Wow, you and your (sad) buddies just proved my point by again modding down a valid opinion. You are damaging the purpose of the FSF by doing this, because word is: GPL zealots are assholes.
Part of the hypocrisy is that FSF supporters frequently mod down anyone who does not have their exact opinion on Slashdot. If the poster isn't a "troll", it's otherwise because the poster completely misunderstood, or is a moron, or all of the above. No freedom of thought for you, buddy! The GPLv3 fits nicely in this world view - it's heading more and more in the direction of "if you are not with us - you are against us", where even people who choose other open source licenses are bashed, because these are not free, as in their definition of it. Funny thing is, the creator of the software that was the biggest catalyst of the GPL, Linus Torvald, completely distances himself from any religious part of the FSF and the GPL , sees it just as a deal to get stuff back, does respect the choices of others, and calls MIT/BSD the most free license.
FFY, Google prime strategy against competition has been to create as big a barrier of entrance to the market as possible, in other words, the opposite of the behavior you suggest they should show.
Why on earth would I want to, of all things, authenticate using a 3rd party propriety system from a vendor with proven business practices like MS? That seems like the very last thing I want to do. And I haven't even mentioned the outages, so your uptime depends on MS. What are you gonna do when that happens, call them? I have a much better idea, Bill. Why don't you use my unified login system. I've made a version in Visual Basic especially for you.
So how does this make this free? I have to pay a monthly bill for health insurance, and because of the commercial nature nowadays of health care, that bill increases every year. Pay a huge increasing sum each month != free health care.
>He pays some ridiculous amount of money monthly, 10 or 20 Euros, and gets high speed broadband, TV (including the porn channels) and phone. His mortgage is 3.8%. Sex of any kind is not against the law and he can travel to any country in the EU without even slowing down as he drives across the border. At the risk of going off topic, do I need to add that health care and education are free.
Well at least get it right. I'm actually from the Netherlands, I pay 25 euro for 20MBit, which is the best deal around, and does not not include TV which costs another 10-15 euro, but without the porn. The mortgage is 4.8%. At the risk of adding more to the pain, neither health care nor education are free nor cheap. Cheaper than in the USA, yes.
Gosh I guess the Wikia people and investors are really stupid, that they failed to see what any layman can come up with after reading that announcement. Amazing they didn't consider those issues before, and we have to read the clear truth on Slashdot instead. Either that, or:
>Wikia is a... reminiscent of Kazaa
Comparing Kazaa to Wikia is rather over the top as Wikia doesn't install spyware and ad-serving crap. A bit of FUD?
>Distributing the web crawl isn't that big a win
>Besides, what's the selling point?
What's the selling point of open source software? What's the selling point of Linux? We got Windows Vista! You're missing the whole point: it's about open search. It's about not knowing how exactly Google determines something should go to the top. It's about privacy. You didn't get it.
>Remember, you can't trust the client.
So you crawl content from multiple sources and filter out the bad clients.
That's not what you said, thank you for your new statement. What you said was a copy of RMS, about his redefinition of "freedom" for his personal world view. It's funny all his friends from yesteryear praise him for what he has achieved, but make fun of the ideology part. If only it could have been a simple "I want code back" license, an agreement, like it really is, without the crap stuffed into it that polarized the hacker scene and for many is just a way to sell, well that you want stuff back, it would have been fine.
GPL is a license for people who can't talk about it without FUDding some other respected open source license, where they don't do that kind of thing. Whenever you see FUD about other open source licenses when someone is talking about the GPL, be aware, be very aware... and tell them reality is Webkit.
I've used my brain. What makes you think everybody who doesn't agree with you, didn't use their brain, and you can use terminology like you did? It's a stupid thing to say, unless you think people who don't use their brains argue about Stallman on Slashdot. Puh-lease. That's why you don't deserve counterarguments. It ain't that hard. Grow up and use your own brain for once, instead of mirroring the thoughts of another person like a lemming and acting like a simple fanboy.
Ah yes, "you don't understand" and "you are stupid." again. No sir, -you- don't understand, and -you- are stupud with your fabricated arguments and FUDding anything which is not entirely your opinion. Sir, get a mind of your own, and learn some respect. Your lack of respect for others is disgusting.
>So please stop spreading FUD and mis-conceptions about Free software
Ah yes, the usual reply to critics of Stallman/the GPL. "You don't understand." "You are stupid." I think -that's- amoral. Know what? A black box ain't amoral. It's sold as a black box. The GPL is not about freedom, it's a arrangement to get stuff back. Freedom is what you read about on the site of Amnesty International. A redefinition of that word to serve your puny software purpose, is called "decadence". If you think otherwise, perhaps you should empathically try to imagine how true victims of a lack of freedom (see Amnesty's site) would feel about someone who redefined it for software programming and a mis-conception about black box morality, and someone who can only apply that kind of luxury live philophosy, because he was born on a very rich, capitalist country. Sir, -you- are stupid. (I don't really mean that, but hey, I'm freely copying your demeanor.)
I haven't read magazines for over a decade except for individual articles pointed to by RSS.
This was because of three reasons:
1) Magazines were always late, you read about it somewhere else first;
2) Magazines don't have the best people. The best people are out there doing it, not reporting about it;
3) Their advertisers are equal to the subjects of their articles.
This all combined means I can read on dead tree or C|NET the not-so-critical article about Foo, by someone who has less expert knowledge about the subject, just after we finished discussing it on blogs or fora and moved on to the next subject. Yeah this is great.
Because of 2) I don't think there is much one can do about it, if you'd wish to. There are always better experts elsewhere. But if they want to try to salvage some, perhaps they should start by targeting other advertisers. Writing about Foo and wanting ad money from Foo doesn't combine well. But tech readers don't only spend money on tech stuff. For example, they have to shave, and many have to shave more regularly too. Seek Gillette, not Logitech or Novell, as advertisers. Then maybe we can start to trust them.
To fix 2, if it's possible, they should try to become respectable aggregators of expert content by buying articles from them, where ever they are, instead of having an inner circle of writers, employees or freelance, who are economical depending on them, and thus are no experts, or they would have had "real" jobs. The guy who wrote that excellent insightful comment on the tivo forum should write an article, not some guy in an office who just finished his latest ipod review. This could be interesting for both sides, as the forum guy now makes a buck of his content and moreover his piece has much more eyeballs and a wider audience (if things work out).
Besides that, it is also still very useful with today's wide screens because
1. My editor shows a function list (and other crap) next to the code.
2. I can have 2 or 3 files open side-by-side.
and it all fits.
Yeah, but by snitching on little guys and pushing their managers, Bill earns a lot of money, which he then spends partly on charity, so everything is OK. What a great guy!
Yes. Everybody else misunderstands and is wrong, and you're morally and intellectually superior. Bah.
Look, in general the people posting on Slashdot are quite intelligent.
Being a fanboy and rebutting every single argument with your own constructed truth where you have to put down other people, is just sad. You might as well say nothing because your attitude hurts the goals of the FSL as well.
Another GPL history rewriter. How convenient. They always have to attack anything in sight, with nonsense.
The FSF does NOT predate open source, this is false. Perhaps you're confusing with the OSI?
Open source' includes a lot of pre-FSF history like the early IETF and the Tech Model Railroad Club. Opinions vary, but a lot of people refer to 1961, the year MIT took delivery of the first PDP-1 and the earliest group of self-described 'hackers' coalesced around it.
Open source is the inclusive term for the entirety of a history and a culture that transcends any of our narrow internecine disputes about licensing and propaganda. Neither the FSF nor the OSI is the axis of that history.
Our community didn't spring full-blown from Linus Torvalds's head, nor from Richard Stallman's. It includes 'free software' developers, but also tribes like those around BSD and X that are not centered on the GPL and rejected the term 'free software' with all its ideological baggage. And it includes many more to whom the GPL/anti-GPL dispute matters only a little if at all.
I for one think the GPL freedomology-rap and redefinition for their own purposes, is pure decadence from people completely disconnected from real issues of freedom, poverty and war in the world.
"Why "Open Source" misses the point of Free Software [gnu.org]" is exactly one of the reasons why so many dislike his redefinition of freedom and the RMS ideology.
That's a "great" way to discuss things. You start by saying a complete movement misses the point, and conclude that it must be FEAR.
Well really. Looks like someone is trapped in a small monkeysphere. I for one RESPECT the license choices others make and what works best for them. RMS should stop polarizing the hacker community like that and learn some respect. Or does he miss the point and is in reality full of fear of open source, et ceteblah?
Stop it. Just stop it. I know "web 2.0" is considered evil here and all problems are probably caused by it, but mouseover or a:hover is absolutely, completely unrelated to "web 2.0", nor is it an convention of it. That is just nonsense and the same as saying javascript or a div are web 2.0 inventions, just because someone used those elements for what he calls a web 2.0 site. Although I'd be pretty interested to find out how someone can either do Ajax calls with a:hover or how it does perform a social function for the community. Surely web 2.0 deserves all the cliche rants that this article results in here, but there is a time and place for things, and a different interface paradigm of the iphone and possible problems with mouseovers on existing web pages isn't one.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, you and your (sad) buddies just proved my point by again modding down a valid opinion. You are damaging the purpose of the FSF by doing this, because word is: GPL zealots are assholes.
Part of the hypocrisy is that FSF supporters frequently mod down anyone who does not have their exact opinion on Slashdot. If the poster isn't a "troll", it's otherwise because the poster completely misunderstood, or is a moron, or all of the above. No freedom of thought for you, buddy! The GPLv3 fits nicely in this world view - it's heading more and more in the direction of "if you are not with us - you are against us", where even people who choose other open source licenses are bashed, because these are not free, as in their definition of it. Funny thing is, the creator of the software that was the biggest catalyst of the GPL, Linus Torvald, completely distances himself from any religious part of the FSF and the GPL , sees it just as a deal to get stuff back, does respect the choices of others, and calls MIT/BSD the most free license.
FFY, Google prime strategy against competition has been to create as big a barrier of entrance to the market as possible, in other words, the opposite of the behavior you suggest they should show.
Why on earth would I want to, of all things, authenticate using a 3rd party propriety system from a vendor with proven business practices like MS? That seems like the very last thing I want to do. And I haven't even mentioned the outages, so your uptime depends on MS. What are you gonna do when that happens, call them? I have a much better idea, Bill. Why don't you use my unified login system. I've made a version in Visual Basic especially for you.
So how does this make this free? I have to pay a monthly bill for health insurance, and because of the commercial nature nowadays of health care, that bill increases every year. Pay a huge increasing sum each month != free health care.
>He pays some ridiculous amount of money monthly, 10 or 20 Euros, and gets high speed broadband, TV (including the porn channels) and phone. His mortgage is 3.8%. Sex of any kind is not against the law and he can travel to any country in the EU without even slowing down as he drives across the border. At the risk of going off topic, do I need to add that health care and education are free.
Well at least get it right. I'm actually from the Netherlands, I pay 25 euro for 20MBit, which is the best deal around, and does not not include TV which costs another 10-15 euro, but without the porn. The mortgage is 4.8%. At the risk of adding more to the pain, neither health care nor education are free nor cheap. Cheaper than in the USA, yes.
So... have you been making this stuff up?
Gosh I guess the Wikia people and investors are really stupid, that they failed to see what any layman can come up with after reading that announcement. Amazing they didn't consider those issues before, and we have to read the clear truth on Slashdot instead. Either that, or: ... reminiscent of Kazaa
>Wikia is a
Comparing Kazaa to Wikia is rather over the top as Wikia doesn't install spyware and ad-serving crap. A bit of FUD?
>Distributing the web crawl isn't that big a win
>Besides, what's the selling point?
What's the selling point of open source software? What's the selling point of Linux? We got Windows Vista! You're missing the whole point: it's about open search. It's about not knowing how exactly Google determines something should go to the top. It's about privacy. You didn't get it.
>Remember, you can't trust the client.
So you crawl content from multiple sources and filter out the bad clients.
That's not what you said, thank you for your new statement. What you said was a copy of RMS, about his redefinition of "freedom" for his personal world view. It's funny all his friends from yesteryear praise him for what he has achieved, but make fun of the ideology part. If only it could have been a simple "I want code back" license, an agreement, like it really is, without the crap stuffed into it that polarized the hacker scene and for many is just a way to sell, well that you want stuff back, it would have been fine.
GPL is a license for people who can't talk about it without FUDding some other respected open source license, where they don't do that kind of thing. Whenever you see FUD about other open source licenses when someone is talking about the GPL, be aware, be very aware... and tell them reality is Webkit.
FYI I'm in Western Europe and am paying 24 euros/month for 20mbit + voice.
You don't leave much of an impression with standard rabbit fanboy behavior.
I've used my brain. What makes you think everybody who doesn't agree with you, didn't use their brain, and you can use terminology like you did? It's a stupid thing to say, unless you think people who don't use their brains argue about Stallman on Slashdot. Puh-lease. That's why you don't deserve counterarguments. It ain't that hard. Grow up and use your own brain for once, instead of mirroring the thoughts of another person like a lemming and acting like a simple fanboy.
Ah yes, "you don't understand" and "you are stupid." again. No sir, -you- don't understand, and -you- are stupud with your fabricated arguments and FUDding anything which is not entirely your opinion. Sir, get a mind of your own, and learn some respect. Your lack of respect for others is disgusting.
>So please stop spreading FUD and mis-conceptions about Free software
Ah yes, the usual reply to critics of Stallman/the GPL. "You don't understand." "You are stupid." I think -that's- amoral. Know what? A black box ain't amoral. It's sold as a black box. The GPL is not about freedom, it's a arrangement to get stuff back. Freedom is what you read about on the site of Amnesty International. A redefinition of that word to serve your puny software purpose, is called "decadence". If you think otherwise, perhaps you should empathically try to imagine how true victims of a lack of freedom (see Amnesty's site) would feel about someone who redefined it for software programming and a mis-conception about black box morality, and someone who can only apply that kind of luxury live philophosy, because he was born on a very rich, capitalist country. Sir, -you- are stupid. (I don't really mean that, but hey, I'm freely copying your demeanor.)
I haven't read magazines for over a decade except for individual articles pointed to by RSS.
This was because of three reasons:
1) Magazines were always late, you read about it somewhere else first;
2) Magazines don't have the best people. The best people are out there doing it, not reporting about it;
3) Their advertisers are equal to the subjects of their articles.
This all combined means I can read on dead tree or C|NET the not-so-critical article about Foo, by someone who has less expert knowledge about the subject, just after we finished discussing it on blogs or fora and moved on to the next subject. Yeah this is great.
Because of 2) I don't think there is much one can do about it, if you'd wish to. There are always better experts elsewhere. But if they want to try to salvage some, perhaps they should start by targeting other advertisers. Writing about Foo and wanting ad money from Foo doesn't combine well. But tech readers don't only spend money on tech stuff. For example, they have to shave, and many have to shave more regularly too. Seek Gillette, not Logitech or Novell, as advertisers. Then maybe we can start to trust them.
To fix 2, if it's possible, they should try to become respectable aggregators of expert content by buying articles from them, where ever they are, instead of having an inner circle of writers, employees or freelance, who are economical depending on them, and thus are no experts, or they would have had "real" jobs. The guy who wrote that excellent insightful comment on the tivo forum should write an article, not some guy in an office who just finished his latest ipod review. This could be interesting for both sides, as the forum guy now makes a buck of his content and moreover his piece has much more eyeballs and a wider audience (if things work out).
Besides that, it is also still very useful with today's wide screens because
1. My editor shows a function list (and other crap) next to the code.
2. I can have 2 or 3 files open side-by-side. and it all fits.
Yeah, but by snitching on little guys and pushing their managers, Bill earns a lot of money, which he then spends partly on charity, so everything is OK. What a great guy!
So, you say the empiric evidence is false, throwing in suspicions and your anecdotal evidence.
Yes. Everybody else misunderstands and is wrong, and you're morally and intellectually superior. Bah. Look, in general the people posting on Slashdot are quite intelligent. Being a fanboy and rebutting every single argument with your own constructed truth where you have to put down other people, is just sad. You might as well say nothing because your attitude hurts the goals of the FSL as well.
The FSF does NOT predate open source, this is false. Perhaps you're confusing with the OSI?
Open source' includes a lot of pre-FSF history like the early IETF and the Tech Model Railroad Club. Opinions vary, but a lot of people refer to 1961, the year MIT took delivery of the first PDP-1 and the earliest group of self-described 'hackers' coalesced around it.
Open source is the inclusive term for the entirety of a history and a culture that transcends any of our narrow internecine disputes about licensing and propaganda. Neither the FSF nor the OSI is the axis of that history.
Our community didn't spring full-blown from Linus Torvalds's head, nor from Richard Stallman's. It includes 'free software' developers, but also tribes like those around BSD and X that are not centered on the GPL and rejected the term 'free software' with all its ideological baggage. And it includes many more to whom the GPL/anti-GPL dispute matters only a little if at all.
I for one think the GPL freedomology-rap and redefinition for their own purposes, is pure decadence from people completely disconnected from real issues of freedom, poverty and war in the world.
"Why "Open Source" misses the point of Free Software [gnu.org]" is exactly one of the reasons why so many dislike his redefinition of freedom and the RMS ideology.
That's a "great" way to discuss things. You start by saying a complete movement misses the point, and conclude that it must be FEAR.
Well really. Looks like someone is trapped in a small monkeysphere. I for one RESPECT the license choices others make and what works best for them. RMS should stop polarizing the hacker community like that and learn some respect. Or does he miss the point and is in reality full of fear of open source, et ceteblah?
Stop it. Just stop it. I know "web 2.0" is considered evil here and all problems are probably caused by it, but mouseover or a:hover is absolutely, completely unrelated to "web 2.0", nor is it an convention of it. That is just nonsense and the same as saying javascript or a div are web 2.0 inventions, just because someone used those elements for what he calls a web 2.0 site. Although I'd be pretty interested to find out how someone can either do Ajax calls with a:hover or how it does perform a social function for the community. Surely web 2.0 deserves all the cliche rants that this article results in here, but there is a time and place for things, and a different interface paradigm of the iphone and possible problems with mouseovers on existing web pages isn't one.
http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.as p?productID=13753&ta=detail_img&pi=Y&st=5
Google links to newspaper stories that feature ads, so Google should get part of the revenue.
You can't make money buying a toilet either. So you're saying you saved yourself that expense and crap on the floor? Or was it on the neighbors lawn?