The problem is, it is constant and it is heavy cursing.
I know that ESR himself says he's got nothing against RMS -- but I think he's burned out, he haven't been able to choose words and keep calm. And while I've never seem anything from RMS which hadn't grounds, even if I happen to disagree, ESR sometimes just throw some four letter words at me because I complained about his writing being biased, lacking fundament or being against RMS rather than for OSI.
It seems to me that FireWire is not buit-in, but must be separately purchased as a PC Card... this is to me the biggest fault of Apple feature-wise, that it is dumping SCSI from iMacs and PowerBooks without replacing it with FireWire.
Second, while it is implicit it seems quite a necessity from RMS's (and mine) point of view. Since non-copylefted code will sooner or later be coopted by proprietary developers (witness BSD code in SunOS, Ultrix, BSD/i, etc.), the only solution is to copyleft as much as possible.
You may disagree, but it is a legitimate goal, and necessary for the stated goal of making free code available to everyone.
What puzzles me is why people who will think it ok for Apple, Sun and everyone else to make the BSD-licensed code proprietary scream about making it copylefted...
Just in case it is not so yet, let me try to clarify it: the GNU GPL, the FSF or even RMS are not saying you code has no value; it is just that this value should be not artificially augmented by restricting the user's freedom to copy, modify and redistribute.
This is why the GPL does not forbid you to sell anything, but requires you to make the source code available to your buyer under the same conditions you received it itself. This doesn't prevent you from having an alternate (proprietary) licensing scheme for code of which you are the sole author.
I wonder why both ESR and Tom have such animosity against RMS and the FSF. Anything that RMS says is criticized by then, often in personal tones.
Everyone and your father know that RMS is a polemist sparing no one, but his critics are always to the point, never personal -- even when he calls Tim O'Reilly a "parasite", he has before him the objective situation of non-free documentation about free software.
Not so with Tom. He seems to grudge that many people do consider GNU GPL the ultimate free software license. Also ESR seems to grudge the moral stance ESR has taken outside of the Open Source thing.
I consider this one to be the most detrimental issue in free software politics these days. It is highly visible to the outside world and generates much ill will. Even I myself, a non-coder with no personal interest in the matter, have been personally attacked with dirty words by both ESR and Tom while trying to write them about these issue, showing that the thing has gone much farther than the uninterested ideas discussion.
This has become like a personal vendetta agains RMS, and as such quite childish and destructive. Both Tom and ESR claim that it is not like that, but then it really seeems like that -- and appearances are enough to poison a community. Let's >/dev/null all this personal nitpickings! If at least they were really fun...
Old news in Brazil... we have here the best soft drink in the world, and it is called Guaraná Champagne Antarctica: http://www.antarctica.com.br./english/reguana.htm Even if it is.htm (argh!), its mascot is... a penguin!.
Coca-Cola is for soft drinks what rWindows is for OSs. Guaraná is the real thing -- just like GNU.
I've already emailed ESR about this... but it is telling that while OSI enjoyed a hyperlink in the Jargon File, and open source had an entry, the FSF had an entry but not a hyperlink and "free software" has not even an entry.
No one should publish such hateful, harmful, ill-informed articles. Tom Christiansen is one of the less reasonable persons I ever met, and publishing such bad words does only harm to the cause of freedom and (or) good software.
I do not think CmdrTaco can reasonably justify having published this.
"Commercial art is different to true art. True art is an expression of the artist's soul. Commercial art is aimed at customers: getting them to buy something."
Actually you are professing a Romantic concept of art which is mystical and worth not a nickel. Art is about expressing beauty or truth, according to the values professed by the artist's culture -- or "climate of opinion".
As to the Romantics the most important thing was one's own sentiments, their concept of art became attractive to all egotistic artists (almost all of them, as they are common people and not a bunch of altruistic angels) and is perpetuated until today, with much loss to beauty, truth and even communication (expression) in art.
Free software should not be Romantic, even if Idealist.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, it is constant and it is heavy cursing.
I know that ESR himself says he's got nothing against RMS -- but I think he's burned out, he haven't been able to choose words and keep calm. And while I've never seem anything from RMS which hadn't grounds, even if I happen to disagree, ESR sometimes just throw some four letter words at me because I complained about his writing being biased, lacking fundament or being against RMS rather than for OSI.
It seems to me that FireWire is not buit-in, but must be separately purchased as a PC Card... this is to me the biggest fault of Apple feature-wise, that it is dumping SCSI from iMacs and PowerBooks without replacing it with FireWire.
> Unlike RMS, I don't think that people are evil if they disagree with me
Would you people please stopping putting words on another's mouth? This is the ultimate flamebait, misinterpreting one another.
First, this no explicit...
Second, while it is implicit it seems quite a necessity from RMS's (and mine) point of view. Since non-copylefted code will sooner or later be coopted by proprietary developers (witness BSD code in SunOS, Ultrix, BSD/i, etc.), the only solution is to copyleft as much as possible.
You may disagree, but it is a legitimate goal, and necessary for the stated goal of making free code available to everyone.
What puzzles me is why people who will think it ok for Apple, Sun and everyone else to make the BSD-licensed code proprietary scream about making it copylefted...
Are you enlightened already?
Just in case it is not so yet, let me try to clarify it: the GNU GPL, the FSF or even RMS are not saying you code has no value; it is just that this value should be not artificially augmented by restricting the user's freedom to copy, modify and redistribute.
This is why the GPL does not forbid you to sell anything, but requires you to make the source code available to your buyer under the same conditions you received it itself. This doesn't prevent you from having an alternate (proprietary) licensing scheme for code of which you are the sole author.
I wonder why both ESR and Tom have such animosity against RMS and the FSF. Anything that RMS says is criticized by then, often in personal tones.
/dev/null all this personal nitpickings! If at least they were really fun...
Everyone and your father know that RMS is a
polemist sparing no one, but his critics are always to the point, never personal -- even when he calls Tim O'Reilly a "parasite", he has before him the objective situation of non-free documentation about free software.
Not so with Tom. He seems to grudge that many people do consider GNU GPL the ultimate free software license. Also ESR seems to grudge the moral stance ESR has taken outside of the Open Source thing.
I consider this one to be the most detrimental issue in free software politics these days. It is highly visible to the outside world and generates much ill will. Even I myself, a non-coder with no personal interest in the matter, have been personally attacked with dirty words by both ESR and Tom while trying to write them about these issue, showing that the thing has gone much farther than the uninterested ideas discussion.
This has become like a personal vendetta agains RMS, and as such quite childish and destructive. Both Tom and ESR claim that it is not like that, but then it really seeems like that -- and appearances are enough to poison a community. Let's >
Old news in Brazil... we have here the best soft drink in the world, and it is called Guaraná Champagne Antarctica: http://www.antarctica.com.br./english/reguana.htm .htm (argh!), its mascot is... a penguin!.
Even if it is
Coca-Cola is for soft drinks what rWindows is for OSs. Guaraná is the real thing -- just like GNU.
I've already emailed ESR about this... but it is telling that while OSI enjoyed a hyperlink in the Jargon File, and open source had an entry, the FSF had an entry but not a hyperlink and "free software" has not even an entry.
Obviously that is the truth of the particular moment when and distribution about which RMS was talking.
He was never a liar.
The FSF lives to support the "freedom in software" idea, so every ad for GNU or FSF is evangelizing for freedom.
No one should publish such hateful, harmful, ill-informed articles. Tom Christiansen is one of the less reasonable persons I ever met, and publishing such bad words does only harm to the cause of freedom and (or) good software.
I do not think CmdrTaco can reasonably justify having published this.
"Commercial art is different to true art. True art is an expression of the artist's soul. Commercial art is aimed at customers: getting them to buy something."
Actually you are professing a Romantic concept of art which is mystical and worth not a nickel. Art is about expressing beauty or truth, according to the values professed by the artist's culture -- or "climate of opinion".
As to the Romantics the most important thing was one's own sentiments, their concept of art became attractive to all egotistic artists (almost all of them, as they are common people and not a bunch of altruistic angels) and is perpetuated until today, with much loss to beauty, truth and even communication (expression) in art.
Free software should not be Romantic, even if Idealist.