I Know that, but the fact that we know and accept the fact that most people just doesn't care, doesn't make it right, and so we must remind them and us that it's morally wrong.
That's because you are lacking something called Ethics. Restricting knowledge is BAD. Proprietary software restricts what users can do, and restricts their innherent right to LEARN. That's why i use Free Software, and i also used it when most of it "sucked", that is, i only used GNU/Linux on my system back in the day when most hardware wasn't supported, important parts of the system where missing, and getting things to work was a real mess.
The purpose of using Free Software is to be FREE from corporations/individuals that wants to tell you what you can do with your computer and what you can't, and still, many companys keep releasing proprietary software for Free plataforms, If i wanted Proprietary software, i woudln't be using GNU/Linux. In certain cases where they release some software for which there is no real Free Software alternative, i can see they know they will have a marketshare (It's still ethically wrong, but i understand it), but when they release such a trivial piece of proprietary software like a toolbar, to run on very big developments that are completely free, and where there are alternatives to that specific software (There are thousands of Free toolbars for Firefox), i don't see how someone would install it.
The problem you are having is beetween chair and keyboard, you are using a Badly designed distro, prepared for the illiterate masses, get Slackware, learn Unix, and everything will be easier for you. If it doesn't compile is because you don't have a clean build environment, with all the required librarys, it's your mistake, not the fault of the GNU System. And please, call the system by it's proper name, GNU/Linux.
One of the main features of Free Software is that you CAN add things to it, you have the source, and since GNU/Linux is a Unix-like system it's easy to automate tasks, and to interface with any software on the system. Each part of the system is a different project, with it's own interfaces well declared and documented. In the case of proprietary software, you are limited to the APIs provided, since you don't have access to the source, and also, all the system is badly designed, many things are just hacked toghether into random librarys, and the whole OS is a single mess, and you can only use the provided API (which is poorly documented) to interface with the system. In many cases, the SDKs and APIs are proprietary, and you have to pay thousands to use them, in many other cases, you are legally FORBIDDEN to modify/interface with certain software, so, again, how it's hard to add things to Free Software and easy to add them to Proprietary soft?.
Just how many coders outside Microsoft have added parts to the windows kernel?, now think how many coders contribute to Linux, How many plugins are there for MSN, and how many for Gaim?, The list just goes on and on...
The problem is that the user code becomes part of the page, so they are in the same security context, but we could require the GM functions to require a hash to be passed, this hash would be generated for each machine, so, code coming from the net would not know the hash and would be unable to access the functions, but code coming from the user would have the correct hash, and so would be executed...
I Said batteries in a GENERIC way, i didn't say Nickel-Metal or something like that. I understand perfectly how the fucking battery in my cellphone works, and not, i'm not talking about that kind of batterie, What i'm saying is that new technology in that area must be developed. I Don't have the {knowledge,resources,time} to research and tell you what kind of technology it could be, but i can see that all the development done later in mangetic fields handling and super-conductors, for example, may have some kind of aplication in this area. Besides this, Fuel Cells looks to me like a patch, an ugly hack to solve our energy storing problem, not a real solution.
Storing Materials (For example, Gasoline), and using it to produce energy is primitive and inadecuate. What we need is better, smaller batterys. So, we have a form of energy (Electricity), that is clean, easy to store, cheap, and that is portable across different aplications (That is, you can power allmost anything with electricity, engines for different aplications, a radio, a computer, a cellphone...), and the most important is: You can produce electricity in lots of different ways, from nuclear power, hidroelectric facilities, wind, solar power, using oil, etc. So, we have a virtually unlimited resource (Since it's present in nature, is renovable, and can be produced in many ways, some of them are not renovable, but some are).
The only problem with this technology are batteries, because they are not sufficiently evolved, we just need to put more effort into producing better batteries, and in creating a standard so you can plug any batterie in any device.
But if you want to know, my money is in my pocket, you can see it anytime you want, and you can have copys of if if you want, in any medium you may need, digital or analog. I Can Scan my money and send you a GIF if you want.
Yes, that is for inhouse aplications, but if you REDISTRIBUTE the modified sources, you have to release the code, and posting them to/. certainly IS redistribution.
The post you are replying to is licensed under the GPL License, and, since your response is a derivative work based on my post, you are infringing the GPL if you don't show me your post.
In my case, i think information should be free, all information, even private information. If there is something that i don't want other people to know, it's in my head, if i write something down, then everyone should be able to see it. The reason i don't like this kind of stuff it's because it's proprietary, and if we are fighting to have a fully Free Software Operating System, it's stupid to integrate such small and unimportant pieces of software that will taint your whole system. If i have 6 gb of Free Software on my machine, then why should i taint all of that with 1 mb of proprietary software. Again, if there weren't any Free C Compilers for GNU, then i might use a proprietary one, and i would understand other people doing so for important pieces of software, but for something as trivial as a toolbar, when we have a completely Free OS with allmost everything you could ever need?, no thanx.
First of all, a sysadmin *must* know exactly what he has in his system, but, if you need to know, 99.99% of Unix software has a --version option...
"Programming" is not an art, but hacking ...
on
Is Programming Art?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Hacking is an art. When some coder develops something in visual basic because he has been told too do so by his boss, and he gives a given ammount of work hours to finish it as fast as he can, it's usually not art. But when J.R. Hacker writes something in C & Asm just to see if he can actually do it, it's art, because of the motivations for developing the software, the hacker will try to make it as best as possible, and the reason to write many parts of the software will be to make it beatyful and elegant, not only in it's code, but while it runs, The same happends with any more conventional form of art, for example: Some teapot produced at a factory, where they will try to produce as many as possible, all equal, that ain't art, but if someone puts all it's effort into making a hand-make teapot, then it will be art.
Slackware is secure. Slackware is convenient (I Know that many will say otherwise, but if you have Unix experience, it's the best solution, really easy to manage)- It's cheap, it doesn't contain any proprietary software.
Also, Debian can be as safe as Slackware, the problem with this kind of Distro (Debian) is that the people using it pretends that someone else takes care of their security. A Sysadmin doesn't need some stupid organization to submit patches to him automatically or anything like that. He just has to download and compile all of the critical services of his system, and update them when necesary. Anyone that says otherwise is an Amateur, not a Sysadmin, and if he's an amateur, he shoudln't be running any system bigger than he can manage, and he shoudln't run any critical services, and for the kind of things that an amateur should host the kind of security provided by allmost any Unix system is more than enough. The problem with all this shit is that there are lots of amateurs out there calling themselves sysadmins...
1X (Broadband over CDMA) is a greate technology, i consider it even more reliable than GPRS, the only problem is the high latency of the conection. I really want to try it with an FWT instead of a cellphone, so i can atach a directional antena, i actually did it with a Dowtel FWT, and i hacked the antena by connecting a standard 2.4ghz reflector corner antena (The cellphone is in 1900 mhz but it should work anyway) and connecting it with a homemade cable (4m of rg58 + 2 TNC connectors). The problem is that the only interface that this FWT provides is a fkn rs232 port, and it really sucks, the only good CDMA fwt out there is the Motorola 1900 but it doesn't have 1X support. Oh well...
Noone will create free content for the web, so we should all see annoying popups. The same way that noone will create Free Software, so we should all let M$ conquer the world. It's not like there is a Free Operating System or anything.. oh... wait..
The Crackers are the bad guys he's talking about, the Hackers created the fucking Internet, and are also responsible for most software concepts, technologies, and actual software that we use today. But, again, Hackers and Crackers aren't two real groups of people. There are many people out there that are either Crackers or Hackers (or Both), but don't agree, or feel they are part of the same group than many other people that consider themselves also Hackers/Crackers, so, in the first place, they can't be blamed because there's nothing really binding theme together besides common interests and skills. OTOH, anything that the human being has created so far has been abused, from the most old and basic things as trade and money, to complex electronic/mechanical/electrical systems, So a system (any kind of system) needs to have security in order to preserve it's integrity, that's why there is a state, why there are cops, and that's why people sign legal agreements, so, blaming the atackers/abusers of the system for the big flaws of the system is just plain stupid.
There are sites that are linked to allmost daily on/., for example, Google or the Wikipedia. And those sites hasn't been vandalized by us, actually, those sites apreciate the traffic that slashdot generates. They should think what they are doing wrong, not blame it on us.
Yes, but computing is not for dumbs. Would you trust a person that can't remember a 2 leter command to be your sysadmin?. The point is, the problems that you have to solve through the use of computers are not simple, and the main tasks involved in solving them aren't easy either. If you think Emacs is to hard to use, then you don't really need Emacs, since, if the editor seems to hard for you, don't even talk about C Code. People trash-talk constantly about old-school software, saying it's hard or unusable, read: Sendmail, Emacs, C, Bash, etc. Some people just extends that to Unix as a whole. This tools are very powerfull, and most of them has been here for over 30 years. Hackers allready know them, and they are the way they are, because the kind of people that should be in front of a computer coding, usually thinks like that, the software i mentioned, is software that has an interface designed to be used by MACHINES, and Hackers tend to think like machines. I Do, in many ways, only that we are creative machines. So, if you have a "programmer", that complains about the interface of the tools we have used for years, the same tools that has been used to develop all the software we currently have, then that person doesn't think like a Hacker, he is a user. If he can't think like a coder, then he can't expect us to adapt our compilers, editors, debuggers, etc. to his stupid point and click interface, if he thinks like a user, then BE just a user. The problem in the windows world is that most windows programmers are users that wanted to code. In Unix, lusers are lusers, and Hackers are Hackers. That's why Unix works, and Windows is what it is.
Re:When four corners is too much
on
Drafting GPL3
·
· Score: 1
If it weren't for the work of RMS, you would be using proprietary software now, and would certainly be under a lot more control and with a lot less freedoms that current windows users (without Free Software compiting, M$ and others would be way out of control). Changing the GPL is a scary thing for many people that depends on it because it has work published under it, and because he/she uses lots of soft under that license, because RMS has proved to be lawful to what he beleives in any situation, it is a good thing to know that he will be responsible for the modifications, in that way, we know what to expect, and we can be certain that our freedoms won't be removed.
Re:the code of conduct for free software distribut
on
Drafting GPL3
·
· Score: 1
The GNU License gives everyone equal freedoms. The BSD license gives the developers the right to REMOVE freedoms from the users, which obviously doesn't sound right.
Yep, i didn't say that the companys didn't paid them enough. What i said is that the USA sistematically worked over the last 50 years to sumerge certain nations into poverty, so they can later exploit their workers, and the richness of the country paying them cents, regardless of the fact that those cents may pay for food or not.
Well, the USA created it, the USA caused the actual situation of many 3rd world countrys, then those countrys were poor, and so they had cheap workers, and then the USA stated outsourcing.
Slashdot Mirror
I Know that, but the fact that we know and accept the fact that most people just doesn't care, doesn't make it right, and so we must remind them and us that it's morally wrong.
That's because you are lacking something called Ethics. Restricting knowledge is BAD. Proprietary software restricts what users can do, and restricts their innherent right to LEARN. That's why i use Free Software, and i also used it when most of it "sucked", that is, i only used GNU/Linux on my system back in the day when most hardware wasn't supported, important parts of the system where missing, and getting things to work was a real mess.
The purpose of using Free Software is to be FREE from corporations/individuals that wants to tell you what you can do with your computer and what you can't, and still, many companys keep releasing proprietary software for Free plataforms, If i wanted Proprietary software, i woudln't be using GNU/Linux. In certain cases where they release some software for which there is no real Free Software alternative, i can see they know they will have a marketshare (It's still ethically wrong, but i understand it), but when they release such a trivial piece of proprietary software like a toolbar, to run on very big developments that are completely free, and where there are alternatives to that specific software (There are thousands of Free toolbars for Firefox), i don't see how someone would install it.
The problem you are having is beetween chair and keyboard, you are using a Badly designed distro, prepared for the illiterate masses, get Slackware, learn Unix, and everything will be easier for you. If it doesn't compile is because you don't have a clean build environment, with all the required librarys, it's your mistake, not the fault of the GNU System.
And please, call the system by it's proper name, GNU/Linux.
One of the main features of Free Software is that you CAN add things to it, you have the source, and since GNU/Linux is a Unix-like system it's easy to automate tasks, and to interface with any software on the system. Each part of the system is a different project, with it's own interfaces well declared and documented. In the case of proprietary software, you are limited to the APIs provided, since you don't have access to the source, and also, all the system is badly designed, many things are just hacked toghether into random librarys, and the whole OS is a single mess, and you can only use the provided API (which is poorly documented) to interface with the system. In many cases, the SDKs and APIs are proprietary, and you have to pay thousands to use them, in many other cases, you are legally FORBIDDEN to modify/interface with certain software, so, again, how it's hard to add things to Free Software and easy to add them to Proprietary soft?.
...
Just how many coders outside Microsoft have added parts to the windows kernel?, now think how many coders contribute to Linux, How many plugins are there for MSN, and how many for Gaim?, The list just goes on and on
The problem is that the user code becomes part of the page, so they are in the same security context, but we could require the GM functions to require a hash to be passed, this hash would be generated for each machine, so, code coming from the net would not know the hash and would be unable to access the functions, but code coming from the user would have the correct hash, and so would be executed ...
I Said batteries in a GENERIC way, i didn't say Nickel-Metal or something like that. I understand perfectly how the fucking battery in my cellphone works, and not, i'm not talking about that kind of batterie, What i'm saying is that new technology in that area must be developed. I Don't have the {knowledge,resources,time} to research and tell you what kind of technology it could be, but i can see that all the development done later in mangetic fields handling and super-conductors, for example, may have some kind of aplication in this area.
Besides this, Fuel Cells looks to me like a patch, an ugly hack to solve our energy storing problem, not a real solution.
Storing Materials (For example, Gasoline), and using it to produce energy is primitive and inadecuate. What we need is better, smaller batterys. So, we have a form of energy (Electricity), that is clean, easy to store, cheap, and that is portable across different aplications (That is, you can power allmost anything with electricity, engines for different aplications, a radio, a computer, a cellphone ...), and the most important is: You can produce electricity in lots of different ways, from nuclear power, hidroelectric facilities, wind, solar power, using oil, etc.
So, we have a virtually unlimited resource (Since it's present in nature, is renovable, and can be produced in many ways, some of them are not renovable, but some are).
The only problem with this technology are batteries, because they are not sufficiently evolved, we just need to put more effort into producing better batteries, and in creating a standard so you can plug any batterie in any device.
I Am a Comunist, i don't use credit cards.
But if you want to know, my money is in my pocket, you can see it anytime you want, and you can have copys of if if you want, in any medium you may need, digital or analog. I Can Scan my money and send you a GIF if you want.
Yes, that is for inhouse aplications, but if you REDISTRIBUTE the modified sources, you have to release the code, and posting them to /. certainly IS redistribution.
The post you are replying to is licensed under the GPL License, and, since your response is a derivative work based on my post, you are infringing the GPL if you don't show me your post.
In my case, i think information should be free, all information, even private information. If there is something that i don't want other people to know, it's in my head, if i write something down, then everyone should be able to see it. The reason i don't like this kind of stuff it's because it's proprietary, and if we are fighting to have a fully Free Software Operating System, it's stupid to integrate such small and unimportant pieces of software that will taint your whole system. If i have 6 gb of Free Software on my machine, then why should i taint all of that with 1 mb of proprietary software. Again, if there weren't any Free C Compilers for GNU, then i might use a proprietary one, and i would understand other people doing so for important pieces of software, but for something as trivial as a toolbar, when we have a completely Free OS with allmost everything you could ever need?, no thanx.
First of all, a sysadmin *must* know exactly what he has in his system, but, if you need to know, 99.99% of Unix software has a --version option ...
Hacking is an art. When some coder develops something in visual basic because he has been told too do so by his boss, and he gives a given ammount of work hours to finish it as fast as he can, it's usually not art. But when J.R. Hacker writes something in C & Asm just to see if he can actually do it, it's art, because of the motivations for developing the software, the hacker will try to make it as best as possible, and the reason to write many parts of the software will be to make it beatyful and elegant, not only in it's code, but while it runs, The same happends with any more conventional form of art, for example: Some teapot produced at a factory, where they will try to produce as many as possible, all equal, that ain't art, but if someone puts all it's effort into making a hand-make teapot, then it will be art.
Slackware is secure.
...
Slackware is convenient (I Know that many will say otherwise, but if you have Unix experience, it's the best solution, really easy to manage)-
It's cheap, it doesn't contain any proprietary software.
Also, Debian can be as safe as Slackware, the problem with this kind of Distro (Debian) is that the people using it pretends that someone else takes care of their security. A Sysadmin doesn't need some stupid organization to submit patches to him automatically or anything like that. He just has to download and compile all of the critical services of his system, and update them when necesary. Anyone that says otherwise is an Amateur, not a Sysadmin, and if he's an amateur, he shoudln't be running any system bigger than he can manage, and he shoudln't run any critical services, and for the kind of things that an amateur should host the kind of security provided by allmost any Unix system is more than enough. The problem with all this shit is that there are lots of amateurs out there calling themselves sysadmins
1X (Broadband over CDMA) is a greate technology, i consider it even more reliable than GPRS, the only problem is the high latency of the conection. I really want to try it with an FWT instead of a cellphone, so i can atach a directional antena, i actually did it with a Dowtel FWT, and i hacked the antena by connecting a standard 2.4ghz reflector corner antena (The cellphone is in 1900 mhz but it should work anyway) and connecting it with a homemade cable (4m of rg58 + 2 TNC connectors). The problem is that the only interface that this FWT provides is a fkn rs232 port, and it really sucks, the only good CDMA fwt out there is the Motorola 1900 but it doesn't have 1X support. Oh well ...
Noone will create free content for the web, so we should all see annoying popups. .. oh ... wait ..
The same way that noone will create Free Software, so we should all let M$ conquer the world. It's not like there is a Free Operating System or anything
The Crackers are the bad guys he's talking about, the Hackers created the fucking Internet, and are also responsible for most software concepts, technologies, and actual software that we use today.
But, again, Hackers and Crackers aren't two real groups of people. There are many people out there that are either Crackers or Hackers (or Both), but don't agree, or feel they are part of the same group than many other people that consider themselves also Hackers/Crackers, so, in the first place, they can't be blamed because there's nothing really binding theme together besides common interests and skills.
OTOH, anything that the human being has created so far has been abused, from the most old and basic things as trade and money, to complex electronic/mechanical/electrical systems, So a system (any kind of system) needs to have security in order to preserve it's integrity, that's why there is a state, why there are cops, and that's why people sign legal agreements, so, blaming the atackers/abusers of the system for the big flaws of the system is just plain stupid.
There are sites that are linked to allmost daily on /., for example, Google or the Wikipedia. And those sites hasn't been vandalized by us, actually, those sites apreciate the traffic that slashdot generates. They should think what they are doing wrong, not blame it on us.
Yes, but computing is not for dumbs. Would you trust a person that can't remember a 2 leter command to be your sysadmin?.
The point is, the problems that you have to solve through the use of computers are not simple, and the main tasks involved in solving them aren't easy either. If you think Emacs is to hard to use, then you don't really need Emacs, since, if the editor seems to hard for you, don't even talk about C Code. People trash-talk constantly about old-school software, saying it's hard or unusable, read: Sendmail, Emacs, C, Bash, etc. Some people just extends that to Unix as a whole. This tools are very powerfull, and most of them has been here for over 30 years. Hackers allready know them, and they are the way they are, because the kind of people that should be in front of a computer coding, usually thinks like that, the software i mentioned, is software that has an interface designed to be used by MACHINES, and Hackers tend to think like machines. I Do, in many ways, only that we are creative machines. So, if you have a "programmer", that complains about the interface of the tools we have used for years, the same tools that has been used to develop all the software we currently have, then that person doesn't think like a Hacker, he is a user. If he can't think like a coder, then he can't expect us to adapt our compilers, editors, debuggers, etc. to his stupid point and click interface, if he thinks like a user, then BE just a user.
The problem in the windows world is that most windows programmers are users that wanted to code. In Unix, lusers are lusers, and Hackers are Hackers. That's why Unix works, and Windows is what it is.
If it weren't for the work of RMS, you would be using proprietary software now, and would certainly be under a lot more control and with a lot less freedoms that current windows users (without Free Software compiting, M$ and others would be way out of control).
Changing the GPL is a scary thing for many people that depends on it because it has work published under it, and because he/she uses lots of soft under that license, because RMS has proved to be lawful to what he beleives in any situation, it is a good thing to know that he will be responsible for the modifications, in that way, we know what to expect, and we can be certain that our freedoms won't be removed.
The GNU License gives everyone equal freedoms. The BSD license gives the developers the right to REMOVE freedoms from the users, which obviously doesn't sound right.
Yep, i didn't say that the companys didn't paid them enough. What i said is that the USA sistematically worked over the last 50 years to sumerge certain nations into poverty, so they can later exploit their workers, and the richness of the country paying them cents, regardless of the fact that those cents may pay for food or not.
It Won't work !!!, they are in the wrong city!, they should be drilling in Reikjavik ;-)
Well, the USA created it, the USA caused the actual situation of many 3rd world countrys, then those countrys were poor, and so they had cheap workers, and then the USA stated outsourcing.
You created This Global economy, now eat it.