"So you wanted that the website that announced this only allowed people with passwords. What's next? See "The Right To Read", from RMS (couldn't find the URL)."
What website? Fermilab's? I don't care what they put there, but why have it on Slashdot when it's not important enough? What's next? "Bill Gates to speak at Comdex"?
How can one man (or one organization) represent an eclectic group hackers/coders?
It's not possible. ESR turned off all the hackers that didn't like the mixing of free software and business. Open Source turn off those who thought it was too broad, and could be abused too easily... but it struck a chord of truth with many.
I believe (or maybe I hope) that each of us... all of us coders out there... will form their own beliefs, and who is right will always be up to debate.
A person out in the field, out posing as a representative to hackers, will always have critics. Some critics are flamers/etc/etc, but most aren't... they're hackers that disagree. Disagreement is allowed. What if there isn't one true way for everything?
I'd be much happier myself if all these people (notably ESR and RMS) would stop preaching for a while and let their ideas speak for themselves. It's hard to force a revolution.
As for me, I'll still be coding. My fame pales in the light of Linus or Richard or Eric, but does that make me less of a person? Less of a hacker? I'll still be coding with my friends, in real life, and online, maybe someday with someone who's reading this... but as long as I feel that what I'm doing what is right, then fame looks less important.
Possibly... but it's the people who write/wrote the code that make the real difference.
> We would not be getting the press we are today;
Unfortunatly this is true. Perhaps the press will ignore us now.
>Numerous products, including Apple's OS X, would be fully proprietary
I'm unimpressed by Apple's "open source" operating system. The "open source" parts (mach, bsd stuff) were already "open source". What's so special bout that?
I'm so ashamed - AS WELL YOU SHOULD BE
on
RMS on APSL
·
· Score: 1
>Because it would be helpful to me.
How, specifically? BSD source is already out there, so is Mach kernel source. Without Apple's restrictions.
>Because it would be helpful to tother BSD users.
AFAIK it uses BSD source, how would looking at source BSD developers made be helpful to them? And they could never put it into a *BSD OS, because of the license.
>Because it would be helpful, period.
Yes, maybe, but you'll always have that nice feeling that Apple can terminate the agreement, huh?
I'm so ashamed - AS WELL YOU SHOULD BE
on
RMS on APSL
·
· Score: 1
"open source" has a broad meaning now. in apple's instance of it, they think that programmers are going to work hard on a kernel -- insignifigant by itself (what makes it so special?) -- and be FORCED to report any changes to apple, and RISK having ALL PRODUCT RIGHTS be taken away for ANY REASON.
I come to two conclusions, either:
1) Apple/Steve Jobs is an idiot
2) Just another marketing spin to make a few of the light-hearted go "ooh ooh it's open source".
personally, i see no reason why i should waste my time on apple's code.
1) I currently have no desire to mix my hacking with any business.
2) If I did, I'd think twice about connecting my software with Open Source(tm). Why? ESR. He hasn't done anything amazingly embarrasing, but the Obi-wan thing, and more importantly the immature snippets from the AOL letter... maybe if this was hacker2hacker, but not hacker2businessman. I'm suprised Mr. "suit" Case didn't respond with "HAHA."
I'd much rather be connected with the FSF/Free software movement. Plain and simple freedom.
Repost, so I'll repost
on
RMS vs. ESR
·
· Score: 1
Well, I only read parts it since I already knew where it was headed (it's on opensource.oreilly.com for goodness sake). I felt that they misrepresented GNU, FSF and Mr. Stallman.
It's about freedom. The writer missed that major point.
Some of "us" are still hackers and not business people. Some of "us" still like free software...
I've felt that ESR's tried to downplay the importance of the GNU/FSF and what RMS has done. I like GCC and emacs a little more than fetchmail. Sorry ESR.
And ESR didn't create any movement. It was (free software was) already alive and well long before he pushed himself into the scene.
Linux was around before "Open Source" or at least before it was tradmarked and turned into a buzzword. What was it then? Free Software. Plain & simple.
Was/is it sold? Yes, just look at Redhat. Free Software can be sold.
Well, I only read parts it since I already knew where it was headed (it's on opensource.oreilly.com for goodness sake). I felt that they misrepresented GNU, FSF and Mr. Stallman.
It's about freedom. The writer missed that major point.
Also, can anyone give me an example of when free software is not open source software? Free software = more freedom.
Regarding shrink wrapped applications, sure, coporate users would probably perfer those over some downloaded from an FTP site, but look at the big distributions today, they come with SO MANY apps. Not only stuff for coders, apps word processors, e-mail readers, and internet stuff. Out-of-the-box Redhat has more apps than Windows. GOOD apps.
I fail to see how Word to/from Excel integration has anything to do with integration to the OS. Windows has OLE and we've got CORBA, which isn't one big bug like OLE is:P
Security through integration? Huh?! How much integration can one handle? WinNT has "services" and we have daemons. Not much difference.
Linux costs more than WinNT? Well, if one considers time = money, then *maybe* for *end users* but not one who knows what he's doing. And, in the end, if it does take longer to *set up* Linux, don't worry, there goes all the blue screens.
Linux supports so few applications? What an idiot. It supports that small thing called POSIX, it has many of X apps, it has multiple binary support and even has impressive DOS (dosemu) and Windows (wine) support.
Blah, I don't want to read more.
Sued by who? GPL Binary Only RULES!
on
VA Going Bigtime
·
· Score: 1
"There is plenty of GPL code release without the source."
...cDc, l0pht and CCC just want something to say so they can grab some attention. LoU never declared war on Iraq, go read LoU's response.
Heh, I especially like the part on HNN where it says "This was the first time in history that so many hacking groups had come together for a common cause. It is the first time that such a large project had been undertaken by so many. The spirit of cooperation and working together was phenomenal." Cooperation to make a press release? Whoopee. l0pht should stick to writing security advisories and working on several interesting projects they have on their site.
Oh, and I find it very interesting that nobody's said anything about cDc's stupid windows trojan. "We strongly oppose any attempt to use the power of hacking to threaten or destroy the information infrastructure of any country, for any reason." I guess it's bad to go against a country, but one's free to attack every Windows user on the 'net. Oh yeah, thanks for those bomb videos, cDc.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm fairly certain there are no restrictions on how long a license can be. =P
Remind me never to ask Justin for legal advice.
"So you wanted that the website that announced this only allowed people with passwords. What's next? See "The Right To Read", from RMS (couldn't find the URL)."
What website? Fermilab's? I don't care what they put there, but why have it on Slashdot when it's not important enough? What's next? "Bill Gates to speak at Comdex"?
What was the point of even announcing this? I guess it was to create confusion.
some of them were amazingly hilarious. :)
normal coder average coding time to drop by 20%?!
Um, no.
Except I'd like to go farther and say that we coders don't need representatives. (see post "My Nomination").
This doesn't mean that we'll stop pushing ideas that we believe in.
It is not possible to represent the hacker community.
How can one man (or one organization) represent an eclectic group hackers/coders?
It's not possible. ESR turned off all the hackers that didn't like the mixing of free software and business. Open Source turn off those who thought it was too broad, and could be abused too easily... but it struck a chord of truth with many.
I believe (or maybe I hope) that each of us... all of us coders out there... will form their own beliefs, and who is right will always be up to debate.
A person out in the field, out posing as a representative to hackers, will always have critics. Some critics are flamers/etc/etc, but most aren't... they're hackers that disagree. Disagreement is allowed. What if there isn't one true way for everything?
I'd be much happier myself if all these people (notably ESR and RMS) would stop preaching for a while and let their ideas speak for themselves. It's hard to force a revolution.
As for me, I'll still be coding. My fame pales in the light of Linus or Richard or Eric, but does that make me less of a person? Less of a hacker? I'll still be coding with my friends, in real life, and online, maybe someday with someone who's reading this... but as long as I feel that what I'm doing what is right, then fame looks less important.
> The Mozilla Organization would not exist;
Possibly... but it's the people who write/wrote the code that make the real difference.
> We would not be getting the press we are today;
Unfortunatly this is true. Perhaps the press will ignore us now.
>Numerous products, including Apple's OS X, would be fully proprietary
I'm unimpressed by Apple's "open source" operating system. The "open source" parts (mach, bsd stuff) were already "open source". What's so special bout that?
>Because it would be helpful to me.
How, specifically? BSD source is already out there, so is Mach kernel source. Without Apple's restrictions.
>Because it would be helpful to tother BSD users.
AFAIK it uses BSD source, how would looking at source BSD developers made be helpful to them? And they could never put it into a *BSD OS, because of the license.
>Because it would be helpful, period.
Yes, maybe, but you'll always have that nice feeling that Apple can terminate the agreement, huh?
"open source" has a broad meaning now. in apple's instance of it, they think that programmers are going to work hard on a kernel -- insignifigant by itself (what makes it so special?) -- and be FORCED to report any changes to apple, and RISK having ALL PRODUCT RIGHTS be taken away for ANY REASON.
I come to two conclusions, either:
1) Apple/Steve Jobs is an idiot
2) Just another marketing spin to make a few of the light-hearted go "ooh ooh it's open source".
personally, i see no reason why i should waste my time on apple's code.
find freedom at http://www.gnu.org/
I know one thing for sure: it definatly isn't free software!
find freedom @ http://www.fsf.org
ESR is quite the mature fellow.
two things:
1) I currently have no desire to mix my hacking with any business.
2) If I did, I'd think twice about connecting my software with Open Source(tm). Why? ESR. He hasn't done anything amazingly embarrasing, but the Obi-wan thing, and more importantly the immature snippets from the AOL letter... maybe if this was hacker2hacker, but not hacker2businessman. I'm suprised Mr. "suit" Case didn't respond with "HAHA."
I'd much rather be connected with the FSF/Free software movement. Plain and simple freedom.
Well, I only read parts it since I already knew where it was headed (it's on opensource.oreilly.com for goodness sake). I felt that they misrepresented GNU, FSF and Mr. Stallman.
It's about freedom. The writer missed that major point.
Some of "us" are still hackers and not business people. Some of "us" still like free software...
I've felt that ESR's tried to downplay the importance of the GNU/FSF and what RMS has done. I like GCC and emacs a little more than fetchmail. Sorry ESR.
And ESR didn't create any movement. It was (free software was) already alive and well long before he pushed himself into the scene.
Linux was around before "Open Source" or at least before it was tradmarked and turned into a buzzword. What was it then? Free Software. Plain & simple.
Was/is it sold? Yes, just look at Redhat. Free Software can be sold.
Well, I only read parts it since I already knew where it was headed (it's on opensource.oreilly.com for goodness sake). I felt that they misrepresented GNU, FSF and Mr. Stallman.
It's about freedom. The writer missed that major point.
Also, can anyone give me an example of when free software is not open source software? Free software = more freedom.
Regarding shrink wrapped applications, sure, coporate users would probably perfer those over some downloaded from an FTP site, but look at the big distributions today, they come with SO MANY apps. Not only stuff for coders, apps word processors, e-mail readers, and internet stuff. Out-of-the-box Redhat has more apps than Windows. GOOD apps.
:P
I fail to see how Word to/from Excel integration has anything to do with integration to the OS. Windows has OLE and we've got CORBA, which isn't one big bug like OLE is
Security through integration? Huh?! How much integration can one handle? WinNT has "services" and we have daemons. Not much difference.
Linux costs more than WinNT? Well, if one considers time = money, then *maybe* for *end users* but not one who knows what he's doing. And, in the end, if it does take longer to *set up* Linux, don't worry, there goes all the blue screens.
Linux supports so few applications? What an idiot. It supports that small thing called POSIX, it has many of X apps, it has multiple binary support and even has impressive DOS (dosemu) and Windows (wine) support.
Blah, I don't want to read more.
"There is plenty of GPL code release without the source."
Haha, how is this accomplished?
Well, uh, they better. Unless they want to be sued.
I saw it on eBay!
I heard from someone that MS held a large meeting to discuss how they fear the massive user-friendliness of X11. And how easy it is to setup.
Little children, cover your eyes, ESR is not worthy of the baby Gnu =)
Heh, I especially like the part on HNN where it says "This was the first time in history that so many hacking groups had come together for a common cause. It is the first time that such a large project had been undertaken by so many. The spirit of cooperation and working together was phenomenal." Cooperation to make a press release? Whoopee. l0pht should stick to writing security advisories and working on several interesting projects they have on their site.
Oh, and I find it very interesting that nobody's said anything about cDc's stupid windows trojan. "We strongly oppose any attempt to use the power of hacking to threaten or destroy the information infrastructure of any country, for any reason." I guess it's bad to go against a country, but one's free to attack every Windows user on the 'net. Oh yeah, thanks for those bomb videos, cDc.
LI, formerly LoU isn't a group about destruction.