Too bad Vista is also affected, along with other versions of "M$ Windoze".
Does that put a dent on your brilliant theory or do you plan on spending the day arguing with people who are more intelligent and less religious than you about this, like you did in the "M$ caused Skype to fail" thread?
If by that you mean "you have a different definition of what freedom is, therefore I don't like you" then sure, I'm a "BSD troll" or whatever.
your definition of "freedom" is ludicrous.
GPL -> Distribution restrictions.
BSD -> No restrictions.
No restrictions -> More freedom.
More freedom -> Possible unsavory side effects that people choose to live with
Isn't logic great?
The GPL definition of freedom is that a sofware and derivatives must always, under all conditions, be free.
BSD has a similar one, except that it doesn't place restrictions on how that happens. No one can make BSD-licensed software "non free", it will always be available to everyone. The only difference is that it might not benefit from coerced third party improvements, but that's what you sign up for.
it simply distributes freedoms in a different matter
The Kool-Aid is strong with this one.
But don't go around accusing the GPL is limiting freedoms when it gives others freedoms that the BSD could never guarantee.
BSD licenses guarantee absolutely nothing. Here's the code, do whatever the heck you want with it. The perceived benefits to using the GPL are nice, but please don't insult people's intelligence by claiming they result in more freedom. A restriction to ensure X or Y is still that - a restriction. The distribution restrictions on the GPL are designed to further Stallman's social causes (some of which I actually agree with). If you feel that's fine, then by all means use the GPL. That's your choice.
No, my NAS is a headless Fedora server install running on another, older box. The one that was running Ubuntu is beefier, so that's where I'm going to move NAS to.
That box also has my SVN repo but not much else, so it's never had X installed at all.
I can get my hands on MHS for cheap since I have an MSDN Universal subscription, but I got FreeNAS running on a Fedora box for the challenge. Sometimes (not very often) I do like to tinker a bit.
Get ready to be modded down for the suggestion though:)
God, you truly are stupid. I mean, not in the sense someone would say "you're stupid" in the comfort of their home while posting online when faced with an opposing argument, but truly stupid in the real-world sense of stupid. I hope to hell you have some redeeming attribute like being able to whistle Beethoven's Fifth through your nostrils.
I like and use Microsoft software, especially the development tools and servers, and I've (almost) always considered they are worth the money. But WGA is the most stupid thing Microsoft has ever done. I could understand product activation to a certain extent - it's really no different than most commercial software protection schemes in most respects. But WGA needs to be killed off. WGA is a hell of a lot closer to treating customers like criminals than WPA ever was.
Personally I've never had problems with WPA or WGA, but this incident pisses me off just thinking about how pissed off I would be if that would ever happen to me. Microsoft needs to understand that there are limits to how much bullshit people can take, even among people who appreciate some of their software.
On the other hand it's not like I'd switch to Linux anyway. Ubuntu completely screwed up my X configuration after an apt-get upgrade that took two hours (6.x to 7.4) and I just shut the thing down. I need to move my FreeNAS to a better box anyway so that's what I'll probably do after wiping it. If I had a dime for every time I've typed su vim/etc/X11/xorg.conf I'd get me an iPhone or something.
That won't do. The GPL is really more of a social instrument than a software license, so for people like Stallman a BSD-style license (which is just one step above public domain and true freedom) would be unacceptable. A lot of bandwidth and keyboard lubricant has been spent over the years to ensure that everyone thinks the GPL is the "best" software license - and the thousands of developers that buy into the FSF "freedom, with caveats" spiel by using the GPL (because well, that's what everyone uses) without really understanding what it's for are part of that problem.
As you can imagine I really don't like the GPL or the FSF or Richard Stallman or any of his friends too much. While I recognize their contributions I think that they've fallen into the trap of trying to force everyone to convert to what has become a quasi-religion where the Inquisition is more important than celebrating mass.
Well flocktard, I think anything I could have said about your stupid "M$ has brainwashed Linus" whine would be less effective than your well-deserved troll moderation, since moderation is obviously what you live for.
How does it feel, to be so painfully obsessed by Microsoft that you have to work them into everything you say and do? Your life must suck so much.
Your post is a perfect example of the very thing Torvalds dislikes. Developers shouldn't be politicians, but unfortunately that "push" by people like Stallman (and the ideologues like you that carry the same extremist torch) have forced him to get involved in issues that shouldn't be issues at all. He built a kernel and he let the world have it. His responsibility is to make sure that it does what it's supposed to. He's a hacker. Anything beyond that, like "Debian is the one true distribution" and "freedom, any way you want it as long as it's my way" is just quasi-religious static that is neither useful nor particularly fun to deal with.
People who claim that Torvalds should be doing this or saying that should examine their own positions and honestly consider if they're not simply trying to use him and his position within the community to try and further a particular POV.
I don't know about your silly lists - they seem filled with half-truths, dodgy conclusions and exaggerations. But there are some really great comments there.
A hard-nosed person might say the real solution is to design a secure OS.
A reasonable one might suggest Slashdot change their misleading headline, and recommend Skype fix their network. It's not like this is the first Patch Tuesday in history, or the last.
It's convenient to blame Microsoft, I think. Skype knows all over the internets today people will be waxing poetic about "software monoculture" and "M$ Windoze is teh suxxorz" instead of questioning why a simple DoS they're supposed to be able to handle also caused a massive two-day outage.
The guy clearly got fucked in the ass by a Microsoft employee when he were a kid or something.
Well, that's one way to put it:)
probably does more to scare away people from GNU/Linux and FOSS than any person I've met on this website
Oh, you have no idea how true that is. The tragedy here is that I think most of the people like me he accuses of being "M$ astroturfers" are actually rooting for free software, because we know that it's the only thing that can give Microsoft a run for their money. Firefox proved that. I want Microsoft to have competition, otherwise all they do is stagnate. But I see no reason for accepting the religious bullshit and all-or-nothing extremism that comes along with people like this annoying wanker, never mind being coerced to stop using Microsoft products that provide value in my work just because I could get lots of "freedom" by using inferior alternatives.
If twitter had a real job at a real company (down in the trenches if you will) he'd realize how much damage people like him are doing to FOSS. I cringe every time I hear things like open source? you mean all those assholes running around the internet telling me how stupid I am because I like Windows? whenever I bring up the possibility of using a free PHP CMS or Bugzilla as alternatives to crappy commercial products, for example. Normal people out there may not have lots of love for Microsoft, but they are witnessing all those type-A personalities hurling insane amounts of bullshit FUD at Microsoft and concluding that they want nothing to do with a group of people who are so fucking insane.
DiBona needs to recuse himself from this process. He lost the privilege of speaking for the larger "community" when he went to work for Google, which are now competitors to Microsoft. So far in that thread he has done nothing more than to complain that Microsoft's license is GPL-incompatible. As far as I know OSI and the FSF are still two distinct and separate organizations.
Either the license is valid as far as the OSI's guidelines are concerned and it gets accepted, or it contains some sort of evil clause and it's not. Either way, DiBona needs to stay away from the whole thing and stop trying to convince the world that the only good software license is the one that's compatible with the Stallman's credo.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry there, twitter. Next time I see a statement like "It's planned" I'll whip out my Zealot Thesaurus and look up the correct definition.
Don't confuse disagreement with hatred. Hatred is what fills your life, not mine.
Because I don't consider them holy prayers.
I do, as long as it's unlocked and carrying a T-Mobile SIM card. And looks like I might just get my wish now :)
Does that put a dent on your brilliant theory or do you plan on spending the day arguing with people who are more intelligent and less religious than you about this, like you did in the "M$ caused Skype to fail" thread?
If by that you mean "you have a different definition of what freedom is, therefore I don't like you" then sure, I'm a "BSD troll" or whatever.
GPL -> Distribution restrictions.
BSD -> No restrictions.
No restrictions -> More freedom.
More freedom -> Possible unsavory side effects that people choose to live with
Isn't logic great?
BSD has a similar one, except that it doesn't place restrictions on how that happens. No one can make BSD-licensed software "non free", it will always be available to everyone. The only difference is that it might not benefit from coerced third party improvements, but that's what you sign up for.
The Kool-Aid is strong with this one.
BSD licenses guarantee absolutely nothing. Here's the code, do whatever the heck you want with it. The perceived benefits to using the GPL are nice, but please don't insult people's intelligence by claiming they result in more freedom. A restriction to ensure X or Y is still that - a restriction. The distribution restrictions on the GPL are designed to further Stallman's social causes (some of which I actually agree with). If you feel that's fine, then by all means use the GPL. That's your choice.
That box also has my SVN repo but not much else, so it's never had X installed at all.
Get ready to be modded down for the suggestion though :)
God, you truly are stupid. I mean, not in the sense someone would say "you're stupid" in the comfort of their home while posting online when faced with an opposing argument, but truly stupid in the real-world sense of stupid. I hope to hell you have some redeeming attribute like being able to whistle Beethoven's Fifth through your nostrils.
I consider BSD to be a superior server environment to Linux, and so far it's doing quite well.
Personally I've never had problems with WPA or WGA, but this incident pisses me off just thinking about how pissed off I would be if that would ever happen to me. Microsoft needs to understand that there are limits to how much bullshit people can take, even among people who appreciate some of their software.
On the other hand it's not like I'd switch to Linux anyway. Ubuntu completely screwed up my X configuration after an apt-get upgrade that took two hours (6.x to 7.4) and I just shut the thing down. I need to move my FreeNAS to a better box anyway so that's what I'll probably do after wiping it. If I had a dime for every time I've typed su vim /etc/X11/xorg.conf I'd get me an iPhone or something.
Lack of choices suck too.
As you can imagine I really don't like the GPL or the FSF or Richard Stallman or any of his friends too much. While I recognize their contributions I think that they've fallen into the trap of trying to force everyone to convert to what has become a quasi-religion where the Inquisition is more important than celebrating mass.
That's rich, considering you've been whining about "Bartko" and DR-DOS for the last ten years.
Looks like you have yourself a business model :)
How does it feel, to be so painfully obsessed by Microsoft that you have to work them into everything you say and do? Your life must suck so much.
People who claim that Torvalds should be doing this or saying that should examine their own positions and honestly consider if they're not simply trying to use him and his position within the community to try and further a particular POV.
Head. Explodes.
Just like they are to blame for the Skype outage.
I don't know about your silly lists - they seem filled with half-truths, dodgy conclusions and exaggerations. But there are some really great comments there.
Yes, because anyone who suspects Slashdot is just one big flamefest-for-AdSense-revenue operation must be employed by Microsoft.
Good for the GP, for a moment I thought you were going to go postal again because he dared correct you.
A reasonable one might suggest Slashdot change their misleading headline, and recommend Skype fix their network. It's not like this is the first Patch Tuesday in history, or the last.
It's convenient to blame Microsoft, I think. Skype knows all over the internets today people will be waxing poetic about "software monoculture" and "M$ Windoze is teh suxxorz" instead of questioning why a simple DoS they're supposed to be able to handle also caused a massive two-day outage.
It depends. Is that before or after Microsoft submits a license?
Well, that's one way to put it :)
Oh, you have no idea how true that is. The tragedy here is that I think most of the people like me he accuses of being "M$ astroturfers" are actually rooting for free software, because we know that it's the only thing that can give Microsoft a run for their money. Firefox proved that. I want Microsoft to have competition, otherwise all they do is stagnate. But I see no reason for accepting the religious bullshit and all-or-nothing extremism that comes along with people like this annoying wanker, never mind being coerced to stop using Microsoft products that provide value in my work just because I could get lots of "freedom" by using inferior alternatives.
If twitter had a real job at a real company (down in the trenches if you will) he'd realize how much damage people like him are doing to FOSS. I cringe every time I hear things like open source? you mean all those assholes running around the internet telling me how stupid I am because I like Windows? whenever I bring up the possibility of using a free PHP CMS or Bugzilla as alternatives to crappy commercial products, for example. Normal people out there may not have lots of love for Microsoft, but they are witnessing all those type-A personalities hurling insane amounts of bullshit FUD at Microsoft and concluding that they want nothing to do with a group of people who are so fucking insane.
Now I think I'm going to whine about being "modbombed" by the Evil Forces Of The Twitter Club and re-post everything again, just like him! :)
Either the license is valid as far as the OSI's guidelines are concerned and it gets accepted, or it contains some sort of evil clause and it's not. Either way, DiBona needs to stay away from the whole thing and stop trying to convince the world that the only good software license is the one that's compatible with the Stallman's credo.
It's a little late for that. Not to mention it would come across as disingenuous to say the least.
Oh god, I know that. But not everyone does, obviously.