It sounds to me more like you're simply an old advocate of RMS, since what you're saying here is his worldview, pretty much word for word.
FOSS, GNU and Linux is about the right to choose, a right wich is very limited outside the FOSS community.
Stallman is not about a choice at all. He cannot tolerate the idea of anyone using any other license whatsoever. This is an example of what I'm talking about, in his own words. This is another good article which illustrates what I'm talking about, in terms of his attitude towards making a living from software development.
In his mind however, it is his way or the highway, and I believe that this and the above attitude are also part of the reason why the BSDs aren't more popular; Stallman has succeeded in alienating many people from them, simply because the people producing them don't adhere to his decrees. I am glad Linus is finally putting some kind of conscious, deliberate thought as to whether or not to stay on this man's bandwagon any longer...it is something that should have been done a very long time ago.
On the surface, Stallman is very good at making his arguments sound compelling...it's only when you look beneath the surface that you start to discover that his motives aren't anywhere near as pure as they initially seem to be.
a) Most other licenses don't have the GPL's requirement on distributing source with binaries. Some do, sure. That isn't necessarily a problem for some things, but GNU reactionaries tend to be well-versed in Stallman's rhetoric, and unyielding in their entirely autonomic refusal to use anything without said requirement.
b) The aforementioned reflexively pro-GNU sheep comprise a fairly large demographic of Linux's userbase, which is exactly what Stallman wanted. The man may not display much *wisdom*, but he is intelligent in the sense that it's the above element (copyleft) that gives it the viral element and causes it to be self-perpetuating. Hence, it would be very difficult to get rid of from an entrenched base.
If Stallman goes increasingly rogue, the only real alternative is going to be to migrate to one of the BSDs, and to come up with a new source-with-binaries license which doesn't however try and have Stallman's onerous demands to comply with his worldview.
I don't have a problem with the FSF shooting itself in the foot at all. They're welcome to do it as often as they want as far as I'm concerned, because the more they do, the less time it'll take for them to become almost completely irrelevant.
It's Stallman's own equivalent of the Ten Commandments. What he is essentially saying with this is that any software licensed under the GPL now also falls under his philosophical jurisdiction.
It's been his attitude for a while now that anybody who uses Linux is supposedly on his turf by default, whether they like it or not...that he as a single individual deserves most (if not all) of the credit for the fact that Linux exists, and that if you don't essentially want to become an intellectual clone of his, then you have no right to use Linux. People are going to think I'm insane here, sure...After all, DRM itself is a bad thing, right? DRM however is not the point. Stallman always claims to value principles...I do too...and here's the principle at stake here:- That Stallman thinks he is entirely able and fully justified to make whatever decrees he wishes to people who use GPL licensed software. He might not have (blatantly) done it yet, but I have no difficulty believing that in the next version of the license, (if not this one) he will start attempting to attach conditions and decrees which have nothing to do with software licensing whatsoever, but are to do with the way people *think.*
What is also typical is Moglen's abdication of responsibility...claiming that they're simply reacting to the behaviour of others. That's always been Stallman's line; demonise the opposition, make himself out to be a martyr or a saint, and then use that as justification for behaviour that is itself fanatical and authoritarian.
I have genuinely wanted to make this post sound less fanatical, profane, and reactionary than others I've written about Stallman in the past; I'm not using foul language, but my point still remains that as someone who not only values freedom on an instinctive level, but who also (unlike some people) does not simply see the word freedom as euphemism for other people doing what I want, I cannot in good conscience advocate the philosophy, attitudes, or behaviour of Richard Stallman. The reason why is because despite what he says, I do not believe (based on my observations of his behaviour) that advancing the cause of individual freedom is genuinely his primary motivation; but rather that he is motivated primarily by a need for adoration and intellectual conformity from his followers.
To me this sounds at least in places as though the FSF are using the GPL as an opportunity to further dictate to their already-converted more than anything else.
For one thing, it insists that software patents should either be made freely usable by everyone, or else not obtained at all. Whether you argue that this is a desirable sentiment or not, the bottom line is that this directive is beyond Stallman's legitimate power to make. The draft tries to decree a similar prohibition against DRM, which again, is beyond its power and will be found unenforcable.
I've said for a while that Stallman's ego and delusions about his own level of authority were getting out of control...to me, this draft fairly conclusively proves that assertion.
Where is Senator McCarthy when we really need him?;-)
moral implications of Free Software development; after all, its contribution is only incidental. If there are no moral or ethical implications, and leadership has no value in this new market of ideas, all that remains is the Invisible Hand. All praise the Invisible Hand.
What you neglect to mention is that "leadership" isn't. It consists of individuals who are fundamentally the same as everyone else (having the same requirements for bowel movements, etc) but who are led via narcissism into believing that they're somehow better than the rest of us.
Stallman, Larry Wall et al. might have contributed large amounts to FOSS's progress; I'm not denying that...but so have a very large number of other people. I'm not going to spend time contributing to the inflation of the egos of a few select individuals on the one hand, at the expense of never recognising said others at all.
I am thoroughly sick and tired of this small handful of grand standing, self promoting narcissists who are aided and abetted in claiming that they *are* Linux. It's a crock of shit from beginning to end, and it always has been. Said narcissists wouldn't have got anywhere if it hadn't been for the thousands of others in the trenches and on IRC who've laid their groundwork.
...on the road to America becoming a repeat of Nazi Germany. The judicial system has been almost entirely dismantled already. Habeas corpus is gone, and Bush has been claiming that as Fuhrer in Chief he doesn't need to listen to either the courts or the representative bodies. That's why you get things like this happening...all the good Germans imitating Bush's attitude down the chain.
The only thing he really needs to do now is implement Rex 87, and you're all officially fucked. Even if that poor kid does get locked up and sodomised and/or waterboarded for 20 years, just think of it as him going in early.
It'll take a while, cos there are so many of you...but Bush'll get around to all of you, in time.
IBM have taken hold of Linux with both hands. Not only that, it's worth remembering that people wanting to leave Microsoft can run Linux on the PC they've already got, whereas OSX is *still* on proprietary hardware, even if it's now x86 based.
IBM also have a tendency not to put all their eggs in one basket; they might have embraced Linux right now, but what happened with PCMCIA and OS/2 demonstrated to me that even if those things didn't work, IBM are still a company who are willing to look at unconventional things and take risks; and that's how companies move forward.
I don't care how much money Jobs makes from the iPod in the mobile space; Apple are still going to remain largely irrelevant, IMNSHO. Put OSX on *exactly* the same hardware as what Windows and Linux use, and that will change.
Jobs needs to abandon proprietary hardware once and for all...Until he does that, he can expect to remain on the fringe irrespective of anything else he might do.
I have very little sense of nationalism, but what microscopic degree I do have was offended by this article.
To the Americans reading this:- I understand that your attempt to include what few of our cultural references that you know about when writing about Australians is based on the assumption that people in other countries are as pathologically ethnocentric as yourselves. To put it bluntly, I at least am not...and even if we were, the references in this article are incorporated so crudely that they come across as patronising, moronic, and inept. I'm also not sure how talking about us having started as a nation of criminals could possibly be meant as anything other than an insult. It might be true, but it's a very tactless thing to make reference to.
Australia might have started as a colony of convicts...America on the other hand started as a colony of deranged religious fanatics, overhyped philosophical plagiarists, and genocidal, white supremacist racists. Given our comparitive political situations currently, I think I know which of the two countries has most suffered from its' origins returning to haunt it...and it hasn't been ours.
I'm on a 1.5 mb down/256k up ADSL line now, and before that I was on dialup. I will admit that until I discovered Bit Torrent, the experience was initially actually somewhat traumatic, since being able to get virtually any file I could think of more or less instantly was overwhelming to me, especially since I was also introduced to DirectConnect within about two days of getting the connection as well. I had files coming at me from all directions...I was unable to keep up with what I was being sent, and it caused me some panic.
Eventually I calmed down, got off DC++, and set up my firewall properly. Now I only use Bit Torrent for very specific files that I want, and I don't simply sit on DC++ randomly leeching everything that goes past.
The thing that can be overwhelming about broadband is that it gives you so many options of what to do, that it's very difficult out of all of said possibilities to actually make choices...at least at first. Once you realise that it doesn't mean you're going to be automatically buried by a tsunami of data that you can't control, it becomes manageable. I realised that it was simply something I could use for getting the files I wanted as I had with broadband...just much more quickly.:)
I'm looking forward very much to the introduction of SDSL in my area now as well...because that way I'll be able to host my own Unreal Tournament 2004 server, which will be great fun.
As I recall, Hitler's fatal mistake was to attempt to conquer Russia, as well.
I wonder if this parallel is symbolic of anything?;)
(To the lemmings who will doubtless now pour out of the woodwork screaming about Godwin's Law, please go back to sleep. That law refers to gratuitous overuse of references to Hitler or the Nazis...it doesn't say they should not be mentioned at all. Although even if it did, personally I'd hardly care...so don't bother.)
John Dvorak is a troll, and not even an entertaining one, yet his antagonistic, clueless opinions have often been promoted on the front page of Slashdot.
Many from this site have also considered me a troll...I've been modded such numerous times, and also can point to ten individuals in my freaks list who share this opinion...and yet I don't get the kind of promotion which Dvorak enjoys, even though I'd probably like having it even more than he does.
Could somebody please explain the cause of this inconsistency to me?
but it can safely be considered in cryogenic suspension.
Games like the recent Path of Neo debacle could be considered allegorical for the PC gaming industry having accidentally attempted suicide due to a heroine overdose.;)
It's hard to call him a fascist when he hasn't issued a single veto
He didn't issue vetoes in the past because with DeLay as House majority leader, he didn't need to...everything he wanted went through. Now that DeLay has been removed, however, we may possibly see one or two at least.
Bush's cronyism is not robust. Having different people in the same manner as organs in a body works fine as long as said people are there. If they get removed for whatever reason however, that is essentially a part of the governmental machine which has been lost. The loss of DeLay has been a mortal wound for Bush politically, and it is not one I expect him to recover from.
Without GNU, there would be no Linux. There wasn't any alternative before Linux to the GNU tools and there still isn't.
Gee, I wonder how the BSDs have coped, then?;) Granted, they use gcc...but most of the other elements that Linux has borrowed from the GNU project, the BSD peeps have written their own versions of. Download NetBSD sometime...you'll find that out.
There is also at least one other free compiler in existence...Open Watcom. I tried to find out if there were alternatives to GNU stuff at one point, because for a long time I've been tired of RMS and his crap...and for most things, there actually are. Linus adopted the GNU stuff because it was quicker and easier...not because there was *no* other alternative. He has since said that if he'd known about FreeBSD at the time, he would have worked on that.
I didn't expect you to know that though...Most Linux users don't seem to. RMS has done a surprisingly good job of making sure a lot of Linux users only know what he wants them to.
You're interpreting. RMS says: use free software, he doesn't say you should this particular piece of software. This is a moral stand, not a technical one. So he is in his role to say that and there is no arrogance.
This is complete bullshit. Stallman is probably the single most self-righteous, flagrantly narcissistic individual I've ever heard of. Go and read his "words to avoid" screed on gnu.org where he basically outlines exactly how people should think, as but one example. The amount of credit he has repeatedly demanded where Linux is concerned is similarly outrageous.
but where would modern software be if it weren't for GNU and the GPL?
Probably happily using one or more of the BSDs, I expect.;)
Stallman's lemmings forget about the existence of the BSDs and try to imply that if it wasn't for Stallman, open source in general would not exist...which is entirely untrue. It is, however, exactly what Stallman wants people to think.
No, it isn't. Linus opted to use the GNU project's software purely because it was there, and meant that he didn't have to write more than the kernel itself. He didn't give a damn about Stallman's self-stimulatory idealism, either. He did it purely for pragmatic reasons...although in hindsight, it's turned out to be a bad idea.
Stallman is very bad for Linux, because there are times when people refuse to use Linux not because of the operating system itself, but purely because they (completely understandably) don't want to be associated with him or his followers.
So if you think for example, that smoking is bad and it is bad for people to smoke as it harms themselves and others, some other indvidual might not think of smoking as bad and doesn't think it is bad for others. Now what happens if someone next to you starts smoking? It contradicts your ethical standards but not theirs.
True. Thus, in order not to infringe said smoker's free will, my own choices are to either stay, and endure the smoke, or remove myself from that situation. My girlfriend is actually a smoker, while I am not...and I generally give her space when she wants to smoke. She is not offended by that, and so it works well.
I also was not attempting to say that I feel that anyone *has* to use p2p. I do strongly believe that it would be beneficial for more people if they started to, but if they do not, it *is* their choice. What I would mainly prefer is that groups that do not wish to use it cease in their efforts to make myself and others who *do* wish to, unable to do so...because such is infringing upon *our* free will.
I tend to think that this is what differentiates my own perspective from that of Richard Stallman and his followers, as a primary example, and it is one of the main reasons why I find them as vexatious as I do. I have views on what would constitute a better society, sure...but I think it is entirely wrong of anyone to attempt to *force* their own views onto other people.
The GNU/FSF faction of Linux users believe that their perspective, and their perspective alone, should govern how people do things, at least as far as software is concerned. I on the other hand believe that certain things are beneficial, and will certainly attempt to promote said things when I can...but the difference is that I recognise that diversity of opinion is also vitally important...and that there is no right more inalienable than the right to choose.
I bet he just got bumped up on W's list... don't be surprised if RMS meets a sudden and unfortunate demise... hope they don't arrest him and try him in court.
I doubt it, somehow. Just about everybody who's conscious these days knows about Bush's dictatorial aspirations...we didn't need The Prophet (sic) to tell us that.
Stallman would probably love it if W *did* arrest him, though...ESR has written about him having aspirations towards martyrdom. Stallman considers at least the appearance of having the moral high ground to be extremely powerful...and I suspect he would consider his assassination to be the ultimate logical extension of such.
Stallman is somebody who wants nothing more than to be seen as a greater man than he actually is, and he consistently demonstrates that a craving for veneration is his primary motivation. Thus, in his mind, being awarded concrete boots would be the greatest honour anyone could bestow upon him...because it would mean he could potentially be seen in the same light as someone like Martin Luther King or John Lennon...which is exactly how he wants to be seen.
I try to make reciprocity (the Golden Rule, basically) my own ethical basis. Ergo, the question is...with whatever it is that I'm doing, would I like it if other people were doing the same to me?
That is the reason why I believe in p2p, and why I've never had a moral problem with piracy, believe it or not. Sure, it benefits and enriches my life to have mp3s, films, and software, but I've seen it benefit and enrich the lives of others likewise. I take what I want/need from the datastream myself, and then leave the program open afterwards in order to assist others in doing the same.
People can talk about ethics as being dictated by the majority, but determining what is or is not ethical is normally fairly simple, in my own mind. If what you're doing is as beneficial for others as it is for yourself, then it is ethical. If it benefits only yourself, to the detriment of others, then it is unethical.
According to this heuristic, retailing of media (films, music, and so on) is actually less ethical than piracy, because in the retail model, the consumer loses money, but then gains an item of media in return for it. The losso f money however means that a consumer will typically only be able to engage in such a trade a limited number of times.
In the p2p scenario, there are no "consumers". Everyone has the opportunity to be equally proactive, and in fact if the application is left running long enough, this will happen automatically. It is also true that unlike with fiat currency, if a user obtains a particularly highly-demanded file, they can continue to trade that file for files they want indefinitely, for as long as the file they have remains in high demand. It is a much more free system of trade than the one involving fiat currency, and it is one which is much more likely to ensure the mutual benefit of everyone who participates.
If the film and record companies claim they are losing money from p2p, then let the question be asked...what do they spend that money on? If they are talking about material goods like food and cars, the system is not applicable with that, (yet) but if they are talking about also wanting information and music/software/films themselves, let them as individuals come and participate in the p2p system. They will see their films or music traded, yes...but they are also entirely welcome to take as much other material from the network for their own use as they want...there is more available than any one person could watch or listen to in a lifetime.
Didn't MPAA scare everyone into accessing P2P networks?
They seem to have almost successfully killed eDonkey at least. Although then again, Napster died...Kazaa is still up, but there's virtually nothing there these days. I suspect Kad/Overnet and Gnutella are going to end up being our only choices. Then there's Direct Connect...but that is a lot closer to IRC than p2p in my mind.
Slashdot Mirror
I am probably just an old idealist but so is RMS.
It sounds to me more like you're simply an old advocate of RMS, since what you're saying here is his worldview, pretty much word for word.
FOSS, GNU and Linux is about the right to choose, a right wich is very limited outside the FOSS community.
Stallman is not about a choice at all. He cannot tolerate the idea of anyone using any other license whatsoever. This is an example of what I'm talking about, in his own words. This is another good article which illustrates what I'm talking about, in terms of his attitude towards making a living from software development.
In his mind however, it is his way or the highway, and I believe that this and the above attitude are also part of the reason why the BSDs aren't more popular; Stallman has succeeded in alienating many people from them, simply because the people producing them don't adhere to his decrees. I am glad Linus is finally putting some kind of conscious, deliberate thought as to whether or not to stay on this man's bandwagon any longer...it is something that should have been done a very long time ago.
On the surface, Stallman is very good at making his arguments sound compelling...it's only when you look beneath the surface that you start to discover that his motives aren't anywhere near as pure as they initially seem to be.
a) Most other licenses don't have the GPL's requirement on distributing source with binaries. Some do, sure. That isn't necessarily a problem for some things, but GNU reactionaries tend to be well-versed in Stallman's rhetoric, and unyielding in their entirely autonomic refusal to use anything without said requirement.
b) The aforementioned reflexively pro-GNU sheep comprise a fairly large demographic of Linux's userbase, which is exactly what Stallman wanted. The man may not display much *wisdom*, but he is intelligent in the sense that it's the above element (copyleft) that gives it the viral element and causes it to be self-perpetuating. Hence, it would be very difficult to get rid of from an entrenched base.
If Stallman goes increasingly rogue, the only real alternative is going to be to migrate to one of the BSDs, and to come up with a new source-with-binaries license which doesn't however try and have Stallman's onerous demands to comply with his worldview.
I'm glad some other people are finally starting to see this.
I don't have a problem with the FSF shooting itself in the foot at all. They're welcome to do it as often as they want as far as I'm concerned, because the more they do, the less time it'll take for them to become almost completely irrelevant.
It's Stallman's own equivalent of the Ten Commandments. What he is essentially saying with this is that any software licensed under the GPL now also falls under his philosophical jurisdiction.
It's been his attitude for a while now that anybody who uses Linux is supposedly on his turf by default, whether they like it or not...that he as a single individual deserves most (if not all) of the credit for the fact that Linux exists, and that if you don't essentially want to become an intellectual clone of his, then you have no right to use Linux. People are going to think I'm insane here, sure...After all, DRM itself is a bad thing, right? DRM however is not the point. Stallman always claims to value principles...I do too...and here's the principle at stake here:- That Stallman thinks he is entirely able and fully justified to make whatever decrees he wishes to people who use GPL licensed software. He might not have (blatantly) done it yet, but I have no difficulty believing that in the next version of the license, (if not this one) he will start attempting to attach conditions and decrees which have nothing to do with software licensing whatsoever, but are to do with the way people *think.*
What is also typical is Moglen's abdication of responsibility...claiming that they're simply reacting to the behaviour of others. That's always been Stallman's line; demonise the opposition, make himself out to be a martyr or a saint, and then use that as justification for behaviour that is itself fanatical and authoritarian.
I have genuinely wanted to make this post sound less fanatical, profane, and reactionary than others I've written about Stallman in the past; I'm not using foul language, but my point still remains that as someone who not only values freedom on an instinctive level, but who also (unlike some people) does not simply see the word freedom as euphemism for other people doing what I want, I cannot in good conscience advocate the philosophy, attitudes, or behaviour of Richard Stallman. The reason why is because despite what he says, I do not believe (based on my observations of his behaviour) that advancing the cause of individual freedom is genuinely his primary motivation; but rather that he is motivated primarily by a need for adoration and intellectual conformity from his followers.
To me this sounds at least in places as though the FSF are using the GPL as an opportunity to further dictate to their already-converted more than anything else.
For one thing, it insists that software patents should either be made freely usable by everyone, or else not obtained at all. Whether you argue that this is a desirable sentiment or not, the bottom line is that this directive is beyond Stallman's legitimate power to make. The draft tries to decree a similar prohibition against DRM, which again, is beyond its power and will be found unenforcable.
I've said for a while that Stallman's ego and delusions about his own level of authority were getting out of control...to me, this draft fairly conclusively proves that assertion.
Where is Senator McCarthy when we really need him? ;-)
moral implications of Free Software development; after all, its contribution is only incidental. If there are no moral or ethical implications, and leadership has no value in this new market of ideas, all that remains is the Invisible Hand. All praise the Invisible Hand.
What you neglect to mention is that "leadership" isn't. It consists of individuals who are fundamentally the same as everyone else (having the same requirements for bowel movements, etc) but who are led via narcissism into believing that they're somehow better than the rest of us.
Stallman, Larry Wall et al. might have contributed large amounts to FOSS's progress; I'm not denying that...but so have a very large number of other people. I'm not going to spend time contributing to the inflation of the egos of a few select individuals on the one hand, at the expense of never recognising said others at all.
I am thoroughly sick and tired of this small handful of grand standing, self promoting narcissists who are aided and abetted in claiming that they *are* Linux. It's a crock of shit from beginning to end, and it always has been. Said narcissists wouldn't have got anywhere if it hadn't been for the thousands of others in the trenches and on IRC who've laid their groundwork.
...on the road to America becoming a repeat of Nazi Germany. The judicial system has been almost entirely dismantled already. Habeas corpus is gone, and Bush has been claiming that as Fuhrer in Chief he doesn't need to listen to either the courts or the representative bodies. That's why you get things like this happening...all the good Germans imitating Bush's attitude down the chain.
The only thing he really needs to do now is implement Rex 87, and you're all officially fucked. Even if that poor kid does get locked up and sodomised and/or waterboarded for 20 years, just think of it as him going in early.
It'll take a while, cos there are so many of you...but Bush'll get around to all of you, in time.
IBM have taken hold of Linux with both hands. Not only that, it's worth remembering that people wanting to leave Microsoft can run Linux on the PC they've already got, whereas OSX is *still* on proprietary hardware, even if it's now x86 based.
IBM also have a tendency not to put all their eggs in one basket; they might have embraced Linux right now, but what happened with PCMCIA and OS/2 demonstrated to me that even if those things didn't work, IBM are still a company who are willing to look at unconventional things and take risks; and that's how companies move forward.
I don't care how much money Jobs makes from the iPod in the mobile space; Apple are still going to remain largely irrelevant, IMNSHO. Put OSX on *exactly* the same hardware as what Windows and Linux use, and that will change.
Jobs needs to abandon proprietary hardware once and for all...Until he does that, he can expect to remain on the fringe irrespective of anything else he might do.
I have very little sense of nationalism, but what microscopic degree I do have was offended by this article.
To the Americans reading this:- I understand that your attempt to include what few of our cultural references that you know about when writing about Australians is based on the assumption that people in other countries are as pathologically ethnocentric as yourselves. To put it bluntly, I at least am not...and even if we were, the references in this article are incorporated so crudely that they come across as patronising, moronic, and inept. I'm also not sure how talking about us having started as a nation of criminals could possibly be meant as anything other than an insult. It might be true, but it's a very tactless thing to make reference to.
Australia might have started as a colony of convicts...America on the other hand started as a colony of deranged religious fanatics, overhyped philosophical plagiarists, and genocidal, white supremacist racists. Given our comparitive political situations currently, I think I know which of the two countries has most suffered from its' origins returning to haunt it...and it hasn't been ours.
I'm on a 1.5 mb down/256k up ADSL line now, and before that I was on dialup. I will admit that until I discovered Bit Torrent, the experience was initially actually somewhat traumatic, since being able to get virtually any file I could think of more or less instantly was overwhelming to me, especially since I was also introduced to DirectConnect within about two days of getting the connection as well. I had files coming at me from all directions...I was unable to keep up with what I was being sent, and it caused me some panic.
:)
Eventually I calmed down, got off DC++, and set up my firewall properly. Now I only use Bit Torrent for very specific files that I want, and I don't simply sit on DC++ randomly leeching everything that goes past.
The thing that can be overwhelming about broadband is that it gives you so many options of what to do, that it's very difficult out of all of said possibilities to actually make choices...at least at first. Once you realise that it doesn't mean you're going to be automatically buried by a tsunami of data that you can't control, it becomes manageable. I realised that it was simply something I could use for getting the files I wanted as I had with broadband...just much more quickly.
I'm looking forward very much to the introduction of SDSL in my area now as well...because that way I'll be able to host my own Unreal Tournament 2004 server, which will be great fun.
As I recall, Hitler's fatal mistake was to attempt to conquer Russia, as well.
;)
I wonder if this parallel is symbolic of anything?
(To the lemmings who will doubtless now pour out of the woodwork screaming about Godwin's Law, please go back to sleep. That law refers to gratuitous overuse of references to Hitler or the Nazis...it doesn't say they should not be mentioned at all. Although even if it did, personally I'd hardly care...so don't bother.)
John Dvorak is a troll, and not even an entertaining one, yet his antagonistic, clueless opinions have often been promoted on the front page of Slashdot.
Many from this site have also considered me a troll...I've been modded such numerous times, and also can point to ten individuals in my freaks list who share this opinion...and yet I don't get the kind of promotion which Dvorak enjoys, even though I'd probably like having it even more than he does.
Could somebody please explain the cause of this inconsistency to me?
but it can safely be considered in cryogenic suspension.
;)
Games like the recent Path of Neo debacle could be considered allegorical for the PC gaming industry having accidentally attempted suicide due to a heroine overdose.
It's hard to call him a fascist when he hasn't issued a single veto
He didn't issue vetoes in the past because with DeLay as House majority leader, he didn't need to...everything he wanted went through. Now that DeLay has been removed, however, we may possibly see one or two at least.
Bush's cronyism is not robust. Having different people in the same manner as organs in a body works fine as long as said people are there. If they get removed for whatever reason however, that is essentially a part of the governmental machine which has been lost. The loss of DeLay has been a mortal wound for Bush politically, and it is not one I expect him to recover from.
Without GNU, there would be no Linux.
;) Granted, they use gcc...but most of the other elements that Linux has borrowed from the GNU project, the BSD peeps have written their own versions of. Download NetBSD sometime...you'll find that out.
There wasn't any alternative before Linux to the GNU tools and there still isn't.
Gee, I wonder how the BSDs have coped, then?
There is also at least one other free compiler in existence...Open Watcom. I tried to find out if there were alternatives to GNU stuff at one point, because for a long time I've been tired of RMS and his crap...and for most things, there actually are. Linus adopted the GNU stuff because it was quicker and easier...not because there was *no* other alternative. He has since said that if he'd known about FreeBSD at the time, he would have worked on that.
I didn't expect you to know that though...Most Linux users don't seem to. RMS has done a surprisingly good job of making sure a lot of Linux users only know what he wants them to.
You're interpreting. RMS says: use free software, he doesn't say you should this particular piece of software. This is a moral stand, not a technical one. So he is in his role to say that and there is no arrogance.
This is complete bullshit. Stallman is probably the single most self-righteous, flagrantly narcissistic individual I've ever heard of. Go and read his "words to avoid" screed on gnu.org where he basically outlines exactly how people should think, as but one example. The amount of credit he has repeatedly demanded where Linux is concerned is similarly outrageous.
Stop defending the man...he doesn't deserve it.
but where would modern software be if it weren't for GNU and the GPL?
;)
Probably happily using one or more of the BSDs, I expect.
Stallman's lemmings forget about the existence of the BSDs and try to imply that if it wasn't for Stallman, open source in general would not exist...which is entirely untrue. It is, however, exactly what Stallman wants people to think.
Linux is merely a byproduct of that ideal.
No, it isn't. Linus opted to use the GNU project's software purely because it was there, and meant that he didn't have to write more than the kernel itself. He didn't give a damn about Stallman's self-stimulatory idealism, either. He did it purely for pragmatic reasons...although in hindsight, it's turned out to be a bad idea.
Stallman is very bad for Linux, because there are times when people refuse to use Linux not because of the operating system itself, but purely because they (completely understandably) don't want to be associated with him or his followers.
They actually both want power. Money is a cover for Bill, and an illusion of moral superiority is Stallman's.
A few more upgrades, like AI, memory storage etc then we will never have to worry about who will replace RMS. We will each have a copy.
;-)
Mine would be subjected to *massive* reprogramming.
So if you think for example, that smoking is bad and it is bad for people to smoke as it harms themselves and others, some other indvidual might not think of smoking as bad and doesn't think it is bad for others. Now what happens if someone next to you starts smoking? It contradicts your ethical standards but not theirs.
True. Thus, in order not to infringe said smoker's free will, my own choices are to either stay, and endure the smoke, or remove myself from that situation. My girlfriend is actually a smoker, while I am not...and I generally give her space when she wants to smoke. She is not offended by that, and so it works well.
I also was not attempting to say that I feel that anyone *has* to use p2p. I do strongly believe that it would be beneficial for more people if they started to, but if they do not, it *is* their choice. What I would mainly prefer is that groups that do not wish to use it cease in their efforts to make myself and others who *do* wish to, unable to do so...because such is infringing upon *our* free will.
I tend to think that this is what differentiates my own perspective from that of Richard Stallman and his followers, as a primary example, and it is one of the main reasons why I find them as vexatious as I do. I have views on what would constitute a better society, sure...but I think it is entirely wrong of anyone to attempt to *force* their own views onto other people.
The GNU/FSF faction of Linux users believe that their perspective, and their perspective alone, should govern how people do things, at least as far as software is concerned. I on the other hand believe that certain things are beneficial, and will certainly attempt to promote said things when I can...but the difference is that I recognise that diversity of opinion is also vitally important...and that there is no right more inalienable than the right to choose.
I bet he just got bumped up on W's list... don't be surprised if RMS meets a sudden and unfortunate demise... hope they don't arrest him and try him in court.
I doubt it, somehow. Just about everybody who's conscious these days knows about Bush's dictatorial aspirations...we didn't need The Prophet (sic) to tell us that.
Stallman would probably love it if W *did* arrest him, though...ESR has written about him having aspirations towards martyrdom. Stallman considers at least the appearance of having the moral high ground to be extremely powerful...and I suspect he would consider his assassination to be the ultimate logical extension of such.
Stallman is somebody who wants nothing more than to be seen as a greater man than he actually is, and he consistently demonstrates that a craving for veneration is his primary motivation. Thus, in his mind, being awarded concrete boots would be the greatest honour anyone could bestow upon him...because it would mean he could potentially be seen in the same light as someone like Martin Luther King or John Lennon...which is exactly how he wants to be seen.
I try to make reciprocity (the Golden Rule, basically) my own ethical basis. Ergo, the question is...with whatever it is that I'm doing, would I like it if other people were doing the same to me?
That is the reason why I believe in p2p, and why I've never had a moral problem with piracy, believe it or not. Sure, it benefits and enriches my life to have mp3s, films, and software, but I've seen it benefit and enrich the lives of others likewise. I take what I want/need from the datastream myself, and then leave the program open afterwards in order to assist others in doing the same.
People can talk about ethics as being dictated by the majority, but determining what is or is not ethical is normally fairly simple, in my own mind. If what you're doing is as beneficial for others as it is for yourself, then it is ethical. If it benefits only yourself, to the detriment of others, then it is unethical.
According to this heuristic, retailing of media (films, music, and so on) is actually less ethical than piracy, because in the retail model, the consumer loses money, but then gains an item of media in return for it. The losso f money however means that a consumer will typically only be able to engage in such a trade a limited number of times.
In the p2p scenario, there are no "consumers". Everyone has the opportunity to be equally proactive, and in fact if the application is left running long enough, this will happen automatically. It is also true that unlike with fiat currency, if a user obtains a particularly highly-demanded file, they can continue to trade that file for files they want indefinitely, for as long as the file they have remains in high demand. It is a much more free system of trade than the one involving fiat currency, and it is one which is much more likely to ensure the mutual benefit of everyone who participates.
If the film and record companies claim they are losing money from p2p, then let the question be asked...what do they spend that money on? If they are talking about material goods like food and cars, the system is not applicable with that, (yet) but if they are talking about also wanting information and music/software/films themselves, let them as individuals come and participate in the p2p system. They will see their films or music traded, yes...but they are also entirely welcome to take as much other material from the network for their own use as they want...there is more available than any one person could watch or listen to in a lifetime.
Didn't MPAA scare everyone into accessing P2P networks?
They seem to have almost successfully killed eDonkey at least. Although then again, Napster died...Kazaa is still up, but there's virtually nothing there these days. I suspect Kad/Overnet and Gnutella are going to end up being our only choices. Then there's Direct Connect...but that is a lot closer to IRC than p2p in my mind.