Now it's being done in a way that is also compatible with proprietary software
Which is why Microsoft and Apple have been aggressively pushing BSD-style licenses. The notion of end-user freedoms is obviously antithetical to the way they want to push computing, so they fight against it.
I know there is the contrived case of a codebase being improved and re-packaged under a proprietary license but that just doesn't happen
The problem, of course, is that you'd probably never realize it unless you looked really, really hard at software whose license would prohibit you from looking (c.f. anti-reverse engineering clauses, etc.)
So RMS maybe right but he is wrong by enforcing his opinion on others if he truly believes in freedom.
He does, which is why everything under the GPL is there voluntarily, placed there by the original author.
But really his solution is worse than the problem.
Prove it. Go on, substantiate your claim.
I will take Milton Friedmans stance on this by a limited framework where both users and developers do what they will as long as they do not oppose that will on others.
And we have that framework, where everyone is allowed to freely license the software they write - and alter/redistribute software according to the license placed on it by the original creator.
Your argument is horribly disingenuous and twists your citation back in on itself. That no one else has called you out on this shows how vocal the anti-RMS, anti-FSF, anti-GPL trolls in this thread are.
Except that people are willfully ignoring the massive patent exception to the MIT license. Even you gloss over it. At least the terms of the GPL are clearly spelled out, you don't know what will happen if you intentionally or even accidentally cross Microsoft's very limited patent grant.
So don't go using these sources in anything not a.NET runtime or application running on a.NET runtime. Even if you think it might help Python, Ruby, or some other application in some other language. It's open, but not really.
We'll (deliberately) ignore that groups beyond those with "tea party" in their name were also delayed. Because that destroys the "conservative groups are so persecuted!" narrative.
This was done to rig the 2012 election
Paranoid, conspiratorial bullshit doesn't help anything except to paint you as a partisan hack.
Consider just Canada alone, from which Cuba could have had any technology they wished.
Given they haven't gotten it, I suspect it's more complex than that! Part of it may be that companies that operate in violation of U.S. embargoes cannot do business in the U.S., thus making Cuba not worth their attention might be part of it.
Change has to come from Cuban leadership, if at all.
Indeed, when dealing with a regime on the wrong side of an embargo or blockade, it's always the one at the bottom of the power slope that is responsible, right?
What is very telling is that the cuban community in Florida is really, really angry we are lifting the embargo - because all it does is empower the people that made Cuba what it is today.
They're angry because their property was seized - but their kids don't generally care. On the other hand, the Cuban government released a bunch of political prisoners in the past week or two, which at least suggests that Raul and the party are at least cognizant of the changes coming down the pipe.
when somebody considers himself justified to do anything other than talk back in response to whatever speech he may find offensive.
I think people are willfully misconstruing the sort of thing the EFF is talking about. They certainly don't appear to be talking about things that are generally offensive, but specific, targeted harassment against individuals where they are hounded everywhere they go.
But since people are getting killed over comics, you shouldn't worry about the torrent of abuse directed towards you on every site you visit. Right? Just suck it up and be glad you're not dead?
Indeed, you have the right to stalk them from website to website and deliver a constant stream of abuse. They take offense? Oh, that's their problem. So long as you don't physically harm someone, you're OK! Emotionally harming and constantly harassing someone until they break is a-ok though!
At least, if I understand ShangahiBill and the above post by fyngrz.
Are we to assume that because France is having trouble, the EFF should stop and we should just not bother?
"Oh, they're dealing with something terrible, I suppose I should just be quiet and accept the abuse I suffer because, hey, at least I'm not being murdered!"
No I am tired of that argument it might have been legit 20 years ago but history in the mean time has proven its horse shit.
So basic logic was legit 20 years ago, but now it's invalid?
One religion in recent history has been responsible for the vast vast majority of religious inspired violence.
You mean a subset of people who consider themselves to be part of a religion.
I am not saying governments ought to step in an stop people from practicing their faith but I do think the rest of society might do well to express a little less religious tolerance and acceptance.
But only against those you choose to be intolerant again. And when you are intolerant, you express blanket intolerance. Great way to make enemies and end up like Europe.
A little social exclusion would probably lead lots of younger folks to drop it
Or it would make them feel oppressed and alienated, leading them to lend an ear to the extremists. Oh wait, this is exactly what is happening. You are your own worst enemy.
If noting that Isaac Newton was born on Dec. 25 would turn religious people away from science, they're too buried in their dogma and myopia to ever accept reality.
That doesn't mean it's a good movie. Most of the sold out showings are because of the hype surrounding this incident. The reviews are pretty uniformly bad.
People aren't flocking to it because it looked good, or because it is good. They're going mostly to spite the group that hacked Sony and North Korea.
The attempt to imply that the FBI said they were investigating pro-Gamergate people has already been destroyed in the comments (thank fuck users are still in control of the discussion here).
Destroyed in the comments? Mealy-mouthed arguments and claims of "false flag" (what the fuck is this, Infowars?) don't make a convincing argument.
there still hasn't been a single/. thread about the Gamergate scandal itself
Sure there has. Oh you mean the journalism aspect, which was never a relevant part and the actions of the gamergate horde ensured that out of the gate.
Never mind that the journalism angle that sparked the whole thing was shown to be a bullshit basis to start.
the universal news media blackout and user forum/comment censorship
Universal? Not really. It's been observed for the horrible harassment campaign it's shown itself to be (omg false flag, false flag!) And people have been basically scrubbing forums of this stuff because it tends to be a drag and largely unproductive.
the still-ongoing coordinated smear campaign that was launched on August 28 with the "Gamers are Dead" shotgun blast of hit pieces.
Yeah, yeah, giant conspiracy. Not a reaction to the torrent of abusive behavior that erupted from the gaming world once they realized there was a much wider, and diverse audience for games than their narrow worldview let them conceive of.
But please, keep banking on the misbegotten persecution complex.
There was a bit of a conspiracy, because, while there's no concrete evidence
So your claims are baseless and hollow.
it appeared that a few of the 'victims' were working really hard through the use of sockpuppets
IT'S A CONSPIRACY (even though we haven't a shred of evidence to prove it)! A giant conspiracy that suddenly sprung up, not a bunch of people deciding that they'd somehow been wronged by an indie developer because her boyfriend made some (apparently incorrect) claims and some blog author and deciding to go nuclear.
You'll have to forgive me if I'm massively skeptical about apologetics for gamergate.
I hope this because I know damn well GamerGate did not make these threats.
Given that there's nothing resembling membership rolls or a roster for gamergate, much like occupy and anonymous, anyone can claim they're part of gamergate and say whatever they want. And given that the birth cries of gamergate were basically textbook misogyny and harassment, it's pretty much impossible to separate the two.
The entire case against GamerGate is built of press pushing talking points off of empty claims made by professional victims.
Has it? So what's more believable:
It's a giant conspiracy by media types to set up false harassment fronts against professional victims to make gamergate look bad.
or
Gamergate was full of assholes who continue to act like assholes and don't like it when their targets push back rather than simply accept being harassed into silence.
By far one is much simpler, and hews much closer to the truth despite gamergate apologists denying and deflecting.
Answer to #3 is clearly NO - that's why GPLv3 was created, which pissed off a large number of companies, and drove them to BSDL solutions, like LLVM/Clang instead of GCC
Unspecified patent claims on software should be an anathema to BSDL software, given that could result in the patent holder controlling any and all usage of the project despite the license.
Of course, if this is true then it shows how vile said corporations are. So desperate to undermine the core points of Free Software for the sake of power over others.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why Microsoft and Apple have been aggressively pushing BSD-style licenses. The notion of end-user freedoms is obviously antithetical to the way they want to push computing, so they fight against it.
It leaves the users of the closed code in the lurch, which the GPL was designed to fix.
The problem, of course, is that you'd probably never realize it unless you looked really, really hard at software whose license would prohibit you from looking (c.f. anti-reverse engineering clauses, etc.)
He does, which is why everything under the GPL is there voluntarily, placed there by the original author.
Prove it. Go on, substantiate your claim.
And we have that framework, where everyone is allowed to freely license the software they write - and alter/redistribute software according to the license placed on it by the original creator.
Your argument is horribly disingenuous and twists your citation back in on itself. That no one else has called you out on this shows how vocal the anti-RMS, anti-FSF, anti-GPL trolls in this thread are.
Except that people are willfully ignoring the massive patent exception to the MIT license. Even you gloss over it. At least the terms of the GPL are clearly spelled out, you don't know what will happen if you intentionally or even accidentally cross Microsoft's very limited patent grant.
So don't go using these sources in anything not a .NET runtime or application running on a .NET runtime. Even if you think it might help Python, Ruby, or some other application in some other language. It's open, but not really.
But that's neither a rational or logical objection. It's a biased objection born of ignorance.
This is because companies like Intuit and H&R Block lobby Congress to prevent the IRS from simply applying all the information they already have.
We'll (deliberately) ignore that groups beyond those with "tea party" in their name were also delayed. Because that destroys the "conservative groups are so persecuted!" narrative.
Paranoid, conspiratorial bullshit doesn't help anything except to paint you as a partisan hack.
Yeah, because my PC is as interactive and important as my dishwasher!
Indeed, we shouldn't concern ourselves with options outside of that which Microsoft provides. Doing so is stupid, and makes you stupid. Right?
Given they haven't gotten it, I suspect it's more complex than that! Part of it may be that companies that operate in violation of U.S. embargoes cannot do business in the U.S., thus making Cuba not worth their attention might be part of it.
Indeed, when dealing with a regime on the wrong side of an embargo or blockade, it's always the one at the bottom of the power slope that is responsible, right?
They're angry because their property was seized - but their kids don't generally care. On the other hand, the Cuban government released a bunch of political prisoners in the past week or two, which at least suggests that Raul and the party are at least cognizant of the changes coming down the pipe.
Because they complete with Microsoft and Google, and have done a good job at it.
Staying relevant and keeping up with standards, and delivering a browser with updates on a timely basis.
Because in short while the project would likely fall apart when faced with the pace of development MS and Google can do.
And a great many of those contributors are compensated for doing so, via other sources. They are very fortunate.
And enjoy it as it falls behind.
Because it reinforces the mindset that the only way forward is military superiority, which is suicidal.
when somebody considers himself justified to do anything other than talk back in response to whatever speech he may find offensive.
I think people are willfully misconstruing the sort of thing the EFF is talking about. They certainly don't appear to be talking about things that are generally offensive, but specific, targeted harassment against individuals where they are hounded everywhere they go.
But since people are getting killed over comics, you shouldn't worry about the torrent of abuse directed towards you on every site you visit. Right? Just suck it up and be glad you're not dead?
Indeed, you have the right to stalk them from website to website and deliver a constant stream of abuse. They take offense? Oh, that's their problem. So long as you don't physically harm someone, you're OK! Emotionally harming and constantly harassing someone until they break is a-ok though!
At least, if I understand ShangahiBill and the above post by fyngrz.
Are we to assume that because France is having trouble, the EFF should stop and we should just not bother?
"Oh, they're dealing with something terrible, I suppose I should just be quiet and accept the abuse I suffer because, hey, at least I'm not being murdered!"
So basic logic was legit 20 years ago, but now it's invalid?
You mean a subset of people who consider themselves to be part of a religion.
But only against those you choose to be intolerant again. And when you are intolerant, you express blanket intolerance. Great way to make enemies and end up like Europe.
Or it would make them feel oppressed and alienated, leading them to lend an ear to the extremists. Oh wait, this is exactly what is happening. You are your own worst enemy.
If noting that Isaac Newton was born on Dec. 25 would turn religious people away from science, they're too buried in their dogma and myopia to ever accept reality.
That doesn't mean it's a good movie. Most of the sold out showings are because of the hype surrounding this incident. The reviews are pretty uniformly bad.
People aren't flocking to it because it looked good, or because it is good. They're going mostly to spite the group that hacked Sony and North Korea.
Destroyed in the comments? Mealy-mouthed arguments and claims of "false flag" (what the fuck is this, Infowars?) don't make a convincing argument.
Sure there has. Oh you mean the journalism aspect, which was never a relevant part and the actions of the gamergate horde ensured that out of the gate.
Never mind that the journalism angle that sparked the whole thing was shown to be a bullshit basis to start.
Universal? Not really. It's been observed for the horrible harassment campaign it's shown itself to be (omg false flag, false flag!) And people have been basically scrubbing forums of this stuff because it tends to be a drag and largely unproductive.
Yeah, yeah, giant conspiracy. Not a reaction to the torrent of abusive behavior that erupted from the gaming world once they realized there was a much wider, and diverse audience for games than their narrow worldview let them conceive of.
But please, keep banking on the misbegotten persecution complex.
So your claims are baseless and hollow.
IT'S A CONSPIRACY (even though we haven't a shred of evidence to prove it)! A giant conspiracy that suddenly sprung up, not a bunch of people deciding that they'd somehow been wronged by an indie developer because her boyfriend made some (apparently incorrect) claims and some blog author and deciding to go nuclear.
You'll have to forgive me if I'm massively skeptical about apologetics for gamergate.
Irony, given how many gamergate apologists sound like right wingers after viewing Fox News for extended periods.
So in other words, IT'S A CONSPIRACY!
Given that there's nothing resembling membership rolls or a roster for gamergate, much like occupy and anonymous, anyone can claim they're part of gamergate and say whatever they want. And given that the birth cries of gamergate were basically textbook misogyny and harassment, it's pretty much impossible to separate the two.
Has it? So what's more believable:
It's a giant conspiracy by media types to set up false harassment fronts against professional victims to make gamergate look bad.
or
Gamergate was full of assholes who continue to act like assholes and don't like it when their targets push back rather than simply accept being harassed into silence.
By far one is much simpler, and hews much closer to the truth despite gamergate apologists denying and deflecting.
Unspecified patent claims on software should be an anathema to BSDL software, given that could result in the patent holder controlling any and all usage of the project despite the license.
Of course, if this is true then it shows how vile said corporations are. So desperate to undermine the core points of Free Software for the sake of power over others.
Which is all well and good, except for the idiocy that goes along with it.