"Sure, if the assistant principle had somehow shutdown the web site this might be justified, but he did not. He merely punished the student for violating the rules of the school, which to my mind is within his rights."
I'm assuming that you mean "principal" when you say "principle". Buy a dictionary. =)
Unfairly suspending a student is actionable under current case law. Additionally, nothing done by a student off of school property can usually be considered as grounds for a suspension.
"Was the web site downloadable on school PCs? If so, this is no different than a student being suspended for distributing an obscene parody pamphlet, or running down the halls yelling obscene things about the assistant principle."
If the student is distributing a web page, pamphlet, etc. on school grounds, this is actionable, but if students at school are accessing a web site through the school's internet connection, then obviously the school is distributing the web page _in the school_, not the student.
"Freedom of speech is certainly sacrosanct, but this boy's freedom of speech was not violated -"
How is this not prior restraint? Or are you arguing that a school isn't a government agency, or that it's rules somehow don't fit the mould? Anyway, that's not what the case is about, so I'm not going to argue about it.
"he did not have to take down his web site (though he may have of his own accord)." He could have broken the rules and gotten a suspension, right.
"In the same way, you have every right to put up an independent parody web site criticizing your employer, but don't expect to keep your job when they find out."
Right... But, similarily, you could always go after them for wrongful termination.
I see RMS' point; technically speaking, GNU/Linux is more correct. And, I feel that the GNU project's assistance to the Linux community should be more widely recognized. But, RMS' insistence on the naming issue is most reminiscent of the Open Group's guidelines for the use of its Unix trademark, which mandated, for example, that covered operating systems always be refered to as "Unix operating systems" and never just "Unix". (That trademark has changed hands many times over the years, and is now so tenuous due to common usage and non-enforcement as to be almost unenforceable.)
I think that Mr. Stallman should at this point stand back and let users formulate their own speech patterns as they choose.
As someone else points out in another thread, there is much software in the typical linux distribution that falls either in the GNU or Linux categories. (And they also incorrectly assume that "GNU" refers to all GPLed software, and not just that software created as part of the GNU project.) As such, I'm thinking that "Linux-based unix distribution" or something like that would be more appropriate.
"The fact that I can't make a direct system call (and bypassing the LGPL'ed glibc) in Linux without GPL'ing my software is nauseating. The fact that I can't use the GNU regular expression library without GPLing my software is even more frustrating. What is the point of a library you can't use because of licensing issues?"
Aside: Why would you need to staticly link to the regexp library? Why not just dynamicly link to it?
Also, why not just do calls through glibc instead of doing direct calls?
In the eyes of many GPLed library writers, if you refuse to GPL your code, then what you get (not being able to use GPLed libraries) is appropriate punishment for inflicting a non-free license on your users.
Obviously, if you can convince the code author that whatever licensing you are using is sufficiently free for them not to punish you with a linking prohibition, they can add a license exception to specifically allow linking with it.
Generally speaking, I think that attracting developers of non-free code to high quality primarily free platforms while allowing them to link proprietary source code serves free sofware advocates writing libraries better than forcing GPLing of software linked to their libraries would. But that's a choice for library writers to make.
"the plus operator '+'" is not an assertion. How could it be proven or disproven? That would be like me asserting "rubber chicken" or "walking to the store to buy a new package of razor blades" or "pink" or "five o'clock".
Please take an introductory algebra course before you go using the word "axiom". 1+1=2 is not an axiom, but is provable from axioms of the natural numbers, assuming the axiom symbolic "+" and "=", and assuming that "2" is the successor to "1" and that "1" is the unit value.
But that the statements are qualified does not make them any less part of the category that was identified.
Science: "all you can do is approximate the truth more and more closely." Please replace "truth" with "experimental results". Thank you.
What is an unqualified statement?
Your statement about reindeer is a qualified statement.. It depends on the definitions of "reindeer", "flying", etc. Is there such a thing as an unqualified statement?
Oh man... The funniest bad translation I've seen was the "do not leave in direct sunlight"-type note that came inside my case logic(tm) cd case. It's too bad that I didn't save it... Anyone know the one I'm talking about?
Heh... Law enforcement people who natter on about the dangers of encryption (or privacy in general), but who like to call irc channels full of anonymous kiddie pr0n traders "online pedophile rings" after they bust them to get more media attention, and who confiscate equipment when serving search warrants and then keep it indefinitely as punishment for _not_ having committed a crime, get more laughs than sympathy from me.
"Now I'm not saying that this technology should be stopped, but with all new technology, there has to be regulation to ensure it is not used."
With statements like that one, this guy should consider a career in politics.
Huh? A levy on computer or media prices, when it is only to offset increased permission to copy that is granted (e.g. Canada's blank audio media levy, which coincided with the granting of permission for Canadians to make copies for personal use of audio recordings - even those they don't own) seems like a pretty fair trade to me... How is this overregulation? Sure, sometimes the group benefitting from the increased freedoms and the group paying for them are disjoint... I agree that this difference should be minimised as much as possible. But, many (myself included) would argue that the opposite (overzealous intellectual property law) is more truly overregulation.
Slashdot Mirror
Nuclear weapons testing, you mean? A d-u reactor isn't particularly a weapon. =) I know of no general radioactive materials usage ban...
"A weak CDN Dollar is the reason why we have a tremendous export surplus with the US." Uh... Or, v.v... =)
"tremendous" -- no. (viz. Japan)
Congratulations. You have now successfully learned the concept of a continent. Please advance to grade two.
Really? Why would that be?
Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.? (AECL)
It was published in the school by the school, not by the student. Again, learn how to use the language properly, please. =)
"Sure, if the assistant principle had somehow shutdown the web site this might be justified, but he did not. He merely punished the student for violating the rules of the school, which to my mind is within his rights."
I'm assuming that you mean "principal" when you say "principle". Buy a dictionary. =)
Unfairly suspending a student is actionable under current case law. Additionally, nothing done by a student off of school property can usually be considered as grounds for a suspension.
"Was the web site downloadable on school PCs? If so, this is no different than a student being suspended for distributing an obscene parody pamphlet, or running down the halls yelling obscene things about the assistant principle."
If the student is distributing a web page, pamphlet, etc. on school grounds, this is actionable, but if students at school are accessing a web site through the school's internet connection, then obviously the school is distributing the web page _in the school_, not the student.
"Freedom of speech is certainly sacrosanct, but this boy's freedom of speech was not violated -"
How is this not prior restraint? Or are you arguing that a school isn't a government agency, or that it's rules somehow don't fit the mould? Anyway, that's not what the case is about, so I'm not going to argue about it.
"he did not have to take down his web site (though he may have of his own accord)." He could have broken the rules and gotten a suspension, right.
"In the same way, you have every right to put up an independent parody web site criticizing your employer, but don't expect to keep your job when they find out."
Right... But, similarily, you could always go after them for wrongful termination.
And, as we all know, everyone uses windows. =)
I see RMS' point; technically speaking, GNU/Linux is more correct. And, I feel that the GNU project's assistance to the Linux community should be more widely recognized. But, RMS' insistence on the naming issue is most reminiscent of the Open Group's guidelines for the use of its Unix trademark, which mandated, for example, that covered operating systems always be refered to as "Unix operating systems" and never just "Unix". (That trademark has changed hands many times over the years, and is now so tenuous due to common usage and non-enforcement as to be almost unenforceable.)
I think that Mr. Stallman should at this point stand back and let users formulate their own speech patterns as they choose.
As someone else points out in another thread, there is much software in the typical linux distribution that falls either in the GNU or Linux categories. (And they also incorrectly assume that "GNU" refers to all GPLed software, and not just that software created as part of the GNU project.) As such, I'm thinking that "Linux-based unix distribution" or something like that would be more appropriate.
"The fact that I can't make a direct system call (and bypassing the LGPL'ed glibc) in Linux without GPL'ing my software is nauseating. The fact that I can't use the GNU regular expression library without GPLing my software is even more frustrating. What is the point of a library you can't use because of licensing issues?"
Aside: Why would you need to staticly link to the regexp library? Why not just dynamicly link to it?
Also, why not just do calls through glibc instead of doing direct calls?
In the eyes of many GPLed library writers, if you refuse to GPL your code, then what you get (not being able to use GPLed libraries) is appropriate punishment for inflicting a non-free license on your users.
Obviously, if you can convince the code author that whatever licensing you are using is sufficiently free for them not to punish you with a linking prohibition, they can add a license exception to specifically allow linking with it.
Generally speaking, I think that attracting developers of non-free code to high quality primarily free platforms while allowing them to link proprietary source code serves free sofware advocates writing libraries better than forcing GPLing of software linked to their libraries would. But that's a choice for library writers to make.
My meme is better than your meme! (or so my meme tells me...)
Arguing about the answers to undecidable questions is pointless. (But it's sure lots of fun. =)
Were you trying to respond?
"the plus operator '+'" is not an assertion. How could it be proven or disproven? That would be like me asserting "rubber chicken" or "walking to the store to buy a new package of razor blades" or "pink" or "five o'clock".
Please take an introductory algebra course before you go using the word "axiom". 1+1=2 is not an axiom, but is provable from axioms of the natural numbers, assuming the axiom symbolic "+" and "=", and assuming that "2" is the successor to "1" and that "1" is the unit value.
"do not exist independant of the human mind" -- was that what you meant to say? Obviously, they're independent of physics.
But that the statements are qualified does not make them any less part of the category that was identified.
Science: "all you can do is approximate the truth more and more closely." Please replace "truth" with "experimental results". Thank you.
What is an unqualified statement?
Your statement about reindeer is a qualified statement.. It depends on the definitions of "reindeer", "flying", etc. Is there such a thing as an unqualified statement?
WTF is a negative assertion?
Ok, Signal 11: What is the highest prime number?
You're on crack. Math isn't physics, fool. =)
Oh man... The funniest bad translation I've seen was the "do not leave in direct sunlight"-type note that came inside my case logic(tm) cd case. It's too bad that I didn't save it... Anyone know the one I'm talking about?
Heh... Law enforcement people who natter on about the dangers of encryption (or privacy in general), but who like to call irc channels full of anonymous kiddie pr0n traders "online pedophile rings" after they bust them to get more media attention, and who confiscate equipment when serving search warrants and then keep it indefinitely as punishment for _not_ having committed a crime, get more laughs than sympathy from me.
"Now I'm not saying that this technology should be stopped, but with all new technology, there has to be regulation to ensure it is not used."
With statements like that one, this guy should consider a career in politics.
What kind of "abuse" (definition varies) would constitute a valid reason to sieze my computer or read my email?
Huh? A levy on computer or media prices, when it is only to offset increased permission to copy that is granted (e.g. Canada's blank audio media levy, which coincided with the granting of permission for Canadians to make copies for personal use of audio recordings - even those they don't own) seems like a pretty fair trade to me... How is this overregulation? Sure, sometimes the group benefitting from the increased freedoms and the group paying for them are disjoint... I agree that this difference should be minimised as much as possible. But, many (myself included) would argue that the opposite (overzealous intellectual property law) is more truly overregulation.
Sorry... How is that a misprint? =)
Twice as much? Time to give whatever you're smoking a break. =)
Any credibility this post had went out the window with the last sentence. =)
So, why do they sell modems, then?