Actually the whole point of Free Software is that you can use, modify it and redistribute it with the rights still intact. The term "Open Source" has many meanings.
No it isn't. That is the problem with the "open source" term. The biggest spyware on the planet calls itself "open source". Until the bits that ship on your Mac match what is in the sourcecode, it isn't "open source".
I didn't realize Moore's Law was about circuits on a chip. Can you please explain? I didn't read the article but they must be talking about "AI" processing.
Normally I don't agree with you, but I do agree with you on this point. We should support GPL and Free Software. Free Software is NOT the same as what OSI Open Source is pushing. What we have today is "open source" which isn't open at all. Only the GPL should be trusted at this point. Unfortunately I think it is too late, and Free software will fall by the wayside.
That is awfully harsh. If you actually read the blog, he says the press release is from 1996. Did you even read the press release? A snippet:
Individuals can use OpenDOS source for personal use at no cost.
Individuals and organizations desiring to commercially redistribute
Caldera OpenDOS must acquire a license with an associated small fee.
Source code for proprietary third-party components of Novell DOS 7
will not be published.
Why are you saying that no geeks could touch it, or redistribute it? That clearly isn't correct.
It isn't just ethical, it is practical as well. Without the source code, how do you know what the software is doing? How can you modify it to do what YOU want? We have created an industry that spies on its users because no one knows what is going on.
Baloney. There are no "secrets" like that. A jet engine a micron across? But we can barely make a functional F-35 after billions in development. Right.
The OSI is essentially Bruce Perens and ESR. I don't trust either one of them particularly. Really the only person I trust when it comes to software is Richard Stallman.
There is no "top secret" work that is 50 years ahead. If there were, those people would quit and make billions in industry. You live in a fantasy world.
Slashdot Mirror
https://puri.sm/
Yes I do. Do you?
How would I know they did this? Unless the extensions are open source I have no idea what they are doing. Google should be requiring open source.
Actually the whole point of Free Software is that you can use, modify it and redistribute it with the rights still intact. The term "Open Source" has many meanings.
Yes, it is equally as bad. If you don't care about Freedom, that is your business.
No it isn't. That is the problem with the "open source" term. The biggest spyware on the planet calls itself "open source". Until the bits that ship on your Mac match what is in the sourcecode, it isn't "open source".
Yes. What about you?
Thats weird. You run a closed source OS on your Mac. Freedom doesn't seem very important to you.
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
I didn't realize Moore's Law was about circuits on a chip. Can you please explain? I didn't read the article but they must be talking about "AI" processing.
No, it is really meant to assist with the data collection. The earlier you can get them hooked into a spyware device the better.
I remember when people understood what "Free Software" meant and why it was important.
The OSI has a whole section devoted to the "Coining" claim. It seems pretty important to them. You should ask them why.
https://opensource.org/history
Normally I don't agree with you, but I do agree with you on this point. We should support GPL and Free Software. Free Software is NOT the same as what OSI Open Source is pushing. What we have today is "open source" which isn't open at all. Only the GPL should be trusted at this point. Unfortunately I think it is too late, and Free software will fall by the wayside.
That is awfully harsh. If you actually read the blog, he says the press release is from 1996. Did you even read the press release? A snippet:
Individuals can use OpenDOS source for personal use at no cost. Individuals and organizations desiring to commercially redistribute Caldera OpenDOS must acquire a license with an associated small fee. Source code for proprietary third-party components of Novell DOS 7 will not be published.
Why are you saying that no geeks could touch it, or redistribute it? That clearly isn't correct.
It isn't just ethical, it is practical as well. Without the source code, how do you know what the software is doing? How can you modify it to do what YOU want? We have created an industry that spies on its users because no one knows what is going on.
https://opensource.org/history
Look at the "Coining Open Source" section.
You might be "pretty sure", but you are wrong. It says so on the OSI website (which she is a part of)
THIS is an important question. The motivations of OSI are questionable at best.
Baloney. There are no "secrets" like that. A jet engine a micron across? But we can barely make a functional F-35 after billions in development. Right.
Not concerned at all. Nanotechnology is the 1980s equivalent of what "AI" is today. It isn't anything at all, just hype and very limited use cases.
The OSI is essentially Bruce Perens and ESR. I don't trust either one of them particularly. Really the only person I trust when it comes to software is Richard Stallman.
There is no "top secret" work that is 50 years ahead. If there were, those people would quit and make billions in industry. You live in a fantasy world.
Analytics, Predictive Modeling, Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing have been around for decades. It just seems new to you.
Name one person. Go ahead.