Slashdot Mirror


Richard Stallman: 'Apple Has Tightest Digital Handcuffs In History'

jrepin points out a discussion with Richard Stallman in which he talks about how the Free Software movement is faring in light of companies that have been successful in the long term with very different principles, like Microsoft and Apple. Stallman had this to say: "I would say the free software movement has gone about half the distance it has to travel. We managed to make a mass community but we still have a long way to go to liberate computer users. Those companies are very powerful. They are cleverly finding new ways to take control over users. ... The most widely used non-free programs have malicious features – and I’m talking about specific, known malicious features. ... There are three kinds: those that spy on the user, those that restrict the user, and back doors. Windows has all three. Microsoft can install software changes without asking permission. Flash Player has malicious features, as do most mobile phones. Digital handcuffs are the most common malicious features. They restrict what you can do with the data in your own computer. Apple certainly has the digital handcuffs that are the tightest in history. The i-things, well, people found two spy features and Apple says it removed them and there might be more. When people don’t know about this issue they choose based on immediate convenience and nothing else. And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect."

315 of 515 comments (clear)

  1. Handcuffs are a good thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...if they stop you from eating the scabs on your feet.

    1. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      YES YES YES YES YES.

      I'm sorry, but after watching Stallman eat his own foot-candy *while giving a presentation*, I can no longer take *anything* he says seriously.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ

    2. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      YES YES YES YES YES.

      I'm sorry, but after watching Stallman eat his own foot-candy *while giving a presentation*, I can no longer take *anything* he says seriously.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ

      WTFF!!???

    3. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1, Funny

      I don't think there is any danger of /. deciding not to respect someone who posts a rant against Apple :)

    4. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by partyguerrilla · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nice argumentum ad-hominem you got there, champ.

    5. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by jc42 · · Score: 2

      I don't think there is any danger of /. deciding not to respect someone who posts a rant against Apple :)

      Wait; I thought /. was controlled by Apple fanboys who down-modded anything that criticised Apple (or didn't criticise Micro$oft).

      So which is it?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    6. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Dahamma · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow, that video started making me nauseous - and THEN I saw what you were talking about! Best comment: "Stallman only obtains his food from open sores."

      Still - don't take someone's opinion less seriously because they are physically disgusting. Take them less seriously because they are pompous, arrogant, and have no interest in listening to anyone else's point of view on a subject.

      Though to be honest, I actually mostly agree with his comments on Apple's "handcuffs", at least. Though I don't think telling people they are being "herded" is going to win over anyone...

    7. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by morcego · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wait; I thought /. was controlled by Apple fanboys who down-modded anything that criticised Apple (or didn't criticise Micro$oft).

      So which is it?

      It kinda is/was. The problem is, Apple pulled so much shit, that even fanboys are pissed at them.

      --
      morcego
    8. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by fredprado · · Score: 2

      It has not been the case many times in History, and I don't see why should it be a prerequisite now.

    9. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not just physically disgusting, it's borderline insane. The entire point of taking someone like RMS's opinion is based on the assumption that he's more informed than the average person, has dedicated more thought to it, and has come to rational conclusions.

      I have always had serious trouble with the "rational" part of that in regards to Stallman, and the foot-eating thing only reinforces that. Basic disagreements with his philosophy (in particular the extremist elements of it, the basic idea that software should be free I agree with but we live in a concrete world and our philosophical models aren't perfect so you need to be flexible) aside, I have a real problem delegating any thought at all to someone so unaware or uncaring of social norms.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    10. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      to be fair, Stallman started it by basically insinuating people who don't heed his warnings to be "sheeple" with the choice quotes:
      "...liberate computer users."
      "...they choose based on immediate convenience and nothing else. And therefore they can be *herded*..."

      Let's be frank here. He doesn't have much respect for people who don't read EULAs, or people who aren't as geeky as the average /.'er.

    11. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1, Funny

      The entire point of taking someone like RMS's opinion is based on the assumption that he's more informed than the average person, has dedicated more thought to it, and has come to rational conclusions.

      Perhaps he *is* and *has* - Has anyone tasted his feet or run a nutritional analysis on them?

      [ I'm sure sure which idea here creeps me out more ... ]

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    12. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by crioca · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but after watching Stallman eat his own foot-candy *while giving a presentation*, I can no longer take *anything* he says seriously

      That's seems like more of a problem with you though than with him. His lack of social grace has little relevance to his insights on computing, but someone being narrow minded has an impact across a large potion of their life.

    13. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not a psychiatrist, but I know other people with similar eating disorders and he may well have Pica. Dismissing his ideas because of that is not unlike picking on the socially awkard kid who is also a genius.

      If RMS were "normal" he wouldn't have had the insight and persistence that earned him universal recognition as the father of the Free software movement and a MacArthur "Genius" Fellowship. If the price he pays for the genius is a little socially inappropriate behavior when he's stressed and it doesn't hurt anyone, then what's really the problem here? Sounds more like a convenient red herring than anything else.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    14. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1
    15. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Which only means that underage girls of 17 (by insane US standards that are not followed anywhere else in the world) should be able to decide if they want to have sex with without sending the poor guys to jail.

    16. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      The entire point of taking someone like RMS's opinion is based on the assumption that he's more informed than the average person, has dedicated more thought to it, and has come to rational conclusions.

      I have a real problem delegating any thought at all to someone so unaware or uncaring of social norms.

      Most social norms are not founded in rationality, and in fact, many of them are incredibly irrational. Personally, I think social norms are important too, but in my experience those who care most about social norms don't tend to be objectively rational.

      On the other hand, "rationality" is in part a construct of society. While some aspects of logic may seem to have to do with how the universe "just works," a lot of "rationality" is fundamentally based on human ways of thinking about the world. So, a person who becomes increasingly divorced from humanity will eventually develop ideas that by our society definitions MUST be irrational.

      I make no claims about how this applies to RMS.

    17. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by jampola · · Score: 1

      First post and it has to mention "footgate". This must be some kind of record!

    18. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And I wouldn't listen to him either. I just don't get it, this wasn't him getting caught in some moment he thought he was off camera, whacko RMS went and DID IT ON STAGE during a fricking lecture no less! I mean how whack a doodle do you have to get before people go "You know, maybe listening to this guy isn't the brightest of ideas".

      Lets face it folks the guy gets more bizarre as he goes along, he acts like a 5 year old (putting the name of a company you don't like into the language of your license? Really?) and as his munching down on toe jam on stage at a lecture shows he either doesn't have the good sense or just doesn't give a fuck about doing truly gross shit in front of God and everybody, on camera no less, so WHY does anybody listen to him?

      If there HAS to be a spokesman for FOSS, you have so many other choices that actually make FOSS look intelligent, Linus Torvalds and Eric Raymond just to name two and at least they aren't acting like a crazy homeless guy on camera or isn't calling what he doesn't like about a company "sins" like he's the fricking pope.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    19. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2

      Does what he has said in TFA's discussion make sense?

      Yes or no?

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    20. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by tyrione · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not a psychiatrist, but I know other people with similar eating disorders and he may well have Pica. Dismissing his ideas because of that is not unlike picking on the socially awkard kid who is also a genius.

      If RMS were "normal" he wouldn't have had the insight and persistence that earned him universal recognition as the father of the Free software movement and a MacArthur "Genius" Fellowship. If the price he pays for the genius is a little socially inappropriate behavior when he's stressed and it doesn't hurt anyone, then what's really the problem here? Sounds more like a convenient red herring than anything else.

      Then Einstein must have been a moron or an idiot for not indulging in deplorable hygiene habits. After all, his genius certainly should have afforded him blowing himself in public with how abnormal his insights on Physics have been. Your argument portrays you as an enabler of his repulsive traits because you think the guy is brilliant and his social value far exceeds his personal social habits. Here is a clue: He's not. He's a guy with a Bachelor's degree in Physics. Helping to write a James Gosling free version of Emacs should never have won him such high praise. James Gosling for inventing Emacs, Java and much more should sit far higher on the shelves of genius in the world of modern Computer Science. Stallman is an activist who amazingly barks loudly about free source, but quietly recognizes without the tens and tens of billions of dollars, euros, etc., poured into Open Source projects the entire movement goes no where.

      Linux is nothing without billions from IBM, Oracle and many others. Torvalds knows it. These corporations gladly throw the money into areas they know would cost far more to duplicate, in-house, and the areas of distinction are spent more on R&D and Patenting as any sensible person would do. There is a reason so many corporations are busting their hump with LLVM/Clang and the exponentially growing list of projects embracing it--Open Source can be Open and still Open in Licensing that doesn't bind everyone to the GPL. The GPL has many excellent qualities about it--sans Richard Stallman.d

    21. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Divebus · · Score: 2

      The hardware in Apple stuff doesn't trap anything that doesn't have RIAA/MPAA shackles on it (DRM), and a lot of it doesn't anymore. Just take your files and play them on anything that plays standards compliant MPEG4/H.264/AAC media.

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    22. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by pantaril · · Score: 1

      I have always had serious trouble with the "rational" part of that in regards to Stallman, and the foot-eating thing only reinforces that.

      You say you have problems with Stallman ideas yet you fail to provide single valid argument against him. Instead you resort to attacking his behaviour, which has nothing to do with his opinions. This is logical falacy.

    23. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      Next up on slashdot: stallman declares 2+2=4, get challenged on it because he had been eating the scabs on his feet.

      Not that performing such acts during conferences has ever been a good idea (wtf), but I see a problem when stallman is always about communism idealism and hygiene while people have discussed for years Dubya Bush policy without mentioning he was drunk.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    24. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      >The entire point of taking someone like RMS's opinion is based on the assumption that he's more informed than the average person.

      Not a good idea.

      e.g. a quite important guy calls you bamboccione and you react by going to live by yourself getting a house at the very peak of the housing bubble, giving money to the interests this obviously very well informed guy represented. Fatal mistake huh?

      You should instead try looking for the consequences an opinion implies, look for possible conflict of interest, agendas, and compare the premises annd the conclusions with reality.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    25. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by yusing · · Score: 1

      Ya see?? There's what separates Slashdot today from what it used to be: people aren't afraid to direct attention away from the issues being addressed by drawing attention to the eccentricities of the writer!! Just like it worked on the playground!! And it's marvelous that the carefully-selected Slashdot mods reward Mr. AC for his delightful, acute, sophisticated wit.

      Bravo Slashdot! You're not becoming irrelevant like so many of the other decades-old commentary sites!

      --

      "You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson

    26. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Then Einstein must have been a moron or an idiot for not indulging in deplorable hygiene habits.

      What, what an ass you are to make that false equivalance. I didn't even imply that genius requires repulsive behavior. It was your asshole nature that decided to interpret it that way so you could feel better about yourself. You are more disgusting than RMS by far.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    27. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      No.

    28. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Apple's reputation management team is trying to deflect discussion from their lockin.

      Sounds like your excuse for the much more likely scenario that most people don't care.

      "Music, movies, TV, and podcast subscriptions. All tied up in Apple's little ecosystem. A very pretty noose to keep people chained to its hardware.

      All the music i've downloaded from iTunes is playable on all my non-Apple devices, you don't seem very educated on the subject.

      Imagine, just for a moment, that your Sony DVD player would only play Sony Movies' films. When you decided to buy a new DVD player from Samsung, none of those media files would work on your new kit without some serious fiddling.

      That would certainly suck, but i've been playing the same movies on my apple and non-apple devices - the devices aren't restricted to apple-only or anything like that so i'm not sure what your imagined scenario is supposed to relate to, again it sounds like you don't really know much about this subject.

      I want to watch Nokia movies on my Samsung hardware running Google's Android, and then back them up to DropBox.

      And why would you not be able to do that? I don't know what 'Nokia movies' are - AFAICT there is no such thing - but i've played movies from various sources on my nexus 7 which i have then backed up to skydrive.

    29. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Right now, the law leaves the 'poor guys' in no doubt that if they have sex w/ an underaged girl, they'll end up in the slammer. Stallman's view would change that by making it nebulous, and based on the whims of the underaged person - girl or boy - on whether they'd go to jail.

      How is Stallman's views, which allows for the 'poor guys' to be confused, better than the current law, which makes it clear to them that if she's underaged, you're going to jail?

    30. Re:Handcuffs are a good thing... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      No because again he tries to frame every discussion into a "battle of good VS evil" in which he is the sole arbiter of what is listed as good and what is evil, like he is a religious figurehead.

      You simply can't have a rational debate on the merits of an issue when somebody calls you a "sinner" because they are simply trying to enflame, no different than an Internet Troll and that is RMS in a nutshell. he labels all that don't follow HIS beliefs as evil sinners, and like some cult leader only HE can lead you to "the one true way". Again this completely derails conversations and does nothing but to divide the audience, but RMS doesn't care about that because he is "good" and you are "evil" and that is that. As the head of Red Hat noted "RMS treats his friends as his enemies" because he believes in NO discussion, NO compromise or debate, its strictly the way of St iGNUcious or the highway, which is why we need to stop giving press to the loonie because he makes the entire FOSS movement look like religious nuts.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Freedom by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

    1. Re:Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On the flip side, there are those who trade safety and security for freedom even if it's only an illusion.

    2. Re:Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most people are idiots as well which leaves me wondering about:

      Windows has all three. Microsoft can install software changes without asking permission.

      Is he referring to Windows Update? Well when Stallman can get people to properly configure and update their software I'll join in the irrational OSS circlejerk.

    3. Re:Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

      The malware I clean up day after day is not an illusion. Freedom isn't free. It requires constant vigilance. The freedom to tinker has no value to me, and the cost in my time is absurd. I would have to be an idiot not to use a locked down device.

    4. Re:Freedom by vikingpower · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Even if I fully agree with Stallman, I agree with you, too. The 2 opinions do not exclude eachother. Where are my f*****g modpoints ?

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    5. Re:Freedom by bjwest · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The malware I clean up day after day is not an illusion. Freedom isn't free. It requires constant vigilance. The freedom to tinker has no value to me, and the cost in my time is absurd. I would have to be an idiot not to use a locked down device.

      And this malware you speak of is on which platform? Is it an open or closed platform? I've been using Linux for well over 15 years, and I've never, NEVER had a virus or malware on my system. I've also been using an Android phone since the original Droid which has also never had malware or a virus on it.

      Perhaps its because, as they say, Linux isn't mainstream enough to become a target, but I don't think so. I think it'd due to the openness and community support of the code. No one is trying to hide the security flaws - anyone can look though the code - so they get found and fixed quickly.

      There are malware on the Android platform (no more so than on ios or win moble/8/whatever it's called this week), but it's relatively new and not as polished as the rest of the Linux distros. Also a lot of venders add custom, proprietary code. Just don't click on every link you see and you'll be fine.

      --

      --- Keep the choice with the user..
    6. Re:Freedom by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

      Isn't the freedom to chose safety itself an exercise of choice?

    7. Re:Freedom by davydagger · · Score: 4, Informative

      most GNU/Linux distros do this pretty well compared to windows update.

      in addition, most modern package managers sign packages with gpg, and include the keys in the install ISO, which is further signed with gpg, and hashed.

      and windows fanbois have no clue what they are talking about.

    8. Re:Freedom by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

      Isn't the freedom to chose safety itself an exercise of choice?

      Not when there's no choice involved.

      For example, I never agreed to sacrifice my right to travel freely in exchange for airport feel-ups and highway checkpoints (actions which, coincidentally, do not actually make anyone safer).

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    9. Re:Freedom by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Most people don't really care about being free.

      Yes, many folks are into S&M these days . . . just look at the popularity of "50 Shades of Grey".

      I guess folks like their kink with their tech gadgets, too.

      This is a great opportunity for an aspiring geek novelist: Write a hot & steamy novel about the S&M relationship between guys and gals, and their tech gadgets.

      "Ooooh . . . Apple makes me feel so macho!"

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    10. Re:Freedom by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

      Isn't it nice that their forebears cared about freedom enough to die for it, so that they can sit on their fat asses and not care about it today?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    11. Re:Freedom by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The problem is that there is too much to be concerned about to be safe. Sure most of us on Slashdot are IT Professionals or are at least better than others with computers. But people in other specialties have their own conserns and are baning their head saying people would be so much better if they just did this which is an easy job for me.
      Eg.
      Invest into your 401k
      Eat better food
      Exercise Daily
      Don't Speed
      Don't Drink/Smoke/Use Drugs
      Get up and get some fresh air...

      There are so many things in life that we need to concern ourselves about, for the people who are not that interested in technology wants someone else to look out for them. Microsoft, Apple, Google, your APT repository... They just want something to go and fix the problem without too much hassle.

      Unfortunately the App Store which is similar to a locked down APT Repository, offers that safety, here is a spot where I can get stuff and I can trust it. Back in the olden days we could go to a reputable store and buy a box set. However with most apps being offered on the internet these App Stores from trusted sources with rather rigorous testing are giving us more safety than the casual user just downloading a program off the internet.

      They don't care about software freedom. They want to use the program and get the results they are not interested in geeky flamewars.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    12. Re:Freedom by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've been using Linux for well over 15 years, and I've never, NEVER had a virus or malware on my system. I've also been using an Android phone since the original Droid which has also never had malware or a virus on it.

      That you know of.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    13. Re:Freedom by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I use Linux, and I used to agree with some of your platitudes, but not any more.

      Although you believe that the community isn't trying to hide the flaws, most users didn't compile squat on their machines. They didn't look at the code, and although some are indeed coders, there are now millions of lines of code that change *a lot*. There's the kernel, in many revisions, and there are apps and distro families that change/mutate frequently and not very many people look at the code before they compile it and go Oh! There's a problem there! They may look at best, as a forensic exercise, long after they downloaded a replacement app, but that's about it.

      Yes, there are wonderful kernel contributors and many fantastic FOSS sites and apps and distros. Only a handful of organizations try and keep it together-- at all.

      "Found and fixed quickly" is largely a myth. Some communities really work hard towards fixing bugs, but there are many platforms and combinations needed to emulate problems. Coders move on, communities split, fork, or just die of boredom. There are no guarantees in either commercial or FOSS software.

      And having been hacked hard twice, I can tell you that you can be rooted in moments, your machine hijacked, and unavailable to a user session no matter what OS you use. With a big enough hammer, you can break *anything*. The smugness is unwarranted.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    14. Re:Freedom by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      A good part is not about freedom, but ownership. Is your data or you are giving it to someone that just want your money to give it back to you (or someone else) how he likes, when he likes, and if he likes? You are not giving away just freedom, also what you own, and what you are, without even realizing it.

    15. Re:Freedom by dwightk · · Score: 1

      Also: Some people value freedom so much they give up all sorts of freedom to keep their options open.

      --
      Like anyone can even know that
    16. Re:Freedom by jedidiah · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > Well when Stallman can get people to properly configure and update their software

      Well engineered software should require neither.

      Windows is in a constant state of flux because it is a mess built on top of a mess built on top of another mess. It is a solution to a problem that Microsoft created itself. If it comes with it's own problems (like the registry does), then there is only one entity to fault.

      You're trying to blame the victim.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    17. Re:Freedom by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Macs are similarly open systems and don't have all of the problems that Windows does.

      The problems that Windows has are a Windows problem. They aren't shared by anyone else. Even the problems that Android has are down to bad apps masquerading as good ones and aren't the self-replicating and browse-by infections that you can get with Windows.

      Windows is the only cesspool. It's about Microsoft engineering, not popularity.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    18. Re:Freedom by bjwest · · Score: 2

      I've been using Linux for well over 15 years, and I've never, NEVER had a virus or malware on my system. I've also been using an Android phone since the original Droid which has also never had malware or a virus on it.

      That you know of.

      I will concede to this. Although I don't regularly scan my computers, I do keep an eye on the net traffic. Unless the malware is piggybacking itself on my regular data, nothing seems amiss. There is no traffic other than the periodic email check during my down time, and I've not noticed any data going out on any strange ports.

      You have peeked my curiosity, however. I may just go find a good Linux scanner and check things out. I have two partitions I keep swapping installs back and forth on, so I have my last Kubuntu 11.04 install I can scan as well as this one.

      --

      --- Keep the choice with the user..
    19. Re:Freedom by bjwest · · Score: 2

      I'm not talking about normal bugs, and I guarantee you the kernel and all core programs are scrutinized to all ends by people looking for vulnerabilities (both malicious and those looking to fix/report them). I don't download and run/compile code from just anywhere, nor do I click on just anything I receive in email or any old link on a web page, and I do take precautions like noscript and addblock on the web. I'm not saying Linux is invulnerable, but it is a hell of a lot harder to get into than the most popular OS. Just use a bit of common sense, and you'll be just fine.

      The GP was talking about daily cleaning of malware. This should not happen to anyone in this day and age, and it certainly doesn't require a locked down device to remain clean, again, it just takes common sense. It's been well know for years now how easy it is to get infected. It's been all over the web and news but sill you have idiots (they are not uneducated on the problem, so yes, they are idiots) who keep clicking on crap because it flashes at them and promises them something for nothing.

      --

      --- Keep the choice with the user..
    20. Re:Freedom by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      A friend is a kernel contributor. Early on, one of my routines, now long gone, was in there. The process is familiar. This is the kernel. Like other kernels, it has numerous kinds of users. Some are adept, some are not, and some are accident free, while others are prone to it.

      Cleaning machines daily of malware doesn't have to happen at all, no matter the OS. The ability to inhibit malware and virus infection vectors is at hand for most all platforms (I'll leave out exceptions, to reduce a flame war).

      Email messages become more and more clever at inducing users to click on stuff. What's there when they arrive? Maybe it's a benign ED drug site. Maybe they're about to get a big gulp of crap. Lock downs, as you cite, have varying degrees of helpfulness. OSes need seat belts, air bags, and other metaphorical help. I don't find any of them particularly immune, although I like the design of IPFW, and SELinux for session management-- where that's practical in a client/server environment. On user hardware, presume an infected OS, no matter the type. Android, in my mind, is as bad as iOS, although I like APNS lockdowns. But people root phones all the time, and some of the MDM software out there barely sends up a red flag. Are roots inherently evil? Any organization has to consider them a problem, because they're an infection vector and payload provider.

      Believing that Linux is less vulnerable is onerous because it will lead to sloth. One less thing to worry about, or so it would seem. Then, like me, you can get your primary httpd site taken down in a heartbeat to become part of a bot'd torrent network temporary C&C server. Fortunately, the AC plug was nearby.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    21. Re:Freedom by tepples · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately the App Store which is similar to a locked down APT Repository, offers that safety

      The difference between the App Store model and Ubuntu is that on Ubuntu, you don't need to pay a recurring fee just to add a PPA.

      here is a spot where I can get stuff and I can trust it. Back in the olden days we could go to a reputable store and buy a box set.

      Back in the olden days you weren't cryptographically limited to one store, except in the video game console market. Stores would compete for your business. Likewise in the Android system, both Google Play Store and Amazon Appstore compete for your business.

    22. Re:Freedom by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 2

      Can I say the same about other OSes? I'd say that depends more on how well you know the OS than differences in engineering at this point. My Windows 7 install is the same one I was running since it was released to MSDN subscribers, earlier than its general release 3 years ago. I've had to clean things up from time to time, but I know the OS well enough to clean out old Explorer add-ins and run-on-startup programs, which is the cause of 90% of the slowdowns on old Windows installs. 90% of the remaining 10% is caused by running your filesystem too full without defragmenting. Take care of those two things, and your Windows install can last a long, long time.

      I'll certainly concede that it's much harder to know what's really going on with Windows though.

      On the Linux side though, I also run Gentoo, I have for the last 8 years or so, and I managed to get hit with a worm that got in through my Roundcube install. This is on a system that is updated weekly, with the hardened make.profile, and official ebuilds for everything. Roundcube was installed with the official ebuild and webapp-config.

      It wasn't able to do anything other than write to my temp folder and execute the code it wrote there as the apache account in order to participate in a UDP flood, and the security hole was in Roundcube (which is as typically awful as you'd expect from a PHP app) and not the base install, but the point is, Linux is certainly not immune to viruses or worms, and they do exist, and if you think that it is or they don't, you're fooling yourself. Programmers make mistakes, and many eyes still miss things. More secure by design? Sure, I'll buy that. But applying superlatives like "never" or "immune" is just silly.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    23. Re:Freedom by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Where are my f*****g modpoints ?

      We took them away to protect your from the psychological stress of having to make a decision.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    24. Re:Freedom by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      Oh, I wasn't trying to say it's likely that you personally were infected, just to make the point that the successful infections are the ones you're most likely to not know about. Virus scanners aren't perfect, and there's a lot of room to hide in the billions of bits on a typical system's RAM, or trillions of bits on their HDDs, or hundreds of thousands to millions of bits per second on a typical net connection. It's the competent malware writers that are really scary, and probably up to the scariest stuff.

      But you seem reasonable, so you probably already knew that. Oh, btw, it's "piqued".

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    25. Re:Freedom by Arker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And this brings us right back to the crux of it - freedom may not be free, but neither is your 'locked down device' ever going to be secure. We dont make secure devices anymore, we havent for years, the lockdown isnt to prevent software that YOU consider malicious, only to prevent software that the manufacturer (who generally doesnt even consider you a customer) considers malicious, regardless of your opinion. The manufacturer always leaves ways for themselves to get in, they are just locking YOU out. The malware makers then come along and find and exploit the doors the manufacturer left, so these systems wind up being LESS secure than Free systems.

      Freedom to tinker isnt only important to the tinkerer - it's important to 'consumers' in general, because todays tinkerer is tomorrows competitor in the marketplace offering something the customer wanted - or alternatively not offering it, because that freedom was taken away and they never had a chance.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    26. Re:Freedom by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      The freedom to tinker has no value to me...

      But the freedom for others to tinker does have value to you. Excellent example: the Linux kernel, which chances are, powers more than one device you own.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    27. Re:Freedom by fredprado · · Score: 2

      Sorry, exchanging a possibility to be infected by malware in a badly maintained open system to the certainty of living full of malwares built in by the manufacturing company is indeed stupidity no matter how much you value your time.

    28. Re:Freedom by unixisc · · Score: 1

      No, let Stallman or the FSF guys complete HURD, and then make it painless to install and configure and update. Translation: editing files in /etc under vi or emacs is not painless.

    29. Re:Freedom by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      You're diligent whatever it is. All of them can get pounded to the point where something will break, and you get rooted, or slipped with bit of nastyware. All of them.

      You do what you're supposed to do: protect each machine as though it were an island. Use authentication that has reasonable key exchange. Stay off "hotspots" that don't use WPA or stronger keys. Backup. There are entire college degrees based on the question you ask.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    30. Re:Freedom by Arker · · Score: 1

      Android is proprietary system only marginally more free than iOS, and the number of infectors out there is not the only measure of security, in fact it's one of the poorest ones. If there are hundreds of packages of half-assed malware out there that could theoretically infect my android phone but in practice dont and cant, why should that bother me? On the other hand both of these systems are proprietary and therefore both may be expected to provide official backdoors that can be exploited by serious attacks and against which you are nearly defenseless. I have had a lot of complaints about my android but malware was never one of them.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    31. Re:Freedom by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1
      Fly? Hell, I just want to hit the damn food court without being molested!

      Note that my post said nothing about flying.

      You can pave a runway in your own backyard, build a plane in your garage, and fly the shit out of it if you want. All within fairly reasonable limitations.

      So, in order to travel freely, every American would have to build their own infrastructure?

      I don't think "freely" means what you think it means.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    32. Re:Freedom by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      For example, I never agreed to sacrifice my right to travel freely in exchange for airport feel-ups and highway checkpoints (actions which, coincidentally, do not actually make anyone safer).

      Not really apt comparison in the context of free software, given that no one is mandating that you give up any of your rights if you don't chose to run Windows or OSX.

    33. Re:Freedom by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      There are malware on the Android platform (no more so than on ios or win moble/8/whatever it's called this week)

      I'm afraid blatant lying will get you nowhere. There's lots of malware Android, But they're almost unknown on iOS. And Windows Mobile isn't known for viruses either.

    34. Re:Freedom by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It doesn't power any of the devices I own.

    35. Re:Freedom by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Lucky you. I set up a Linux desktop once, then CERT called me because it got pwned and was acting as C&C for a botnet.

    36. Re:Freedom by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      The difference between the App Store model and Ubuntu is that on Ubuntu, you don't need to pay a recurring fee just to add a PPA.

      Which:
      a) Doesn't matter to consumers.
      b) Is one of the lesser but real reasons that the Apple App Store is safer.

      Back in the olden days you weren't cryptographically limited to one store, except in the video game console market. Stores would compete for your business.

      Heck in the real old days you'd go to the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, the green grocer, the chemist (drug store), all in a days shopping. These days people do most of their shopping at a single hypermarket. And that trend isn't finished. It is after all more convenient to have everything in one store.

    37. Re:Freedom by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      That's what you (are paid to) think. Do you have a TV?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    38. Re:Freedom by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      Ah the sign of a truly closed mind. The notion that anyone with different ideas must be paid to have them.

      Yes I have a TV. It doesn't run Linux.

    39. Re:Freedom by exomondo · · Score: 1

      The problems that Windows has are a Windows problem. They aren't shared by anyone else. Even the problems that Android has are down to bad apps masquerading as good ones and aren't the self-replicating and browse-by infections that you can get with Windows.

      Windows is the only cesspool. It's about Microsoft engineering, not popularity.

      Wow, that's some serious blinders you've got on, you've obviously got a religious attachment to some Microsoft hate that makes you spew out rubbish like that. The sort of thing that keeps you ignorant of things like jailbreakme.com, linux rootkits, OSF.8759, Slapper, Scalper, Linux.Svat and L10n among many, many, many others. You're just a clear ignorant fanboy.

    40. Re:Freedom by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I'll have to call you an Apple zealot. I seriously doubt your home has no Linux devices, even now. Do you have a stereo receiver? Not that you would tell the truth if you did have a Linux device in your Apple toady zone.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    41. Re:Freedom by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      As I said, you have a truly closed mind.

    42. Re:Freedom by davydagger · · Score: 1

      vi and emacs? what is this 1985????

      There are a whole host of nice Xorg based GUI text editos, many like gnome's gedit even does syntax highlighting for quite a few langauges, and even lightweight ones more comparable to MS notepad still number lines.

      On the command line, on modern UNIX boxen, there is GNU nano
      http://www.nano-editor.org/

      its a simple to use WYSIWYG editor with syntax highliting, regexpression, as well as simple string searching, and a lot of other great advanced features, most people will never know, care, or use.

      Then of course comes with the fact on modern linux desktops, most configuration is done in the GUI in KDE, GNOME, and even XFCE now. All have fantastic control panels.

      Then of courses comes the occational manual edit. In windows this is done by modifying values in the "registry". Even experts get confused in lost in the registry. editing text files in /etc/, especially now, since there is no more /usr/etc and /usr/local/etc on modern linux systems (real UNIX still has them I think.) is very painless. Combine modern text editors, loads of comments explaining options. All you really need to configure files in /etc/ is patience to read the comments, and basic ability to send commands to nano with the control key

    43. Re:Freedom by Arker · · Score: 1

      Can you name one Android device that works without blobware? That's not a free system. You can download, modify, and build the source to *parts* of the system - but the system remains entirely owned by a proprietary blob. I have an Android device and it most assuredly is a proprietary device, as even after rooting it control of critical parts of the system remain completely beyond my control and the code I can download is only a subset of the code that actually makes the thing work.

      YOU, Sir, are the one that shouldnt be commenting on things you know nothing about.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    44. Re:Freedom by apotheon · · Score: 1

      Any major OS may have an occasional problem. There is a difference between occasional problems and epidemic problems, though. Just about every piece of self-replicating malware created for Unix-like systems in the last twentyish years has required user intervention to allow it to execute (and thus replicate), in fact -- maybe all of them (I'm sure there are some I haven't read about, but all of them that I have read about require user intervention somehow). One of the big differences is Microsoft's reticence to admit to a vulnerability -- a problem Apple shares -- which tends to incent the vendor to hide or deny vulnerabilities rather than fix them a rather unacceptable percentage of the time. Another is the relatively small pool of people who know the system well enough to develop specific solutions (last I checked, a few years ago, Microsoft's fastest-ever turn-around time on a vulnerability from report to fix was longer than the average for core open source OS projects like OpenBSD and the Linux kernel).

      Probably the biggest for Microsoft, though, is its refusal to consider many types of vulnerabilities as system issues at all. Instead, they are regarded as though they are unavoidable forces of nature, offloading the task of securing the system against these problems to detection and removal systems (e.g. antivirus software) rather than dealing with it at the source (addressing the system's flaws). As a result, there are always legions of viruses and other pieces of malware floating around out there that are largely identical to older viruses and other malware previously detected and protected against by those detection and removal systems. The new malware continues to work because it has been altered enough to escape immediate detection, even though it is basically v3.3 of a virus that has been through half a dozen other major and minor versions that attracted the attention of antivirus vendors in the past. New signatures and heuristic detection routines then need to be developed -- and, adding insult to injury, the new heuristic detection routines end up generating false positives a dismaying percentage of the time, resulting in occasional news items on Slashdot about some antivirus software flagging legitimate software as a "virus". All of this could be avoided by simply addressing the vulnerabilities at the source. Too bad some of those vulnerabilities are "features" that people who are aware of the dangers often try to turn off or otherwise render inoperable, an effort that is generally only partially effective (breaking the feature not not preventing all exploits of the underlying system behavior).

      Examples of certain classes of software (notably including web servers) that are dominated by non-Microsoft (and especially open source) alternatives, where the Microsoft offerings still tend to be the most-compromised examples, point to a much more endemic problem with Microsoft's software development and maintenance policies than can be simply explained away by popularity making MS Windows a bigger target. An understanding of the architectural designs of various systems also lends itself to recognition of the fact that the kinds of problems "enjoyed" by Microsoft's software offerings seem pretty much inevitable at a technical level. Consider the fact that for almost thirty years Microsoft has failed to ever implement any kind of architectural privilege separation in an OS, merely laying a thin veil of permission-checking over a system without concern for privilege separation as a fundamental design principle, to the point where Microsoft's phone-home license verification has been found to literally turn off privilege checking so it can run. Even if it was merely a matter of popularity, though, that wouldn't change the fact that for security purposes you'd be much better served using something other than MS Windows, anyway.

      Of course, some of this is changing for some Linux distributions, and the GNU project is a complicit contributor to the problem. Consider the case of Ubuntu's ro

      --
      Unfetter your ideas. Copyfree your mind.
  3. Richard Stallman says something inciteful . . . by InvisibleClergy · · Score: 1, Redundant

    . . . and in other news, the sky is still blue and Moore's Law continues to be a marketing ploy.

    1. Re:Richard Stallman says something inciteful . . . by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

      hmmmm...

      accidental, on purpose, typo?

      Inciteful. Yeah, that he is.

      Insightful. Yeah, I hate to say it, he is that too.

  4. Yup. by nathana · · Score: 2

    Perhaps this is Richard Stallman already answering my Ask Slashdot question?

    https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3278789&cid=42118329

    Given what I've been through recently with Apple on my iPhone (http://www.anderson-net.com/~nathan/apple-broke-my-phone), and also recent stories such as this one (http://www.telecoms.com/54319/apple-vetting-operators-on-lte-network-performance/), I'd have to say, "yup."

    -- Nathan

    1. Re:Yup. by nathana · · Score: 1

      Ignoring for the moment the question of Are You Human or Are You Troll, that is a terrible analogy. Digital and analog television are encoded and transmitted completely differently over the air; in contrast, from the phone's link layer perspective, any two GSM carriers are indistinguishable from one another, especially if both carriers are transmitting in the same radio band, and ESPECIALLY if both carriers are in fact one and the same from a physical network perspective, as AT&T and the MVNO Straight Talk are!

      My situation with the phone would be more like having a digital television set that was programmed by its manufacturer to only allow you to watch specific channels and lock others out, even though the television set is physically and in all other ways capable of allowing you to watch the non-whitelisted channels: it's simply an arbitrary software lockout. The "unsupported" channels aren't doing anything funky or being encoded and transmitted some other way.

      Or it might be more like an IP router -- for the sake of this example, let's say it's a boring sub-$100 consumer-grade router/switch/wireless-AP thing -- that will only allow you to use it with certain internet service providers, even if another "unsupported" ISP encapsulates and delivers its traffic to you in exactly the same way the "approved" ISPs do. Let's say the ISP expects the customer's gear to speak direct IP-over-Ethernet to it (and not IP-over-ATM, PPPoE, or any number of other possibilities), and that the "supported" and "unsupported" ISPs both also run DHCP servers. The "unsupported" ISP fails to work with the router, not because it is doing anything out of the ordinary when compared against the set of standards that the router was manufactured to support, but rather because although the router accepts the DHCP responses from both ISPs, it willfully ignores the default route passed to it and overrides it in the routing table with a hard-coded IP address that it knows the "supported" ISP will have a gateway responding on.

      That's what's happening here with the phone: it's overriding the APN settings with the AT&T values and not allowing me to change them. Since it is an unlocked phone, I not only consider the fact that AT&T's iOS carrier profile is the agent "doing" (in the loosest sense of the word) the APN overriding immaterial (after all, Apple's the one who handed those keys over to them...AT&T wouldn't have that ability unless Apple engineered it into the system and said "here you go"), but Apple *specifically* shouldn't be giving their carrier partners that kind of control over *unlocked* models.

      -- Nathan

  5. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Have you seen the ubuntu app store?

    You can't get easier and all the stuff you are talking about is even free.

  6. Apple Spyware?! by the_B0fh · · Score: 4, Informative

    WTF? If anything it was shown that the silly monitoring application had the spyware pieces *DISABLED* on iPhones whereas Android phone sellers had it enabled. Google's original bits did not have it, since Google have their own way of tracking users :)

    So how I am supposed to take Stallman seriously?

    1. Re:Apple Spyware?! by nathana · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure he's referring to this:

      http://blog.chpwn.com/post/13572216737

      -- Nathan

    2. Re:Apple Spyware?! by the_B0fh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As was I. CarrierIQ, as implemented on iOS, *DID NOT* have the spyware pieces enabled. If there was no spyware, how can you justify calling it spying?

      Remember, at its core, CarrierIQ is simply a monitoring solution. That you can turn it into spyware means that someone was doing stupid things.

    3. Re:Apple Spyware?! by phayes · · Score: 1

      RMS makes good points in general but in this instance I thing he's mistaken & just scratching a very old itch of his by habit.

      He has been anti-Apple since the days of the look&feel process that Apple won against Digital research for copying the Mac UI in Gem.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    4. Re:Apple Spyware?! by Microlith · · Score: 2

      in this instance I thing he's mistaken

      Mistaken about what?

      He has been anti-Apple since the days of the look&feel process that Apple won against Digital research for copying the Mac UI in Gem.

      He's been pretty opposed to anything that artificially limits people's ability to create and learn.

    5. Re:Apple Spyware?! by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      You are either a moron or have simple reading comprehension issues.

      Do you classify tcpdump as spyware and hacking tools as well?

      CarrierIQ is simply a tool to track usage. That they *LOG* that and *SEND KEYSTROKES* is something that is not available on iOS.

      Idiot.

    6. Re:Apple Spyware?! by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      Another idiot Anon Coward. Double bonus points for missing the irony in calling out irony.

      Additional bonus points for not actually bothering to find out exactly what happened before commenting. Hint: a simple search on slashdot gives you this:

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/12/05/2225202/researchers-say-carrier-iq-isnt-logging-data-texts

    7. Re:Apple Spyware?! by RocketRabbit · · Score: 2

      Not this shit again.

      The ONLY reason for that software to exist is to spy on the phone users. There is no innocuous use for it.

    8. Re:Apple Spyware?! by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      Seriously?! It was mentioned a number of times. You're just acting like a dick.

      Here's a link, learn to read. http://www.iphoneincanada.ca/iphone-news/carrier-iq-spyware-references-discovered-in-ios-here-are-the-details/

      1) information is never sent in the default configuration
      2) You have to *OPT IN* to send diagnostic information to apple
      3) If you do turn it on, it has no access to the UI layer - NO FUCKING KEYLOGGING
      4) It doesn't send emails or other shit, just phone numbers - you know, for fucking diagnostic on why your phone isn't successfully making phone calls.

      Fucking Morons.

    9. Re:Apple Spyware?! by phayes · · Score: 1

      RMS Is clearly referring to Apple's past use of part of CarrierIQ which, as the_B0fh quite correctly stated earlier, never had the phone home part that android phones included, cannot be called spyware.

      I respect RMS for much that he has given us (I use emacs daily as my main text editor on multiple OSs) but that doesn't mean that I am blind when he makes the occasional mistake, This is one of them.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    10. Re:Apple Spyware?! by melikamp · · Score: 1

      Seriously?! It was mentioned a number of times. You're just acting like a dick.

      No, I'm not. Mentioned does not mean proven to be true. In the link you gave me, some iOS hacker claims it to be disabled. Is that your most authoritative source? I am not being a dick, buddy, you are being a gullible sap.

  7. Some of us are grown-ups by Joehonkie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect." Or, perhaps, they judged what they want and what they are giving up and chose something of their own accord because they don't care about the same things in their computing experience that RMS does. Crazy, I know.

    1. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by fredprado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mostly because they can't see what waits them in the end of the road if they keep on this path. RMS has a very good point. Most users would abhor, if they could see a bit ahead, the dystopia companies like Apple and MS want to create where they have absolute control over what we can or cannot do with the devices we buy. If they don't it is mostly because of ignorance.

    2. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by alen · · Score: 1

      but you need a Mac and XCode

      I mean how evil is that. you need a computer from the same company that made your phone to write software for it

    3. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by fredprado · · Score: 3, Informative

      And a certificate from Apple or Jailbreaking your phone (which they try to make harder and even illegal as time goes).

    4. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      Or, perhaps, they judged what they want and what they are giving up and chose something of their own accord

      I will believe that when I believe everyone reads, understands, and, after due consideration of alternatives, agrees to the EULA.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    5. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by davydagger · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "I can install any software on my iPhone that I want, provided I can write it."

      unless apple decides they don't want you to, and then they can remotely wipe it without telling you.

      "Isn't that the sort of freedom that would appeal to Mr. Stallman?"
      part of it. the other part is the right to run any programs you want from anywhere, because its your hardware, with no preconditions set by the hardware manufacturer.

    6. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      You mean indentured. Endentured is when your'e surrounded and trapped by false teeth, I guess.

    7. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by fredprado · · Score: 1

      There are certain freedoms that need to be enforced regardless of the will of an individual to sell them off for what he, in despair or ignorance, may judge to be of his benefit That is why you can't sell yourself to slavery even if you want to, and that is why you shouldn't be able to compromise the freedom to use your property as you see fit because you mistakenly think that you aren't giving up on anything important and that it won't come to bite you in the ass later on.

    8. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by euxneks · · Score: 2

      have absolute control over what we can or cannot do with the devices we buy

      I don't think this will happen - another company can swoop in and take the market share of disgruntled users if there are any. The only reason I can see people having to use a device they don't want to use is if they are *mandated* to do so - there's a reason Apple has been so successful in the phone market, and it's not because they have an iron grip on the users' testes.

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    9. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Considering what depends on computers nowadays and how much more will likely do in the future, saying "just computers" is stupidity at its best, and rest assured most people can only say so until it becomes too obvious to be ignored.

    10. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Considering corporations dictate government policies more and more it wouldn't be far fetched to see a future where a patented standard was mandatory and people would indeed be forced to use a product. Or "trusting computing" would be enforced by law to allow governments to spy on you.

      Even if it does not come to that, high end technology is dominated by the same players and thinking that another one will come and fill the void is wishful thinking. It is much more likely that another one will come to join the club.

      An easy example of how it works is the Telecom market. Most Telecoms have a very disgruntled user base, but few users have any other option but to accept their services as they are or having none.

    11. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Fortune tellers and futurologists are usually wrong. So you've got the RMS religion, and believe his prognostications.

      You believe something I think is stupid.

      It's isn't ignorant to not belong to a cult.

    12. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      No, people in general don't care about the things RMS does. In fact if they'd ever come across him they'd mostly think he was insane.

      And it's no illusion when people find their gadgets are doing the things they bought them for.

    13. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Ah, I see your belief in the RMS religion has progressed to where you want to enforce it on others. Truly you are a cultist.

      How long before you progress to terrorism against the non-believers?

    14. Re:Some of us are grown-ups by euxneks · · Score: 1

      Telecoms are skating on a fine line of "I can't take any more of this crap" to "I don't care enough about the crap I'm getting to cancel this". Apparently they're doing it well enough to make money.

      I think it's a bit hyperbolic to claim that we as a majority of people will end up being sheep/cogs in a slaughterhouse in which our money is the ultimate goal. There is a tipping point, when that is though, I don't know. I just hope we can do get past this sort of thing without violence.

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
  8. PR genius by paiute · · Score: 2, Informative

    I am as much for free and open software as the next nerd, but having its spokesman say about potential users that "they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect...." is extremely counterproductive. He is admitting that free software is inconvenient, that it isn't going to be supported by your workplace or school, and - what? What the heck is the "network effect"?

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:PR genius by pr0nbot · · Score: 5, Informative

      The network effect is where you need to use (random example) Skype because everyone else you need to talk to uses Skype, and Skype is not built on open standards in a way which would allow you to use an alternative.

    2. Re:PR genius by fredprado · · Score: 2

      He is just saying that convenient features, and peer and institutions pressure force people into non open standards. He didn't say a thing about all convenient features being exclusive to closed source. Currently Apple has inferior products, with far less convenient features than the competition and still it sells as if it was good, due to it being fashionable and a symbol of status. MS products have mostly infuriating features, but people are used to them and learning new things is inconvenient to many.

    3. Re:PR genius by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And yet, he's absolutely honest and correct. Any marketing spin would be slightly dishonest and manipulative, and he won't stand for that.

      Humans are biased to our own detriment. We'll take immediate payoff (the "convenient features") over a bigger long-term benefit (Linux's flexibility). We'll trust recommendations ("pressure") from authorities as being absolute, rather than re-evaluating solutions to find what's best for us. When surrounded by others doing something, we'll assume that we must do the same (allowing the "network effect")

      Humans just suck. Not saying that outright is being nice.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:PR genius by swan5566 · · Score: 1

      Yeah the "herded" comment could come across as being rather conceited. I've seen this guy talk at a gathering before in person, and let's just say I think he's pretty used to preaching to the choir.

      --
      In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
    5. Re:PR genius by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      There's more than one way to skin them though.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    6. Re:PR genius by euxneks · · Score: 1

      The network effect is where you need to use (random example) Skype because everyone else you need to talk to uses Skype, and Skype is not built on open standards in a way which would allow you to use an alternative.

      And yet, there are no simple, easy, and free alternatives to Skype.

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    7. Re:PR genius by euxneks · · Score: 1

      I'm not complaining about your example, I just wish there was a free alternative to Skype.

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    8. Re:PR genius by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      He is admitting that free software is inconvenient...

      I take it that you skipped logic class, or failed it?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    9. Re:PR genius by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Currently Apple has inferior products, with far less convenient features than the competition

      Not true. Apple's products are obviously superior. They just don't price to serve the bottom end of the market as Android does.

      Amongst people who actually want to use smartphones for the "smart" part - web-browsing and running apps, iOS is more popular. Or at the very least more people are actually using them for those purposes than are using Androids.

      Androids market share comes from selling to the cheap "feature phone" market.

  9. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by jonnythan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, and it's full of an incomprehensible jumble of hundreds of apps that do the same thing, with a distinct lack of the super-common apps that most people (and the computer kid down the street) know how to use already.

  10. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Do you think your grandparents are going to be any more fit to handle problems on Windows? No. Seriously: managing a Windows (or malfunctioning Apple) is a job for an IT person, not the layperson. This is like saying a car is not fit for someone because the mechanics who service another kind of car cannot fix the other. Your criticism that they'd like to "buy software from the store" is valid, but the rest is not. The only real argument against GNU/Linux distributions at this point is "it doesn't run software X." Sound, graphics, performance, filesystem support, networking, etc. are good enough, or better than the alternatives. A correctly installed stable (good) distribution of Linux will work fine for anyone as long as the software they want supports Linux.

  11. Liberate users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was going to write something sardonic until I read his wiki entry for "personal life."
    He reminds me of a LARPer, but instead of being invested in fantasy quests, he's obsessed about privacy.

    Don't get me wrong, I worry about privacy, but he just takes it to a whole different level. Personally, I worry about diet and exercise, something he doesn't seem to prioritize. But, to each his own.

  12. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by macraig · · Score: 1

    I get the impression he hates on Apple because it's popular to hate on them in particular....

    Your impression is malformed. Back to the drawing board with you.

  13. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by alen · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    why don't geeks spend hours and hours tinkering with cars? I mean everyone should know how to do all the things needed to keep their car running.

    what is so useful about spending all your time tinkering with computers but not other things you use in your life?

  14. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by eldavojohn · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Why put him in a straightjacket? Crowds gather to listen to him rant and rave -- does that bother you? Why not let him opine for hours until he's hoarse if it fits his fancy?

    but the real problem with the "Just run Linux" solution is that non-Computer Science people want to do things like answer e-mail, write correspondence, and buy software from the store that has a nice, easy installer.

    I'm sorry, I didn't see anywhere in this actual article where he urges people to "Just run Linux" as you quoted, could you help me find it here? Whether or not he rambles about how people should use Linux seems a separate point from his (in my opinion) valid criticisms of Apple, wouldn't you say?

    Or are you just trying to get to the talking points that you've learned to parrot ...

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a computer engineer to exercise it - most people will take the padded handcuffs.

    OH! Okay, I see you have little to say about what was discussed in the article so you fall back on the same old boring bullshit. Carry on. Let me help you with that quote:

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a civil engineer or economist to exercise it - most people will take the oppressive government.

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a biological engineer to exercise it - most people will take big pharma.

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a radio engineer to exercise it - most people will take the FCC.

    Do I need to keep going or are you done with your "Freedom is nice but I'll totally trade it for some trivial shit" statements?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  15. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by nathana · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm not sure why you say "they aren't doing MORE than what everyone else in the industry is doing." They were one of the (if *not* THE) first to come up with a general computing platform that has a digital distribution mechanism for client apps full of DRM *that happens to be the only way to install third-party software on the platform*. By Apple's mandate, there is no sanctioned sideloading of apps. And jailbreaking/rooting doesn't count because that's simply people exploiting security holes in the system that Apple constructed to keep non-App Store apps off the platform.

    Sure, everybody else is doing it now, but Apple pioneered that trend. The others followed suit after they saw the success of their platform.

    Even if you want to develop a little utility of your own to run on your own device and not sell or distribute to anyone else, you *still* have to pay Apple $99/year for the privilege of loading *your own* software on *your own* device.

    -- Nathan

  16. Users to blame as much as corporations like Apple by kheldan · · Score: 2

    People, especially the current generation, have been indoctrinated to the concept that "privacy" is an outmoded concept, and in some cases that a lack of privacy is the normal, natural order of things. This, of course, is wrong and needs to be corrected before the problems with corporations and governments can be corrected. As always, the free flow of information and education of the masses leads to what's best for people.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  17. Removing my privacy is not about inproved security by tuppe666 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

    Its not true in the slightest; everybody want freedom and privacy, admittedly most do not realise either how much they have given up, or have not noticed it being taken away...and have not sacrificed these things anything as astute as security [that does not make sense anyway ] they have done it for old fashioned *convenience*.

    It only the massive marketing campaign by Apple/Microsoft that they fuck you over for your own good. Its not good you being fucked. I find it offensive that you repeat there insane propaganda.

  18. On the mention of Windows... by yuhong · · Score: 1

    "Microsoft can install software changes without asking permission."
    Is RMS referring to Automatic Updates?

  19. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Informative

    I get the impression he hates on Apple because it's popular to hate on them in particular

    RMS doing something becuse it's popular? Huh? Are we discussing the same RMS?

    the real problem with the "Just run Linux" solution is that non-Computer Science people want to do things like answer e-mail, write correspondence, and buy software from the store that has a nice, easy installer

    When will this lie end? Modern distros are far more useable than Windows, and possibly Apples as well (I wouldn't know). The only thing you got right was the "buy software" part. You don't buy software with Linux, you download it from the distro's repository. It takes one click and no reboots.

    Since I am not drinking the Apple hate-eraid, I imagine I will be modded into oblivion.

    Apple fans get mod points, too, as seen by your "+3 interesting" comment that's almost 100% incorrect.

  20. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by tsa · · Score: 2

    Yes, and most games you want to play are not on there.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  21. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by partyguerrilla · · Score: 1

    They're free as in free beer, not free as in freedom.

  22. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by idontgno · · Score: 1

    Hold it. When did we suddenly transition to talking about the iOS app store?

    The decision paralysis problem caused by having too many choices is pretty common. It's pretty much your prototypical "first world problem". And any product marketing itself as a consumer product is prone to it. "All things to all people" effectively winds up "too many things for any given person".

    RMS is more about freedoms most consumers will never notice they don't have. "The freedom to examine and modify"? Sheesh. Most consumers don't even want to know how to open the hood on their car. Read, edit, compile, and deploy software?

    Free Software is an awesome notion, but for the overwhelming majority it's as irrelevant as the freedom to rebuild you car's engine. If Ford welded hoods shut and promised convenient lifetime service at authorized service centers "for free" (i.e., already in the price of the vehicle), a huge number of consumers would jump on it.

    Expect the proliferation of "No user-serviceable parts inside" stickers on software and firmware.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  23. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, and it's full of an incomprehensible jumble of hundreds of apps that do the same thing, with a distinct lack of the super-common apps that most people (and the computer kid down the street) know how to use already.

    Just to clarify, are you talking about Apples app store, the ubuntu app store, or a 3rd app store like the google play app store or the amazon app store or ?

    What you've described is pretty much the inherent characteristics of every bbs file section / ftp site / shareware cdrom / gopher site / file download web site / app store that's ever existed.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  24. Re:Removing my privacy is not about inproved secur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're wrong. Most people wants the freedom to be comfortable. Privacy is just part of personal comfort.

    True freedom isn't comfortable, it's messy as well as a shitload of work. Most people don't care for it.

    RMS doesn't promote true freedom, he simply promotes his own version of it.

  25. 'convenient features' by rbprbp · · Score: 3

    "And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect."


    Convenient features, such as stuff actually working well and doing what it's supposed to without needing tinkering. Pressure from institutions and network effect, aka '90% of my peers use the same software, it works well for our needs and it would be a major undertaking for them to migrate just to satisfy my whims'.

    --
    They're there in their room. You're on your own.
    1. Re:'convenient features' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly. Convenience is the *hard* part of software. RMS shouldn't be belittling people for wanting to use software that doesn't get in their way. If anything, he should be berating the FOSS folks who hit the 'usable' mark and stop improving to the 'convenient to use' mark. It's the lack of polish, not features, that does the most to hold back FOSS software. A powerful tool that is hard to use is going to get less use than a less powerful tool that is easy to use.

  26. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

    Like every app store?

    How exactly is it ever going to have the windows apps you want?

    If you want that you're stuck.

  27. No, RMS by A+bsd+fool · · Score: 1

    MS cannot "install software changes without asking permission" -- unless you give it permission to do so. Derp harder. After you take a bath.

    1. Re:No, RMS by fredprado · · Score: 1

      How exactly can you say that for sure. Do you have access to Windows Source Code?

    2. Re:No, RMS by A+bsd+fool · · Score: 1

      I have access to all my network traffic logs.

    3. Re:No, RMS by fredprado · · Score: 1

      And exactly in which way that determines what MS can or cannot do with your system?

    4. Re:No, RMS by A+bsd+fool · · Score: 1

      I suppose they could be using psychic waves rather than electromagnetic ones.

    5. Re:No, RMS by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Or nothing at all. In your case. Yet. Which proves nothing.

      There is no way for you to tell what they could do, what trojans they have built in and could be used at will. Or even what they are doing right now when you decide to install those critical security updates.

      That is the main problem with closed source, you just don't know. Ever.

    6. Re:No, RMS by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Or nothing at all. In your case. Yet. Which proves nothing.

      It proves nothing to the insanely paranoid.

      Likewise, there MIGHT be a tea-pot in orbit around the plant Mars.

      That is the main problem with closed source, you just don't know [if there's some malware feature that hasn't been enabled yet]. Ever.

      You probably don't know with open-source either. Because you're probably incapable of understanding all the code. And even if you are capable you don't have time to read it all. Despite the "many eyes" catechism of open source, the truth is that most open source has only ever had one pair of eyeballs on it. The eye-balls of the person that wrote it.

    7. Re:No, RMS by fredprado · · Score: 1

      It proves nothing to the insanely paranoid.

      Or for someone that is not naive enough to take a corporation's good will for granted.

      You probably don't know with open-source either. Because you're probably incapable of understanding all the code. And even if you are capable you don't have time to read it all. Despite the "many eyes" catechism of open source, the truth is that most open source has only ever had one pair of eyeballs on it. The eye-balls of the person that wrote it.

      Even if that was true the proof is there. You will find that very few people are bold enough to take the risk to do illegal things in plain sight. On the other hand when the secret of whatever you did is protected by law you may do whatever you want.

    8. Re:No, RMS by A+bsd+fool · · Score: 1

      I can place limits on what they "can't" do, which is, "install software without my permission", the question as originally posed.

      They can't do that. Full stop.

      When I do give them permission to install something, I can expend the time and energy determining exactly what it is, if I so choose. Full stop.

      In other words, you're still wrong on the face of it, no matter how asinine and paranoid the rabbithole you want to lead us down is, nor how empirically false your suppositions are when viewed in the context of conspiracies and game theory.

    9. Re:No, RMS by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You will find that very few people are bold enough to take the risk to do illegal things in plain sight.

      Where did that comment come from? The vast majority of offences are committed in plain sight.

      On the other hand when the secret of whatever you did is protected by law you may do whatever you want.

      Any illegal thing that closed source DID is not protected by law. You seem to be advocating the equivalent of pre-crime. Worse in fact. That closed source is guilty not for having done anything. But because you suspect it it might do at some unspecified point in the future.

      Insane.

    10. Re:No, RMS by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Where did that comment come from? The vast majority of offences are committed in plain sight.

      Sure, sure. Then find me a single open source program that has been found to have any illegal code embedded. A worm, a trojan, anything. Good luck!

      Any illegal thing that closed source DID is not protected by law. You seem to be advocating the equivalent of pre-crime. Worse in fact. That closed source is guilty not for having done anything. But because you suspect it it might do at some unspecified point in the future. Insane.

      The secrecy of the code is protected by law, and you need a considerable amount of evidence to get a court order to inspect it, if you can get one at all. And please, closed sourced programs cannot be guilty of anything, they are just programs. The companies that developed them may be guilty of installing trojans in your hardware, though, or may be not, but we will never know until something too obvious happens. In the meanwhile if the companies or the government through them decides to snoop your data in the next security update you make, how can you be sure they can't?

      You, my good friend, is the insane one, and naive on top of that.

    11. Re:No, RMS by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Then find me a single open source program that has been found to have any illegal code embedded. A worm, a trojan, anything. Good luck!

      Really? The third link on a google search:

      http://blog.seculert.com/2012/02/citadel-open-source-malware-project.html

      The secrecy of the code is protected by law, and you need a considerable amount of evidence to get a court order to inspect it, if you can get one at all.

      Of course you do. Just like a search warrant for property. Or are you OK with the police searching your house on a whim?

      There's no justification for searching the source code unless a crime has been committed. If a crime has been committed then there must be evidence of it from the behaviour of the software, not it's source.

      You're just dealing in paranoia. And that is a mental problem. Hence "insane".

    12. Re:No, RMS by fredprado · · Score: 1

      Really? The third link on a google search: http://blog.seculert.com/2012/02/citadel-open-source-malware-project.html [seculert.com]

      You can't be so dense, can you? This is not an open source program with a malware hidden inside. It is a malware by design explicitly documented like so and made with the sole objective of creating such a program. It has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about.

      Of course you do. Just like a search warrant for property. Or are you OK with the police searching your house on a whim? There's no justification for searching the source code unless a crime has been committed. If a crime has been committed then there must be evidence of it from the behaviour of the software, not it's source.

      There is plenty of justification to searching the source code. I want to know what a program is doing in my system when I run it. I should have this right. I am not trying to invade the company and search their financial files, or invade your house to search anything. I want to be able to check for myself if the program you sold me does what you tell me it does and nothing else.

      You're just dealing in paranoia. And that is a mental problem. Hence "insane".

      Nope. I am dealing with the reasonable right of knowing what I bought. You on the other hand is dealing with blind and absolute trust. Between the two of us you are by far the insaner one.

  28. powering the cloud by faustoc4 · · Score: 2

    Shills get a life. Even your bosses use open source software to power the cloud and to surveil and record all of us. The only difference is that they don't redistribute the code because they sell it as a service.

    1. Re:powering the cloud by unixisc · · Score: 1

      And here, Stallman and another wacko named Affero created Affero licenses

  29. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    Modern Distros still have some major rough edges. I cant even get ubuntu to stop turning off the monitor, and there is nowhere in the UI that even offers it. I tried 7 different vectors at the command line before i gave up. It shouldnt be that hard.

    --
    Good-bye
  30. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by vlm · · Score: 2

    If Ford welded hoods shut and promised convenient lifetime service at authorized service centers "for free"

    LOL thats the worst automotive analogy I've ever heard about that topic.

    If Ford welded hoods shut and used their money and power as a multinational megacorp plus all the force and power of the federal government to hunt you down like a dog and destroy you if you dared to open the hood of "your" car

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  31. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by geek · · Score: 1

    Who says we don't? I rebuilt my 1978 Camaro myself. A buddy of mine builds motorcyles for fun and sells them. I have another friend that converted his car to electric. I also put a computer in my Camaro so I have some overlap there.

  32. Sorry Richie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Gadgets are there to get things (not necessarily work) done.
    They are not a political instrument to convince everyone of your narrow-minded world-view.
    And they certainly not a tool for tool's-sake.

    If OSS can get do the shit I need to to in a convenient, easy and fun way without causing eye-sore, fine. Sign me up.
    If not, get lost.

    There is a mentality problem. But NOT on the side of closed source software users, but on the FSF side.
    OSS ist not better just because it is OSS. You can't expect people to use OSS just because it is OSS, despite being a pile shit (hard to use, fugly, not documented, needs maintenance, needs compiling, etc).

    The last 25 years, OSS has catered the nerds (notable exceptions like Firefox, Android and (hidden!) Linux on routers aside). Unless OSS is truly mainstream, and that means being as polished as commercial Software, like Apple's for instance, he can talk as much as he wants. No one, except some acolytes of him, will listen to him and do what he says. And rightly so.

  33. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by eldavojohn · · Score: 1

    Modern Distros still have some major rough edges. I cant even get ubuntu to stop turning off the monitor, and there is nowhere in the UI that even offers it. I tried 7 different vectors at the command line before i gave up. It shouldnt be that hard.

    Not sure what a vector at the command line means but after 10 seconds of clicking through their help guide:

    Click the icon at the very right of the menu bar and select System Settings.
    Click Brightness and Lock.
    Change the value in the Lock screen after drop-down list.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  34. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by wierd_w · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What are you talking about? Many engineering students make modifications to vehicles, purely for pleasure.

    The issue is simple:

    If I WANT to tinker, *I CAN*.

    THAT is the freedom being discussed here. I can't just decide one day that I am dissastisfied with the windows file copy dialog box's estimated time to completion algorithm, bust open the source code, and tinker on it.

    I *CAN* do that on linux. (Moreover, if my reimplemetation is superior, the linux community eagerly wants my changes!)

    If I *want* to modify my fuel injection system on my vehicle, I can. The hood isn't welded shut, and the ECM isn't designed to kill itself when tampered with. Compare that with say, an xbox360 with efuses, and tamper tape.

    Stallman is definately a crackpot in a large number of ways. (Harvesting fresh footfungus in front of an audience and all that..) however, arguing about this level of freedom, even if people choose not to make use of that freedom, is definately to the betterment of mankind, and should be supported.

  35. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

    Except that's exactly the meaning of free that RMS and the FSF, etc are NOT talking about.

    Those apps don't cost money, but a lot of them are closed source. RMS/FSF has no problem with charging money for apps, they just want the source to be available in that case.

  36. Car by ckhorne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder what kind of car Stallman drives. Seriously. Does he update the firmware controlling the engine timing and fuel injectors?

    What's that? The car manufacturers have digitally handcuffed him so that he can't go mucking around with things? Oh - it must be a safety issue. OK, well, surely he can update the firmware for other things in his car, such as the radio display?

    People aren't hearded in to giving up their freedoms. There are certain freedoms that those people just don't *need* to begin with. My mother, who has an iPhone, isn't handcuffed - if anything, the device liberates her into using technology that she wouldn't otherwise use in in the modern world.

    There are products across the spectrum that address the balance between usable and the freedom to do whatever you'd like. Just because manufacturers lock down their devices doesn't mean there's not a suitable audience that doesn't benefit...

    1. Re:Car by Microlith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People aren't hearded in to giving up their freedoms.

      Sure they are. All the companies with power have to do is push tech in a certain direction and ensure that what options are made available serve their purposes. Most people will go along without asking any questions, in many cases because they don't know what questions to ask.

      There are certain freedoms that those people just don't *need* to begin with.

      Says who? I'm sure a justification can be made to suggest you don't *need* any freedom you have.

      My mother, who has an iPhone, isn't handcuffed - if anything, the device liberates her into using technology that she wouldn't otherwise use in in the modern world.

      That she doesn't venture far enough to reach the fence doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Suggesting that the fence must exist for it to be usable for her is an unfounded argument so, please, don't go there as so many do.

      There are products across the spectrum that address the balance between usable and the freedom to do whatever you'd like.

      Not really. All I've seen is an increase in lock down. More restrictions, not fewer.

      Just because manufacturers lock down their devices doesn't mean there's not a suitable audience that doesn't benefit.

      Lock down that puts the end-user perpetually on the outside of the security model is never intended to benefit the audience except may be as an unintentional side effect.

    2. Re:Car by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1, Redundant

      He drives one of those Fred Flintstone cars where you propel it with your bare feet. Using a modern car you can't totally control is the first step to a global dictatorship and loss of all freedoms.

    3. Re:Car by davydagger · · Score: 1

      what?

      a previous generation of car owners was able to repair their own cars. This really didn't matter for most car owners, but it allowed a whole host of independant shops, and independant manual writers to spring up that were not dependant on manufacturers.

      Buying a car didn't let the car owners own you as long as you owned their car.

      http://www.righttorepair.org/main/default.aspx

      and yes, when they went to closed systems, it was a big deal, because it hurts independant autoshops. more competition drives prices down, and allows autonomy from the dealership. Now dealerships have more power to over you, by refusing to service your car, effectively reducing the service life drasticly if there is no 3rd party. They can further price gouge you for repairs, tune ups and scheduled maintence.

      Nobody benefits when manufactures lock their devices down, except the manufacturer, and he does so at your peril.

    4. Re:Car by Hillgiant · · Score: 1

      Does he update the firmware controlling the engine timing and fuel injectors?

      MegaSquirt.

      Okay, fine. You can argue that the license is not completely "free" because it is restricted to only one class of hardware. I'm sure Stallman would refer to it as only slightly-free. However, you can directly control the spark and fuel timing.

      --
      -
    5. Re:Car by lhunath · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When your mother buys a printer and AirPrint happens to not work with it, she might ask you or anyone tech-knowledgable to make it work for her.

      Since the iPhone has locked you out of doing anything that isn't Apple-certified, your only reply to her will be, buy a new printer. This time, make sure it has AirPrint support on the label.

      If the iPhone hadn't been locked down (eg. it's jailbroken), you could easily install additional printer drivers or support.

      Yes, buying an iPhone is giving up the freedom to make your new computer do things that you need it to do but aren't certified by the vendor. And yes, consumers do suffer from that. Stop blinding yourself to that. The iPhone would work no different for your mom if there had been a way for techy people to become root. The only difference is, now any techy person can help her. Not just the Apple-certified ones, and not just with Apple-certified solutions.

      That is what software freedom is eventually about. It matters to tech people just as much as it does to non-tech people, because it enables them to go to tech people for help. Stallman's formulated four freedoms are simply the rules he figures will guarantee a consumer's freedom to control their own devices, or get help with them from a knowledgable person.

      Similarly, in your car analogy, it would be nice if vendors released sufficient documentation publicly so that the car repair person next door who happens to be a really awesome mechanic can help me with my car's issues. Instead, I'm forced to suffer the pain of finding a vendor-certified dealership. That pain is not for the better of me, kindly stop lying to me.

      --
      ``OK, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, yeah?''
    6. Re:Car by andydread · · Score: 1

      you can replace the proprietary engine control computer with one of these The source is open. Controls fuel injectors, Ingition etc. Maybe he's already using one on his car if he even drives at all. Only know a few autistic genius types that even drive a car.

    7. Re:Car by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      When your mother buys a printer and AirPrint happens to not work with it, she might ask you or anyone tech-knowledgable to make it work for her.

      Since the iPhone has locked you out of doing anything that isn't Apple-certified, your only reply to her will be, buy a new printer. This time, make sure it has AirPrint support on the label.

      And if you weren't "locked out", you would write a new printer driver? In your spare time?

      Much more effective is to go with her back to the store, get a refund for the printer, and buy one that is AirPrint compatible.

    8. Re:Car by lhunath · · Score: 2

      No, you would use software such as the following instead:
      http://intelliborn.com/truprint.html

      Not only is this hurting unfortunate customers, it's also hurting hardware vendors or products that didn't get the Apple blessing. Anyway, getting into semantics about the printer example is pointless. The greater issue here is that any kind of issue at all requires an Apple-certified solution in this scenario. And such is rarely in the best interest of all customers.

      If things are not locked down, customers can choose for an Apple certified solution that comes with Apple support and blessing. Or they can opt for going to the local tech guy who isn't necessarily less able than the staff at the Apple store; and often to the contrary.

      --
      ``OK, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, yeah?''
    9. Re:Car by Rich0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder what kind of car Stallman drives. Seriously. Does he update the firmware controlling the engine timing and fuel injectors?

      Say what you will of Stallman, but the guy eats his dog food. He uses non-free software/hardware/etc when free alternatives are not available, but he is VERY tolerant of inconvenience when it will allow him to substitute something free. He is largely free of proprietary software, and I'm sure he's gotten quite far on the hardware front. I'm sure when he buys a new car that the sorts of things you mention are considerations for him, and if riding in the rain on a moped would get him closer to an all-FOSS world he'd probably do it.

      He also writes software, though I suspect not as much as he used to. So, he isn't just demanding that others write his software for him.

      Does he represent an extreme? Sure. However, he is actually reasonably practical about his beliefs. He doesn't insist on swimming across the Atlantic because all the planes and ships have proprietary ECUs.

    10. Re:Car by unixisc · · Score: 1

      In another thread, they were discussing a CPU that has the FSF endorsement. Maybe, they need an FSF endorsed car - one whose specs are open for anyone to build, repair, whatever as long as they have the tools. Maybe, w/ GPL3, it can describe the tools used to make/repair the car. Once that happens, everyone will have free cars, and the 'free car' movement will be successful

    11. Re:Car by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Much more effective is to go with her back to the store, get a refund for the printer, and buy one that is AirPrint compatible.

      When your mother buys a printer that is the printer that she wants, and she can't use it with Apple but can use it with Android, because she can simply download a printing app to get support with Android, then it may well make sense for her to take the printer back to the store and get another one, but it still demonstrates the failure of a closed ecosystem, preventing the user from doing what they want to do. The issue isn't that she would write a new printer driver, but that someone else would do so (and make it available for a nominal fee) if not for the closed software ecosystem. Your argument is stupid and tired and I want to burn your newsletter.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Car by davydagger · · Score: 1

      I think ford is slowly moving this with with audrino chips in their cars.

      mabey ford would be the first FSF certified car?

      It would be great, and keep independant mechanics and other automotive based small businesses in business.

      The point of Free software isn't that anyone or everyone is going to modify the source code themselves, its the fact the common man gets to pick which expert they want to see about their tech problems.

      It also assures those experts are independant and not pressured into actions that could adversly affect the end user by the manufacturer. It also makes sure that being an expert is something you attain not by favors, but by skill, and time put in. More experts independant from eachother insulations an ECOSYSTEM of experts from group think, or peer pressure, making them less likely to act against the common good.

    13. Re:Car by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Most people will go along without asking any questions, in many cases because they don't know what questions to ask.

      Here's a clue. Virtually no one gives a damn about your stupid questions. Just like you probably don't give a damn what questions should be asked to endure a product is Halal.

      One person is a muslim. They require that their products are Halal.
      One person is a follower of RMS. They require that their products are open source.

      Both think their reasons are fundamental and unarguable. Both think that the whole world should think the same as them. But it doesn't, and there's no reason it should.

    14. Re:Car by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      If the iPhone hadn't been locked down (eg. it's jailbroken), you could easily install additional printer drivers or support

      The entire premise of you comment debunked:
      http://intelliborn.com/truprint.html

    15. Re:Car by thoromyr · · Score: 1

      The fence is there around apple's walled garden and for many people that is a *good* thing. This is hard for some folks to understand, they are so wrapped up in themselves, their desires and wanting everyone else to be like them.

      Let's take a simple example: in OS X 10.8 unsigned apps are not allowed to run by default. This is a *good* thing for security -- something the user *should* care about as it helps to mitigate the risks associated with the *freedom* of an essentially unregulated Internet. If the java exploit results in download of malware, but execution of the malware fails due to this check it is a *good* thing.

      Freedom is never free, and one of the costs of an open network is the abuses that will be done by folks with malicious intent. Finding ways to mitigate this risk on an end node -- as opposed to trying to bring an end to the open network -- is IMO a better solution. Many choose to run antivirus software to mitigate the risk of getting infected. I choose to not run antivirus (unless I'm checking specific files or directory trees) because I *want* to keep the malicious files around and don't want them deleted. But I don't go around telling people they shouldn't run antivirus software...

      As with most things the details of any given real situation make things less tidy, but to assert that a walled garden that has restrictions is necessarily a bad thing for all users is to operate with some serious blinders.

  37. Re:Seriously? by spire3661 · · Score: 2

    ITS NOT JUST A PHONE. It is a pocket computer with more storage and horsepower THEN MY COLLEGE IRC NODE/WAREZ SITE, a plethora of sensors and its backdoored all to hell. It is a phenomenally powerful device, and you would reduce it to voice comms and fart apps. No one is saying we dont want secure devices, only that we should be able to take off the restrictions if we choose as intelligent human beings.

    --
    Good-bye
  38. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by vlm · · Score: 2

    why don't geeks spend hours and hours tinkering with cars?

    Does not match

    I mean everyone should know how to do all the things needed to keep their car running.

    I have a 15 year old domestic car with about 140K miles and (un-)fortunately "tinkering with the car" means pretty much changing the oil every quarter and checking/replacing certain other fluids roughly annually.

    hours and hours ... per decade?

    Also there's no optimization left. In my grandfather's time cars were so poorly engineered that you could slap on a higher flow muffler and gain 75 HP and adjust the "points" every weekend to regain 10 HP lost over the course of the week or whatever. Those optimization failures are history other than the most extreme hot-rodders. All thats left is boring maintenance, and theres not much of it.

    In contrast give me something that boots Debian amd64 or i386 and I can keep busy for an infinite amount of time doing interesting "stuff".

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  39. BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by killfixx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wrong. Just patently wrong. People care about safety after a host of different attributes, such as: convenience, sex appeal, price, social status, etc...

    People don't buy Apple products because they're safe, but because they fit into one of the above mentioned categories. Who would purposely purchase shackles when presented with a "shackle-free" alternative, ninety-nine percent of the (American?) population.*

    My favorite science teacher in school told me this, "Life is lazy". Everything wants to do the least amount of work possible. Why would people be any different. I'm not excusing this behavior, just illuminating the cause. Like I tell my students, "If you strive to fit in, you're aiming for the bottom. Be better."

    Now, if you had said, "Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather do the "popular" thing", then I would be inclined to agree with you.

    We (people in general) have become "fat and happy" and don't want to be hassled with the responsibility of making our own decisions. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke

    "Do not go gentle into that good night" -Dylan Thomas

    All great minds have railed against the "popular opinion". Why? Because as a people, humans are notoriously unreliable at making good decisions. As individuals, we have made magnificent strides in science, art, literature, etc...

    Please, consciously decide against the tyranny of corporate control. They will never have your best interests at heart.

    *I can only speak from an American point of view.

    --
    "Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
    1. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by davydagger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it starts in school when the administration ostracises and persecutes people for acting diffrently and encourages "saftey in numbers" and the herd mentality.

      We then justify anyone outside the norm might be potentially dangerous and we'd have no idea so we let authority figures sort it out, and they tell us who is dangerous and what is the proper thing to do about it, and inform us when they've done so.

      They'd made it clear that challenging the status quo makes you just as much a target as anything else.

      The ability to change the status quo and innovate is reserved for leaders, and those in high standng., who we admire and worship for their flagrant disregard for set standards, and ability to walk away unscathed from what would cost us everything. To change the slightest things, we'd need their OK, given the full credit for our ideas, and be thankful we merely be allowed to exist.

    2. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People care about safety after a host of different attributes, such as: convenience, sex appeal, price, social status, etc...

      Well, the TSA sure as hell isn't convenient, and it wastes our tax dollars, at that.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    3. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by killfixx · · Score: 2

      That's a fair point. We're taught to comply our entire lives, until we get into "upper" management. Then we're expected to go for aggressiveness training to make us better leaders. WTF?!

      I teach my students to be different, to think differently. I encourage the left-field ideas. How else can we grow? How else can we learn?

      Without crazy, off-the-wall thinkers we would be nowhere and we would be terribly bored. :)

      --
      "Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
    4. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by killfixx · · Score: 1

      Did we really "choose" the TSA?

      --
      "Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
    5. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're half right. It's not about avoiding making decisions. It's about being afraid of making a dangerous decision without realizing it. Folks like you and me understand computers. We understand how our actions affect our experience. Most folks don't. And they don't want to. They don't want to think about whether opening that attachment will actually run some app on their machine that installs a keylogger and sends their credit card login information to a server in Croatia. They want their device to work for them, not against them, and as you yourself put it, they are notoriously unreliable at making good decisions about what is or is not a safe action. So for them, the only way to have a modicum of safety and comfort is to have less freedom.

      What corporate control does is creates a responsible party that at least ostensibly should be able to make more informed decisions about what is and is not safe than your average non-programmer. This is not saying that it should not be possible for people who know what they are doing and truly understand the risks to get out from under that corporate control—it can be useful, even necessary at times—but rather that systems should be designed in such a way that it is really, really freaking obvious when you stray outside those lines. If you don't have to work at it, then straying outside those bounds becomes second nature, and people begin to take it for granted that what they're doing is safe even when it really isn't.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    6. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by davydagger · · Score: 1

      if we ever get into "upper" management. Some people are allowed and encouraged ot act aggressive from the start and are groomed for the upper management jobs.

      The whole point of making use docile is so we are all uncapable of being "upper management", so the positions naturally get filled by insiders.

    7. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      Reelected the people that put it in place. That counts as choosing.

    8. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

      My favorite science teacher in school told me this, "Life is lazy". Everything wants to do the least amount of work possible.

      Then I suggest that you try to persuade a lady salmon to lay her eggs downstream, rather than upstream, and save herself a whole lot of trouble. Sometimes, you need to go out of your way to do what feels right. You misunderstood the GP in that "safety" was not meant as "software security", but rather as the overall feeling of safety generated by conforming to some given standards of convenience, social status etc. that you correctly mention. The point is, the shackle-free alternative takes away the shackles, but ties you on a wheelchair, controlled by the provider of the aforementioned (false) safety. I would rather walk around in shackles and go anywhere I like, than sit myself on a wheelchair and get pushed around.

    9. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by Chrontius · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the subject of phones, my free choice is what OpenMoko and nothing else? What's wrong with this picture? Let me count the ways.

      • Not available in America. I must order from:
        • Spain
        • India
        • Belgium
        • Germany
        • France
        • Switzerland
        • Netherlands
      • Not available subsidized; costs 300 euro.
      • Expensive - over $1000 when upgraded, and still generation-gapped.
        • Subsidizing a handset is part of my cell bill, whether I replace my phone or not.
      • Not feature complete
        • Have they got calling working yet?
        • No camera. To get a 1.3 mp camera, I must buy additional hardware, plug a module into the motherboard, and drill the case myself. Camera board is MIA.
        • Lousy screen - VGA.
        • Upgrade boards are now MIA, stuck with 350 MHz processor.
      • Slow - 2G wireless.

      I cannot bear the cost of learning to audit my Linux kernels, and I am forced to trust a vendor. I cannot trust Google to respect my pseudonyms - or if I use them, to not brick my phone. I cannot trust Blackberry to stay in business. I cannot trust Microsoft to make a software ecosystem (may as well use a pretty feature-phone!). I cannot trust OpenWebOS to ship hardware. I cannot trust Apple to let me hack my hardware. Only one of these choices implies a phone I can use, and count on continuing to use for the duration of a 2-year phone contract.

      That the vendor I choose has sex appeal is just gravy. I'd like to avoid the digital handcuffs, but my choice is one of several sets of said metaphorical handcuffs or a choice that Stallman ignores - a cheap, dumb "burner" phone that makes calls. Then, I'd be free to what? Carry around a non-encumbered 35mm film camera, a relatively unencumbered Diskman and a small selection of about 60 CDs, and hire a courier to deliver a newspaper whenever I'd like to read the news and I'm away from my desk.

    10. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      If you don't leave the decisions to the product designers, who are you going to leave them to? The only alternatives I can think of are:

      • Cell carriers. They will do everything possible to ensure that your experience is specific to their carrier, that your apps can't come with you, and that you will have to either buy new apps whenever you buy a new phone or pay a subscription fee every month for the privilege of running the Facebook app.
      • Government. Every government will have their own set of rules that all lag five years behind the state of the art, and thus will do absolutely nothing to protect you in practice, yet will get in your way constantly so that you feel secure.
      • Third-party antivirus companies. Every so often, your machine will become unbootable because they quarantined part of the OS. And everything will run slowly. And most users will still get infected by every piece of malware on the planet because they didn't pay their protection money.

      The device designers are in the best position to make those decisions sanely, both because they are most familiar with the device and because they have the most to lose in terms of sales if they screw up. It is the responsibility of the public to push back when they cross the line and do something stupid—to keep them honest, so to speak. :-)

      That said, for the 1-2%, I would certainly favor legislation to mandate that companies who lock down devices provide the owners of those devices (at no cost) with a means to compile/sign copies of software for their individual devices. It's a high enough bar to make it unlikely that my parents (for example) would do it, yet easy enough that it wouldn't prevent folks like us from tinkering. I don't see our government being clueful enough to pass such a law in the next century, but I would be in favor of it if they did.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    11. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      How do you he did? That said, I believe we were talking about the majority of the population, and seeing as how plenty of people keep voting for the same guys that keep the TSA around...

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    12. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      *How do you know he did?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    13. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      The whole point of making use docile is so we are all uncapable of being "upper management", so the positions naturally get filled by insiders.

      Almost. The point of not teaching us what they teach those who would lead us is that we would be pissed off if we knew. Even at so-called Christian colleges business classes teach you to be manipulative and deceptive and business ethics classes teach you how not to get in trouble for being such.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by davydagger · · Score: 1

      but in computer classes as early as high school, you have to sign wavers saying you won't use the computer for anything they think is either "manipulative or deceptive", by their paranoid ignorant thought proccess

    15. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      I appreciate where you're coming from, but should we really be leaving those kind of decisions to corporations whose primary motive is profit? That's like making a 10 year old responsible for your grocery purchases.

      Or basing computing choices on the philosophy of an insane man who's publicly eating scabs off his foot.

    16. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by Reziac · · Score: 1

      This doesn't explain why tribal behavior (following the group) is the norm even in areas where there is NO education...

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    17. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Please, consciously decide against the tyranny of corporate control.

      Sure that sounds bad and all, but where is it that this has manifested as a problem for a significant portion of the population in the context of this discussion? Everyone's had the choice of free software or proprietary software and most people wouldn't have much of a problem switching to FOSS if there were a compelling reason to do so. So my question is why do you think it is that people choose not to be freed from the 'tyranny of corporate control'? I would suggest the likely reason is that it simply isn't as terrible as you make it out to be, in fact it's probably not bad at all. Stallman as spent nearly 3 decades pontificating on how evil proprietary software is, yet those evils really haven't manifested in any real form and the free and open alternatives don't seem to have shown distinct superiority in that regard either.

    18. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      but in computer classes as early as high school, you have to sign wavers saying you won't use the computer for anything they think is either "manipulative or deceptive", by their paranoid ignorant thought proccess

      That might be true today, but I had computer classes in elementary school in third grade, and in Junior High in sixth and seventh grade, and in high school in ninth grade (hell I took electronics in ninth grade) and I was never asked to sign anything. My conduct was covered by the same rules as it was the rest of the time, which is to say, I could not get away with anything because I was not a jock.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:BULLSHIT! (Re:Freedom) by davydagger · · Score: 1

      it was true in the 1990s when I was growing up.

      computer classes when I went to school were entirely watered down, to the point they were no more than glorified typing classes.

      One of them I failed because it was a quiz on "whats the best search engine". A graded excersize paid for by dogpile, that marketed dog piles line, they gave you hideously easy, but slanted questions promoting their product.

      I refused to answer, and got an F, and got disciplined for talking back to a teacher for complaining. After all, what does some kid know about computers.

      And when I kid knew something about computers, it was some form of conspiracy.

      In high school I was able to get into a "computer science class", which was C++.

      Before the class, they made everyone sign this corporate manefesto saying you won't reverse engineer anything, break into anything, and will be no more intrested in programming than is neccary to work for a company, yaddy yaddy yadda, made sure you knew that intellectual property wasn't yours, period.

  40. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a civil engineer or economist to exercise it - most people will take the oppressive government.

    Not to nitpick, but a small correction here; my father was a civil engineer, it had nothing to do with politics or designing government. In his case, he designed roads and highways, related infrastructure (drainage, etc), and small bridges.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  41. GNU is almost 30... by Sebastopol · · Score: 1

    That means by 2043 the free software movement will be ... what exactly?

    i think it's gone farther than half way: heck, every one of the 100,000+ compute server at my company runs suse linux.

    i'd say the free software movement is suffering from a "last mile" problem.

    but i guess that depends on what the intent of the movement is, exactly? dominate every compute platform?

    hmmmm.....

    --
    https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    1. Re:GNU is almost 30... by faustoc4 · · Score: 1

      So throw away your android phone because there is a linux kernel on it, also there is a BSD on every Iphone.

    2. Re:GNU is almost 30... by Sebastopol · · Score: 1

      Too bad you're an AC, i'd like to continue this discussion.

      One server: sure, I see your point.

      100,000 servers? : Yes, the SUSE support contracts cost, but nowhere near as much as AIX or Sparc licenses, it would cost literally hundreds of millions of dollars to go back to pre-LINUX. So I think that qualifies as "married to the free software movement", no?

      --
      https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
  42. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by thoth · · Score: 1

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a computer engineer to exercise it - most people will take the padded handcuffs. Just the way most 'mundanes' are, sad to say. Since I am not drinking the Apple hate-eraid, I imagine I will be modded into oblivion.

    Exactly! Isn't this a "free market" issue anyway? If your ecosystem isn't competing favorably (as far as number of users) then compete and make it better, in a way regular people will actually care about.

    It isn't like Apple is going around coercing people into buying their products... they've built an ecosystem and made it appealing to a large segment of regular computer users. That other options exist is fine for people with enough knowledge and patience to use them.

  43. Did I miss the responding AMA? by bornagainpenguin · · Score: 1

    I was wondering about that myself when I saw the man's name in the headline and was disappointed to see this wasn't it.

    --
    Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
  44. Why does it have to be free by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    I love free things too but I'm not under some illusion that everything has to be free or open source. These companies have a right to do as they wish and I have the right to not use or pay for their products which I exactly why there are no computers in my house that have windows in them an all run Linux. Now if there was a commercial *nix alternative to windows that offered better driver support/os support compared to free Linux distros I'd use that system and happily pay for it.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  45. Stallman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I talked to a guy that picked Stallman up from the airport. He stopped to get gas and was berated for using his credit card. "They can track you!!" I'm sure he means well, but it comes across as ultraparanoid. And eating toejam doesn't really help your cause. You probably lose more credibility that way than Reiser.

  46. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by davydagger · · Score: 1

    "I get the impression he hates on Apple because it's popular to hate on them in particular"
    I say you hate linux, because its popular to do so.

    "but the real problem with the "Just run Linux" solution is that non-Computer Science people want to do things like answer e-mail, write correspondence"

    welcome to the latter half of 2012, linux can do all these things...well.

    "and buy software from the store that has a nice, easy installer"
    a physical store? what is this 1999? No people want to download software that works, prefrably that doesn't cost them money they don't have.

    Anyway, Ubuntu has had one click install since 2007, before apple's app store. Its actually easy to use an intuivtive, with a search fucntion. Ubuntu also sells non-free apps, in the same software center, if your into that sort of thing.

    "Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a computer engineer to exercise it"
    1999 called, they want their FUD back.

  47. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    why don't geeks spend hours and hours tinkering with cars?

    As a "geek" who has built no less than 4 hot rods from the ground up, and is currently in the process of rebuilding the 350 in his pickup, I would tend to disagree with that statement.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  48. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    Do we not depend entirely on the government for these things? Are we not prohibited from building these things on our own land?

    No, we're not. You're welcome to build all the highways and bridges you want on your own property (OK, no illusions here - the property you rent from Uncle Sam), granted you can pay for it.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  49. RMS is right, but it goes against Big Shiny by sethstorm · · Score: 2

    Apple might as well have resurrected Compuserve and all the lock-in that it had; one only needs to look at their platforms and their un-free nature.

    No wonder they want to go with ARM, since it provides an environment that locks the user to a few "approved" uses as well as having a platform that is equally as obscured as current Apple gear.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:RMS is right, but it goes against Big Shiny by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 2

      Nothing stops you from jailbreaking your iphone and doing whatever you want with it.

    2. Re:RMS is right, but it goes against Big Shiny by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      That presumes that I bought an iPhone and not a more Free(as in speech) Nokia N900.

      Even Android is more free.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    3. Re:RMS is right, but it goes against Big Shiny by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      All that applies to an Android phone if you wish to actually receive OS updates for more than a few months. Besides if you want the freedom to using your phone like a desktop and doing what you want with it then you need to live with the same risk of fucking things up like many people do with their desktop.

    4. Re:RMS is right, but it goes against Big Shiny by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Android is only free if you're capable of rooting the thing or putting yourself at risk by accepting non-google play sources. Yes that is more free but for your average person they have to know to enable that option while not doing the stupid crap they do on their desktop.

  50. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    he's right about the digital handcuffs though.
    however that's not really news at all. even woz knows and thinks they could loosen 'em up.

    still, I'd wager nintendo puts on tighter cuffs. and plenty of tv and stb manufacturers - but those are rarely counted as computers whereas people are increasingly counting idevices as such.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  51. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    And it does fuck all, screen still blanks. There is more then one mechanism at play, and the UI does not combine them into one interface.

    --
    Good-bye
  52. Re:Users to blame as much as corporations like App by dgatwood · · Score: 2

    Horses**t. Anything I do in the privacy of my home, assuming it leaves no evidence and does not affect or involve anyone else, is private, always has been, and should rightfully continue to be in the future unless I choose to make it public. Anyone who claims otherwise is probably in the business of violating someone's privacy.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  53. Re:Users to blame as much as corporations like App by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Privacy is a myth, it always has been a myth, and you are wrong.

    Sayeth the completely anonymous internet user.

    That's funny stuff right there.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  54. Re:Users to blame as much as corporations like App by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    See, the difference is that rivers never used to flow uphill, so yes, there's your myth. Privacy did, in fact, have a significant role in our society -- that is not a myth. This was before folks like you grew up and got into the system. The 4th amendment used to mean something. But what it meant (primarily) was that the federal, and pretty much the state, governments had hard limits on them. They no longer do, as SCOTUS has made perfectly clear. So you're right, when you characterize it as "putting the genie back in the bottle" in terms of difficulty. However, you're very wrong when you characterize it as a myth. Vestiges still remain. As they go, there will be some uproar from those who understand the value of what is being lost, and yes, I know, you don't have to tell me -- that won't include you or people like you.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  55. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    Why put him in a straightjacket? Crowds gather to listen to him rant and rave -- does that bother you? Why not let him opine for hours until he's hoarse if it fits his fancy?/q

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  56. Freedom is different from privacy by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

    That is not true. People are great at discerning reality from illusion, and do not feel "more comfortable" with illusion as protection - many dislike the TSA for example.

    But something that is really going wrong in this discussion is that many seem to be thinking "freedom" equals "privacy", or that privacy has anything to do with freedom. The truth is that while people like and enjoy freedom, they really don't generally care as much about privacy.

    By tying the two together, you are making people care less about freedom because you are bundling in arguments about things they don't really care about.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  57. Re:Users to blame as much as corporations like App by kheldan · · Score: 1

    ..and YOU, you Cowardly Bastard, are EXACTLY the sort of person I'm talking about. You've been so thoroughly indoctrinated by governents, the media, and the corporations behind them all, that you actually believe what you're saying is The One And Only Truth, and that anyone that disagrees with you has a screw loose.

    Sadly, there may be no hope for people like you.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  58. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

    I get the impression he hates on Apple because it's popular to hate on them in particular

    I get the impression that you hate on RMS because it is popular to hate on him.

    Seriously though, why would RMS follow the crowd when it comes to which companies to criticize? He has always criticized companies for creating proprietary platforms and imposing proprietary licenses on their users, and Apple does both. In his view, Apple is the most serious offender; I disagree with him, but to claim that he is just following the crowd here is way off base.

    the real problem with the "Just run Linux" solution is that non-Computer Science people want to do things like answer e-mail, write correspondence

    My mother uses Fedora. She has no trouble checking her email.

    and buy software from the store that has a nice, easy installer

    Your point being what? There are vendors out there that make proprietary software for GNU/Linux that has binary installers. Frankly, I think the app store model has shown us that most users do not care how their software is installed, whether it be from a package manager or from an installer program.

    We geeks don't have trouble with the idea of tinkering under the hood when we don't like something

    Nobody has to "tinker under the hood" to use GNU/Linux.

    I am driven to drinking when I think of my grandmother or father trying to use OSS for anything useful when they hit their first problem.

    Really? In my experience, there is no difference between GNU/Linux, Windows, or Mac OS X here. My cousin called me the other day begging for help with her MacBook; she was utterly unable to troubleshoot it when it stopped booting up.

    Freedom is nice, but when it involves having to become a computer engineer to exercise it

    It does not, stop spreading FUD.

    most people will take the padded handcuffs

    Most people have no idea they have handcuffs on when they use their iPad; they think that it is just a different design and that there are technical reasons that some software cannot run on it. Many people will tell you that an iPad or a PS3 is not even a computer, because to them, a "computer" is something that runs the software you want to run on it.

    Since I am not drinking the Apple hate-eraid, I imagine I will be modded into oblivion.

    It's not about "hate," it is about Apple abusing their customers. Apple did not have to make jailbreaking the iPad so difficult, and they certainly didn't have to brick jailbroken iPhones. Apple could have just made a switch somewhere that disables the restrictions -- and then people who wanted to use apps that Apple did not approve could do so. Apple has always abused their power over what software people run on their computers, forbidding political cartoon programs, forbidding pornographic programs, forbidding their competitors' software, etc. This is not hate, it is criticism. There is a difference.

    For what it's worth, I criticize Sony, Microsoft, and numerous other companies for engaging in these practices. Why should I go easier on Apple than I go on them? Why should RMS do so?

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  59. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by mspohr · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the Apple App Store.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  60. Like how iPhones can only call other by Brannon · · Score: 1

    iPhones and can only display web pages created on a Mac. That kind of thing...

    1. Re:Like how iPhones can only call other by pr0nbot · · Score: 1

      If I could figure out how to install Facetime for Android, we could continue the discussion face to face.

    2. Re:Like how iPhones can only call other by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      iPhone supports Skype. Now what's preventing you?

    3. Re:Like how iPhones can only call other by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Or how iTunes music is DRMed and locked to only Apple products.

      No it's not.

      Or how the iDevices are locked and limited to only the apps that Apple deems okay.

      That's why it doesn't have the malware that Android does. As a result, amongst people that want to run apps, iOS is more popular than Android.

    4. Re:Like how iPhones can only call other by pr0nbot · · Score: 1

      What's preventing me is that the person at the other end doesn't use Skype... hence the network effect. You have to use what other people on the network use. Skype is a good example of the network effect, which is the point I was trying to make. It's not a good example of Apple abusing the network effect; I was not trying to make that point.

    5. Re:Like how iPhones can only call other by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      What's preventing me is that the person at the other end doesn't use Skype...

      What are they using?

  61. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by raydobbs · · Score: 1

    I don't hate Linux, I really like it actually. I use it for servers and tinkering workstations all the time - I'm a geek, after all. But every time I've tried to use it for real work - some huge glitch keeps me from making the switch over, something doesn't work as advertised, or something just gets depreciated without a replacement.

    Business and people DO buy software in stores, especially the non-technologically savvy.

    I can say, however, it is a fair to disclose that I have not had the occasion to try Ubuntu on the desktop as of yet. Their server distros are nice, and the instructions they give for getting things set up is great.

  62. Not really true by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 2

    iOS is certainly more tied down than OS X but It's certainly not like phones were open before and he should be grateful Apple removed their DRM from their music and open sourced their coded to make sure he could play his media everywhere. But most importantly, I'll take the walled garden over the mess that is the play store which effectively makes me a slave to anti-virus/malware software instead of Apple.

    Stallman is a good guy to have around (despite the fact he borders on crazy) but if he think iOS is so bad he's more than welcome to come up with a better alternative. Google hasn't so the opportunity is there.

  63. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by MrHanky · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Right. As if your grandmother would do anything differently when encountering problems under Linux than under Windows -- either she'd ignore it (like my parents do with their infinite number of browser toolbars bogging down their systems), or she'd come to you for help. Most people are entirely incapable of fixing problems under either Windows or OS X, as exemplified by the infinite number of hits you get when googling "repair permissions", the universal remedy for all Mac problems (which are remarkably frequent for a faultless system) that never ever works, suggested by clueless idiots to helpless computer illiterate users every day.

    In the end, most users just blame themselves for their computer problems: after all, they have chosen not to learn how the system works. Perhaps that seems less irresponsible with proprietary consumer software, a sort of feel-better-factor, but don't pretend your average computer user is capable of fixing problems under Windows or OS X.

  64. Apple? Really? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 3

    Wether you're for or against things like copyrights, or the fact that it's been twisted and corrupted way beyond the original goal, you need to acknowledge that there's two kinds of files. The ones you create and the ones you buy. This means there is a difference between your property vs the property of other people.

    As far as your own files are concerned, in my opinion Apple is not a bad guy, far from it.

    Apple supports a lot of formats, some of them licensed and others completely open:
    - Screen captures are in 32-bit PNG
    - iCal supports regular .ical files
    - Mail supports regular pop3 accounts
    - Address Book supports vCard files
    - iTunes supports AIFF, WAV, MP3, AAC, MPEG-4 and H.264 and their own proprietary Apple Lossless format
    - Keynote has its own proprietary format but can export to Quicktime, Microsoft PowerPoint, PDF, images in JPEG/PNG/TIFF, Flash, HTML and even a format for iPods.
    - Pages has its own proprietary format but can export to PDF, Microsoft Word, RTF and plain text.
    - Numbers has its own proprietary format but can export to PDF, Microsoft Excel and plain CSV text with three choices of text encoding, one of them being UTF-8.
    - iChat supports AIM, Jabber and Google Talk.
    - Preview supports a shitload of formats
    - Any program that can print can create a PDF file

    Last week I just discovered that you can even Quick Look a Collada file and rotate the object while still in Quick Look mode, for crying out loud.

    Some people will bitch that Apple doesn't support OGG Vorbis or OGG Theora, so let me the 1000th to bitch that such stupid names were bound to fail at grabbing any sensible marketshare. The idiots who thought of those names should be forced to watch this Simpsons episode every day for a year.

    In contrast, Microsoft created BMP at a time when there was already at least 10+ graphic formats available, WAV at a time when there was at least 3+ audio formats available and AVI at a time when there was at least 2+ video formats available.

    If there's someone who's disrupting your abilities to quit their platforms by chaining down your own documents, it's Microsoft a hell of a lot more than it is Apple.

    Media that you paid for, however, is a completely different story. But don't only blame Apple, blame the media companies and remember that there hasn't been DRM on audio files from iTunes for the last five years or so. Just because these people will never understand that you can't lock down bit patterns doesn't mean they won't keep trying.

  65. The problem with the analogy... by sootman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... is that handcuffs do nothing but restrain you. An iPhone restrains you in certain ways but it also enables a whole lot of other things. It's all about trade-offs.

    It's the difference between an actual prison, and a prison where you can eat delicious food, see your friends, travel to some extent, etc etc etc., versus living "free" in the woods.

    Furthermore, they aren't "handcuffs" in that I can get out of them. I might lose some stuff, but then again, I might not -- it all depends on what I'm doing and how. As it happens, there is nothing on my iPhone that I a) care about and b) couldn't easily move to another system. So depending on who you are, they may not be handcuffs at all.

    Finally, it's a continuum. There's a difference between "handcuffs" and "oh well, I guess I can't watch this movie I bought in iTunes anymore because I have an Android phone now." I gain nothing from some pursuit of absolute theoretical perfection. Same thing with security: what do I gain by reading SSL certificates, if I'm going to give my credit card to a 19-year-old in a restaurant to take out of my sight for five minutes the next day? "Those who would trade...", yeah yeah yeah. It is impossible to live a life that is perfect in every way. Have you ever tripped? Well then, why don't you just stare at your feet for every single step you take in all of life? Oh, because the benefits of looking around every hour of every day outweigh tripping on things a couple times a year.

    The bigger problem with cell phones, really, are the odious terms from the telcos, like AT&T selling me a fixed number of bytes and then charging extra depending on what I want to do with them. Or requiring that all smartphones have data plans in the first place, and then making the "entry level" plans more and more expensive each year.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:The problem with the analogy... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      ... is that handcuffs do nothing but restrain you. An iPhone restrains you in certain ways but it also enables a whole lot of other things. It's all about trade-offs.

      The problem with your comment is that you started it in the subject line.

      The problem with your idea is that it is wrong. An iPhone doesn't enable things you can't do with a more-open phone. If it did, surely you could have listed at least one example.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  66. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by davydagger · · Score: 2

    "I don't hate Linux, I really like it actually. I use it for servers and tinkering workstations all the time"
    I was being facetious. RMS pointed out some really great reasons why apple is doing bad things. you accused him of hating apple because its cool to do so, when RMS presented some valid arguments.

    "But every time I've tried to use it for real work - some huge glitch keeps me from making the switch over, something doesn't work as advertised, or something just gets depreciated without a replacement."
    Funny, huge glitches in MS made me switch around ubuntu 10.04. Never looked back. I expected to be back on windows after a year break. It came a long way since the last time I pulled this shit with Redhat 6

    "I can say, however, it is a fair to disclose that I have not had the occasion to try Ubuntu on the desktop as of yet. Their server distros are nice, and the instructions they give for getting things set up is great."

    Try mint. its based of ubuntu without unity. If your used to windows the learning curve with cinamon is nill. MATE is just a fork of gnome 2 if you liked that sort of thing.

    Its so intuitive you don't need instructions beyond what is presented to you in the GUI installer. You could just click next like 10 times for a working install.(same installer as ubuntu).

  67. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by Applekid · · Score: 1

    If Ford welded hoods shut and promised convenient lifetime service at authorized service centers "for free"

    LOL thats the worst automotive analogy I've ever heard about that topic.

    If Ford welded hoods shut and used their money and power as a multinational megacorp plus all the force and power of the federal government to hunt you down like a dog and destroy you if you dared to open the hood of "your" car

    Point being that in your version, it's obvious that it's a power grab. Cars have already been around and society is used to expect certain things of them, namely, having to check the blinker fluid and such.

    So much of technology today is brand new, and there are no real pre-existing expectations in society. Even when cars were "new", machinery had been around and people were familiar with trains, steamships, and other mechanized marvels. The average person today probably didn't even see a practical need for a computing device in the home until maybe fifteen or so years ago.

    In this way the power grab is much more subtle. It sure doesn't feel like you're giving away your freedom when you pick up a snazzy new iPhone considering all the stuff you can now do versus before you had anything like it in your pocket.

    To the original car analogy, I'd add that you don't even have to give people anything to get them to give up their privacy. How many people complete submissions to sweepstakes that only promise they have a shadow of a chance to get the prize? Of course, they all will be sold on the open market to telemarketers and junk mail and electronic spam. How many people volunteer and sign up for Facebook and just give away their musings and pictures and networks for no compensation, not even a chance to win something, whatsoever?

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  68. very nice handcuffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What RMS doesn't realize, is that the handcuffs are very comfortable and grant the wearer superpowers.

  69. Re:Removing my privacy is not about inproved secur by uniquename72 · · Score: 1

    Most people don't really care about being free. They'd rather be safe and feel secure even if it's only an illusion.

    Its not true in the slightest; everybody want freedom and privacy

    The difference is that I can show reams of evidence that people in general are happy with only the illusion of safety and security, while you can't show any evidence at all that people as a whole want freedom and privacy based on their actions.

    (Also, there => their.)

  70. Nothing stops apple suing you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For copyright infringement and DMCA violations.

    Nothing is stopping your carrier from refusing to allow your phone to connect.

    Nothing is stopping the county court jailing you for a criminal act (you DID turn on the phone and click I agree to the EULA, right? UCITA has your ass).

    1. Re:Nothing stops apple suing you by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      And how has spent jail time or been sued for jailbreaking their iphone?

  71. Re:Wow. You have no idea, do you. by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I agree that someone can still be brilliant but completely socially backward, you are equating chewing your fingernails with sitting down in a large lecture, taking your shoe and sock off, picking something off of your foot, and visibly munching down on it.

    Biting his fingernails in front of a crowd would be a pretty bad habit. Picking his nose and eating it in front of the crowd (which I'm not sure he wasn't doing earlier in the video, anyway) is very "socially backward". Taking off his shoe and eating his own toenails (or whatever it was) on camera in the middle of hundreds of people is getting pretty borderline. I wouldn't go as far as saying borderline insane, but borderline dementia or some other mental disturbance, possibly...

  72. Re:Wow. You have no idea, do you. by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First off, no, I don't chew my fingernails (I prefer nail clippers, but I don't think it's particularly odd to do) or eat my own boogers (eew!).

    But even if I did, I can recognize that there's a large difference between doing either of those things in private, and eating something you just picked off of your foot while not only in public, but while being recorded, in front of an audience. That's the borderline insane part. Any normal person would immediately be aware of the consequences, and have the self-control to not do it, even if they were gross enough to want to. If you can't see the difference, you should be aware that most people can, and the other responses of disgust you can find in this thread are on the low end of the spectrum of reactions you'd get if you showed this video to people outside the Slashdot community.

    For histronics, you should probably take a second look at your own post.

    --
    <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
  73. Re:Fuck him. by Ensign_Expendable · · Score: 1

    If I had half a clue how to mod you up (I'm an old fart) I'd mod your post to 11, brother.

  74. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by uniquename72 · · Score: 1

    why don't geeks spend hours and hours tinkering with cars?

    Because I'm too busy tinkering with my motorcycle.

  75. Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just finished reading the comments, thank you all, most insightful in understanding the demographics of /. today: rage comic addicts with a depressingly shallow perspective on free software and that would gladly trade their siblings for the next iShiny and that think that saying inanity like "Well, freedom isn't important if the product is usable" is anything more than a mediocre platitude. Reading Computer Shopper adverts was more challenging that this drivel, "Oh, I don't mind that I don't own the software or even know what they do with my data because it is soooo convenient lol this RMS guy is so out of it!".

    Magnis nomini umbra indeed Slashdot.

    1. Re:Thank you by DustinB · · Score: 1

      Where has all the old crowd gone? Or have they converted as well?

  76. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    >I'm a geek, after all. But every time I've tried to use it for real work - some huge glitch keeps me from making the switch over, something doesn't work as advertised, or something just gets depreciated without a replacement.

    HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA, and you're a "geek".

    Jesus fucking Christ, what sad state of affairs: "geeks" are fucking WIndows and Apple users who "don't really get this whole Linux thing" that "sometimes doesn't work right". Perhaps it doesn't run you Windows games or you AppStore apps, is that the problem you poor little "geek"? What a joke.

  77. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    When I was young dad I spent many weekends under my car, now I have a car that doesn't break down and goes to the mechanic for regular servicing. I also don't mow my own lawn or maintain a lawn mower these days. Being "good with computers" has provided me with sufficient income that I no longer need to do some of the things I hate doing. If you enjoy repairing cars, mowing lawns, unblocking toilets, or cleaning roof gutters then great, I will happily pay you to do mine.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  78. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by bursch-X · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But that's a freedom most of the population couldn't care less about. Let's say I was making a fuss, because I couldn't get the InDesign data for all the books I own, and those books were evil, because they were taking away the freedom to design them in a more legible and typographically sound way. You couldn't care less, but honestly I sometimes don't even consider reading something that is designed just too badly, since I am a typography/design geek. But you might not give a flying f*ck about these things. Sometimes things you consider extremely important are just totally irrelevant to others.

    --
    There are two rules for success:
    1. Never tell everything you know.
  79. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by Kjella · · Score: 2

    They were one of the (if *not* THE) first to come up with a general computing platform that has a digital distribution mechanism for client apps full of DRM *that happens to be the only way to install third-party software on the platform*

    Well, if you consider extending it to a "general computing platform" as their innovation. Consoles have been locked down for years, they haven't been exclusively digital distribution but including physical distribution equally full of DRM they've been doing it since the NES in 1983 and they've been constantly expanding their functionality towards browsing, media playback and media center functionality and other general computing. Apple caught them blindsided moving via smart phones to tablets they were hardly the first or the only ones to try killing off the general purpose PC. They were just a lot more successful at it.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  80. Re:Fuck him. by lhunath · · Score: 1

    There is nothing but hate in your post. You might as well be talking to a wall.

    If you could substantiate some of that with something of value, we might be able to learn from whatever wisdom drew you to that conclusion.

    --
    ``OK, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, yeah?''
  81. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 1

    I've spent hours and hours tinkering on cars. On my old one ('88 Volvo 244) there was nothing I could not fix and replace. After it bit the dust*, I got a '01 Peugeot 307, and there's a whole lot less I can fix on it. Plastic covers everywhere, no room in the engine bay, high pressure fuel injection system, front-wheel drive, stupid connectors that I could've made better myself in 30 minutes with some glue... Newer cars are even worse. And if there is an electronic problem, you're well and truly fucked. One reason I ended up with Peugeot is that the manufacturer software and hardware to interface with the car (same they have at dealerships, way more than just ODB2) is readily available on eBay at a reasonable price. This is not true for many other manufacturers.

    * it rusted. Could have been fixed, but it would have cost about twice what I payed for it in the first place.

    --
    for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
  82. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

    Those optimization failures are history other than the most extreme hot-rodders. All thats left is boring maintenance, and theres not much of it.

    You hit the nail on the head. I'm one of the "grandfathers" you speak of, been driving (legally) since 1978, I've still got a "timing gun" somewhere in the garage. One minor nitpick, you forgot the simplest modification, on many older cars a foxtail tied to the aerial will give you an extra 10mph.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  83. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    So this isn't about getting something done. It's about showing off Brand X. You might as well be whining about Prada shoes.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  84. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The freedom to tinker means that you can get your oil changed at Jiffy Lube.

    The freedom to tinker allows for a greater degree of flexibility, and lower prices, and enables innovators. It's so pervasive in many areas that people like you even take it for granted.

    You don't recognize it even when it's staring you in the face.

    The freedom to tinker is why the PC even exists. The same goes for any of it's killer apps.

    This goes WAY beyond what RMS wants out of a computing device.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  85. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    Try the power management settings.

    This would be the same place you would look under Windows.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  86. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    You mean something like Windows or MacOS or any other conventional home computer OS that has ever existed?

    According to all of the "I"m a Mac" ads, Apple already solved all of the PC's problems long before the iPhone and iPad was released.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  87. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by thoth · · Score: 1

    Modern distros are far more useable than Windows, and possibly Apples as well (I wouldn't know).

    Until you want to do something like DVD playback, and are faced with bewildering instructions on foreign downloads (well, foreign to those of us in the U.S.) to get it to work. And it still appears illegal to do it: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/dmca-exemptions-rejected/

    In this case, it kind of sucks really bad.

  88. Stallman doesn't own a car by Coop · · Score: 1

    FYI

    --
    "If you're not passionate about your operating system, you're married to the wrong one."
  89. Define "general computing platform" by tepples · · Score: 1

    They were one of the (if *not* THE) first to come up with a general computing platform that has a digital distribution mechanism for client apps full of DRM *that happens to be the only way to install third-party software on the platform*.

    Define "general computing platform". NES had Videomation, and Super NES had Mario Paint. Both used cryptographic lockout chips to ensure that only authorized cartridges would run, even if the NES had a vulnerability to reversing the polarity.

  90. Limits of web applications by tepples · · Score: 1

    That was sarcasm. This isn't: iPhones can only run web applications and applications created on a Mac, and its web browser limits the capabilities of web applications. For example, how can a web application use the device's 3D accelerator, camera, or microphone? Does Safari for iOS do WebGL and getUserMedia yet?

    1. Re:Limits of web applications by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      That was sarcasm. This isn't: iPhones can only run web applications and applications created on a Mac

      Nonsense. To to any standards compliant web app with Safari, and then tell it to add the web app to the home screen.

      That web app could have been created on any computer.

      and its web browser limits the capabilities of web applications.

      All browsers limit the capabilities of web applications. Generally for security and stability purposes. Are you telling me that of I access a web page on an Android it can take a picture of me and record my voice?

  91. Usable alternative by tepples · · Score: 2

    i'd say the free software movement is suffering from a "last mile" problem.

    but i guess that depends on what the intent of the movement is, exactly? dominate every compute platform?

    Or at least provide a usable, widely available alternative to every non-free compute platform. For example, Xubuntu is the alternative to Windows, Android is the alternative to iOS, and in April 2013, Ouya will be the alternative to Wii U.

    1. Re:Usable alternative by tepples · · Score: 1

      Ouya is a non-free compute platform, riddled with DRM.

      You don't expect the microcode of your CPU or the BIOS/EFI of a name-brand laptop motherboard to be freely licensed, do you? Sometimes you have to take what you can get and accept incremental improvements in freedom. Ouya is substantially less non-free than other popular* set-top platforms because every Ouya console can be turned into a developer unit, for which I'm guessing freely licensed applications can be compiled.

      And good luck with your full firmware recompile for your Android phone.

      Team Douche has done a good job with its CyanogenMod distribution of AOSP, I'm told. In any case, Android is substantially less non-free than the other platforms used for phones that your cellular carrier offers. All Android devices that come with Google Play Store or Amazon Appstore support Android Debug Bridge at no additional charge, and essentially all also support "Unknown sources" so that the F-Droid repository of only freely licensed applications can be added.

      * I'm told HTPC is not popular.

  92. Re:Removing my privacy is not about inproved secur by gutnor · · Score: 2

    everybody want freedom and privacy

    Yeah, that explains twitter and facebook.

    But yes that is true that people want freedom and privacy. However, as computer specialist we are a bit how of touch with the real world meaning of that. Most people are happy to share minute details of their life to anybody interested to hear them. But they want privacy from the people that would use that information in a negative way, or more precisely, they want to be protected from the people that would not follow the "social contract". A bit like how people were leaving their door opened in village: the understanding was that you would not enter if you hadn't some good reason.

    Until Joe User figure out what kind of place internet really is, open and free system will be a tough sell.

  93. Freedom to do...what? by anyaristow · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm so tired of hearing OSS fanatics tell me I'm not free. What, exactly, am I not free to do?

    Install your OS on my device? Why the hell would I want to do that?
    Shop in your app store? Why the hell would I want to do that? Have you not noticed you app store kinda sucks?
    Install music moving it between folders? Why the hell would I want to do that?
    Use Gimp? Oops, I *can* do that. If for some damned reason I wanted to.

    Freedom to do things the hard way? Freedom to not use professional tools? Freedom to get help from condescending jerks?

    What, precisely, am I not free to do?

    1. Re:Freedom to do...what? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      To give a simple example, how about buying a book on iBooks, and then later on reading it on some device that doesn't run iOS (even just OS X!).

    2. Re:Freedom to do...what? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Everyone thinks they are free......until they want to do something they can't.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Freedom to do...what? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      If he has 2 different tablets - say an iPad and a Galaxy tab, he can buy something from Amazon and access it via the Kindle software on both. You only go w/ the native tool if you work in only that environment. How many of you try using Vi as a Windows editor?

    4. Re:Freedom to do...what? by anyaristow · · Score: 1

      I you find a piece of software that does have an unnecessary constraint, you are free to modify that software to suit your needs.

      Freedom to be limited to software choices that need fixing. Freedom to do things the hard way.

      Just because you lack the necessary skill set, and the motivation to acquire it,

      Freedom to get help from condescending jerks. I already covered that.

      See, you didn't realize I have the necessary skill set to code my own solutions. You just presumed you know something I don't.

      Listen, I think it's great that you have the freedom to do things the hard way. I think it's great that a tiny minority of the world's tech consumers are well-served by platforms that allow them to roll their own. I think it's great that there is competition in the market.

      What mystifies me is why you care so much about the choices I make. And it amuses me that you think they are non-choices, because I can't modify them. As if that's something many people want to do.

      BTW, I'm an iOS developer. I *can* roll my own.

    5. Re:Freedom to do...what? by anyaristow · · Score: 1

      Come back and apologize when you realize you have no control over the device that you own, and all your music got hosed because the company in charge of your DRM-ridden music had a bad year.

      You have no clue, do you? Neither Amazon nor Apple are DRM-ing their music these days. Very old news. Keep up.

    6. Re:Freedom to do...what? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's good that Kindle store is available on so many platforms today. However, this is at Amazon's whim. It may well not be available on them tomorrow - and if they drop the corresponding apps, you're SOL, given the DRM on the books (which can be stripped, yeah, except it's actually illegal).

      So we aren't quite there yet, but we sure as hell seem to be heading that way.

  94. Liberation by JohnG · · Score: 2

    You can't liberate people by forcing, or coercing them, into thinking the same way that you do. People who buy closed systems do so of their own free will, for reasons that might be more important to them they are to you. They do it in spite of reasons that may be more important to you than they are to them. True liberty is about respecting the choices of others, and allowing everyone access to a variety of options so that they may choose which is most suitable for them. If you want people to choose your option, make it as attractive to them as the options presented by the people you oppose. Don't blame others for presenting options that you disagree with.

  95. fastboot oem unlock on anything Nexus by tepples · · Score: 1

    how can I uninstall the Blockbuster application on my phone without rooting the thing?

    By next time buying a device that you can root out of the box.

  96. Re:Wow. You have no idea, do you. by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    To tell the true, I find you disgusting for dwelling on it.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  97. It makes 'ownership' grotesque by gelfling · · Score: 1

    We really don't own our hardware or software anymore. We just plunk down a prepaid user fee. The vendors are the ones who have most of the benefits of what we commonly call ownership. They can do more or less whatever they like to the object you 'own', whenever it suits them. They can even stop you from using it after you pay them. And they can use that object to do whatever they want to all the other objects you think you own but really don't. And if it stops working or doesn't behave the way they pretend they've warranted, you discover it was never warranted and it sucks to be you. Even your own behavior while using their object isn't your own. It's theirs, the information about it is theirs to do with as they wish w/o your knowledge or consent.

    Which is fine. When I rent a car this is how I expect to be treated. When I 'buy' an airplane ticket this is how it works. All we're arguing about is whether or not when you 'buy' software or hardware you're really just prepaying consumption of that hardware or software just as you would a rented car or a perishable service like an airline seat.

    All we have to do is disabuse ourselves of the fiction that we're buying something that we then own. We are not.

  98. Re:Fuck him. by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    I'll only contribute to BSD or similarly-licensed projects: Absolutely no GPL3

    You sound like a pretty sick puppy, I'm not sure I want your angry code in anything I depend on. In any case, I hope it doesn't raise your blood pressure too high to know that code you contribute under a BSD license can be freely incorporated into any GPL project, if there is anything good about it of course.

    By the way, all the BSD coders I know, first and foremost, just accept other licenses as being what somebody wanted, and BSD is about complete freedom, right? Including the freedom to choose a copyleft license. And in fact, most of the BSD fans I know make regular contributions to GPL projects. Few of them display such bile as you. I wonder what your contributions really are?

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  99. Re:Users to blame as much as corporations like App by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    Also, rms is to blame too.

    The onus is on him to prove his claims. That having open access to source is better and software freedom is paramount.

    Don't blame apple when they figured out having a more closed ecosystem meant things ran more smoothlyn, and not just from the security side either.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  100. or how like you are an idiot who thinks iTunes by Brannon · · Score: 1

    music has DRM.

  101. Re:Wow. You have no idea, do you. by milkmage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "That's the borderline insane part. " i don't think it's insanity..
    is a simple failure to recognize social norms. think about what you do in your car (dig for gold) at a stoplight. you forget you are in a little glass box where everyone can see you.

    i've seen women applying makeup, men shaving, people flossing.. BUT those same people (hopefully) don't do that at the fucking dinner table.. RMS is just in his car ALL THE TIME.

    brilliant guy, but the social graces of a mountain fucking gorilla...

    have you seen his requirements for a personal appearance? I don't think the biggest Hollywood diva's get this specific:

    "Above 72 fahrenheit (22 centigrade) I find sleeping quite difficult. (If the air is dry, I can stand 23 degrees.) A little above that temperature, a strong electric fan blowing on me enables me to sleep. More than 3 degrees above that temperature, I need air conditioning to sleep."

    complete list: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/pipermail/developers-public/2011-October/007647.html

  102. Inside the bubble. by westlake · · Score: 1

    An iPhone restrains you in certain ways but it also enables a whole lot of other things. It's all about trade-offs.
    It's the difference between an actual prison, and a prison where you can eat delicious food, see your friends, travel to some extent, etc etc etc., versus living "free" in the woods.
    Furthermore, they aren't "handcuffs" in that I can get out of them. I might lose some stuff, but then again, I might not -- it all depends on what I'm doing and how.

    I won't say that Slashdot is user-unfriendly, however often the word "sheepie" is used around here. But their voices are absent.

  103. RMS by smash · · Score: 1

    If you want to hang on to everything RMS says like it is gospel, then you should know that he never believed in putting passwords on computers either.

    ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman#Early_years

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  104. Funny, given the source. by seebs · · Score: 2

    Stallman's not a person I can take seriously when he talks about liberty, for one simple reason:

    He's as much a control freak as the MPAA and RIAA are.

    The GPLv3 is fundamentally in the same category as DRM; it's there to prohibit you from doing things with something that the author doesn't want you to do. The purpose is not to maximize freedom; it's to maximize one very narrow subset of freedoms, while prohibiting whole classes of others. And the more aggressive and draconian terms, coupled with the ever more elaborate attempts to prevent people from violating the spirit of the law, come down to the same thing that's wrong with the DMCA: You cannot make ethics happen by force. All you can do is replace any consideration of the ethics with a focus on the legal limits.

    When I give code away, I give it away. I do not sit around making elaborate rules for how it can be used. I let people make their own calls. That's liberty. Liberty does include the possibility that other people will do things you don't appreciate, such as not choosing to also give things away or give people free reign with their stuff. Okay, fine.

    But once people start making elaborate and complicated legal terms for things, which are designed to try to prevent all sort of things they don't like, and maybe they prevent a few things which coulda been okay but whatever... I don't care whether it's the RIAA or the FSF. It's about control, not liberty, and I don't like it.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  105. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by am+2k · · Score: 1

    If I WANT to tinker, *I CAN*.

    THAT is the freedom being discussed here. I can't just decide one day that I am dissastisfied with the windows file copy dialog box's estimated time to completion algorithm, bust open the source code, and tinker on it.

    I *CAN* do that on linux.

    That has not been my experience with GNU/Linux at all. Whenever I try to use it, I end up in an all-night vim-session, trying to fix all the text file configurations, because something doesn't work as it's supposed to. I *have* to tinker with GNU/Linux to actually use it.

    On my Mac, I'm productive right after installing the OS (and Xcode), with no configuration at all (other than my Apple ID login, so I can get Xcode).

    At the moment, I have some very urgent software installation to do on my Linux VPS, but that has been delayed for a week, because I simply don't have a whole day to spare for that. On a Mac, this would take a few minutes maximum.

  106. Re:Nothing to see here by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Precisely. And if you've read his site once, you know where he'll stand on just about anything.

  107. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by nathana · · Score: 1

    You and the other two respondents raise a fair point: console makers have been doing this for a long time. So I guess you could say that in my mind I have made a distinction -- illogically or no -- between "general-use computing" devices and specific-use devices, such as a game consoles. I would also say, though, that I think what the console manufacturers do is just as much BS as what Apple has been doing.

    -- Nathan

  108. Re:iOS users not limited by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    It's the best solution possible; a very locked down system for nontechnical users, a much more relaxed system for technical users that choose to step outside.

    The best solution possible is the one that Google is using, where you only have to click a checkbox to "step outside". Apple forces you to break out, which is why it's a jail. Google's door is open, which is why it isn't. You are not a very good liar.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  109. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by fido_dogstoyevsky · · Score: 1

    why don't geeks spend hours and hours tinkering with cars? I mean everyone should know how to do all the things needed to keep their car running.

    I do.

    what is so useful about spending all your time tinkering with computers but not other things you use in your life?

    I spend very little time tinkering with any of my four Linux PCs (apart from updates) because everything "just works".

    --
    It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
  110. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by BanHammor · · Score: 1

    And Thunderbird, Firefox, VLC, Audacity, GIMP. Because nobody uses them, right?

  111. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by BanHammor · · Score: 1

    What exactly do you use as Linux? I mean, I've been running Linux for 4 years now, never actually running vim, emacs, or anything more complex than Nano to make it work.

  112. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

    as exemplified by the infinite number of hits you get when googling "repair permissions", the universal remedy for all Mac problems (which are remarkably frequent for a faultless system) that never ever works, suggested by clueless idiots to helpless computer illiterate users every day

    Background: Installing software mostly means putting lots of files in the right places, with the right access rights (permissions). Early MacOS X versions sometimes got that wrong. So Apple made installers that not only put files into the right places, with the right access rights (hopefully), but also added log files that described what access rights each file should have. So if something messed up these access rights, a tool could read the log files, check what access rights each file should have, and fix it if it was wrong.

    All that was many years ago. Files don't tend to be installed with wrong access rights anymore. Software doesn't tend to modify these access rights on random files anymore. So "repair permissions" tends to do nothing at all in practice.

  113. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    That has not been my experience with GNU/Linux at all. Whenever I try to use it, I end up in an all-night vim-session, trying to fix all the text file configurations, because something doesn't work as it's supposed to. I *have* to tinker with GNU/Linux to actually use it.

    Bullshit. I've been using Linux for ten years and never once opened vim or modified a config file. Modern distros all have Windows-like "control panel" programs. In short, buddy, I'm calling you a damned liar.

    At the moment, I have some very urgent software installation to do on my Linux VPS, but that has been delayed for a week, because I simply don't have a whole day to spare for that. On a Mac, this would take a few minutes maximum.

    Again, you're lying. You don't even have a Linux box or you'd know that software installation takes about two clicks of a mouse and you're done.

  114. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

    Do we not depend entirely on the government for these things? Are we not prohibited from building these things on our own land?

    It was just the way it was worded, as either being a civil engineer or accepting an oppressive government. In that context, a civil engineer doesn't design the way government works (oppressive vs open), he just deals with the logistical infrastructure. His designs or work don't have a direct impact on legislation. An economist, on the other hand, might have some say or pull in the legislature or decision making process.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  115. Just abolish copyright then by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 1

    "But once people start making elaborate and complicated legal terms for things, which are designed to try to prevent all sort of things they don't like, and maybe they prevent a few things which coulda been okay but whatever... I don't care whether it's the RIAA or the FSF. It's about control, not liberty, and I don't like it."

    You would have wasted less bytes if you simply stated that you hate copyright. Any copyright system is based on the idea of control. Even the non-copyleft licenses would prohibit you from claiming that you wrote something that you didn't. Or from changing the permissive copyright to a copyleft, something which a clueless Linux hacker once attempted to do WRT some BSD code.

  116. Re:iOS users not limited by tepples · · Score: 1

    iOS users are not limited either; they can jailbreak if they want to use other stores, and many do.

    Are iPad (fourth generation), iPad mini, and iPhone 5 jailbroken yet? Is jailbreaking a tablet (not a phone) even legal in the United States?

  117. Re:Wow. You have no idea, do you. by milkmage · · Score: 3, Interesting

    you didn't read the list.

    tea: "A supply of tea with milk and sugar would be nice. If it is tea I
    really like, I like it without milk and sugar. With milk and sugar,
    any kind of tea is fine. I always bring tea bags with me, so if we
    use my tea bags, I will certainly like that tea without milk or sugar. ...if he brings his own tea all the time, WTF milk and sugar? if he brings his tea with him, why even mention this?

    audio: It is best to provide audio recordings in the original recorded sample
    rate, up to 44100Hz. Monophonic is generally adequate for speech
    recordings and saves a lot of space over stereo.

    HOW to pay for his tickets? you're getting a free ticket why do you care HOW i pay for it?
    If you buy bus or train tickets for me, do not give my name! Big
    Brother has no right to know where I travel, or where you travel, or
    where anyone travels. If they arbitrarily demand a name, give a name
    that does not belong to any person you know of. If they will check my
    ID before I board the bus or train, then let's look for another way
    for me to travel. (In the US I never use long-distance trains because
    of their ID policy.)

    Don't give them your name either: please pay for the ticket in cash.

    hates breakfast:
    I do not eat breakfast. Please do not ask me any questions about
    what I will do breakfast. Please just do not bring it up.

    don't be polite: So please don't ask me "Where do you want to eat?" or "What kind of
    restaurant do you want to go to?" I can't make an intelligent
    decision without knowing the facts, and unless I am already familiar
    with the city we're in, I can only get those facts from you. ..i can see him storming out of a room because someone asked him a friendly question.

    coke vs. pepsi - sure state your preference.. but I don't give a shit WHY
    If I am quite sleepy, I would like two cans or small bottles of
    non-diet Pepsi. (I dislike the taste of coke, and of all diet soda;
    also, there is an international boycott of the Coca Cola company for
    killing union organizers in Colombia and Guatemala; see
    killercoke.org.) However, if I am not very sleepy, I won't want
    Pepsi, because it is better if I don't drink so much sugar.

    it's MY EVENT. STFU:
    If you plan to restrict admission to my speech, or charge a fee for
    admission, please discuss this with me *personally in advance* to get
    my approval for the plan. If you have imposed charges without my
    direct personal approval, I may refuse to do the speech.

    I'm not categorically against limiting admission or fees, but
    excluding people means the speech does less good, so I want to make
    sure that the limitations are as small as necessary. For instance,
    you can allow students and low-paid people and political activists to
    get in free, even if professionals have to pay. We will discuss what
    to do.

    Another method, which works very well in some places, is to allow
    people to attend gratis but charge for a certificate of attendance.
    If the certificate is given by an educational institution, many will
    find it useful for career advancement, while the others could enter
    gratis. Whether this would be effective in your country is something
    you would need to judge.

    can I have your couch? are you kidding me? - I do not have the ability to maintain a sleeping environment temperature +/- 2 degrees
    But please DON'T make a hotel reservation until we have fully explored
    other options. If there is anyone who wants to offer a spare couch, I
    would much rather stay there than in a hotel (provided I have a door I
    can close, in order to have some privacy). Staying with someone is
    more fun for me than a hotel, and it would also save you money.

    REALLY? would YOU stay in a place that doesn't card people?
    Please call the hotel and ask whether they will demand to see my
    passport, and whether they report all their guests to the police. If
    it has thi

  118. Re:Removing my privacy is not about inproved secur by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    It only the massive marketing campaign by Apple/Microsoft that they fuck you over for your own good.

    Ahem. The main Android device supplier? Samsung.

    Samsung alone spend more than 10 times as much on marketing as Apple does. So much for the Apple is only successful because of the marketing myth.

    Apple is successful because their products are better.

  119. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

    >The issue is simple:

    If I WANT to tinker, *I CAN*.

    Apple selling stuff that doesn't require a CS degree to operate in no way prevents you from perpetuating your virginity.

  120. Re:Straightjacket and RMS... by am+2k · · Score: 1

    Bullshit. I've been using Linux for ten years and never once opened vim or modified a config file.

    Then you were very lucky.

    Modern distros all have Windows-like "control panel" programs. In short, buddy, I'm calling you a damned liar.

    Two years ago I developed some software using CUDA on Ubuntu. This required the latest driver that's not available via the official Ubuntu support system, so I had to use the official one by Nvidia. This resulted in a broken Xorg every time the kernel was updated (automatically by the Ubuntu updater, which was about once every two weeks). I had to drop down into console to download the Nvidia driver (via lynx) and install it manually.

    You don't even have a Linux box or you'd know that software installation takes about two clicks of a mouse and you're done.

    You sure? How do you think I can do mouse clicks on a VPS?

    W: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found [IP: 91.189.92.177 80]

    The system is too old, the packages don't exist on the server any more. I can't update to a never version, because the VPS hoster's only option of updating the system is by completely wiping it and installing a new system (which takes a while to configure).

  121. Re:Wow. You have no idea, do you. by unixisc · · Score: 1

    I had totally forgotten about this huge list. There was also the part about his table manners - his dipping into his e-mail rather than join in the dinner conversation

  122. I tried these keywords? by tepples · · Score: 1
    Anonymous Coward wrote:

    Why do you persist in asking stupid questions that are answered in the affirmative with five seconds of Google work?

    I went to Google, typed in iphone 5 jailbreak, and got pages like "genuine progress being made". And I went to Google and typed in ipad jailbreak legality and got this page distinguishing tablets, which don't have a DMCA exemption, from phones, which do. What keywords did you end up typing?

  123. Multiple hypermarkets by tepples · · Score: 1

    [The fact that end users are forbidden to add their own PPAs] Is one of the lesser but real reasons that the Apple App Store is safer.

    Would it be even safer to require developers to have "relevant industry experience", "financial stability", and a "secure office not located in a residence and not shared with another business" before being allowed to sign up for the iOS developer program?

    These days people do most of their shopping at a single hypermarket.

    For one thing, most != all. For another, I don't know about where you live, but in my home town, they have a Target, a Walmart, and a Meijer just within a few blocks of each other, so people have a choice of which hypermarket to choose. Likewise, Android phone owners have a choice of which app hypermarket to use (Google or Amazon).

    1. Re:Multiple hypermarkets by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Would it be even safer to require developers to have "relevant industry experience", "financial stability", and a "secure office not located in a residence and not shared with another business" before being allowed to sign up for the iOS developer program?

      It would, and that's the standard I had to meet before writing software for Nokia. I suspect you got them from the games console developers requirements, which are similar.

      For one thing, most != all. For another, I don't know about where you live, but in my home town, they have a Target, a Walmart, and a Meijer just within a few blocks of each other, so people have a choice of which hypermarket to choose.

      Sure. And when they buy iOS they've made their choice of hypermarket. They have the additional benefit of knowing that when they look for an app in the hypermarket, they are seeing everything. They don't have to search in multiple hypermarkets to find their complete range of choices.

    2. Re:Multiple hypermarkets by tepples · · Score: 1

      [Requirements like Sony's or Nintendo's are] the standard I had to meet before writing software for Nokia.

      So how should a startup company meet such a standard?

      And when they buy iOS they've made their choice of hypermarket.

      Exactly. iOS is for people who want to be in jail. Stockholm syndrome anyone?

      They don't have to search in multiple hypermarkets to find their complete range of choices.

      Neither do Android users. They can just search Google, which indexes even competitors' markets just like Progressive auto insurance gives you several competitors' prices.

    3. Re:Multiple hypermarkets by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      So how should a startup company meet such a standard?

      By starting somewhere else. Just as my company did.

      Exactly. iOS is for people who want to be in jail. Stockholm syndrome anyone?

      That's the amusing thing about you open-source types. You talk about freedom, but you actually want to restrict people's choices. It's not enough for you that Android is available and appears to fit your desires. You feel you have to destroy other people's choices. Thus reducing the field of choice.

      Neither do Android users. They can just search Google, which indexes even competitors' markets just like Progressive auto insurance gives you several competitors' prices.

      You mean like this?
      http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=android+fart+apps&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&ei=QBfCUMarILP34QTNtoDwAQ&safe=strict

      I hope not. I really hope you don't consider this a suitable substitute for a dedicated search for apps in a store.

    4. Re:Multiple hypermarkets by tepples · · Score: 1

      It's not enough for you that Android is available and appears to fit your desires. You feel you have to destroy other people's choices.

      The problem with "go back to Android" is that Apple is attempting, through the U.S. courts, to take Android away from us.

  124. Opt in to getUserMedia by tepples · · Score: 1

    To to any standards compliant web app with Safari

    How would one go about making a barcode scanner or something like Instagram as a standards compliant web app?

    Are you telling me that of I access a web page on an Android it can take a picture of me and record my voice?

    Yes, but only if you've already given microphone and camera permissions to that origin.

    1. Re:Opt in to getUserMedia by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Actually, not being a web developer I wasn't aware of this, but accelerometer has been available to web-apps since iOS 4.2. And camera access came with iOS6. Also, with permission from the user.

      So I guess that settles that one.

  125. Five years by tepples · · Score: 1

    And camera access came with iOS6.

    So why did it take five years from the "all apps are web apps" mentality of iOS 1 to Safari finally getting camera access in iOS 6?

    1. Re:Five years by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Once again you're trying to move the goalposts after the goal has been scored.

  126. Fx and O do WebGL by tepples · · Score: 1

    [Safari for iOS] limits the capabilities of web applications. [...] Does Safari for iOS do WebGL and getUserMedia yet?

    All browsers limit the capabilities of web applications. Generally for security and stability purposes.

    Firefox and Opera support at least some WebGL on Android according to this chart, but Safari on iOS 6 does not.

    1. Re:Fx and O do WebGL by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      WebGL is not yet a web standard. And it still has stability and security problems.

      Once those three issues are sorted out then perhaps Apple will use it for iOS. But they certainly wouldn't until they are sorted. For much the same reasons they wouldn't have Flash.

    2. Re:Fx and O do WebGL by tepples · · Score: 1

      WebGL is not yet a web standard.

      Neither is anything else in HTML5. The latest W3C Recommendation is still HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0/1.1/2.0. Besides, the 2D canvas was implemented in iOS before it was accepted by W3C.

      And it still has stability and security problems.

      True, in June of 2011, a bunch of security problems were pointed out in WebGL, causing Microsoft to shun WebGL in favor of its own Direct3D-based alternative as part of Silverlight. But what security problems remain eighteen months later? Google webgl security, limited to the past year, links to a page mentioning a possible DoS when a scene is so complex that it slows down the device, but that can already be done with JavaScript. This eight-month-old page claims that a lot of other vulnerabilities have been plugged as well. So what are the current attacks on WebGL in Firefox and Opera? One lingering possibility is that defects in graphics drivers could be exploited, but Apple controls the graphics drivers on iDevices.

  127. Re:People who have iOS devices actually use them by jc42 · · Score: 1

    ... either iDevices have more spyware or the spyware on Android devices is more efficient.

    It's entirely possible that both are true. ;-)

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.