7. In security, what are your opinions about full-disclosure of software bugs?
I think it depends on what the bug does. If the bug puts users at risk, the best thing is to inform the users how to fix it, without saying how to exploit it. If the bug enables users to break DRM, the best thing is to inform the users so they can take advantage of it.
I read the bits on the forums, and whoever owns that blog is a fucking retard who's full of shit.
this weekend I will re-vamp my old 10K botnet, ready and steady
the 10K zombies aren't user PC's it are live hacked servers, which have way more power than desktops
Right. Because a ``server'' is completely different from a ``desktop'', other than the services it provides. It's not just the exact machine sitting in a different chassis running a different fucking set of services and applications.
If one wanted to argue that a botnet of servers is better than a botnet of PCs, I'm not going to debate that. But it's for reasons other than the computational capacity of the hardware -- the fact that they're connected to significantly fatter pipes is the only real difference in making a DDOS attack effective.
Also I'm really fucking drunk so YHBT IHBT HAND etc. Niggers.
I'm normally a fairly calm guy, but Stallman makes me want to fucking stab dolphins.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 5:16
>>14
Why? Because he advocates that users should live in freedom? PROTIP: Without the right to tinker with the code, you are helpless. PROTIP: Without the right share the program, you are divided.
If you have the four freedoms, you have liberty to remain autonomous and free. If you choose proprietary software, you are helpless and divided.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 5:17
Oh I forgot. IHBTC.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 6:06
>>15 Crazy free software mumbo jumbo.
Back to soviet russia, commie.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 7:46
8. What is the biggest mistake in the design of the Internet? That is outside my expertise, so I have nothing to say.
class
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 7:52
windows is malware
facepalm.jpg
big companies like microsoft, apple etc have to sole purpose of monitoring your porn habits
That is outside my expertise, so I have nothing to say.
GOGOGO UNIVERSITY EDUCATION
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 9:00
>>17
PROTIP: We encourage people to sell free software for whatever the user will bear.
I personally earn a living from selling copies of free software, charging money for support, and charging money for guarantees and charging money for customising programs. It's your own prerogative if you care to practise your right to sell free software.
>>19
His point is about control over the software. The user does not have control over proprietary software. Programmable computers are increasingly becoming an important part of our lives. Without the right to tinker with the code (and run it), the user has chosen to relinquish the autonomy they have over their life; they are helpless to help themselves and are subject to the proprietor's whims for help. Apple and MS are both equal in the manner at which they subjugate their users.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 9:47
GNU GPL == fail
BSD license = win
RMS's idea of software "freedom" has too many conditions
>>23
If everybody had the right to all four freedoms to free software, then there would be no need of the GPL as it would be superfluous. The reality is, people feel the need to trap users into helplessness (deprive users of source code or deprive the right to run modified programs) and divide users from cooperating (deprive users the right to share software or modifications to the software). The power to subjugate users into helplessness and division is not a power that is worth protecting.
If you understand this, then the GPL is very simple: give users the right to all four freedoms of free software. All that legalese is for the people that don't understand that "this licensed software is intended to guarantee the four rights to all recipients of the software".
Richard Stallmann (often referred to as RMS, although this seems to be an affectation based on the vast number of three-letter acronyms in computing) is one of the founders and director of the Free Software Foundation, and is a tireless proponent of open source. At one point he used to be a programmer, writing software such as Emacs (a text editor) and some of the GNU/Linux tools used by Debian and other free distros. Nowadays he does nothing other than give speeches about open source software, and attack projects which don't follow his ideology, such as KDE or glibc.
``In 1998 when a United Airlines plane was waiting in the queue at Washington Dulles International Airport for take-off to New Orleans (where a Usenix conference was taking place), one man stood up from his seat, demanded that they stop waiting in the queue and be permitted to deplane. Even after orders from the crew and a pilot from the cockpit he refused to sit down. The plane exited the queue and returned to the airport gangway. Security personnel ran onto the plane and removed this man, Richard Stallman, from the plane. After Richard was removed from the plane, everyone else stayed onboard and continued their journey to New Orleans.''
I'm a single atheist white man, 54, reputedly intelligent, with unusual interests in politics, science, music and dance.
I'd like to meet a woman with varied interests, curious about the world, comfortable expressing her likes and dislikes (I hate struggling to guess), delighting in her ability to fascinate a man and in being loved tenderly, who values joy, truth, beauty and justice more than "success"--so we can share bouts of intense, passionately kind awareness of each other, alternating with tolerant warmth while we're absorbed in other aspects of life.
My 23-year-old child, the Free Software Movement, occupies most of my life, leaving no room for more children, but I still have room to love a sweetheart if she doesn't need to spend time with me every day. I spend a lot of my time traveling to give speeches, often to Europe, Asia and Latin America; it would be nice if you were free to travel with me some of the time.
If you are interested, write to rms at stallman dot org and we'll see where it leads.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 14:37
Someone from /prog/ should email him and see where it leads.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 14:42
I'm a single atheist white man, 54, reputedly intelligent, with unusual interests in politics, science, music and dance. 54 What.
There was an interview with richard stallman in New Scientist this week.
Interviewer: don't some companies go out of buisness because of the gpl?
stallman: I don't care.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 17:17
RMS can suck my balls.
As long as I live I'll never use GPL'd software. Even if I didn't wholeheartedly disagree with their entire philosophy, I still wouldn't use it, if not for the simple fact that almost all GPL'd code is shite.
Thousands of monkeys who aren't good enough to get jobs where they get paid to write code are the people making GPL software. Yeah, they're so bad at code that they decide to write it for free. And of course there's no such thing as standards, or design. It's entirely "Hack it until it works!". You have 50,000 subpar programmers each hacking the application to put their little pet features into it.
Face it guys, it's never going to work in the long run. The only reason it's gotten this far is simply because you have thousands of monkeys working on it at once, simply to make up for the fact that it takes 50x longer to do anything in GPL'd software than in properly architected designs.
Think about this. Why does Open Office suck so badly? Because word processing is BORING as hell. NO ONE wakes up and says "OH BOY! I THINK I'LL MAKE A WORD PROCESSOR TODAY!". The ONLY motivation an OO developer has is "I'M GONNA FUCKING KILL MICROSOFT TODAY. CRY HAVOK AND LET LOOSE THE DOGS OF WAR. YOU WILL RUE THE DAY YOU EVER MADE SOFTWARE, MICRO$OFT! YES! I USED A DOLLAR SIGN INSTEAD OF AN 'S', SEE HOW CLEVERLY CLEVER I AM?! YOU ARE NO MATCH FOR MY WITS, BILL GATES!!!!". So you get a whole bunch of loonies, working for free, whose only purpose is to piss off Microsoft, and none of them can possibly say they actually enjoy what they're working on.
Meanwhile, Microsoft is out there going "Gosh, we need money. Let's make some new features. And pay our devs money, because hey, no one would possibly be dumb enough to want to make a word processor for free.".
I so totally forgot where I was going with this. Bottom line, Fuck RMS. Fuck him up his stupid ass.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 18:08
>>42 Exactly. I mean, it's not like anyone ever went out of business selling closed-source software.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 18:08
As long as I live I'll never use GPL'd software.
Shiichan is licensed under the GPL. Please stop posting.
I think RMS is too radical, but that line of thought is fucking stupid as well.
>>15
BS. GPL has nothing to do with freedom. If the license fucking tells you what machines you can and can't use it on (ie: Tivo and GPL3), that is the antithesis of freedom.
Freedom is FREE.
BSD = free.
GPL = shackles.
Just because you keep calling it "free" doesn't make it so.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 18:54
>>49
It's supposed to ensure a particular kind of freedom by restricting another. Of course it's about freedom.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 19:17
>>49
Four actions that you can practise with free software is the four liberties that RMS has defined. Another action that you can practise (with liberally licensed free software) is to subjuate users into helplessness and division. When a proprietor chooses to deprive other people of any of the four essential freedoms, nobody can say that the recipient is free; that recipient has relinquished their right to help themself and cooperate with their community; they may be free to reject the proprietary program at a later point, but that doesn't make them free before the rejection point.
A GPLd program will guarantee that all users have the right to practise the four freedoms; all users are guaranteed to have the liberty to help themselves and cooperate with their communities. The GPL achieves this by removing the power to deprive users of any of the four essential freedoms.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 19:33
hax my anus, you faggots
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 21:15
>>49
Wrong. The GPL3 doesn't say that. It says that you should give users the "keys" so that they can remove any technical shackles that will prevent the user from running that GPL program.
Truly free software is software which the writer is FREE to do with whatever he wants. This includes NOT BEING FORCED TO GIVE IT OUT TO MOOCHING WANKERS LIKE GPLTARDS.
What don't you get about the word "free"?
You can't fucking define 4 random freedoms and proclaim that those are the only freedoms that matter.
If GPL was free (as in FREE), then I would be free to modify a GPL program, sell it, and not be forced to give out the code. But I'm not. Because the GPL isn't actually free.
So stop repeating the lie that GPL is free. It's not. Any moron can see that. Christ, you GPLTards are worse than fucking Communist China.
"TIBET DOESN'T WANT THE DALAI LAMA TO SAVE IT. WE HAVE PROOF: THERE ARE NO MURALS OR PICTURES OF THE DALAI LAMA DISPLAYED PUBLICLY IN ALL OF CHINA"
NO SHIT TURDSTRANGLERS. YOU OUTLAWED PICTURES OF THE DALAI LAMA UNDER PENALTY OF DEATH.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 23:06
I just want to say that the GPL killed my sister. It was rather tragic, and I must say, I do harbour some resentment and ill-will towards the GPL as a result of that event.
Not that it will ever result in my performing any overt action against the GPL, for I am more of a passivist than an activist, but I just wanted to spread the word that the GPL isn't as free as some people would like you to believe.
The GPL is definitely not free. My sister paid for the GPL... with her life.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 23:14
If you want to be correct, only code released in the public domain is free. Anything with licensing requirements is less free.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-16 23:49
Your ideas about freedoms are socially irresponsible. If you can't enforce them, they might as well not exist.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 3:18
----a commercial companies take on opensauce----
GPL: i might consider using this if i didn't have to fag up my whole project by putting some lame ass hippy license on it.
freeBSD license: oh shi... i can do whatever i want with this, ofcourse i'll use it. wow, using that code was a real time saver. maybe opensauce software is actually a good idea, i'll make a point to find out more about it. maybe one day i might even contribute to a project or host an opensauce project.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 4:25
>>60
True. And this is where the anoncoreutils will be.
GPL is just like a regular commercial license, except that it restricts in a different manner.
>>63
You're a fucking faggot.
Get this through your thick skull you fucking dumbshit:
ANONCOREUTILS WILL WORK ONLY ON YOUR UBANTO AND WILL POTENTIALLY HAVE A MILLION BUGS. YOU FUCKING DUMBSHIT UNEXPERIENCED SHITHEAD.
----a commercial companies take on opensauce----
No, commercial companies should simply fuck off and vanish.
I agree with RMS 100%.
He is extreme, I'm fucking extreme. Want to write commercial code? You deserve to die. You want to abuse one of my freedoms? You deserve to die. It's that simple.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 7:32
>>65
i lol'd hard.
your either a troll or really really stupid...
who do you think 90% of people who can write code are?
programmers or students studying computers and programming.
if there are no commercial companies then thats 90% of your developers gone. and ofcourse, since noone would be writing code anymore, then no new hardware will be created to run the code.
therefore your pathetic FSF is completely self destructive and destined to fail miserably.
>>66 who do you think 90% of people who can write code are?
How would I know? programmers or students studying computers and programming.
And you know that, how?
Also, are you aware that 90% of the programmers out there are really REALLY REALLY BAD at what they are doing? And that 90% of the code out there is REALLY REALLY REALLY BAD at what it does?
Do you understand a HUGE company like Microsoft had to copy BSD's implementation of sockets? Why? Why would a huge company copy the code of a small group of people? Maybe because money doesn't make the programmer.
DO youi realize apple fucking uses the WHOLE FUCKING UNIX KERNEL AS IS AND SELLS YOU THAT SHIT
YOU ARE A FUCKING FAGGOT MOTHERFUCKER
So, first year college, faggot?
Do you have any fucking idea how people get paid? You think ubanto developers don't get paid? How the fuck do they maintain a fucking OS and a ufcking website which gets huge traffic?
PROTIP: sponsors.
Same for gnu.org and other websites. Sure, you won't become a millionare like Mr Gates, but you get what you deserve for spending time on code.
>>68
Arguably, Apple has put a lot of work into the original 4.4BSD kernel, in addition to writing what is presumably their own original window manager and all that flashy wank.
Really, I think open sores is good and all, but ultimately I'm a BSD fag and don't give a living shit what you do with my code. I write code for myself. If you want to use it, fine. If you want to make it available for others that's fine too. But who the fuck am I to tell you what not to do with material that I'm voluntarily putting into the public domain?
>>68
i cant stop laughing. seriously!
go suck RMS stallmans tiny GNU penis.
FSF can never do any good, only halt technological progress.
that viral licensing bullshit makes them just as bad as any proprietary software company
>>76
Those that don't, allow you to use licenses that do, and as a result, they also do.
So there are no licenses that "don't" except for those that restrict you from being compatible with licenses that do.
So far there's only GPL that does that, therefore GPL is truly free.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 8:45
>>75
If total freedom means being part of some little treehouse circle-jerk club, you can keep it.
The real world does not work like that. People co-operate with and help each other because that's how progress is made.
>>78 The real world does not work like that.
Then the real world doesn't like me to be free. fuck the real world.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 8:50
GPL isn't free. its just a loan.
you don't give a gift and say "here, this is yours now. but you can only use it the way that i tell you and you can't give it away without my permission and without following these rules.."
when you give a gift you say, "here. this is yours now, so you can do anything you want with it".
>>80
That's a very bad simile.
What the fuck don't you understand about "commercial companies and programmers should die?". I'm serious about it. ANYONE (or anything) who infringes my freedom should vanish.
Go code for MS code mon(k)ey.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 9:01
>>81
>"commercial companies and programmers should die?".
You're denying my freedom to work for whoever I want. Why should your freedom be of more importance than mine? After all, I'm the one writing the real code and you're just the leeching fucking maggot wanting it all for free.
>>82
I changed it to vanish, but apparently not every occurance of die.
I realized it's a big word and that yes, I do deny your freedom by doing so.
So rather, everything that denies MY freedom should vanish.
Like, licenses, code, companies, etc. Not people.
I admit I was wrong about that. I'm all for freedom of speech.
After all, I'm the one writing the real code
You seem to have associated "real" with "give me your freedom". I don't know why, but you clearly need to do some thinking about it.
After all, all I want is my freedom and you're just the leeching fucking maggot demanding to take it away.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 9:06
>>81
your denying my freedom to sell the software that a make?
should an artist be denied the freedom to sell his paintings?
should musicians be denied the freedom to sell their music?
your denying my freedom to sell the software that a make?
Have you read GPL? It allows you to do so. should an artist be denied the freedom to sell his paintings?
Yes, if it infringes one of the 4 freedoms. But as it stands, it does not, so, no, an artist should not be denied that. should musicians be denied the freedom to sell their music?
Ditto.
Please read GPL and what stallman has to say before you critisize them. As for me, I accept that I am a nutter and quite possibly wrong about a lot of things.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 9:13
>>85
according to the GPL i wouldn't be allowed to paint and sell a picture of a building that was not constructed by me
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 9:20
Dear GPL supporters,
Grow up and let the adults talk. When you go out and get a real job in the real world, maybe one day you'll realise just how silly this all is.
Face it, guys, RMS is just stealing your work and getting you to pay him for giving speeches about nonsense. You're being scammed.
You can sit here and scream about how evil closed-source software is, but the fact of the matter is this: Without companies like IBM and Microsoft, there would be no computer industry at all. You wouldn't have your cheap computers and you wouldn't be able to write your free (as in shackled) software at all.
>>86
Again, bad simile and not true anyway. >>87
Dear Ignorant brainwashed faggot,
choke on a wall of dicks.
Sincerely yours.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 9:35
The GPL makes me cum hard
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 10:05
>>88
Real mature. Remember what I said about growing up? Yeah. Directed at you.
Prove me wrong. "Evil" corporations like IBM and MS are responsible for the entire existence of the computer industry. Without them, you wouldn't be able to have your cheap little box that you program loonix on, because without software driving sales, no one would have wanted computer hardware, and no company would have even bothered making hardware if there wasn't a profitable market to enter.
Go around and claim they're evil all you want, but face the facts. They're responsible for the existence of the computing industry.
Trying to destroy that industry with your GPL nonsense is simply foolish quixoticism.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 10:31
>>90
Yep, agreed on the first part. Without IBM earlier, MS later, there would be no real computers now indeed. But, you see, they've done their stuff. They laid the foundations, now it's time to improve what they've done. Big corporations have the means to get things going, but it's not hard to join an already started project. That's when GNU kicks in, with programmers that have the time to be bothered with minor issues. And yes, a mass of programmers concerned with minor issues improves stuff over time.
But thanks anyway, I'll remember to say hi to the first lizard I see for you -- we evolved from these after all!
>>90
I have no qualms with proprietary software, but there's nothing wrong with free software either. This whole "BAWWW, THE GPL KILLS BUSINESSES" thing is bullshit. If your software is better than the free alternative, it will never die. The GIMP will never replace Photoshop. Ever.
Also, what about proprietary freeware, dipshit? Making Netscape and IE free made it so no one else could (successfully) charge for a non-mobile web browser. Microsoft fucked Netscape over and killed their revenue by giving away IIS. Windows Media Player being free and bundled killed Real (thanks God). IBM successfully made it so no one else could charge for a Java IDE by funding Eclipse.
Newsflash: Your "Evil" corporations like IBM and MS are "destroying" the computer industry as much as the GPL is.
Making some things free is necessary for the computer software industry to thrive, who the fuck is going to pay for all the libraries installed on their system? Why should a hobbyist programmer pay for a compiler? Why should I pay for something easy to implement that would take me a day to write?
>>93
I'm the GPL fag, well said.
It's a shame I have a hard time expressing what I'm trying to say.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 11:39
i have nothing against free software, but GPL software is just as bad as any commercial software and RMS is a blatant hypocrite
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 11:45
>>93
"I have no qualms with proprietary software, but there's nothing wrong with free software either. This whole "BAWWW, THE GPL KILLS BUSINESSES" thing is bullshit. If your software is better than the free alternative, it will never die. The GIMP will never replace Photoshop. Ever."
While that is true, you're neglecting the effect it has on small companies.
We had a freetard manager come in last year and insist to management that we're paying MS far too much money for development tools. He showed them a bunch of spreadsheets, and on paper, obviously, "free" is going to look a shitload better than commercial software. So management bought into it, hook, line and sinker.
Fast forward a few months. We ditched all of our MS servers and workstations, replaced them with loonix.
Around 80% of the company could figure out how to do anything. Loonix is designed by and for hackers, and was never meant to be used by the average joe. Within 2 months, 40% of the support department had quit because they couldn't stand the environment. It took them 10x longer to do anything, and management gave them all negative reviews because of lower productivity.
Our computers kept crashing. We couldn't find proper drivers for most things. Our IT department's ticket queue length went from an average 4 hours to get to a ticket to over a week. It's still increasing. Any ticket I submit now will take at least 10 days to be even looked at.
Then the real problems kicked in. We previously paid vendors such as ComponentArt and Infragistics for our UI libraries. Freetard managed to convince management to use GPL'd libraries instead. In our code. I objected strenuously, but what do I know, I'm just a mere developer. In managements' eyes, Dollars were at stake. Lots of Dollars.
So we spent 3 months integrating tons of GPL shit into our code, and THEN management finally realises that it's too late now... we have to completely abandon 3 months of work, or give out our source code.
Naturally, we chose to abandon 3 months of work. And lay off 10% of the staff due to the contracts we missed because of this.
Luckily, Freetard was one of the ones fired.
But, GPLTards, I hope you feel happy about putting hardworking honest people out on the street simply because you have fucked up ideas of what freedom is.
While that is true, you're neglecting the effect it has on small companies.
Big companies have a worse effect on small companies. Around 80% of the company could figure out how to do anything.
While you're at it, learn English. Loonix is designed by and for hackers, and was never meant to be used by the average joe.
No, linux is a better server than MS products, and it was meant to be used (as a server) by system administrators. If you don't have those, it's your companies problem for hiring idiots. Within 2 months, 40% of the support department had quit because they couldn't stand the environment.
40% of your support department was clueless people that did not deserve the job they had. Success! Our computers kept crashing.
A computer does not crash, a program crashes. I doubt the linux kernel crashed. You probably call "crash" all that text on the terminal that you cannot understand. We couldn't find proper drivers for most things.
Like? What kinda drivers does a god damn server need? But, GPLTards, I hope you feel happy about putting hardworking honest people out on the street simply because you have fucked up ideas of what freedom is.
I don't think these people that got fired where honest in their job interview, else they'd know how to administrate a server.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 12:19
>>98
incompetent or liars because they were employed as windows tech support\administrators and don't know how to use lunix? just because you use lunoox, doesn't mean everyone else does.
imagine you are employed as a java developer or somesuch. then oneday your boss decides that java sucks and everything should be done in perl. does it mean you are incompetent because you have never programmed in perl and have no idea how to do anything in it?
incompetent or liars because they were employed as windows tech support\administrators and don't know how to use lunix? just because you use lunoox, doesn't mean everyone else does.
Then obviously the manager was a retard, and anyone who accepted to install linux while clearly nobody had a clue about linux was a retard too. It has nothing to do with GPL.
imagine you are employed as a java developer or somesuch. then oneday your boss decides that java sucks and everything should be done in perl. does it mean you are incompetent because you have never programmed in perl and have no idea how to do anything in it?
Well if my boss decides that, then I'm either fucked or I have to learn perl.
Too bad learning perl shouldn't take more than 5 to 10 days, if you already know a language such as java. (which sucks)
It's true your manager did a major mistake suggesting linux since all the employees where windows tech support/admins. I mean that's an obvious and blatant mistake.
>>106
I don't deny that. That's because you prefer all the ascii/etc faggotry than a meaningful discussion.
I'm going to browse /prog/ 20 hours a day saging every god damn troll post. your little game is fucked
>>108
Is not >>106, but I am glad there are more quality posters at this board left.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 13:33
HAX MY ANUS
(This message was presented by 4-ch.net public message bot.)
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 13:35
>>101
"It's true your manager did a major mistake suggesting linux since all the employees where windows tech support/admins. I mean that's an obvious and blatant mistake."
That's my point. GNU types go around shouting at the top of their lungs that GNU is quality and free.
1) it's not quality. Not in any sense of the word. I've not yet found a large scale GNU project that is consistent in its programming style or architecture choices. They're passed around through so many different developers who each have their own ways of doing things that you end up with an unmaintainable mess.
2) it's not free. Not only does it cost far more money in the long run to support because the programs interfaces are entirely inconsistent (see #1. 500 developers each had their own ways of making an interface, and therefore almost every app has a ridiculous mishmash of clashing UI themes), but it isn't even free in the idealogical sense either, since it removes the freedom that developers have to do what they want with their own code.
GPL is a scam perpetrated by sub-par hackers who want to benefit from what competent developers write without having to pay for it.
>>111
So basically, because you had a bad experience with a retarded manager that forced inappropriate software that no one knew how to use properly down the throats of everyone in the company, all GPL'd software must suck. Good game, you're at the level of the 13 year old boys who scream "M$ SUX, GNAA/LUNIX 4EVAH" when they get a blue screen.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 19:15
The freedom that RMS refers to is about the liberty to help yourself and cooperate with your community so that the user can live in freedom. Proprietary software is designed to make people helpless and divide communities; helpless as they have no right to the code and divided as they have no right to share the program with their communities.
If you have all four freedoms of free software, you can remain autonomous and free as proprietary software is designed to make people helpless and divided.
>>81,116,
There is nothing wrong with selling free software and making money from free software.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 19:37
All this came about just because RMS is rubbish at reverse engineering things, and couldn't be bothered to invest the time in learning to do it effectively and develop helpful tools to do so.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 19:40
>>119
wat
RMS developed gcc, emacs and gdb. what the fuck are you talking about lol
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 19:44
>>119
Society shouldn't have to live like that. Society would be far more productive if everyone had the right to help themselves.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 19:46
>>119
You're so wrong. Why do you think that people who break copy protections and unlock DRMs and stuff are called hackers? Because RMS is a hacker.
Oh, and BSDfags: Sometimes I write free software, and sometimes I write proprietary software. But when I write proprietary software, I expect to get paid.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 20:09
>>64
I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE SIR. Speaking as an anoncoreutilscontributor, I have personally tested over 75% of the features in the code I implemented. Not only that, but online support is always available for free on various textboards.
What we have here is a new model for software development. The GPL can eat my ass.
>>126
Ok, ok. If it is so, please post the code somewhere. No .git bullshit. 7-bit pure ASCII fucking code. Do it faggot. Give me the opportunity to fucking show the rest here what a fucking charlatan you are.
GPL definition of freedom: when you only do what "we" tell you to do.
G.W Bush: when you only do what "I" tell you to do.
definition of freedom anywhere else: when you have the right to do whatever you want to do.
google when asked "define:freedom": * the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints.
conclusion: the FSF fails at being free and all GPLtards fail at life for being brainwashed.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 22:38
>>134
NO-U!
RMS IS SMARTER TEN THE DICSHONARY!
I'M RIGHT BECOS I CAN SHOUT LOUDER AND HAVE MORE FRIENDS!
GPL IS FREEDOM! DICSHONARES ARE WRITTEN BY MICROSOFT!!!
ITS A FUCKING CONSIPERACY!!!!
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 22:42
>>134
If you accept proprietary software, you are helpless and divided. How can someone be free if they are helpless and divided? The GPL guarantees that users are not helpless to help themselves and they are not divided from their community.
>>136
helpless and divided, helpless and divided, helpless and divided.
you can't help someone be free (facepalm.txt) ,you can only free someone, and you don't free someone by shackling them down.
according the the dictionary, freedom is the condition in which an individual has the ability to act according to his or her own will. not to the GPL's
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 23:40
"I have no qualms with proprietary software, but there's nothing wrong with free software either. This whole "BAWWW, THE GPL KILLS BUSINESSES" thing is bullshit. If your software is better than the free alternative, it will never die. The GIMP will never replace Photoshop. Ever."
EXCEPT THAT THERE ARE MORE GIMP INSTALLS THAN LEGAL PHOTOSHOP INSTALLS
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-17 23:47
>>139
EXCEPT THAT THERE ARE MORE PHOTOSHOP INSTALLS THAN GIMP INSTALLS
GPL supports seem to all be completely retarded.
VISTA SUCKS! IT USES TOO MUCH SYSTEM RESOURCES!!
I CANT AFFORD $10 WORTH OF RAM!!!
oh wait... ubantoo has all the resource wasting shiny that vista and mac OSX does...(and yet you still bitch and moan about it, completely ignoring that fact that you are hypocritical idiots for doing so)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYgV2GlsufI
What kinda shit is that? Retarded faggot shit or what?
Oh, wait, you are a little kid and need the shiny shit, right? Well, I only need twm. Now go back to your crap pile of steeming nigger semen AIDS.
>>148
but seriously, it's a track by rob d i think off the matrix soundtrack
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 10:16
>>138
Proprietary software by definition is designed to make users helpless. Without the right to the code, users can not help themselves whenever the program needs to be changed. The user MUST obtain the permission of the master of the program before the program can be changed to suit the user. This means that the user is no longer autonomous; the user not free to help themself and so, is helpless.
Proprietary software by definition is designed to divide society. Society advances whenever communities cooperate with each other to further the standing of the relevant communities. It is alright if members of society do not want to cooperate with others. It is not alright for a master to divide members of society that do want to cooperate (in practising socially beneficial acts) by preventing them the right to share resources (such as information or tools) and preventing them the right to use those resources to achieve an outcome. Without the right to share programs, users cannot cooperate with their community; society is divided from helping each other.
Society should not have to live helpless and divided but this is what happens whenever these members accept proprietary software. If all users had the four freedoms (that RMS had defined as free software), then the GPL would be useless; nobody would be helpless or divided and there won't be any need to guarantee the four freedom as everybody would have those four freedoms. The reality is, people will subjugate other people into helplessness and division through software. Having the power to subjugate users into helplessness and division is not a power worth protecting. The GPL guarantees that everyone has the right to help themselves and cooperate with their communities by removing the power to subjugate the user.
If you don't wish to cooperate with other people, then that is acceptable. However, you should not subjugate the users of your software into helplessness. It would be much better if you did not share that program at all so that nobody would be helpless. You should also not divide the users of your program. It would be much better if you did not share that program at all so that society would not be divided.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 10:48
>>151
Not true. If one has the skills and time, then even closed-source applications are modifiable. Especially if they're written in some language that compiles to an easily reversed bytecode, such as .net or java or python.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 11:06
>>152
This is usually against the terms of the license, though.
>>156
Today, I pirated a copy of GNU's not unix chess.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 12:26
Ultimately, none of this discussion matters. The wanks that think that they're being leet by being anti-copyleft will go back to reddit, and the rest of the real programmers will continue freeing the world.
Holy wars aren't winnable in words, but the way we can win is by actually practicing what we preach. So far, the only example of anti-copyleft is "anonutils", which as we all know is total and complete faggottry.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 12:28
I pirated a copy of SUSE Linux from Walmart.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 14:51
Well, I only need twm
What a faggot. I bet you also use a mouse.
Real men use stumpwm.
>>162
They say that some people are just unable to interpret sarcasm; it's got something to do with how there brain's are wired.
You are crazy.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 18:56
>>152
Broken window fallacy. The effort that people put into studying proprietary (undocumented binary) code is far better invested into extending and improving software that is already free.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 19:54
Altough Anonymous -seems to be a trend here :)- i'd like to comment.
Damn, you guys are sharp!! First time i visit 4chan from the referers back here. -so be easy on me- Well, I guess it's a hard topic to discuss, many years gone by -30 orso- and I agree it's a difficult topic, there are alot of nuances that sets a GNU philosophy apart, I am glad that it's discussed here, the dissing also, because that is important because i think that puts things in perspective. I've read ALL the comments, and with alot of them I agree, anyway I hope you enjoyed the article, and hopefully gave you another perspective on how things can work.
I think people are conditioned in their restictions -e.g. they made to belive that there are limits- Well, the fact that one person made it possible that anyone can run a OS for free, shows that their are no limitations in life. It is possible, to me that is a very clear message: If you think you can accomplish something, you can. Don't let anyone deviate from your path. You are intelligent enough to become whatever you want to become. just a matter of having faith in yourself.
Keep it going, I really appreciatre the ideas/comments being aired here, that another kind of precious freedom.
>>166
bullshyte. proof you are in fact that person or.. gtfo.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 20:11
I am :)
I checked back the link I got from 4chan in my ref.logs, don't know how to prove it either. Anywayz, If you're not sure hook me up on my e-mail on my website, and i'll send you a confirmation. I'm just back from a night in the city here, so I'm wasted by now. xD
Yeah first-timer here on the "CHAN" and what can I say, it's crazy and brilliant @ the same time. But I have to get used to it, that's 4 sure.
Cheers,
Ronald.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 20:24
>>166,168
You'll have to excuse >>167, he still thinks this is /b/.
You seem quite capable of producing original content, but if you plan to become a part of this: lurk moar (and stop being a namefaggot). PROTIP: Get to know the other chans/boards, maybe you'll like them better.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 20:26
>>166 I've read ALL the comments
A lesser man would have stopped at >>... well, probably >>2.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 20:27
>>168
lurk moar and you'll understand the culture.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 20:32
>>166
Thanks for doing the interview. How did you find talking to Stallman? From what I hear he can be quite difficult and rude in his body language and attitude.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 20:42
From what I hear he can be quite difficult and rude in his body language and attitude. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PROGRAMMER, RIGHT?
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy