If it was GPLed, then great! The heroinewarrior.com people will be missed, but they aren't *needed*; they can't retract what they've given away. Does anyone have a copy of the source, and can we get a SourceForge project set up please?
I agree, someone else can continue the project. I just downloaded the source, so the program is not going to disappear anytime.
We need to let people know that the GPL is designed to be a service to the people. And because it is a service, people cannot jack others because of damages. That's inhumane.
If we let people go about suing the GPL style license, then open source software is in danger.
I dunno, maybe proprietory software licensors see the as a positive thing towards their cause. Maybe Microsoft would use this as a reason why open source it bad.
If these things are going to happen, they need to stop right away.
I have never bought a pre-built computer. My computer has been bought in pieces and assembled myself. I choose Linux as my OS. As far as I know, it doesn't have the Digital Rights Management as far as the government is concerned.
I have also built computers for people, same way basically.
What would happen if it is discovered on my computer or other computers that I have built, overcomes security measures that been set by the government? If it was someone I built a computer for, why would I be responsible? Wouldn't it be the fault of the owner of the computer? This bill would hold me responsible up to $500,000, something that a computer hobbyist could never pay.
If someone was downloading an "unsecure movie" on the internet from outside the US, does it remove my right to view and allow the government to block it not even knowing what it was? Isn't this intential censorship?
This goes beyond just computers--anything electronic. Anything that's not government secure, is automatically under their control.
My site contains 100% GPL pictures that are free to copy as long as it keeps the same license.
Why are people putting pictures on the internet and think they won't be copied? If I put anything on the internet, might as well make it free to use, like GPL.
Don't forget that is was the electoral college that got him in! In the popular vote, it was clearly not a majority, and it doesn't have to be under the constitution.
Also, if you want to technical, only 535 people voted for the president. Not even close to half.
oh wait, what am i thinking, we can't have those sorts of revolutions . . . the gasoline companies would go bankrupt and our economy would fall into ruin . . .
Actually, a whole lot of environmentalists would suddenly have no cause.
See, both sides have to keep the conflict up because it's their job.
Maybe the car makers signed a deal with with environmentalists so that they kept making cars that don't pass emissions, and people keep paying out the money for clean air, by constant car maintenance (sounds like microsoft).
While discussing an Apple story yesterday, TH4L35 replied:
-- Apple is shaping the future by permitting -albeit slowly- the "freedoom" that GNU users enjoy to permeate its way into the mainstream. And I'm not just talking about OS X being built on a BSD kernel.
I was just gonna originally reply saying that Apple is only doing this because they are losing support, and by switching themselves to a UNIX standard, they strengthen their software base.
But I didn't want to reply like this because I would seem like an idiot without proof. However this article, about the FSF, comments about Apple and it proves my point:
BK: Today, our feeling toward Apple is like our feeling toward most software companies who do both Free Software and proprietary software. We thank them for their Free Software contributions, but still push them to go further in supporting software freedom. We have to judge each action separately. Some things that Apple does are good for the Free Software community, and some things it does are bad Free Software community.
Apple has allowed many of its employees to contribute to various GNU programs, and we are glad that they have done so. But Apple still develops lots of proprietary software and for that we criticize them.
Also, I wouldn't say that Apple "obviously has a vested interest in supporting the FSF". They clearly have some interest in helping certain Free Software projects (such as GCC and GDB), but I don't think they are really dedicated to the goal of software freedom. For them, it's likely only a pragmatic necessity that leads them to support some Free Software projects.
Note he also believes that "it's likely only a pragmatic necessity that leads them to support some Free Software projects."
If you read more into it, they say they more specifically support Linux/GNU. And why are they more positive to it? Because it does shapes the future, not apple! So does GNU shape the future of apple?
-- Apple is shaping the future by permitting -albeit slowly- the "freedoom" that GNU users enjoy to permeate its way into the mainstream. And I'm not just talking about OS X being built on a BSD kernel.
I was just gonna originally reply saying that Apple is only doing this because they are losing support, and by switch themselves to a UNIX standard, they strengthen their software base.
But I didn't want to say this at first because you might not believe just me. However there is a new article posted on SlashDot, about the FSF. They comment about Apple and it proves my point:
BK: Today, our feeling toward Apple is like our feeling toward most software companies who do both Free Software and proprietary software. We thank them for their Free Software contributions, but still push them to go further in supporting software freedom. We have to judge each action separately. Some things that Apple does are good for the Free Software community, and some things it does are bad Free Software community.
Apple has allowed many of its employees to contribute to various GNU programs, and we are glad that they have done so. But Apple still develops lots of proprietary software and for that we criticize them.
Also, I wouldn't say that Apple "obviously has a vested interest in supporting the FSF". They clearly have some interest in helping certain Free Software projects (such as GCC and GDB), but I don't think they are really dedicated to the goal of software freedom. For them, it's likely only a pragmatic necessity that leads them to support some Free Software projects.
Note he also believes that "it's likely only a pragmatic necessity that leads them to support some Free Software projects."
If you read more into it, they say they more specifically support Linux/GNU. And why are they more positive to it? Because it does shapes the future, not apple! GNU shapes the future of apple!
Apple had a day when it really mattered. - The early 1980's
Today, I think it doesn't matter much. It's just another computer company trying to make money.
To me, Apple is as bad as Microsoft. Both are trying to make themselves the solution and make other solutions look backwards. They both have their own figure heads (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates). And why don't they matter to me: They are closed sourced (they try to make it seem otherwise)
Linux does matter. Linux can run on almost any personal computer now without much trouble. They are great for networking. Linux may not be for you now, or ever. But Linux does matter because it will shape the future.
What makes linux so important? It doesn't restrict the users freedom. Tell me anything else recent that matter. I don't think there is one.
Slashdot Mirror
If it was GPLed, then great! The heroinewarrior.com people will be missed, but they aren't *needed*; they can't retract what they've given away. Does anyone have a copy of the source, and can we get a SourceForge project set up please?
I agree, someone else can continue the project. I just downloaded the source, so the program is not going to disappear anytime.
We need to let people know that the GPL is designed to be a service to the people. And because it is a service, people cannot jack others because of damages. That's inhumane.
If we let people go about suing the GPL style license, then open source software is in danger.
I dunno, maybe proprietory software licensors see the as a positive thing towards their cause. Maybe Microsoft would use this as a reason why open source it bad.
If these things are going to happen, they need to stop right away.
The people on slashdot are very open minded, and there are sometimes posts on emulation, compatability, and security-Alot having to do with linux.
Allowing posts on such, Any open message board could be considered as a network facility to allow breaches in security?
This bill needs to be stopped.
Its the government thats communist! Not linux.
Linux promotes competition between security software standards.-capitalist
Government sets one standard. restricts all other types. imposes heavy fines.-communist
I absolutely believe that would happen. Freenet is in danger.
I have never bought a pre-built computer. My computer has been bought in pieces and assembled myself. I choose Linux as my OS. As far as I know, it doesn't have the Digital Rights Management as far as the government is concerned.
I have also built computers for people, same way basically.
What would happen if it is discovered on my computer or other computers that I have built, overcomes security measures that been set by the government? If it was someone I built a computer for, why would I be responsible? Wouldn't it be the fault of the owner of the computer? This bill would hold me responsible up to $500,000, something that a computer hobbyist could never pay.
If someone was downloading an "unsecure movie" on the internet from outside the US, does it remove my right to view and allow the government to block it not even knowing what it was? Isn't this intential censorship?
This goes beyond just computers--anything electronic. Anything that's not government secure, is automatically under their control.
My site contains 100% GPL pictures that are free to copy as long as it keeps the same license.
:)
Why are people putting pictures on the internet and think they won't be copied? If I put anything on the internet, might as well make it free to use, like GPL.
But no one would care about my site any way
Don't forget that is was the electoral college that got him in! In the popular vote, it was clearly not a majority, and it doesn't have to be under the constitution.
Also, if you want to technical, only 535 people voted for the president. Not even close to half.
oh wait, what am i thinking, we can't have those sorts of revolutions . . . the gasoline companies would go bankrupt and our economy would fall into ruin . . .
Actually, a whole lot of environmentalists would suddenly have no cause.
See, both sides have to keep the conflict up because it's their job.
Maybe the car makers signed a deal with with environmentalists so that they kept making cars that don't pass emissions, and people keep paying out the money for clean air, by constant car maintenance (sounds like microsoft).
Nothing appears as things really are.
I was just gonna originally reply saying that Apple is only doing this because they are losing support, and by switching themselves to a UNIX standard, they strengthen their software base.
But I didn't want to reply like this because I would seem like an idiot without proof. However this article, about the FSF, comments about Apple and it proves my point:
Note he also believes that "it's likely only a pragmatic necessity that leads them to support some Free Software projects."
If you read more into it, they say they more specifically support Linux/GNU. And why are they more positive to it? Because it does shapes the future, not apple! So does GNU shape the future of apple?
I was just gonna originally reply saying that Apple is only doing this because they are losing support, and by switch themselves to a UNIX standard, they strengthen their software base.
But I didn't want to say this at first because you might not believe just me. However there is a new article posted on SlashDot, about the FSF. They comment about Apple and it proves my point:
Note he also believes that "it's likely only a pragmatic necessity that leads them to support some Free Software projects."
If you read more into it, they say they more specifically support Linux/GNU. And why are they more positive to it? Because it does shapes the future, not apple! GNU shapes the future of apple!
Apple had a day when it really mattered. - The early 1980's
Today, I think it doesn't matter much. It's just another computer company trying to make money.
To me, Apple is as bad as Microsoft. Both are trying to make themselves the solution and make other solutions look backwards. They both have their own figure heads (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates).
And why don't they matter to me: They are closed sourced (they try to make it seem otherwise)
Linux does matter. Linux can run on almost any personal computer now without much trouble. They are great for networking. Linux may not be for you now, or ever. But Linux does matter because it will shape the future.
What makes linux so important? It doesn't restrict the users freedom. Tell me anything else recent that matter. I don't think there is one.