Agreed, and wholeheartedly so. I don't mind having two entries under the word "hacker" in the dictionary (hell, it's happened to better words before, right?) The warez dudes (and their Biff Alphabet) can have IRC all to themselves for all I care. As far as icons go, Mitnick is no Mandela.
But his rights as an accused criminal were either definately violated or walked the line too closely. IANAL, FWIW, so YMMV.:-)
Mr. Torvalds, Mr. Stallman, Mr. Wall: you stand before this court to face the most serious charge of hacking libre, a criminal offense against the First Church of Rand. Our game theorists have run simulations which show that your act will lead to the eventual marginalization of our precious dogma; we predict that your crime will inevitably reach treasonous proportions on June 27, 2012 -- how plead you?
Linus: It wasn't just me; a lot of other people helped.
Richard: Will I be allowed to redistribute a modified version of the court-record?
Larry: I sure am happy.
This court is offended by your sight. You are sentenced to copy The Fountainhead onto Big Chief Tablets with a crayon. Bailiff!
But for a large number of applications, it is next to impossible to make enough money writing (or supporting, customizing, or whatever) GPL'd software to support themselves.
I agree there with you there, but what you're saying is only trivially true insofar as there's no such thing as a one-size-fits-all license. All you are saying is that there are some problem-domains where the GPL would be a poor choice of licenses. That's a far cry from Brett's claim.
A license is just a tool. You're saying that a hammer isn't very useful when you need to drive a screw. Brett may grok this, but he's obviously holding a grudge against the hammer anyway.
[ANNOUNCEMENT] English Purity Project
on
Feature:Free Linux
·
· Score: 1
In response to infidel LetterJ, I'd like to initiate a project to recreate those parts of the English language that came from Latin, French, Norse or Spanish. Then we'll be free at last!
Hi, Brett. I think you're being disingenuous here. The GPL does not prevent money-grubbing programmers from making money from their own labor. Nay, it doesn't even prevent them from making money from GPL'd software! I say, as respectfully as I can muster, that you're talking straight out of your ass.
That's a good point (about gift-giving), and it should hold equally well for Linus -- who should have no qualms with me, from this point forward, refering to GNU/Linux as "Tux". Although I still like "Lavendar FistCheese(tm)".
Thank you Caleb, for putting it in terms that anyone should be able to understand. Anyone who, after reading your post, persists in their nomenclature-jihad (from either side!) simply isn't up to the task of understanding.
The fulfillment of RMS's dream is not a FSF-copyrighted kernel (Hurd) but a copylefted-kernel (Linux). That FSF does not hold the copyright is irrelevant. That linux is GPL'd is.
Cast off the shoes! Follow the gourd!
on
Feature:Free Linux
·
· Score: 1
No, no, it is a sign that like him we must think not of the things of the body, but of the face and head!
It makes me sad to see all of this animosity over a mere label. I accept "Linux" and "GNU/Linux" to be equivalent terms, and don't feel offended by either. Call it "Lavendar FistCheese(tm)" for all I care. Let's have a holy-war against holy-wars for a change.
There are many entries under "Moof" in the jargon file: 1) The call of Clarus the dogcow 2) Used to flag untested software (Moof!) within MacOS community.
The third definition, the one that matches the Kipling useage, is said to be used within the MSN community: 3) verb, on The Microsoft Network, the term 'moof' has gained popularity as a verb meaning 'to be suddenly disconnected by the system'. One might say 'I got moofed'.
I doubt that anyone here would admit to having used it in that sense.;-)
...but I lay claim to inventing the term "Information-Superhighway-Howdy".:-)
This is is different than what I have been hearing
on
Red Hat Backlash?
·
· Score: 1
I've heard the same rumblings here at/., but I have taken it to be a handful of anonymous trolls trying to start a flamewar. (Red Hat's GPL'd contributions to the source-pool are "proprietary"!? These trolls know not of what they speak, obviously.) True: if I were a Gartner Groupie hanging out on slashdot, I'd have written the same article, but that's only because if I were a Gartner Groupie I wouldn't have the sense to tell the difference between the pulse of the community and a few saber-rattling flame-mongers.
There's always going to be turncoats who deride their once-favorite indie band that signs on with a major label. Debian & slackware will be the cool distros, and the tragically-hip can always roll their own, riding the unstable branch of whatever packages they care to, on top of freebsd even (if linux is just too mainstream for their tastes). World domination is still inevitable.;-)
If they were to take that 90K and hire one person, that one person may fail. If, instead, they wave the same 90K in front of the noses of the world's programmers, you may get several programmers to compete for the prize, perhaps increasing the odds of success.
I'm getting it, but I had to view the html source to see it. For some odd reason, NS4.5 just gave me a blank page with a red vertical margin along the left side.
On a different subject, I want the cdindex program to have a switch to just print out the encoded url, and not launch the browser. (I wouldn't mind pasting.) I've got a wrapper script to set up to provide netscape with a special environment, and it breaks the url-passing that cdindex relies upon. And it insists on launching a new instance of netscape, rather than passing the url to an existing instance.
P.S. I thought the "shameless rip" comments in the source were amusing.
P.P.S. The first CD I tried to index was the Steve Morse Band, an instrumental guitar/bass/drums trio. Would that count as a single-artist CD, or do Van Romaine and Dave LaRue count as "artists"?;-)
That's an interesting observation. It makes me wonder how society would handle computer-simulated child pornography -- where the content was entirely synthetic (i.e. no children were involved). I would be tempted to take a step down the short & slippery slope to 1984 and ban its distribution on the basis of content alone; but, then, I have children.
I wrote a response, but it appears that I may have neglegted to submit it. (Or, maybe, I was bitten by the technical difficulties.)
I began by appealing to the definition of "citizen" that I had in my dictionary: A person who owes loyalty to and is entitled to protection of a government.
I think it's clear that the protection you want is the right to flame. What, then, is the loyalty that you owe? How can it be violated? What is the government in the case of "internet citizenry", and is treason possible? What happens when the owed-loyalty is not given?
Slashdot Mirror
But his rights as an accused criminal were either definately violated or walked the line too closely. IANAL, FWIW, so YMMV. :-)
Linus: It wasn't just me; a lot of other people helped.
Richard: Will I be allowed to redistribute a modified version of the court-record?
Larry: I sure am happy.
This court is offended by your sight. You are sentenced to copy The Fountainhead onto Big Chief Tablets with a crayon. Bailiff!
I agree there with you there, but what you're saying is only trivially true insofar as there's no such thing as a one-size-fits-all license. All you are saying is that there are some problem-domains where the GPL would be a poor choice of licenses. That's a far cry from Brett's claim.
A license is just a tool. You're saying that a hammer isn't very useful when you need to drive a screw. Brett may grok this, but he's obviously holding a grudge against the hammer anyway.
In response to infidel LetterJ, I'd like to initiate a project to recreate those parts of the English language that came from Latin, French, Norse or Spanish. Then we'll be free at last!
Hi, Brett. I think you're being disingenuous here. The GPL does not prevent money-grubbing programmers from making money from their own labor. Nay, it doesn't even prevent them from making money from GPL'd software! I say, as respectfully as I can muster, that you're talking straight out of your ass.
That's a good point (about gift-giving), and it should hold equally well for Linus -- who should have no qualms with me, from this point forward, refering to GNU/Linux as "Tux". Although I still like "Lavendar FistCheese(tm)".
Thank you Caleb, for putting it in terms that anyone should be able to understand. Anyone who, after reading your post, persists in their nomenclature-jihad (from either side!) simply isn't up to the task of understanding.
I wrote: That linux is GPL'd is [what matters].
The fulfillment of RMS's dream is not a FSF-copyrighted kernel (Hurd) but a copylefted-kernel (Linux). That FSF does not hold the copyright is irrelevant. That linux is GPL'd is.
No, no, it is a sign that like him we must think not of the things of the body, but of the face and head!
It makes me sad to see all of this animosity over a mere label. I accept "Linux" and "GNU/Linux" to be equivalent terms, and don't feel offended by either. Call it "Lavendar FistCheese(tm)" for all I care. Let's have a holy-war against holy-wars for a change.
Rent-a-gnuru?
The third definition, the one that matches the Kipling useage, is said to be used within the MSN community: 3) verb, on The Microsoft Network, the term 'moof' has gained popularity as a verb meaning 'to be suddenly disconnected by the system'. One might say 'I got moofed'.
I doubt that anyone here would admit to having used it in that sense. ;-)
Is he to blame for that emarassing bulge I walk around with all day!? That @%$*&!
...but I lay claim to inventing the term "Information-Superhighway-Howdy". :-)
I've heard the same rumblings here at /., but I have taken it to be a handful of anonymous trolls trying to start a flamewar. (Red Hat's GPL'd contributions to the source-pool are "proprietary"!? These trolls know not of what they speak, obviously.) True: if I were a Gartner Groupie hanging out on slashdot, I'd have written the same article, but that's only because if I were a Gartner Groupie I wouldn't have the sense to tell the difference between the pulse of the community and a few saber-rattling flame-mongers.
There's always going to be turncoats who deride their once-favorite indie band that signs on with a major label. Debian & slackware will be the cool distros, and the tragically-hip can always roll their own, riding the unstable branch of whatever packages they care to, on top of freebsd even (if linux is just too mainstream for their tastes). World domination is still inevitable. ;-)
If they were to take that 90K and hire one person, that one person may fail. If, instead, they wave the same 90K in front of the noses of the world's programmers, you may get several programmers to compete for the prize, perhaps increasing the odds of success.
On a different subject, I want the cdindex program to have a switch to just print out the encoded url, and not launch the browser. (I wouldn't mind pasting.) I've got a wrapper script to set up to provide netscape with a special environment, and it breaks the url-passing that cdindex relies upon. And it insists on launching a new instance of netscape, rather than passing the url to an existing instance.
P.S. I thought the "shameless rip" comments in the source were amusing.
P.P.S. The first CD I tried to index was the Steve Morse Band, an instrumental guitar/bass/drums trio. Would that count as a single-artist CD, or do Van Romaine and Dave LaRue count as "artists"? ;-)
All things being equal, I think I'd rather have a woody and a buzz right now.
I got stuck on it for hours, and had to frob the power switch.
That's an interesting observation. It makes me wonder how society would handle computer-simulated child pornography -- where the content was entirely synthetic (i.e. no children were involved). I would be tempted to take a step down the short & slippery slope to 1984 and ban its distribution on the basis of content alone; but, then, I have children.
I began by appealing to the definition of "citizen" that I had in my dictionary: A person who owes loyalty to and is entitled to protection of a government.
I think it's clear that the protection you want is the right to flame. What, then, is the loyalty that you owe? How can it be violated? What is the government in the case of "internet citizenry", and is treason possible? What happens when the owed-loyalty is not given?
In the case of the internet, what is this government, and how is this loyalty expressed or broken?
AFAIK, one can sell closed-source apps that dynamically link against LGPL'd libs, such as GTK.