But what if something obscure in the program happens to not work. If they say it works on 2000 they'd have to support it. This isn't MS screwing anyone, this is just common sense.
None of that is a reason why I shouldn't be allowed to. Now a new version of the kernal could break support for old versions of binary modules, that's absolutely fine, so long as I'm allowed to add it back when i compile my own kernal of course.
Then presumably you have no problems with (for instance) Windows Genuine Advantage.
Or DRM.
After all, that's just a creator dictating what you do.
You'd presumably also support non-DRM music being banned from being played on either OS, it might be pirated after all...
The issue is that, the point of linux is to be unrestricted in terms of how I use it. There's no reason to stop me using binary modules. None. If you don't want to support it, don't sign a contract saying you have to support it.
For me it would be the exact opposite. I don't get windows problems or if I do there's 50,000 alternative programs available to do the thing I want to do.
Bear in mind the phrase I used above would only be directed to standard windows users who wouldn't have the faintest clue what it is "make" would do.
Seriously, there should be no "bans" of any code from Linux. That defeats the entire point. Banning people from loading their own kernal modules because YOU think there may be some weird legal issue is exactly the same as making your media player play only DRM files.
This should be a short topic, Linus' reply (which if you haven't read you should) should finish the entire conversation right here, it's a stupid and petty toys out of the pram act and I'm glad he shot it down.
Hopefully if it somehow does make it into the trunk, there will be very quickly versions with it removed releases as we go forward too because I don't think the wider community will have any truck with this at all.
The law in europe DOESN'T make it an offence for them to buy it, but for the retailer to sell it.
And once again, for all the posturing, it's American games that are cut and european ones that are not. So in this case the free speech law has failed in spectaular fashion.
Actually there is PRECISELY that restriction, articles deemed indecent can be legally restricted, as much porn is.
Plus you, as so many have it ass backwards. If they're legally restricted parents CAN decided whether their children get them. If the kids are allowed to buy them you've taken that choice away from the parents.
I didn't realise that had happened (in case anyone wonders we're talking about the game known as Bully). That said, you can still buy it from Game, Gamestation, Tesco and 15,000 others, uncut.
True, no even remotely credible source here ever suggests a complete ban, just the Daily Mail, which helps. And also there are no stores that refuse to carry 18 rated games like the problems they have with AO in the US (which probably leads to more cuts than the lack of legal enforcement tbh)
And indeed, the USA's current laws mean games like San Andreas and Indigo Properchy are only available to the US in cut versions, where in the UK where they carried legal 18 and 15 ratings respectively they're available unmolested.
If games would shut the hell up with unconstitutional for 2 seconds they might realise that allowing the adult themed games to be legally protected is in everyone's best interest. The law still allows a parent or guardian to buy for their kid and it's them, rather than anyone else who should make that choice.
Slashdot Mirror
My Linux CD includes the bible in PDF!
Because if they allow it to install people will expect support.
You can't say unsupported, it doesn't work these days.
It happens to be fine yes.
But what if something obscure in the program happens to not work. If they say it works on 2000 they'd have to support it. This isn't MS screwing anyone, this is just common sense.
Then you don't use them.
None of that is a reason why I shouldn't be allowed to. Now a new version of the kernal could break support for old versions of binary modules, that's absolutely fine, so long as I'm allowed to add it back when i compile my own kernal of course.
Then presumably you have no problems with (for instance) Windows Genuine Advantage.
Or DRM.
After all, that's just a creator dictating what you do.
You'd presumably also support non-DRM music being banned from being played on either OS, it might be pirated after all...
The issue is that, the point of linux is to be unrestricted in terms of how I use it. There's no reason to stop me using binary modules. None. If you don't want to support it, don't sign a contract saying you have to support it.
A lot of lawyers consider deCSS and all Mp3s illegal too.
Doesn't mean my OS should act as a policemen, in fact that's precisely WHY a lot of people switch TO linux, because it doesn't do that.
Fair enough, you don't have to run proprietary drivers.
But in a supposedly "open" OS, why the hell should you STOP me doing so if I wish.
For me it would be the exact opposite. I don't get windows problems or if I do there's 50,000 alternative programs available to do the thing I want to do.
Bear in mind the phrase I used above would only be directed to standard windows users who wouldn't have the faintest clue what it is "make" would do.
This might get flamebaited but I promise it isn't meant that way.
I always say "Linux is free, if your time is worthless" (I really should say OSS instead of Linux there of course)
I don't mean that as an arguement against it, but the things that make it damned useful don't come for "free" unless you have unlimited time.
I actually don't run Linux on the desktop, but if I did it would be for the same reason I DO run windows more.
"It runs the software I need to use".
The thing is, this patch would remove choice. You want a 100% code visible system now, make one, go ahead. I won't stop you.
But this patch would stop me using binary modules if that's what I needed to do something I want to do, for no reason other than pure pettyness.
Seriously, there should be no "bans" of any code from Linux. That defeats the entire point. Banning people from loading their own kernal modules because YOU think there may be some weird legal issue is exactly the same as making your media player play only DRM files.
This should be a short topic, Linus' reply (which if you haven't read you should) should finish the entire conversation right here, it's a stupid and petty toys out of the pram act and I'm glad he shot it down.
Hopefully if it somehow does make it into the trunk, there will be very quickly versions with it removed releases as we go forward too because I don't think the wider community will have any truck with this at all.
There's plenty of 2d doing very well on XBLA.
Geometary Wars and the massively superb Assault Force for example.
Once again you misunderstand.
The law in europe DOESN'T make it an offence for them to buy it, but for the retailer to sell it.
And once again, for all the posturing, it's American games that are cut and european ones that are not. So in this case the free speech law has failed in spectaular fashion.
Oh course for all your hillarious mostly inaccurate racism, you've missed the central point.
Your laws mean games are cut for America but not for Europe.
Who's got the "free speech" again?
And you'd be against changing any law? Interesting. Good thing they didn't enshrine slavery in the constitution isn't it.
Actually there is PRECISELY that restriction, articles deemed indecent can be legally restricted, as much porn is.
Plus you, as so many have it ass backwards. If they're legally restricted parents CAN decided whether their children get them. If the kids are allowed to buy them you've taken that choice away from the parents.
Thanks for entirely proving my point with a kneejerk irrelevent comparison.
By the way, I don't believe the constitution has anything to say about stealing.
I didn't realise that had happened (in case anyone wonders we're talking about the game known as Bully). That said, you can still buy it from Game, Gamestation, Tesco and 15,000 others, uncut.
True, no even remotely credible source here ever suggests a complete ban, just the Daily Mail, which helps. And also there are no stores that refuse to carry 18 rated games like the problems they have with AO in the US (which probably leads to more cuts than the lack of legal enforcement tbh)
And indeed, the USA's current laws mean games like San Andreas and Indigo Properchy are only available to the US in cut versions, where in the UK where they carried legal 18 and 15 ratings respectively they're available unmolested.
If games would shut the hell up with unconstitutional for 2 seconds they might realise that allowing the adult themed games to be legally protected is in everyone's best interest. The law still allows a parent or guardian to buy for their kid and it's them, rather than anyone else who should make that choice.
Judging by some of the driving I've seen, I think they already did.
Bad idea to use a story from 2005 that says people were still buying casettes, if in smaller quantities, even then.
You seriously think the average consumer stopped buying tapes and LPs in 1985?
Super.
It's just a shame we weren't talking about you but instead the original guy I replied to before the mouthbreather brigade leapt in.
Digital TV doesn't make a single TV obsolete. You don't need a new TV for digital any more than you did for VHS or for NES.
Well congratulations.
But if you think you're the norm you're crazy.