Blacklisting your MAC probably works for most abusers, but it's still a poor solution because you might get someone who knows how to run a MAC changer.
Google does let you index block just the News bot without blocking Search; you just have to setup different rules for the "Googlebot" and the "Googlebot-News" useragent. (It's the same bot, but it complies with both rules if they're defined).
If there is ANYONE that doesn't believe there are serious GPL zealots in the top ranks of the code devs you obviously haven't been paying attention. hell look at how VLC can't be offered on the iPad because a SINGLE dev refused to allow it to be anywhere that didn't "respect the GPL".
I don't get your point; a person was infringing on his copyright. Does this mean you support copyright infringement?
This example has nothing to do with "allowing" Steam or not; in that case, the guy's work was being illegally distributed. In this case, there's nothing of a kind. It's completely different.
Do you have any evidence of the X11, networking or other infrastruture developers making changes and breaking a single application regularly? Because that's a grave accusation to make.
Personally i think Gabe drank too much of the koolaid and thinks the Linux devs will be nice to him, when reality they are gonna fuck him HARD because Steam is DRM and they HATE DRM and anything not GPL
As evidenced by the fact that almost all distros distribute non-free software, some going as far as helping such developers sell it?
They don't distribute squat - people download what they want from their sites.
Making it publicly available is one way of distributing. Otherwise, making proprietary software available on P2P networks wouldn't be copyright infringement.
Also, if you look at the GNU non-endorsements page, in a lot of cases, they say things like 'there's no clear policy about what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are included in Linux, the kernel.... Of course, with no firm policy in place, there might be other nonfree software included that we missed.' Translation: we can't tell whether they are compliant or not, so we're simply going to assume that they're not.
Well, of course. It'd be strange if they decided otherwise. Endorsing means they are claiming that the distro is purely free software; they can hardly claim that honestly if they can't assert that is it true, can they? That'd almost be fraud!
It'd be like a grocery shop saying "this product may or may not have sugar; since we can't tell, we're going to call it 'sugar-free'".
One new addition to that page is Canaima GNU/Linux - made by Venezuela's government to distribute w/ computers Which is a hoot, given how big a fan RMS is of Hugo Chavez. Somehow, Comrade Hugo forgot to get RMS's endorsement for the distribution his minions made, or else, they'd have left out that nasty 'Install non-free software' in the main menu.
Well, I agree with you that the FSF doesn't really develop software; I just think that accusing them of such is like accusing NASA of not building PCs. It's simply not the purpose of the organization.
a bunch of guys who go around telling us all thatOpen Source is evil
Where have they done that? RMS' essay clearly says otherwise: "We in the free software movement don't think of the open source camp as an enemy".
They just don't matter, because nothing the do or advocate now has any impact on the industry.
You could say the same about social movements which for decades - sometimes centuries - have been composed of a small core of members who in their lifetimes changed nothing, yet are now the prevalent views. For example, the view that women are not property of their fathers and husbands. Certain groups have been arguing that since at least the Ancient Greece, yet it only became common very recently.
I think you are confusing thing because you're thinking of the FSF as an individual organization. The FSF is just an advocacy wing, and they didn't even contribute the license or the model.
The wing of the Free Software movement which did contribute stuff is GNU, which has projects like: the GPL, GCC (until recently, the only "real" C/C++ compiler), Bash, Gnome, coreutils, GNU grep, screen, emacs, etc.
Accusing the FSF of not contributing anything makes no sense, because that's just the way they're organized. It's like accusing Samuel Clemens of having wrote nothing of importance because he signed Mark Twain in his novels.
Don't be ridiculous. Trisquel, the distro that's being endorsed, uses APT and you can just stick any Ubuntu-compatible repository into the sources list - like e.g. Skype's (and the distro comes with tools for that, like add-apt-repository) - and install proprietary software.
Debian, Red Hat, etc are not endorsed because they actually distribute themselves non-free software. Hell, one of the Debian repositories is called just that!
I'm not saying I follow their path - I'm a Debian fan, and I do have contrib and non-free packages installed - but what you said is just wrong.
As usual, you want Debian. Install whatever you want, while keeping a clear separation from the non-proprietary ("main"), the proprietary ("non-free") and the non-proprietary which depend on proprietary software ("contrib"). By default, only "main" is enabled.
Regarding Flash, have you tried Gnash? It mostly works, nowadays (much like Flash, but in different ways).
As a Portuguese, I can tell you: we don't. The fact that much of the country has a real animosity against Spanish people doesn't help, but even descendants of Galicians like me and much of my family consider them different languages and cultures. I believe this is more blurry in the north near the border, though (there's also some rivalry between them and the south. And people ask why the EU integration dream is so hard to achieve!)
Yeap, clearly all software that nobody in the open source community uses anymore. It's all irrelevant.
Oh, I forgot the GNU GPL. It's just the license that governs about half of all the free and open source projects, including small stuff like Linux. Completely irrelevant.
My paycheck from developing AGPL licensed code must be an illusion, then.
RMS' ideology just eliminates jobs that depending on rewriting the wheel. New code still has to be written, and there's plenty of work and money to those who are willing to write it.
Not at all. I made a typing mistake; parent (and GP) didn't - they wrote the same word three times with the wrong spelling.
And I wouldn't be playing "spelling nazi" for any word, it's just that I dislike how that word - which happens to describe me and my fellow countrymen - gets consistently misused.
And in any case, I'm not trying to prove anything about my language skills - I'm well aware of my poor command of English. I just consider the usage of a spell checker to be basic etiquette on the Web.
Slashdot Mirror
Blacklisting your MAC probably works for most abusers, but it's still a poor solution because you might get someone who knows how to run a MAC changer.
No, your experience will suck if you have a crappy router and/or don't flash it with a decent firmware.
Good routers will let prioritize your traffic over the other connections.
That didn't stop me from enjoying Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition (ahem).
They opted-in when they configured their servers to provide content to Googlebot.
You can configure robots.txt to block Google News and not Search, Google has two different user-agents just for that.
They're just rent seeking, that's all.
Google does let you index block just the News bot without blocking Search; you just have to setup different rules for the "Googlebot" and the "Googlebot-News" useragent. (It's the same bot, but it complies with both rules if they're defined).
If there is ANYONE that doesn't believe there are serious GPL zealots in the top ranks of the code devs you obviously haven't been paying attention. hell look at how VLC can't be offered on the iPad because a SINGLE dev refused to allow it to be anywhere that didn't "respect the GPL".
I don't get your point; a person was infringing on his copyright. Does this mean you support copyright infringement?
This example has nothing to do with "allowing" Steam or not; in that case, the guy's work was being illegally distributed. In this case, there's nothing of a kind. It's completely different.
Do you have any evidence of the X11, networking or other infrastruture developers making changes and breaking a single application regularly? Because that's a grave accusation to make.
Personally i think Gabe drank too much of the koolaid and thinks the Linux devs will be nice to him, when reality they are gonna fuck him HARD because Steam is DRM and they HATE DRM and anything not GPL
As evidenced by the fact that almost all distros distribute non-free software, some going as far as helping such developers sell it?
Yes, but even if they demanded it due to the license, it still wouldn't be a transfer of ownership.
they only demand that Linux be called GNU/Linux b'cos GNU userland utilities come bundled w/ the kernel
I've never seen they demanding anything. They just advocate for it.
They don't distribute squat - people download what they want from their sites.
Making it publicly available is one way of distributing. Otherwise, making proprietary software available on P2P networks wouldn't be copyright infringement.
Also, if you look at the GNU non-endorsements page, in a lot of cases, they say things like 'there's no clear policy about what software can be included, and nonfree blobs are included in Linux, the kernel.... Of course, with no firm policy in place, there might be other nonfree software included that we missed.' Translation: we can't tell whether they are compliant or not, so we're simply going to assume that they're not.
Well, of course. It'd be strange if they decided otherwise. Endorsing means they are claiming that the distro is purely free software; they can hardly claim that honestly if they can't assert that is it true, can they? That'd almost be fraud!
It'd be like a grocery shop saying "this product may or may not have sugar; since we can't tell, we're going to call it 'sugar-free'".
One new addition to that page is Canaima GNU/Linux - made by Venezuela's government to distribute w/ computers Which is a hoot, given how big a fan RMS is of Hugo Chavez. Somehow, Comrade Hugo forgot to get RMS's endorsement for the distribution his minions made, or else, they'd have left out that nasty 'Install non-free software' in the main menu.
I don't get your point.
I agree, but that wasn't my point; I was just disproving parent's ridiculous claim.
The FSF has never claimed ownership of Linux.
Well, I agree with you that the FSF doesn't really develop software; I just think that accusing them of such is like accusing NASA of not building PCs. It's simply not the purpose of the organization.
a bunch of guys who go around telling us all thatOpen Source is evil
Where have they done that? RMS' essay clearly says otherwise: "We in the free software movement don't think of the open source camp as an enemy".
They just don't matter, because nothing the do or advocate now has any impact on the industry.
You could say the same about social movements which for decades - sometimes centuries - have been composed of a small core of members who in their lifetimes changed nothing, yet are now the prevalent views. For example, the view that women are not property of their fathers and husbands. Certain groups have been arguing that since at least the Ancient Greece, yet it only became common very recently.
I think you are confusing thing because you're thinking of the FSF as an individual organization. The FSF is just an advocacy wing, and they didn't even contribute the license or the model.
The wing of the Free Software movement which did contribute stuff is GNU, which has projects like: the GPL, GCC (until recently, the only "real" C/C++ compiler), Bash, Gnome, coreutils, GNU grep, screen, emacs, etc.
Accusing the FSF of not contributing anything makes no sense, because that's just the way they're organized. It's like accusing Samuel Clemens of having wrote nothing of importance because he signed Mark Twain in his novels.
Sadly, no. I've never been to the US and I know very little about the Portuguese community there.
Maybe you should question why you need to physically remove the screens in order to get family members to talk to each other.
Don't be ridiculous. Trisquel, the distro that's being endorsed, uses APT and you can just stick any Ubuntu-compatible repository into the sources list - like e.g. Skype's (and the distro comes with tools for that, like add-apt-repository) - and install proprietary software.
Debian, Red Hat, etc are not endorsed because they actually distribute themselves non-free software. Hell, one of the Debian repositories is called just that!
I'm not saying I follow their path - I'm a Debian fan, and I do have contrib and non-free packages installed - but what you said is just wrong.
If you want to keep something private, maybe you shouldn't make it available to everyone on the Web?
As usual, you want Debian. Install whatever you want, while keeping a clear separation from the non-proprietary ("main"), the proprietary ("non-free") and the non-proprietary which depend on proprietary software ("contrib"). By default, only "main" is enabled.
Regarding Flash, have you tried Gnash? It mostly works, nowadays (much like Flash, but in different ways).
As a Portuguese, I can tell you: we don't. The fact that much of the country has a real animosity against Spanish people doesn't help, but even descendants of Galicians like me and much of my family consider them different languages and cultures. I believe this is more blurry in the north near the border, though (there's also some rivalry between them and the south. And people ask why the EU integration dream is so hard to achieve!)
Just because n% of apps in Y operating system are from X organization, you don't arbitrarily qualify to call an /operating system/ X/Y.
What about because Linux is licensed under the GNU GPL?
GNU software:
Yeap, clearly all software that nobody in the open source community uses anymore. It's all irrelevant.
Oh, I forgot the GNU GPL. It's just the license that governs about half of all the free and open source projects, including small stuff like Linux. Completely irrelevant.
My paycheck from developing AGPL licensed code must be an illusion, then.
RMS' ideology just eliminates jobs that depending on rewriting the wheel. New code still has to be written, and there's plenty of work and money to those who are willing to write it.
Not at all. I made a typing mistake; parent (and GP) didn't - they wrote the same word three times with the wrong spelling.
And I wouldn't be playing "spelling nazi" for any word, it's just that I dislike how that word - which happens to describe me and my fellow countrymen - gets consistently misused.
And in any case, I'm not trying to prove anything about my language skills - I'm well aware of my poor command of English. I just consider the usage of a spell checker to be basic etiquette on the Web.
one of these guys is using Comic Sans as his coding font, as he's dyslexic and it helps him
Has he looked into fonts designed to help dyslexics, like Gill Dyslexic and Open-Dyslexic?
That's nothing. Windows 98 crashed its own show.