That's: "Smoke me a cipper, I'll be back for breakfast." - Ace Rimmer, Red Dwarf
He was talking about: "Win one for the Gipper." - Knute Rockne, Knute Rockne: All American
It's a shame, NetBSD I can understand, there may be some confusion when both BSDs use the same "daemony" logo style, but the other BSDs have all moved away from beastie.
The religious issue I cannot believe actually warrents changing the logo and I see nothing particularly unprofessional about the daemon.
"...don't look like a reject from the 80s."
Not to burst your bubble on that, but it looks like one of the best systems of the early 90s, not the worst of the 80s.
But how is it fundamentally different? It is something belonging to the masses, that one is digital or print and the other is a hunk matter doesn't really make too much a difference.
The only difference is the ability to duplicate the one more easily and it cannot be stolen. Creative works can be copied much more easily than physical works, but that doesn't mean that physical works cannot be copied.
Creative works cannot be stolen so much as copied, which is plagerism or copyright infringement. Physical works can be carted off which is theft, or they can be duplicated which is counterfeiting.
Then you're saying two things: "Public property cannot be converted into non-public property without diminishing the quantity of public property available."
This is not what happens with code or books, the originals are still there, therefore the quantity of public property available remains.
But the work in the public domain is not being converted, it is being copied and the copy is being converted. The original remains.
Is there any way you can honestly see using a public domain item to make a copyrighted work removing the public domain item from the reach of the people? Does it suddenly cease to exist because there is a new derived work?
No, public domain is public property and noone can deny access to that code.
GPL stuff is private stuff that is granted to the public under the condition that all works generated from it remains in the same position.
I don't see why an article like this one would even be mentioned on Slashdot, let alone put on the front page.
I see no reason for Linux fans to be jizzing in one another's faces. It can be assumed that a person knows of if not likes the GPL based on the fact that they are reading Slashdot, there is no need for the mutual masterbation.
Now, before someone goes calling this flamebait, think about it. Was this article informative? Was it insightful? Was it news? Was it even interesting? I say no, this was a GNUist saying that they agree with themselves.
I infact disagree with the idea that the GPL protects some magical freedom to edit code, I don't think that such a freedom exists. I believe that the right is given to people under the terms of a license and that the license ensures that the right remains for anyone else.
The article says the public domain does not protect this magical freedom, yet the original code will always remain in the public domain as it was released. The code is not going anywhere, if someone takes it and improves it that does not suddenly remove the original from the public domain.
Anyways, to end my rant, I feel that this article was completely needless and uninspired.
But Evolution is a buggy piece of crap. It cannot ever manage to close properly and doesn't shut down programmes that it starts up either. Like I really need a bunch of random Gnome programmes running after I close Evolution.
No, the open source people have to make the damned drivers themselves. Companies often make drivers and give them to Microsoft to have in the system. They don't do that for Linux operating systems or BSDs, they only give the drivers straight up to Microsoft.
It's not like it's overly difficult to give a driver to more than one system, the makers just don't care about the other systems.
Just a few minor points: Firstly I agree with the sendmail bending postfix over and add qmail as well.
Linux doesn't have that great of support, it has some companies with for-fee support, but it doesn't have the support of hardware manufacturers. I'd rather have Windows level of support, you know, where drivers are just there.
DragonFlyBSD actually has a company called FireFlyBSD that supports DragonFlyBSD commercially (which Matt Dillion is advisor to) and NetBSD has Wasabi.
I don't really see any major problem with the plain cut OpenBSD ports system really, would be nice I guess to add upgrading old ports.
Of course, I am just a crackpot that thinks there should be an annual Intersystem Hackathon where there are two seperate areas; the crazed zealots of the systems are in one area where they can fight and drink to the death and only the devs of systems and tools can go into the second area where all the devs can exchange ideas face to face. It's a crazy idea, I know. That's why everything I say needs to be taken with a shaker of salt.
Quake 3 isn't released GPL, only Quake 2 and Quake are released as GPL. Though that is also a part of my point, people are more eager to use the base code if it is BSD instead of GPL (they can keep things closed that way).
Who said it had to be started by a company? I don't think that it is impossible for a group of people to set up an RTS, they're not so vastly complecated really. It is more the AI within the game that is hard to do well.
With a single BSD base to the RTS games it would allow for closed enhancements that some companies don't want to give competitors, yet allow for a common codebase where any involved party could put their code together with the other involved groups to get a more advanced game without as much individual work.
I dunno about that. If there were say the release of a BSD or even more liberal Realtime Strategy game where the entirety of it, engine and all, were open to everyone. I think that the game would soon sprout a bunch more Strategy games because of how much work had suddenly been done for anyone that wants to make one.
The same I think would happen if there was a source release of an Action Adventure game, or a Myst styled game. I can definately say it would with a First Person Shooter, though it seems less likely to happen with a Role Playing game. Role Playing games tend to want to be more distinct and not all look the same (usually at least, recently there have been more Final Fantasyish games then I recall in my childhood).
So yeah, I feel I must disagree with you there. People like to make mods and such for free so you cannot say there are not people out there interested in making a game for free, it is that so far they aren't being given full control of an already existing game's source. If FreeCiv wasn't so bad with the AI I think there would be more popular Civ-like games out there.
I think that advertising like that is highly distasteful, but since these ads are through a free system that noone is being forced to use this was a sound judgement to make.
I would respect Google more if they did not use that kind of advertising, even MSN search only comes up with Redhat related ad results when you search in it.
That is the most sound reason to leave everything under the BSD or public domain I have ever seen.
Noone cares though, many people do not want a company to take something they worked on and make money off of it without them getting their piece. Many more just don't want a company making money off their work.
No loss involved, I just cannot wrap my head around this system that was constructed for moderation. Leaving it in the hands of random joes has made it less than steller.
Then again, I also believe in a more structured system in society where only the educated can vote after passing a test to show they know what all the candidates are and what they stand for.
I would like to just submit that I find your post to be highly distasteful. I cannot find there anything funny about the brutal murder of those woman by their husbands.
Your implied corilation of death is not only of poor taste but suprisingly cold-hearted.
Let me get this straight, I post before you and people mark me the Redundant one? Goodness me, I need to change my signature to contain some definitions of various words.
Redundant - repetition of same sense in different words
Flamebait - meant to trigger conflict
Insightful - grasping the inward or hidden nature of things
Informative - providing or disclosing information
Interesting - to arouse the curiosity or hold the attention of
Sorry to go off on an Offtopic tangent on you, that kind of moderating always rubs me wrong, kinda like when people mod jokes in the BSD section Flamebait if they have the keyword dead. They need a guide to moderating properly.
Slashdot Mirror
That's: "Smoke me a cipper, I'll be back for breakfast." - Ace Rimmer, Red Dwarf He was talking about: "Win one for the Gipper." - Knute Rockne, Knute Rockne: All American
And the grinning chameleon of SuSE is much better for it's professional looks?
The religious issue I cannot believe actually warrents changing the logo and I see nothing particularly unprofessional about the daemon.
"...don't look like a reject from the 80s." Not to burst your bubble on that, but it looks like one of the best systems of the early 90s, not the worst of the 80s.
No, perhaps you could try googling when curious.
Ok, now I see what you're saying. I'll slow my role now.
The only difference is the ability to duplicate the one more easily and it cannot be stolen. Creative works can be copied much more easily than physical works, but that doesn't mean that physical works cannot be copied.
Creative works cannot be stolen so much as copied, which is plagerism or copyright infringement. Physical works can be carted off which is theft, or they can be duplicated which is counterfeiting.
This is not what happens with code or books, the originals are still there, therefore the quantity of public property available remains.
The parent of that post seems to be under the impression that the public domain work goes away once a proprietary work exists.
Is there any way you can honestly see using a public domain item to make a copyrighted work removing the public domain item from the reach of the people? Does it suddenly cease to exist because there is a new derived work?
What you're saying implies it.
No, public domain is public property and noone can deny access to that code. GPL stuff is private stuff that is granted to the public under the condition that all works generated from it remains in the same position.
I think you may have messed up your copy and paste, seems you were on the DSPAM site, what you wanted was just a few posts up.
I see no reason for Linux fans to be jizzing in one another's faces. It can be assumed that a person knows of if not likes the GPL based on the fact that they are reading Slashdot, there is no need for the mutual masterbation.
Now, before someone goes calling this flamebait, think about it. Was this article informative? Was it insightful? Was it news? Was it even interesting? I say no, this was a GNUist saying that they agree with themselves.
I infact disagree with the idea that the GPL protects some magical freedom to edit code, I don't think that such a freedom exists. I believe that the right is given to people under the terms of a license and that the license ensures that the right remains for anyone else.
The article says the public domain does not protect this magical freedom, yet the original code will always remain in the public domain as it was released. The code is not going anywhere, if someone takes it and improves it that does not suddenly remove the original from the public domain.
Anyways, to end my rant, I feel that this article was completely needless and uninspired.
I'd rather run Sylpheed.
It's not like it's overly difficult to give a driver to more than one system, the makers just don't care about the other systems.
Linux doesn't have that great of support, it has some companies with for-fee support, but it doesn't have the support of hardware manufacturers. I'd rather have Windows level of support, you know, where drivers are just there.
DragonFlyBSD actually has a company called FireFlyBSD that supports DragonFlyBSD commercially (which Matt Dillion is advisor to) and NetBSD has Wasabi.
I don't really see any major problem with the plain cut OpenBSD ports system really, would be nice I guess to add upgrading old ports.
Of course, I am just a crackpot that thinks there should be an annual Intersystem Hackathon where there are two seperate areas; the crazed zealots of the systems are in one area where they can fight and drink to the death and only the devs of systems and tools can go into the second area where all the devs can exchange ideas face to face. It's a crazy idea, I know. That's why everything I say needs to be taken with a shaker of salt.
Quake 3 isn't released GPL, only Quake 2 and Quake are released as GPL. Though that is also a part of my point, people are more eager to use the base code if it is BSD instead of GPL (they can keep things closed that way).
With a single BSD base to the RTS games it would allow for closed enhancements that some companies don't want to give competitors, yet allow for a common codebase where any involved party could put their code together with the other involved groups to get a more advanced game without as much individual work.
The same I think would happen if there was a source release of an Action Adventure game, or a Myst styled game. I can definately say it would with a First Person Shooter, though it seems less likely to happen with a Role Playing game. Role Playing games tend to want to be more distinct and not all look the same (usually at least, recently there have been more Final Fantasyish games then I recall in my childhood).
So yeah, I feel I must disagree with you there. People like to make mods and such for free so you cannot say there are not people out there interested in making a game for free, it is that so far they aren't being given full control of an already existing game's source. If FreeCiv wasn't so bad with the AI I think there would be more popular Civ-like games out there.
I would respect Google more if they did not use that kind of advertising, even MSN search only comes up with Redhat related ad results when you search in it.
Noone cares though, many people do not want a company to take something they worked on and make money off of it without them getting their piece. Many more just don't want a company making money off their work.
Then again, I also believe in a more structured system in society where only the educated can vote after passing a test to show they know what all the candidates are and what they stand for.
Your implied corilation of death is not only of poor taste but suprisingly cold-hearted.
OpenSSL is in no way related to OpenBSD. They are completely unrelated.
Redundant - repetition of same sense in different words
Flamebait - meant to trigger conflict
Insightful - grasping the inward or hidden nature of things
Informative - providing or disclosing information
Interesting - to arouse the curiosity or hold the attention of
Sorry to go off on an Offtopic tangent on you, that kind of moderating always rubs me wrong, kinda like when people mod jokes in the BSD section Flamebait if they have the keyword dead. They need a guide to moderating properly.