hacking help

hay. i've looked all over the place on the internet, but i haven't been able to find any web sites to teach me how to hack, if anyone is willing to help me learn to hack, or find me a web site, please post here

http://hacking.on.nimp.org/Default.aspx

I know it's mostly symbolic on a text board, but sage

>>3
you know nothing.
gb2/b/

>>4
saging my post now? Well I'll show you

>>3
leave

>>3
Oh my god, you fucking loser. I know you hack.
I'm gonna tell the admin on you, you faggot.
Leave now, you faggot. Leave, leave, leave before the admin bans you.¹

1 - http://www.pwned.nl/ as accessed on 11FEB09 at 19:50 GMT-6

11FEB09
is that some hexadecimal date format?

>>1
http://www.gnu.org/music/free-software-song.html
Join us now and share the software;
You'll be free, hackers, you'll be free.

>>9
Join us now and hoard the software;
No thanks, I'd rather write really free software.

>>10
That's right!! You'll be free, hackers, you'll be free.

>>10
I'm tired of your bullshit.

With GNU, software is free because no one can stop anyone else from getting it.
With BSD, you are free. You are free to do anything with software, including making money with other people's work.

I can see why you would hate GNU, but at least stop calling it non-free because this is just stupid.

>>12

With GNU, software is free because no one can stop anyone else from getting it.

You can take a piece of GPLed code, modify it and only keep the modified version to yourself, without breaking GPL.
You can take a piece of GPLed code, modify it and only distribute it along with the patch to a closed group of people, without breaking GPL.

GPL only requires that you provide the source to whoever you're giving the software. It doesn't make it that much free.

>>13
Is that somehow related to your >>10 post? You have some sort of license that makes people distribute all the changes to code, even if they don't plan to distribute the program itself? GNU is the best we have and that's it. If you're calling it non-free, offer an alternative.

>>14 I'm not >>10
I believe both BSD and GNU are ``free'' to some extent, but neither is truly free, the only thing which is truly free is public domain.

>>14
i'm >>10. >>13 is not me.

>>12
with GNU, no one and nothing is free.
with BSD, you are free.
with public domain, you are free and the software is free.

My code costs money.

Someone recently told me that you cannot link to proprietary libraries in GPL'ed code. Well, he might have been bullshitting around, but assuming he was correct I'd have to say: The moment a license restricts me from writing code the way I want to, it's no longer free, but a piece of shit.

STALLMAN

>>12
It's easy to understand the logic here. Some of the people that claim the GPL is non-free want the power to fork free software and make the fork proprietary software; the logic being that one is more free if one has the power to make proprietary software from free software. The other logic used is: more rules means less freedom; since the GPL has more rules, it inherently has less freedom.

The logic that the FSF folk use is that: all users should have the right to use, study and share all software within their possession. The reason for this is so that each individual can maintain complete control of their computing (the freedom to help oneself) and be able to be good citizens (as good citizens share resources). Any software that doesn't adequately meet their definition of free software is proprietary software.

The FSF folk claim that the ability to fork free software into proprietary software is harmful to socitey and so, created the GPL with the intent that nobody can make a proprietary fork of a GPL program and thus, users will remain free.

>>18
The GPL3 is a software conveyance license. The moment you convey GPL3 code (whether in binary or source form, it doesn't really matter), you are subject to the terms of the GPL3. When you fail to abide by the licence, you will be subject to Copyright infringement.

By statically linking your code together with GPL code AND conveyancing the resultant binary, you would be conveyancing the GPL code and would be subject to the terms of the GPL.

>>18
You can write it any way you like, just don't give it to anyone else without including the source.

I like to masturbate all over the gnu logo. Then I release my semen under the GPL v3 or later license

Can somebody sum up for me the differences between GPL2 and GPL3? And optionally those between LGPL2 and LGPL3.

23 posts and FairX ;) hasn't been mentioned? This is not the /prog/ I once knew and loved...

My name is rmS the haxxor if you don't payme anything I'll give you access to a private area of free software ;)
http://www.fsf.org/

this guy will helpyou with the hax
http://amix.dk/blog/viewEntry/19105

>>27
HAHAHA! Oh wow…

>>24
LGPL2 < LGPL3 < GPL2 < GPL3 < LPGA

>>27
'For The Attention Of The Pakis

    Just so you know: he's using the word "hacking" in the archaic, 1960s computer hippie sense. It has very little to do with its current definition of breaking computer security.

    I know it looks a bit odd in a modern context, but many computer nerds who missed that era have a longing to feel as if they're in amongst those early programming pioneers, so adopt language from those times such as "hacker", "grok", "foo" and "cudder".

See Wikipedia for more details.'

I lol'd

>>27
There sure are a lot of desperate people who want various GMail accounts hacked.

I know it looks a bit odd in a modern context, but many computer nerds who missed that era have a longing to feel as if they're in amongst those early /prog/ramming pioneers, so adopt language from those times such as "GRUNNUR".

HI BUDDY,
THIS IS ANSH.HW RU .I NEED UR HELP.I WAAN PASSWORD OF THIS TWO ID--MSMANISHASHARMA4@GMAIL.COM,SWEET_JANVI@YAHOO.COM.....



PLEASE LOOK MY MATTER IS URGENT.IM WAITING 4UR REPLY.BYE BUDDY

>>30
Nobody is going to take away MY hacker definition away from me. When anybody asks, I am a GAY HACKER.

>>34
Where did you learn to English?

>>36
At MIT during the 1960's

>>36
I remember those days, back when we computer nerds used to say things like "cudder"...

>>37
"GRUNNUR"

>>38
Did you say "GRUNNUR"?

>>39
Did you ask if >>38 said "GRUNNUR"?