A lot of people actually came up from eBusiness expo, which was very nice. Tom Turner from the FSF was down at the eBusiness handing out GNU papers to people, so hopefully that accounted for some traffic. We tried to hang some GNOME/FSF banners in the main hallway over the stairs to the lowest level, but we had to take them down due to "union regulations." Blah.
Why not come to a show where he'll be and find out for yourself?:-) I could try to explain him for you, but it would be hard to do. He's very nice though, often misrepresented in press and by other people who haven't met him.
I think RMS meant that as in, "I won't die without having done my best to change the world." But you should ask him yourself instead of relying on what people tell you and what you think he meant.
I liked this event very much, though I did not get a chance to talk to any of the "Big Guys". I did walk over to the.org pavilion at one point and spoke to the NetBSD guy, but it felt oddly out-of-place for me, so I walked back to the FSF booth where I had a good time selling GNU stuff and speaking about the GNU project (it was especially fun because most people were very interested in freedom issues, even those who had scant knowledge about computers, or perhaps I should say; those who had never used a computer agreed more about the issues of freedom than those who had).
As someone pointed out, RMS wasn't there much, which was a shame. He took the time in New York to visit his sick mother at the hospital, so I guess he's excused.
The andover.net party was terrific, and it was sad that we had to be dragged away from it to go to FAO Schwarz, which I didn't particularly enjoy.
Oh, I tagged along with RMS, Bruce Perens and some other people to a burmese restaurant at Broome Street in NYC (number 380 if I remember correctly). The place is called "Mandalay Palace" and I strongly recommend it.
From us in the FSF booth, I'd like to say Thank you! to the various volunteers who played with our computers and got them moderately working, and likewise to everone who kept talking about freedom and everyone who bought things from us.
I've been stomping around being mildly irritated because NetBSD doesn't seem to support SMP and software RAID. Or rather; it might, at least software RAID. But apparently you need some special package for it. I'm probably being suitably lame about it, but with the Linux kernel, I compiled in multiple disk support and had the system running in half an hour.
Still, that NetBSD can run on my old VAX computers are golden. It's nothing as interesting as having a VAXstation 3100 serving as Windows NT PDC.
I don't find this very surprising. What I've seen of the various BSD flavours has been very positive for me. They are still lacking kernel drivers that I would like to see, but I would like to use BSD more.
Re:Pascal had an intermediary form before gcc
on
RMS The Coder
·
· Score: 1
You forget that RMS was around, working on compilers, kernels and various other things before that!:-) Still, I don't think he invented that. He probably got the idea from any of the many research papers that clutters the GNU offices.
Re:What license does Guile have?
on
RMS The Coder
·
· Score: 2
libguile is under the GPL with an exception; "The exception is that, if you link the GUILE library with other files to produce an executable, this does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License."
Of course he's argumentative! Having an argument with someone is a great way to get a better grasp of things, to learn from each other and to see what the Right Thing is.
Re:RMS wrote too much code :-)
on
RMS The Coder
·
· Score: 1
Could you tell me where RMS rejected this? I can't remember that he's ever said anything to that extent.
Re:RMS wrote too much code :-)
on
RMS The Coder
·
· Score: 1
I think that's part of his point; if I wanted to do something like that, it might take me a few months at best, maybe a year more realistically. The GNU project has been writing software for more than 15 years.
Re:Why is LISP superior?
on
RMS The Coder
·
· Score: 1
He was a system programmer for the AI Labs for quite some time. But right now; I'd rather have RMS out there speaking about free software than sitting behind a desk writing proprietary software.
Re:Why is LISP superior?
on
RMS The Coder
·
· Score: 1
It's not just any random ramblings. It's what he believes. He has worked with LISP for many, many years, but if you show him a language that is as powerful and useful as LISP, I'm sure he would appreciate it.
You're choosing between two extremes. RMS is neither against high security, nor for it. He doesn't say that "security isn't important in a program". He says that he would like it better if people would not use security. So, in some extent, you hit the mark in your last sentence.
You seem to be confused by the meaning of hacker vs. cracker. Cracker is a person who breaks into sustems, often with malicious intent. Hacker doesn't do that -- or at least not with an intent to sabotage or destroy information.
Interestingly enough, didn't the cracker in Cliff Stoll's book get in through a bug in move-mail which was a part of Emacs? In either case, this should be up to the administrator of each machine to decide for himself. If I want security, I won't go complaining to someone else when people try to break in, because that's pretty much what I would expect would happen. In particular, I would not even think of blaming someone who runs an open system which the cracker used to try to break into my machine. Why would I want to do such a thing? That's like forcing that all crowbars be locked into safes because you were afraid that they could potentionally be used to break into your house.
I would argue that C++ has never been compatible with anything else even in the first place. GNU software follows whatever standards are available where it is convenient for the user. If the standard doesn't make sense, there seems to be scant reason to implement it just so you can say that you followed a standard.
Even if people say that it can't be done, why would that stop someone who has seen such a society work stop trying to implement it today? RMS saw and took part of such an open community for a long period of time at MIT, so we know for a fact that it works for a limited community. Wouldn't it be fun to see if it couldn't also work in a more extended community?
The Incompatible Time-sharing System (ITS) that RMS hacked on and which was used at MIT for many years did not have much security. Security always comes to the cost of convenience, and security builds walls to divide people, much like proprietary software does. RMS's favourite umask is 000 and the information given to new people who gets accounts on a gnu.org machine recommends this umask, iirc. On one of the machines that RMS uses, he says that it's fine for people to read his email, but that he wishes they would do it with `more' and not with a mailreader so there's no risk of loosing mail. Until only a few years ago he had the password 'rms'. He doesn't use much of the gnu.org computers for this reason. His own computer doesn't have security.
I support RMS in this. I wish people would understand that security isn't always important.
Well, if Microsoft (or any other proprietary developer) did this, I'm pretty sure that their deviations from the standard would be non-documented, and you would have no way of knowing how they did it. With free software, you can always find out how it is done, if you want to, and more often than not is it also documented. This doesn't apply too much when it comes to if `df' should output its findings in kilobytes or in blocks, but it makes a huge difference in other, more technical, areas.
As always, things like this swing both ways. I don't complain too much about the X configuration and the modelines. In fact, my biggest problem with X has traditionally been to get the keyboard correctly installed and not the monitor. I like X and I like modelines, they make my monitor go 110Hz instead of 90Hz which the Windows drivers refuse to cross.
And WHY should some more money to Rob, Hemos et al make any difference? This is (close to) the way Slashdot used to work even before Andover bought them. Effectively; nothing has changed, and that's probably as it should be.
FWIW; RMS doesn't read Slashdot. But sometimes some nice GNUers who does read Slashdot (such as myself) forward interesting comments to RMS and he usually takes time off from his work to answer them via email to the poster.
Here's an idea; let SPI sell Debian CD's and manuals and use the profits from that sale to hire people to write a new dselect (and other things that are needed in Debian) -- just like the FSF develops some of their software. There's a common misconception in the world today that free software "simply happens" because someone needs a tool. There's some truth to that of course, but things like the GNU libc, GNU CC and other projects where started and paid for by the FSF because they saw a need for that software.
Geeks want portable networks and computers because it's generally assumed that if you can bring your network wherever you go, you will suddenly end up going to the pub, discos and friends more often, thus having some sort of life. It wouldn't actually be like that of course, but it's a nice enough thought.
This is why I made my Whois-client (jwhois) first ask whois.internic.net and then redirect the query to whatever server it replies knows about it. But I must say that I don't mind them separating the Whois registries like this.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of people actually came up from eBusiness expo, which was very nice. Tom Turner from the FSF was down at the eBusiness handing out GNU papers to people, so hopefully that accounted for some traffic. We tried to hang some GNOME/FSF banners in the main hallway over the stairs to the lowest level, but we had to take them down due to "union regulations." Blah.
Why not come to a show where he'll be and find out for yourself? :-) I could try to explain him for you, but it would be hard to do. He's very nice though, often misrepresented in press and by other people who haven't met him.
I think RMS meant that as in, "I won't die without having done my best to change the world." But you should ask him yourself instead of relying on what people tell you and what you think he meant.
As someone pointed out, RMS wasn't there much, which was a shame. He took the time in New York to visit his sick mother at the hospital, so I guess he's excused.
The andover.net party was terrific, and it was sad that we had to be dragged away from it to go to FAO Schwarz, which I didn't particularly enjoy.
Oh, I tagged along with RMS, Bruce Perens and some other people to a burmese restaurant at Broome Street in NYC (number 380 if I remember correctly). The place is called "Mandalay Palace" and I strongly recommend it.
From us in the FSF booth, I'd like to say Thank you! to the various volunteers who played with our computers and got them moderately working, and likewise to everone who kept talking about freedom and everyone who bought things from us.
Still, that NetBSD can run on my old VAX computers are golden. It's nothing as interesting as having a VAXstation 3100 serving as Windows NT PDC.
I don't find this very surprising. What I've seen of the various BSD flavours has been very positive for me. They are still lacking kernel drivers that I would like to see, but I would like to use BSD more.
You forget that RMS was around, working on compilers, kernels and various other things before that! :-)
Still, I don't think he invented that. He probably got the idea from any of the many research papers that clutters the GNU offices.
libguile is under the GPL with an exception; "The exception is that, if you link the GUILE library with other files to produce an executable, this does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License."
Of course he's argumentative! Having an argument with someone is a great way to get a better grasp of things, to learn from each other and to see what the Right Thing is.
Could you tell me where RMS rejected this? I can't remember that he's ever said anything to that extent.
I think that's part of his point; if I wanted to do something like that, it might take me a few months at best, maybe a year more realistically. The GNU project has been writing software for more than 15 years.
He was a system programmer for the AI Labs for quite some time. But right now; I'd rather have RMS out there speaking about free software than sitting behind a desk writing proprietary software.
It's not just any random ramblings. It's what he believes. He has worked with LISP for many, many years, but if you show him a language that is as powerful and useful as LISP, I'm sure he would appreciate it.
You're choosing between two extremes. RMS is neither against high security, nor for it. He doesn't say that "security isn't important in a program". He says that he would like it better if people would not use security. So, in some extent, you hit the mark in your last sentence.
Interestingly enough, didn't the cracker in Cliff Stoll's book get in through a bug in move-mail which was a part of Emacs? In either case, this should be up to the administrator of each machine to decide for himself. If I want security, I won't go complaining to someone else when people try to break in, because that's pretty much what I would expect would happen. In particular, I would not even think of blaming someone who runs an open system which the cracker used to try to break into my machine. Why would I want to do such a thing? That's like forcing that all crowbars be locked into safes because you were afraid that they could potentionally be used to break into your house.
I would argue that C++ has never been compatible with anything else even in the first place. GNU software follows whatever standards are available where it is convenient for the user. If the standard doesn't make sense, there seems to be scant reason to implement it just so you can say that you followed a standard.
Even if people say that it can't be done, why would that stop someone who has seen such a society work stop trying to implement it today? RMS saw and took part of such an open community for a long period of time at MIT, so we know for a fact that it works for a limited community. Wouldn't it be fun to see if it couldn't also work in a more extended community?
I support RMS in this. I wish people would understand that security isn't always important.
Well, if Microsoft (or any other proprietary developer) did this, I'm pretty sure that their deviations from the standard would be non-documented, and you would have no way of knowing how they did it. With free software, you can always find out how it is done, if you want to, and more often than not is it also documented. This doesn't apply too much when it comes to if `df' should output its findings in kilobytes or in blocks, but it makes a huge difference in other, more technical, areas.
As always, things like this swing both ways. I don't complain too much about the X configuration and the modelines. In fact, my biggest problem with X has traditionally been to get the keyboard correctly installed and not the monitor. I like X and I like modelines, they make my monitor go 110Hz instead of 90Hz which the Windows drivers refuse to cross.
And WHY should some more money to Rob, Hemos et al make any difference? This is (close to) the way Slashdot used to work even before Andover bought them. Effectively; nothing has changed, and that's probably as it should be.
FWIW; RMS doesn't read Slashdot. But sometimes some nice GNUers who does read Slashdot (such as myself) forward interesting comments to RMS and he usually takes time off from his work to answer them via email to the poster.
Here's an idea; let SPI sell Debian CD's and manuals and use the profits from that sale to hire people to write a new dselect (and other things that are needed in Debian) -- just like the FSF develops some of their software.
There's a common misconception in the world today that free software "simply happens" because someone needs a tool. There's some truth to that of course, but things like the GNU libc, GNU CC and other projects where started and paid for by the FSF because they saw a need for that software.
Geeks want portable networks and computers because it's generally assumed that if you can bring your network wherever you go, you will suddenly end up going to the pub, discos and friends more often, thus having some sort of life. It wouldn't actually be like that of course, but it's a nice enough thought.
This is why I made my Whois-client (jwhois) first ask whois.internic.net and then redirect the query to whatever server it replies knows about it.
But I must say that I don't mind them separating the Whois registries like this.