Just go do a DejaNews search on Tom C.'s rantings in the gnu.misc.discuss group and elsewhere. He's definitely got a huge chip on his shoulder about RMS, GNU, and the GPL. I can't believe that a guy as tolerant and understanding of other people as Larry Wall puts up with Tom as a perl community leader.
traceroute uses UDP packets by default I believe. Though it does have an ICMP ECHO option. Of course UDP and the default traceroute ports can always be blocked too.
If it's anything like the genocide site, there is a block on robots and linking directly to subpages. The return page if you try is very obnoxious and accuses you of bandwidth theft. This guy was a fucking moron and deserves to lose everything for that alone because if he'd just let Google spider his site he could have redownloaded the whole thing from their cache.
Raymond starts a movement - open source - and Stallman says he doesn't want to be a part of that movement because it doesn't match with his ideals. Raymond says "Shut up!" and wants Stallman to quietly allow the Open Source people to trumpet the accomplishments of the GNU project as part of the Open Source movement. This is certainly odd. Why should anyone be forced to allow themselves to be classified with a movement that they don't agree with? I certainly wouldn't. I am not a proponent of the open source movement and do not wish to be lumped in with it either. I'm a free software guy. I personally don't consider the two equivalent.
Interestingly, Raymond claims to believe in freedom for software, but it appears that he believes in it for utilitarian reasons only. I suspect he has a quite different reason for supporting other freedoms. For example, does he think free speech is good only because free speech leads to better government or does he believe it is an inherent moral right of all men? I put free software in the same classifications of rights as free speech and others we hold dear. (Though of course free software is probably not as important).
Re:Philanthropy != Communism
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 2
Ah yes, a gratuitous slap a Reagan. Isn't it interesting to see how things change. In the 80's, the Wall Street boom was a sign of "Republican greed", now it's a sign of the "Clinton economic miracle". Homelessness is a worse problem than ever, yet the issue seems to have dropped off the left's radar scope. Financial wealth is more concentrated after six years of Clinton than ever. (The only multi-mega-billionaires in the Reagan years were Arab oil magnates).
The poor old lefties still want to carp about Reagan when in fact American under Clinton has been everything the left claimed about Reagan times two.
Companies in the US at least keep two sets of books: one done using GAAP for financial reporting purposes and the other for taxes. The financial accounting numbers are the ones you see in SEC filings and such and are totally separate from the way taxes are calculated.
A more interesting question is the difference between US and German accounting systems. My knowledge of German accounting is very sparse.
If you think a Red Hat monopoly would be bad, imagine a world with a SuSE monopoly. Red Hat has invested a lot of money to further free software development: RPM, hiring Alan Cox, Gnome, now even a KDE developer. Everything they write is GPL. What has SuSE done? They release some proprietary X servers and contribute some code to XFree86. That's all I can think of off hand. Their distro is also loaded with freedom subtracted products.
I'm with a CLEC, so the ILEC tech's had to come out and extend an unbundled loop to my house as a second line. But the process was identical to installing a second phone line. If my "main" phone line had DSL hooked up to it, I would not have needed anyone to come out. The Nortel equipment (which is rock solid, BTW) could be based on g.lite, but I don't know.
I've got ADSL with the full 1MB downstream/384K upstream using Nortel's 1 meg modems. Awesome! Pages load instantly now. I also have a voice line on the DSL circuit so I can surf and talk at the same time. (Porn and 1-900, hehehe).
George Carlo cannot be believed. Click here to find out one example why. Just reading the story should clue you in to the exceptionally weak evidence here: "suggest a correlation" (we all know that correlation does not imply causation and this guy can't even show a definitive correlation!), "come to the [possible] conclusion", "far from conclusvie", "can't wait around for the slow scientific process", etc. Typical scaremongering by someone hungry to pump up the budget of the organization he runs dedicated to the scare in question.
The big question here is whether or not this will be free software. The article didn't make it clear and I couldn't find out on Cygnus' web site. Does anyone know the details on licensing?
I think OSI wants to certify software, not licenses. Regardless, certifcation marks cannot be applied involuntarily to a product and I doubt very much that the FSF will allow any of its software or licenses to bear the "OSI Certified" mark. I certainly don't intend to allow any of mine to be so certified since I disagree with the "open source" term.
The term "open source" is at least as confusing as "free software". Clearing up confusion is not the reason to make the change. The reason is that Raymond, et. al. wanted to make free software corporate friendly and strip it of the ethical significance that goes along with it (which they had never agreed with).
It was pointed out from day one that the obvious meaning of "open source" is "you can have the source code" which is not sufficient to make something free. Thus I don't believe it when I'm told that the reason for switching terms is to eliminate confusion. It was to eliminate troublesome ideas.
I personally don't think ICANN is much better. It's really sad to see but the old Internet where the actual people who used it mattered is in on the verge of death. Some things survive, such as the open membership IETF working groups and their insistence on unecumbered standards, but I think this will rapidly become a rearguard action. Witness the rise of "standards" such as MP3 that are owned by corporations, and the growth of corporate dominated standards bodies such as the W3C. And the ICANN bootlicking of corporate trademark holders.
As much as people hate the guy, it's really too bad that Karl Denninger's AlterNIC never really took off. That would have been a real free market solution to the DNS problem: multiple, independent, competing name registrars. The ideas were right. Too bad the people were wrong for it.
-- New devices (I do have USB, but nothing on it currently)
-- Ensuring that 2.0.X users don't get forced to upgrade. (What? You want to run Gnome 2.0? That requires gtk1.4 which only support glibc 2.2.3 which requires Linux 2.6)
Re:Kaffe never ran as well as Blackdown ( for me .
on
Java-Clone Announced
·
· Score: 2
Kaffe is still under development. IMO, they should not be calling themselves 1.x, but that was a marketing decision by TVT. It is reasonably stable and should most things. When was the last time you tried it?
It's unfortunate that the Linux community appears to be sinking more effort into porting and tuning Sun's proprietary Java implementation rather than working to get a free one.
There are two versions, the Open Edition and the Transvirtual edition. The open edition is GPL'd and other has a proprietary license. The code base of the two projects are totally separate. Transvirtual donated most of the code to the open edition, and continues to provide many updates. There are a few proprietary features that aren't availabe in the open edition (such as a DOS (?!?) AWT), but not many. People who contribute to the Kaffe open edition are not automatically contributing to the proprietary version. Only if you voluntarily decide to let Transvirtual use will it be included in the proprietary version.
Obviously I'd rather not see a proprietary version at all, but I think Tim Wilkenson has done a pretty good job of trying to find a model that lets him make money and contribute to the free software community as well. Originally, Kaffe was under a BSD license, and some people ripped him off by not releasing their changes as free software. He was planning on taking Kaffe proprietary as a result, but decided to release it as GPL instead. In this case, the GPL protects both the commerical interests of Transvirtual and the free software community.
So Kaffe will remain available as a free software product. If Microsoft hires TVT to write some Windows specific changes to it, these may or may not be released as free software, but this will not affect the main body of the Kaffe open edition code.
It's doubtful that an installation program or various other proprietary add-ons would be covered by the GPL in any case. The GPL can't solve all the world's problems.
BTW: perl is dual licensed under the GPL and the Artistic license.
Slashdot Mirror
Just go do a DejaNews search on Tom C.'s rantings in the gnu.misc.discuss group and elsewhere. He's definitely got a huge chip on his shoulder about RMS, GNU, and the GPL. I can't believe that a guy as tolerant and understanding of other people as Larry Wall puts up with Tom as a perl community leader.
Hehe. That's the real Tom we all know and love.
traceroute uses UDP packets by default I believe. Though it does have an ICMP ECHO option. Of course UDP and the default traceroute ports can always be blocked too.
If it's anything like the genocide site, there is a block on robots and linking directly to subpages. The return page if you try is very obnoxious and accuses you of bandwidth theft. This guy was a fucking moron and deserves to lose everything for that alone because if he'd just let Google spider his site he could have redownloaded the whole thing from their cache.
I wonder if that could really be JP himself just trying to get another enemy in trouble for making death threats?
Raymond starts a movement - open source - and Stallman says he doesn't want to be a part of that movement because it doesn't match with his ideals. Raymond says "Shut up!" and wants Stallman to quietly allow the Open Source people to trumpet the accomplishments of the GNU project as part of the Open Source movement. This is certainly odd. Why should anyone be forced to allow themselves to be classified with a movement that they don't agree with? I certainly wouldn't. I am not a proponent of the open source movement and do not wish to be lumped in with it either. I'm a free software guy. I personally don't consider the two equivalent.
Interestingly, Raymond claims to believe in freedom for software, but it appears that he believes in it for utilitarian reasons only. I suspect he has a quite different reason for supporting other freedoms. For example, does he think free speech is good only because free speech leads to better government or does he believe it is an inherent moral right of all men? I put free software in the same classifications of rights as free speech and others we hold dear. (Though of course free software is probably not as important).
Ah yes, a gratuitous slap a Reagan. Isn't it interesting to see how things change. In the 80's, the Wall Street boom was a sign of "Republican greed", now it's a sign of the "Clinton economic miracle". Homelessness is a worse problem than ever, yet the issue seems to have dropped off the left's radar scope. Financial wealth is more concentrated after six years of Clinton than ever. (The only multi-mega-billionaires in the Reagan years were Arab oil magnates).
The poor old lefties still want to carp about Reagan when in fact American under Clinton has been everything the left claimed about Reagan times two.
Companies in the US at least keep two sets of books: one done using GAAP for financial reporting purposes and the other for taxes. The financial accounting numbers are the ones you see in SEC filings and such and are totally separate from the way taxes are calculated.
A more interesting question is the difference between US and German accounting systems. My knowledge of German accounting is very sparse.
If you think a Red Hat monopoly would be bad, imagine a world with a SuSE monopoly. Red Hat has invested a lot of money to further free software development: RPM, hiring Alan Cox, Gnome, now even a KDE developer. Everything they write is GPL. What has SuSE done? They release some proprietary X servers and contribute some code to XFree86. That's all I can think of off hand. Their distro is also loaded with freedom subtracted products.
I'm with a CLEC, so the ILEC tech's had to come out and extend an unbundled loop to my house as a second line. But the process was identical to installing a second phone line. If my "main" phone line had DSL hooked up to it, I would not have needed anyone to come out. The Nortel equipment (which is rock solid, BTW) could be based on g.lite, but I don't know.
I've got ASDL w/voice and I don't need any low pass filter for my voice line. There is no interference on my voice calls from the data circuit.
I've got ADSL with the full 1MB downstream/384K upstream using Nortel's 1 meg modems. Awesome! Pages load instantly now. I also have a voice line on the DSL circuit so I can surf and talk at the same time. (Porn and 1-900, hehehe).
George Carlo cannot be believed. Click here to find out one example why. Just reading the story should clue you in to the exceptionally weak evidence here: "suggest a correlation" (we all know that correlation does not imply causation and this guy can't even show a definitive correlation!), "come to the [possible] conclusion", "far from conclusvie", "can't wait around for the slow scientific process", etc. Typical scaremongering by someone hungry to pump up the budget of the organization he runs dedicated to the scare in question.
The big question here is whether or not this will be free software. The article didn't make it clear and I couldn't find out on Cygnus' web site. Does anyone know the details on licensing?
You are so right about ICANN. By the way, that MST3K parody of the Dyson letter is hilarious. An absolute must read.
I think OSI wants to certify software, not licenses. Regardless, certifcation marks cannot be applied involuntarily to a product and I doubt very much that the FSF will allow any of its software or licenses to bear the "OSI Certified" mark. I certainly don't intend to allow any of mine to be so certified since I disagree with the "open source" term.
The term "open source" is at least as confusing as "free software". Clearing up confusion is not the reason to make the change. The reason is that Raymond, et. al. wanted to make free software corporate friendly and strip it of the ethical significance that goes along with it (which they had never agreed with).
It was pointed out from day one that the obvious meaning of "open source" is "you can have the source code" which is not sufficient to make something free. Thus I don't believe it when I'm told that the reason for switching terms is to eliminate confusion. It was to eliminate troublesome ideas.
I personally don't think ICANN is much better. It's really sad to see but the old Internet where the actual people who used it mattered is in on the verge of death. Some things survive, such as the open membership IETF working groups and their insistence on unecumbered standards, but I think this will rapidly become a rearguard action. Witness the rise of "standards" such as MP3 that are owned by corporations, and the growth of corporate dominated standards bodies such as the W3C. And the ICANN bootlicking of corporate trademark holders.
As much as people hate the guy, it's really too bad that Karl Denninger's AlterNIC never really took off. That would have been a real free market solution to the DNS problem: multiple, independent, competing name registrars. The ideas were right. Too bad the people were wrong for it.
-- Security Updates
-- New devices (I do have USB, but nothing on it currently)
-- Ensuring that 2.0.X users don't get forced to upgrade. (What? You want to run Gnome 2.0? That requires gtk1.4 which only support glibc 2.2.3 which requires Linux 2.6)
I'm still on 2.0.X and don't have any plans to upgrade. Things are running well for me and all of my devices are supported.
Question: Has anyone stepped up and said they will take over maintenance of 2.0.X if Alan and Linus don't want to anymore?
Kind of like the ITS Output Spy program, eh
Here is the corrected link
Kaffe is still under development. IMO, they should not be calling themselves 1.x, but that was a marketing decision by TVT. It is reasonably stable and should most things. When was the last time you tried it?
It's unfortunate that the Linux community appears to be sinking more effort into porting and tuning Sun's proprietary Java implementation rather than working to get a free one.
Ok, folks, here are some facts on Kaffe:
There are two versions, the Open Edition and the Transvirtual edition. The open edition is GPL'd and other has a proprietary license. The code base of the two projects are totally separate. Transvirtual donated most of the code to the open edition, and continues to provide many updates. There are a few proprietary features that aren't availabe in the open edition (such as a DOS (?!?) AWT), but not many. People who contribute to the Kaffe open edition are not automatically contributing to the proprietary version. Only if you voluntarily decide to let Transvirtual use will it be included in the proprietary version.
Obviously I'd rather not see a proprietary version at all, but I think Tim Wilkenson has done a pretty good job of trying to find a model that lets him make money and contribute to the free software community as well. Originally, Kaffe was under a BSD license, and some people ripped him off by not releasing their changes as free software. He was planning on taking Kaffe proprietary as a result, but decided to release it as GPL instead. In this case, the GPL protects both the commerical interests of Transvirtual and the free software community.
So Kaffe will remain available as a free software product. If Microsoft hires TVT to write some Windows specific changes to it, these may or may not be released as free software, but this will not affect the main body of the Kaffe open edition code.
It's doubtful that an installation program or various other proprietary add-ons would be covered by the GPL in any case. The GPL can't solve all the world's problems.
BTW: perl is dual licensed under the GPL and the Artistic license.