It's like losing your keys and then getting into your house through the window. Of course, there are a ton of "this guy's a hypocrite" comments, but he didn't actually do anything hypocritical. Now, if he had defended the DMCA, and then pulled this stunt, that would be another story. He was simply circumventing the lock on data he had a right to access. I don't see how bypassing a lock door makes you a hypocrite for saying lock on doors are necessary.
"You've got the format of a 'if you denounce A without denouncing B, you must support B' down to a science. I hope you're proud of your achievement. But where is your post denouncing the drowning of kittens? And have you finally gotten around to stopping beating your wife?"
You are oversimplifying. In this case A and B are clearly corellated, and RMS has chosen to denounce B without even a mention of A. I don't need your smug attitude either asshole, since your logic skills need more work than mine.
" But a simple splitter will let you get a copy of the encrypted data, which you can then hack on at your leisure. You can FTP a copy to, say, Norway where a buddy can play with it without having to buy hardware."
You already have a copy of the encrpypted data. That's what you started with.
And also, federal employees, i.e. TSA employees, aren't required to listen to RMS's speech either under the constitution. TSA security is there to enforce security, not put up with his bs. If he thinks TSA procedures are wrong, or doesn't like the conduct of a particular agent, arguing with the agent isn't going to solve anything. He should try exercising his "free speech" in a court room, and see how long before they throw him out after he fails to obey the judge telling him to shut up.
from RMS's website: " Here's the text of a complaint that I am sending to the TSA for misleading treatment at Logan Airport.
When I continued to verbally criticize the conduct of the agents, and didn't sit down and shut up, they called the State Police, and one Officer Gillespie told me that "Unless you shut up I will throw you out." I asked if that meant he would arrest me for speaking, and he said, "No, for making a scene." (Different words for the same act.) I told him that was bullying and abuse of power, and refused to shut up. "
Stallman doesn't seem to understand that the right to free speech doesn't also mean the right to a platform for free speech. Airlines rent space at airports, and if they don't want you there because your a belligerent ass, then they have the right to call the cops to kick you out. You don't have the right to make people listen to you, RMS.
Along with Boycotting J.K. Rowlings, Stallman has an anti-Israel agenda. I've seen this type of agenda from a lot of liberals. I understand how he may disagree with Israel's tactics in defending itself. What troubles me, is on RMS's long laundrey list of causes, there is nothing denouncing Hamas, Hezbollah, Isamic Jihad, etc. It seems somewhat anti-semitic to criticize Israel without bothering to criticize Israel's enemies, given their goals and tactics.
Exactly. Your original analogy was flawed. "To be stolen" is a much better analogy to linking to copyrighted material. You're telling people where they can go to "steal" something. So changing your analogy was appropriate. BTW, in the US, it is a crime to point out someone who is dealing drugs to a potential buyer, to provide another analogy.
"I'm not sure that is true. I mean sure anything can be secure if you unplug it, but can a Windows machine be as secure while still as functional as a Linux machine? "
" It's funny how people think. Since neither product is 100% secure, they both think they're equally insecure. This logic is as stupid as saying "reading slashdot is just as dangerous as motorcycle racing, because I could get hit by meteor and die either way". Clearly one of the products has more serious exploits than the other and has caused more loss to businesses, but some people just don't want to admint that."
How do you conclude Windows has more serious flaws than Linux. I've seen no evidence to support that claim. In fact a major security flaw in Kerberos was just announced (that isn't in the MS version). Your post is just anti-MS FUD
"Yes, l337 h4x0rs will probably find a way to make it happen. No, it will not be the rosy seamless computing experience MacOS provides on controlled hardware. Apple's success in OS development is in no small amount tied to their control of the hardware it runs on; don't expect that to go away anytime soon."
These Apple boxes will use generic harware found in your standard hp or dell box. Home made pcs will run MacOS just fine. Apple is using a DRM to raise the barrier of entry to nearly infinity for competing hardware companies who want to sell mac clones to maintain a monopoly on selling hardware that runs MacOS. That way they can charge a premium on hardware to subsidize their OS development and make a healthy profit by choosing their own price without worrying about market forces. Apple knows their product is differentiated enough from an MS PC that these machines are not really competing head-to-head, so my monopoly arguement is valid.
"Those damn commie-europeans! This is against the free market! How dare that organisation offer something free to the public when the public has funded that organisation with taxes!
O, wait..."
The point is not everyone in the public cares about Beethoven, yet they all had to pay for it so some people could get free Beethoven recordings. What's fair about that? It's better to have a free market where people who want Beethoven recordings pay for them, and people who don't want them, keep their money instead of being taxed, and use it for things they enjoy.
"Then he said "SYKE! I never got paid royalties. Like most composers, the government (the king) paid me to do what I do, and my music was performed for the paeons to keep them happy. My music was passed around for free for generations after that through the earliest form of open source P2P , music lessons and badly copied versions of sheet music""
Are you really suggesting that the govt. be in charge of deciding what good art is, and that taxpayers should pay for this art whether they like it or not? FHow did this get modded up? For a group of people who claims to believe in freedom, there sure are a lot of people who will sell out their neighbors freedom to get free stuff.
"Apparently all free music really is illegal these days, or soon will be, public domain be damned."
No, the complaint is that music publishers can't compete against government sponsored, tax payer subsidized, free downloads of performances that cost a lot of money to produce. The London philharmonic got paid a lot of money for these performances, paid for with your tax dollar. Rather than selling them, to recoupe this money, the performances were given away. Whenever a producer of a product offers it for a lower price than the current market value, the overall monetary value if the product is lowered. This point, that the music labels tried to explain, was completely lost on the article writer and the/. poster.
The arguement has nothing to do with public doain, since the performances are owned by the BBC. The music may seem free, but British citizens who pay the BBC tax actually paid for the music for the rest of us, so the music was not free as in beer.
In short, whether or not you agree with the music industry's position, at least describe it orrectly, rather than using straw man arguement tactics.
" Please do NOT export USA "way of life" as it was exported to Vietnam, Hiroshima, Nagazaki, Iraq, Afhganistan,.... (unending list.....)"
Please do NOT overthrow allied govts to US (without US permission), sneak attack US military base, give GW Bush any pretext for involving the US in a stupid war, fly planes into American buildings,...(unending list).
"Vietnam and Iraq clearly did not attack America first (only in the alternate universe of the criminal-in-chief where the truth is spun of a web of lies). Their sovereignty was first invaded by America, and neither launched an offense against America, except as part of a regional civil war or protecting their own homeland."
America tried to defend South Vietnam against North Vietnam. America successfully defended Kuwait against Iraq in the Gulf War. The current Iraq war is supposedly due to violations of the treaty ending the Gulf War. I'm not a big fan of the current conflict, BTW. As an aside, claiming any dictator has the right to rule a country by force, which is what you did by talking about Iraq's sovereignty, is a strange belief.
"I'd go further: companies that enjoy the same legal rights as individuals should bear the same legal responsibilities as individuals. The corporate equivalent of serving a prison sentence is suspending commercial activity. If a company commits a crime (ie if responsibility cannot be attributed to any single employee), the company should serve the same sentence as a person who commits the same crime."
Suspending commercial activity of a company for any extended period of time is a death sentence.
"It is a HELLUVA lot easier to get a kid to fork up $65 for a book than the $850 for laptops. What happens when someone steals the laptop? Not too many people look to jack you for a textbook."
Just buying the laptop doesn't mean the textbooks will be free. You still need to pay for electronic copies of the textbooks as well.
"Perhaps true, but it does make the whole work experience more enjoyable. I use a Mac and a PC (XP). I seriously love spending time on the Mac. The XP machine is boring and dull. Does that make me more productive then? No, but I walk away from using the Mac without a headache."
Why are people so irrational? I guess that's what keeps Apple in business.
" And why does Apple need to switch from plain-Jane ARM processors to Intel's greased-lightning XScale? What do they need that extra power for? Why, to bring back the Newton, of course!"
Yeah that'll be effective. It's clear from the letter that your real agenda is attacking MS instead of actually caring about the issue filing tax returns on non-MS computers.
"Third, whenever things finally settle, a bomb goes off.
The current situation suggests that there is a small minority of individuals who *financially benefit* from all of this. Peace time means no recruitment. Satisfaction means no desparation, and desparation is one of the leading conditions that facilitate acts of terror."
I've noticed this pattern too. It isn't a cycle of violence, as the media claims it is. There's a terrorist attack, and an Israeli response. Whenever there's a cease fire, the same side breaks the cease fire, usually claiming some lame excuse for doing it.
In reality, groups like Hamas need money to operate. They feed off of hate, and need to keep hatred towards Israel alive and well to line their pockets.
"Only because you create it yourselves. In the meantime the country I live in is in no threat at all since we do not occupy other countries and kill their civilians."
Israle is targeted because many Muslims do not believe they have the right to exist. You've confused cause and effect.
Slashdot Mirror
" To the agencies and get him arrested for violation of the DMCA?
Finally, a GOOD use for the DMCA... putting people behind bars that support the DMCA. "
I don't see anywhere in either article where the guy says he supports the DMCA. Saying DRM is a necessary evil does not mean you support the DMCA.
It's like losing your keys and then getting into your house through the window. Of course, there are a ton of "this guy's a hypocrite" comments, but he didn't actually do anything hypocritical. Now, if he had defended the DMCA, and then pulled this stunt, that would be another story. He was simply circumventing the lock on data he had a right to access. I don't see how bypassing a lock door makes you a hypocrite for saying lock on doors are necessary.
"You've got the format of a 'if you denounce A without denouncing B, you must support B' down to a science. I hope you're proud of your achievement. But where is your post denouncing the drowning of kittens? And have you finally gotten around to stopping beating your wife?"
You are oversimplifying. In this case A and B are clearly corellated, and RMS has chosen to denounce B without even a mention of A. I don't need your smug attitude either asshole, since your logic skills need more work than mine.
" But a simple splitter will let you get a copy of the encrypted data, which you can then hack on at your leisure. You can FTP a copy to, say, Norway where a buddy can play with it without having to buy hardware."
You already have a copy of the encrpypted data. That's what you started with.
And also, federal employees, i.e. TSA employees, aren't required to listen to RMS's speech either under the constitution. TSA security is there to enforce security, not put up with his bs. If he thinks TSA procedures are wrong, or doesn't like the conduct of a particular agent, arguing with the agent isn't going to solve anything. He should try exercising his "free speech" in a court room, and see how long before they throw him out after he fails to obey the judge telling him to shut up.
from RMS's website:
" Here's the text of a complaint that I am sending to the TSA for misleading treatment at Logan Airport.
When I continued to verbally criticize the conduct of the agents, and didn't sit down and shut up, they called the State Police, and one Officer Gillespie told me that "Unless you shut up I will throw you out." I asked if that meant he would arrest me for speaking, and he said, "No, for making a scene." (Different words for the same act.) I told him that was bullying and abuse of power, and refused to shut up. "
Stallman doesn't seem to understand that the right to free speech doesn't also mean the right to a platform for free speech. Airlines rent space at airports, and if they don't want you there because your a belligerent ass, then they have the right to call the cops to kick you out. You don't have the right to make people listen to you, RMS.
Along with Boycotting J.K. Rowlings, Stallman has an anti-Israel agenda. I've seen this type of agenda from a lot of liberals. I understand how he may disagree with Israel's tactics in defending itself. What troubles me, is on RMS's long laundrey list of causes, there is nothing denouncing Hamas, Hezbollah, Isamic Jihad, etc. It seems somewhat anti-semitic to criticize Israel without bothering to criticize Israel's enemies, given their goals and tactics.
" I am here in the UK.
And note the use of "stolen" vs "to be stolen"."
Exactly. Your original analogy was flawed. "To be stolen" is a much better analogy to linking to copyrighted material. You're telling people where they can go to "steal" something. So changing your analogy was appropriate. BTW, in the US, it is a crime to point out someone who is dealing drugs to a potential buyer, to provide another analogy.
" You forgot about the bazaar model.
Here, more users = more developers = larger bazaar = more people working on security = better security"
You forgot that more users -> more hackers trying to circumvent security. And they will succeed.
"I'm not sure that is true. I mean sure anything can be secure if you unplug it, but can a Windows machine be as secure while still as functional as a Linux machine? "
Linux isn't secure. Check your assumptions.
" It's funny how people think. Since neither product is 100% secure, they both think they're equally insecure. This logic is as stupid as saying "reading slashdot is just as dangerous as motorcycle racing, because I could get hit by meteor and die either way". Clearly one of the products has more serious exploits than the other and has caused more loss to businesses, but some people just don't want to admint that."
How do you conclude Windows has more serious flaws than Linux. I've seen no evidence to support that claim. In fact a major security flaw in Kerberos was just announced (that isn't in the MS version). Your post is just anti-MS FUD
"Yes, l337 h4x0rs will probably find a way to make it happen. No, it will not be the rosy seamless computing experience MacOS provides on controlled hardware. Apple's success in OS development is in no small amount tied to their control of the hardware it runs on; don't expect that to go away anytime soon."
These Apple boxes will use generic harware found in your standard hp or dell box. Home made pcs will run MacOS just fine. Apple is using a DRM to raise the barrier of entry to nearly infinity for competing hardware companies who want to sell mac clones to maintain a monopoly on selling hardware that runs MacOS. That way they can charge a premium on hardware to subsidize their OS development and make a healthy profit by choosing their own price without worrying about market forces. Apple knows their product is differentiated enough from an MS PC that these machines are not really competing head-to-head, so my monopoly arguement is valid.
"Those damn commie-europeans! This is against the free market! How dare that organisation offer something free to the public when the public has funded that organisation with taxes!
O, wait..."
The point is not everyone in the public cares about Beethoven, yet they all had to pay for it so some people could get free Beethoven recordings. What's fair about that? It's better to have a free market where people who want Beethoven recordings pay for them, and people who don't want them, keep their money instead of being taxed, and use it for things they enjoy.
"Then he said "SYKE! I never got paid royalties. Like most composers, the government (the king) paid me to do what I do, and my music was performed for the paeons to keep them happy. My music was passed around for free for generations after that through the earliest form of open source P2P , music lessons and badly copied versions of sheet music""
Are you really suggesting that the govt. be in charge of deciding what good art is, and that taxpayers should pay for this art whether they like it or not? FHow did this get modded up? For a group of people who claims to believe in freedom, there sure are a lot of people who will sell out their neighbors freedom to get free stuff.
"Apparently all free music really is illegal these days, or soon will be, public domain be damned."
/. poster.
No, the complaint is that music publishers can't compete against government sponsored, tax payer subsidized, free downloads of performances that cost a lot of money to produce. The London philharmonic got paid a lot of money for these performances, paid for with your tax dollar. Rather than selling them, to recoupe this money, the performances were given away. Whenever a producer of a product offers it for a lower price than the current market value, the overall monetary value if the product is lowered. This point, that the music labels tried to explain, was completely lost on the article writer and the
The arguement has nothing to do with public doain, since the performances are owned by the BBC. The music may seem free, but British citizens who pay the BBC tax actually paid for the music for the rest of us, so the music was not free as in beer.
In short, whether or not you agree with the music industry's position, at least describe it orrectly, rather than using straw man arguement tactics.
" Please do NOT export USA "way of life" as it was exported to Vietnam, Hiroshima, Nagazaki, Iraq, Afhganistan,.... (unending list.....)"
...(unending list).
Please do NOT overthrow allied govts to US (without US permission), sneak attack US military base, give GW Bush any pretext for involving the US in a stupid war, fly planes into American buildings,
"Vietnam and Iraq clearly did not attack America first (only in the alternate universe of the criminal-in-chief where the truth is spun of a web of lies). Their sovereignty was first invaded by America, and neither launched an offense against America, except as part of a regional civil war or protecting their own homeland."
America tried to defend South Vietnam against North Vietnam. America successfully defended Kuwait against Iraq in the Gulf War. The current Iraq war is supposedly due to violations of the treaty ending the Gulf War. I'm not a big fan of the current conflict, BTW. As an aside, claiming any dictator has the right to rule a country by force, which is what you did by talking about Iraq's sovereignty, is a strange belief.
"I'd go further: companies that enjoy the same legal rights as individuals should bear the same legal responsibilities as individuals. The corporate equivalent of serving a prison sentence is suspending commercial activity. If a company commits a crime (ie if responsibility cannot be attributed to any single employee), the company should serve the same sentence as a person who commits the same crime."
Suspending commercial activity of a company for any extended period of time is a death sentence.
"It is a HELLUVA lot easier to get a kid to fork up $65 for a book than the $850 for laptops. What happens when someone steals the laptop? Not too many people look to jack you for a textbook."
Just buying the laptop doesn't mean the textbooks will be free. You still need to pay for electronic copies of the textbooks as well.
"Perhaps true, but it does make the whole work experience more enjoyable. I use a Mac and a PC (XP). I seriously love spending time on the Mac. The XP machine is boring and dull. Does that make me more productive then? No, but I walk away from using the Mac without a headache."
Why are people so irrational? I guess that's what keeps Apple in business.
"Does it bother you that churches have a Mission Statement touting their Core Values?"
Christians have been sending msiionaries to set up missions long before the industrial revolution.
" And why does Apple need to switch from plain-Jane ARM processors to Intel's greased-lightning XScale? What do they need that extra power for? Why, to bring back the Newton, of course!"
They want to support ogg?
Yeah that'll be effective. It's clear from the letter that your real agenda is attacking MS instead of actually caring about the issue filing tax returns on non-MS computers.
"Third, whenever things finally settle, a bomb goes off.
The current situation suggests that there is a small minority of individuals who *financially benefit* from all of this. Peace time means no recruitment. Satisfaction means no desparation, and desparation is one of the leading conditions that facilitate acts of terror."
I've noticed this pattern too. It isn't a cycle of violence, as the media claims it is. There's a terrorist attack, and an Israeli response. Whenever there's a cease fire, the same side breaks the cease fire, usually claiming some lame excuse for doing it.
In reality, groups like Hamas need money to operate. They feed off of hate, and need to keep hatred towards Israel alive and well to line their pockets.
"Only because you create it yourselves. In the meantime the country I live in is in no threat at all since we do not occupy other countries and kill their civilians."
Israle is targeted because many Muslims do not believe they have the right to exist. You've confused cause and effect.