You're completely right! I've had no problems with jupming 2.2->2.4, but lots of bugs with a third-figure shift in glibc.
So I'd rather call the glibc and GNU userland "Linux" -- they're harder to replace then the kernel.
As far as I can see, in today's technical English the term "Linux" refers to "the GNU/Linux system", while "the kernel written by Mr. Torvalds" is actually called "the Linux kernel" or simply "the kernel". (The most used word becomes the shortest).
This BTW is like having the car you're manufacturing referred to as "the car" or the bank you're running called "the bank". Sounds cool to me:^)
And that's why Klipper is basically a capsule with wings for more controllable and soft landing. And the soyuz's achievements AFAIK are incorporated as much as possible.
And yes, the article is a dupe (though it seems to reveal more details as in "seeking funding" -> "seems to find at least some funding"). Or maybe even a "trupe"...
But still, it's basically good that *technology* gets *publicity* on *slashdot*.
You have forgotten the main reason: Microsoft hates the whole "thin client" concept, because it makes the "desktop" thing irrelevant. Most windows apps (even open-source) are damn hard to port to other OSes... except for those that are really just front-ends.
Basically that's the same reason they wanted to kill Netscape.
The Google's business model is commoditizing the "end user's computer platform". Too bad for MSFT.
Also, Google is getting too mush control over the Internet. If I control all the people's cars, I'm Overlord... Until someone takes over the oil and suddenly is on par with me. Worst nightmare (I don't control the cars, just an example).
That said, I find parent's posts completely valid, maybe except for #2: surely it's running Linux but than what? Not so much publicity...
But anyway Google *is* helping Linux. I've found Googling howtos/manuals easier than reading through windows/office/whatever help files that silently assume I'm dumb and don't want any choice:-P
While I mostly agree with your post, I have something to add. The stats that are really useful should show the relation between the usage of a browser and negative consequenses.
You know, conditional probabilities.
Like this: P (owned | $browser) = P ("you use $browser" && "you get owned") / P ("you use $browser")
Seriously, how many times did you or your friends get burned with Firefox exploits? Most of them seem to be either proofs-of-concept or DoSes.
Linux in the commercial world (which is what we are talking about here) is not about the geeks, it never was.
Yes Linux is about the geeks.
Is Linux run by the qualified engineers paid by big corps? Yes. Do those engineers grow on trees? No.
As the geeks who support Linux mature, IBM, RedHat and others hire them. No geeks == harder to hire the right people == less profit == the board decides to not support Linux.
I doubt layering OpenGL over directX will make a 50% slowdown; all the time processing is in the GPU and the amount of time spent in an API is insignificant.
Um, no. What if they implement OpenGL through Direct3D putpixel() function* entirely? THAT will be a slowdown!!!
Seriously, MSFT are really interested in a slowdown. Why not make 50%?
He was just robbed, no connection to spam or mafia, as CNews Russia reports.
The police says that he was dating three girls, and they opened the door to robbers. The man tried to defend himself and got killed.
They (the police) have also found some women's clothes in the apartment. His money and credit cards were stolen. One of the girls is currently arrested (well, they arrested *some* girl and suspect she has something to do with the incident).
The most ironic part is that the Center of American English reports that they'll "continue our daily operations". Don't they care for their carma? Sounds as funny as something homicide-related can be...
P.S. Very rough translation and poor English, but I'm writing this in a hurry -- I must return to work now:))
I agree that package managers are good, but a user doesn't want constant downloads just because a random text editor needs GTK of version $his+0.0.1
What distro makers need to do is verifying package dependencies so that each package requires oldest possible setup it runs with. I know it's a load of work, but still...
Yesterday I typed in # urpmi perl-Pg and guess what? It reinstalled Postgres-*, a bunch of libs, and Ocaml to boot. The packege itself contained a.PM, a.so and a man page. And it can work over the network, so it MUST NOT depend on the server part. (Yes, it may depend on libpq but again, why won't it work with an older version?)
Yes I know I could run rpm --nodeps, but why should I care? So, installing stuff would become easier if every packager made sure the package work on oldest possible configuration, and does not depend on optional components.
In fact, the thing that made development of GNU/Linux project possible is relative independance of packages, so that bash can be developed without knowing the status of ls and cp projects.
We should strive to make a flexibility heaven out of dependancy hell:) I'll start this Saturday -- find a random source and make sure it goes well with not-the-last stuff.
The only real difference is the terms of the agreement.
GPL does not apply to data formats or processing algorithms. At least it was not intended to.
You can look at the source and write your own (or better), and license it whatever you like. "Doing like the other guy" is not copyright infringement, and GPL is based on copyright.
NDA (and perhaps the MS agreement I didn't see anyway), on the other side, limits usage of *the knowledge you can get viewing the formats description*. No it's not the same.
Parent = FLAMEBAIT! Read the other answers!
on
Opera 8 Released
·
· Score: 1
Why is an insulting comment modded insightful?
It would be insightful if the author have tried 7.54 and 8.0 and said: "No, I've taylored my Firefox much better, just look at the extention list".
But maybe some moderators haven't tried Opera either, or just hate it for some reason? Well, there could be such reasons... I just don't have one.
There are numerous thing that keep me with Opera... The main is that everytime I download Firefox I tend to make Opera out of it by using tons of extentions. Why bother with google and downloads then?
Where is the "load this particular image" button in Firefox? Switch-images-on-the-fly? (G in Opera) Stop-showing-me-green-on-purple-5px-font? (Ctrl-G)
I've once lost ISP account information by pressing back in Firefox... Because I didn't know it reloads everything in sight by default. When one presses back, it means just "remind me please what it's all about" not "load that again, I've spent too little bandwidth".
Opera has shortcomings, of course. But Opera never annoys me, unlike other *cough IE cough* browsers. The FF is improving (and I actually like it from 0.8), but Opera is still a valid competitor at least. One should learn from one's rivals, not just ignore them.
PS: What I'd rather see in both browsers:
o "Resume loading page" button (ever lost connection to an on-line library?)
o "Load images below X*Y pixels (forum controls, smileys, etc)
o (FF has ext) delete *this* image NOW!!
o (Opera has for ages) show *this* image NOW!!
o Treat flash like images (it's visual and unsearchable, after all)
No, I won't write that myself (at least now). Why add bad code to FF?
Now, if only we could get Linux versions of these programs...
That's one of the consequences... Well...
Desktop Linux is a small, but extending market. If you have 1% market share and release for Linux, you can get significant advantage, that's why, say, Opera is a cross-platform browser.
If you have a few percent marketshare, you gain from Linux market too, provided that the porting efort is not too hard.
If you are Mr. Second in the market, the only incentive is to become #1 in new market and help its further expansion, thus undermining your competitors in both market.
If you're the major vendor, you are not interested in any change and the only incentive to release for Linux is to do it before #2 does.
That said, I see mutual competition as the primary reason for Adobe and Macromedia to release anything under Linux.
You can see the same thing with nVidia vs ATI -- Linux users don't make them much money, but good publicity and entering new market before competitor is worth porting drivers.
So, now Adobe has no need to fight for a small Linux market, and Macromedia... well... there's no Macromedia. I don't think the merger helps getting more products ported to Linux.
I am not a marketologist(sp?), so I would appreciate being proven wrong.
In a hi-tech market, the R&D cost is much greater than the manufacturing costs, and marginal costs are much less then average:
dC/dq << C/q
where C(q) = cost to produce q pieces.
This way, if you want to release a cheaper product without undermining the market for the expencive one, you can
(1) make r&d twice, pay twice the cost, collect twice the price for both
(2) cripple the expencive one, ???, profit.
(3) totally lower the price, go out of business, let your competitors rape the customers
Corps tend to choose (2) and it's somewhat good for the public: gamers buy GHz and real people buy workhorse machines and research is done once, not twice. (next post already pointed it out).
Expamles are countless: USRobotics sportsler and courier modems, 486SX, celerons (at least some of them), as well as Qt, Star/Open Office, RHEL/Fedora...
Those, who can, buy, those, who can't, buy too.
It's not crippling product, it's doing the expensive research once, not twice.
And yes though I've never used XP Stopped Edition I think it's crippled a bit too much, and could be harder to use than Linux for those with no computer experience.
But Brazil is trying to get more independence, and possibly won't take it anyway. I'd rather see my country to go Linux, too...
Black holes do not exist, but some weird objects that behave exactly like black holes do.:))
OTOH, I haven't found that article too reasonable. It relies on contradictions between Quantum physics and General Relativity that are currently being solved by Superstring theory.
Re:live performances vs. commercial product
on
EZTree Shuts Down
·
· Score: 1
it'd be up to the artist(s) to defend their rights.
RIAA: Mr. Lennon, would you please stand up for your rights? Lennon's ghost: But it's OK, I enjoy popularity! RIAA: Mr. Lennon, we are thinking of hiring some other artists... Ghost: Arrgh... Well, I'll go to court. RIAA: Thanks.
IIRC It's considered well-known that some distant Galaxies (as well as This one perharps) are emitting positrons. We don't see positrons as "small balls of positively-charged antimatter", but we do see X-rays likely generated by annihilation.
So, it is very likely that electron-positron annihilation accounts for the radiation observed in the center of the Galaxy. OTOH, the "classical" black-holes could emit positrons as well, there is nothing wrong with the fact.
A black hole-sized force field would poroduce tons of particles+antiparticles out of vacuum, and some of them will escape, and these may be positrons.
I am no astrophysician. But some of my friends are.
What you need, people, is an Independent Copyright Holders Union (or such).
So that GPL is enforced, small proprietary companies (like Opera, TrollTech) can stand software patent suits, writers get published without slavery contracts, musicians get listened to online and paid, and finally RIAA gets squashed by competition from those (or evolves).
It's not that hard to get a legal team, a typography, a few record studios and a heap of internet servers (and maybe even a TV channel) if there are millions of people connected and donating/paying for membership.
There are organisations like that in separate areas, but they don't seem to be strong enough yet. What if they join?
The current settlement prohibits Microsoft's OEM license from disallowing dual boot machines. This was the tactic used against BeOS. It also allows OEMs to pre-install other applications without Microsoft's permission. This was a tactic used against Netscape.
Does this regulation apply in EU? (I guess it does)
Let the WMP lie down in the dustiest corner of the file system. Let the OEM install Winamp, QuickTime and XMMS to boot.
Just make the phrase "you cannot install competing stuff" illegal to appear in a license. Because locking out others is anticompetitive and not bundling.
The message should be: "Do your business. Compete on merit. Let the user/OEM/whoever choose." not "remove the media player (r) (tm) and continue your dirty games".
...they either a) Have some balls. Or b) are dumb as rocks.
c) are pro-Linux.
Look: - They've sued IBM (instead of sett(l)ing a precedent first with a bunch of weak companies). - They've annoyed the judges so that the case would not be won by accident - They've robbed MicroSoft - They've told everyone that "Linux is like UNIX but for free" - They've sponsored/. by providing news => ads revenue. - Finally, they're advertizing Groklaw.
Oh, I've forgotten. They're entertaining Linux/OSS fans, and you know laughter prolongs life!:)
I like most of your other posts, but this one seems wrong to me.
From the formal point of view, violating any license is the same and should be treated the same way.
However, the GPL violators are (partially) basing their business on an illegal activity while file-sharers just trying to get something for free.
It's like shoplifting vs. selling loads of stolen goods. Both are the same crime but the damage is orders of magnitude different. That's why people tend to defend filesharers. (And no infringment isn't theft, but it's still illegal and (mostly) unethical).
Also, the **AA are disliked for being big and strong against ordinary citizens while in GPL case the ground is leveled. Most people tend to like the weaker one more, with known exception for SCO. It's just human nature.
No need to worry yet: AFAIUnderstand, the news is mostly about a chip that holds the private key and generates the key pair on demand.
An (external) device like this might come in handy if there is a break-in and hop... the public key is undamaged, the system alerts, the intruder is screwed (no log deletion etc.). However, I wonder how long will it take to make the chip obsolete (the criptography evolves, the chip does not!).
The chip is shipped for some time now with (some) IMB laptops, and has a GPL driver and Linux support.
And btw, IBM, one of the adopters, is not interested in "one OS to rule them all". Look: MS forcedly dominates, prices rize, IT budgets rise, no one buys IBM's Iron.
Moreover, IBM is interested in commodization of OS market. They've spent billions on Linux and OSS, and they are reaping the reward -- increased demand in servers and services.
Slashdot Mirror
You're completely right! I've had no problems with jupming 2.2->2.4, but lots of bugs with a third-figure shift in glibc.
:^)
So I'd rather call the glibc and GNU userland "Linux" -- they're harder to replace then the kernel.
As far as I can see, in today's technical English the term "Linux" refers to "the GNU/Linux system", while "the kernel written by Mr. Torvalds" is actually called "the Linux kernel" or simply "the kernel". (The most used word becomes the shortest).
This BTW is like having the car you're manufacturing referred to as "the car" or the bank you're running called "the bank". Sounds cool to me
What Russia is great at is designing capsules.
And that's why Klipper is basically a capsule with wings for more controllable and soft landing. And the soyuz's achievements AFAIK are incorporated as much as possible.
And yes, the article is a dupe (though it seems to reveal more details as in "seeking funding" -> "seems to find at least some funding"). Or maybe even a "trupe"...
But still, it's basically good that *technology* gets *publicity* on *slashdot*.
You have forgotten the main reason: Microsoft hates the whole "thin client" concept, because it makes the "desktop" thing irrelevant. Most windows apps (even open-source) are damn hard to port to other OSes... except for those that are really just front-ends.
l
:-P
Basically that's the same reason they wanted to kill Netscape.
I'm not stating anything new here, it's all Joel: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.htm
The Google's business model is commoditizing the "end user's computer platform". Too bad for MSFT.
Also, Google is getting too mush control over the Internet. If I control all the people's cars, I'm Overlord... Until someone takes over the oil and suddenly is on par with me. Worst nightmare (I don't control the cars, just an example).
That said, I find parent's posts completely valid, maybe except for #2: surely it's running Linux but than what? Not so much publicity...
But anyway Google *is* helping Linux. I've found Googling howtos/manuals easier than reading through windows/office/whatever help files that silently assume I'm dumb and don't want any choice
While I mostly agree with your post, I have something to add. The stats that are really useful should show the relation between the usage of a browser and negative consequenses.
You know, conditional probabilities.
Like this: P (owned | $browser) = P ("you use $browser" && "you get owned") / P ("you use $browser")
Seriously, how many times did you or your friends get burned with Firefox exploits? Most of them seem to be either proofs-of-concept or DoSes.
Linux in the commercial world (which is what we are talking about here) is not about the geeks, it never was.
Yes Linux is about the geeks.
Is Linux run by the qualified engineers paid by big corps? Yes. Do those engineers grow on trees? No.
As the geeks who support Linux mature, IBM, RedHat and others hire them. No geeks == harder to hire the right people == less profit == the board decides to not support Linux.
I doubt layering OpenGL over directX will make a 50% slowdown; all the time processing is in the GPU and the amount of time spent in an API is insignificant.
Um, no. What if they implement OpenGL through Direct3D putpixel() function* entirely? THAT will be a slowdown!!!
Seriously, MSFT are really interested in a slowdown. Why not make 50%?
*I do not know the real name for putpixel in D3D.
He was just robbed, no connection to spam or mafia, as CNews Russia reports.
:))
The police says that he was dating three girls, and they opened the door to robbers. The man tried to defend himself and got killed.
They (the police) have also found some women's clothes in the apartment. His money and credit cards were stolen. One of the girls is currently arrested (well, they arrested *some* girl and suspect she has something to do with the incident).
The most ironic part is that the Center of American English reports that they'll "continue our daily operations". Don't they care for their carma? Sounds as funny as something homicide-related can be...
P.S. Very rough translation and poor English, but I'm writing this in a hurry -- I must return to work now
I agree that package managers are good, but a user doesn't want constant downloads just because a random text editor needs GTK of version $his+0.0.1
.PM, a .so and a man page. And it can work over the network, so it MUST NOT depend on the server part. (Yes, it may depend on libpq but again, why won't it work with an older version?)
:) I'll start this Saturday -- find a random source and make sure it goes well with not-the-last stuff.
What distro makers need to do is verifying package dependencies so that each package requires oldest possible setup it runs with. I know it's a load of work, but still...
Yesterday I typed in
# urpmi perl-Pg
and guess what? It reinstalled Postgres-*, a bunch of libs, and Ocaml to boot. The packege itself contained a
Yes I know I could run rpm --nodeps, but why should I care? So, installing stuff would become easier if every packager made sure the package work on oldest possible configuration, and does not depend on optional components.
In fact, the thing that made development of GNU/Linux project possible is relative independance of packages, so that bash can be developed without knowing the status of ls and cp projects.
We should strive to make a flexibility heaven out of dependancy hell
The only real difference is the terms of the agreement.
GPL does not apply to data formats or processing algorithms. At least it was not intended to.
You can look at the source and write your own (or better), and license it whatever you like. "Doing like the other guy" is not copyright infringement, and GPL is based on copyright.
NDA (and perhaps the MS agreement I didn't see anyway), on the other side, limits usage of *the knowledge you can get viewing the formats description*. No it's not the same.
Why is an insulting comment modded insightful?
It would be insightful if the author have tried 7.54 and 8.0 and said: "No, I've taylored my Firefox much better, just look at the extention list".
But maybe some moderators haven't tried Opera either, or just hate it for some reason? Well, there could be such reasons... I just don't have one.
There are numerous thing that keep me with Opera... The main is that everytime I download Firefox I tend to make Opera out of it by using tons of extentions. Why bother with google and downloads then?
Where is the "load this particular image" button in Firefox? Switch-images-on-the-fly? (G in Opera) Stop-showing-me-green-on-purple-5px-font? (Ctrl-G)
I've once lost ISP account information by pressing back in Firefox... Because I didn't know it reloads everything in sight by default. When one presses back, it means just "remind me please what it's all about" not "load that again, I've spent too little bandwidth".
Opera has shortcomings, of course. But Opera never annoys me, unlike other *cough IE cough* browsers. The FF is improving (and I actually like it from 0.8), but Opera is still a valid competitor at least. One should learn from one's rivals, not just ignore them.
PS: What I'd rather see in both browsers:
o "Resume loading page" button (ever lost connection to an on-line library?)
o "Load images below X*Y pixels (forum controls, smileys, etc)
o (FF has ext) delete *this* image NOW!!
o (Opera has for ages) show *this* image NOW!!
o Treat flash like images (it's visual and unsearchable, after all)
No, I won't write that myself (at least now). Why add bad code to FF?
Now, if only we could get Linux versions of these programs...
That's one of the consequences... Well...
Desktop Linux is a small, but extending market. If you have 1% market share and release for Linux, you
can get significant advantage, that's why, say, Opera is a cross-platform browser.
If you have a few percent marketshare, you gain from Linux market too, provided that the porting efort
is not too hard.
If you are Mr. Second in the market, the only incentive is to become #1 in new market and help its
further expansion, thus undermining your competitors in both market.
If you're the major vendor, you are not interested in any change and the only incentive to release for
Linux is to do it before #2 does.
That said, I see mutual competition as the primary reason for Adobe and Macromedia to release anything
under Linux.
You can see the same thing with nVidia vs ATI -- Linux users don't make them much money, but good
publicity and entering new market before competitor is worth porting drivers.
So, now Adobe has no need to fight for a small Linux market, and Macromedia... well... there's no
Macromedia. I don't think the merger helps getting more products ported to Linux.
I am not a marketologist(sp?), so I would appreciate being proven wrong.
I am not an economist.
In a hi-tech market, the R&D cost is much greater than the manufacturing costs, and marginal costs are much less then average:
dC/dq << C/q
where C(q) = cost to produce q pieces.
This way, if you want to release a cheaper product without undermining the market for the expencive one, you can
(1) make r&d twice, pay twice the cost, collect twice the price for both
(2) cripple the expencive one, ???, profit.
(3) totally lower the price, go out of business, let your competitors rape the customers
Corps tend to choose (2) and it's somewhat good for the public: gamers buy GHz and real people buy workhorse machines and research is done once, not twice. (next post already pointed it out).
Expamles are countless: USRobotics sportsler and courier modems, 486SX, celerons (at least some of them), as well as Qt, Star/Open Office, RHEL/Fedora...
Those, who can, buy, those, who can't, buy too.
It's not crippling product, it's doing the expensive research once, not twice.
And yes though I've never used XP Stopped Edition I think it's crippled a bit too much, and could be harder to use than Linux for those with no computer experience.
But Brazil is trying to get more independence, and possibly won't take it anyway. I'd rather see my country to go Linux, too...
There are too many "The Only Right Ways To Go". Some of them are wrong. And some aren't even ways to go!
No we do not need *one* license.
BTW, if GPL ceased to exist somehow, the CDDL vs BSD flamewars will spread. Some people tend to like flamewars...
Black holes do not exist, but some weird objects that behave exactly like black holes do. :))
OTOH, I haven't found that article too reasonable. It relies on contradictions between Quantum physics and General Relativity that are currently being solved by Superstring theory.
http://superstringtheory.com/
it'd be up to the artist(s) to defend their rights.
RIAA: Mr. Lennon, would you please stand up for your rights?
Lennon's ghost: But it's OK, I enjoy popularity!
RIAA: Mr. Lennon, we are thinking of hiring some other artists...
Ghost: Arrgh... Well, I'll go to court.
RIAA: Thanks.
IIRC It's considered well-known that some distant Galaxies (as well as This one perharps) are emitting positrons. We don't see positrons as "small balls of positively-charged antimatter", but we do see X-rays likely generated by annihilation.
So, it is very likely that electron-positron annihilation accounts for the radiation observed in the center of the Galaxy. OTOH, the "classical" black-holes could emit positrons as well, there is nothing wrong with the fact.
A black hole-sized force field would poroduce tons of particles+antiparticles out of vacuum, and some of them will escape, and these may be positrons.
I am no astrophysician. But some of my friends are.
I'd like the media to last at least a few years after the copyright protection expires.
So, should that be a digital media that prolongs it's lifespan when needed?</sarcasm>
What you need, people, is an Independent Copyright Holders Union (or such).
So that GPL is enforced, small proprietary companies (like Opera, TrollTech) can stand software patent suits, writers get published without slavery contracts, musicians get listened to online and paid, and finally RIAA gets squashed by competition from those (or evolves).
It's not that hard to get a legal team, a typography, a few record studios and a heap of internet servers (and maybe even a TV channel) if there are millions of people connected and donating/paying for membership.
There are organisations like that in separate areas, but they don't seem to be strong enough yet. What if they join?
Oh yeah, I'm an optimist...
I write my passwords down in a custom cryptogram system
Hm... Tried to create one, but saw my passwords written everywhere!
Now I just use long passphrases of a few alphanumerics and usual words that are meaningful to me.
+1945Elp -- go crack it! (And the components are still easy to remember)
being backed by a terrorist nation
Dynamite can be used by terrorists, that doesn't tarnish the Noble prize.
Guns can be used by terrorists, but the armies don't throw them away or destroy them!
Hell, someone could take a sledgehammer and break down his neighbour's door. That would not put the blame on sledgehammers.
Now I know I was secretly right, but obviously misinformed :)
I've googled it:
http://www.aufait.net/~garnet/muse/lla.html
The current settlement prohibits Microsoft's OEM license from disallowing dual boot machines. This was the tactic used against BeOS. It also allows OEMs to pre-install other applications without Microsoft's permission. This was a tactic used against Netscape.
Does this regulation apply in EU?
(I guess it does)
Let the WMP lie down in the dustiest corner of the file system. Let the OEM install Winamp, QuickTime and XMMS to boot.
Just make the phrase "you cannot install competing stuff" illegal to appear in a license. Because locking out others is anticompetitive and not bundling.
The message should be: "Do your business. Compete on merit. Let the user/OEM/whoever choose." not "remove the media player (r) (tm) and continue your dirty games".
...they either a) Have some balls. Or b) are dumb as rocks.
/. by providing news => ads revenue.
:)
c) are pro-Linux.
Look:
- They've sued IBM (instead of sett(l)ing a precedent first with a bunch of weak companies).
- They've annoyed the judges so that the case would not be won by accident
- They've robbed MicroSoft
- They've told everyone that "Linux is like UNIX but for free"
- They've sponsored
- Finally, they're advertizing Groklaw.
Oh, I've forgotten. They're entertaining Linux/OSS fans, and you know laughter prolongs life!
I like most of your other posts, but this one seems wrong to me.
From the formal point of view, violating any license is the same and should be treated the same way.
However, the GPL violators are (partially) basing their business on an illegal activity while file-sharers just trying to get something for free.
It's like shoplifting vs. selling loads of stolen goods. Both are the same crime but the damage is orders of magnitude different. That's why people tend to defend filesharers. (And no infringment isn't theft, but it's still illegal and (mostly) unethical).
Also, the **AA are disliked for being big and strong against ordinary citizens while in GPL case the ground is leveled. Most people tend to like the weaker one more, with known exception for SCO. It's just human nature.
No need to worry yet: AFAIUnderstand, the news is mostly about a chip that holds the private key and generates the key pair on demand.
An (external) device like this might come in handy if there is a break-in and hop... the public key is undamaged, the system alerts, the intruder is screwed (no log deletion etc.). However, I wonder how long will it take to make the chip obsolete (the criptography evolves, the chip does not!).
The chip is shipped for some time now with (some) IMB laptops, and has a GPL driver and Linux support.
And btw, IBM, one of the adopters, is not interested in "one OS to rule them all". Look: MS forcedly dominates, prices rize, IT budgets rise, no one buys IBM's Iron.
Moreover, IBM is interested in commodization of OS market. They've spent billions on Linux and OSS, and they are reaping the reward -- increased demand in servers and services.