I disagree. I am under NO obligation to release *any software or source*. None what-so-ever. So the entire argument boils down to "obligation", much like religion boils down to "faith". Bollocks to both.
Granted, let's take a more rational look, shall we?
Let's say I write software. I write "the program that changes the world." Exactly again why should I give the source away?
1) Bug cleaning up, that's a great reason 2) To add functionality with little input from me, that's another great reason 3) To show others how I created this program, if I'm a teacher, that's also a great reason
but there is no inherent obligation, science be damned. It might be in everyone's best interest, but ultimately, it's up to ME. There's nothing you can do about it. There's nothing RMS can do about it. You can legislate it, you can religiously mandate it, but the fact remains, regardless of your leanings, you do not have *any* right to any product of my mind. Period.
Yes, I do have the moral right to keep my code away from you. Why? because it is the product of MY mind, not yours. NOt RMS's. If I never release it, how will you if it exists? How will you place value upon it if it never hits the world? You won't. And if I do release it, where is this obligation? There is NONE. If you wish to reverse-engineer it and recreate it, that's your business (which is why I disagree with the DMCA and CDPTDA whatever). ANd if you create a better program because of it, why, good for you. I do not have a right to YOUR code either.
I understand the Open Source (i.e ESR argument) and happen to agree with it wholly. But there is no implied obligation for any reason. If I share my source, it's because I want to, not because of any "moralizing" demanding on anyone else's part.
There is no mandate that I have to LIKE RMS. There is no mandate that I have to give ONE iota of respect to RMS. There is no mandate that I have to USE his software. There is no mandate anywhere that says "Thou shalt name your software after RMS." None. Zero. Zilch.
RMS is fighting the wrong battle. Smart guy, can't figure out what the real issue is. The real issue, GNU/Linux notwithstanding, is whether or not you have a right to my mind and products I create. RMS's argument is teetering with emotionalism: We'd all be better off if we shared source with one another. That may very well be the case, but only on a VOLUNTARY basis. While he may say otherwise, the implication is that software, in general, is trivial to make, so how can you claim it is unique? How can you claim it's yours? I don't know. All I can say to this is MY SOFTWARE is MINE and I"ll share if I want to. Stamp your feet, scream at me, call me names, it does not change the fact that the thousands of hours I put into my software gives me the RIGHT to say it is mine, to hell with you.
RMS realizes that he has lost the battle to mandate "free software" (instead, like religion in the US, it's a choice up to the individual), and has found another pet peeve to run up the flagpole. It's petty and, IMHO, rather pathetic.
WHy not answer my accusations? because you *can't*.
Why does Stallman think he has a right to "source code?" Where is this proven? Where does this come from? Had you read his biography, you can clearly tell that he develops this attitude AFTER he can't get some printer source and AFTER his buddies leave him stranded at MIT.
So what? He wrote the applications, big deal. Without Linus, we'd still be waiting for THE HURD and still be running Xenix or something. (well, there's always BSD). I see GNU tools on BSD, why isn't he demanding BSD being called GNU/BSD? Because Linux has more marketshare and more eyes. His fragile little ego has been shattered into a million itty bitty peices, poor poor Richard.
Richard: YOU chose the license. You did NOT make any instructions regarding the use of your tools in the creation of an operating system regarding it's NAMING CONVENTION. Suck it up. If Linus doesn't want to call it GNU/Linux, then deal with it. Remember your line about not speaking at a function? Why? Because they don't have a *right* to you. You don't have a *right* to Linux, only to the *software* that you wrote that runs on Linux.
There is NO inherent right to anything *I* create. Just as there is NO right to demand Stallman to speak at a function, there is no right to one line of my code. Not one. You do not have the "right" to my source code. You do not have the "right" to use my software. If I want to release the source for whatever reason, whether it be to improve my developer base, or "the many eyes" argument, or just for shits and giggles, then that is *MY* right and *MY* right alone. If I want to charge a BILLION dollars for MY software or keep it locked up on my harddrive, it is MY RIGHT. NOT YOURS. GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING HEAD, STALLMAN. Just because you lost your support group when "commercialism" took over MIT doesn't mean ANYONE HAS TO SHARE ANYTHING WITH ANYONE! Understand? You don't have a RIGHT TO SOURCE. You dont' have a RIGHT TO SOFTWARE. If you don't like it, write an alternative (which you seem to have done, but you still don't get it).
Furthermore, your reasoning for calling linux "GNU/Linux" as a proper "social convention" is absolutely ludicrous. Linux put the last peice in, he can call his system "FuckYouFSF" if he wants. If you don't like your tools being distributed with Linux, then change your licensing. No where in the GPL does it say "This software must be mentioned in the name of the software" or whatever. This isn't BSD (the advertising clause is what I'm referring to, which if my memory serves correct, is no longer there?).
Now, on to more serious matters:
I appreciate the FSF for it's fine tools. gcc and bash are BY FAR the most useful tools I've ever used. I'm glad that you and your "employees" have released them for my use. When people ask what compiler and shell I favor, I never hesitate to ADVERTISE your software. But I'll be goddamned if I'm going to change my name to GNU/Shane. I'll be goddamned if I change my software to be GNU/whatever. I know I know, that's not what you're asking, but IT IS. LINUX is not YOURS. You may have contributed, just like all those hapless kernel hackers that contributed to it. If anything LINUX has done MORE TO FURTHER THE CAUSE of GNU than anything previously. Just think, Mr. Stallman, everyone who runs linux (well, most) KNOWS what GNU is, knows what the GPL is, knows the difference between free and "free". Your software is running on MILLIONS of computers world-wide and is arguably the most popular. And that's not enough? Quit with your ego and see a psychologist because you need a reality check.
Kiss my ass, Richard Stallman. It's people like YOU who almost make me ashamed of Linux and "Open Source."
Might you give me some advice regarding this field? I'm a biology freak (evolutionary, behavioral, any, actually), but am also a computer geek (since C64 days). I've never taken any biology in College (well, I dread the inevitable "begging for a grant" that I seem to see a lot of), but am trying to go back. I'm graduating with a degree in IT:UNIX programming from the local community college, but now that there seems to be a nice private sector demand for biologists, what can I do to "steer" my UNIX programming knowledge towards a career in Bioinformatics (which seems right up my alley)? Thanks in advance...:)
Negative on that. They've got other non-generic trademarks such as Office, Word, Access, etc. How many times do you hear people in your office say a word like that when they access the system?
My question is, why haven't we done this already? Why don't we have a political action group? For example, Senator Hollings is in SC. Even though we may not be from SC, we can sure be pissed off at what he does. So, why don't we start a group that targets Sen. Hollings and contributes to his opponent's campaigns, media campaigns, etc, to educate HIS constituency of the things he's doing to screw EVERYONE over? What's to stop someone from buying up billboard space in downtown Charleston, SC and putting up ads that read "Sen. Hollings thinks YOU are a criminal" with maybe a link to a website with a rational, well reasoned point by point explanation of the son-of-SSSCA (forgot the new version) and why that means the consumer is a criminal. And Etc. We may be few across the states, but together, we may get people out of office and then Congress will realize that they, once again, serve the PEOPLE, not corporate "interests". Think of it as concentrated firepower, m'kay?
In their spare time, you should have call center techs do something menial, like pick cotton out in the fields. With today's portable phone and wireless computing technologies, there's no reason why techs can't field and log calls between bushels.
You know, I hate to rain on your parade, but it's really fucking lame to copy/paste *other people's words* as your own. You know what I'm talking about.
Sheesh, first article I check out today and see one of my posts with someone else's fuckin name attached.
For example, my university has this policy of when you register for classes, you have to click a button that says "By registering, I agree to pay money, even if I don't attend classes." There's no statement of fees (you can access them,though), there's no credit check, there's no proof of ability to pay, etc. It's really akin to putting a button on my webpage that says "Hey, by visiting my site, you agree to pay me $2000, please enter your billing information below:" with no real identity check other than an assigned "pin number", etc. Is a click a legally binding signature? In the past, I've had to sign documents (ostensibly called "loans"), etc. Now I can just click. Is this legal? Maybe I should post this up on Ask Slashdot...
"Reporting live, from Moscow, we've just gotten word that the attack upon the digital terrorist, Elcomsoft by a US gunship, the AC130, was okay by General Ashcroft to curb digital terrorism. Quoting George W. Bush, he said "We shall have NO tolerence for terrorists, digital or otherwise." Behind me is the smoking crater where Elcomsoft existed only minutes ago.
We're getting word that the headquarters of 2600 magazine were just raided by US special forces in the search for digital terrorist Emmanuel Goldstein. No word on the status of the mission, but let us impress upon the viewer that these are highly dangerous individuals. Special Forces have been trained to fighter router to router, server by server to destroy the menace that is digital terrorism.
Personally, this is precisely why I decided a year or two ago to do my gaming projects completely in Java. My interests lie primarily in RolePlaying Game work (2D, sprite based, see SNES/NES style games), which does not need any real sort of performance. It's the story that matters (I hope). It would be nifty to have a game I can run on any system with a JVM, it just means more potential market.
Granted, if I were doing an FPS, I'd probably not go Java, but then again, I know *nothing* about the performance of Java in that kind of environment.
I almost had to drop out of my freshman year of college because of the Original SF2. I probably spent a thousand bucks in the game to become a locally respected Dhalsim player..;) I didn't win everytime, but I could sure beat the hell out of the short-kick/throw ken/ryu players who hadn't mastered instant uppercut (or was that in the next iteration?). Unfortunately, I gave up around Super SF II, and quit playing the game pretty much for good. In fact, I pretty much quit playing all 2D fighters, much like I got FPS'd out after Doom II. I picked up Guilty Gear X for the PS2 and have had a blast with it, but it's still nothing compared to the thrill I got in an arcade full of shit-talking teens. You know it's bad when you tell your own brother "YOu know, you wouldn't be so bad if you weren't such a fucking bitch" as you bounced him off the game. Tough love indeed.
20 packs of Ramen noodles (food for a week or so, and the preservatives will save on embalming costs when I croak from high blood pressure)
or
Ramen, eggs, and bread (eating more varied, but less, but that's also food for a week)
or
hell, I could buy a lot of beans and greens for $5.
Does everyone eat at Wendy's every day or something? Am I missing the boat?
At this moment, I'm floating $50k in debt from car loans, student loans, and credit cards, and $25k/year in salary, and I'm still not finished with college. $5 is a lot of cash to be asking for:
Poor grammar Poor spelling No stories (really, other than Jon Katz and the occasional book review, this site just makes a convenient one stop for me to read stuff elsewhere).
They compared this to a magazine subscription. If you want this to be a pay-site, I have to ask for just a few things: Hire a fucking editor and use a spell checker! If I'm paying, I don't want to see all those embarrassing spelling/grammatical mistakes! I swear, reading through some of the story summaries reminds me of my High School years. You remember, all those stupid jocks that couldn't spell their fucking names. Folks, you're smart, use it to learn how to spell, m'kay? You may not take it seriously, but your paying subscriber base will.
2) Original content
etc.
This site could be the most profitable FOR FEE site if it had the BEST content. Professionalism goes a long way here, folks.
I'll put up with the ads, thanks (and maybe occasionally click through).
I think it comes down to familiarity of the helpdesk with the common problems.
I can go to any decent helpdesk kiddo and ask him what's wrong with my Win98 desktop and either he knows what's wrong or just nukes my box and reimages it, problem solved. It seems that the entire toolkits of 90% of so-called "techies" revolves around windows and getting windows working. The problem is not the end-users, it's the ability of the helpdesk to smoothly transition to an "alternative" system in terms of technical "expertise". I know I worked at a helpdesk and I could ask any of the 100's of techs about Windows and everyone had "solutions". If I had one question about Linux, I'd get blank stares. So, we have armies of MS techies, who refuse to switch. As you said, USERS don't give a damn. The techs do. It's the IT departments and the pseudo-computer literati that must be converted, not the users. Remember that the average user has post-it notes taped to his/her monitor telling them how to save a file! It would be no different if they were using Appleworks, MS OFFICE, WordPerfect, or Star Office.
Indeed. In 1993, I took an "intro to microcomputers" course where we learned.. Word Perfect and Lotus 1-2-3. That same class now teaches Access, Excel, and Word. Interesting to happen in LESS than 10 years (IIRC, Office97 is where Office started to shine, despite some bugs, and is still pretty much the only Office Suite I tell my friends to install because it does everything THEY need... I have OfficeXP, but not currently installed.. It's nice, but doesn't run on Linux... So far, the KDE office does just about everything I need/want, and I'm hearing more and more good things about StarOffice 6.0..)
Personally, I'm really eager to see Enlightenment 0.17. I mean, shit, if i want Eye Candy, might as well go all the way. But, 0.17 looks pretty nifty, and you get to avoid all these nasty GNOME vs. KDE threads...:)
What would be nice if someone in the Open Source community could get a list of all the businesses who received one of these "threats" and immediately mass-mail some Open Source propaganda/literature, whatever. What would be nicer is if someone could foot the bill to produce some nice GLOSSY BROCHURES written to entice the average business owner without sounding too much like an ass, and for someone to foot the bill to mail them all out.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL.. I am selfish. Thanks for noticing.
And did I say I horded code? No, I did not. I personally ascribe to Open Source. But I do not pretend that it's a right.
I disagree. I am under NO obligation to release *any software or source*. None what-so-ever.
So the entire argument boils down to "obligation", much like religion boils down to "faith". Bollocks to both.
Granted, let's take a more rational look, shall we?
Let's say I write software. I write "the program that changes the world." Exactly again why should I give the source away?
1) Bug cleaning up, that's a great reason
2) To add functionality with little input from me, that's another great reason
3) To show others how I created this program, if I'm a teacher, that's also a great reason
but there is no inherent obligation, science be damned. It might be in everyone's best interest, but ultimately, it's up to ME. There's nothing you can do about it. There's nothing RMS can do about it. You can legislate it, you can religiously mandate it, but the fact remains, regardless of your leanings, you do not have *any* right to any product of my mind. Period.
Yes, I do have the moral right to keep my code away from you. Why? because it is the product of MY mind, not yours. NOt RMS's. If I never release it, how will you if it exists? How will you place value upon it if it never hits the world? You won't. And if I do release it, where is this obligation? There is NONE. If you wish to reverse-engineer it and recreate it, that's your business (which is why I disagree with the DMCA and CDPTDA whatever). ANd if you create a better program because of it, why, good for you. I do not have a right to YOUR code either.
I understand the Open Source (i.e ESR argument) and happen to agree with it wholly. But there is no implied obligation for any reason. If I share my source, it's because I want to, not because of any "moralizing" demanding on anyone else's part.
There is no mandate that I have to LIKE RMS.
There is no mandate that I have to give ONE iota of respect to RMS.
There is no mandate that I have to USE his software.
There is no mandate anywhere that says "Thou shalt name your software after RMS."
None.
Zero.
Zilch.
RMS is fighting the wrong battle. Smart guy, can't figure out what the real issue is. The real issue, GNU/Linux notwithstanding, is whether or not you have a right to my mind and products I create. RMS's argument is teetering with emotionalism: We'd all be better off if we shared source with one another. That may very well be the case, but only on a VOLUNTARY basis. While he may say otherwise, the implication is that software, in general, is trivial to make, so how can you claim it is unique? How can you claim it's yours? I don't know. All I can say to this is MY SOFTWARE is MINE and I"ll share if I want to. Stamp your feet, scream at me, call me names, it does not change the fact that the thousands of hours I put into my software gives me the RIGHT to say it is mine, to hell with you.
RMS realizes that he has lost the battle to mandate "free software" (instead, like religion in the US, it's a choice up to the individual), and has found another pet peeve to run up the flagpole. It's petty and, IMHO, rather pathetic.
HOw is this flamebait?
WHy not answer my accusations? because you *can't*.
Why does Stallman think he has a right to "source code?" Where is this proven? Where does this come from? Had you read his biography, you can clearly tell that he develops this attitude AFTER he can't get some printer source and AFTER his buddies leave him stranded at MIT.
and ETC.
So what? He wrote the applications, big deal. Without Linus, we'd still be waiting for THE HURD and still be running Xenix or something. (well, there's always BSD). I see GNU tools on BSD, why isn't he demanding BSD being called GNU/BSD? Because Linux has more marketshare and more eyes. His fragile little ego has been shattered into a million itty bitty peices, poor poor Richard.
Richard: YOU chose the license. You did NOT make any instructions regarding the use of your tools in the creation of an operating system regarding it's NAMING CONVENTION. Suck it up. If Linus doesn't want to call it GNU/Linux, then deal with it. Remember your line about not speaking at a function? Why? Because they don't have a *right* to you. You don't have a *right* to Linux, only to the *software* that you wrote that runs on Linux.
There is NO inherent right to anything *I* create. Just as there is NO right to demand Stallman to speak at a function, there is no right to one line of my code. Not one. You do not have the "right" to my source code. You do not have the "right" to use my software. If I want to release the source for whatever reason, whether it be to improve my developer base, or "the many eyes" argument, or just for shits and giggles, then that is *MY* right and *MY* right alone. If I want to charge a BILLION dollars for MY software or keep it locked up on my harddrive, it is MY RIGHT. NOT YOURS. GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING HEAD, STALLMAN. Just because you lost your support group when "commercialism" took over MIT doesn't mean ANYONE HAS TO SHARE ANYTHING WITH ANYONE! Understand? You don't have a RIGHT TO SOURCE. You dont' have a RIGHT TO SOFTWARE. If you don't like it, write an alternative (which you seem to have done, but you still don't get it).
Furthermore, your reasoning for calling linux "GNU/Linux" as a proper "social convention" is absolutely ludicrous. Linux put the last peice in, he can call his system "FuckYouFSF" if he wants. If you don't like your tools being distributed with Linux, then change your licensing. No where in the GPL does it say "This software must be mentioned in the name of the software" or whatever. This isn't BSD (the advertising clause is what I'm referring to, which if my memory serves correct, is no longer there?).
Now, on to more serious matters:
I appreciate the FSF for it's fine tools. gcc and bash are BY FAR the most useful tools I've ever used. I'm glad that you and your "employees" have released them for my use. When people ask what compiler and shell I favor, I never hesitate to ADVERTISE your software. But I'll be goddamned if I'm going to change my name to GNU/Shane. I'll be goddamned if I change my software to be GNU/whatever. I know I know, that's not what you're asking, but IT IS. LINUX is not YOURS. You may have contributed, just like all those hapless kernel hackers that contributed to it. If anything LINUX has done MORE TO FURTHER THE CAUSE of GNU than anything previously. Just think, Mr. Stallman, everyone who runs linux (well, most) KNOWS what GNU is, knows what the GPL is, knows the difference between free and "free". Your software is running on MILLIONS of computers world-wide and is arguably the most popular. And that's not enough? Quit with your ego and see a psychologist because you need a reality check.
Kiss my ass, Richard Stallman. It's people like YOU who almost make me ashamed of Linux and "Open Source."
Might you give me some advice regarding this field? I'm a biology freak (evolutionary, behavioral, any, actually), but am also a computer geek (since C64 days). I've never taken any biology in College (well, I dread the inevitable "begging for a grant" that I seem to see a lot of), but am trying to go back. I'm graduating with a degree in IT:UNIX programming from the local community college, but now that there seems to be a nice private sector demand for biologists, what can I do to "steer" my UNIX programming knowledge towards a career in Bioinformatics (which seems right up my alley)? :)
Thanks in advance...
Negative on that. They've got other non-generic trademarks such as Office, Word, Access, etc. How many times do you hear people in your office say a word like that when they access the system?
Dude, you need to get a job. You're taking this *waaaaaaaaaay* too seriously.
My question is, why haven't we done this already? Why don't we have a political action group? For example, Senator Hollings is in SC. Even though we may not be from SC, we can sure be pissed off at what he does. So, why don't we start a group that targets Sen. Hollings and contributes to his opponent's campaigns, media campaigns, etc, to educate HIS constituency of the things he's doing to screw EVERYONE over? What's to stop someone from buying up billboard space in downtown Charleston, SC and putting up ads that read "Sen. Hollings thinks YOU are a criminal" with maybe a link to a website with a rational, well reasoned point by point explanation of the son-of-SSSCA (forgot the new version) and why that means the consumer is a criminal. And Etc. We may be few across the states, but together, we may get people out of office and then Congress will realize that they, once again, serve the PEOPLE, not corporate "interests". Think of it as concentrated firepower, m'kay?
Nonononono..
Wrong activities.
In their spare time, you should have call center techs do something menial, like pick cotton out in the fields. With today's portable phone and wireless computing technologies, there's no reason why techs can't field and log calls between bushels.
Sheesh.
You know, I hate to rain on your parade, but it's really fucking lame to copy/paste *other people's words* as your own. You know what I'm talking about.
Sheesh, first article I check out today and see one of my posts with someone else's fuckin name attached.
At least give credit.
Ass.
What about for financially obligations?
For example, my university has this policy of when you register for classes, you have to click a button that says "By registering, I agree to pay money, even if I don't attend classes." There's no statement of fees (you can access them,though), there's no credit check, there's no proof of ability to pay, etc. It's really akin to putting a button on my webpage that says
"Hey, by visiting my site, you agree to pay me $2000, please enter your billing information below:" with no real identity check other than an assigned "pin number", etc. Is a click a legally binding signature? In the past, I've had to sign documents (ostensibly called "loans"), etc. Now I can just click. Is this legal? Maybe I should post this up on Ask Slashdot...
"Reporting live, from Moscow, we've just gotten word that the attack upon the digital terrorist, Elcomsoft by a US gunship, the AC130, was okay by General Ashcroft to curb digital terrorism. Quoting George W. Bush, he said "We shall have NO tolerence for terrorists, digital or otherwise." Behind me is the smoking crater where Elcomsoft existed only minutes ago.
We're getting word that the headquarters of 2600 magazine were just raided by US special forces in the search for digital terrorist Emmanuel Goldstein. No word on the status of the mission, but let us impress upon the viewer that these are highly dangerous individuals. Special Forces have been trained to fighter router to router, server by server to destroy the menace that is digital terrorism.
Back to you, John."
I think you may be referring to Neil Postman's The Disappearance of Childhood.
Personally, this is precisely why I decided a year or two ago to do my gaming projects completely in Java. My interests lie primarily in RolePlaying Game work (2D, sprite based, see SNES/NES style games), which does not need any real sort of performance. It's the story that matters (I hope). It would be nifty to have a game I can run on any system with a JVM, it just means more potential market.
Granted, if I were doing an FPS, I'd probably not go Java, but then again, I know *nothing* about the performance of Java in that kind of environment.
No f'ing shit.
;) I didn't win everytime, but I could sure beat the hell out of the short-kick/throw ken/ryu players who hadn't mastered instant uppercut (or was that in the next iteration?). Unfortunately, I gave up around Super SF II, and quit playing the game pretty much for good. In fact, I pretty much quit playing all 2D fighters, much like I got FPS'd out after Doom II. I picked up Guilty Gear X for the PS2 and have had a blast with it, but it's still nothing compared to the thrill I got in an arcade full of shit-talking teens. You know it's bad when you tell your own brother "YOu know, you wouldn't be so bad if you weren't such a fucking bitch" as you bounced him off the game. Tough love indeed.
I almost had to drop out of my freshman year of college because of the Original SF2. I probably spent a thousand bucks in the game to become a locally respected Dhalsim player..
:)
Actually, $5 buys me a lot:
/. .
20 packs of Ramen noodles (food for a week or so, and the preservatives will save on embalming costs when I croak from high blood pressure)
or
Ramen, eggs, and bread (eating more varied, but less, but that's also food for a week)
or
hell, I could buy a lot of beans and greens for $5.
Does everyone eat at Wendy's every day or something? Am I missing the boat?
At this moment, I'm floating $50k in debt from car loans, student loans, and credit cards, and $25k/year in salary, and I'm still not finished with college. $5 is a lot of cash to be asking for:
Poor grammar
Poor spelling
No stories (really, other than Jon Katz and the occasional book review, this site just makes a convenient one stop for me to read stuff elsewhere).
They compared this to a magazine subscription. If you want this to be a pay-site, I have to ask for just a few things:
Hire a fucking editor and use a spell checker! If I'm paying, I don't want to see all those embarrassing spelling/grammatical mistakes! I swear, reading through some of the story summaries reminds me of my High School years. You remember, all those stupid jocks that couldn't spell their fucking names. Folks, you're smart, use it to learn how to spell, m'kay? You may not take it seriously, but your paying subscriber base will.
2) Original content
etc.
This site could be the most profitable FOR FEE site if it had the BEST content. Professionalism goes a long way here, folks.
I'll put up with the ads, thanks (and maybe occasionally click through).
Hope you make it to 2003,
watch your mouth!
Before long, TV's will start coming with EULA's that govern what, how, when, where we watch TV and what devices we can hook up to them...
"Free" TV will become "licensed" and protected under the DMCA.
Sad sad day. I'm glad I don't watch TV anymore
I think it comes down to familiarity of the helpdesk with the common problems.
I can go to any decent helpdesk kiddo and ask him what's wrong with my Win98 desktop and either he knows what's wrong or just nukes my box and reimages it, problem solved. It seems that the entire toolkits of 90% of so-called "techies" revolves around windows and getting windows working. The problem is not the end-users, it's the ability of the helpdesk to smoothly transition to an "alternative" system in terms of technical "expertise". I know I worked at a helpdesk and I could ask any of the 100's of techs about Windows and everyone had "solutions". If I had one question about Linux, I'd get blank stares. So, we have armies of MS techies, who refuse to switch. As you said, USERS don't give a damn. The techs do. It's the IT departments and the pseudo-computer literati that must be converted, not the users. Remember that the average user has post-it notes taped to his/her monitor telling them how to save a file! It would be no different if they were using Appleworks, MS OFFICE, WordPerfect, or Star Office.
Indeed. In 1993, I took an "intro to microcomputers" course where we learned.. Word Perfect and Lotus 1-2-3. That same class now teaches Access, Excel, and Word. Interesting to happen in LESS than 10 years (IIRC, Office97 is where Office started to shine, despite some bugs, and is still pretty much the only Office Suite I tell my friends to install because it does everything THEY need... I have OfficeXP, but not currently installed.. It's nice, but doesn't run on Linux... So far, the KDE office does just about everything I need/want, and I'm hearing more and more good things about StarOffice 6.0..)
Anyway, enough of that.
Seriously.
If you were really serious about inflicting pain, how about:
setting up one of those $125 per call phone lines in the bahamas and then having the imac call it every 2 minutes...
repeatedly call 911 and play recorded message: "help! I've fallen and I can't get up!" over and over again
install a keylogger so you can post their most intimate conversations on your website.
those are just a few ideas that have popped in my head.. Hell, you could do that with VB email virii and make a mint with the first one...
Personally, I'm really eager to see Enlightenment 0.17. I mean, shit, if i want Eye Candy, might as well go all the way. But, 0.17 looks pretty nifty, and you get to avoid all these nasty GNOME vs. KDE threads... :)
nonono.. Not SPAM.. mail *mailing*, as in USPS. Make it legit. :)
What would be nice if someone in the Open Source community could get a list of all the businesses who received one of these "threats" and immediately mass-mail some Open Source propaganda/literature, whatever. What would be nicer is if someone could foot the bill to produce some nice GLOSSY BROCHURES written to entice the average business owner without sounding too much like an ass, and for someone to foot the bill to mail them all out.
:)
What Linux needs is a marketing department.