Yeah, the best way to convince someone to do what you want is by telling them they don't know what they're talking about. Open Source IS a zero-revenue model. IBM and Redhat don't make money on the software, they make money on hardware and/or support. This is something that Sun obviously understands (as quoted in the article), and the condescending tone of ESR's letter doesn't help this cause very much.
A better first step, IMO, would be to convince Sun to loosen up their distribution restrictions so that the Java SDK could be included in Linux distros. It's not bloody likely that Sun's just going to jump up and let all of their stuff go at once. It would be better to work on smaller things before moving on to the big battle.
The point of the original article was that due to the open, free, and highly available nature of open source code that ANYONE could get it and fuck with it. Yes, it's just as likely that someone with fuck with closed code but that IS NOT THE POINT. The availability of open source code IS.
If someone at Microsoft implants a backdoor into Windows XP and it goes out with the next update, it will be a matter of hours until they find, fire, and more than likely arrest the guy that did it. There are very few people working directly with Windows code than there are people working with Linux/open source code. While the possibility of someone installing a backdoor is still there, the risk associated with doing so in a closed enviroment is much higher because the probability of being caught is much higher.
It is more likely that someone that wanted a way into your system would just, I don't know, hack a trojan into Gaim or something. Or even better, something with a large codebase. Open Office, Mozilla, and so on. All it would take is to package it as an RPM file then tell the core team you're packaging RPM's so they link to your site. Everyone that downloads that version has a nice gaping Goatse-style hole in their browser.
No, it's not likely, but without a doubt the probability of something like this happening with open source software is much higher than it happening with closed source software.
As an aside, I'm sick of seeing rebuttal articles that do nothing besides lick the balls of open source ideological diatribe while simultaneously calling the integrity of the original articles author into question. If you're going to use that absolutely inane logic, then nothing that RMS, ESR, or Linus says has one bit of integrity either. In some way, all of them make money from open source software, so why is their integrity not in doubt when they speak of open vs closed software? Don't they have any bias? OF COURSE THEY DO! But of course, they're on 'our' side, so it's okay if they are biased. Whatever.
It's not journalism, it's a short biography on a few notable computer hackers. I wasn't aware that TLC and the Discovery Channel were supposed to be hardcore journalistic endeavours. They don't have a fucking thing to do with journalism. If you're going to complain about journalistic practices on a fucking TV channel's website, let's also bitch a little bit about the shit posted on/. as well.
Slight correction. What mainstream America GETS is marketed music, but it's not always what they WANT. It's all they hear about, so it's all they know. Yeah, that might be splitting hairs but it's an important one.
Is it okay for a witness to a crime to finger a suspect? How is a camera any different, other than that it is much harder to falsify video than it is to make up a story? Please think from point A to point B before posting. Thank you.
Does it worry me? Fuck no. I'd PREFER a cop on every street corner watching EVERYONE. Unlike most of the people around here I don't have some sort of paranoid view of cops that says they're all just out to get me. My grandfather was a cop and I've grown up around cops. Believe me, most cops seriously don't give a shit who you are or what you're doing until you commit a crime.
So you want to ban things because of POTENTIAL bad uses? Does this include the destruction of all knives because they COULD be used to kill someone? Yes, you have to take possible misuse of EVERYTHING into consideration, but you must also realize that simply burrowing your head in the sand and wishing it away to the corn field isn't going to solve any problems. Neither is flailing your arms around and screaming "THEY'RE TRYING TO TRACK US!"
Look, if you are actually worthy of being tracked, YOU WILL BE TRACKED. Otherwise, take off the tinfoil hat and rewind the X-Files tapes and go outside.
Re:Anyone with two feet and perhaps access to a ca
on
The Trouble with RFID
·
· Score: 1
Want to bet? You bought cologne at the store. Hitler wore cologne. So, you're a Nazi.
Wow, this jumping to wild conclusions thing is fun. Now I know what all the trolls are raving about!
No, it's equating certain elements within a community as criminals. Do you have ANY doubt whatsoever that MyDoom was perpetrated by pissed Linux users? I don't, and if you look around neither does the/. majority.
Have you READ./ recently? This place sounds like happy hour at the Tinfoil Hat Association's yearly barn dance. It's also an extremely large cross section of Linux users and developers. Put two and two together, and you end up with this story.
What's missing here is an ASSUMPTION OF INJURY. When you have a condition that could be aggravated by certain things, ASSUME YOU WILL GET HURT BY DOING THEM. Warnings or not, ASSUME THE WORST. You should know by now what might trigger your sons seizures, so you should ALWAYS play the games before he does. This isn't a foolproof method, but it's better than nothing.
So basically your frusrations come from having to abide by the terms of the GPL. If you don't like it, buy QT and you can develop all the commercial apps you want. Or you could just use any of the dozens of other completely free GUI toolkits that are available, such as wxWindows or GTK+.
And wow, I never would have guessed that a company would be concerned about making money. Who'd have thunk it? What would you have them do? Pay for their software development with t-shirt sales? Whatever.
Just me thinking out loud, but isn't writing something like "MICROSOFT VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS" somewhat, you know, slanderous? "MICROSOFT AND HUMAN RIGHTS", that's fine. "HUMAN RIGHTS AND SOFTWARE", yeah that's okay. "MICROSOFT VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS" is pure slander. If you don't believe me, believe dictionary.com...
slander n.
1. Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
2. A false and malicious statement or report about someone.
The headline states that MS is guilty of human rights violations in China. That is the only way one could possibly interpret that statement and it is clearly worded to ensure as much. The MS bashing is one thing, but watch your asses. MS can fold you up and stuff you in the glove compartment without batting an earnings report, and shit like this gives them a good fucking reason.
You're missing the point. The non-American thing has fuckall to do with his post, dumbass. His point was that the Chinese goverment is sponsoring their own Linux distro, and we don't see any "LINUX ABUSES HUMAN RIGHTS!" posts on the front of Slashdot, now do we?
How many websites watermark their images? Most all of them that are popular. But of course, if KODAK does it.. well, shit, that's just WRONG because they're a COMPANY trying to make MONEY. So fucking what if a company starts using this on sensitive documents? What, does the watermark also disable digital cameras?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, the best way to convince someone to do what you want is by telling them they don't know what they're talking about. Open Source IS a zero-revenue model. IBM and Redhat don't make money on the software, they make money on hardware and/or support. This is something that Sun obviously understands (as quoted in the article), and the condescending tone of ESR's letter doesn't help this cause very much.
A better first step, IMO, would be to convince Sun to loosen up their distribution restrictions so that the Java SDK could be included in Linux distros. It's not bloody likely that Sun's just going to jump up and let all of their stuff go at once. It would be better to work on smaller things before moving on to the big battle.
The point of the original article was that due to the open, free, and highly available nature of open source code that ANYONE could get it and fuck with it. Yes, it's just as likely that someone with fuck with closed code but that IS NOT THE POINT. The availability of open source code IS.
If someone at Microsoft implants a backdoor into Windows XP and it goes out with the next update, it will be a matter of hours until they find, fire, and more than likely arrest the guy that did it. There are very few people working directly with Windows code than there are people working with Linux/open source code. While the possibility of someone installing a backdoor is still there, the risk associated with doing so in a closed enviroment is much higher because the probability of being caught is much higher.
It is more likely that someone that wanted a way into your system would just, I don't know, hack a trojan into Gaim or something. Or even better, something with a large codebase. Open Office, Mozilla, and so on. All it would take is to package it as an RPM file then tell the core team you're packaging RPM's so they link to your site. Everyone that downloads that version has a nice gaping Goatse-style hole in their browser.
No, it's not likely, but without a doubt the probability of something like this happening with open source software is much higher than it happening with closed source software. As an aside, I'm sick of seeing rebuttal articles that do nothing besides lick the balls of open source ideological diatribe while simultaneously calling the integrity of the original articles author into question. If you're going to use that absolutely inane logic, then nothing that RMS, ESR, or Linus says has one bit of integrity either. In some way, all of them make money from open source software, so why is their integrity not in doubt when they speak of open vs closed software? Don't they have any bias? OF COURSE THEY DO! But of course, they're on 'our' side, so it's okay if they are biased. Whatever.
It's not journalism, it's a short biography on a few notable computer hackers. I wasn't aware that TLC and the Discovery Channel were supposed to be hardcore journalistic endeavours. They don't have a fucking thing to do with journalism. If you're going to complain about journalistic practices on a fucking TV channel's website, let's also bitch a little bit about the shit posted on /. as well.
Because, as we all know, all of those things are practically web browsers. *cough*
Slight correction. What mainstream America GETS is marketed music, but it's not always what they WANT. It's all they hear about, so it's all they know. Yeah, that might be splitting hairs but it's an important one.
Is it okay for a witness to a crime to finger a suspect? How is a camera any different, other than that it is much harder to falsify video than it is to make up a story? Please think from point A to point B before posting. Thank you.
So what you're saying is that the Revolution WILL be televised?
Does it worry me? Fuck no. I'd PREFER a cop on every street corner watching EVERYONE. Unlike most of the people around here I don't have some sort of paranoid view of cops that says they're all just out to get me. My grandfather was a cop and I've grown up around cops. Believe me, most cops seriously don't give a shit who you are or what you're doing until you commit a crime.
Spoken like a true paranoid delusional psycopath.
OR IS IT?
*cue dramatic music*
So you want to ban things because of POTENTIAL bad uses? Does this include the destruction of all knives because they COULD be used to kill someone? Yes, you have to take possible misuse of EVERYTHING into consideration, but you must also realize that simply burrowing your head in the sand and wishing it away to the corn field isn't going to solve any problems. Neither is flailing your arms around and screaming "THEY'RE TRYING TO TRACK US!"
Look, if you are actually worthy of being tracked, YOU WILL BE TRACKED. Otherwise, take off the tinfoil hat and rewind the X-Files tapes and go outside.
Want to bet? You bought cologne at the store. Hitler wore cologne. So, you're a Nazi.
Wow, this jumping to wild conclusions thing is fun. Now I know what all the trolls are raving about!
And in case you don't get it, it's a joke.
No, it's equating certain elements within a community as criminals. Do you have ANY doubt whatsoever that MyDoom was perpetrated by pissed Linux users? I don't, and if you look around neither does the /. majority.
Have you READ ./ recently? This place sounds like happy hour at the Tinfoil Hat Association's yearly barn dance. It's also an extremely large cross section of Linux users and developers. Put two and two together, and you end up with this story.
What's missing here is an ASSUMPTION OF INJURY. When you have a condition that could be aggravated by certain things, ASSUME YOU WILL GET HURT BY DOING THEM. Warnings or not, ASSUME THE WORST. You should know by now what might trigger your sons seizures, so you should ALWAYS play the games before he does. This isn't a foolproof method, but it's better than nothing.
So basically your frusrations come from having to abide by the terms of the GPL. If you don't like it, buy QT and you can develop all the commercial apps you want. Or you could just use any of the dozens of other completely free GUI toolkits that are available, such as wxWindows or GTK+.
And wow, I never would have guessed that a company would be concerned about making money. Who'd have thunk it? What would you have them do? Pay for their software development with t-shirt sales? Whatever.
It's Slashdot. Of course I do. ;)
http://www.gnu.org
Hear that noise shoot over your head? That was the joke. You missed it. ;)
Just me thinking out loud, but isn't writing something like "MICROSOFT VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS" somewhat, you know, slanderous? "MICROSOFT AND HUMAN RIGHTS", that's fine. "HUMAN RIGHTS AND SOFTWARE", yeah that's okay. "MICROSOFT VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS" is pure slander. If you don't believe me, believe dictionary.com... slander n. 1. Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation. 2. A false and malicious statement or report about someone. The headline states that MS is guilty of human rights violations in China. That is the only way one could possibly interpret that statement and it is clearly worded to ensure as much. The MS bashing is one thing, but watch your asses. MS can fold you up and stuff you in the glove compartment without batting an earnings report, and shit like this gives them a good fucking reason.
You're missing the point. The non-American thing has fuckall to do with his post, dumbass. His point was that the Chinese goverment is sponsoring their own Linux distro, and we don't see any "LINUX ABUSES HUMAN RIGHTS!" posts on the front of Slashdot, now do we?
It specifically states that contain an image of the illustration or any part thereof. The money isn't an image of the illustration, it's the original.
Because we all know it is completely impossible to use any sort of proprietary software on a Linux based system. WTF are you talking about?
How many websites watermark their images? Most all of them that are popular. But of course, if KODAK does it.. well, shit, that's just WRONG because they're a COMPANY trying to make MONEY. So fucking what if a company starts using this on sensitive documents? What, does the watermark also disable digital cameras?
This whole thing is making my head hurt. Really.
If Ford stopped servicing them, it would mean more business for my dad (he runs an independent auto repair shop). ;-)
Hey, that would be nice if I was a programmer, but I'm not. I guess I can just kind of look at the pretty brackets...