No they're not necessarily against open-source per se but they ARE against what it stands for. In their view, OSS and free-market principles are not reconcilable. It's not the truth, but tell that to their lawyers.
My view is this: OSS is a bit too close to communism for the comfort of most old-school capitalists. The ones control the large corporations, and the money...
This is a decent idea, but I'm not too sure how it would actually pan out. Lawyers are a finicky bunch, but that's not their fault - law is very finicky.
Starting small, with sites such as this, is probably the best idea.
No, I agree with his ideals, actually. But there's a such thing as tact. And there's a such things as compromise. Free software wouldn't be where it is now if it weren't for ESR. It'd still be a fringe movement. ESR knows how to talk to the people who have the money. And in spite of RMS's ideals, it's the money that gets the wheels moving.
RMS has done a lot, but he is ultimately not the reason it is going mainstream. One of them, yes. THE? No.
For the record, I do admire ESR standing up for his beliefs and stuff. I don't knock that. I wish I were half that idealistic. But... life, at least for me, isn't that way...
That's not open source. That's an open API. There's still an elite cabal of people (lawyers) who are the only ones (in most cases) that put the stuff together and submit it. In order to do most things, one must go through a lawyer.
This gives us access a little more to the internals. Things must go through the kernel API now, instead of the userspace API. It's the difference between a libc call and a system call.
Maybe it's just human. There's an old saying that 80 percent of the people are followers and 20 percent are leaders. Maybe the 80 percent that are followers are just followers, and maybe that's the natural order of things.
The only real problem comes when one person decides that he or she is a leader, and that everyone else must be a follower...
I'm realizing more and more that people are different, and what works for me may not work for them. For example, I find going to the mall to be distasteful, at this point in time. Others don't. And there's nothing wrong with that. I find certain things (DeCSS fiasco, for one) to be morally unconscionable. I'm moved to do something about it. Others aren't. Nothing wrong with that, either, just puts the onus on me to do what I can about it.
So, in that way, this is an open government. We're free to be ourselves, for the most part, even if it means that we don't care. But those who *do* care should act.
Speak for yourself, Troll. I have a lot of regard for what Stallman has done, but I've always thought he was a little extreme and have taken a little softer approach to the whole thing.
It's obvious that the Open-Source (free-software) community is under attack from those who don't understand it and would like to kill it. This is probably the best way for us to meet this challenge - leveraging the one thing that makes us different (and arguably nimbler and better) than our closed-source nemeses.
Not all of us are lawyers, and that's OK. When it comes to technical issues, you have the techies to make the cases, and the lawyers to put them into formats that the courts will accept and that could possibly win.
I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that this marks a turning point for free software. Maybe now we can mount competent defenses/offenses against the large corporations who would stifle/censor us.
I thought that, being a government agency, unless there was some kind of national security motivation, that software generated by them must be put in the public domain.
That's how it is when I worked at the Bonneville Power Administration. I got to take home all the code I worked on, because it was done on goverment dime.
I second that. I've been running Linux for several years and have only seen... maybe two... crashes. And those were all due to hardware failures.
My advice to the original poster: If you think that the window manager and OS are one and the same... go back to windows. Linux will hold no advantage for you...
BSDI, maybe. But you see what happens when you just try to create DRIVERS for NT...
Don't forget, computers in space can (but not necessarily always do) mean the difference between life and death. "open that airlock... damn! bluescreen!
And you really think that if too many people stopped buying from corporations that the government wouldn't find some way to force the issue?
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Re:Was the Internet really designed to be free?
on
Politics Follows Code
·
· Score: 3
The Internet was designed in order to withstand physical and military assaults of staggering proportions. I think that the community and freedom of the net was a wholly unexpected consequence.
but it is true, that the net does interpret censorship, among other things, as damage, and routes around it.
You have just hit upon the downside of a capitalistic society. I am not quite a socialist or anything like that, but I am definitely not a capitalist either. Or at least I'm not a corporatist.
The large corporations tend to drive the economy of the nation. It would be very easy for a few companies acting in concert to cause serious damage to this country's (and the world's, for that matter) economy. The way I see it, lawmakers really don't have much *choice* but to go along with them most of the time. What are they going to do? Even if they're not getting a cent, all the corporations have to do is convince them that the economy will fail because they don't get their way, and boom... they get their way.
The problem here is the notion of corporations in the first place, the centralization of ecomonic power into a few very large entities, and the fact that the government allows this to happen. The corporations need to be toppled and a new economy based on fair trade and free market (which I believe has NOTHING to do with corporations) built. Only then will we be able to solve these kinds of problems.
This isn't about copyright... it's about *control*. Personally, I am very active against the DVD CCA, and I am doing everything I can to ensure that they FAIL. But I am not a pirate, and I frown on anyone who is. I just believe that if I purchase content I should be allowed to listen to it anywhere and in any way I choose.
You're at least partially misrepresenting the issue. I may never view DVDs on Linux. I just want the freedom to. I may never do a lot of things, but if they win this, believe me, they'll just come down on us harder and harder until we need a license to breathe.
Slashdot Mirror
You have to make an effort but Linux can be pretty much as secure as OpenBSD. It's just usually shipped in a wide-open state.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
No they're not necessarily against open-source per se but they ARE against what it stands for. In their view, OSS and free-market principles are not reconcilable. It's not the truth, but tell that to their lawyers.
My view is this: OSS is a bit too close to communism for the comfort of most old-school capitalists. The ones control the large corporations, and the money...
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Bingo.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
But in this case... the documentation actually determines how well the code runs.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Yup, that was a typo. I meant RMS.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
That has nothing to do with this!
For those of you that don't follow the link, that stands for "North American Man Boy Love Association". Perv.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
This is a decent idea, but I'm not too sure how it would actually pan out. Lawyers are a finicky bunch, but that's not their fault - law is very finicky.
Starting small, with sites such as this, is probably the best idea.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
No, I agree with his ideals, actually. But there's a such thing as tact. And there's a such things as compromise. Free software wouldn't be where it is now if it weren't for ESR. It'd still be a fringe movement. ESR knows how to talk to the people who have the money. And in spite of RMS's ideals, it's the money that gets the wheels moving.
RMS has done a lot, but he is ultimately not the reason it is going mainstream. One of them, yes. THE? No.
For the record, I do admire ESR standing up for his beliefs and stuff. I don't knock that. I wish I were half that idealistic. But... life, at least for me, isn't that way...
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
That's not open source. That's an open API. There's still an elite cabal of people (lawyers) who are the only ones (in most cases) that put the stuff together and submit it. In order to do most things, one must go through a lawyer.
This gives us access a little more to the internals. Things must go through the kernel API now, instead of the userspace API. It's the difference between a libc call and a system call.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Maybe it's just human. There's an old saying that 80 percent of the people are followers and 20 percent are leaders. Maybe the 80 percent that are followers are just followers, and maybe that's the natural order of things.
The only real problem comes when one person decides that he or she is a leader, and that everyone else must be a follower...
I'm realizing more and more that people are different, and what works for me may not work for them. For example, I find going to the mall to be distasteful, at this point in time. Others don't. And there's nothing wrong with that. I find certain things (DeCSS fiasco, for one) to be morally unconscionable. I'm moved to do something about it. Others aren't. Nothing wrong with that, either, just puts the onus on me to do what I can about it.
So, in that way, this is an open government. We're free to be ourselves, for the most part, even if it means that we don't care. But those who *do* care should act.
I'll get off my soapbox now.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Speak for yourself, Troll. I have a lot of regard for what Stallman has done, but I've always thought he was a little extreme and have taken a little softer approach to the whole thing.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
This is all fine and good. I've joined EFF, I've joined the ACLU, and I put my considerable moral support behind all of this...
But what else do you suggest?
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Now this is a good idea.
It's obvious that the Open-Source (free-software) community is under attack from those who don't understand it and would like to kill it. This is probably the best way for us to meet this challenge - leveraging the one thing that makes us different (and arguably nimbler and better) than our closed-source nemeses.
Not all of us are lawyers, and that's OK. When it comes to technical issues, you have the techies to make the cases, and the lawyers to put them into formats that the courts will accept and that could possibly win.
I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that this marks a turning point for free software. Maybe now we can mount competent defenses/offenses against the large corporations who would stifle/censor us.
Kudos.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
No, he said it was GPLed. Which means it is not in the public domain.
You have to claim a copyright on something to put it under a license. Public domain is by definition a forfeiture of any rights under copyright law.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
I meant radiation hardened, of course.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
I thought that, being a government agency, unless there was some kind of national security motivation, that software generated by them must be put in the public domain.
That's how it is when I worked at the Bonneville Power Administration. I got to take home all the code I worked on, because it was done on goverment dime.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
I second that. I've been running Linux for several years and have only seen... maybe two... crashes. And those were all due to hardware failures.
My advice to the original poster: If you think that the window manager and OS are one and the same... go back to windows. Linux will hold no advantage for you...
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
BSDI, maybe. But you see what happens when you just try to create DRIVERS for NT...
Don't forget, computers in space can (but not necessarily always do) mean the difference between life and death. "open that airlock... damn! bluescreen!
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Combine Linux with the low power requirements of the Crusoe and... woohoo! perfect space application. No support needed and very little power.
Microsoft's new slogan should be "Houston, we have a problem"...
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
I don't have an HR. I'm an independent contractor. At least I put my money where my mouth is.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
Business speech is just as protected as political speech. It's things like this that make me *very* angry.
Another manifestation of the same attitude that makes MPAA think it's invulnerable.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
And you really think that if too many people stopped buying from corporations that the government wouldn't find some way to force the issue?
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
The Internet was designed in order to withstand physical and military assaults of staggering proportions. I think that the community and freedom of the net was a wholly unexpected consequence.
but it is true, that the net does interpret censorship, among other things, as damage, and routes around it.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
You have just hit upon the downside of a capitalistic society. I am not quite a socialist or anything like that, but I am definitely not a capitalist either. Or at least I'm not a corporatist.
The large corporations tend to drive the economy of the nation. It would be very easy for a few companies acting in concert to cause serious damage to this country's (and the world's, for that matter) economy. The way I see it, lawmakers really don't have much *choice* but to go along with them most of the time. What are they going to do? Even if they're not getting a cent, all the corporations have to do is convince them that the economy will fail because they don't get their way, and boom... they get their way.
The problem here is the notion of corporations in the first place, the centralization of ecomonic power into a few very large entities, and the fact that the government allows this to happen. The corporations need to be toppled and a new economy based on fair trade and free market (which I believe has NOTHING to do with corporations) built. Only then will we be able to solve these kinds of problems.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
This isn't about copyright... it's about *control*. Personally, I am very active against the DVD CCA, and I am doing everything I can to ensure that they FAIL. But I am not a pirate, and I frown on anyone who is. I just believe that if I purchase content I should be allowed to listen to it anywhere and in any way I choose.
You're at least partially misrepresenting the issue. I may never view DVDs on Linux. I just want the freedom to. I may never do a lot of things, but if they win this, believe me, they'll just come down on us harder and harder until we need a license to breathe.
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.