If you accept the incorrect usage of "open source" to mean "GPL'd code" then this statement makes
perfect sense.
I suspect his usage wasn't meant to be just "GPL'd code", but rather any code licensed in such a way that the source is available to any particular competitor (i.e. the OS movement) but that micros~1 can't integrate that source into their software. It's certainly a valid opinion for micros~1 to hold, just as I hold the opinion that extensions to at least some government-funded work should be similarly available.
I can only guess, but it looks like he's laying a foundation so people will see it their way if/when micros~1 decides to sue to stop an Open Source project that uses government money (e.g. university research funded by NSF grants).
Open source is not available to commercial companies.
This quote is especially funny. Sure, the source code isn't available for inclusion in commercial software (which is the only truth applicable to that statement). But the source code isn't available to anyone if the source is closed. And interestingly, the GPL may actually be very appropriate for research-developed software: it requires that anyone extending that research contribute back to the body of knowledge.
/me braces for "No, the GPL is evil!" flames. And yes, I have heard the arguement that the GPL cannot apply to a government-developed project since the government may not hold copyrights. But that doesn't apply to every government-funded project.
GPL is not about technology, it is about social change.
And this comes as a surprise to you? It says right in the license itself that it's all about freedom, and that this goal represents a change from the standard proprietary practices.
Some believe this freedom will lead to technical excellence, because the code that one person writes can be studied, improved, and built upon by others without restriction. "We stand on the shoulders of giants" is the goal. Others disagree, as you seem to. This is an arguement for another thread.
BTW, your reply here has nothing to do with the parent post. Freedom IS the added value under consideration, regardless of possible or real technical merits. Go to your local bookstore and buy a book to learn how to properly refute a point.
As for your original post, the scenario makes perfect sense to me. If you want to require payment from every user or whatever, then don't use the GPL because it grants distribution rights you'd rather keep. If you want to require payment from every subsequent user of something you recieved under the GPL, then you're screwed up in the head. The GPL doesn't care about you making money. If that's all you care about, look elsewhere.
You really don't get it, do you? Hopefully this is an accident, go read http://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.html to gain some understanding. You don't have to agree, but you will then argue better if you know the actual goal of your opponent.
But the whole idea of FSF and GPL is to do away with copywrited software and any limitations that come with it.
The whole idea of the FSF it to make software free (libre). The GPL uses copyright law as a means to that end.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."
Appropriate quote, since that's exactly what you're trying to do here. The issue is in blocking sites that have nothing to do with spam, just because they happen to use the same ISP and some bastard decides "If i go overboard and block everything then they'll surely listen to me!"
Or do you really believe sites like peacefire.org deserve to be blocked? Or that access to a web site should be blocked because the owners operate a mailing list (which may or may not be classed as spam, i haven't looked into the issue) from a different IP address (so it could easily be differentiated, even if you decide to blackhole all traffic rather than just SMTP).
It's easy to block SMTP rather than blackhole all traffic. It's easy to block the offending IP address instead of an entire class C. I fail to see the point of your rant.
Wisconsin just instituted a "graduated licensing program". Among other things, no driving late at night and no driving with more than one passenger "other than immediate family or qualified adult". See http://www.dot.state.wi.us/dmv/GDLchanges.html, and be warned that the whole site is a propaganda thing so it only prevents 'positive' arguments.
Illinois seems to have a graduated program as well, but you can still get a license at 16 (after taking drivers ed classes). In general, look at the state's DMV website for information.
I'd be willing to bet they'd raise the driving age to 18 or 21 straight out if they thought they could get away with it. So instead they do "graduated programs" so they can say "but you still get to drive!".
-----
Re:Intelligent Routing
on
Smart Routers
·
· Score: 1
If I am
trying to ftp from my machine to a client across town, why on earth does it need to be bounced across the
country, because we use different ISP's.
Not that this will actually solve that problem. It just means that all the routers on the path across the country and back will decide to deprioritize your traffic so the connection will be slower.
The reason it bounces across the country isn't technological, it's 'business'.
Why do I get the impression that this gem wasn't at all written by Mr. Mundie himself at all, but by some highly skillfull PR flack ?
Couldn't tell you. I get the impression that it was written by some poor intern who slept through his writing classes back in high school. Or some MS manager who did the same.
Poor attempts at humor aside, I think Micros~1's goal here was to write something so horribly incoherent that it's impossible to effectively refute it, while having a high enough FUD factor that those who don't know better will fear and doubt.
The school administrators that deal with disciplinary problems deal with guns, drugs, and lewd conduct
all day. They treat the computer people, generally meeker and milder and more intelligent, the same as
everyone else.
Wow, look at the misunderstanding on this one (vague) sentance...
If the "computer people" are in drugs, or guns, or whatever, yeah, treat them the same as everyone else. But when they treat someone who sends a big email the same as a kid with a gun, there's something wrong.
And why the hell can't they get the advice of someone who knows something (there are probably 10 other students readily available, for one thing), rather than just making assumptions when they don't understand the computers? Not that that always helps, i once drew the attention of the campus network security bastard, who decided to delay reinstating my network access for an extra week because he didn't like the tone of my voice when i called him about it (after he didn't follow the written notification policy in the first place, but that's another story).
AOL! Ritalin does help some people, but a lot of the time it's just "this kid doesn't bow to any and all authority, drug him!"
I don't remember what this scenario is called, but it goes something like this:
1. Something must be done
2. This is something
3. Therefore we will do this.
Fallacy of Four Terms, with Equivocation
A few examples: "Nothing is better than steak (sorry vegetarians). Hot dogs are better than nothing. Therefore, hot dogs are better than steak." "Nobody can do it. I am nobody. Therefore, i can do it!"
1. My dog has four legs.
2. A cat has four legs
3. Therefore my dog is a cat.
That's an Undistributed Middle, a different kind of logical fallacy.
Although i always ended up using NEWDOS, since i only had one floppy with TRSDOS while i had about 10 with NEWDOS (all 11 of which had random bit rot, hence "use this one to boot, then switch to this when it complains about errors, then this to..."). One copy of MSDOS 3.0, which wouldn't boot at all.
www.trsdos.com is a pretty crappy site, all it says is "get internet explorer 5.5". No possibility to try the site with any other browser. Configuring junkbuster to return an IE user agent gives a page about some class completely unrelated to TRSDOS. However, i award negative points to Microsoft products because the site was created by and is served off of those products. Also, negative points to the Harvard Extension school for whoever there created the page. There is no www.trsdossucks.com.
No mascot that i can recall... maybe some BUAF spelling "TRSDOS"?
The search engine test returns 0 results for both phrases. Does that beat 66,700 for W2K?
The Magic 8-Ball test was inconclusive... it answered "Yes" no matter how i phrased it (although it did have some trouble deciding, it told me to try again 5 times in a row)
"Fuck TRSDOS"... ummm, yeah. Takes too long to say.
There we have it! A post about an ancient OS that few know anything about. Now excuse me as i go peruse my crate of TRS-80 related magazines for cool BASIC programs. Old-style BASIC, with required line numbers and all that goodness, not this new "Visual Basic" Microsoft pushes. And no fancy GUI, not even lower-case letters on my old Model I without that special chip someone hacked in!
-----
Because that's exactly what you'd expect! ;)
on
13 Month Calendar?
·
· Score: 1
BTW, i never actually claimed i personally follow Discordianism (i also never said i don't).
The Dischordian calendar has 5 'months' (Chaos, Discord, Confusion, Bureaucracy, and The Aftermath), each of 365/5=73 days. Once every 4 years (1+4=5), St. Tib's Day is inserted between Chaos 59 and Chaos 60.
For example, today is Prickle-Prickle, The Aftermath 62, 3166 YOLD.
Yes, the subject is a valid a point (and besides the part about cygwin et al, it was the main one in the parent post). There's a very simple reason for this: Micros~1 and Windos are, right or wrong, on the vast majority of x86 PCs. So a hardware manufacturer would be insane to sell something without making damn sure there's a Windows driver. Linux at the moment is on a small (but growing) percentage, so Linux drivers aren't a top priority if the company will develop them at all.
The result: windos support is there as soon as the hardware is released, but Linux support doesn't come until the hardware has been out, and bought by someone with the time and talent to put together Linux support.
because along with the stack of operating systems I've collected I also have the BeOS 5 Pro that I picked up at BestBuy when it was on sale. Although I haven't installed it on the Athlon system, it has always worked just fine on the Desqpro 2000 that also gave Linux fits.
A version of BeOS from 2000 on a 1997 machine, compared with versions of Linux from 1997 on the 1997 machine and from 2000 on a 2000 machine? Or did i miss something in your argument?
The 4.x X servers use a new style of configuration file. It's supposed to be automagically generated by running xf86cfg; however, this doesn't always work. Branden has written a tool to generate the config file, but it doesn't always work either. In lieu of this, it's probably a good idea to go to XFree86.org and brush up on the 4.0 series XF86Config file format before upgrading.
xf86config seems to work nicely, except that it generates/etc/X11/XF86Config instead of/etc/X11/XF86Config-4. And if you want any extra modules loaded, or you want to change some of the more obscure defaults, you'll still have to edit it.
Also, the new name for the config file is XF86Config-4 (I don't know if this is debian specific) instead of XF86Config.
If you have no XF86Config-4, then it looks at XF86Config. But (probably to support keeping 3.x on the system or something) the packages install XF86Config-4 by default.
Try to avoid emailing Branden at all costs. He's been less than friendly to me, and I know other people who have had similar experiences.
That's odd, 1152x864x16 works fine on my S3 Virge card. Except that i apparently haven't gotten the tweaks right yet, the pixel corruption is a bit annoying.
Seeing articles like this, i believe if you'd change that to read "with above-congressman-average intelligence" then we could make a committee of Eliza, SHLRDU, Pitr's AI. Throw in an Abio and Sid's AI if you want more than 3.
(2) linking any Internet web site, either directly or through a series of links, to any other Internet web site containing DeCSS.
Therefore, most if not all search engines are violating the DMCA, as are any sites that link to search engines, etc. So did the MPAA send these letters to half the internet?
On my copy of the cuecat, there was an EULA notice: "By using this software..." it said on the CD package. "Cool!" i thought, as i threw the CD aside. "There's no restriction on the hardware, which Radio Shack gave me for free!"
The type-speed thing works on a specific pass-phrase rather than a computer-generated one-time "type this please" string, so typing speed should be easily duplicatable.
Quick poll: How many of you use rather random passwords like "U{.Z!Li}"? How many of you type them slowly at first, but can type these very quickly after using them for a week or so? I though so.
Yet another hole in this scheme, if it's a constant passphrase then you'll naturally become faster with practice, and then lose your access because your typing style has changed.
Slashdot Mirror
Off I go for my 100 lashings.
-----
I suspect his usage wasn't meant to be just "GPL'd code", but rather any code licensed in such a way that the source is available to any particular competitor (i.e. the OS movement) but that micros~1 can't integrate that source into their software. It's certainly a valid opinion for micros~1 to hold, just as I hold the opinion that extensions to at least some government-funded work should be similarly available.
-----
I can only guess, but it looks like he's laying a foundation so people will see it their way if/when micros~1 decides to sue to stop an Open Source project that uses government money (e.g. university research funded by NSF grants).
This quote is especially funny. Sure, the source code isn't available for inclusion in commercial software (which is the only truth applicable to that statement). But the source code isn't available to anyone if the source is closed. And interestingly, the GPL may actually be very appropriate for research-developed software: it requires that anyone extending that research contribute back to the body of knowledge.
-----
If you're extracting as non-root, don't be surprised ;) If you're extracting as root, try the --no-same-owner option.
-----
Anyway, at least some of the ftp.us.kernel.org servers have the update at this point. If the one you try doesn't have it, try another.
-----
And this comes as a surprise to you? It says right in the license itself that it's all about freedom, and that this goal represents a change from the standard proprietary practices.
Some believe this freedom will lead to technical excellence, because the code that one person writes can be studied, improved, and built upon by others without restriction. "We stand on the shoulders of giants" is the goal. Others disagree, as you seem to. This is an arguement for another thread.
BTW, your reply here has nothing to do with the parent post. Freedom IS the added value under consideration, regardless of possible or real technical merits. Go to your local bookstore and buy a book to learn how to properly refute a point.
As for your original post, the scenario makes perfect sense to me. If you want to require payment from every user or whatever, then don't use the GPL because it grants distribution rights you'd rather keep. If you want to require payment from every subsequent user of something you recieved under the GPL, then you're screwed up in the head. The GPL doesn't care about you making money. If that's all you care about, look elsewhere.
-----
But the whole idea of FSF and GPL is to do away with copywrited software and any limitations that come with it.
The whole idea of the FSF it to make software free (libre). The GPL uses copyright law as a means to that end.
-----
Appropriate quote, since that's exactly what you're trying to do here. The issue is in blocking sites that have nothing to do with spam, just because they happen to use the same ISP and some bastard decides "If i go overboard and block everything then they'll surely listen to me!"
Or do you really believe sites like peacefire.org deserve to be blocked? Or that access to a web site should be blocked because the owners operate a mailing list (which may or may not be classed as spam, i haven't looked into the issue) from a different IP address (so it could easily be differentiated, even if you decide to blackhole all traffic rather than just SMTP).
It's easy to block SMTP rather than blackhole all traffic. It's easy to block the offending IP address instead of an entire class C. I fail to see the point of your rant.
-----
Illinois seems to have a graduated program as well, but you can still get a license at 16 (after taking drivers ed classes). In general, look at the state's DMV website for information.
I'd be willing to bet they'd raise the driving age to 18 or 21 straight out if they thought they could get away with it. So instead they do "graduated programs" so they can say "but you still get to drive!".
-----
Not that this will actually solve that problem. It just means that all the routers on the path across the country and back will decide to deprioritize your traffic so the connection will be slower.
The reason it bounces across the country isn't technological, it's 'business'.
-----
Couldn't tell you. I get the impression that it was written by some poor intern who slept through his writing classes back in high school. Or some MS manager who did the same.
Poor attempts at humor aside, I think Micros~1's goal here was to write something so horribly incoherent that it's impossible to effectively refute it, while having a high enough FUD factor that those who don't know better will fear and doubt.
-----
Wow, look at the misunderstanding on this one (vague) sentance...
If the "computer people" are in drugs, or guns, or whatever, yeah, treat them the same as everyone else. But when they treat someone who sends a big email the same as a kid with a gun, there's something wrong.
And why the hell can't they get the advice of someone who knows something (there are probably 10 other students readily available, for one thing), rather than just making assumptions when they don't understand the computers? Not that that always helps, i once drew the attention of the campus network security bastard, who decided to delay reinstating my network access for an extra week because he didn't like the tone of my voice when i called him about it (after he didn't follow the written notification policy in the first place, but that's another story).
-----
Maybe i'm missing something obvious, but what's so special about 0x3B9ACA00?
-----
I don't remember what this scenario is called, but it goes something like this:
1. Something must be done
2. This is something
3. Therefore we will do this.
Fallacy of Four Terms, with Equivocation
A few examples: "Nothing is better than steak (sorry vegetarians). Hot dogs are better than nothing. Therefore, hot dogs are better than steak." "Nobody can do it. I am nobody. Therefore, i can do it!"
1. My dog has four legs.
2. A cat has four legs
3. Therefore my dog is a cat.
That's an Undistributed Middle, a different kind of logical fallacy.
-----
www.trsdos.com is a pretty crappy site, all it says is "get internet explorer 5.5". No possibility to try the site with any other browser. Configuring junkbuster to return an IE user agent gives a page about some class completely unrelated to TRSDOS. However, i award negative points to Microsoft products because the site was created by and is served off of those products. Also, negative points to the Harvard Extension school for whoever there created the page. There is no www.trsdossucks.com.
No mascot that i can recall... maybe some BUAF spelling "TRSDOS"?
The search engine test returns 0 results for both phrases. Does that beat 66,700 for W2K?
The Magic 8-Ball test was inconclusive... it answered "Yes" no matter how i phrased it (although it did have some trouble deciding, it told me to try again 5 times in a row)
"Fuck TRSDOS"... ummm, yeah. Takes too long to say.
There we have it! A post about an ancient OS that few know anything about. Now excuse me as i go peruse my crate of TRS-80 related magazines for cool BASIC programs. Old-style BASIC, with required line numbers and all that goodness, not this new "Visual Basic" Microsoft pushes. And no fancy GUI, not even lower-case letters on my old Model I without that special chip someone hacked in!
-----
-----
For example, today is Prickle-Prickle, The Aftermath 62, 3166 YOLD.
-----
The result: windos support is there as soon as the hardware is released, but Linux support doesn't come until the hardware has been out, and bought by someone with the time and talent to put together Linux support.
because along with the stack of operating systems I've collected I also have the BeOS 5 Pro that I picked up at BestBuy when it was on sale. Although I haven't installed it on the Athlon system, it has always worked just fine on the Desqpro 2000 that also gave Linux fits.
A version of BeOS from 2000 on a 1997 machine, compared with versions of Linux from 1997 on the 1997 machine and from 2000 on a 2000 machine? Or did i miss something in your argument?
-----
xf86config seems to work nicely, except that it generates /etc/X11/XF86Config instead of /etc/X11/XF86Config-4. And if you want any extra modules loaded, or you want to change some of the more obscure defaults, you'll still have to edit it.
Also, the new name for the config file is XF86Config-4 (I don't know if this is debian specific) instead of XF86Config.
If you have no XF86Config-4, then it looks at XF86Config. But (probably to support keeping 3.x on the system or something) the packages install XF86Config-4 by default.
Try to avoid emailing Branden at all costs. He's been less than friendly to me, and I know other people who have had similar experiences.
He's probably very busy ;)
-----
-----
Seeing articles like this, i believe if you'd change that to read "with above-congressman-average intelligence" then we could make a committee of Eliza, SHLRDU, Pitr's AI. Throw in an Abio and Sid's AI if you want more than 3.
-----
Therefore, most if not all search engines are violating the DMCA, as are any sites that link to search engines, etc. So did the MPAA send these letters to half the internet?
-----
-----
-----
Quick poll: How many of you use rather random passwords like "U{.Z!Li}"? How many of you type them slowly at first, but can type these very quickly after using them for a week or so? I though so.
Yet another hole in this scheme, if it's a constant passphrase then you'll naturally become faster with practice, and then lose your access because your typing style has changed.
-----