While the classical theory (i.e. the tree diagrams) and semiclassical corrections (one-loop diagrams) behaved as expected, the Feynman diagrams with two (or more) loops led to ultraviolet divergences - i.e. infinite results that could not be removed because the quantized general relativity was not renormalizable, unlike Quantum electrodynamics. In popular terms, the discreteness of quantum theory is not compatible with the smoothness of Einstein's general relativity. These problems, together with some conceptual puzzles, led many physicists to believe that a theory more complete than just general relativity must regulate the behavior near the Planck length. Superstring theory finally emerged as the most promising solution; it is the only known theory in which the quantum corrections of any order to graviton scattering are finite.
Do you think police keystroke loggers should be legal? Should the GPLv3 be modified to allow the DMCA to protect the police and law enforcement officials from wiretaps, or simply not void the license even if their actions may be illegal in some locations at some times?
1. So if its already illegal then the GPL just says you can't protect it with GPLv3 licensed DRM. Whereas you could protect it with any other form of DRM, thereby creating a tunnel through which you could illegally steal end user's information and it would normally be illegal under the DMCA for anyone to break your encryption to prove your actions.
2. DRM. That's your problem with the GPLv3? It was intended to dissolve the protections the DMCA granted to DRM. DRM, inherently, violates the fundamental principals of free software. That's why the GPLv3 and the FSF don't like it. If you're so pro-DRM I suggest you use a different license and bark up a different tree. We not only disagree with you, we think you're stupid for even mentioning it.
Why use GPLv3 DRM? The GPLv3 does nothing to stop you from making BSD licensed DRM or closed source DRM or DMCA protected DRM. Why don't you go choose one of the alternative options? Now I am very curious, your comment has perked some ears, I hope that was your intent.
How close and how large does matter have to be before we can detect it? Can we detect all the rocks the size of the Earth floating between the Milky Way and Andromeda?
We are just now starting to find planets orbiting other stars. It seems to me like we're rather ignorant at this point, specifically about the mass of objects floating around in space.
But perhaps our theoretical physisists are using more advanced technology and never make mistakes. I don't know. I just know it doesn't matter, no matter how much matter is out there is doesn't matter, its all dark and gloomy and this subject is too stuffy for a lowly druggy like me to ponder anymore.
A change comes that satisfies as many people as possible.
Like the DMCA?
How transparent is the government? On the top it looks like a mess of disorganized papers, but you find a solid 6 foot thick lead wall seperating you from the classified details. It looks quite opaque to me.
Besides, I know my enemy. They do want to impose unnecessary restrictions on us that don't quite sync up with science. I won't think for a second I don't have enemies or everyone just wants to get along. No, we're surrounded by opressors who think they're better than us. We're swimming with the sharks. We would be wise not to get bit, again.
Dark matter is a stupid idea. Its just like ID, the "theory" that God created everything and ghosts.
I don't mind the idea that there's some particles we haven't detected yet. But the idea that there's some matter out there that isn't visible because its cloaked by some weird sci-fi nebula field thingy that prevents us from detecting it, but its there, and its really big and its coming right for us. Is stupid.
I mean what is more likely: that we're dumb and have yet to piece together the fundamental forces of nature to fully explain motion in our universe, or we've already solved the math and just need a few large chucks of rock to explain our discrepencies?
We're not that smart. We thought there were WMDs in Iraq. We thought global warming was a fad. We thought Bush was going to take us to Mars. We thought the Earth was the flat center of the universe a few hundred years ago. And those traditional values still drive our horribly ignorant species into the future. We'll be lucky if we can solve the equations to explain the fundamental forces of our universe before our own ignorance and stupidity kills us. Or specifically, I fear we will not act to slow down to prevent global warming until it is too late and drives us back into a feudal system where religion and our own humanity corrupt our search for the truth.. we may never escape the fate of our planet or our star, not if we don't believe or understand it.
You mean without copyright, trademarks and patents?
I think we need to be more specific.
It would be nice if everyone could think for a moment and come to a complete and final decision about what they actually mean and want.
But its a lot harder to get independant thought out of our free society than an angry unorganized mob foaming at the mouth for "justice" and "freedom" and other concepts they barely understand.
I guess we'll have to wait until he takes some classes and developes some skills and gets a job writing and testing virus scanners or firewalls or encryption algorithms before we'll get that securely designed system.
But you don't actually seem to care about real security. I think you're only interested in punishing people you consider beneath you, children, script-kiddies, etc.
Its the same problem we get from multi-billion dollar corps like Microsoft. Its not like they couldn't solve their security problems. They could have taken out ActiveX or set sane defaults or designed the system with security in mind from the start. The reason they don't is simple. Its not the most profitable short-term strategy. In the long-term there is no strategy. So you get what we have here. Which is the way you want it. Well, you get it.
Fortunately for me, I won't ever have to deal with script-kiddie problems. I'm an expert. Security is simple, stupid.
So we're back to Napster, where its okay to copy it as long as its for personal use.
Does anyone else here feel like we're going in circles?
Copyright is stupid. Rating systems are stupid. Censorship is stupid. And you are stupid for support it in any form.
There, that makes me feel better.
BTW, you're STUPID!
Supporting copyrights, patents, and trademarks is just encouraging abuse. The same abuse you get when a government supports money, religion or politics. People get put in a place of authority because of these laws, then use their new powers to control and monopolize sectors of society. Eventually you have a choice of 10 movies, all of them good-for-the-family, none of them educational or thought provoking. And the audience...
The audience stops questioning, stops learning, stops thinking, and eventually they do what they are told like good drones, obedient and polite.
The problem is that you don't see your hacking as a problem.
Yeah? What's your point? You don't see insecure deisign as a problem? Even for a bank vault?
To tell these kids that stealing your money is wrong and slap their hand does nothing to protect your money from the real threat, people like me. We won't just stop at taking your money, we'll steal your whole identity and use whatever we need to get the next set of credentials. You're just a small fish in a big pond. I think you would be wise to listen to the little kids, who are only trying to show you how someone far more sinister could easily bypass your security.
I think you would be wise to think for yourself and question authority, instead of interrogating peons. If you truely believe children are a threat to your society you have more serious problems than can be addressed in this post. I'd suggest psychelogical help, but its unlikely any amount of therapy can correct the cancerous ideology that's consuming your soul.
Regardless of any other provision of this License, no permission is given to distribute covered works that illegally invade users' privacy, nor for modes of distribution that deny users that run covered works the full exercise of the legal rights granted by this License.
No covered work constitutes part of an effective technological protection measure: that is to say, distribution of a covered work as part of a system to generate or access certain data constitutes general permission at least for development, distribution and use, under this License, of other software capable of accessing the same data. ...
For a brief description may I suggest you read this forum, specifically "Is PGP a a DRM system?" by Wol, before you write too much about how the sky is falling and software licensed by the GPLv3 will be shunned by the media industry. It will only be shunned by those businesses in support of the DMCA. It will be adopted by individuals like me and businesses that fear legal reprocussions, disagree with the DMCA, or get a kick out of poking holes through the dumbest laws in the land like forwarding ports through your company's firewall with ssh.
There's nothing they can do to stop us. We've already won. The ignorant masses need only wait. No, we won't pirate mp3s for them or give them free movies. But we will prevent anyone from protecting GPLv3 protected copyrighted works with the DMCA. The GPLv3 shields us from the same loops holes the DMCA uses to protect copyrighted works from your personal fair use. You don't understand this, I know. So I can provide further explanation if and when you become interested.
To me, there's a huge difference between free software and free content, and it seems to me that this stance in GPL3 is essentailly saying that if you want to make the former, you've got to embrace the latter as well.
Is that what is says?
That's not what I read.
Look, its a software license. It governs the software that falls under its protection. Its protection pokes holes through laws like the DMCA which state that you cannot decrypt anything that has been encrypted for the purpose of protecting its copyright. The GPLv3 simply says you can decrypt it and reverse engineer it legally. It doesn't say its illegal to add DRM to a Linux distro, you just can't prevent anyone from getting access to the source code for any GPLv3 software by encrypting it and hiding behind the DMCA.
God, would you people please read the license before wasting my time with your ignorant opinions?
I don't know about usability, at least not to start, but my goal is to make something you configure once through some simple interface and don't have to worry about, it will email you or contact you somehow if and when it needs attention, etc.
I love the UNIX way of doing things, keeping it simple and efficient, only report errors, etc. But that doesn't mean it can't be usable and pleasant to look at.. I think it just takes a little creativity..
I'm talking about 2TB of redundant storage, about 3TB of physical storage, plus encryption.. for around $4k. And at the same price in about 6 months it could have 3TB of redundant storage.
It does line speed over 100Mb and can easily handle 200+Mb.
In a perfect world we wouldn't have this discussion.
There's more to 3D graphics APIs than cutting-edge gaming features.
OpenGL was originally designed for professional 3D graphic modelling, not gaming.
That it does so well in games is an example of how efficient and well thought out it was originally designed.
Getting these new "features" into OpenGL is a no-brainer. Seriously. Children can do it.
You have a point about drivers, since most drivers are closed-source, meaning we have to rely on nVidia and ATI to provide drivers that work with OpenGL. But if they didn't it would only hurt their products. There's always competition, nobody can use their market dominance to force something this significant.
What products exist for Windows that will protect against a new worm? What products exist that will protect against a known trojan in DRM?
When you buy anti-virus and anti-spyware software you're really just paying for insurance in case something bad happens. You're not preventing the natural disaster, just helping yourself clean up afterwards.
With OSX and Linux we've already done the work to prevent these disasters so the chances of running into a worm or trojan are far less likely.
This may requires a semi computer literate user base, so it may not be possible on Windows, but almost anyone who uses OSX and Linux "get it" which is why they are unconcerned about these threats.
The only thing you have to fear is fear itself. Remember that. Its so true.
Who's spreading the fear? Who's trying to make you affraid? What's their motive? Sometimes their only motive may be to make you feel as affraid as they already do.. Misery loves company.
I'm frugal. I don't pay extra money for something because it comes in a shiny plastic case. I pay for the hardware I need and download the software I want for free. That's why I love GNU. Its far more cost efficient for me to spend my money this way. That's how I can afford to build a gigabit network of 10 2+ Ghz CPUs and 2TB of redundant encrypted storage for about the same price most people pay for a PowerMac and a PowerBook.
Now I can't use OSX and I don't have a fancy water cooled dual processor 64-bit G5 in brushed aluminum to show off to my friends, but I have everything I want. Something I couldn't afford to get from Apple. Besides, I don't think they would sell me 2TB of encrypted RAID5 storage. I don't think they even offer this option to customers like me who know what we want. Where can I get this kind of storage for around $3000? Is that even possible? I'm really curious, I would love to know, because I'm considering starting a business selling these systems for a very modest markup. I think they would be highly competitive for SoHo businesses looking for the real deal w/o the BS.
Direct3D isn't an option on my desktop, well, not without libraries that use OpenGL to do the actual rendering.
Besides, I'd rather use OpenGL for my own programs. So its unlikely it won't survive. It may not be your favorite, it may not have your favorite D3D eye candy games, but this isn't a competition about who can make the best gaming API. It isn't even really a competition. OpenGL is already the standard on my platform of choice, just like D3D is the standard on yours.
Windows is alright and OSX is pretty, but I love GNU.
I've noticed, Microsoft sure spends a lot of time and money patching their OS and making sure hackers like me can't easily activate it when we move our harddrives between PCs. And Apple has been trying hard to keep me from copying any of those songs my friends purchase from iTunes. And now OSX will only run on Apple x86 hardware, even though it may have drivers for another PC and be able to run just find on it. Some people might even be willing to pay the $130 retail price to be able to use it. But that's not for me.
If I want it I know I can get it. You see, I have friends that know all about Windows XP activation and how to get around it. And they know all about OSX and how to crack it too. I can even steal music from iTunes. But why don't I?
Because I love GNU. I love the effort a bunch of people are putting into this system. And you know something? None of that effort, none of that time or money is going towards DRM or any lockin/lockout, activation, CD-KEY authorization or other form of authoritarian copy prevention technology that might one day cost me time and money when I try to use the software in a way other than its original intended purpose. Plus we get access to the source code. And on top of all of that, we get the right to modify and resell it.
I'd love to see Microsoft or Apple compete with that. But I know they won't. They can't. Capitalism won't let them. Not until its too late.
If I accept your EULA handcuffs I am losing my freedom to disassemble your code, redistribute it, modify it, etc.
I would rather weaken your motive to distribute your software by lowering the cost of the freedom-enforcing alternatives and help market them fiercely. My motive is to prevent your closed-source software from being created because I recognize the direct attack on my freedom it represents when it becomes "the standard" or no freedom-enforcing alternatives exist.
Right now the only freedom-enforcing software I know of is licensed with the GNU GPL. So I will happily accept those terms, modify it, market it, redistribute it and use it to prevent your software's distribution and weaken your profit motive for creating your software in the first place.
My goal is to make you go out of business because you don't like me, you just like my money.
I will be happy when the ONLY software businesses in existence sell freedom-enforcing software, have zero-stress work environments, treat employees with respect and grant them freedom of speech, dress, time and thought. Notice today how commercial proprietary businesses have dress codes and handbooks of proprietary regulations to go along with their overall attitude of oppression.
That is why we're fighting this War on Property. That's right, just like the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs we're going to make more property for everyone, so much that eventually you will just give up and have to think hard and creatively to find some other way to get more shiny gold coins. I don't care about you, your money or your proprietary ideas. You can keep it all. But I will be there whenever and wherever you attempt to spread. You and your ideas are a cancer and GNU is the cure.
You have the freedom to purchase security with your mandetory income tax deductions.
Somehow that doesn't make me feel like I'm free.
Maybe if you could lock me up in a cage and feed me more bullshit I'll forget I ever knew what freedom means. (This makes me think of those people sitting in their living rooms watching Fox News every night, I'm sure they forgot what freedom means.)
It is true I don't have the freedom to redistribute your create, but what makes you think you have the freedom to distribute your creation? If I'm your competition I have the freedom to purchase the rights to your creation or create some competition to weaken your profit motive, most likely your only motive to create. So I think it is in my best interest to prevent your creation from distribution at any cost.
Slashdot Mirror
What I'm trying to say, from Wikipedia:
While the classical theory (i.e. the tree diagrams) and semiclassical corrections (one-loop diagrams) behaved as expected, the Feynman diagrams with two (or more) loops led to ultraviolet divergences - i.e. infinite results that could not be removed because the quantized general relativity was not renormalizable, unlike Quantum electrodynamics. In popular terms, the discreteness of quantum theory is not compatible with the smoothness of Einstein's general relativity. These problems, together with some conceptual puzzles, led many physicists to believe that a theory more complete than just general relativity must regulate the behavior near the Planck length. Superstring theory finally emerged as the most promising solution; it is the only known theory in which the quantum corrections of any order to graviton scattering are finite.
Now Ima go smoke a bowl,
Peace.
Do you think police keystroke loggers should be legal? Should the GPLv3 be modified to allow the DMCA to protect the police and law enforcement officials from wiretaps, or simply not void the license even if their actions may be illegal in some locations at some times?
1. So if its already illegal then the GPL just says you can't protect it with GPLv3 licensed DRM. Whereas you could protect it with any other form of DRM, thereby creating a tunnel through which you could illegally steal end user's information and it would normally be illegal under the DMCA for anyone to break your encryption to prove your actions.
2. DRM. That's your problem with the GPLv3? It was intended to dissolve the protections the DMCA granted to DRM. DRM, inherently, violates the fundamental principals of free software. That's why the GPLv3 and the FSF don't like it. If you're so pro-DRM I suggest you use a different license and bark up a different tree. We not only disagree with you, we think you're stupid for even mentioning it.
Why use GPLv3 DRM? The GPLv3 does nothing to stop you from making BSD licensed DRM or closed source DRM or DMCA protected DRM. Why don't you go choose one of the alternative options? Now I am very curious, your comment has perked some ears, I hope that was your intent.
How close and how large does matter have to be before we can detect it? Can we detect all the rocks the size of the Earth floating between the Milky Way and Andromeda?
We are just now starting to find planets orbiting other stars. It seems to me like we're rather ignorant at this point, specifically about the mass of objects floating around in space.
But perhaps our theoretical physisists are using more advanced technology and never make mistakes. I don't know. I just know it doesn't matter, no matter how much matter is out there is doesn't matter, its all dark and gloomy and this subject is too stuffy for a lowly druggy like me to ponder anymore.
So if we're brilliant and dark matter doesn't exist did we waste all that time pretending it did?
Or if we're dumb and dark matter does exist does that mean God does too?
Y'know, I think the reason space bends is because we're all stuck in a Dali painting being watched by someone tripping on LSD.
That's as sound a scientific theory as most of what I hear from quantum physicists.
So far the only thing that makes sense is M-Theory or other alternative theories of gravity.
Neuton's model of gravity was wrong. Einstein knew this. He proved it. Get over it.
A change comes that satisfies as many people as possible.
Like the DMCA?
How transparent is the government? On the top it looks like a mess of disorganized papers, but you find a solid 6 foot thick lead wall seperating you from the classified details. It looks quite opaque to me.
Besides, I know my enemy. They do want to impose unnecessary restrictions on us that don't quite sync up with science. I won't think for a second I don't have enemies or everyone just wants to get along. No, we're surrounded by opressors who think they're better than us. We're swimming with the sharks. We would be wise not to get bit, again.
Dark matter is a stupid idea. Its just like ID, the "theory" that God created everything and ghosts.
I don't mind the idea that there's some particles we haven't detected yet. But the idea that there's some matter out there that isn't visible because its cloaked by some weird sci-fi nebula field thingy that prevents us from detecting it, but its there, and its really big and its coming right for us. Is stupid.
I mean what is more likely: that we're dumb and have yet to piece together the fundamental forces of nature to fully explain motion in our universe, or we've already solved the math and just need a few large chucks of rock to explain our discrepencies?
We're not that smart. We thought there were WMDs in Iraq. We thought global warming was a fad. We thought Bush was going to take us to Mars. We thought the Earth was the flat center of the universe a few hundred years ago. And those traditional values still drive our horribly ignorant species into the future. We'll be lucky if we can solve the equations to explain the fundamental forces of our universe before our own ignorance and stupidity kills us. Or specifically, I fear we will not act to slow down to prevent global warming until it is too late and drives us back into a feudal system where religion and our own humanity corrupt our search for the truth.. we may never escape the fate of our planet or our star, not if we don't believe or understand it.
without restriction
You mean without copyright, trademarks and patents?
I think we need to be more specific.
It would be nice if everyone could think for a moment and come to a complete and final decision about what they actually mean and want.
But its a lot harder to get independant thought out of our free society than an angry unorganized mob foaming at the mouth for "justice" and "freedom" and other concepts they barely understand.
I guess we'll have to wait until he takes some classes and developes some skills and gets a job writing and testing virus scanners or firewalls or encryption algorithms before we'll get that securely designed system.
But you don't actually seem to care about real security. I think you're only interested in punishing people you consider beneath you, children, script-kiddies, etc.
Its the same problem we get from multi-billion dollar corps like Microsoft. Its not like they couldn't solve their security problems. They could have taken out ActiveX or set sane defaults or designed the system with security in mind from the start. The reason they don't is simple. Its not the most profitable short-term strategy. In the long-term there is no strategy. So you get what we have here. Which is the way you want it. Well, you get it.
Fortunately for me, I won't ever have to deal with script-kiddie problems. I'm an expert. Security is simple, stupid.
So we're back to Napster, where its okay to copy it as long as its for personal use.
Does anyone else here feel like we're going in circles?
Copyright is stupid. Rating systems are stupid. Censorship is stupid. And you are stupid for support it in any form.
There, that makes me feel better.
BTW, you're STUPID!
Supporting copyrights, patents, and trademarks is just encouraging abuse. The same abuse you get when a government supports money, religion or politics. People get put in a place of authority because of these laws, then use their new powers to control and monopolize sectors of society. Eventually you have a choice of 10 movies, all of them good-for-the-family, none of them educational or thought provoking. And the audience...
The audience stops questioning, stops learning, stops thinking, and eventually they do what they are told like good drones, obedient and polite.
The problem is that you don't see your hacking as a problem.
Yeah? What's your point? You don't see insecure deisign as a problem? Even for a bank vault?
To tell these kids that stealing your money is wrong and slap their hand does nothing to protect your money from the real threat, people like me. We won't just stop at taking your money, we'll steal your whole identity and use whatever we need to get the next set of credentials. You're just a small fish in a big pond. I think you would be wise to listen to the little kids, who are only trying to show you how someone far more sinister could easily bypass your security.
I think you would be wise to think for yourself and question authority, instead of interrogating peons. If you truely believe children are a threat to your society you have more serious problems than can be addressed in this post. I'd suggest psychelogical help, but its unlikely any amount of therapy can correct the cancerous ideology that's consuming your soul.
http://www.sofa-king.com/
I think some ideas are too good to not be pirated..
From the license you have yet to read:
...
Regardless of any other provision of this License, no permission is given to distribute covered works that illegally invade users' privacy, nor for modes of distribution that deny users that run covered works the full exercise of the legal rights granted by this License.
No covered work constitutes part of an effective technological protection measure: that is to say, distribution of a covered work as part of a system to generate or access certain data constitutes general permission at least for development, distribution and use, under this License, of other software capable of accessing the same data.
For a brief description may I suggest you read this forum, specifically "Is PGP a a DRM system?" by Wol, before you write too much about how the sky is falling and software licensed by the GPLv3 will be shunned by the media industry. It will only be shunned by those businesses in support of the DMCA. It will be adopted by individuals like me and businesses that fear legal reprocussions, disagree with the DMCA, or get a kick out of poking holes through the dumbest laws in the land like forwarding ports through your company's firewall with ssh.
There's nothing they can do to stop us. We've already won. The ignorant masses need only wait. No, we won't pirate mp3s for them or give them free movies. But we will prevent anyone from protecting GPLv3 protected copyrighted works with the DMCA. The GPLv3 shields us from the same loops holes the DMCA uses to protect copyrighted works from your personal fair use. You don't understand this, I know. So I can provide further explanation if and when you become interested.
Did you read the license?
Of course not. You just comment away, broadcasting your opinions all over without actually doing any research.
BTW, the GPLv3 does not ban DRM, in case you missed that part. It just pokes holes through the DMCA. Please, now, for your own education, go RTFL!
so in the end you end up as a small time group instead of people who changed the world.
Or in the end you are the people changing the world, but not fast enough to get the ignorant masses to stop being sofa king ignorant.
To me, there's a huge difference between free software and free content, and it seems to me that this stance in GPL3 is essentailly saying that if you want to make the former, you've got to embrace the latter as well.
Is that what is says?
That's not what I read.
Look, its a software license. It governs the software that falls under its protection. Its protection pokes holes through laws like the DMCA which state that you cannot decrypt anything that has been encrypted for the purpose of protecting its copyright. The GPLv3 simply says you can decrypt it and reverse engineer it legally. It doesn't say its illegal to add DRM to a Linux distro, you just can't prevent anyone from getting access to the source code for any GPLv3 software by encrypting it and hiding behind the DMCA.
God, would you people please read the license before wasting my time with your ignorant opinions?
It actually hurts to try to follow your logic.
I don't know about usability, at least not to start, but my goal is to make something you configure once through some simple interface and don't have to worry about, it will email you or contact you somehow if and when it needs attention, etc.
I love the UNIX way of doing things, keeping it simple and efficient, only report errors, etc. But that doesn't mean it can't be usable and pleasant to look at.. I think it just takes a little creativity..
I'm talking about 2TB of redundant storage, about 3TB of physical storage, plus encryption.. for around $4k. And at the same price in about 6 months it could have 3TB of redundant storage.
It does line speed over 100Mb and can easily handle 200+Mb.
DVD backups and web based configuration..
but its not exactly a shiny new XServe..
In a perfect world we wouldn't have this discussion.
There's more to 3D graphics APIs than cutting-edge gaming features.
OpenGL was originally designed for professional 3D graphic modelling, not gaming.
That it does so well in games is an example of how efficient and well thought out it was originally designed.
Getting these new "features" into OpenGL is a no-brainer. Seriously. Children can do it.
You have a point about drivers, since most drivers are closed-source, meaning we have to rely on nVidia and ATI to provide drivers that work with OpenGL. But if they didn't it would only hurt their products. There's always competition, nobody can use their market dominance to force something this significant.
What protection?
What products exist for Windows that will protect against a new worm? What products exist that will protect against a known trojan in DRM?
When you buy anti-virus and anti-spyware software you're really just paying for insurance in case something bad happens. You're not preventing the natural disaster, just helping yourself clean up afterwards.
With OSX and Linux we've already done the work to prevent these disasters so the chances of running into a worm or trojan are far less likely.
This may requires a semi computer literate user base, so it may not be possible on Windows, but almost anyone who uses OSX and Linux "get it" which is why they are unconcerned about these threats.
The only thing you have to fear is fear itself. Remember that. Its so true.
Who's spreading the fear? Who's trying to make you affraid? What's their motive? Sometimes their only motive may be to make you feel as affraid as they already do.. Misery loves company.
Got Faith?
Me too!
Because you're cheap and stingy?
Must have touched a nerve with that one..
I'm frugal. I don't pay extra money for something because it comes in a shiny plastic case. I pay for the hardware I need and download the software I want for free. That's why I love GNU. Its far more cost efficient for me to spend my money this way. That's how I can afford to build a gigabit network of 10 2+ Ghz CPUs and 2TB of redundant encrypted storage for about the same price most people pay for a PowerMac and a PowerBook.
Now I can't use OSX and I don't have a fancy water cooled dual processor 64-bit G5 in brushed aluminum to show off to my friends, but I have everything I want. Something I couldn't afford to get from Apple. Besides, I don't think they would sell me 2TB of encrypted RAID5 storage. I don't think they even offer this option to customers like me who know what we want. Where can I get this kind of storage for around $3000? Is that even possible? I'm really curious, I would love to know, because I'm considering starting a business selling these systems for a very modest markup. I think they would be highly competitive for SoHo businesses looking for the real deal w/o the BS.
Direct3D isn't an option on my desktop, well, not without libraries that use OpenGL to do the actual rendering.
Besides, I'd rather use OpenGL for my own programs. So its unlikely it won't survive. It may not be your favorite, it may not have your favorite D3D eye candy games, but this isn't a competition about who can make the best gaming API. It isn't even really a competition. OpenGL is already the standard on my platform of choice, just like D3D is the standard on yours.
Windows is alright and OSX is pretty, but I love GNU.
I've noticed, Microsoft sure spends a lot of time and money patching their OS and making sure hackers like me can't easily activate it when we move our harddrives between PCs. And Apple has been trying hard to keep me from copying any of those songs my friends purchase from iTunes. And now OSX will only run on Apple x86 hardware, even though it may have drivers for another PC and be able to run just find on it. Some people might even be willing to pay the $130 retail price to be able to use it. But that's not for me.
If I want it I know I can get it. You see, I have friends that know all about Windows XP activation and how to get around it. And they know all about OSX and how to crack it too. I can even steal music from iTunes. But why don't I?
Because I love GNU. I love the effort a bunch of people are putting into this system. And you know something? None of that effort, none of that time or money is going towards DRM or any lockin/lockout, activation, CD-KEY authorization or other form of authoritarian copy prevention technology that might one day cost me time and money when I try to use the software in a way other than its original intended purpose. Plus we get access to the source code. And on top of all of that, we get the right to modify and resell it.
I'd love to see Microsoft or Apple compete with that. But I know they won't. They can't. Capitalism won't let them. Not until its too late.
If I accept your EULA handcuffs I am losing my freedom to disassemble your code, redistribute it, modify it, etc.
I would rather weaken your motive to distribute your software by lowering the cost of the freedom-enforcing alternatives and help market them fiercely. My motive is to prevent your closed-source software from being created because I recognize the direct attack on my freedom it represents when it becomes "the standard" or no freedom-enforcing alternatives exist.
Right now the only freedom-enforcing software I know of is licensed with the GNU GPL. So I will happily accept those terms, modify it, market it, redistribute it and use it to prevent your software's distribution and weaken your profit motive for creating your software in the first place.
My goal is to make you go out of business because you don't like me, you just like my money.
I will be happy when the ONLY software businesses in existence sell freedom-enforcing software, have zero-stress work environments, treat employees with respect and grant them freedom of speech, dress, time and thought. Notice today how commercial proprietary businesses have dress codes and handbooks of proprietary regulations to go along with their overall attitude of oppression.
That is why we're fighting this War on Property. That's right, just like the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs we're going to make more property for everyone, so much that eventually you will just give up and have to think hard and creatively to find some other way to get more shiny gold coins. I don't care about you, your money or your proprietary ideas. You can keep it all. But I will be there whenever and wherever you attempt to spread. You and your ideas are a cancer and GNU is the cure.
Just... great.
You have the freedom to purchase security with your mandetory income tax deductions.
Somehow that doesn't make me feel like I'm free.
Maybe if you could lock me up in a cage and feed me more bullshit I'll forget I ever knew what freedom means. (This makes me think of those people sitting in their living rooms watching Fox News every night, I'm sure they forgot what freedom means.)
It is true I don't have the freedom to redistribute your create, but what makes you think you have the freedom to distribute your creation? If I'm your competition I have the freedom to purchase the rights to your creation or create some competition to weaken your profit motive, most likely your only motive to create. So I think it is in my best interest to prevent your creation from distribution at any cost.
Now that's progress.