While I agree that Miguel is as fox in the henhouse, I don't think that Stallman is right here.
His tantrum basically boils down to "you can't present proprietary software as legitimate". Which is BS. Your own decision on how to do things is your decision, you can NOT tell others that their way of doing things is not legitimate. If companies want to do things the proprietary way, that's their decision. If your approach is better, then time will prove that.
Theo De Raadt did this. He's also an arrogant prick, but when he decided that everyone else's way was inferior to his, he fork offed. Which, in his case, was the best thing he could do, because he was able to deliver the ideals he believed in, giving the world OpenSSH and OpenBSD, both of which are shining examples of "fine I'll do it my way and show you".
Stallman needs to STFU. He's ruining free software by trying to make it exist in some kind of walled garden where nobody who uses it can interact with anyone or anything else.
It will when you realize that the phrase "know thyself" is really a tip on how bes to use your most valuable resource; your mind. If your job is one that requires intelligence (e.g., programming, sysadmin, engineer) your brain is your primary earner. Using it effectively will make you a better worker, and more able to "pay the bills".
Your flippant response really illustrates the attitude of the modern worker; I'll just do my job so I can continue to exist.
While I can accept that music would be less distracting that office chatter, I simply don't understand the concept that music is better than silence. I can work with music, but if I need to concentrate on something intensely, like a complex coding problem or making decisions based on a large amount of data, I need silence.
I blame life in a modern city causing people to hardly ever hear silence, which makes them uncomfortable with it. I grew up on a small country town, and silence was just something I got used to when walking in the bush or playing in the yard. Even traffic noise was not present. I remember finding the constant sound of cars going past when we moved to the city to be a novelty, and soon an annoyance for many years after moving to the city. To this day, 22 years later, I still find my trips to the country a relief from the sensory barrage that is life in a city.
I'm actually trying to understand the point that you're attempting to make, but it seems your head exploded and what appears to be your brain is... Everywhere!
Right. Because it's completely justifiable, logical, and rational to elect fucking terrorists as your leaders.
You call them terrorists, they call them freedom fighters. It's a matter of perspective. Get some.
Back in 1948 when Israel was declared independent, no one displaced. No one was kicked out. What did happen though was a bunch of racist "palestinians" who hated the Jews so much that they got up and left voluntarily.
Total misdirection; a typical tactic of the pro-Israel mob. In 1948 when Israel was declared to exist (it did not declare independence, as it did not exist prior to that), it immediately enacted Jewish favoring laws, and the Irgun and Haganah (which would later become the IDF) harassed and threatened the Palestinians so that they left out of fear. There was a recent exhibit in Melbourne where Palestinian families told how they lost their homes as the borders of Israel creep outward, displacing the people as they go. Most Palestinians do not have Israeli citizenship, and so as the borders move, so must they. Trouble is, their houses do not. Many told stories of being able to look over barbed wire fences and actually see people living in the house that they had to abandon only a few years earlier.
How civilized can you say a people really are when they elect terrorists to lead them?
Dunno. How about you tell me about the US being led by people like Colin Powell, who willfully lied to the world about WMDs in order to start an illegal, unpopular. Tell me about GW Bush whose family fortunes are essentially based on war. Tell me about Henry Kissinger who has some kind of fetish for ruining South American economies for fun and relaxation. Tell me about Cheyney lobbying Congress to ensure that his Halliburton cronies got the lions share of the Iraqi war loot.
Israel is a state founded with violence. Its borders were carved out by the illegal violence perpetrated by the Irgun and Haganah. Live by the sword, die by the sword. If Israel wants to rule by virtue of being the stronger party, that's fine. But at least be man enough to admit the desire to rule by might. Don't do it and whine the whole time when others challenge that type of rule.
Also, tell me who the terrorists are given a) relative body counts between Israeli civilians and Palestinian civilians b) the fact that Israel has violated more UN resolutions than any other country while pointing vociferously at any other country that violates them (hey, either you support the UN or you don't, but you don't get to point at violators when you yourself are the biggest violator) and c) Israel's continual policy of setting up illegal settlements right along the border and then moving the border just a bit more.
Sorry, Israel is *not* above reproach. Far, far from it.
So... offering the people a place to stay was heinous?
They were not offered a place to stay, Palenstinian land and buildings are usurped using the progressive tactic of:
1. Build border settlements 2. Whine about rocket attacks 3. Move border out of range of rockets
Wash, rinse, repeat. This is why the illegal settlements are such a sore point in the issue; they are the mechanism by which Israel is stealing the entire area that was the Palestinian state. Just look at a map from 1948 and a map from today. If you have time, check the map every decade between, you'll see Israel increasing steadily in area.
I guess you consider it heinous to defend your sovereignty?
That's just it; the Palenstinians contend that Israel is not only violating their sovereignty, but displacing it physically by pushing their country into a smaller and smaller area. Gaza and the West Bank are becoming more and more overpopulated as the Palestinian lands shrink, effectively making them concentration camps.
There is however a large group of nomads that chose to be led by a well known terrorist organization.
Say what you want about Hamas. They were elected fairly, in elections overseen by Jimmy Carter. Whatever you, the UN or your government may think of them, they are the democratically elected party, and they were elected mainly because the previous group who did not support direct violence fell out of favour because Israel refused to negotiate with them. This fuelled support for Hamas. Now that Hamas are in Israel strangely wants to talk to Fatah again.
Smells like Israel just wants a belligerent neighbor so they can keep pointing at them and playing victim all the while dredging military aid from the US by the billions.
I don't get Google fanboyism. I really don't. Every time something like this happens, we get some idiots who are in love with Google the way geeks loved Microsoft in the early days when they were the little guys taking down Big Nasty IBM making up some absurd reason why what they are doing is just fine and that Google couldn't *possibly* do anything wrong, because, after all, their corporate slogan proves it.
Google hasn't been a friendly garage company for years now, they are a Big Nasty Megacorp looking to squeeze every ounce of value from us they can, and their method of doing that is even more invasive than Microsoft's.
FWIW, I find Australians don't like tinkering with technology and are bit insecure.
Have you actually been here or are you just speculating about foreign places out of your ass in typical American fashion?
I remember reading somewhere that Australians buy a larger per capita number of Macs than other countries and my informal personal observations align with this.:-(
Ah. I see it's the latter. Global market share for Mac is around 9.3%. In Australia its about 5.3% Here's a new tagline for a company you may have heard of:
"Google - Dispelling arsehole-originated facts since 1998."
BS. The optic nerve is the most complex neural pathway in the body after the spine. We're closer to a working release of Duke Nukem Forever than we are to eyeball transplants.
Ancient times, it bears repeating, are over, past, kaput, done, no longer applicable.
Ancient times are the only place you'll find examples of Sharia law. Criticising modern Muslim nations is not a critique of Sharia law, rather, it's a critique of tinpot dictators who Muslims do not want or support, and who we wish the US would stop funding so that we could deal with them ourselves. As it is, we can't overthrow idiots like the Saudi royals because they get enormous military support from the US in return for cheap oil. You want freedom in the middle east? Easy. Leave, and we'll sort it out. You, personally, were deployed to KSA on a "friendly basis". You, personally, helped prop up that morally bankrupt regime. You, personally, have no right to then criticize Muslims for having morally bankrupt leaders because you, personally are part of the problem.
There are zero Muslim countries where one has the freedoms we expect in the secular West.
You lost your ability to talk about freedom the minute your government started with the PATRIOT act and the rest of that silliness. The US is no freer than China or those other countries you like knocking on, your government just has better PR spinners. What with NSA having the capability that it does, and the CIA spying on everyone these days regardless of its international only mandate, you're probably more watched than Iranians.
Actually, the Iranian regime is Shia, not mainstream Muslim. Shia represent a minority (estimates vary from 5% to 15%) of the worldwide Muslim population that the Western media lumps together. Mainstream Islam (Sunni, counting for between 805 to 90%) is hugely different from Shia, although the Shia people are allowed into Sunni countries freely and without incident (roughly 100,000 enter Saudi Arabia annually to perform the Hajj to Mecca, without incident).
In Iran, Shia are a majority, the only country in which this is the case. They are going after the traditional Muslims, who are contending that the brutality of the regime is not consistent with Sharia law, which has very clear principles. Ironically, the Western media is pointing to the Iranian regime and blaming its adherence to Sharia as the cause for the unrest there.
Sharia law is not counter to human rights, Sharia law resulted in a 1,400 year long reign over the middle east which was described by Jewish historian Bernard Lewis as the only time man has achieved true social harmony. It's a pity that the Western media has absolutely no idea what Sharia is, but bashes it based on a few clips from some village of some woman being whipped, regardless of the fact that Sharia had no part in such instances and does not condone violence against anyone, man, woman, Muslim or otherwise. Sharia law worked for 1,400 years in the middle east, and only fell when World War 1, a European war, spilled over into the region.
"which one of those is tied to the US government?"
If you consider the comments on/. to be part of the news (and really, they are if you use them as a meter of public opinion) then if Fox News watchers make up the majority, guess what? You're watching the views of Fox News.
Yea, but then what would you call a revolution? Putting down your teacup with a clatter, standing up abruptly, saying in a stern voice "Good DAY to you sir!" and storming out?
I'd like to see Google make their far-forward cookie and personalization tracking service be opt-in. If someone wants to have Google looking over their shoulder almost 100% of the time they're on the web (remember, it's not just google.com but every site with a Google ad) ensuring that they are effectively advertised at, then it should be something you ask for, not ask to have taken away.
If they made their tracking "services" an opt-in proposition, *that* would prove to me and probably all other Google skeptics that they truly were out to do no evil.
As it stands, I'm convinced they're as evil as the next megacorp monopoly.
Wrong. The real reason someone would feel bad for writing bad code is because afterwards they'd have to put up with RMS picketing their offices every morning. I can imagine the boardroom now: Director 1: We're making millions from this closed source software, it's the company's greatest success. Director 2: Yea, but that scary guy with the beard and the long hair keeps turning up and making my morning miserable. Director 1: I know, he's really annoying. All in favor of scuttling our revenue in the interests of making him go away, say "aye". Directors 1 - 20: "AYE!"
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree that Miguel is as fox in the henhouse, I don't think that Stallman is right here.
His tantrum basically boils down to "you can't present proprietary software as legitimate". Which is BS. Your own decision on how to do things is your decision, you can NOT tell others that their way of doing things is not legitimate. If companies want to do things the proprietary way, that's their decision. If your approach is better, then time will prove that.
Theo De Raadt did this. He's also an arrogant prick, but when he decided that everyone else's way was inferior to his, he fork offed. Which, in his case, was the best thing he could do, because he was able to deliver the ideals he believed in, giving the world OpenSSH and OpenBSD, both of which are shining examples of "fine I'll do it my way and show you".
Stallman needs to STFU. He's ruining free software by trying to make it exist in some kind of walled garden where nobody who uses it can interact with anyone or anything else.
Rather than Gnome leave GNU, wouldn't it be easier for Richard Stallman to just fork reality? It seems he's always wanted his own.
You're all forgetting that the $860 million dollar fine will likely get paid to the same companies in the form of government contracts.
It will when you realize that the phrase "know thyself" is really a tip on how bes to use your most valuable resource; your mind. If your job is one that requires intelligence (e.g., programming, sysadmin, engineer) your brain is your primary earner. Using it effectively will make you a better worker, and more able to "pay the bills".
Your flippant response really illustrates the attitude of the modern worker; I'll just do my job so I can continue to exist.
While I can accept that music would be less distracting that office chatter, I simply don't understand the concept that music is better than silence. I can work with music, but if I need to concentrate on something intensely, like a complex coding problem or making decisions based on a large amount of data, I need silence.
I blame life in a modern city causing people to hardly ever hear silence, which makes them uncomfortable with it. I grew up on a small country town, and silence was just something I got used to when walking in the bush or playing in the yard. Even traffic noise was not present. I remember finding the constant sound of cars going past when we moved to the city to be a novelty, and soon an annoyance for many years after moving to the city. To this day, 22 years later, I still find my trips to the country a relief from the sensory barrage that is life in a city.
I'm actually trying to understand the point that you're attempting to make, but it seems your head exploded and what appears to be your brain is... Everywhere!
You call them terrorists, they call them freedom fighters. It's a matter of perspective. Get some.
Total misdirection; a typical tactic of the pro-Israel mob. In 1948 when Israel was declared to exist (it did not declare independence, as it did not exist prior to that), it immediately enacted Jewish favoring laws, and the Irgun and Haganah (which would later become the IDF) harassed and threatened the Palestinians so that they left out of fear. There was a recent exhibit in Melbourne where Palestinian families told how they lost their homes as the borders of Israel creep outward, displacing the people as they go. Most Palestinians do not have Israeli citizenship, and so as the borders move, so must they. Trouble is, their houses do not. Many told stories of being able to look over barbed wire fences and actually see people living in the house that they had to abandon only a few years earlier.
Dunno. How about you tell me about the US being led by people like Colin Powell, who willfully lied to the world about WMDs in order to start an illegal, unpopular. Tell me about GW Bush whose family fortunes are essentially based on war. Tell me about Henry Kissinger who has some kind of fetish for ruining South American economies for fun and relaxation. Tell me about Cheyney lobbying Congress to ensure that his Halliburton cronies got the lions share of the Iraqi war loot.
Then also talk to me about Israel holding a big ceremony celebrating the Irgun terrorists who bombed the King David hotel.
Israel is a state founded with violence. Its borders were carved out by the illegal violence perpetrated by the Irgun and Haganah. Live by the sword, die by the sword. If Israel wants to rule by virtue of being the stronger party, that's fine. But at least be man enough to admit the desire to rule by might. Don't do it and whine the whole time when others challenge that type of rule.
Also, tell me who the terrorists are given a) relative body counts between Israeli civilians and Palestinian civilians b) the fact that Israel has violated more UN resolutions than any other country while pointing vociferously at any other country that violates them (hey, either you support the UN or you don't, but you don't get to point at violators when you yourself are the biggest violator) and c) Israel's continual policy of setting up illegal settlements right along the border and then moving the border just a bit more.
Sorry, Israel is *not* above reproach. Far, far from it.
They were not offered a place to stay, Palenstinian land and buildings are usurped using the progressive tactic of:
1. Build border settlements
2. Whine about rocket attacks
3. Move border out of range of rockets
Wash, rinse, repeat. This is why the illegal settlements are such a sore point in the issue; they are the mechanism by which Israel is stealing the entire area that was the Palestinian state. Just look at a map from 1948 and a map from today. If you have time, check the map every decade between, you'll see Israel increasing steadily in area.
That's just it; the Palenstinians contend that Israel is not only violating their sovereignty, but displacing it physically by pushing their country into a smaller and smaller area. Gaza and the West Bank are becoming more and more overpopulated as the Palestinian lands shrink, effectively making them concentration camps.
Say what you want about Hamas. They were elected fairly, in elections overseen by Jimmy Carter. Whatever you, the UN or your government may think of them, they are the democratically elected party, and they were elected mainly because the previous group who did not support direct violence fell out of favour because Israel refused to negotiate with them. This fuelled support for Hamas. Now that Hamas are in Israel strangely wants to talk to Fatah again.
Smells like Israel just wants a belligerent neighbor so they can keep pointing at them and playing victim all the while dredging military aid from the US by the billions.
Well, in this case, Google is kinda right because believe you me, if you buy the wrong ones, it'll be a crime for which you will never be forgiven.
I don't get Google fanboyism. I really don't. Every time something like this happens, we get some idiots who are in love with Google the way geeks loved Microsoft in the early days when they were the little guys taking down Big Nasty IBM making up some absurd reason why what they are doing is just fine and that Google couldn't *possibly* do anything wrong, because, after all, their corporate slogan proves it.
Google hasn't been a friendly garage company for years now, they are a Big Nasty Megacorp looking to squeeze every ounce of value from us they can, and their method of doing that is even more invasive than Microsoft's.
Have you actually been here or are you just speculating about foreign places out of your ass in typical American fashion?
Ah. I see it's the latter. Global market share for Mac is around 9.3%. In Australia its about 5.3% Here's a new tagline for a company you may have heard of:
"Google - Dispelling arsehole-originated facts since 1998."
Dude, I think you're on the wrong web site...
Probably. But the real question is, will it save you from his baseball bat if he finds out?
BS.
The optic nerve is the most complex neural pathway in the body after the spine. We're closer to a working release of Duke Nukem Forever than we are to eyeball transplants.
Ancient times are the only place you'll find examples of Sharia law. Criticising modern Muslim nations is not a critique of Sharia law, rather, it's a critique of tinpot dictators who Muslims do not want or support, and who we wish the US would stop funding so that we could deal with them ourselves. As it is, we can't overthrow idiots like the Saudi royals because they get enormous military support from the US in return for cheap oil. You want freedom in the middle east? Easy. Leave, and we'll sort it out. You, personally, were deployed to KSA on a "friendly basis". You, personally, helped prop up that morally bankrupt regime. You, personally, have no right to then criticize Muslims for having morally bankrupt leaders because you, personally are part of the problem.
You lost your ability to talk about freedom the minute your government started with the PATRIOT act and the rest of that silliness. The US is no freer than China or those other countries you like knocking on, your government just has better PR spinners. What with NSA having the capability that it does, and the CIA spying on everyone these days regardless of its international only mandate, you're probably more watched than Iranians.
Kids these days and their newfangled "vinyl" cheap rubbish. Give me my Bach on a wax cylinder, and then get off my long-dead lawn.
Actually, the Iranian regime is Shia, not mainstream Muslim. Shia represent a minority (estimates vary from 5% to 15%) of the worldwide Muslim population that the Western media lumps together. Mainstream Islam (Sunni, counting for between 805 to 90%) is hugely different from Shia, although the Shia people are allowed into Sunni countries freely and without incident (roughly 100,000 enter Saudi Arabia annually to perform the Hajj to Mecca, without incident).
In Iran, Shia are a majority, the only country in which this is the case. They are going after the traditional Muslims, who are contending that the brutality of the regime is not consistent with Sharia law, which has very clear principles. Ironically, the Western media is pointing to the Iranian regime and blaming its adherence to Sharia as the cause for the unrest there.
Sharia law is not counter to human rights, Sharia law resulted in a 1,400 year long reign over the middle east which was described by Jewish historian Bernard Lewis as the only time man has achieved true social harmony. It's a pity that the Western media has absolutely no idea what Sharia is, but bashes it based on a few clips from some village of some woman being whipped, regardless of the fact that Sharia had no part in such instances and does not condone violence against anyone, man, woman, Muslim or otherwise. Sharia law worked for 1,400 years in the middle east, and only fell when World War 1, a European war, spilled over into the region.
Sharia law causing global instability indeed.
"which one of those is tied to the US government?"
If you consider the comments on /. to be part of the news (and really, they are if you use them as a meter of public opinion) then if Fox News watchers make up the majority, guess what? You're watching the views of Fox News.
It kind of like passive smoking.
Yea, but then what would you call a revolution? Putting down your teacup with a clatter, standing up abruptly, saying in a stern voice "Good DAY to you sir!" and storming out?
Will it be billed to his Google Finance account?
I'd like to see Google make their far-forward cookie and personalization tracking service be opt-in. If someone wants to have Google looking over their shoulder almost 100% of the time they're on the web (remember, it's not just google.com but every site with a Google ad) ensuring that they are effectively advertised at, then it should be something you ask for, not ask to have taken away.
If they made their tracking "services" an opt-in proposition, *that* would prove to me and probably all other Google skeptics that they truly were out to do no evil.
As it stands, I'm convinced they're as evil as the next megacorp monopoly.
Anyone smart enough to decipher that post would not only know that, but also the answer to life, the universe and everything.
I haven't seen the movie yet. For a moment there you had me thinking I was in for an even weirder movie than I'm already expecting.
Ahem. RAID anyone? ZFS? Btrfs? Hello?
Isn't this what filesystem devs have been concentrating on for about 5 years now?
Wrong. The real reason someone would feel bad for writing bad code is because afterwards they'd have to put up with RMS picketing their offices every morning. I can imagine the boardroom now:
Director 1: We're making millions from this closed source software, it's the company's greatest success.
Director 2: Yea, but that scary guy with the beard and the long hair keeps turning up and making my morning miserable.
Director 1: I know, he's really annoying. All in favor of scuttling our revenue in the interests of making him go away, say "aye".
Directors 1 - 20: "AYE!"