In the real world, if an trespasser pees in my swimming pool, I suffer damage because my pool has been polluted. If the trespasser takes walnuts from my trees, I sufer damage because I have fewer walnuts.
But with GPL software, how am I harmed if someone improves my code but doesn't grant me access to it? I want a serious answer to this question, and not ideological spewage. How has it damaged the software residing on my ftp server? I may not have access to those improvement, but those improvements are not mine. I am in EXACTLY the same situation wether those improvements were made or not made.
RMS takes great pains in explaining that copyright infringement is not theft or piracy. Because of its special nature, information cannot be stolen. Yet doesn't this exact same nature mean that we are not harmed if improvements are kept private? Or as ESR recently said, why is GPL software so fragile that we have to protect it with the full power of the court system, and the armed police force that back it?
There is a small but significant and vocal minority in the Linux community that insists on defining Linux in terms of other operating systems. They are not content with Linux just being Linux. "Mactel" is a threat to Linux, in their worldview, simply because Mactel is a threat to Wintel.
If you are unable to detect that you've been hurt or damaged by the misappropriation, then you should consider the very strong possibility that you have not been hurt or damaged by the misappropriation.
Is GPL code so fragile that you must resort to gumshoes and dicks following it around just to be sure no looks at it with squinty eyes?
For all intents and purposes, an ncurses interface is a GUI, it's just not as pretty as you might want. A true command line interface doesn't have buttons or checkboxes or lists. The CLI promotes learning because you must read the manpage, you must learn *what* is going on.
I'm an old fart, so remember a world most of you can never imagine. But there used to be a time when it was routine for an automobile owner to change his own oil, turn his own engine, and replace his own belts. Really, it's true, look it up in your history books. People who owned timing lights weren't considered geeks. There's weren't hordes of Microsoft and Apple users ridiculing those who knew how to fix their own cars.
But today with computers some of you act as if everlasting world peace would immediately ensue if we could only banish the command line or weld the car's hood shut. Not every user needs to learn the command line, but neither should it be forbidden knowledge.
"Reactionary" used to be a euphemism for extremists on the right wing. But more and more the left is meeting the definition of "reacting against progress and liberalism". More and more they are the ones reacting before thinking, the ones opposing progressive (in the non-leftist sense) policies.
The LA Times should expect just as much defacement of conservative comments, as they do any other kind of defacement.
Calling it "anal" doesn't mean it isn't important.
That's what the obsessive compulsives tell me when they wash their hands twenty times a day. It's what they say when they Lysol their whole environment. It's what they say after they've induced constipation by not using the public toilet. Do they really end up being less sick than the rest of us? And if so, is it worth the price?
My predefined worldview includes the opinion that people should use whatever software they want to use and/or are comfortable with, even if it's Windows. However, if I would dare utter that worldview in a LUG meeting I would be shown to the door.
I'm not casually making this stuff up. I was at a LUG meeting once when a representative of a then controversial company was shouted down by more than half the audience when she tried to explain her company's position. The president of this LUG, a well known Linux advocate whose name you would recognize, stepped back from the podium to let the shouting continue, with no effort to stop it.
That was the last LUG meeting I ever went to. I may go to a LUG in the future, but it won't be that one.
Then why aren't we bitching about Afghanistan? We are losing troops there as well, but no one is complaining about it. That's because Moore didn't make a movie about Afghanistan, he made one about Iraq. So it's only Iraq that people get their knickers in a twist over.
This isn't a Red versus Blue or Democrat versus Republican issue. Bill Clinton was on the radio this morning and he made it very clear that we cannot leave Iraq right now. He said that even though the invasion itself may have been wrong, leaving now or before we're ready would be a grave mistake.
What's scary is NOT that the poll came up with this result. Instead what is scary is that our government might take this poll seriously.
You and I do not know what the poll questions were. Was it "do you think something should be done to better protect your privacy on the internet?" If so, I would have answered yes. The question isn't about the government, or privacy bills, or putting filters in libraries, or anything like that. But what if the question was "do you think the government should be given expanded powers to control how you use the internet", then fewer people would be agreeing. To take it to the extreme, what if the question said "should there be a Department of Internet Safety and an office of the Virus Czar and should people have to get a license to use a computer?"
Hammil started off whiny, but ended up non-whiny by the end of the film. In EV, he had only a bit of whininess. And by EVI, had lost all whininess. Why? Character development. Which happens to be sorely lacking in EI-EIII. We had Hayden's acting because it's 100% whiny all the way through EII and EIII. Gaaagh!
As someone with an embarrassingly-encyclopedic knowledge of the movies*, I'd say Episodes I-III are as good as (and maybe better) than Episodes IV-VI.
Classic Coke versus New Coke. Original Trek versus Next Generation. Old Star Wars versus New Star Wars.
The fact of the matter is that Lucas has given us TWO DISTINCT series of movies. They do not go together except in the most contrived sort of way. We who prefer the original series (IV-VI) know this. But those who prefer the new series (I-III) cannot accept it as a stand alone series of three films, but continually insist that it's a part of a larger work. You're refusing to let it stand on its own, so why should the rest of us give it any creedence?
Since the first seconds after Episode III was released, you guys have done nothing but tell us how bad IV was. You cannot praise your movie without first tearing another down.
That horrible FDR! He got us into a war in Europe, and sixty years later we're STILL THERE! Damn that Truman, we STILL have troops in Korea! Bring them back home! Bring them back home!
Consumer: "Oh my god! Don't be an elitist asshole! Do I look like a mechanic? Of course I don't! That's why I brought me car to you. If you can't fix I'll take it elsewhere!"
Mechanic: "Have you tried the service garage across the street?"
You need to keep current. The BSD communities have long left the RTFM days behind. However, they don't have much patience with those who *refuse* to read the FM. Someone who asks a question answered by the FAQ, will be politely redirected to the FAQ. Someone who claims they read the FAQ, but still asks a question covered by the FAQ, will get flamed. If they do this repeatedly, they will get royally flamed. BSD support is 100% volunteer. We don't have paid tech support monkeys. We don't have distro employees paid to answer questions on the list. So don't cop an attitude if you don't want us to respond in kind.
And please ask complete sensical questions. Asking "I can't get it to install, what do I do?" isn't going to get you much success. Why should we answer with a twenty page post on how to install, when the handbook already has twenty pages on how to install? Please tell us WHAT went wrong with your install, so that we can narrow it down a bit.
We are not going to hold your hands. We are not going to coddle you like infants. We expect you to pull your own weight. If you're the type who still lives in your parent's basement because it's too scary to grow up and be independent, we don't want you. If that makes us elitist assholes, so be it.
I would expect the user base of Linux to be somewhat more homogenous than Windows, but attitudes still vary.
But the vocal faction of Linux users seem to be extremely homogenous. They're "advocacy geeks". They get their identity from Linux, and so will mercilessly attack anything that doesn't fit their predefined worldview.
Stallman found out long ago that he was an ass. He accepts it. He has learned to control his ass-ness by communicating primarily in writing, and editing anything before posting or sending. It's only when he's caught offguard in a public situation without a chance to edit his words an hour after saying them, that he gets his reputation.
Theo needs to learn that lesson as well. He can write his scathing comment, but he needs to wait an hour before posting it.
Actually it was Redhat (as in GNOME) who first declared KDE to be illegal. Only Debian believed them. Everyone else who looked at the issue dismissed the fearmongering.
But the damage has been done. Even as recently as two months ago Debian was on the kde-core mailing list claiming that the QPL was no longer a Free license, despite RMS' assurances that it is.
I see you've copyrighted your web page so I assume you can see the wisdom of treating software and the written word differently. Why you insist on castigating RMS for something you do yourself is beyond me.
I am not claiming that my webpage is free. I am not claiming you can take it and modify it and redistribute it. On the other hand, RMS does precisely this with the GFDL. He says the license is Free as in "Free Software", but it does not even meet his own definition of Free.
As for the documentation I write, that which comes with my software, it's 100% Free and Open and unrestricted.
Get a clue! You sound like with the Debian Social Contract, Microsoft would be walking all over everything. But reality shows something else. Reality shows NON-DEBIAN distros emerging, growing and putting down deep roots, even at the same time that Microsoft is a monopoly. Mandrake, SuSE, Slackware, Gentoo, et al, do not operate under the Debian Social Contract. They include GFDL documentation. They include Firefox. Back when Debian said KDE was illegal, they included KDE. And did Microsoft destroy them for it? OF COURSE NOT!
Debian isn't about freedom, it's about anal pedantic legalism.
In Debian's favor, the GFDL really is a crap piece of licensing. It allows you to keep parts of the document proprietary, an act that would have RMS suffering from conniption fits if it were done with software. Unfortunately, the FSF has done a good job of proselytizing the license, so that most people use it out of a knee jerk reaction, instead of actually examing the license for suitability.
Against Debian, however, is their anal approach to licenses. They are not about freedom, they are a support group for the terminally legalistic and argumentative.
Well I have run Windows in a while, they make me do it at work. But none of the FMs I have said anything at all about "cscript", including the Javascript FM. I'll have to try this tomorrow.
Slashdot Mirror
In the real world, if an trespasser pees in my swimming pool, I suffer damage because my pool has been polluted. If the trespasser takes walnuts from my trees, I sufer damage because I have fewer walnuts.
But with GPL software, how am I harmed if someone improves my code but doesn't grant me access to it? I want a serious answer to this question, and not ideological spewage. How has it damaged the software residing on my ftp server? I may not have access to those improvement, but those improvements are not mine. I am in EXACTLY the same situation wether those improvements were made or not made.
RMS takes great pains in explaining that copyright infringement is not theft or piracy. Because of its special nature, information cannot be stolen. Yet doesn't this exact same nature mean that we are not harmed if improvements are kept private? Or as ESR recently said, why is GPL software so fragile that we have to protect it with the full power of the court system, and the armed police force that back it?
There is a small but significant and vocal minority in the Linux community that insists on defining Linux in terms of other operating systems. They are not content with Linux just being Linux. "Mactel" is a threat to Linux, in their worldview, simply because Mactel is a threat to Wintel.
If you are unable to detect that you've been hurt or damaged by the misappropriation, then you should consider the very strong possibility that you have not been hurt or damaged by the misappropriation.
Is GPL code so fragile that you must resort to gumshoes and dicks following it around just to be sure no looks at it with squinty eyes?
Slackware is not based on any BSD. But it's init system is unique among distros in that it copied the older style BSD init system.
For all intents and purposes, an ncurses interface is a GUI, it's just not as pretty as you might want. A true command line interface doesn't have buttons or checkboxes or lists. The CLI promotes learning because you must read the manpage, you must learn *what* is going on.
I'm an old fart, so remember a world most of you can never imagine. But there used to be a time when it was routine for an automobile owner to change his own oil, turn his own engine, and replace his own belts. Really, it's true, look it up in your history books. People who owned timing lights weren't considered geeks. There's weren't hordes of Microsoft and Apple users ridiculing those who knew how to fix their own cars.
But today with computers some of you act as if everlasting world peace would immediately ensue if we could only banish the command line or weld the car's hood shut. Not every user needs to learn the command line, but neither should it be forbidden knowledge.
"Reactionary" used to be a euphemism for extremists on the right wing. But more and more the left is meeting the definition of "reacting against progress and liberalism". More and more they are the ones reacting before thinking, the ones opposing progressive (in the non-leftist sense) policies.
The LA Times should expect just as much defacement of conservative comments, as they do any other kind of defacement.
Notice the "®" at the end of the article. They registered a trademark on the story? WTF!
hard to justify the argument if you are talking about "linux users" as a whole
You're proving my point!
I was NOT talking about linux users as a whole. Go reread my original post. Let me repeat: I was NOT talking about linux users as a whole.
Calling it "anal" doesn't mean it isn't important.
That's what the obsessive compulsives tell me when they wash their hands twenty times a day. It's what they say when they Lysol their whole environment. It's what they say after they've induced constipation by not using the public toilet. Do they really end up being less sick than the rest of us? And if so, is it worth the price?
My predefined worldview includes the opinion that people should use whatever software they want to use and/or are comfortable with, even if it's Windows. However, if I would dare utter that worldview in a LUG meeting I would be shown to the door.
I'm not casually making this stuff up. I was at a LUG meeting once when a representative of a then controversial company was shouted down by more than half the audience when she tried to explain her company's position. The president of this LUG, a well known Linux advocate whose name you would recognize, stepped back from the podium to let the shouting continue, with no effort to stop it.
That was the last LUG meeting I ever went to. I may go to a LUG in the future, but it won't be that one.
Then why aren't we bitching about Afghanistan? We are losing troops there as well, but no one is complaining about it. That's because Moore didn't make a movie about Afghanistan, he made one about Iraq. So it's only Iraq that people get their knickers in a twist over.
This isn't a Red versus Blue or Democrat versus Republican issue. Bill Clinton was on the radio this morning and he made it very clear that we cannot leave Iraq right now. He said that even though the invasion itself may have been wrong, leaving now or before we're ready would be a grave mistake.
What's scary is NOT that the poll came up with this result. Instead what is scary is that our government might take this poll seriously.
You and I do not know what the poll questions were. Was it "do you think something should be done to better protect your privacy on the internet?" If so, I would have answered yes. The question isn't about the government, or privacy bills, or putting filters in libraries, or anything like that. But what if the question was "do you think the government should be given expanded powers to control how you use the internet", then fewer people would be agreeing. To take it to the extreme, what if the question said "should there be a Department of Internet Safety and an office of the Virus Czar and should people have to get a license to use a computer?"
Hammil started off whiny, but ended up non-whiny by the end of the film. In EV, he had only a bit of whininess. And by EVI, had lost all whininess. Why? Character development. Which happens to be sorely lacking in EI-EIII. We had Hayden's acting because it's 100% whiny all the way through EII and EIII. Gaaagh!
As someone with an embarrassingly-encyclopedic knowledge of the movies*, I'd say Episodes I-III are as good as (and maybe better) than Episodes IV-VI.
Classic Coke versus New Coke. Original Trek versus Next Generation. Old Star Wars versus New Star Wars.
The fact of the matter is that Lucas has given us TWO DISTINCT series of movies. They do not go together except in the most contrived sort of way. We who prefer the original series (IV-VI) know this. But those who prefer the new series (I-III) cannot accept it as a stand alone series of three films, but continually insist that it's a part of a larger work. You're refusing to let it stand on its own, so why should the rest of us give it any creedence?
Since the first seconds after Episode III was released, you guys have done nothing but tell us how bad IV was. You cannot praise your movie without first tearing another down.
...started a war it doesn't know how to end...
That horrible FDR! He got us into a war in Europe, and sixty years later we're STILL THERE! Damn that Truman, we STILL have troops in Korea! Bring them back home! Bring them back home!
Consumer: "Fix my car.:
Mechanic: "What's wrong with it?"
Consumer: "Oh my god! Don't be an elitist asshole! Do I look like a mechanic? Of course I don't! That's why I brought me car to you. If you can't fix I'll take it elsewhere!"
Mechanic: "Have you tried the service garage across the street?"
Consumer: "They sent me here."
You need to keep current. The BSD communities have long left the RTFM days behind. However, they don't have much patience with those who *refuse* to read the FM. Someone who asks a question answered by the FAQ, will be politely redirected to the FAQ. Someone who claims they read the FAQ, but still asks a question covered by the FAQ, will get flamed. If they do this repeatedly, they will get royally flamed. BSD support is 100% volunteer. We don't have paid tech support monkeys. We don't have distro employees paid to answer questions on the list. So don't cop an attitude if you don't want us to respond in kind.
And please ask complete sensical questions. Asking "I can't get it to install, what do I do?" isn't going to get you much success. Why should we answer with a twenty page post on how to install, when the handbook already has twenty pages on how to install? Please tell us WHAT went wrong with your install, so that we can narrow it down a bit.
We are not going to hold your hands. We are not going to coddle you like infants. We expect you to pull your own weight. If you're the type who still lives in your parent's basement because it's too scary to grow up and be independent, we don't want you. If that makes us elitist assholes, so be it.
I would expect the user base of Linux to be somewhat more homogenous than Windows, but attitudes still vary.
But the vocal faction of Linux users seem to be extremely homogenous. They're "advocacy geeks". They get their identity from Linux, and so will mercilessly attack anything that doesn't fit their predefined worldview.
Stallman found out long ago that he was an ass. He accepts it. He has learned to control his ass-ness by communicating primarily in writing, and editing anything before posting or sending. It's only when he's caught offguard in a public situation without a chance to edit his words an hour after saying them, that he gets his reputation.
Theo needs to learn that lesson as well. He can write his scathing comment, but he needs to wait an hour before posting it.
Actually it was Redhat (as in GNOME) who first declared KDE to be illegal. Only Debian believed them. Everyone else who looked at the issue dismissed the fearmongering.
But the damage has been done. Even as recently as two months ago Debian was on the kde-core mailing list claiming that the QPL was no longer a Free license, despite RMS' assurances that it is.
I see you've copyrighted your web page so I assume you can see the wisdom of treating software and the written word differently. Why you insist on castigating RMS for something you do yourself is beyond me.
I am not claiming that my webpage is free. I am not claiming you can take it and modify it and redistribute it. On the other hand, RMS does precisely this with the GFDL. He says the license is Free as in "Free Software", but it does not even meet his own definition of Free.
As for the documentation I write, that which comes with my software, it's 100% Free and Open and unrestricted.
Get a clue! You sound like with the Debian Social Contract, Microsoft would be walking all over everything. But reality shows something else. Reality shows NON-DEBIAN distros emerging, growing and putting down deep roots, even at the same time that Microsoft is a monopoly. Mandrake, SuSE, Slackware, Gentoo, et al, do not operate under the Debian Social Contract. They include GFDL documentation. They include Firefox. Back when Debian said KDE was illegal, they included KDE. And did Microsoft destroy them for it? OF COURSE NOT!
Debian isn't about freedom, it's about anal pedantic legalism.
The didn't change their name until this year, immediately after merging with Connectiva. They did NOT do a year earlier after that ruling.
In Debian's favor, the GFDL really is a crap piece of licensing. It allows you to keep parts of the document proprietary, an act that would have RMS suffering from conniption fits if it were done with software. Unfortunately, the FSF has done a good job of proselytizing the license, so that most people use it out of a knee jerk reaction, instead of actually examing the license for suitability.
Against Debian, however, is their anal approach to licenses. They are not about freedom, they are a support group for the terminally legalistic and argumentative.
Well I have run Windows in a while, they make me do it at work. But none of the FMs I have said anything at all about "cscript", including the Javascript FM. I'll have to try this tomorrow.