RMS thinks giving other people's shit away is good
The term "giving away" implies a situation where one party is deprived of something so another person can have it. This is not an accurate representation of Stallman's views, nor is is an accurate description of copyright infringement. When a copy is made and provided to another party, both parties now have the item in question.
RMS believes the above described behavior is morally correct, and should be universally allowed. Furthermore, he believes software is an entity unto itself that has rights, just as a person has rights. I happen to disagree with him on these points, but regardless of your position on such matters, it is very important to describe them correctly. Much as RMS has a long history of attempting to redefine the word "freedom" to suit his sociopolitical agenda, I must disagree with those who attempt to make statements on important matters such as these without getting their definitions right.
That sentence makes no sense, unless you were attempting to humorously bolster the claim that the entire continent of Africa is devoid of any modern technology. If the latter is true, that would be an erroneous claim.
Indeed, I heard RMS has been using TP composed of shredded Windows 3.1 install floppies and printouts of the leaked Windows NT source for years now. Furthermore, his meals are all organically grown and fertilized by sewage covertly diverted from One Microsoft Way. You've gotta respect a man on a mission.
Yes, he could, at least for the specific case of chief executives or directors of most agencies. He couldn't immediately install someone else in the open slot, because that requires Senate confirmation, but he could fire a chief executive of an agency that is blatantly ignoring the law. That said, he hasn't, and he won't. Far from the obvious political troll the GP was attempting to pull, the current administration has allowed the TSA to do whatever it wants for 3.5 years.
Fully agreed, but let's not forget who makes up the bottom tier of the investor pool. That would be us.
On a side note, if I had mod points right now, I'd be torn between modding your post insightful or funny. Unfortunately, there's no "sad but true" option. Maybe there should be.
You're right on one point. Their masters must be blamed. I absolutely blame the present administration for allowing them to continue to exist for the last 3.5 years.
Copyright infringement is still illegal, and in the United States profiting from it under specific circumstances carries criminal penalties. Your attempt at misdirection is transparent, and your apparent level of understanding of the actual roles ISPs and power companies play is either deeply ignorant, or you're simply knowingly creating horribly flawed analogies. As soon as you're ready to show us how you could conceivably use any case law to demonstrate a means for hauling ISPs and power companies into court for criminal prosecution over the topic at hand, please let us know.
I've watched locksmiths get into multiple modern cars with pick kits and a couple of other tools in a matter of seconds per car. In fact, I've never seen one have to resort to drilling anything out. You appear to know crappy locksmiths.
What have you done to understand atheists and agnostics?
Did you actually read the post you replied to? Let me quote from it:
For the record: I am atheist/agnostic (depending on your definition), buy I still attend Church somewhat regularly because my mother-in-law is a devout believer and invites us to go with her. In the interest of family harmony, I oblige.
He's not making sweeping generalizations in his post, either. All he's doing is relating his personal perspective. Incidentally, yes, people who want to criticize anything should study it first, so they're properly informed in the first place, much like the fact that you should have read his post in full before knee-jerking a reply that only serves to prove his point and make you look foolish.
No, Debian stable (Squeeze) uses 2.6.32. Where are you getting your information? If you're getting it from some random VPS provider, be advised that you're probably not running a native Debian kernel. Also, this bug appears to affect that kernel and others beyond the indicated level, judging by continuous reports coming in throughout the day.
What happens when their Internet connection goes down? This tends to happen a bit more often than other modes of failure. How do they interface their POS hardware with a server hosted offsite? Assuming you can make the last bit work, who pays for the inevitable PCI DSS signoff on the remotely hosted servers? Did you read the summary at all?
I'd be delighted to see you back up any of your assertions with deep insights into my personal history, the histories of other interested parties on this topic, actual refutation of any of the listed points instead of generalized hand waving, demonstrated understanding of how practical open source / free software development works, and additional relevant citations.
Son, I've been writing software since 1989, and that happens to include a graphics driver. You're out of your depth here, and continuing to demonstrate your idiocy. I sincerely hope you're just a troll, but my pessimistic side suspects my earlier assessment of your position in life was accurate, and that you're suffering from acute self-entitlement and fantasies of your own.
You could actually try to talking to some of the folks actively working on this stuff, and perhaps learn about things like real hardware interface specifications and APIs. I've got better things to do than continue to document your issues, namely writing useful code, so good luck.
This is utterly wrong. It's telling that you posted as an AC, and I'm assuming that's because you're not a developer involved in any open source work on this issue, and you don't have the first clue about how these things actually work.
However, you do sound like a user with an incredibly exaggerated sense of entitlement, or perhaps a college freshman with wild-eyed ideas that every line of code on the planet should be forcibly "freed." If the code for something hasn't already been written, I presume you're of the view that companies should be forced to pay developers to write it, and of course they should be sure to call you every day for your personal stamp of approval on the last 24 hours of coding. Naturally, the resulting code, which you didn't pay for and didn't write a single line of, must be licensed in precise accordance with your personal opinions on freedom, right?
Let me be absolutely clear on this: the core developers in the open source community working on this stuff want the specs. Just like anything and everything else that open source code was been written for, even back before the term "open source" was even in common usage, precise hardware specifications allow developers to write software that properly interfaces with the specified hardware.
I will be the first to stand up and strongly advocate for open hardware specifications. That said, the absurdly entitled position you're taking does far more harm than good in the community at large. In short, kindly shut the fuck up and stop ranting about things you have no understand of, and no honest stake in.
There are some things money can't (or shouldn't, or should be illegal, or should get your house firebombed for suggesting) buy. For everything else, there's couchslug.
I'm already imagining a helicopter picking him from the embassy to rendezvous with an Ecuadoran ship in international waters. Somehow that seems like a better bet than attempting egress via any airport in the UK.
The march of progress goes on. Every month, new announcements are made that indicate machine intelligence is moving a couple of steps forward. Some are seemingly trivial, some are dubbed merely "interesting," but all contribute to the overall forward march of functional machine reasoning. To date, most of the major advances might be deemed as mere pieces of a much larger puzzle, but ongoing integration of such bits will undoubtedly yield much more interesting results.
Speaking as someone who started his journey into the wonders of computing in the 1980s, things are indeed moving at an accelerated rate these days, and the rate is only continuing to increment. The imaginings of my childhood and early adulthood, as told by Asimov, Gibson, Stephenson, and in some respects even Card, are beginning to reflect reality when viewed through the prism of what is regarded as mundane present day media coverage.
In light of this, my message is simple. If you're working in the information technology arena, and your job doesn't involve focused application of creativity, the time to start refocusing your career objectives is now.
You're still wrong. It's the company's network, the company's computers, and the company's decision what happens on both. Employees should not be doing personal tasks at work, period. If employees have a problem with this, they can go work somewhere else that accommodates their whims.
Also, It doesn't matter how many years you have in the "IT security space," since you're not the one writing IT implementation/integration/security policies at the submitter's place of employment, and the topic at hand here is the legitimacy of employers' rights to monitor and control what happens on their networks. Your entire post was irrelevant, as there is "compromising of the privacy of end users" happening here. The submitter is simply upset that he may encounter issues doing things like personal banking, etc at work, which he shouldn't be doing in the first place.
The check is in the mail to your address in the alternate universe where/dev/null can be read to reproduce the input message using wanktty(1). Also, since/dev/null is a character-based pseudo-device, >> (append) is redundant for the stated purpose, and you simply need > (output).
Slashdot Mirror
RMS thinks giving other people's shit away is good
The term "giving away" implies a situation where one party is deprived of something so another person can have it. This is not an accurate representation of Stallman's views, nor is is an accurate description of copyright infringement. When a copy is made and provided to another party, both parties now have the item in question.
RMS believes the above described behavior is morally correct, and should be universally allowed. Furthermore, he believes software is an entity unto itself that has rights, just as a person has rights. I happen to disagree with him on these points, but regardless of your position on such matters, it is very important to describe them correctly. Much as RMS has a long history of attempting to redefine the word "freedom" to suit his sociopolitical agenda, I must disagree with those who attempt to make statements on important matters such as these without getting their definitions right.
Africa has lots of technology like and such as.
That sentence makes no sense, unless you were attempting to humorously bolster the claim that the entire continent of Africa is devoid of any modern technology. If the latter is true, that would be an erroneous claim.
Dude, it's kinda like that quote from Office Space, "I wouldn't say I've been missing it."
Indeed, I heard RMS has been using TP composed of shredded Windows 3.1 install floppies and printouts of the leaked Windows NT source for years now. Furthermore, his meals are all organically grown and fertilized by sewage covertly diverted from One Microsoft Way. You've gotta respect a man on a mission.
Yes, he could, at least for the specific case of chief executives or directors of most agencies. He couldn't immediately install someone else in the open slot, because that requires Senate confirmation, but he could fire a chief executive of an agency that is blatantly ignoring the law. That said, he hasn't, and he won't. Far from the obvious political troll the GP was attempting to pull, the current administration has allowed the TSA to do whatever it wants for 3.5 years.
I think that means civilization will collapse immediate after it's written.
Fully agreed, but let's not forget who makes up the bottom tier of the investor pool. That would be us.
On a side note, if I had mod points right now, I'd be torn between modding your post insightful or funny. Unfortunately, there's no "sad but true" option. Maybe there should be.
You're right on one point. Their masters must be blamed. I absolutely blame the present administration for allowing them to continue to exist for the last 3.5 years.
Copyright infringement is still illegal, and in the United States profiting from it under specific circumstances carries criminal penalties. Your attempt at misdirection is transparent, and your apparent level of understanding of the actual roles ISPs and power companies play is either deeply ignorant, or you're simply knowingly creating horribly flawed analogies. As soon as you're ready to show us how you could conceivably use any case law to demonstrate a means for hauling ISPs and power companies into court for criminal prosecution over the topic at hand, please let us know.
I've watched locksmiths get into multiple modern cars with pick kits and a couple of other tools in a matter of seconds per car. In fact, I've never seen one have to resort to drilling anything out. You appear to know crappy locksmiths.
I prefer the banana phone.
What have you done to understand atheists and agnostics?
Did you actually read the post you replied to? Let me quote from it:
For the record: I am atheist/agnostic (depending on your definition), buy I still attend Church somewhat regularly because my mother-in-law is a devout believer and invites us to go with her. In the interest of family harmony, I oblige.
He's not making sweeping generalizations in his post, either. All he's doing is relating his personal perspective. Incidentally, yes, people who want to criticize anything should study it first, so they're properly informed in the first place, much like the fact that you should have read his post in full before knee-jerking a reply that only serves to prove his point and make you look foolish.
Egoism is an accepted term.
No, Debian stable (Squeeze) uses 2.6.32. Where are you getting your information? If you're getting it from some random VPS provider, be advised that you're probably not running a native Debian kernel. Also, this bug appears to affect that kernel and others beyond the indicated level, judging by continuous reports coming in throughout the day.
You can skip by not clicking links.
What happens when their Internet connection goes down? This tends to happen a bit more often than other modes of failure. How do they interface their POS hardware with a server hosted offsite? Assuming you can make the last bit work, who pays for the inevitable PCI DSS signoff on the remotely hosted servers? Did you read the summary at all?
I'd be delighted to see you back up any of your assertions with deep insights into my personal history, the histories of other interested parties on this topic, actual refutation of any of the listed points instead of generalized hand waving, demonstrated understanding of how practical open source / free software development works, and additional relevant citations.
Son, I've been writing software since 1989, and that happens to include a graphics driver. You're out of your depth here, and continuing to demonstrate your idiocy. I sincerely hope you're just a troll, but my pessimistic side suspects my earlier assessment of your position in life was accurate, and that you're suffering from acute self-entitlement and fantasies of your own.
You could actually try to talking to some of the folks actively working on this stuff, and perhaps learn about things like real hardware interface specifications and APIs. I've got better things to do than continue to document your issues, namely writing useful code, so good luck.
This is utterly wrong. It's telling that you posted as an AC, and I'm assuming that's because you're not a developer involved in any open source work on this issue, and you don't have the first clue about how these things actually work.
However, you do sound like a user with an incredibly exaggerated sense of entitlement, or perhaps a college freshman with wild-eyed ideas that every line of code on the planet should be forcibly "freed." If the code for something hasn't already been written, I presume you're of the view that companies should be forced to pay developers to write it, and of course they should be sure to call you every day for your personal stamp of approval on the last 24 hours of coding. Naturally, the resulting code, which you didn't pay for and didn't write a single line of, must be licensed in precise accordance with your personal opinions on freedom, right?
Let me be absolutely clear on this: the core developers in the open source community working on this stuff want the specs. Just like anything and everything else that open source code was been written for, even back before the term "open source" was even in common usage, precise hardware specifications allow developers to write software that properly interfaces with the specified hardware.
I will be the first to stand up and strongly advocate for open hardware specifications. That said, the absurdly entitled position you're taking does far more harm than good in the community at large. In short, kindly shut the fuck up and stop ranting about things you have no understand of, and no honest stake in.
There are some things money can't (or shouldn't, or should be illegal, or should get your house firebombed for suggesting) buy. For everything else, there's couchslug.
I'm already imagining a helicopter picking him from the embassy to rendezvous with an Ecuadoran ship in international waters. Somehow that seems like a better bet than attempting egress via any airport in the UK.
The march of progress goes on. Every month, new announcements are made that indicate machine intelligence is moving a couple of steps forward. Some are seemingly trivial, some are dubbed merely "interesting," but all contribute to the overall forward march of functional machine reasoning. To date, most of the major advances might be deemed as mere pieces of a much larger puzzle, but ongoing integration of such bits will undoubtedly yield much more interesting results.
Speaking as someone who started his journey into the wonders of computing in the 1980s, things are indeed moving at an accelerated rate these days, and the rate is only continuing to increment. The imaginings of my childhood and early adulthood, as told by Asimov, Gibson, Stephenson, and in some respects even Card, are beginning to reflect reality when viewed through the prism of what is regarded as mundane present day media coverage.
In light of this, my message is simple. If you're working in the information technology arena, and your job doesn't involve focused application of creativity, the time to start refocusing your career objectives is now.
You're still wrong. It's the company's network, the company's computers, and the company's decision what happens on both. Employees should not be doing personal tasks at work, period. If employees have a problem with this, they can go work somewhere else that accommodates their whims.
Also, It doesn't matter how many years you have in the "IT security space," since you're not the one writing IT implementation/integration/security policies at the submitter's place of employment, and the topic at hand here is the legitimacy of employers' rights to monitor and control what happens on their networks. Your entire post was irrelevant, as there is "compromising of the privacy of end users" happening here. The submitter is simply upset that he may encounter issues doing things like personal banking, etc at work, which he shouldn't be doing in the first place.
This is a well known problem. Slashdot simply does not properly support Unicode.
The check is in the mail to your address in the alternate universe where /dev/null can be read to reproduce the input message using wanktty(1). Also, since /dev/null is a character-based pseudo-device, >> (append) is redundant for the stated purpose, and you simply need > (output).