YM "I don't like your opinion, so I'll call you a name" HTH
Does the name "Kerberos" ring a bell? If Micro$loth can distribute Linux binaries without source, they can
introduce code that breaks compatibility. And if we can't see the source, there's not much we can do.
Especially under something evil like the DMCA, where we might not even be able to reverse-engineer it.
This is pure marketting forces coupled with monopolistic behaviour. You're blaming the origional kerberos authors for bad behaviour actually originating from microsoft that may get accepted by the market.
So we'll of course gracefully accept an apology from you for your cowardly attempt at an invalid argument. Thanks in advance!
Imagine if Microsoft walked into the Linux fray, dedicated a team of 1,000 programmers to making Linux
better, but none of the community was allowed to see the code anymore? What if they released a new
version of MS Windows that's actually a Linux base, with the Windows UI on top of it? Suddenly, MS is
gaining from everyone's open source work. That's not fair, but that's what happens if you get rid of licenses
altogether.
Why isn't it fair? The origional open source software writer has _lost no rights_, and my non-techie friends would have a better Windows. And I could run a solid OS with a browser that works!
Why does RMS have to take a look at everyone's license and make certain it is "Free"?
Much of it has to do with the GPL's rather severe restrictions on which _non GPL'ed_ programs can talk to GPL'ed programs. Many of the arguments seem to stem from the fact the FSF calls GPL'ed software 'free' when its is the most restrictive license short of fully proprietory 'non-free' software. Its interesting to note that some so called 'non-free' software, while not being 'free as in beer', offers much more freedom. For instance, you can buy commercial libraries that offer much more liberal linking/runtime policies than any GPL'ed so called 'free' software would.
For a long time you could (may still be able to) write unencumbered device drivers for Microsoft operating systems without releasing source.
This is _hard to do_ in linux, especially in the case of loadable modules, as the GPL folks have taken the damaging view that loadable modules are merely components of a work, this is a stance that has always mystified me, of course, it may be just that linux is less modular than I thought, I'm not a device driver writer:-)
So I think its just about the FSF's 1984 style 'doublespeak' that stirs this argument up everytime, the GPL is only free as in beer, not that that isn't a good thing mind you:-)
"Absolutely! Its about time more folks come out and call the FSF out on this. RMS and Co have done
_great_ things for computer science, the GPL acts as a great balancing mechanism in this evil world of
software patents and closed source mayhem, but make no doubt about it, BSD type licensing offers the
most freedom. RMS would be taken much more seriously if he learned how to call a duck a duck. "
Freedom to get screwed over when someone wants to take their toys and sell them for millions to some
company isn't freedom.
Another mistake in semantics I see often. What is _actually_ happening is that BSD or otherwise truley free software has _enabled_ proprietary product. Notice, the origional truley free software STILL EXISTS and the origional author IS JUST AS HAPPY, because, and this is the important part, HE RETAINS THE ORIGIONAL RIGHTS TO HIS SOFTWARE! The origional author has simply made a gift to the entire computer software community, not to just a select few like the GPL does.
Now, thats not to say that RMS doesn't have some complex considerations, as there are some theories making the rounds that RMS suffers from sour grapes syndrome and is bitter that his house is smaller that Bill Gates. So there are plenty of reasons for the GPL, much of them personal in nature, this can get complex so we need to debate this without hurting RMS's feelings. Those unix weenies can get emotional sometimes, so please keep your comments polite. Hope that helps!
You have to understand that the idea is that software shuld be free. Like air. Like speech. If you don't like
the idea use comercial software and OS and library. There you have no freedom at all.
Well looks like I have to correct lots of folks today:-)
The GPL is _only_ free as in beer. Its otherwise very encumbered in what other software is allowed to talk to it. BSD artistic licensing seems to be the way to go, as it allows subsequent authors the _real_ freedom in subsequent licensing.
Please note, this is not to say GPL'ed software has no value, its just to say that it is only 'free as in beer.' Hope that helps clear things up, some folks like RMS have made this seemingly common error, its an easy one to make apparently.
quit trolling. the fsf encourages you to use other licenses (x11, with the warning that your software can be
included in proprietary software). he wasn't trying to stir up anybody, just answering the simple question of
whether it was a free license. as for the gnu library, they wrote it, so if you want to use it, play by their rules.
otherwise do it yourself.
I think what some folks get a grin out of is that GPL'ed software allows only the weakest definition of 'free', ie., 'free as in beer.' Otherwise, GPL'ed software is heavily encumbered. Hope that clears things up for you.
Absolutely! Its about time more folks come out and call the FSF out on this. RMS and Co have done _great_ things for computer science, the GPL acts as a great balancing mechanism in this evil world of software patents and closed source mayhem, but make no doubt about it, BSD type licensing offers the most freedom. RMS would be taken much more seriously if he learned how to call a duck a duck.
But if I have to pick between a nonthreatening penguin and a viscious devil, I'll stick with the penguin.
Believe it or not there are people who are concerned about morality even in this day and age. Sure you
might say the mascot of the OS is irrelevent. I tend to think it is very relevent because it says a lot about the
people and design and code each OS. I stay away from Windows for this reason as well, Windows usage
tends to be just a bunch of flag waving.
I agree with this sentiment, but I probably wouldn't let it keep me from tinkering with it. BSD is a valid piece of work, maybe there should be some mirrors with a Satan-free logo, no reason to trash BSD because somebody with a bad experience in their childhood became a computer coding Jesus-hater later in life. Those darn catholic priests maybe?:-D
Another interesting thing is that you got modded down for this, it speaks for the culture of this site itself. Folks here _do_ tend to be atheists,
bringing along all the usual baggage being atheist requires, the usual lack of respect for property (copyright, patents, accountability), yet with the paradox of material lust (video games all the time with the usual murderous themes), constant focus on toys vs serious social themes, cultish fantasy worlds (anime being particularily popular here). Rarely do you see topics about "stuff that matters", except for all the geek kids filling their narrow attention spans with toys and fantasies and ignoring the big questions in life. Look what happens when JonKatz brings some serious topics, all the slashdot kiddies tell him to go away because he's taking up valuable screen real estate that could be better used by tacoboy's anime/hentai and video game articles.
But clearly I'm not one to begrudge the kids here, even the culture of greed and self congratulating ignorance needs a church to hang out in;-)
I'm about as non-french as they come, and I can
get some out of it without hitting babel anything.
Were I doing a page about 'news for nerds, stuff that matters', I bet I could get some useful info on this project, especially given that its in french and not chinese, many of the terms are immediately recogniseable, and we're in the 21st century.
But your right, I should be more forgiving of rob, its not like he's doing journalism or anything. I guess I'll just acknowledge that you and rob are hillbillies and forget about it. It just goes to show you can have NT, SGI, Sun, and Linux, and still be as dumb as a brick:-)
Absolutely, and if you can develop equiment that will amplify the sounds that pass BEYOND the
boundaries of the land on which the concert is held then you are free to use it. If you think that it is unlawful
to do so, or to do pretty much whatever you like with a signal broadcast to your property then cite the
relevant law.
Radar detectors are illegal in some states. Theres your law.
No, you have missed the point entirely. This idea is specifically meant to keep Rob busy. If he drools a bit in the process, its a price we must pay. Please, lets not discourage Rob from his hobbies, he seems happy and proud, if he knew what he really looks like with dumb posts like that, there could be some emotional damage.
In a democracy the government has every reason to fear the citizenry as a whole, who can vote it out of
office.
Thats why they have nothing to fear. Most of the citizens are happy to have their traffic snooped because "they haven't done anything wrong." We're basically all trusting sheep. If you don't want your traffic snooped, then "you must have something to hide."
There's a threshold to how complex a product someone can develop with very basic tools. For an analogy,
try writing a web browser in assembly language. YOU CAN'T. Assembly is extremely simple and
everything is ultimately done in it, but there's a limit to how far you can go with it.
Now you are becoming irrational. Please explain, in your best english, _why_ a web browser cannot be written in assembly. (Please keep in mind, the difference between can't and shouldn't
If I wanted to say Americans I would've said it. I mean people in general. Practically everyone around me
knows English as a second language and is satisfied with that. They also think English is cool as a result of
USian propaganda and that contributes to the final effect.
I wouldn't call it 'propaganda', I'd just leave it
at 'influence.' But its really up to you on whether you'd rather sound 'hostile' or 'bitter' or even 'envious' rather than 'analytical', or simply 'conversational'. Goes to show you even English has its subtleties.
Why? Is the average American so much dumber than the average European? Or many Canadians and Latin
Americans? Or me?:-> I think the reason more Americans don't learn other languages is sheer intellectual
laziness...
Mostly a cost/benefit thing. While Latin Americans reap benefits from learning English, Americans don't get as much learning Spanish except where proximity to Mexico matters. So its not really laziness... (And please don't offer yourself up for comparisons in intellect, its
way too tempting for us less disciplined posters.)
This man helped to give the world an operating system that has survived the test of time and will most likely
outlive anything Bill Gates or his gang will ever create... what greater legacy could this man have left to his
profession or his peers ?
Folks who have called unix 'old technology', like bill gates and co., have always left me smiling. When microsoft publishes 'NT' or 'new technology', you can bet what has proven to work in the past has been thrown out, as in 'not invented here'.
(I can't comment on W2K, except that it has a pretty mouse cursor.) Good programming can avoid entrophy IMHO.
Spare account? I know I like having them, theres nothing better than AOL for usenet trolling (the art form, not what you newbie slashdot kids call trolling).
It's really scary when ignorant Slashdot fucks start having opinions about the NetBSD project.
Its not very scary to me:
- If an ignorant 'fuck' as you put it has an opinion that cannot be refuted, then the opinion is valid, therefore it nullifies your classification, unless the opinion itself directly scares you.
- Otherwise, the opinion can be ignored.
Now don't you feel better? You can still sleep with the lights on if that'll help, and good thing you posted anonymously, you sounded a bit ignorant yourself. (Didn't scare _me_ tho:-)
I have had many CD's stolen over the years and it sucks. Had the technology been available in the past to
record those CD's to mp3, I would still have some music that cannot be purchased. (Ice T's CopKiller, free
speech, but not allowed in the US)
Yes, this is terrible. You should take this one
to the Supreme Court, make sure you take a big boom box to demonstrate your right to free speech, I'd hate for the justices not to catch those lyrics!
Until most consumers understand the technology and what it can/can't do or at least or legislators begin to
understand we will be dealing with things like the DMCA and UTICA. If most people truly understood
what was in shrinkwrapped EULA's and what they meant they would prolly be outraged.
Many legislators are ignorant of such technologies and the only people talking to them are from industry and
they are only interested in protecting their precious copyrights.
I just don't think people are that outraged, or
we would have seen riots when 8 tracks were deemed
obsolete. Maybe it will change when DVD's are obsoleted.
To me its just the tyranny of the majority, ie., the majority of folks are perfectly happy buying DVD players and dealing with region codes. And all the legislators see are a bunch of GNU hippies mirroring criminal software and engaging in other sorts of subversive looking activities, its no wonder the legal system goes the way they do.
A lot of the argument seems to be that not only does the industry
own the data, it gets to decide how it is represented.
I think thats the core argument here. (Also include "when" and "where"
and maybe "if" for completeness.) However, given current industry
practices, it seems to be panning out that fair use is allowed except
where prohibitted (such as by the DMCA).
Am I totally off base here? Can you sue to ensure that
"fair use" is possible? It seems perfectly obvious to me that
the courts have already spoken with the DeCSS case, ie., it
is up to the intellectual property owner how, when, where, and
_if_ the licensee can receive the performance. To take it to
extremes, I'm not a DVD customer, can I sue the studios to
make the VHS version of "The Matrix" as interactive as the
DVD is? Say I'm really out there, my religion prohibits
VHS, can I demand a betamax version? Super 8, in case I'm
prohibitted from magnetic media? Live performance because
I believe electricity is a sin?
Go ahead, mod me down, but I'm sure I _do not_ have the constitutional
right to see, hear, or otherwise experience performance
of anybody's intellectual property, furthermore, I'm a live theatric
performer, yet you _cannot_ demand a command performance of my
origional play because your transportation "crashed".
Its really just economics, corporate folks will put in as many
restrictions as their customers will tolerate, and libraries
are not required by law to archive the complete inventory of any given
IP holding organization. But you're welcome to provide counterexamples,
like that doctor who was too stupid to make sure his record system
could export his own data to a useable format.
Cheers!
--
Sometimes stating the obvious is (score -1,flamebait)
Slashdot Mirror
YM "I don't like your opinion, so I'll call you a name" HTH
Does the name "Kerberos" ring a bell? If Micro$loth can distribute Linux binaries without source, they can introduce code that breaks compatibility. And if we can't see the source, there's not much we can do. Especially under something evil like the DMCA, where we might not even be able to reverse-engineer it.
This is pure marketting forces coupled with monopolistic behaviour. You're blaming the origional kerberos authors for bad behaviour actually originating from microsoft that may get accepted by the market.
So we'll of course gracefully accept an apology from you for your cowardly attempt at an invalid argument. Thanks in advance!
Why isn't it fair? The origional open source software writer has _lost no rights_, and my non-techie friends would have a better Windows. And I could run a solid OS with a browser that works!
So wheres this downside I obviously missed?
The best course of action is to not use the GPL unless you like goats! Hope that helps!
Much of it has to do with the GPL's rather severe restrictions on which _non GPL'ed_ programs can talk to GPL'ed programs. Many of the arguments seem to stem from the fact the FSF calls GPL'ed software 'free' when its is the most restrictive license short of fully proprietory 'non-free' software. Its interesting to note that some so called 'non-free' software, while not being 'free as in beer', offers much more freedom. For instance, you can buy commercial libraries that offer much more liberal linking/runtime policies than any GPL'ed so called 'free' software would.
For a long time you could (may still be able to) write unencumbered device drivers for Microsoft operating systems without releasing source. This is _hard to do_ in linux, especially in the case of loadable modules, as the GPL folks have taken the damaging view that loadable modules are merely components of a work, this is a stance that has always mystified me, of course, it may be just that linux is less modular than I thought, I'm not a device driver writer :-)
So I think its just about the FSF's 1984 style 'doublespeak' that stirs this argument up everytime, the GPL is only free as in beer, not that that isn't a good thing mind you :-)
2 cents.
Freedom to get screwed over when someone wants to take their toys and sell them for millions to some company isn't freedom.
Another mistake in semantics I see often. What is _actually_ happening is that BSD or otherwise truley free software has _enabled_ proprietary product. Notice, the origional truley free software STILL EXISTS and the origional author IS JUST AS HAPPY, because, and this is the important part, HE RETAINS THE ORIGIONAL RIGHTS TO HIS SOFTWARE! The origional author has simply made a gift to the entire computer software community, not to just a select few like the GPL does.
Now, thats not to say that RMS doesn't have some complex considerations, as there are some theories making the rounds that RMS suffers from sour grapes syndrome and is bitter that his house is smaller that Bill Gates. So there are plenty of reasons for the GPL, much of them personal in nature, this can get complex so we need to debate this without hurting RMS's feelings. Those unix weenies can get emotional sometimes, so please keep your comments polite. Hope that helps!
Well looks like I have to correct lots of folks today :-)
The GPL is _only_ free as in beer. Its otherwise very encumbered in what other software is allowed to talk to it. BSD artistic licensing seems to be the way to go, as it allows subsequent authors the _real_ freedom in subsequent licensing.
Please note, this is not to say GPL'ed software has no value, its just to say that it is only 'free as in beer.' Hope that helps clear things up, some folks like RMS have made this seemingly common error, its an easy one to make apparently.
Cheers!
I think what some folks get a grin out of is that GPL'ed software allows only the weakest definition of 'free', ie., 'free as in beer.' Otherwise, GPL'ed software is heavily encumbered. Hope that clears things up for you.
Absolutely! Its about time more folks come out and call the FSF out on this. RMS and Co have done _great_ things for computer science, the GPL acts as a great balancing mechanism in this evil world of software patents and closed source mayhem, but make no doubt about it, BSD type licensing offers the most freedom. RMS would be taken much more seriously if he learned how to call a duck a duck.
Because the politically correct always bite ;-)
I agree with this sentiment, but I probably wouldn't let it keep me from tinkering with it. BSD is a valid piece of work, maybe there should be some mirrors with a Satan-free logo, no reason to trash BSD because somebody with a bad experience in their childhood became a computer coding Jesus-hater later in life. Those darn catholic priests maybe? :-D
Another interesting thing is that you got modded down for this, it speaks for the culture of this site itself. Folks here _do_ tend to be atheists, bringing along all the usual baggage being atheist requires, the usual lack of respect for property (copyright, patents, accountability), yet with the paradox of material lust (video games all the time with the usual murderous themes), constant focus on toys vs serious social themes, cultish fantasy worlds (anime being particularily popular here). Rarely do you see topics about "stuff that matters", except for all the geek kids filling their narrow attention spans with toys and fantasies and ignoring the big questions in life. Look what happens when JonKatz brings some serious topics, all the slashdot kiddies tell him to go away because he's taking up valuable screen real estate that could be better used by tacoboy's anime/hentai and video game articles.
But clearly I'm not one to begrudge the kids here, even the culture of greed and self congratulating ignorance needs a church to hang out in ;-)
I'm about as non-french as they come, and I can get some out of it without hitting babel anything. Were I doing a page about 'news for nerds, stuff that matters', I bet I could get some useful info on this project, especially given that its in french and not chinese, many of the terms are immediately recogniseable, and we're in the 21st century.
:-)
But your right, I should be more forgiving of rob, its not like he's doing journalism or anything. I guess I'll just acknowledge that you and rob are hillbillies and forget about it. It just goes to show you can have NT, SGI, Sun, and Linux, and still be as dumb as a brick
Cheers!
Absolutely, and if you can develop equiment that will amplify the sounds that pass BEYOND the boundaries of the land on which the concert is held then you are free to use it. If you think that it is unlawful to do so, or to do pretty much whatever you like with a signal broadcast to your property then cite the relevant law.
Radar detectors are illegal in some states. Theres your law.
No, you have missed the point entirely. This idea is specifically meant to keep Rob busy. If he drools a bit in the process, its a price we must pay. Please, lets not discourage Rob from his hobbies, he seems happy and proud, if he knew what he really looks like with dumb posts like that, there could be some emotional damage.
So, please, think before you post. Thanks!
wasn't there a 'veronica' that indexed (searched) gopher pages?
Thats why they have nothing to fear. Most of the citizens are happy to have their traffic snooped because "they haven't done anything wrong." We're basically all trusting sheep. If you don't want your traffic snooped, then "you must have something to hide."
There's a threshold to how complex a product someone can develop with very basic tools. For an analogy, try writing a web browser in assembly language. YOU CAN'T. Assembly is extremely simple and everything is ultimately done in it, but there's a limit to how far you can go with it.
Now you are becoming irrational. Please explain, in your best english, _why_ a web browser cannot be written in assembly. (Please keep in mind, the difference between can't and shouldn't
If I wanted to say Americans I would've said it. I mean people in general. Practically everyone around me knows English as a second language and is satisfied with that. They also think English is cool as a result of USian propaganda and that contributes to the final effect.
I wouldn't call it 'propaganda', I'd just leave it at 'influence.' But its really up to you on whether you'd rather sound 'hostile' or 'bitter' or even 'envious' rather than 'analytical', or simply 'conversational'. Goes to show you even English has its subtleties.
Cheers!
Mostly a cost/benefit thing. While Latin Americans reap benefits from learning English, Americans don't get as much learning Spanish except where proximity to Mexico matters. So its not really laziness... (And please don't offer yourself up for comparisons in intellect, its way too tempting for us less disciplined posters.)
Folks who have called unix 'old technology', like bill gates and co., have always left me smiling. When microsoft publishes 'NT' or 'new technology', you can bet what has proven to work in the past has been thrown out, as in 'not invented here'. (I can't comment on W2K, except that it has a pretty mouse cursor.) Good programming can avoid entrophy IMHO.
Spare account? I know I like having them, theres nothing better than AOL for usenet trolling (the art form, not what you newbie slashdot kids call trolling).
Its not very scary to me:
- If an ignorant 'fuck' as you put it has an opinion that cannot be refuted, then the opinion is valid, therefore it nullifies your classification, unless the opinion itself directly scares you.
- Otherwise, the opinion can be ignored.
Now don't you feel better? You can still sleep with the lights on if that'll help, and good thing you posted anonymously, you sounded a bit ignorant yourself. (Didn't scare _me_ tho :-)
Yes, this is terrible. You should take this one to the Supreme Court, make sure you take a big boom box to demonstrate your right to free speech, I'd hate for the justices not to catch those lyrics!
Many legislators are ignorant of such technologies and the only people talking to them are from industry and they are only interested in protecting their precious copyrights.
I just don't think people are that outraged, or we would have seen riots when 8 tracks were deemed obsolete. Maybe it will change when DVD's are obsoleted.
To me its just the tyranny of the majority, ie., the majority of folks are perfectly happy buying DVD players and dealing with region codes. And all the legislators see are a bunch of GNU hippies mirroring criminal software and engaging in other sorts of subversive looking activities, its no wonder the legal system goes the way they do.
Not really, few if any arguments given here would sway your average judge. The geeks here better stick to what they know!
I think thats the core argument here. (Also include "when" and "where" and maybe "if" for completeness.) However, given current industry practices, it seems to be panning out that fair use is allowed except where prohibitted (such as by the DMCA).
Am I totally off base here? Can you sue to ensure that "fair use" is possible? It seems perfectly obvious to me that the courts have already spoken with the DeCSS case, ie., it is up to the intellectual property owner how, when, where, and _if_ the licensee can receive the performance. To take it to extremes, I'm not a DVD customer, can I sue the studios to make the VHS version of "The Matrix" as interactive as the DVD is? Say I'm really out there, my religion prohibits VHS, can I demand a betamax version? Super 8, in case I'm prohibitted from magnetic media? Live performance because I believe electricity is a sin?
Go ahead, mod me down, but I'm sure I _do not_ have the constitutional right to see, hear, or otherwise experience performance of anybody's intellectual property, furthermore, I'm a live theatric performer, yet you _cannot_ demand a command performance of my origional play because your transportation "crashed".
Its really just economics, corporate folks will put in as many restrictions as their customers will tolerate, and libraries are not required by law to archive the complete inventory of any given IP holding organization. But you're welcome to provide counterexamples, like that doctor who was too stupid to make sure his record system could export his own data to a useable format.
Cheers!
--
Sometimes stating the obvious is (score -1,flamebait)