It seems to me that responses to this legislation are mostly bordering on the naive. Why do people assume that the FCC is doing such a terrible job of supervising the telecommunications field? What is the basis of this assumption (name some examples)?
It should be obvious that the major beneficiaries of this legislation will be companies that already are major players in the tcom arena -- MS, AOL, ATT &c. Big companies already are slurping up the little ones left, right & center -- and now a lot of you seem to be of the opinion that this not only is great, but that we should have even more of it by eliminating all oversight of the matter.
I hope you don't get your way, because I think you're wrong. The way things are tending, a few years from now non-"portal" access to major portions of the Web is going to be a memory. We don't need to hasten that development by removing regulation of the companies that are turning the 'net into a commercial enterprise zone. Geeks on the net will be like the buffalo on the American Great Plains -- an isolated curiosity to be oogled by virtual tourists passing by on their way to the next "e-commerce" site.
Why do I forget? No, not because I call it Linux and not GNU/Linux, its because with all his complaining about it being GNU/Linux and not Linux,...what he has actually done is lost in the polatics. The more he tries to take credit for other's accomplishments, the more he removes the focus on what he DID accomplish. And yes he is doing that when he tries to call it GNU/Linux because simply put, GNU programs make up a very small portion of the programs used on the system (they may be one of the biggest contributers, but there are many).
Here's an idea. Why don't you remove every GNU item from your system and see what you have left. Of course, you're linking your kernel against GNU libraries, so at some point you're going to have to find a way to compile your kernel without glibc. You won't have bash, grep, ls, awk, sed, chmod, chown, du, mv, cp, rm... well, maybe now you're starting to get the picture.
Anyway, prove me wrong. Remove all that GNU stuff that's "not so important" and post the resulting "system" here.
Patents are the way to beat the GPL. GPL makes me release my source because I link to GPL'd libs. No problem. You can't use my source code, because I've got the patents and using it without a license is a patent violation. You can see how I did it by taking apart the product or by looking at my patent or by reading my GPL code, but you can't use it. Sorry
I think it's pretty obvious you're not sorry and that you're also a thief. You had to work "a way around" the GPL libraries in order to steal the work of all the other programmers who built the libraries. Nobody forced you to link to GPL'ed libraries. If you were an honest man, you would have refused to indulge in the trickery you brag about.
Oh well. I guess if people steal your code, you're only getting what you deserve -- and not one bit more. Turn about's fair play, isn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me that responses to this legislation are mostly bordering on the naive. Why do people assume that the FCC is doing such a terrible job of supervising the telecommunications field? What is the basis of this assumption (name some examples)?
It should be obvious that the major beneficiaries of this legislation will be companies that already are major players in the tcom arena -- MS, AOL, ATT &c. Big companies already are slurping up the little ones left, right & center -- and now a lot of you seem to be of the opinion that this not only is great, but that we should have even more of it by eliminating all oversight of the matter.
I hope you don't get your way, because I think you're wrong. The way things are tending, a few years from now non-"portal" access to major portions of the Web is going to be a memory. We don't need to hasten that development by removing regulation of the companies that are turning the 'net into a commercial enterprise zone. Geeks on the net will be like the buffalo on the American Great Plains -- an isolated curiosity to be oogled by virtual tourists passing by on their way to the next "e-commerce" site.
mp
michael@trollope.org
Here's an idea. Why don't you remove every GNU item from your system and see what you have left. Of course, you're linking your kernel against GNU libraries, so at some point you're going to have to find a way to compile your kernel without glibc. You won't have bash, grep, ls, awk, sed, chmod, chown, du, mv, cp, rm ... well, maybe now you're starting to get the picture.
Anyway, prove me wrong. Remove all that GNU stuff that's "not so important" and post the resulting "system" here.
mp
michael@trollope.org
Patents are the way to beat the GPL.
GPL makes me release my source because
I link to GPL'd libs. No problem. You
can't use my source code, because I've
got the patents and using it without a
license is a patent violation. You
can see how I did it by taking apart the
product or by looking at my patent or
by reading my GPL code, but you can't
use it. Sorry
I think it's pretty obvious you're not sorry and that you're also a thief. You had to work "a way around" the GPL libraries in order to steal the work of all the other programmers who built the libraries. Nobody forced you to link to GPL'ed libraries. If you were an honest man, you would have refused to indulge in the trickery you brag about.
Oh well. I guess if people steal your code, you're only getting what you deserve -- and not one bit more. Turn about's fair play, isn't it?
mp
michael@trollope.org