Valve Offers Free Subscription To Debian Developers: Paying It Forward

OK... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 13:08 · Score: 5, Funny

and now nothing will get done.
This is obviously effort to thwart Debian.

Re:OK... by bug1 · 2014-01-23 16:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

Games are one of the oldest and most powerful learning systems we have. Computer games obviously lose the physical benefit of RL game,s but they still have mental benefits.
They can teach Logic, promote social skills (as compared to TV), and can be good emotionally just ot blow of some steam.
I understand the drama with debian and non-free games, but surely you can seperate the two concepts.
Re:OK... by hairyfeet · 2014-01-23 16:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is something that personally bugs the shit out of me.....tell me EXACTLY how YOUR freedom is being blocked by having CHOICE in the matter? Nobody is holding a gun to your head, nobody is making you use non free anything, so why should those that want it have to jump through flaming fucking hoops just because it doesn't follow YOUR personal feelings on the subject?
Why is those that are supposedly "for" freedom damned near ALWAYS translate to "free to be like me and do what I like?".

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:OK... by Pav · 2014-01-23 17:25 · Score: 4, Interesting

There are plenty of non-free choices... not so many free. I'd like to keep my little free sandbox thanks. Why do you want to take it from me? Obviously many feel the same way or else Debian wouldn't have such a vital community, and perhaps it follows that one of the historical reasons for this vital community is its philosophy and relatively uncompromising attitude (though too compromising for RMS apparently). I have contributed to Debian, though granted in very small ways, and frankly I'd be less motivated with the community soured and schitzophrenic with concerns completely unrelated to the Debian core mission. I have a friend who has abandoned desktop BSD because the community around it as collapsed after Apples involvement... I really don't want to see RMS being right AGAIN, this time about Debian not being strict enough.
Re:OK... by bzipitidoo · 2014-01-23 18:12 · Score: 1

Freedom is not an absolute. Your freedoms end where others' begin. You are not free to enslave people, deny education to women as the Taliban wants to do, recklessly endanger property and lives, litter, trespass, and so on.
In this case, should vendors have the "freedom" to keep customers and users in the dark? That's why we still don't have good open source drivers for some vendors' products. Nice DRM is no better than nice slavery.
Giving up our natural right and ability to share knowledge with one another is far too high a price to pay in order to restrict transfers of knowledge to approved pay channels. If we did that, we might as well abandon democracy, as one of its requirements, public education, is a huge sharing of knowledge that is being done to the detriment of commercial interests' opportunity to profit. The money they make off of textbooks in no way matches the value of an education. Children should pay more, and should be taught not to steal! The alphabet itself is a subversive tool that allows people to write letters and steal from phone companies!

--
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Re:OK... by tlhIngan · 2014-01-23 18:19 · Score: 3, Informative

This is something that personally bugs the shit out of me.....tell me EXACTLY how YOUR freedom is being blocked by having CHOICE in the matter? Nobody is holding a gun to your head, nobody is making you use non free anything, so why should those that want it have to jump through flaming fucking hoops just because it doesn't follow YOUR personal feelings on the subject?
Why is those that are supposedly "for" freedom damned near ALWAYS translate to "free to be like me and do what I like?".
Except Debian tends to be one of the more Free distributions out there - turning down a LOT of stuff.
In fact, it's why Ubuntu was created - Debian is a great distribution with very powerful open and free beliefs. Even when they get in the way of users. Ubuntu forked Debian, trying to apply a more "user-centric" view by adding appropriate non-free stuff to create something that users expect - including stuff like non-free codecs and such that users expect, and Debian lacks on purpose.
Hell, the non-free repos are barely tolerated.
Re:OK... by Sun · 2014-01-23 19:09 · Score: 2

and now this proposition to ship DRM!
No one is talking about shipping DRM as part of Debian (or even in non-free). Valve isn't talking about shipping its games inside Debian. Their games are proprietary, cost money, and contain DRM, and at least the last two make them technically incompatible with the Debian distribution system.
What Valve is offering is for Debian developers to get, free of charge, a Steam subscription to play (almost) all of Valve games. Assuming you are not a Debian developer, you will not see any actual difference in Debian.
Personally, I'm a bit ambivalent on whether to take them up on that offer. All of my proprietary games have come from The Humble Bundle and are DRM free. I do not even have Steam installed, and am not eager to install it. I am, however, curious to see what games are available. Add to that the original commenter's comment, humorous though it was meant to be: I'm not taking a good enough care of my FOSS projects as it is.
Either way, however, this is something for Debian developers to use, not something that affects Debian itself.
Shachar
Re:OK... by Sun · 2014-01-23 19:11 · Score: 4, Informative

I'll just add that Debian split the non-free stuff into a separate repository, not enabled by default. Not only are you free not to install non-free software, you get an easy way of making sure that non-free doesn't creep in by mistake.
Shachar
Re:OK... by mwvdlee · 2014-01-23 19:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

In this case, should vendors have the "freedom" to keep customers and users in the dark?
Yes. They do.
I don't like it, but that's what "freedom" means; not being able to force others to do as you'd like.
The problem here isn't vendors being evil, it's customers paying them to be evil then complaining about it.

--
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Re:OK... by gbjbaanb · 2014-01-23 20:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

You are not free to enslave people, deny education to women as the Taliban wants to do, recklessly endanger property and lives, litter, trespass, and so on.
actually you are. You can do all of those things - there isn't anyone actively stopping you; there's no Tom Cruise watching everything you do and jumping in just before you do it; there's no robot 'guardian' following you around ready to zap you the moment it thinks you're going to do something bad.
Of course, society is also free to to lock you away, and/or otherwise punish you to ensure you don't do it again, or attempt to persuade you not to do it again once you're released.
That's what freedom is all about - the ability to make your own choices and not have someone decide for you, but it also doesn't mean there's no responsibility for your actions either.
Re:OK... by Pav · 2014-01-23 23:51 · Score: 1

I have no problem with them releasing it as steam OS, but it's already in the Debian repo.
Re:OK... by Pav · 2014-01-24 00:05 · Score: 2

...and non-free was bitterly fought over and split the community. Debians place has been the spartan outpost standing behind the flashy Ubuntus and Mints of this world... it's there for when people start wondering about the OS the others stand on, and why it exists in the first place. Much of this software is generated by people who are people steeped in the free software ethos - or "freetards" if you prefer - and are bloodyminded enough to sacrifice a lot to live their. You may think it's folly, but it's for them to decide. Undermine their motivation and a lot of people will be sorry.
Re:OK... by Pav · 2014-01-24 00:07 · Score: 1

...ooops... "preview" NOT "submit"... but you can see what I'm saying.
Re:OK... by Pav · 2014-01-24 00:22 · Score: 1

Debian is democratic, and Valve is buying votes... Perhaps you feel happy about that happening, but look at desktop BSD after the Apple kickbacks, or hell... the US electoral system. This could f*ck us.
Re:OK... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-24 01:10 · Score: 1

It could be argued that there was never much of a Desktop BSD community (none of the BSDs are made for it, and I think we can agree that installing desktop-oriented packages on a server OS doesn't exactly made for a desktop OS) until Applw got involved. It can be argued that Apple's secret sauce made it desktop-y and therefore viable as such.
Honestly, Apple doing the whole Desktop Unix thing left the other BSDs free to focus on what they want to focus on, which on the whole is a good thing.
Re:OK... by serviscope_minor · 2014-01-24 01:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

when it comes to his rabid idealism that that is how the world absolutely has to be.
Yay it's the daily "make up random shit about RMS day" today, same as every day.
If you want to not be an idiot, don't parrot lies you read on the internet, actually find out what RMSs views are before talking about them.
RMS is not forcing you or anyone to do anything or even trying to. He believes that non-Free software is user hostile and unethical. He is also putting his money where his mouth is and doing his level best to bring the world of Free software about.
He's quite clear about what you should do if you have no choice: he himself used proprietary software to build the GNU userland system, and continued to use proprietary software until the kernel came about. In fact only very recently has he been able to get a computer which runs nothing but Free software end-to-end, meaning that he has kept up his use of proprietary software until able to do otherwise.
It's not about how the world has to be it's about how the world should be.
to eat my ass when it comes to his rabid idealism
Basically you're mocking him for trying to live his life as ethically as possible and helping others do the same. That makes you worse than any insult you could lay upon him.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:OK... by serviscope_minor · 2014-01-24 01:23 · Score: 2

actually you are. You can do all of those things
Well then your definition of free is basically meaningless: by your definition, people in prison are free: they're free to try and leave and the guards are free to stop them.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:OK... by ericloewe · 2014-01-24 02:10 · Score: 1

Your principles seem to be in the right place.
However...
How does Valve restrict your freedom by giving you the option of using Steam?
Of course, Free is better than non-Free. You can't expect everyone else to bow to your every request, though. Feel free not to use their non-Free products and services, but don't expect them to waive their conditions just for you.
Re:OK... by bzipitidoo · 2014-01-24 02:47 · Score: 2

How about using the law to prevent others from reverse engineering a product? Or jailing someone for investigating the security of a product, like what happened to Dmitry Sklyarov? That's not freedom, that's power no one should have, because it is too easy to abuse, and is abused. The DMCA takedown provision is routinely abused to hinder and silence perfectly legitimate competitors and critics. Many legitimate videos have been taken down from Youtube on the mere accusation of infringement, without any proof or due process, and some of it by robots sloppily programmed to do minimal checking and to presume guilt. The burden of proof is then upon the poster to prove innocence, rather than the accuser to prove guilt. And this is justified because "everyone is a pirate".
The "freedom" to keep others in the dark is too easy to abuse. It doesn't stop with being used only to protect "trade secrets". It has been used to hide problems, and deny responsibility for causing damages. And to unfairly burden others with all the work to clear their names, without even a clear accusation of such things as exactly what patents or copyrights have been infringed. And to disguise blatantly lying propaganda campaigns as science, fact, or truth.
All that is forcing others not to do what you don't like. When it is cheaper to cover up a problem by depriving others of freedom, causing them undue hardship and placing unreasonable burdens on them, which way do too many businesses choose to go, if they have the "freedom" of such options, backed up by government bullying? Yeah. That's censorship. That's shooting the messenger for pointing out that the emperor has no clothes. Even worse is the trolling, in which businesses arise solely for purposes of exploiting these hugely overreaching laws to blackmail others into paying them protection fees. The big players in the music and movie industry have all made the choice to accuse the entire world of piracy, and because we gave them the freedom to run roughshod over our rights so that they don't have to change and adapt the way the rest of us have to, they have stuck to their position no matter how crazy and wild the outcomes have become. Who still really thinks that Jammie Thomas should be penalized $1.92 million for sharing 24 songs online? Does anyone think every Linux user in the world should each pay SCO a $700 licensing fee? No one thinks that the world owes Big Entertainment $75 trillion. No one is fooled for long by ridiculous propaganda like Captain Copyright.

--
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Re:OK... by xfurious · 2014-01-24 03:55 · Score: 1

I see your point but its not like this is going to dramatically affect the course of the project...
Re:OK... by gbjbaanb · 2014-01-24 04:22 · Score: 1

you misunderstand. You have the ability to do anything you want, even bad things that are proscribed by law, morals or consensus.
Its a natural-world form of freedom, not the legal version you're thinking of. Kind of like how you have free will to do whatever you like.
However, my examples show how your freedom (in both senses) could be subverted - I like the robot overlord following you around to ensure you really do not, no matter what, have the capability of performing an act that violates the rules that it is designed to enforce. That would be a true lack of freedom.
Prisoners are free to attempt to leave - and many of them attempt to do so all the time, prisoners of war for example are duty-bound to try to leave. The 'law' that says they may not does not impact their freedom of acting in a manner designed to bypass that law.
Suicide is illegal. You do not have the legal freedom to kill yourself. Yet many people do.
The law says they do not have the freedom to to commit suicide, so how did those people who killed themselves manage to do so if they did not have the freedom to perform the act?
Hence my point - even though you are not legally free to do some things, you can still do them. The concept of a legal freedom is basically meaningless.
Re:OK... by chmod+a+x+mojo · 2014-01-24 04:27 · Score: 1

No, as a matter of fact I'm better than Stallman. I'm not saying he should stop his idealism, only that it is stupid to push it onto others as hard as he does. He is entitled to his opinion, as I am entitled to mine. I am not disagreeing with his opinion, I am disagreeing with him trying to force / coerce other people into agreeing with him.
As for the complete bullshit about RMS using non-free software, no shit he had to build the first toolchain from non-free compilers et al. they won't spring up from nothing. Yet after that I know for a fact he has said, in the last decade no less - on multiple occasions, that he would rather use crippled hardware rather than use non-free drivers that are available gratis from manufacturers. He also said everyone should do the same, stating it in plain and unambiguous language no less.
So yes, his viewpoints are quite well known on the issues of non-free software - if it isn't open, do without. It has been the topic basis for many of his discussions around the world.

--
To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
Re:OK... by tlhIngan · 2014-01-24 04:33 · Score: 1

...and non-free was bitterly fought over and split the community. Debians place has been the spartan outpost standing behind the flashy Ubuntus and Mints of this world... it's there for when people start wondering about the OS the others stand on, and why it exists in the first place. Much of this software is generated by people who are people steeped in the free software ethos - or "freetards" if you prefer - and are bloodyminded enough to sacrifice a lot to live their. You may think it's folly, but it's for them to decide. Undermine their motivation and a lot of people will be sorry.
Debian follows the free software charter pretty seriously.
Ubuntu forked off Debian because Shuttleworth felt Debian was *almost* there and if they would compromise a bit, they could provide a superior user experience. Since compromise wasn't in the books, Ubuntu forked Debian to create something that most people can easily install and use for desktop Linux. Perhaps being a bit TOO successful at that.
Mint grew out of Ubuntu when Ubuntu started doing some odd things - basically to bring Ubuntu back to the way it was, or at least, being a a "usable Debian" without Ubuntu bloat.
Debian has always been very strongly freedom oriented.
In fact, Valve effectively forked Debian to create SteamOS. And Valve could provide Debian with resources that don't inherently conflict with the charter - build machines, money, hiring developers to work on Debian exclusively, etc.
And I won't fault Debian for it. Because if you want a "practical" user-oriented Linux, there's Ubuntu and Mint. If you want a rather pure free software, there's Debian.
Re:OK... by serviscope_minor · 2014-01-24 05:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

I am disagreeing with him trying to force / coerce other people into agreeing with him.
Well, then you're an idiot because you're disagreeing with him over something he doesn't do.
He does not try to coerce or force, he tries to persuade. Massive difference.
As for the complete bullshit about RMS using non-free software, no shit he had to build the first toolchain from non-free compilers et al. they won't spring up from nothing.
He could have bootstrapped, should he have chosen to. You know, you used to be able to buy Z80 systems where you could key in machine code on the front panel. I've actually used one.
He could have gone that route. It would have been much more painful and slower but it would have been possible. He chose to use a more expedient route.
Yet after that I know for a fact he has said, in the last decade no less - on multiple occasions, that he would rather use crippled hardware rather than use non-free drivers that are available gratis from manufacturers.
Yes, and? He's not forcing you to do the same.
He also said everyone should do the same, stating it in plain and unambiguous language no less.
Yes and? He's not forcing you to do the same. I think everyone SHOULD buy free range produce. I will argue (like RMS) why it's the ethical choice. I will state clearly and unambiguously that OI think you should live your life ethically.
Those are opinions which we both have a right to (as you so graciously conceed). What use are opinions if one is not going to voice them?
He's not forcing you to do anything.
So yes, his viewpoints are quite well known on the issues of non-free software - if it isn't open, do without.
Except again you misrepresent him with subtelty. I get the feeling you are not interested in an honest discussion.
You flipped smoothly from "crippled" to "doing without". The big distinction is you can work with crippled stuff but not with nonexistent stuff.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:OK... by powerlord · 2014-01-24 05:50 · Score: 1

If you've gotten the games through the Humble Bundle, then you might be even more interested in Steam. All (most?) of the Humble Bundle games come with Steam keys so you can immediately add them to your Steam library. Makes it much easier to keep track of your library and manage downloads between computers ... the downside is only 1 computer can be connected to steam at a time (although off-line mode is lovely for things like that).

--
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Re:OK... by Sun · 2014-01-24 06:04 · Score: 1

You lost me.
I already have the games. They are DRM free. I already have a way to keep track of my library. It's at https://www.humblebundle.com/h.... All it takes is a single password. Why would I want another one, merely for the privilege of having another one?
Most of the games I have (at least, those I'm actually playing) have no multiplayer mode that I'm aware of.
The "single connection" limitation is not much of an issue for me (I do, actually, honor the conditions I bought the games under, which is that they are only for my use), but why would having the DRM to enforce it be an advantage for me?
Shachar
Re:OK... by hairyfeet · 2014-01-24 06:45 · Score: 1

Which is why I'm glad to see so many pointing out their doublespeak when it comes to freedom, because for too damned many the only "freedom" you should have is the freedom to do as they say and be like them, no freedom at all.
I mean look at what we are talking about here? Honestly if you are for freedom, which at its core is simply the right to choose then you should have absolutely zero problem with the non free repo as it is just that, a way to allow those that aren't fanatical about their software licenses the ability to use Debian without jumping through flaming hoops. For fucks sake its not even enabled by default so those that dream of a "license pure Debian" already have that OOTB without raising a single finger, the one that wants the non free has to make the effort to flip the switch NOT the other way around!
To me the entire argument points out an ugly underside that nobody wants to talk about, which is that the so called "Stallman followers" won't be happy until every distro has "purity" whether the end user wants that or not. Sorry but that isn't freedom, that isn't choice, because choice means i can choose to not be like the Stallman followers which is exactly what they don't want. Well too damned bad IMHO, because either you are for choice or you are not and letting the user have a single checkbox that they have to go out of their way to enable is not forcing them to do a damned thing, they can have a Debian as "pure" as gnusense if that is their choice, but they shouldn't be allowed to dictate what choice others get.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:OK... by powerlord · 2014-01-24 06:57 · Score: 1

honestly, the biggest advantage Steam offers me are:
1) Making my library available on whatever computer I am using (provided the games support it), without me having to drag around an external drive of some sort.
2) Keeping my downloaded games up to date, and the saved games synchronized between computers.
Granted I'm probably an abnormal user in that I have a desktop at home and a laptop I use for travel/work, but it makes it easy to keep things in sync and start a game on one, then continue on the other, with very little effort on my part.
Didn't sign up to Steam for the longest time, but recently did to try a game a friend sent me. Its much less intrusive and user friendly than I had expected.

--
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Re:OK... by Sun · 2014-01-24 09:01 · Score: 1

To be fair, there is some confusion between people like yourself, who advocate the user's freedom to choose whether to use free only software, and the anti-GPL crowd, who advocate a developer's right to choose whether their addition are free or not.
While I am all for the user's freedom to not use free software (and, in fact, the non-free repository is enabled on my machines, and like I said, I do have some proprietary software installed), whenever I choose a license for free software that I write from scratch, I (usually, there are exceptions) choose a copyleft license.
I think the heat from the later argument is warming up the former argument, despite the fact there are few good arguments to limit a user's freedom of choice for the sake of giving her more freedom.
Shachar
Re:OK... by hairyfeet · 2014-01-24 10:16 · Score: 1

"You can choose not to decide, you still have made a choice"...Rush
The problem is you are equating being for choice as being "Anti-GPL" and THAT is the door through which all the RIAA stye FUD enters, because for the pro-GPL crowd it isn't enough that they choose to run only free, its quite obvious from the posts above and below you that they don't want you to have the ability to run anything else.
Again I'd like it explained how EXACTLY is the "big bad corp" gonna "steal" the BSD code? Its still there, still supported by the same guys as it was the day before, whether you or a corp or the man in the moon downloads the source makes no difference to the original project because the code is still there and just like with the RIAA their FUD doesn't change the fact they are trying to apply rules of scarcity where none exist.
Could a corp come along and "buy" a BSD company? Sure but they can do that with a GPL company, look at Sun and Open Office for just one recent example. That didn't magically make OO.o disappear, in fact it already had been forked before Sun ever sold it and you were free to use Go-OO instead. You can no more force a BSD project to disappear than you can a GPL because as long as a single person has the original source? A fork can be made and things will continue.
For there to be REAL choice then a person has to have the ability to choose NO, simple as that. Does having a checkbox somehow limit the user? Can they no longer choose to have a gnusense level of "purity" from Debian? of course not, all it does is allow those that don't want to go apeshit over licenses to check a box instead of jumping through flaming hoops. I find it quite telling that those that claim to be so gung ho about "freedom" really don't seem to like the idea that some may choose not to be like them, but that is what freedom is about, its about being able to choose what is right for you.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:OK... by hairyfeet · 2014-01-24 10:38 · Score: 1

Exactly and moreover I have thought of a perfect gaming example to illustrate which in light of the topic at hand would be fitting...
There are companies that make games with always online DRM, you cannot play their game unless you agree to their always online DRM. Even though some of these games look enticing, including Diablo which I quite enjoyed the first 2 in that series I have CHOSEN to not buy these games because I refuse to support always online DRM. I think its stupid, its been shown to be totally worthless at stopping piracy and royally fucks those of us who don't live in a megacity and always have Wifi in range by making sure we can't play our games on the go. Therefor instead of getting D3 I made the CHOICE to buy Torchlight 1&2 whose devs are happy to sell their game without the always online crap, heck you can even buy T1 100% DRM free if you'd like.
I personally have no problem with Steam because it is to me a compromise, in return for checking in once a month minimum I get free MP with hassle free matchmaking, I get chat, i get my games patched hassle free, I get the Steam workshop where adding mods and keeping them updated is as simple as hitting a big green "subscribe" button, I get access to a large community with everything from tips and tricks to maps and reviews, I even get my graphics card drivers updated automatically. Not to mention the constant sales that have let me build a crazy huge library for peanuts ;-)
All of this makes Steam worth it to me, if that isn't the case for you, if the ONLY thing you want is 100% DRM free games? That is perfectly fine and I respect your right to feel that way, there are even companies like GOG that are happy to be your DRM free gaming service. But what gives YOU the right to make it a big PITA for ME to choose differently? If and ONLY IF Debian makes the non free repo the default will you have a reason to bitch, but as of today? you have to do absolutely nothing to keep a 100% free Debian, its that way OOTB. But to try to limit others to only be like you, and to only do things your way? I'm sorry but that is wrong, no matter how you try to sugarcoat it.
at the end of the day freedom is about choice, and limiting a person's choice in the name of freedom is about as doublespeak as you can get.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:OK... by Sun · 2014-01-24 18:02 · Score: 1

You said:

Which is why I'm glad to see so many pointing out their doublespeak when it comes to freedom, because for too damned many the only "freedom" you should have is the freedom to do as they say and be like them, no freedom at all.
Not a day goes by, and you say:

because for the pro-GPL crowd it isn't enough that they choose to run only free, its quite obvious from the posts above and below you that they don't want you to have the ability to run anything else.
So, what you're saying is that I should be free to write proprietary software all I want, under whatever restrictions my lawyer can come up with, but should I choose to release the software, that I should not go with a copyleft license.
As my list of projects clearly show, I belong to neither the "Anti-GPL" nor the "GPL-only" camps. As a rule, I try to choose the most restrictive license that does not impose anything on the user of the program (hence - GPL for command line utilities, but LGPL for PgOleDb, which is a driver).
When I have a special interest in people using the software, however, I go with more lenient licenses. BiDiEdit was meant to be a proof of concept reference implementation to a standard, so the higher cause here is the standard, not the actual editor. safewrite represents a relatively modest investment on my part, and a major boon to any program that maintains a configuration file automatically. Since it is a common plague on Linux, my outmost interest here is that people will do safe writes, and my library is a simple convenient way to do it.
The bottom line here is that the licenses on all of those programs represent what I believe is best for my own interests. This is fine and proper, as I am the one who invested the time to write those programs to begin with. You do not gain the moral right to tell me what I should and shouldn't do with programs I write unless you also go around telling Microsoft and Apple what they should with theirs.
Shachar
Re:OK... by hairyfeet · 2014-01-24 20:20 · Score: 1

I don't see what you are babbling about, as both posts are 100% in agreement with one another. The other posters were pissed about the user having the choice to run non free, and with BSD it doesn't make a damned what you, me, or the "big bad corp" does as the project is still there, its not "taken", its not going away, they are applying FUD and doublespeak when there are so many insanely successful BSD projects (If you'd like an example I'd point to Webkit which arguably runs on much more devices than Linux ever has) that there is more than enough proof the "ZOMG they'll TAKE TEH CODEZ!!" FUD is just that, FUD.
But the fact that you yourself admit that what you look for is the MOST restricting license frankly says more than I ever could, because its not enough that you share something that might make another person's life a little easier, you have to make absolutely sure "the other guy", the one who doesn't think exactly like you or believe like you believe, can't touch your "precious". That to me just shows the kind of mindset that the GPLers have and its really sad, because it went from a way to share to St. iGNUcious and the church of GPL.
I honestly don't even know what to say to someone with an attitude as nasty as that, other than its not healthy and maybe you should talk to somebody. Its a license not a religion, and if all you care about is making sure only people that think like you use it? Well I personally won't have to worry about ever running into your code at least as I doubt it'll be used by many.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:OK... by Sun · 2014-01-25 03:16 · Score: 1

That to me just shows the kind of mindset that the GPLers have and its really sad, because it went from a way to share to St. iGNUcious and the church of GPL.
Huh?
I did not pour religious !$%!@# into discussion. You did. I just chose a license for my own software, which I have written and decided to share. If you don't like that license, don't use the software. I am not limiting your choice in any way. If you wish to share your software under a non-copyleft free license, feel free to do so with no word of reproach from me.
I do not understand why you defend software released under a proprietary license, which gives the user a very limited set of freedoms, and yet condemn my choices, which give the users a much much greater set of freedoms (though not a great as you'd like, obviously). You seem to think you have a moral right to my code if I choose a free license, but not if I choose to go proprietary.
I simply do not understand this position. It seems hypocritical to me.
You complain about RMS going around telling people what licenses to use. I get that. I think he's pushing it. Then again, you do the exact same thing, only with a different license. Not only this, but RMS's position is, at least, self consistent. He claims that all software should be free. I agree with neither basic claim nor the method he advances that world view, but I understand the world he's aiming for. You, on the other hand, claim that all free software should be non-copyleft, but that proprietary software can be whatever it likes. Maybe I'm missing something, but that does not seem self-consistent to me.
Shachar
Re:OK... by doccus · 2014-01-25 11:37 · Score: 1

All this endless arguing among people feeling violated becaus of what kind of "free: it is, instead od valuing what they've been lucky enough to get without paying through the nose . Most of the original FOSS proponents were young when first proposing tis concept, and didn't realize at the tine that thje majority are grasping materialists, that are incapable of ascribing a value to someone's hard work unless they've paid top doallar for it. I'm not simply referring to community contributed projects like Linux distros, and software , but also two very big examples are Visual Pnball and the old OSX shapeshifter themes, before they got obsoleted. I made about a dozen of those themes, and half were , in the opinion of Michael Coyle (one of the founders of resexcellence) top level. Each one took me about 45 days to create, a huge amount of tedious work, but because I gave them away, they garnered no appreciation. And with Visual Pinball,among the most monstrous table creators are JP Salas and Uncle Willy.. Their tables are as astonishing recreations of the actual tables, easily as good as The Pinball Arcade, and in many respects better. You'd think the world (or at least Farsight) would be beating a path down to their door, but so far, the grass is growing pretty high in it.
Re:OK... by walter_f · 2014-01-30 11:31 · Score: 1

The FOSS nutjobs don't want to allow you the freedom to give up a particular freedom of your choice for a particular time in exchange for something. They are selfish, they want to propagate their ideology of "freedom" by restricting your freedom of choice.
Don't like freedom? You choose, go for serfdom.
The latter option ain't GNU, it isn't even new.
And as to

to give up a particular freedom of your choice for a particular time in exchange for something.
Good ol' Benjamin Franklin had to say a bit about that. Ever heard his name?

This is a Triumph by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 13:09 · Score: 5, Funny

I'm making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS

Re:This is a Triumph by AlphaWolf_HK · 2014-01-23 14:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

Could be...for Valve, though that's not a bad thing. I'm not even angry; I'm being so sincere right now.
If the debian developers were more interested in something consumer focused like games, then Linux could have a better chance at entering the consumer space (whereas right now it is mostly enterprise focused.) Free games that work with the thing you created isn't a bad way to attract that.

--
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
Re: This is a Triumph by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 14:21 · Score: 4, Funny

instead of free games, THEy should offer free food, something like CAKE. this IS A great way to attract linux coders, not gonna LIE.

5 years later ... by TrollstonButterbeans · 2014-01-23 13:09 · Score: 5, Funny

Q: Why did Debian development stop?
A: The entire development team was given dozens of free video games.

--
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory

Re:Now all we need is rolling release by Trepidity · 2014-01-23 13:13 · Score: 4, Informative

Debian unstable is the rolling release. Debian testing is a slightly more conservative rolling release, with updates screened mostly automatically. Stable is for people who want a manually "release-managed" approach with multi-year support lifetime.

--
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10

Typo in list.debian.org link by Oliver_Etchebarne · 2014-01-23 13:14 · Score: 5, Informative

There is a extra 'v' in the link. The real link is https://lists.debian.org/debia...

--
drmad

The amount of BS here is legendary: by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 13:24 · Score: 1, Insightful

"Valve Software, the makers of Steam OS, is already winning praise from the larger free and open source community â" mainly because of their pro-community approach"

Love to see how the new SlashAds is going...

Re:The amount of BS here is legendary: by dcooper_db9 · 2014-01-23 14:10 · Score: 3, Insightful

Somehow I lost my rating points between loading the page and reading your post. Sorry I couldn't mod you up.
In the future we're going to have locked down devices running proprietary drivers, with proprietary apps and DRM'd content. But it'll run on open-source software. And the community is happy because "we finally got the manufacturers to write drivers for Linux".
And the free game was nice too.

--
I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.

Re:last straw by tepples · 2014-01-23 13:25 · Score: 1

I didn't see or hear an auto-playing ad. But then I use the Flashblock extension for Firefox, so advertisers have to keep it static to reach me.

A wise move.... by Dega704 · 2014-01-23 13:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

Not just because this builds rapport with the community, but also because debian developers playing lots of Valve games will be debian developers with lots of firsthand exposure to any bugs or areas that could be improved; and the best work often comes from someone scratching a personal itch. Valve plays the game well (no pun intended).

Re:A wise move.... by Bovius · 2014-01-23 13:39 · Score: 1

Agreed. I'm sure internally, Valve deals with the same circus of foibles that every other tech company sees. But externally, looking at their overarching business strategy, it's really satisfying to see them playing the long game, and knowing that in all probability the PC gaming market will continue to benefit from their efforts.

Re: So only a small subset of people get this by SpectreBlofeld · 2014-01-23 13:32 · Score: 1

It means the state of gaming on Linux will improve.

Developer approval by tepples · 2014-01-23 13:33 · Score: 4, Interesting

But Debian's approval process for developers might get swamped by people trying to gain Debian Developer status just for the free games.

Re:Developer approval by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 14:27 · Score: 1

which begs the question: Who is considered a developer?
I have contributed hundreds of thousands of lines of code to debian but I'm not officially a Debian "developer"... Fuck me I guess. It's us wall-flowers doing all the actual work that get shafted.
Re:Developer approval by tepples · 2014-01-23 14:56 · Score: 1, Informative

which begs the question: Who is considered a developer?
1. Raises. 2. The page I linked answers your question. It appears that first you must get on an airplane and meet an existing Debian developer in person to get your key signed.
Re:Developer approval by petermgreen · 2014-01-23 17:07 · Score: 5, Informative

which begs the question: Who is considered a developer?
Debian Developer is a well defined status with full upload rights and voting rights. The application process is also documented but well basically it consists of
1: get your key signed by a couple of existing debian developers (in a pinch one debian developer and one
2: find an existing dd to advocate for you
3: make your application
4: wait to be assigned an application manager
5: go through a questioning/testing process with the application manager
6: wait for final approval, account creations etc from front desk, DAM and keyring maint
Nowadays it's generally reccomended to go for the lower status of "Debian Maintainer" (restricted upload rights, no voting rights) first and then move on to applying for Debian Developer (I went straight to DD myself so it IS still possible to go directly in the right circumstances but it's not considered the normal route anymore).
The process of becoming a Debian Developer can take quite some time both in terms of overall process length and the ammount you will have to learn about debian and the contributions you will have to demonstrate you have made to pass it. If you are serious about contributing to Debian then it's worth it, if you are just doing it for the handful of goodies (the ones i'm aware of are lwn subscription, ghandi.net hosting discount, and now valve games) that are given out debian developers then you are wasting your time.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Re:Developer approval by petermgreen · 2014-01-23 17:16 · Score: 2

It appears that first you must get on an airplane

Whether an airplane is needed rather depends on where you live. In your case it looks like a car would suffice.
https://wiki.debian.org/Keysig...

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Re:Developer approval by severn2j · 2014-01-23 20:58 · Score: 1

I'm not so sure, from my reading of it they're giving away the Valve Complete pack, which they tend to sell for next to nothing every time there's a Steam sale anyway.. My guess is most people interested in these games will already have them.
Re:Developer approval by Pav · 2014-01-24 00:32 · Score: 1

...in the process stacking the Debian voting process in favor of Valve - wonderful.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by Anonymous+Freak · 2014-01-23 13:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

WHINE WHINE WHINE I DIDN'T GET ANY WHINE WHINE WHINE

This is news because it is someone giving free stuff to open source developers!

Solely as a thank you for being developers that helped them succeed.

--
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.

Re:"Rewarding" free software with non-free softwar by Thantik · 2014-01-23 13:40 · Score: 5, Informative

Cough cough: http://linux.slashdot.org/stor...

What's required to be recognised as a Debian dev? by monkeyhybrid · 2014-01-23 13:45 · Score: 1

The announcement on the mailing list says that developers need to send a signed email (signed with a key in the Debian keyring) to the Valve contact to request a redemption code. So my question is, what does it take to be recognised by Debian as a developer and get your key added to their keyring? Is this just for core Debian coders, or do documentation authors, package maintainers, etc, count too? This could be a great incentive for more people to get involved with the more mundane tasks that people usually shy away from, although if it's that easy, it would be ripe for abuse too.

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by monkeyhybrid · 2014-01-23 13:50 · Score: 1

Looks like tepples comment answers my question. The Debian New Member process is outlined here.

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 14:04 · Score: 1

It is also open to debian maintainers and others who have their key as part of the debian keyrings.

It is generally a reasonable amount of effort to become even a Debian Maintainer, you have to have:

1. had your key signed by 2 debian developers,
2. declared your intent to become a Debian Maintainer and agreement with the various document (debian free software guidelines, social contract etc), and
3. been "adovcated" by a debian developer, where a debian developer familiar with your work describes it and recommends you.

This implies that you have been doing some work in some capacity for awhile and have been able to get a developer to advocate for you.

It is more work again to become a fully fledged Debian Developer.

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by Narcocide · 2014-01-23 14:05 · Score: 1

Note: "Debian Developer" != "any developer who uses/contributes to debian"

Don't expect to be able to achieve full DD status within the year. In order to become a DD (Debian Developer) I believe you typically also have to have been a DM (Debian Maintainer) for at least 6 months prior. Candidates are fairly thoroughly screened and trained. There is a mentoring process and everything.

For more information you can ask in #debian-mentors on irc.debian.org (irc.oftc.net) but I wouldn't recommend going there until you've done some research by first googling up and reading the information about the process and its requirements that are posted on debian.org. They don't have a lot of patience for people who refuse to do the recommended reading. They generally expect you're smart enough to know there IS recommended reading and go looking for it first before you ask for a personalized answer to your questions.

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by vux984 · 2014-01-23 14:14 · Score: 1

I'm guessing its not that big of a deal.

Steam itself is free. And how many valve games are there actually? 2 left for deads, 2 portals, and the half-life/counterstrike series? Anyone who wants those can pick them up for 75% off during any of their many sales... its what $20 or 30 bucks worth of games tops?

Not to diminish the act, or my appreciation of Valve's recognition of the Debian developer team... but I can't really see a FLOOD of people trying to get on the debian development team over a few games, most of which they probably already have.

Ain't nothing wrong with free by PopeRatzo · 2014-01-23 14:45 · Score: 1

Mark my words: When the Xbone and Paystation 4 are historical artifacts, there will be young people playing games on their Steam Boxes, most likely Hotline:Miami VII.

And then a meteor will hit earth and nobody will be playing anything.

Seriously, Steam Box will overtake the other gaming platforms. Plus, you can dual-boot and get work done. We will look at the consoles of 2013 approximately the way we look at the Dreamcast.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:Ain't nothing wrong with free by Riddler+Sensei · 2014-01-23 15:27 · Score: 1

We will look at the consoles of 2013 approximately the way we look at the Dreamcast.
With a sudden, and overwhelming, desire to find a copy of Power Stone?
Re:Ain't nothing wrong with free by tepples · 2014-01-23 15:28 · Score: 1

We will look at the consoles of 2013 approximately the way we look at the Dreamcast.
You mean as a set-top gaming device that allowed running homebrew with just a CD burner and no modchip?
Re:Ain't nothing wrong with free by PopeRatzo · 2014-01-24 01:39 · Score: 1

OK, on second thought, it won't be exactly as cool as a Dreamcast.
I'll just put the analogy aside and say in a few years, when Steam Boxes are still being enjoyed widely, the main consoles of 2013 will be seen as really lame.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.

Re:Should have said "Rewarding with HL3" by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2014-01-23 14:56 · Score: 1

If I were a Debian developer I'd insert a logic bomb that hosed SteamOS until Valve gave in.

Tragedy of the commons, perhaps. I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO FUCKING BARNEY

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

Re:"Rewarding" free software with non-free softwar by msobkow · 2014-01-23 14:58 · Score: 2

I expect the tweaks and changes they've had to make have been or will be posted upstream in due time. Who would want to keep applying patches instead of submitting them to the source projects for integration?

--
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.

Re: The FOSS community is praising this move? by Scowler · 2014-01-23 15:05 · Score: 1

Name a bigger, more effective distributor of non-DRM FOSS games compared to Steam.

wrong premise by Anonymous Coward · 2014-01-23 15:19 · Score: 1

Contributions are irrelevant, it's how well you put up with the hazing that gets you into the fraternity.

Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundation? by tepples · 2014-01-23 15:26 · Score: 1

why the hell should the open source community praise Valve for bringing proprietrary software to its most famous platform?

For one thing, video games help ease the transition to a free platform. For another, video games by their nature are going to be proprietary because there isn't currently as much of a reciprocal sharing mentality around the components of a video game other than code (meshes, textures, maps, audio, and the like) as there is around code.

Platform fighting by tepples · 2014-01-23 15:30 · Score: 1

We will look at the consoles of 2013 approximately the way we look at the Dreamcast.

With a sudden, and overwhelming, desire to find a copy of Power Stone?

Does Super Smash Bros. or Custom Robo come closer to carrying on the platform fighting legacy of Power Stone?

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by Pav · 2014-01-23 15:30 · Score: 1

It's still worth being uncomfortable about though. Closed is not what Debian is about... it's the ONLY major distro that makes a central point of keeping strong to its open source principles.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by tepples · 2014-01-23 15:33 · Score: 1

Debian [is] the ONLY major distro that makes a central point of keeping strong to its open source principles.

Richard Stallman disagrees, primarily because non-free exists. Besides, how does Fedora compromise free software principles?

So who funds Free games? by tepples · 2014-01-23 15:35 · Score: 1

You appear to suggest that video games instead be developed as free software and free cultural works. So who will feed and shelter developers of Free video games with production values comparable to the proprietary games of 2013?

Re:So who funds Free games? by Arker · 2014-01-23 16:15 · Score: 2

Try to remember that we are talking about Free as in Freedom, not free as in beer.
No one is expected to work for free. But we want to pay them with money, rather than with our rights.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Re:So who funds Free games? by tepples · 2014-01-24 02:44 · Score: 1

Try to remember that we are talking about Free as in Freedom, not free as in beer.
Please explain how that would work in practice for video game development. If the code, meshes, textures, maps, scripts, and audio of a video game are Free as in Freedom, including end users' Freedom to make and distribute copies, then how is the game's developer supposed to be paid for more than the first copy? Or if a developer is expected to sell only one copy, how can any developer make a game compelling enough to charge millions of dollars for one copy?
Re:So who funds Free games? by Arker · 2014-01-24 08:17 · Score: 1

"If the code, meshes, textures, maps, scripts, and audio of a video game are Free as in Freedom"
There's your false postulate. What if the code is free but the artistic content is not? Then there is no problem on either side.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Re:So who funds Free games? by tepples · 2014-01-24 08:46 · Score: 1

What if the code is free but the artistic content is not?
A free game engine is useless without a "mission pack" of artistic content. For example, a Doom source port is useless without WADs. If all mission packs for a given engine are non-free, the game will be excluded from repositories because it requires a non-free component in order to be useful. For example, a free video game engine uploaded to F-Droid that requires or strongly recommends the use of non-free mission packs would be marked with the NonFreeAdd antifeature, and applications with antifeatures were hidden by default last time I checked. Plenty of games are listed here with "no free data" or the like. Nor does Fedora package emulators because they require ROMs, and though free ROMs exist (such as some I've developed myself), someone on fedora-legal told me there aren't enough free ROMs to outweigh the risk of a potential Nintendo v. Red Hat.
Besides, how should a developer deter unlawful copying of the artistic content if the engine is free?
Re:So who funds Free games? by Arker · 2014-01-24 08:59 · Score: 1

"A free game engine is useless without a "mission pack" of artistic content. For example, a Doom source port is useless without WADs."
*Useless* is pushing the matter, but yes, you need the artistic content to play. With the Doom engine alone, and no missions, you would have to build your own missions before you could play them - and that's fine, as long as there is no requirement to install DRM in order to create missions!
"If all mission packs for a given engine are non-free, the game will be excluded from repositories because it requires a non-free component in order to be useful"
Yes. And?
First off if you are really concerned about making it into the Free repository, all you need to do is release some basic content for free, still keeping the bulk of it back for pay.
But why do you care which repository you are in to begin with? People install stuff from non-free all the time. For that matter people install stuff without repositories every day! You can just host a tarball for download and ignore the repositories entirely. There are plenty of ways to distribute your stuff and I dont really care - until you try to sneak DRM onto my machine.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Re:So who funds Free games? by tepples · 2014-01-24 09:26 · Score: 1

With the Doom engine alone, and no missions, you would have to build your own missions before you could play them - and that's fine, as long as there is no requirement to install DRM in order to create missions!
That and build the tools to build the missions in the format expected by the engine.

There are plenty of ways to distribute your stuff and I dont really care - until you try to sneak DRM onto my machine.
Which raises the second question: How should the developer of a video game with a free engine and all-rights-reserved artistic content deter unlawful copying of the all-rights-reserved artistic content?
Re:So who funds Free games? by Arker · 2014-01-24 09:54 · Score: 1

"Which raises the second question: How should the developer of a video game with a free engine and all-rights-reserved artistic content deter unlawful copying of the all-rights-reserved artistic content?"
And that's an interesting question, but it's not as if it is the question is any different, or any easier, if the entire ball of wax is proprietary. You can search for unauthorised distribution on the web, bittorrent, etc. and issue take down notices and if you are smart about how you do it it might not eat more time and money than it's worth. You can provide updates and fixes only to people that are on record giving you money, and deny them to the pirates - this is probably more cost-effective from what I have seen.
But again, the situation is no different if your product is 100% proprietary or if the program itself is free and only the data is proprietary. Either way, if a webhost or a bittorrent swarm or whatever is distributing your proprietary data without authorization, you have exactly the same options available to discourage copyright infringement.
Ultimately the best thing you can probably do is just to treat your customers well. Some people will steal no matter what (and in some cases because of extreme poverty which is hard to blame them for) but most people will do right if you do right by them, and only decide to rob you blind after they notice that you intend to do the same to them. I have noticed the handful of companies that do a decent job at that dont seem to be the ones that are hurting so bad from piracy.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Microlith · 2014-01-23 15:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

why the hell should the open source community praise Valve for bringing proprietrary software to its most famous platform?

Because if anything is going to bring users to Linux it'll be games. Games are what tie me to Windows, and I'd be more interested in testing Wine on my existing library if I can get my newest games out of the (proverbial) box on Linux.

The fact is that an addition of proprietary software to a largely open ecosystem is not a benefit, but a threat.

Not as much of a threat as Microsoft's exclusive ownership of the PC gaming world.

This statement that the FOSS is praising Valve sends out the message that the FOSS community wants another Windows or Mac OS, i.e. another operating system with a great amount of support by proprietary software vendors. That is not what the FOSS community is about.

Please stop talking as if the "FOSS community" was a unified front. I would love to move to a FOSS operating system if I could still play my proprietary games on it. Valve may actually give me a chance.

Re:"Rewarding" free software with non-free softwar by Razordude · 2014-01-23 15:38 · Score: 2

People like you are really, really unpleasant to be around. Just seeing the negative in anything and everything.

Re:"Rewarding" free software with non-free softwar by period3 · 2014-01-23 15:42 · Score: 1

The linked article says 'unspecified open source license'. Not all open source licenses are free (as in libre). Even if it is free, it doesn't change the fact that Valve primarily makes non-free software.

Fair but interesting fact... by Crass+Spektakel · 2014-01-23 15:58 · Score: 1

This is a fair offer but as an interesting fact, you could have gotten the Valve complete pack from a russian reseller for as low as 6-9 TF2 keys = 15 Dollar all day long.

http://store.steampowered.com/...
http://www.steamprices.com/us/...

--
"Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair

Re:Fair but interesting fact... by ArbitraryName · 2014-01-23 17:09 · Score: 1

Good luck activating and keeping Russian keys on US accounts.
Re:Fair but interesting fact... by ButchDeLoria · 2014-01-23 19:18 · Score: 1

I did it with Borderlands 2, and it worked fine. Same for BF3 on Origin.

Thanks! unit tests, naming standards, documentatio by raymorris · 2014-01-23 16:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

Thanks for contributing! I've contributed very little code directly to Debian, but it may well be like some open source projects where developers are expected to spend ten times as much time on a feature than it takes to submit a patch.

In Moodle, for example, I added a feature that took about two hours to develop a working patch. Just before submitting the patch, I became an official developer. Seven MONTHS later I was done with that two hour patch. First, I needed to document the proposal for the new feature, then get (documented) community feedback. I had to apply a huge list of style rules to the patch, covering things like variable naming standards, whitespace, etc. Then I needed the component owner to review it. He pointed out that while it complied with the CURRENT standards, it didn't use the newly developed APIs that were chosen for the upcoming release. I recoded it to use the upcoming standards, and some design changes the component owner wanted. This process involved rebasing against master at several times - any time someone else needed to look at it. The new feature required very minor tweaks to some existing classes. Since I had touched those classes, I needed to update those old classes to the new coding standards as well. Then the integrator pointed out I was missing the suites of unit tests, etc.

In all, a two hour patch submission turns out to be 80 hours when you do all of the "official developer" stuff like unit tests and all. So that's one distinction between a developer, who is on the hook for all of that stuff vs. a contributor who graciously submits code.

Please understand I'm in no way devaluing any contributions. For most open source projects, I contribute patches only. I now have a new appreciation for the committed developers who do the grinding work required to have my code integrated into a high quality project.

Ps - a LOT of what I mentioned above are tasks a non-programmer or newbie programmer can help with, if anyone is looking for ways to contribute to projects you enjoy or are interested in.

Re: "Rewarding" free software with non-free softwa by drunk_punk · 2014-01-23 16:13 · Score: 1

Nothing more than a nicely baited hook...

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Arker · 2014-01-23 16:17 · Score: 2

You're right, the FOSS community doesnt give two squirts about this.

Valve does, however, and they would very much like you to as well. If they can generate a little buzz and fool you into thinking you should be 'praising' them for this then their marketing folks have done their job.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:"Rewarding" free software with non-free softwar by mikesart · 2014-01-23 16:22 · Score: 1

Do you know what license they will be using for VOGL?

We're going to use the same license as APITrace: https://github.com/apitrace/apitrace/blob/master/LICENSE

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by Arker · 2014-01-23 17:11 · Score: 2

That's fine, no one is expecting them to publish the art portion of the game under a free license. It would be nice to get the actual code, but that is not the problem here either. What makes this a farce is the Digital Restrictions Management. Once I buy the game I should be able to run it without running another binary that I cannot audit or even relink and whose professed function - communicating with Valve and possibly preventing me from doing what I want with my computer if they do not send the right response - is inimical to my own interests.

If I paid for the program I should be able to install and run it on my gaming pc - which is quite deliberately NOT connectable to the internet. I will sneaker-net patches that are needed, but why on earth would I sneaker-net in a program whose only function will be to try to phone home over and over with obviously no response, and eventually effect a hostile take-over of my computer to prevent me from paying the game I bought and paid for?

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by exomondo · 2014-01-23 17:26 · Score: 1

open source != free software

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by petermgreen · 2014-01-23 17:43 · Score: 1

It is also open to debian maintainers

Hmm, the announcement on Debian-devel-announce only mentioned Debian Developers not Debian Maintainers.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by PrimaryConsult · 2014-01-23 17:52 · Score: 1

If your gaming PC does not connect to the internet, I'm guessing you don't do much multiplayer...

That said: Steam's DRM is the least evil of them all, since it lets you re-download your games on any PC, anywhere as long as you remember your password. The "freedom" to not care if my gigs of games are wiped out in a hard drive failure, to copy the steam directory as-is to any PC on the same architecture and being able to straight up play, and to arbitrarily delete game files if I temporarily need the space is far more important to me than the freedom to look at arbitrary code.

I've heard Stallman speak, and he does make sense: if a program isn't behaving the way you want, the freedom to go in and correct that is very important towards reducing your stress while making your tasks easier. However, games by their very nature are unnecessary for getting actual work done. If you don't agree with a game's licensing, etc, you will never be forced to use it. Conversely, how many people are forced to use Microsoft Office every day?

This is a "choose your battles" scenario. Either 1) let Valve attract more people to Debian for desktop use. They'll play their closed source games when bored, and use the open source productivity software to get actual work done. Or, 2) fight them on this, they take their ball and go home, and the people they would have attracted continue to regard the FOSS movement as a bunch of loons that like to look gift horses in the mouth.

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by petermgreen · 2014-01-23 17:53 · Score: 1

You missed DOTA 2, Day of defeat, team fortress classic and deathmatch classic (granted you might consider some of those part of the "half life/counterstrike series").

When I look on steam the "valve complete pack" currently costs £50. Of course if you wait for a sale you can probablly pick it up much cheaper than that.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by vux984 · 2014-01-23 18:21 · Score: 1

You missed DOTA 2, Day of defeat, team fortress classic and deathmatch classic (granted you might consider some of those part of the "half life/counterstrike series").

You don't exactly have to be a debian developer to get Dota2 or TFC for free.

The other two titles you mentioned are pretty minor, and usually obtained via a bundle anyway.

When I look on steam the "valve complete pack" currently costs Â£50.

And if you buy during any of the regular sales you can pick up everything Valve offers for 75% off... so ... Â£12.50 give or take.

Pay them by simon1tan · 2014-01-23 18:42 · Score: 1

Thanks Valve. Now we won't have any Debian developers because they will be too busy playing games. Why don't you give them something of worth.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by ButchDeLoria · 2014-01-23 19:10 · Score: 1

Buying an Xbox Telescreen is worse for freedom than proprietary software.

What a coincidence! by m.alessandrini · 2014-01-23 19:37 · Score: 1

Yesterday I just started developing a Debian-related software :-)

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Patch86 · 2014-01-23 21:08 · Score: 2

Let's see...

Better drivers.
Better hardware support.
Improved API sets.
Improved platform awareness in the big software houses.
Better cross platform and porting toolkits.
Larger userbase for the basic OS tools (which means more unintentional bug-hunting and more amateur developers).
More money sloshing around at Debian HQ / Canonical / whoever.

Sounds good to me. I don't believe anyone's going to be confiscating my existing FOSS stuff because of any of the above. Just more good things on top of what I already have.

And, most importantly for me, if Linux really does become a new home for PC gaming, I can finally get rid of my last pesky Windows dual boot. It is literally the only thing keeping me hanging on to the platform outside of work.

It's a trap by Warbothong · 2014-01-23 22:14 · Score: 1

SteamOS is a good thing, since it will reduce the amount of proprietary software used by many gamers. Eventually, Debian may reach the stage where SteamOS and Steam become obsolete, in which case those gamers can switch to regular Debian. However, DDs are *already* on regular Debian, so this would be a step backwards, for short-term gratification.

I don't want to deny DDs this gift, but they should be aware those bearing it may be Greeks.

The first thing that came to mind when I saw 'gratis licenses for Free Software devs' was BitKeeper, and we saw how well that turned out. Thankfully Valve make games, so if this ends up exploding then nothing important will be lost.

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Warbothong · 2014-01-23 22:16 · Score: 1

why the hell should the open source community praise Valve for bringing proprietrary software to its most famous platform?

Because if anything is going to bring users to Linux it'll be games. Games are what tie me to Windows, and I'd be more interested in testing Wine on my existing library if I can get my newest games out of the (proverbial) box on Linux.

So this offer might get some Debian developers to switch to Linux?

Typo in link by UPi · 2014-01-23 23:00 · Score: 1

The link in the article points to https://lists.debian.org/debia...

The correct link is https://lists.debian.org/debia...

Not that anyone here would ever rtfa.. :)

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by allcoolnameswheretak · 2014-01-23 23:20 · Score: 1

Poo, poo Ubuntu dev didn't get late Chweesmas plesent from Valve.

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by Arker · 2014-01-24 00:07 · Score: 1

"If your gaming PC does not connect to the internet, I'm guessing you don't do much multiplayer..."

Not recently but no, I've done plenty of multiplayer this way. You can hook up a LAN with no WAN you know.

"That said: Steam's DRM is the least evil of them all,"

And even if that's true it's still by your own admission evil.

"The "freedom" to not care if my gigs of games are wiped out in a hard drive failure, to copy the steam directory as-is to any PC on the same architecture and being able to straight up play, and to arbitrarily delete game files if I temporarily need the space is far more important to me than the freedom to look at arbitrary code."

The first and last of these things I can do with any game I have purchased, either via a physical disk or via a persistent login/download link from e.g. shrapnel. The middle one is the only one that is at all unique and it doesnt seem important at all in context of the DRM.

"This is a "choose your battles" scenario. Either 1) let Valve attract more people to Debian for desktop use. They'll play their closed source games when bored, and use the open source productivity software to get actual work done. Or, 2) fight them on this, they take their ball and go home, and the people they would have attracted continue to regard the FOSS movement as a bunch of loons that like to look gift horses in the mouth."

I think that is a false dichotomy. Of course Valve is welcome to use Debian here if they wish. It's Free Software. I never objected to them using it. I object to bullshit pronouncements about how the Free Software community somehow is or should be grateful to Valve for this, as if they were doing us a favor. This is no favor. Valve is simply doing what is best for their business *as they should be doing* but that is not something we should praise or be impressed with, that is just normal business.

And if "attracting more people" is cause for diluting the mission of Debian then it will be a bad, not a good thing. The ifs in the previous sentence will be optimised out by any decent compiler.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Valve vote stacking? by Pav · 2014-01-24 00:10 · Score: 1, Funny

So this is basically about Valve stacking the Debian voting process?

Re:Valve vote stacking? by Pav · 2014-01-24 13:35 · Score: 1

That's a weak argument - I'd expect better on a nerd site. It's irrelevant if they're "corruptible" or not. Honourable Uncle Pete is probably easier and cheaper to buy... "These guys are decent because their helping me out!". Used car salesmen are infamous for that one.
Re:Valve vote stacking? by petermgreen · 2014-01-25 14:40 · Score: 1

I suspect this move will win them some favour among debian developers, maybe it will get a few patches accepted quicker or make some debian developers more likely to consider taking a job working for them. I find it highly unlikely that it would win them enough favour to have any signficant impact on the project as a whole. The hard line "I only use FOSS" types aren't going to be swayed by a few "free as in beer" games.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register

Re:Switch to Debian Distro, The by Khyber · 2014-01-24 00:12 · Score: 1

Debian is shit compared to other Distros that aren't Debian-based.

I have better luck gaming under Gentoo than any Debian-based flavor of Linux OSes.

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by Khyber · 2014-01-24 00:13 · Score: 1

I'm not an Ubuntu Dev. I have standards. Ubuntu does not.

But you're just an ignorant assumptive piece of shit, looking at your comment history.

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by Pav · 2014-01-24 00:17 · Score: 1

It will corrupt the community... why can't you see that? Debian Developers have voting rights in a democratic community, and Valve is buying votes just the same as if paper bags were being passed under desks. Perhaps that's not Valves intention, but if they don't own Debian they will when all the extra gamer/developers sign up for Debian Developer status to get their kickbacks.

Re:Now all we need is rolling release by Trepidity · 2014-01-24 00:35 · Score: 3, Interesting

No, Debian unstable is equivalent to a nightly build. At times it is usable, but many times it is broken so bad that you cannot even install it.

No, breaking changes are tested in experimental first. Unstable is usable by an end-user absent some really rare breakage. I've been using it as a regular user who isn't any kind of Debian developer as my desktop system for 10 years.

--
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10

I don't get it anyhow by aliquis · 2014-01-24 00:43 · Score: 1

I've ran Steam in OpenSUSE and do so in Fedora.

I know their OS is based on Debian but I don't really see why I should use their OS. I assume popular performance tweaks are likely to show up in other distributions too.

I don't see what's all that special with Debian as far as Linux + GNU + extras development go.

Codecs by gd2shoe · 2014-01-24 01:22 · Score: 1

The codecs (etc) are avoided because Debian doesn't want to deal with liability or licences. Steam doesn't present that particular problem. The intellectual property owner is actively contributing the software.

Yes, it's non-free, and it needs to be in the appropriate repo. But this isn't a "destroy the project, bring on the wrath of **** **, and sue everybody into oblivion" level of non-free.

(Ubuntu, on the other hand, wants more than just to be a better Debian. They've got a specific vision of where Linux ought to go, and they're trying to push into new territory. They just liked Debian as a starting point, that's all.)

--
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.

Re:last straw by Ash+Vince · 2014-01-24 01:23 · Score: 1

I didn't see or hear an auto-playing ad. But then I use the Flashblock extension for Firefox, so advertisers have to keep it static to reach me.

Whereas I actually contribute to slashdot's running costs by subscribing so I get to turn off ads across the board :)

--
I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.

Re:So only a small subset of people get this by allcoolnameswheretak · 2014-01-24 02:07 · Score: 1

I find your lack of humor disturbing.

Okay, let me make up for poking fun of you by providing some constructive criticism of your original comment.
You know, 98% of stories on Slashdot -or stuff I read in practically any news source, for that matter- doesn't really apply to me and has no impact on my life. I think this is a pretty obvious thing. Yet it doesn't diminish the wish and the value of staying informed about things, because it's good not to be an ignorant, assumptive piece of shit about stuff.

Funny that I have to explain this to you, but there it is.

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by tepples · 2014-01-24 02:53 · Score: 1

If your gaming PC does not connect to the internet, I'm guessing you don't do much multiplayer...

I don't see how not.
Step 1: Connect PC's HDMI, DVI, or VGA output to the HDMI or VGA input of a television.
Step 2: If DVI or VGA was used, connect PC's output to the audio input of a television or stereo system.
Step 3: Connect two to four wired Xbox 360 controllers, an Xbox 360 PC wireless receiver, or other USB game controllers to the PC.
Step 4: Start game and choose single-screen multiplayer mode.

If you don't agree with a game's licensing, etc, you will never be forced to use it.

I was forced to use specific computer games in school, many of them published by MECC.

Re:Now all we need is rolling release by Zebedeu · 2014-01-24 03:54 · Score: 1

I tried being on unstable for a while, and it's actually pretty stable. In fact, I have no complaints at all besides the too-frequent updates, which was what eventually drove me back to testing.

That, and the fact that things in Gnome seemingly kept breaking, only to find out later that it was intentional and part of Gnome's strategy to slowly make their desktop experience less and less usable.
I fixed that by moving to KDE, which improved considerably since I last tried it years ago.

Linux viruses ? by lord_rob+the+only+on · 2014-01-24 05:21 · Score: 1

If Steam for Linux becomes popular, maybe more users will use Linux and it will then attract malware programmers.
Let's hope we won't have a new array Debian-powered botnets.

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by PrimaryConsult · 2014-01-24 05:57 · Score: 1

The first and last of these things I can do with any game I have purchased, either via a physical disk or via a persistent login/download link from e.g. shrapnel. The middle one is the only one that is at all unique and it doesnt seem important at all in context of the DRM.

Disk is useless if lost, damaged, or 1000 miles away in a cabinet while you're on a business trip. The middle one is very useful if you want to play games on a PC in a computer lab or library. Back in my college days, being able to plug an external drive into a lab PC and play counterstrike was quite handy for killing time between classes. And the steam DRM is basically: it needs to phone home about once a month. So once a month it uses about 2 megabytes of bandwidth for DRM, big friggin deal. It's akin to putting a velvet rope up to keep people from walking into unauthorized areas.

I object to bullshit pronouncements about how the Free Software community somehow is or should be grateful to Valve for this, as if they were doing us a favor.

When you put it that way (key being Free Software community) I do agree. However, as a member of the Linux community, I am grateful, because gaming is the *LAST* thing keeping Windows on my primary desktop. If Steam's entire catalog could run natively on Linux, I would only need windows for two games. And at that point, it becomes time-effective for me to investigate getting wine to work.

And if "attracting more people" is cause for diluting the mission of Debian then it will be a bad, not a good thing. The ifs in the previous sentence will be optimised out by any decent compiler.

I don't see how what Valve is doing is diluting the mission of Debian at all, at least not any more than the existence of the non-free repository. A key reason Debian is well known in the Linux community is because whatever people want/need to use can be easily used. What makes them special compared to most others is that Debian defaults to a free configuration. If Debian *didn't* play ball with binary blob distributors, I suspect it would be just as well known as these distros.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here... my line of thinking falls closer to the "Open Source Software" camp than the "Free Software" camp...

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by Arker · 2014-01-24 08:29 · Score: 1

"Back in my college days, being able to plug an external drive into a lab PC and play counterstrike was quite handy for killing time between classes."

But I have done that myself on a number of occasions. No STEAM needed.

"And the steam DRM is basically: it needs to phone home about once a month. So once a month it uses about 2 megabytes of bandwidth for DRM, big friggin deal."

It's sending 2 megabytes a month, I have no way of knowing exactly what is in that 2 megabytes, I cannot audit it, I cannot even look at the code (let alone modify it, not even a one-line edit so it will link with my kernel) and if I prevent this snitch from making it's call I will be deprived of the quiet enjoyment of a product I have bought and paid for, and to you this is no big deal?

Your definition of a big deal and mine appear to have parted ways a LONG ways back. To me that is a VERY big deal. If any company I did business with proposed a system like that to me they would be lucky to get one brief chance to back straight down and apologize before I cut all ties, permanently, and call up my lawyer to suss out our options for a lawsuit.

"I don't see how what Valve is doing is diluting the mission of Debian at all"

Debian's mission is, to boil it down just a little, to be the exact opposite of DRM. You still dont understand how bringing in new people that think STEAM DRM is just wonderful could compromise that mission?

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Arker · 2014-01-24 08:47 · Score: 1

"I would love to move to a FOSS operating system if I could still play my proprietary games on it. Valve may actually give me a chance."

You think you need Valve to give you WINE? How strange.

The game run through WINE the same whether you set it up yourself of pay valve to do it for you. But if you let them do it, they get control of your computer in the deal.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:I Still Don't Understand by Arker · 2014-01-24 08:49 · Score: 1

"Because Debian is about the only Linux distro that doesn't suck giant sweaty gorilla balls."

Nonsense. Slackware is still going strong, and all other distributions are non-standard variants of it.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:Free Textures Foundation? Free Meshes Foundatio by PrimaryConsult · 2014-01-24 08:53 · Score: 1

Since you seem to have a habit of cutting out half my comments to distort their meaning, and failing to address those parts which you cut out, I can only assume you are incapable of a proper debate. I bid you adieu...

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Microlith · 2014-01-24 16:21 · Score: 1

You think you need Valve to give you WINE? How strange.

No, that's just you not reading me right. I explicitly said that I'd be more interested in testing Wine on my existing library, i.e. rather than avoiding it I would actually make the attempt.

if you let them do it, they get control of your computer in the deal.

At no point is Valve in control of my computer, even if they delivered Wine to me.

Re:The FOSS community is praising this move? by Arker · 2014-01-24 18:34 · Score: 1

"At no point is Valve in control of my computer, even if they delivered Wine to me."

Then how do you think they are able to enforce the restrictions?

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Re:Now all we need is rolling release by Raenex · 2014-01-25 03:52 · Score: 1

I tried being on unstable for a while, and it's actually pretty stable. In fact, I have no complaints at all besides the too-frequent updates, which was what eventually drove me back to testing.

I went in the opposite direction and moved from testing to unstable. The problem with testing is that fixed bugs were often held up for months for whatever reason (like some architecture I don't care about is broken). Then there's the freeze as stable is being prepared.

Also, you don't have to take the updates to unstable as they come out. I just update every now and then as required or when the mood strikes me.

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by petermgreen · 2014-01-27 21:37 · Score: 1

edit: according to the followup on debian-devel DMs are in despite the original announcement only mentioning DDs.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register

Re:What's required to be recognised as a Debian de by petermgreen · 2014-01-27 21:57 · Score: 1

I believe you typically also have to have been a DM (Debian Maintainer) for at least 6 months prior.

It's possible to become a DD without being a DM first. Of course you will have to demonstrate significant contributions to Debian in some other way.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register

Slashdot Mirror

Valve Offers Free Subscription To Debian Developers: Paying It Forward

131 of 205 comments (clear)