Re:FSF concerned about GPL stuff
on
SourceForge Drifting
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I don't think they're concerned about possible violations, I think that sourceforge and VA are going to do everything in a very straightforward, legal way.
What they're worried about is what sourceforge can talk people into doing. Like signing over their rights to code. There isn't any GPL violation if an author wants to sign his code over to someone else, but all the same it's a loss for free software. They're also worried about the fact that sourceforge seems to have hooked people on a particular development methodology, (and a GOOD one at that) but that now since they're drifting away from free software, they may bring developers with them.
I think that the FSF's concerns are totally valid. I think it's really odd that most of the other posters in this discussion haven't even examined the software angle, and more importantly the freedom angle - they're more interested in speculating on VA's *business model*. Since when did all of the hackers that used to read slashdot morph into business students? (And poor ones at that)
Are you totally incapable of separating two personas in the same person? I'm sure you have opinions on software. Do those opinions void the value of your political opinions?
Why can't the guy talk about politics if he wants to? While I don't think that he's officially speaking for the Free Software Foundation with this article, and speaking only for himself, everything that he's about has to do with wider politics and society in general, and not just whether or not 14 year olds have to pay for their w4r3z at the store, or whether they can download and compile them themselves at no cost.
RMS has said over and over and over and over and over that it's all about freedom. I'm sorry, I meant that it's all about Freedom. With a capital (F). Read this article again, and see if you think it's totally inappropriate. It's about Freedom isn't it? Or did I miss something?
America is the land of the free, with liberty, and justice for all
Check that, it's the land of liberty and justice for all those who can afford it. I mean, does anybody really doubt that after seeing Rodney King's attackers walk, after seeing OJ walk, and after seeing mentally retarded people with no money for expensive lawyers get the chair in Texas despite obvious mental incompetence? Does anybody really think that it's "liberty and justice for all" in a place where a respected journalist gets the death penalty and the courts won't even listen to an appeal WHEN SOMEONE COMES FORWARD AND COPS TO THE MURDER that the journalist was accused of?
When you can get ass-raped in a police station bathroom by a racist motherfucker with a gun, is it really freedom and justice for all? What about when unarmed people get shot in the back whlie running away?
One of my biggest problems with all of this WtC stuff is the UGLY NATIONALISM that it has bred. People who knew that the US government didn't have their best interests in mind on Monday now slap flags on their cars and sing patriotic hymns as if just because we were attacked we're suddenly in the right about everything. Well I've got news for you. Just because Lee Harvey Oswald was killed doesn't mean that he was a great guy that deserved our support.
America is what it is. The people are going to get EXACTLY as much as they're willing to put up with. America will be america even if we turn into a jackbooted fascist state (which I don't think is that likely). The only difference is that we'll have a few fewer assholes singing patriotic hymns that were written by rich white slaveholders.
I think that he would rather that copyright didn't need to exist, but since it does exist, you may as well use it to enforce the distribution terms that ensure freedom for people.
Ask him about the distribution license for this article. That, and read up on the FSF so you're not so grossly underinformed about what RMS actually believes about copyright.
What if you spill some wine on your seat? Are you going to be officially drunk when driving for the next 2 weeks?
How on earth would this work? This would be hooked to a transmitter inside the car. Wouldn't this be the very first modification a person would make to their car would be to rip this friggin' thing out?
What if someone else in the car is drinking? The pigs pull you, and you have to "audition for your freedom"?
What's the range on the transmitters? Rather than getting the pigs all over you, why not just make other cars able to receive it so people could stay the hell away from you?
Why does it NOT suprise me that this is coming out of Texas Christian University and not, say, MIT?
Public safety threat or no, is it a good precedent to make it OK for the pigs to know about the state of your body at all times?
Yeah...as if people are going to stop drinking coffee because of news like this.
They should have had a different headline:
"THIS JUST IN - THING PEOPLE ENJOY IS ACTUALLY BAD FOR YOU"
If that headline was used, we could all bitch about how this is a repost. How many times have you seen a story like that before? (millions) How many times has a story like that affected people's behavior? (long, awkward silence)
So when are they going to be *real* machines?
on
QNX RTP Running on iPaq
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
These PDAs are getting neater and more powerful every day, but when are they going to be real machines?
I mean, eventually we could have a setup where you would buy a full size monitor and keyboard for office and home, and then just buy one little Super PDA to plug the monitor and keyboard into to use as a full PC. If they can get wireless networking down into that size package (which I'm sure they will eventually) you'd even be able to network without current crappy PDA packet modems or anything like that.
I'm sorry, but why do so many people here care about the business aspects of Ximian? How is that that it's all about the benjamins? I thought it was all about the SOFTWARE!
Certainly, Ximian has business realities that they need to attend to, but I'm at a loss for why those types of things are interesting to slashdotters. When was it exactly that the site turned from primarily people interested in cool technology to people who are interested in the latest business news? When was it that we gained so many people who act as if their entire self-worth is tied up in whether or not "open-source" proves itself to be a viable business model?
Here's the reality of the situation - free software isn't going to die even if it CAN'T be made into a viable business model. If Ximian croaks tomorrow, that doesn't invalidate a single line of code that they put into Evolution. Sure, some businessman in a suit somewhere is going to be pissed off, but unless you are that guy, why do you care?
Enjoy the software. Enjoy life. Life is good! Don't spend time wondering about Ximian's revenue models, their overhead, whether or not their VC capital is dwindling, or even whether or not ESR was right about all that non-software-related business stuff he spews about "open source". Do your part and be a GNU/Linux user, and let the suits take care of themselves.
I don't necessarily think that suits and techies should be separated, but this vein of discussion is something that just isn't all that interesting.
Not only do I *not* mind helping a company out when they are contributing free software back to the community, but when they actively solicit help like this and give people rewards, it's only going to help them out. Also, I think having your customers hunt for bugs reinforces the idea that you're not claiming you're perfect (and thus not trying to pull the wool over their eyes about defects in the software) and also as part of the free software community it makes people feel like they have a stake in the software. Which would you rather use - a package where you felt you had some sort of stake, or MegaCorp's package where feature requests are forwarded to/dev/null and the support team consists of an auto-reply email system?
As a side effect, it's probably a smart marketing move since as I'd imagine, the Ximian FTP sites are hopping right now with slashdotters trying to download a copy of Evolution to win something.
So let's review:
- Free (as in beer) stuff (always cool)
- Free (as in speech) software (even cooler)
I think lots of slashdotters are really keen on making fun of this, particularly when they think there are a few quick karma points to grab, but not many have read it straight from the source.
Rather than listening to a bunch of slashdotters make fun of things, why not read what the FSF has to say about it. Far from being crazy, the argument for GNU/Linux sounds pretty damn good to me. People scream about not getting credit for their code, they scream about free software or "open-source" not getting recognition for the fact that it acts as the internet infrastructure, but they don't particularly feel like giving credit to the foundation of their own system. And we're not talking about ticker tape parades - we're talking about 3 letters and a slash.
For those who want to call it Linux, I'd just suggest this: try running your favorite distro after subtracting all of the GNU system. Have fun.
This is interesting - in the article, Raymond seems to contradict himself on this point. From the article, when referring to GPL'd software, he says that writing it might "decrease the software's tradeable value".
GPL'd software falls under the umbrella of "open-source" software the Raymond made up. I was under the impression that one of the entire points of "open-source" was to show corporations that the tradeable value of "open-source" software wasn't necessarily less than that of proprietary software. Yet here he seems to say that for much of open source software (that that is GPL'd) the value is less.
Well guess what guys - no matter what the value is, (I'm not getting into that, since I'm not an economist and neither is ESR) it's not all about the Benjamins for a lot of developers. It's a good thing that we can write software that has something it comes with far more important than economic value - freedom. Free as in speech that is, not as in beer. Raymond seems to want to avoid the "F" word, because he says it's "confusing" even to us.
<sarcasm>Well never have I shouldered such a heavy intellectual burden, but somehow I'll struggle through to understand the meaning of "freedom" as it was in the American Revolution, as it was in the Civil Rights marches, and as it is today in my own software</sarcasm>
It seems like the height of tyranny for an ungrateful rabble of users to in essence say, "Thanks for creating this product that we find useful. However, that's not damn good enough
The fundamental divide I think is that the FSF doesn't think software should have owners. It sounds like you're getting pissed at users acting that way because the developer should own and control the software - or as you put it "the freedom to choose how their work is used".
GNU believes that programs are generally useful technical information. Most people think that patenting math formulas is bullshit. I don't really see much of a difference, since in both cases they're generally useful technical information.
I hate to borrow from Libertarian philosophy, but a right is not a right if you require coercion of another person
I agree - but put a different spin on it. Who are you to say that I cannot cooperate with my neighbor by sharing generally useful technical information with them? Who are you to throw me in jail because I copied something I bought to a CD? Who are you to call me a 'pirate' (and equate me with someone who robs, murders and rapes ships) when I'm helping my friends and coworkers out? From my perspective, distributing non-free software is coercion - it's coercing users *not* to help their friends. It's coercing them to avoid using and spreading generally useful technical information in many circumstances.
Life is all about gathering, spreading, and exploiting technically useful information. If you disagree with me, disagree with me that computer programs are technically useful information. But without the ability to use, spread, and gather good technically useful information, we're never going to evolve and get off of this planet.
Towards the end of the article, Raymond attacks RMS and the FSF saying "Hypothetically, if they could pass a law that would make proprietary software illegal, they would". A hypothetical condition which has never even been discussed before being the basis for discrediting what they have to say???
Also, let's even say that such a law was passed. He doesn't address the moral idea of whether or not restricting other people's freedom to software is a bad thing or not. He just says it doesn't affect his "flerbage" because nobody is going to kill him because of proprietary software. The reason a law against proprietary software (if it ever happened - which it won't) would happen is because restricting other people's freedom is bad. You have the freedom to do what you want, but you don't have the freedom to restrict the freedom of others.
For Raymond, it seems like everything is framed in a nonsense libertarian world where the primary fear is of getting your ass kicked, shot, and thrown in jail. He makes up the term "flerbage" which no one has agreed to, yet assumes the reader implicitly agrees to it and uses it as a basis to attack others. If I were to come up with a new term and attach something that I liked to that term, would you think of it as a valid arguing style if I were to then use that term which no one necessarily agrees with to beat my opponents over the head?
This essay was just silly. Talking in the end about whether or not the FSF are "safe neighbors". Before considering issues of intellectual property law, it sounds to me like Raymond needs to consider things lower in Maslow's heirarchy of needs, since he seems overly concerned with hypothetical laws beating, shooting, and imprisoning him.
It's not that easy being green
Having to spend each day the color of the leaves
When I think it could be nicer being red, or yellow or gold
Or something much more colorful like that
It's not easy being green
It seems you blend in with so many other ordinary things
And people tend to pass you over 'cause you're
Not standing out like flashy sparkles in the water
Or stars in the sky
But green's the color of Spring
And green can be cool and friendly-like
And green can be big like an ocean, or important
Like a mountain, or tall like a tree
When green is all there is to be
It could make you wonder why, but why wonder why
Wonder, I am green and it'll do fine, it's beautiful
And I think it's what I want to be
Re:But I just got 2.4.7 working right!!!
on
Linux 2.4.8 is Out
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Older config files usually work great, especially just between a patchlevel difference like 2.4.7 -> 2.4.8.
Go into your source directory and do a "make mrproper". Then copy your old config file into ".config" and run "make oldconfig". It *might* ask you one or two questions, often they won't matter if your old kernel was working OK as is.
Then just go straight to the "make dep", "make bzImage", "make modules", etc.
Life would suck without the "make oldconfig" target.:)
You shouldn't use words you clearly don't know the definition of. I'm sure you're using "pinko" in this sense because you've heard the circa 1950's insult "commie pinko" but the word pinko is a slur towards gays, not towards communists. People were called commie pinkos in order to insinuate that they were gay as well as communist. The word "pinko" comes from "pink triangle" which they were forced to wear under Hitler.
I seriously doubt that you mean to accuse RMS of being a homosexual, so I suggest you read up on the meaning of the things you say before you say them.
BTW, I like the Space Ghost image on the front page, although given CmdrTaco's other interests I was kinda expecting some quasi-porn Japanime type image.:)
Think about it...work on your product, release it under the GPL, get suggestions, feedback from your target clients, bug testing galore all for free, maybe even some documentation. (Not likely much code since that would make closing it difficult)
Take all of that benefit that you got from having the community show you good will because you're releasing GPL'd software, close the software, stick in a few things people can't get with the last version that was GPL'd, and release the software closed and make money off of it.
Of course it's legal. But I don't know about ethical. Well at least they got a hell of a QA department for free.
I thought this type of stuff was pretty clear. I mean, "Security through Obscurity is bad" as a statement certainly doesn't mean that giving information out about your system is a good thing.
The most important point of the article is that security through obscurity is terrible if and only if it's used as the only layer of security in the system. As another layer, it can't hurt at all.
I think it's like wearing a bullet proof vest that isn't rated for large caliber weapons. Sure, it's not going to help you out if some loser with a.45 comes along, but it may help you in other situations, so it's not totally worthless.
And obviously this is a rumor. Pretty interesting to read some of the stuff that was said.
And that's why nobody should bitch about what slashdot does and what slashdot says. Ever see anything in the Wall Street Journal followed by "and this is obviously a rumor"...
This is not a professional journalism site. This is a rumour mill, a flame room, and all kinds of other things. So if I see another post saying "slashdot really sucks because they don't give equal time to X" I'm going to start spinning, and spinning, and I'm not going to stop, until THERES BLOOD ALL OVER THE WALLS.
I weep for our educational system.:) But anyway...
What I don't understand in all this talk about people being assholes on message boards and all this other stuff is why we should care? I agree with the assertion that it's probably not just linux users who are being assholes on public forums, but even if it were, who cares?
I would like to think that people use an operating system because it fits their needs. Linus may be out for world domination, and others as well, but frankly I don't care to spend a lot of energy debating and worrying over whether or not the linux community is taking the strategy that maximizes chances for the widest popularity.
Getting drivers for new hardware is one thing, but why is it that all of the rhetoric here and elsewhere seems focused on making linux popular? It would be nice, but I'd rather cut the PR shit and keep writing software. I want people to come and use linux because we're better than the alternative, not because we're nice on message boards, or companies feel warm and fluffy around us, or because our PR department is better at lying to the customer than the competition is.
And even if no one else uses linux, it's still going to move forward. The types of users people are trying to attract aren't even really coders. They're not going to help the progression of the OS any except by making companies take notice, who often contribute non-free software.
Linux is linux, and it's going to be linux. Nobody has to pimp it out in order for it to be what it is.
What's being asked here seems to me to be simply: "We know that a kernel isn't an operating system. So what is 'linux'?"
The difference is the GNU System and the utilities that were built up beside the linux kernel and supporting it. The difference between linux the kernel and linux the system that we all know and love is the GNU System.
And that's why the system is GNU/Linux, and not 'Linux', which merely refers to the kernel.
Well, I think the elderly will learn computers just like everybody else does. By screwing around on them and doing random stuff.
The main thing about the elderly and others who haven't learned computing yet is that they fear the complexity of the machines. If you show them that the user interface is designed to be consistent and helpful and not contrary and impossible, if you show them just a few cool things and what you did to get there, and if you convince them that they can learn it and that it's relatively simple once you've got some practice, then there's no problem.
Essentially there's no difference between the elderly as a specific group learning computers than any other group. Teach them not to fear the computer, show them a few cool things, and then let them loose. That's how I learned computers, I'm betting that's how you learned computers, and that's probably the best way they can learn them too.
It's the attitude that's important. If you try to learn going into the experience thinking that the machine is going to do everything it can to thwart you and that really it's a very difficult task, you'll fail. If you approach it with confidence, then it will be easy. Giving the confidence to approach the machine is your job more than actually teaching the mechanics is. If they have the confidence, the mechanics will teach themselves to the user.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think they're concerned about possible violations, I think that sourceforge and VA are going to do everything in a very straightforward, legal way.
What they're worried about is what sourceforge can talk people into doing. Like signing over their rights to code. There isn't any GPL violation if an author wants to sign his code over to someone else, but all the same it's a loss for free software. They're also worried about the fact that sourceforge seems to have hooked people on a particular development methodology, (and a GOOD one at that) but that now since they're drifting away from free software, they may bring developers with them.
I think that the FSF's concerns are totally valid. I think it's really odd that most of the other posters in this discussion haven't even examined the software angle, and more importantly the freedom angle - they're more interested in speculating on VA's *business model*. Since when did all of the hackers that used to read slashdot morph into business students? (And poor ones at that)
Are you totally incapable of separating two personas in the same person? I'm sure you have opinions on software. Do those opinions void the value of your political opinions?
Why can't the guy talk about politics if he wants to? While I don't think that he's officially speaking for the Free Software Foundation with this article, and speaking only for himself, everything that he's about has to do with wider politics and society in general, and not just whether or not 14 year olds have to pay for their w4r3z at the store, or whether they can download and compile them themselves at no cost.
RMS has said over and over and over and over and over that it's all about freedom. I'm sorry, I meant that it's all about Freedom. With a capital (F). Read this article again, and see if you think it's totally inappropriate. It's about Freedom isn't it? Or did I miss something?
America is the land of the free, with liberty, and justice for all
Check that, it's the land of liberty and justice for all those who can afford it. I mean, does anybody really doubt that after seeing Rodney King's attackers walk, after seeing OJ walk, and after seeing mentally retarded people with no money for expensive lawyers get the chair in Texas despite obvious mental incompetence? Does anybody really think that it's "liberty and justice for all" in a place where a respected journalist gets the death penalty and the courts won't even listen to an appeal WHEN SOMEONE COMES FORWARD AND COPS TO THE MURDER that the journalist was accused of?
When you can get ass-raped in a police station bathroom by a racist motherfucker with a gun, is it really freedom and justice for all? What about when unarmed people get shot in the back whlie running away?
One of my biggest problems with all of this WtC stuff is the UGLY NATIONALISM that it has bred. People who knew that the US government didn't have their best interests in mind on Monday now slap flags on their cars and sing patriotic hymns as if just because we were attacked we're suddenly in the right about everything. Well I've got news for you. Just because Lee Harvey Oswald was killed doesn't mean that he was a great guy that deserved our support.
America is what it is. The people are going to get EXACTLY as much as they're willing to put up with. America will be america even if we turn into a jackbooted fascist state (which I don't think is that likely). The only difference is that we'll have a few fewer assholes singing patriotic hymns that were written by rich white slaveholders.
The GPL uses copyright to protect creations.
I think that he would rather that copyright didn't need to exist, but since it does exist, you may as well use it to enforce the distribution terms that ensure freedom for people.
Ask him about the distribution license for this article. That, and read up on the FSF so you're not so grossly underinformed about what RMS actually believes about copyright.
What if you spill some wine on your seat? Are you going to be officially drunk when driving for the next 2 weeks?
How on earth would this work? This would be hooked to a transmitter inside the car. Wouldn't this be the very first modification a person would make to their car would be to rip this friggin' thing out?
What if someone else in the car is drinking? The pigs pull you, and you have to "audition for your freedom"?
What's the range on the transmitters? Rather than getting the pigs all over you, why not just make other cars able to receive it so people could stay the hell away from you?
Why does it NOT suprise me that this is coming out of Texas Christian University and not, say, MIT?
Public safety threat or no, is it a good precedent to make it OK for the pigs to know about the state of your body at all times?
Yeah...as if people are going to stop drinking coffee because of news like this.
They should have had a different headline:
"THIS JUST IN - THING PEOPLE ENJOY IS ACTUALLY BAD FOR YOU"
If that headline was used, we could all bitch about how this is a repost. How many times have you seen a story like that before? (millions) How many times has a story like that affected people's behavior? (long, awkward silence)
Check out his groundbreaking rap work as well! at MC Hawking.com
These PDAs are getting neater and more powerful every day, but when are they going to be real machines?
I mean, eventually we could have a setup where you would buy a full size monitor and keyboard for office and home, and then just buy one little Super PDA to plug the monitor and keyboard into to use as a full PC. If they can get wireless networking down into that size package (which I'm sure they will eventually) you'd even be able to network without current crappy PDA packet modems or anything like that.
I'm sorry, but why do so many people here care about the business aspects of Ximian? How is that that it's all about the benjamins? I thought it was all about the SOFTWARE!
Certainly, Ximian has business realities that they need to attend to, but I'm at a loss for why those types of things are interesting to slashdotters. When was it exactly that the site turned from primarily people interested in cool technology to people who are interested in the latest business news? When was it that we gained so many people who act as if their entire self-worth is tied up in whether or not "open-source" proves itself to be a viable business model?
Here's the reality of the situation - free software isn't going to die even if it CAN'T be made into a viable business model. If Ximian croaks tomorrow, that doesn't invalidate a single line of code that they put into Evolution. Sure, some businessman in a suit somewhere is going to be pissed off, but unless you are that guy, why do you care?
Enjoy the software. Enjoy life. Life is good! Don't spend time wondering about Ximian's revenue models, their overhead, whether or not their VC capital is dwindling, or even whether or not ESR was right about all that non-software-related business stuff he spews about "open source". Do your part and be a GNU/Linux user, and let the suits take care of themselves.
I don't necessarily think that suits and techies should be separated, but this vein of discussion is something that just isn't all that interesting.
Not only do I *not* mind helping a company out when they are contributing free software back to the community, but when they actively solicit help like this and give people rewards, it's only going to help them out. Also, I think having your customers hunt for bugs reinforces the idea that you're not claiming you're perfect (and thus not trying to pull the wool over their eyes about defects in the software) and also as part of the free software community it makes people feel like they have a stake in the software. Which would you rather use - a package where you felt you had some sort of stake, or MegaCorp's package where feature requests are forwarded to /dev/null and the support team consists of an auto-reply email system?
As a side effect, it's probably a smart marketing move since as I'd imagine, the Ximian FTP sites are hopping right now with slashdotters trying to download a copy of Evolution to win something.
So let's review:
- Free (as in beer) stuff (always cool)
- Free (as in speech) software (even cooler)
What a deal!
Yes, it should be.
I think lots of slashdotters are really keen on making fun of this, particularly when they think there are a few quick karma points to grab, but not many have read it straight from the source.
Rather than listening to a bunch of slashdotters make fun of things, why not read what the FSF has to say about it. Far from being crazy, the argument for GNU/Linux sounds pretty damn good to me. People scream about not getting credit for their code, they scream about free software or "open-source" not getting recognition for the fact that it acts as the internet infrastructure, but they don't particularly feel like giving credit to the foundation of their own system. And we're not talking about ticker tape parades - we're talking about 3 letters and a slash.
For those who want to call it Linux, I'd just suggest this: try running your favorite distro after subtracting all of the GNU system. Have fun.
I gotta keep food on my table SOMEHOW!
This is interesting - in the article, Raymond seems to contradict himself on this point. From the article, when referring to GPL'd software, he says that writing it might "decrease the software's tradeable value".
GPL'd software falls under the umbrella of "open-source" software the Raymond made up. I was under the impression that one of the entire points of "open-source" was to show corporations that the tradeable value of "open-source" software wasn't necessarily less than that of proprietary software. Yet here he seems to say that for much of open source software (that that is GPL'd) the value is less.
Well guess what guys - no matter what the value is, (I'm not getting into that, since I'm not an economist and neither is ESR) it's not all about the Benjamins for a lot of developers. It's a good thing that we can write software that has something it comes with far more important than economic value - freedom. Free as in speech that is, not as in beer. Raymond seems to want to avoid the "F" word, because he says it's "confusing" even to us.
<sarcasm>Well never have I shouldered such a heavy intellectual burden, but somehow I'll struggle through to understand the meaning of "freedom" as it was in the American Revolution, as it was in the Civil Rights marches, and as it is today in my own software</sarcasm>
It seems like the height of tyranny for an ungrateful rabble of users to in essence say, "Thanks for creating this product that we find useful. However, that's not damn good enough
The fundamental divide I think is that the FSF doesn't think software should have owners. It sounds like you're getting pissed at users acting that way because the developer should own and control the software - or as you put it "the freedom to choose how their work is used".
GNU believes that programs are generally useful technical information. Most people think that patenting math formulas is bullshit. I don't really see much of a difference, since in both cases they're generally useful technical information.
I hate to borrow from Libertarian philosophy, but a right is not a right if you require coercion of another person
I agree - but put a different spin on it. Who are you to say that I cannot cooperate with my neighbor by sharing generally useful technical information with them? Who are you to throw me in jail because I copied something I bought to a CD? Who are you to call me a 'pirate' (and equate me with someone who robs, murders and rapes ships) when I'm helping my friends and coworkers out? From my perspective, distributing non-free software is coercion - it's coercing users *not* to help their friends. It's coercing them to avoid using and spreading generally useful technical information in many circumstances.
Life is all about gathering, spreading, and exploiting technically useful information. If you disagree with me, disagree with me that computer programs are technically useful information. But without the ability to use, spread, and gather good technically useful information, we're never going to evolve and get off of this planet.
Towards the end of the article, Raymond attacks RMS and the FSF saying "Hypothetically, if they could pass a law that would make proprietary software illegal, they would". A hypothetical condition which has never even been discussed before being the basis for discrediting what they have to say???
Also, let's even say that such a law was passed. He doesn't address the moral idea of whether or not restricting other people's freedom to software is a bad thing or not. He just says it doesn't affect his "flerbage" because nobody is going to kill him because of proprietary software. The reason a law against proprietary software (if it ever happened - which it won't) would happen is because restricting other people's freedom is bad. You have the freedom to do what you want, but you don't have the freedom to restrict the freedom of others.
For Raymond, it seems like everything is framed in a nonsense libertarian world where the primary fear is of getting your ass kicked, shot, and thrown in jail. He makes up the term "flerbage" which no one has agreed to, yet assumes the reader implicitly agrees to it and uses it as a basis to attack others. If I were to come up with a new term and attach something that I liked to that term, would you think of it as a valid arguing style if I were to then use that term which no one necessarily agrees with to beat my opponents over the head?
This essay was just silly. Talking in the end about whether or not the FSF are "safe neighbors". Before considering issues of intellectual property law, it sounds to me like Raymond needs to consider things lower in Maslow's heirarchy of needs, since he seems overly concerned with hypothetical laws beating, shooting, and imprisoning him.
ARTIST: Muppets
TITLE: It's Not Easy Being Green
It's not that easy being green
Having to spend each day the color of the leaves
When I think it could be nicer being red, or yellow or gold
Or something much more colorful like that
It's not easy being green
It seems you blend in with so many other ordinary things
And people tend to pass you over 'cause you're
Not standing out like flashy sparkles in the water
Or stars in the sky
But green's the color of Spring
And green can be cool and friendly-like
And green can be big like an ocean, or important
Like a mountain, or tall like a tree
When green is all there is to be
It could make you wonder why, but why wonder why
Wonder, I am green and it'll do fine, it's beautiful
And I think it's what I want to be
Older config files usually work great, especially just between a patchlevel difference like 2.4.7 -> 2.4.8.
:)
Go into your source directory and do a "make mrproper". Then copy your old config file into ".config" and run "make oldconfig". It *might* ask you one or two questions, often they won't matter if your old kernel was working OK as is.
Then just go straight to the "make dep", "make bzImage", "make modules", etc.
Life would suck without the "make oldconfig" target.
raving lunatic pinko
You shouldn't use words you clearly don't know the definition of. I'm sure you're using "pinko" in this sense because you've heard the circa 1950's insult "commie pinko" but the word pinko is a slur towards gays, not towards communists. People were called commie pinkos in order to insinuate that they were gay as well as communist. The word "pinko" comes from "pink triangle" which they were forced to wear under Hitler.
I seriously doubt that you mean to accuse RMS of being a homosexual, so I suggest you read up on the meaning of the things you say before you say them.
Banjo.slashdot.org seems to be running veeeeeeeeeeery slowly.
:)
Can slashdot slashdot itself?
BTW, I like the Space Ghost image on the front page, although given CmdrTaco's other interests I was kinda expecting some quasi-porn Japanime type image.
Think about it...work on your product, release it under the GPL, get suggestions, feedback from your target clients, bug testing galore all for free, maybe even some documentation. (Not likely much code since that would make closing it difficult)
Take all of that benefit that you got from having the community show you good will because you're releasing GPL'd software, close the software, stick in a few things people can't get with the last version that was GPL'd, and release the software closed and make money off of it.
Of course it's legal. But I don't know about ethical. Well at least they got a hell of a QA department for free.
I thought this type of stuff was pretty clear. I mean, "Security through Obscurity is bad" as a statement certainly doesn't mean that giving information out about your system is a good thing.
.45 comes along, but it may help you in other situations, so it's not totally worthless.
The most important point of the article is that security through obscurity is terrible if and only if it's used as the only layer of security in the system. As another layer, it can't hurt at all.
I think it's like wearing a bullet proof vest that isn't rated for large caliber weapons. Sure, it's not going to help you out if some loser with a
And obviously this is a rumor. Pretty interesting to read some of the stuff that was said.
And that's why nobody should bitch about what slashdot does and what slashdot says. Ever see anything in the Wall Street Journal followed by "and this is obviously a rumor"...
This is not a professional journalism site. This is a rumour mill, a flame room, and all kinds of other things. So if I see another post saying "slashdot really sucks because they don't give equal time to X" I'm going to start spinning, and spinning, and I'm not going to stop, until THERES BLOOD ALL OVER THE WALLS.
I too weap for our future
:) But anyway...
I weep for our educational system.
What I don't understand in all this talk about people being assholes on message boards and all this other stuff is why we should care? I agree with the assertion that it's probably not just linux users who are being assholes on public forums, but even if it were, who cares?
I would like to think that people use an operating system because it fits their needs. Linus may be out for world domination, and others as well, but frankly I don't care to spend a lot of energy debating and worrying over whether or not the linux community is taking the strategy that maximizes chances for the widest popularity.
Getting drivers for new hardware is one thing, but why is it that all of the rhetoric here and elsewhere seems focused on making linux popular? It would be nice, but I'd rather cut the PR shit and keep writing software. I want people to come and use linux because we're better than the alternative, not because we're nice on message boards, or companies feel warm and fluffy around us, or because our PR department is better at lying to the customer than the competition is.
And even if no one else uses linux, it's still going to move forward. The types of users people are trying to attract aren't even really coders. They're not going to help the progression of the OS any except by making companies take notice, who often contribute non-free software.
Linux is linux, and it's going to be linux. Nobody has to pimp it out in order for it to be what it is.
What's being asked here seems to me to be simply: "We know that a kernel isn't an operating system. So what is 'linux'?"
The difference is the GNU System and the utilities that were built up beside the linux kernel and supporting it. The difference between linux the kernel and linux the system that we all know and love is the GNU System.
And that's why the system is GNU/Linux, and not 'Linux', which merely refers to the kernel.
Well, I think the elderly will learn computers just like everybody else does. By screwing around on them and doing random stuff.
The main thing about the elderly and others who haven't learned computing yet is that they fear the complexity of the machines. If you show them that the user interface is designed to be consistent and helpful and not contrary and impossible, if you show them just a few cool things and what you did to get there, and if you convince them that they can learn it and that it's relatively simple once you've got some practice, then there's no problem.
Essentially there's no difference between the elderly as a specific group learning computers than any other group. Teach them not to fear the computer, show them a few cool things, and then let them loose. That's how I learned computers, I'm betting that's how you learned computers, and that's probably the best way they can learn them too.
It's the attitude that's important. If you try to learn going into the experience thinking that the machine is going to do everything it can to thwart you and that really it's a very difficult task, you'll fail. If you approach it with confidence, then it will be easy. Giving the confidence to approach the machine is your job more than actually teaching the mechanics is. If they have the confidence, the mechanics will teach themselves to the user.
It seems they've proved that malingering is possible. I guess that means that the disease doesn't exist.