded up into oblivion too. The jokes (even 1000 times repeated) might be funny in the article context but this exactly same debate over and over certainly isn't.
People who like this sort of sig will find this the sort of sig they like.
Except its not GPL, its CDDL.
Oops? Yeah, I thought so.
"Thank god the "Soviet Russia" jokes have been dying off"
In Soviet Russia, God thanks you that jokes are dying off!
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
Who here is sick and tired of companies taking something made by others and proclaiming it as their own?
Who here is sick and tired of companies lying about what they release to the public in order to hoodwink fanboys?
Aside from those, I personally am sick and tired of so-called intellectual property. Patents and copyrights have become so abused that we have reached the point where the goal of stimulating the economy would be better served by getting rid of copyrights and patents altogether.
Infuriate left and right
Why do we have patents on software? This world is weird. OK, lets say - you want to build a table with 4 legs and a drawer. So you take your pickup truck to Home Depot and buy a saw, some wood a few nails... oh, don't forget glue and you deffinetly need some sand paper and some wood finish. If I was a betting man I'd bet someone has to have a patent for a "table with 4 legs and a drawer" right and if not then someone most likely has a patent for a special way to glue the legs on. This is a long shot but maybe you would have to pay royalties to the old fart who patented the idea of putting wood finish on wood to make it look perty. How does this apply? Lets check it out. I have an idea. I want to make a website with an area where people can go check out anything they want for free. This will provide information along with a community. So whats involved... Well someone already patented the idea "making a website"... crap! Even if they didn't patent the website idea someone else decided to patent the idea "creating a web community" for people to gather and share information. Thats not good for me and my idea. Oh wait.. I haven't even started to build my website yet and I'm already being sued because someone patented the idea of using a mouse and keyboard with a computer and I use Linux. Does this make any sense at all? Fix-It!
Having RTFA, I need to state the the guy does sound reasonable in this affair... from which we learn: never trust Slashdot headlines to convey the content of a link...
About the issue in question: Sun hasn't had the best trackrecord of making their goals and motifs known... and despite the fact that they have donated considerable amounts of source code (OpenOffice, NFS, Netbeans, var. Java projects,...) they're still seen as big evil company.
This thing about their patents will hopefully soon be cleared up by some of the PR over at Sun.
murphee
And if you are saddled with the man, goodluck trying to make it through a meal without some dithering from him about the available meal and drink selections. Or someone loosing their cool. From what a friend related to me about where he had gone along to a resturaunt meal to provide some "morale support" for the couple billeting RMS, RMS has managed to combine "picky" with "indecision"... A: Do you like lemonade? RMS: I think so. A: Here's a glass of lemonade. RMS: No, I don't like that. *sigh* poor guy, poor us...
No horse, no teeth.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
IBM's patent pledge gets considerable praise from RMS here; several times he notes that IBM has undertaken a real step and he says that IBM's step is a substantive one--you are gaining increased access to 500 more patents than you had access to before. I agree that it is a step in the right direction. However, one should consider the terms of the deal before relying on IBM's promise not to sue regarding the listed 500 patents. One of the finer points of the IBM promise gets no mention.
In the last page of the IBM patent promise, you'll find the revocation clause: (all punctuation, and lack of ending punctuation, is theirs)
Note what you have to give up in order to enjoy IBM's promise not to sue you--if (someone involved with, I gather) "Open Source Software" infringes upon your copyright (one of the many so-called "intellectual property" rights) by, say, distributing copies of essays on your blog without permission, or distributing derivatives based on programs you hold the copyright to without complying with your license, you are put in a serious conundrum: you have to choose between enforcing your rights under law and continuing to enjoy IBM's non-aggression promise. I think this is an exchange one should consider very carefully, particularly considering how different and numerous so-called "intellectual property" laws are (another essay worth reading which RMS points to in his essay on Sun's "no-op announcement"; an essay one should read with IBM's patent promise as well). The number of laws under that overgeneralized catch-all phrase might catch you off guard, thus making you more vulnerable to patent infringement regarding these 500 patents than you thought you were.
Digital Citizen
Developers.Developers.Developers.Developers.Dev
"Beware of Geeks bearing gifts."
RMS doesn't want to make any concessions. The Open Source community does, and gets taken seriously.
Taken seriously by who, Business Week? Check out this cover story that praises Linus, but then goes on to do a hatchet job on RMS. Both Linus and RMS shared the EFF's inaugral Pioneer Award. Beware of those who play one up and put down another.
Its easy to see what the agenda is here. As FOSS gains mainstream acceptance, the corporate world signals to its members who the trouble-makers are. The ones who managers should avoid.
People say RMS is a great coder and spokesmen too, but his real legacy is the GPL. It will go down with Magna Carta and the Declaration of Independence as one of the great documents of history. Its already spawned the creative commons, copyleft movement that is transforming our culture.
His legacy for the future is huge.
You people need to send the message ...
See, there's your problem. You think only in terms of organizations, of corporations is it? You can't seem to wrap your head around the basic idea of people existing all by themselves, or cooperating all by themselves, without some overriding bureaucracy to control things. Thus you think patents and copyrights can only be good because they further the interests of big organized corporations. The idea that mere people would be better off without copyrights and patents as they are now abused is a foreign thought to you.
Right now, "Linux" is "Gimme gimme."
See? More of the same. Your thought patterns are one with the dinosaurs of the corporate world.
You are incapable of understanding the idea that people would say "Here, take this, see what I've done. Use it, but don't steal it as your own. Redistribute it, modify it, have a good time with it, but pass it on under the same circumstances as I gave it to you."
Infuriate left and right
I'm certainly no license expert, but it seems like a lot of people are missing the point. Even if the CDDL *is* incompatible with existing GPL projects, you are still free to take this horse Sun is showing you, give it a fancy new hat, and charge people for rides. You can take a bunch of their amazing horsies, put them on a revolving platter, and share the new carousel you just made. It seems that the only thing in question is whether you can integrate their code/idea into an existing GPL project. Am I wrong? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm just trying to understand the beef here. Is the problem just that the GPL is currently so popular, and the CDDL may be imcompatible with it? What if in ten years, CDDL-like licenses dominate the landscape, and GPL-licensed code is racing toward "legacy?" Would that change people's view of what Sun has done? Again, no rhetoric here.
Given that (as I understand it), the CDDL is just a variant of the MPL, I think we need only look so far as Firefox to see that 'the community' can indeed embrace such a proposition, we can make use of such a license, and that good things can result.
ad 1) Indeed, you're right.
ad 2) GPL libraries are compatible with basically every other Free Software license -- and this is virtually everything except for OpenSSL and APL.
ad 3) Indeed -- the distinction between Free Software and Open Source is not negligible, and only people belonging to the former are hurt by CDDL.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
It's easy to understand that they don't wish their contributions to be co-opted into the GPL realm. As Sun, and many others see it, that would reduce their rights. Avoiding a GPL lockup is undoubtably part of Sun's strategy.
Even RMS is very clear that copyleft is intended to achieve the much same effects as the patent system, though with a very different goal. see Wikipedia on GPL Ideology.
I personally think most technology patents have been a significant deterrent to industry adoption. I believe the GPL has the same effect. There's a huge disincentive for commercial businesses to make significant contributions to GPL projects. Unless their real goal is not to "make the world a better place", but instead to cripple the revenue stream of their competitors a la Microsoft's favourite tactics. I'm generally very cynical about any commerical donation of GPL code. If it's a real donation then it should be under a BSD-like "copycenter" license.
-- "Most people prefer a popular myth to an unpopular truth"
All your old jokes are belong to Soviet Russia.
The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
How about just removing the +5 limit?
They should moderate you +3 stupid. Going for cheap laughs, karma whore?
an ill wind that blows no good
There's a group of people who make and want to promote this thing called Linux.
Let's pretend there were a single product, Linux, that everybody involved wanted to support.
No no no. There are people using Linux. Period. Forget this group nonsense. This is not like a Hollywood movie trying to promote itself, or the Boy Scouts trying to promote themselves, or anything else like that. Linux is NOT a group of anything. It is people period.
There are corporations promoting their collection of Linux and utilities and services. They are not Linux. They are corporations promoting their own self interest.
You just don't get it. And that leads you to insult something you don't understand:
And anybody who looks at Linux can tell, at a glance, that it's not a high-quality product.
Wrong wrong wrong. It is NOT a product. Red Hat Linux is a product, Mandrake is a product, but Linux is NOT a product.
And aside from that, the only people who would be so foolish as to declare Linux low quality "at a glance" are those who look at boxes on shelves and tell the quality of the inner product by the flashy colors on the box. You simply cannot tell "at a glance" that millions of lines of code are indeed "low quality".
You go on and on, about branding, desperation, and so on. All show that you simply cannot grasp the concept of something standing on its own.
Whta is the sound of one hand clapping? You had better try to understand that before you try to understand something as simple as Linux.
Infuriate left and right
The FUD from the GPL crowd is astonishing, given their history of receiving it en mass from Microsoft just a few years ago. Why is it that so many people are so damn quick in firing shots at Sun? If you don't think that Sun's intentions are genuine, you don't even have to waste another thought on OpenSolaris. You can go on with your lives as if nothing has happened. You can stay with Linux and the GPL, resting assured that code is not intermingling from Solaris. Sun's choice of license works both ways, you know.
Do you lose sleep at night about code from Free/Net/OpenBSD finding its way into Linux causing some sort of gigantic IP nightmare? If it didn't bother you for the last fifteen years, why start now?
This reactionary rhetoric against Sun is diluting the meaning of the word hypocrisy.
-- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
What exactly have they done that has been incredibly damaging?
Open Source Java DAO Generator
You see, when all the systems run Linux - then that pits Sun directly against the x86 PC commodity market just at the time it's starting to go 64 bit. In order for Sun to compete, they must do everything and anything to differentiate to make sure that they can cost justify the higher cost of their hardware.
and I really hate to sound like an old
timer, but I rather like SGI IRIX 6.5's
"chkconfig" and separate "rc" scripts
much better.
The interface is uniform, it's easy to
program for, and everything is laid out
by runlevel. But hey, back in the old
days I used to walk uphill to school,
both ways!
Using Z to prove A never makes any sense.
Well, that's funny, because that's exactly what people are trying to do when they equate patents to property, "intellectual property" to be more specific. I tell you what, get them to knock off the former and I'll be happy to knock off the latter.
The irony is that the open source movement argues "choice" at every turn... unless of course that choice is to not use open source software.
You can choose your choices, but you can not choose your consequences. Choosing software that helps others limit your freedoms has consequences that very very predictable and understandable. Why can't people get that!!
in Korea, Soviet Russia jokes are only for old people.
Well it isn't like Sun gave the Open Source community anything. Rather, Sun is trying to clone their own personal community which is Open with its Source in their private little club. Not the same thing.
No, Apache doesn't demand it. The difference is that Apache doesn't say, in effect, "give us the copyright" so that MS can then turn around and sue you, the developer, while Apache gets to use the code you gave them in a forked and closed ApacheTwo project.
The concern is that n days down the road, MS sues and shuts down OpenOffice due to patent infringement that Sun could even know about right now, while Sun remains free and clear to continue with StarOffice. Thus all the work that was GPLed is lost to the community but remains the property of Sun.
Unlike most GPL-zealots, RMS sees nothing wrong with the BSD license -- he considers it free. He just happened to author the GPL, and so he supports it.
Also, he (the OP) didn't call everyone who doesn't like the GPL a racist, but I expect you know that and are deliberately misrepresenting him. What he did say, though, is that attacking someone's person instead of his ideas suggests two related possibilities. One, the attacker finds the ideas of the protagonist repulsive, but cannot find firm logical ground on which to discredit them, and so defaults to the easier ad homniem attack; and two, the attacker finds the ideas of the protagonist repulsive, but fears attacking those ideas directly, as his criticisms are not shared by the majority.
I think that the MLK/RMS comparison is not a good one, but not because it isn't valid -- rather, because very few people see the freeing of software as being as noble a cause as freeing african americans from racial biggotry. This results in emotionally laden non-productive responses to the argument, rather than well thought out discourse (this is why Goodwin's Law still applies, for example, even if a comparison with Nazis is accurate).
For what it's worth, though, RMS at least does see Free Software as a struggle very much on par with Freedom from Biggotry. Very few people care about it as passionately as he does.
I think, though, that Slashdot has a lot of industry-geeks: people that appreciate Free Software on one hand, but, because they depend on software for their economic well-being, fear the future that Stallman envisions. Many of them know he is right, or at least, are frightened enough by what he says that they try their best to ignore his arguments, and instead criticize his facial hair or alleged lack of hygiene. These people are in the latter group I spoke of: they have misgivings, at some level, about the movement. They want free software for their personal use, but they also want a paycheck, and when push comes to shove, they won't quit their jobs to promote Free Software (as RMS has).
RMS is a tremendously consistant, logical guy. He very rarely contradicts himself, he very rarely comments passionately on anything other than this one issue, and his arguments are all very well thought out -- all of this is independant of whether or not people agree with him or not. But it makes his position a difficult one to criticize, especially by someone less skilled in rhetoric than he is -- which includes 98% of all of us. This invites use of the ad homniem attack -- RMS is hard to argue with, he leaves you feeling stupid.
Getting back to the BSD issue, RMS is concerned about BSD-licensed code being co-opted by organizations hostile to Software freedom. BSDers, for what its worth, are not concerned about this -- and that is their right, and RMS doesn't seem to bother with those that understand the choice they are making. What I think he does worry about it people that develop under the BSD license without a full understanding of the risks they are taking when they license that code.
In a way, BSD-zealots are even more rabidly-freedom loving than GPL-zealots are (as evidenced by the countless threads loudly advancing the notion that the BSD license is much more free than the GPL).
In this situation, though, it is time for BSDers and GPLers to put down their pitchforks and stop fighting with each other, because the issue RMS is talking about here is one that affects the BSDs as well -- the issue of software patents.
Right now, Microsoft can co-opt OpenBSD code, for example, and stick it into NT, and never pay anyone a dime. Theo de Raadt understands this and supports it, in the name of freedom -- a noble view. But in a world with Software Patents, Microsoft could co-opt OpenBSD code and use it -- and then turn around and prevent free uses of OpenBSD, by charging outrageous license fees on patents infringed by OpenBSD code.
The standard view on the BSD side: sure,
when the issue of freedom "gets old" to you, that means you are ready to die. the dead don't care about freedom of others, having truly found it for themselves. this is no surprise.
if you want to be entertained by novelty, consider taking RMS's position and surprising the people around you by your actions.
If some company is worried about a GPL project "stealing" their code that they release under the GPL, then they certainly won't release it BSD, becasuse that allows anybody to "steal" it, including the very same GPL people, plus many other!. Trying to use this as an argument for the BSD license is just stupid.
I think people misunderstand RMS' goals with the GPL:
RMS wants to do away with copyright and all "Intellectual Property-rights" entirely. He does not want to force everyone to use the GPL, but he created the GPL, "copyleft" as an answer to copyright: Since Free Software cannot legally obtain source or dumps from proprietary software, there was a need for a license that allowed everything to be shared. Except to proprietary software, since they're restricting sharing unnaturally. How else would Free Software be able to compete against copyright? It's an ironical stab at copyright.
When RMS started, he was laughed at. Nobody believed quality software could be made by people in their spare time. Leaders of corporations thought that making something like a UNIX OS would be impossible for others to achieve, but forgot it's us, human beings , who really created the software in the first place. Now, we're seeing Free Software is ahead in many respects, and is slowly overtaking proprietary solutions and making them uncomfortable.
RMS doesn't live in his own world, he sees the illusion our society is building its card-house on. He sees "IP-rights" as unnatural: It is natural to share information. With the advent of free cost copying and distribution of information (The Internet), we as a society now have roughly two choices:
1) Implement more and more draconian laws to conserve our social structure as it is now. Only the elite will be able to produce and invent, while the poor becomes poorer both in monetary riches and knowledge - one of the ways to oppress people. There's no way to prevent the freedom of information, except to create higher and higher barriers between every entity in this world: nations, cities, communities, institutions, neighbours, family, your own brain. Yes, it becomes ludicrous at a point, but at that point, who can stop it? When you've already lost touch with your community, nobody is on your side anymore.
A way to do this, is to create an artificial war against an abstract enemy, thus making people think they need these laws for protection. Even though more people die in car-accidents each year, than to this fictious enemy.
Back to point #2:
2) Another approach is to create a natural abundant society where people collaborate and contribute to the whole. Free Software is only the beginning, and has already proven its more efficient, flexible and reusable than proprietary solutions. Technology will slowly eliminate limitations and create abundance. In such a society, work will be more like play than the hour-wrecking, time-stretching, guilt-ridden, manipulative, forced labour we have today. Why are we waiting for the clock to turn 4-5 if there's not more work to be done that day? In fact, most of the population will not be required to "work" at all, and what work exist can be done taking turns on it. It requires a mature society that will take care of all its inhabitants. Like it or not: socialism, though just like in Europe not everybody need be treated equally.
The GPL is not forcing anybody to do anything. Copyright and so called "Intellectual Property-rights" are forcing people, and is the enemy to a natural progression towards an abundant society.
Abundance or not, is really a state of mind. Some people want to create a future of everlasting feeling of lack. You need more, and more, and in order to get it you have to do what they tell you to do. No matter how advanced technologically we get, we will never be happy, we will be slaves to emotions being manipulated by a paranoid society.
I want to live in a mature, natural and abundant society, don't you?
Ask yourself, who is working against the natural progression of evolution, a happy and abundant society, or a draconian fear-induced, lack-ridden society. What society is able to cope with reality , make rational decisions and make crime unattractive?
Both will eventually perish in time, but I want to go down with a calm smile, than a paranoid and greedy grin.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
To properly understand people, it's crucial to see where they're coming from, not brand them as crazy, that's just an easy way to opt out of understanding. I think people misunderstand RMS' goals with the GPL.
RMS wants to do away with copyright and all "Intellectual Property-rights" entirely. He does not want to force everyone to use the GPL, but he created the GPL, "copyleft" as an answer to copyright: Since Free Software cannot legally obtain source or dumps from proprietary software, there was a need for a license that allowed everything to be shared. Except to proprietary software, since they're restricting sharing unnaturally. How else would Free Software be able to compete against copyright? It's an ironical stab at copyright.
When RMS started, he was laughed at. Nobody believed quality software could be made by people in their spare time. Leaders of corporations thought that making something like a UNIX OS would be impossible for others to achieve, but forgot it's us, human beings , who really created the software in the first place. Now, we're seeing Free Software is ahead in some respects, and is slowly overtaking proprietary solutions and making them uncomfortable.
RMS doesn't live in his own world, he sees the illusion our society is building its card-house on. He sees "IP-rights" as unnatural: It is natural to share information. With the advent of free cost copying and distribution of information (The Internet), we as a society now have roughly two choices:
1) Implement more and more draconian laws to conserve our social structure as it is now. Only the elite will be able to produce and invent, while the poor becomes poorer both in monetary riches and knowledge - one of the ways to oppress people. There's no way to prevent the freedom of information, except to create higher and higher barriers between every entity in this world: nations, cities, communities, institutions, neighbours, family, your own brain. Yes, it becomes ludicrous at a point, but at that point, who can stop it? When you've already lost touch with your community, nobody is on your side anymore.
A way to do this, is to create an artificial war against an abstract enemy, thus making people think they need these laws for protection. Even though more people die in car-accidents each year, than to this fictious enemy.
Back to point #2:
2) Another approach is to create a natural abundant society where people collaborate and contribute to the whole. Free Software is only the beginning, and has already proven its more efficient, flexible and reusable than proprietary solutions. Technology will slowly eliminate limitations and create abundance. In such a society, work will be more like play than the hour-wrecking, time-stretching, guilt-ridden, manipulative, forced labour we have today. Why are we waiting for the clock to turn 4-5 if there's not more work to be done that day? In fact, most of the population will not be required to "work" at all, and what work exist can be done taking turns on it. It requires a mature society that will take care of all its inhabitants. Like it or not: socialism, though just like in Europe not everybody need be treated equally.
The GPL is not forcing anybody to do anything. Copyright and so called "Intellectual Property-rights" are forcing people, and is the enemy to a natural progression towards an abundant society.
Abundance or not, is really a state of mind. Some people want to create a future of everlasting feeling of lack. You need more, and more, and in order to get it you have to do what they tell you to do. No matter how advanced technologically we get, we will never be happy, we will be slaves to emotions being manipulated by a paranoid society - our spirit crushed or perverted into material goal-chasing.
I want to live in a mature, natural and abundant society, don't you?
Ask yourself, who is working against the natural progression of evolution,
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
A joke is funny if its funny. It may sound stupid, but there isn't any more logic to it than that. Besides, trying to implement a "group think" system for Funny moderation works against the purpose of jokes anyway. I find a joke funny because I find it funny. If you don't like it, well .. move along or make your own joke.
yeah thats old, to be up to date you should use MICROS~1 ;P
need a free COBOL editor for Windows?
I know that it will not exactly shake this community but I've recently taken out /. from my favourites, despite this being my most frequented site (I'm sure that IP logs will show what a fan I've been). And I bet I'm not the only one.
The reason ? While there are loads of cool things on here, the constant bickering about M$, open sores, etc, is turning this place into a pretty boring one that is less pleasant to visit. And this is at a time when open source is becoming more prominent and people want more information !
The site will continue to look like the ideal place for bickering when all the MS flaws get reported but very few of those related to Linux. Stating the obvious here, but surely professional Linux admins would like to hear more about what affects their systems in the first instance ? Reporting MS flaws is just a hook to catch another set of anti-MS sentiment.
Now, if someone could tell me why FileZilla has failed to stop downloading my SUSE 9.2 at 3.1 GB, and wants to carry on, this place would be a whole lot more useful for me right now !
Ok, so I'm back here today but the site does have enormous appeal. And it's not yet back in the favourites !
That's the whole point.
The guy doesn't want anybody to add the GNU/ to Linux
He wants you to call GNU what is GNU.
ls , ps, gcc, tar, bash, that is GNU.
Linux is great, mostly because it works, but it's a kernel, it's stupid to call GNU/Linux just Linux, as it would be stupid to call WindowsXP just "kernel32.dll".
What you expect when you are presented to a so-called "Linux" system is the GNU system, most people don't use so-called "Linux" program to device drivers and stuff, they usually use GNU standard libraries.
Of course, a "Linux" system can use gnome, or kde, X or just fbdev, but a "Linux" system is not a "Linux" system if it doesn't have the GNU tools. Because it's not a "Linux" system, it's a GNU/Linux system.
There are non-GNU Linux systems (like embedded Linux), but they don't comply with the concept that is called "Linux", because a regular "Linux" user wouldn't be able to do much with that system, because it is an incomplete "Linux" system (no bash, no gcc, no gnu-style options for commands).
Of course, that is because when you use a "Linux"
system, you expect a GNU system running on the Linux kernel. That is a GNU/Linux system, again.
I don't believe his claim is pointless.
I thought RMS was stupid, painting GNU/ on "Linux" t-shirts, when he was here in Uruguay for a conference, but then he gave his talk, I listened (that was hard, because he made it in spanish, and wasn't very good at it yet), and I understood.
It's a trick! Get an axe!
*sigh* back to work...
your just trying to get another day off work for "RMS Day"
IBM and others are big but not infinite.
Many small companies will require configuration and support they can afford. IBM et all will not be able to provide for that (it will not be cost effective to baby-sit a 10 body company's IT infrastructure).
A lot of companies will require to customize software to their exact needs. It is impossible for IBM or anybody else to do all this kind of work.
And in any case I don't see anything wrong with working for IBM, the big advantage would be that idiotic NDAs will not stop enterprising people at having a go to get a piece of the action of the IT pie since there would not be unassialable cost of entry against new players (in the form of patented and closed sofware).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
IBM released some (old) patents for free. Sun released some patents only for use under solaris.
That's a pretty big difference, IMHO.
Changa hates change.
He's complaining about licenses which need complaining about. Look at any of those. There are real problems there, and someone needs to write about them. And many of the licenses have been fixed, partly in response to his articles. (the different license used for darwin, the revised bsd license).
I am trolling
I am so sick of choosing leaders based on charisma instead of knowledge. I would rather have an ass who actually knows the issues even though that may slow the cause.
Exactly! And (seemingly) all non-GPL licenses need complaining about. I do not have a problem with this; I was just pointing it out because it is an interesting pattern. Okay?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
That's bullshit man. A leader should be able to ADMIT the failings of his team or a movement, and be able to rationally discuss ways they are either being fixed, or ways to go about fixing them.
Leading is more than taking glory and accolades, it's about leading, putting one's neck out and making waves, not cowering in a corner proving oneself superior to everyone else through ignorance of facts and reality.
Where did you get the idea
I am so sick of choosing leaders based on charisma instead of knowledge. I would rather have an ass who actually knows the issues even though that may slow the cause.
So you'd rather have most people be put off and use Windows instead of Linux? Eliteism will do little for Linux except kill it eventually.
A GOOD leader needs knowledge of the issues, charisma and other leadership skills if he's going to FURTHER your cause.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer