you have microsoft in ur butt

I'm writing to you from the perspective of a concerned citizen, knowledgable computer user, afficionado, and programmer.
I would like to express at once my utter disgust and my state of bafflement over my attempts to use your wireless internet.
I do not intend to be curt or professional.
The software requirements for connecting to the network are completely ridiculous.
A security stack based on the forced use of Microsoft operating systems is completely ridiculous.
Expecting users to install software services on their computer just to connect, is completely ridiculous.
All this trouble because I choose to use Linux. I could probably get online by doing something REALLY simple that involves getting around CCA, but that would violate your use policy by removing a restriction myself.

I am aware that many people do not know how to use a computer, administer their own system, or even how to prevent virii from spreading.
I know this because I've seen what can happen at a university regarding the spread of worms myself.
I've seen complete disregard for shared access, with people who run smtp bots, flood bots, and bandwidth-hogging ptp programs.

But these facts do not come close to justifying the harsh and unintelligent "security" measures you've implemented.
This is not my opinion.

What is my opinion is that your IT departments must either be braindead stupid or that you and your superiors are so bribed by corporate interests as to not consider any other solutions.
I've seen users switch to Linux and love it. I've seen them develop an interest in technological learning, including how to program, over the change. Using a computer carries responsibility. Creating software and encouraging its use carries even more. One of these responsibilities is freedom and openness, which leads to expanded usability as well as security at the user level.

Locking people into using proprietary software accomplishes nothing. It restricts peoples freedom as well as their understanding of computers. It is a downward spiral that only leads to more specialization. It's not that Microsoft writes poor code, per se, but the fact that time and time again they've demonstrated to have no scruples and no regard for the rights, privacy or freedom of its customers or competitors.

So, my suggestion is the following:

Change your supported operating platform to GNU, DELETE all proprietary software, INSTALL free software.
Sell back all your leased and overpriced CISCO hardware. You don't need it.
Form an advisory consortium out of staff members with student interns to guide the process.
Form a technical thinktank to build a new network from scratch, out of reliable but second-hand standard PC hardware.
Use free software and open platforms and encourage students and faculty to do the same. (Those CD printing kiosks are pretty useful)

If your goals include innovation and education these suggestions should be fitting.
If your goals are profit and shoving Microsoft's kawk so far up peoples' asses that they'll never remove it, for the rest of your life, keep doing what you're doing.

Universities and colleges used to write their own programs and operating systems. What happened?


>> @cscc.edu,@franklin.edu

The pleasure of being free-as-in-freedom inside.

>>25
But later when RMS realizes he has exposed himself he retreats back into vague rhetoric like:
RMS considers proprietary software to be a social problem and free software to be the moral solution to that social problem.
I find it somewhat ironic that what you say here is the perfect illustration for why RMS tries to make it clear that the complete OS is called GNU/Linux because everything besides its kernel is GNU.

The problem is that you hear so much "moderate" rhetoric from people like Linus and de Icaza that you begin to think that that is the Free/Libre Open Source Software position, while RMS himself is somehow on the fringe and has to hide his true colours, ha ha ha.

Bollocks.

Free Software ideology was, is and forever would be total annihilation of proprietary software. Yes indeed, proprietary software is a social problem and Free software is intended to be not 'a' solution which works where applicable and peacefully coexists with proprietary software, but the final solution to this problem.

The only thing that might seem 'moderate' about this is that instead of trying to destroy proprietary software by rallying people everywhere to demand a legislation declaring proprietary restrictions illegal (just as it is illegal to draw a contract that demands that a customer consigns herself or her children to slavery), Richard Michael Stallman wisely decided to battle the modern slavers on their own field, by creating superior Free software protected by GPL and outcompeting proprietary software into oblivion.

There's nothing vague about this, this is what RMS and everyone at FSF tell anyone who listens, but the problem is that no one actually goes to gnu.org and reads up on their position, everyone listens to them who shout the loudest, that be Linus Torvalds, Miguel de Icaza, Eric S. Raymond, and the rest of the "Free is a methodology, not an ideology" crowd.

People are, like, Linux was made by Linus and Linus says that Free Software is about users paying you back with patches, so that's what Free Software must be about. And then, like, oh my God, RMS has a "hidden agenda" of destroying proprietary software, go and tell everyone!

So that's the purpose of interjecting for a moment: to refute the false idea that Linus is the one to be listened to regarding the nature of Free Software, go to gnu.org and read what we have to say firsthand, instead. When someone calls the GNU plus Linux correction "pointless pedantry", he turns the mere falsehood into an shameless lie.

"The only thing that might seem 'moderate' about this is that instead of trying to destroy proprietary software by rallying people everywhere to demand a legislation declaring proprietary restrictions illegal (just as it is illegal to draw a contract that demands that a customer consigns herself or her children to slavery), Richard Michael Stallman wisely decided to battle the modern slavers on their own field, by creating superior Free software protected by GPL and outcompeting proprietary software into oblivion."

Double bollocks.

First, if I write good code, that's value added. If you don't pay me for it, I don't see why I should let you have a look at it. My time is valuable and I desire remuneration.

Second, "Superior Free Software" my fucking anus. Software superiority can never be determined from the elegance of the code (which I am willing to admit many GNU products have, but even there, we cannot compare without observing the source code of competitors), it *must* be evaluated from usability, in which many GNU products are sadly lacking.

>>43

Oh, and adding on: Comparing proprietary software to slavery is bullshit. Slavery is starvation. Slavery is murder. Slavery is rape. Slavery is living in fear. Slavery is torture. Slavery is the most utter lack of human dignity.

Proprietary software is waiting 2 more minutes before your fancy first-world computer made with blood metals finishes booting up. Cry me a god damn river, mr. #firstworldproblems

>>44

Wait, now that I'm at it - did I just get trolled? That opinion is so goddamn ridiculous, I can't believe anybody actually holds it. Good Job Trolling, Mr. Stallman

>>43,44
the elegance of the code (which I am willing to admit many GNU products have
Proprietary software is waiting 2 more minutes
#firstworldproblems
And then John had bitch tits.

^{_{Everyone has bitch tits}}.

lol what.

>>43,44
Software superiority can never be determined from the elegance of the code
If the voices tell you something you don't agree with, such as that FLOSS promotes elegant source code and is therefore superior, please argue with the voices, not with me. If you have trouble distinguishing between the things that voices say and the things you see in my arguments, please take your medication and avoid anonymous messageboards until it works.

Slavery is starvation. Slavery is murder. Slavery is rape. Slavery is living in fear. Slavery is torture. Slavery is the most utter lack of human dignity.
Slavery is the lack of freedom. Any of the things you mentioned may or may not follow. Even when Arthur Shelby cares about Uncle Tom's wellbeing and never rapes him, slavery remains slavery.

#firstworldproblems
You are telling a slave that her attempts to break the shackles are insignificant and misguided because someone somewhere has it much worse -- is dying of hunger. So the slave must be glad that she at least is not dying of hunger, and abandon her attempts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_solution_fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

>>43
So make a deal involving money before you write some code. I've paid tens of thousands in US$ this year to improve the software running on my systems. My deals were final BEFORE the code was written.

>>44
A slave is a person that is under bondage of another. While the severity of proprietary software is much softer than human slavery, the point being compared is the attitude of bondage where there is a master that holds unjust power over another person. The fact that users freely enter (and trivially leave) the bondage of proprietary software does not make proprietary software any less moral than slavery.

>>50
there is nothing wrong with being anti proprietary, that all software be free of ownership, its a worthy goal. But its been tried before with things beyond software, to make all kinds of goods and services free of ownership to prevent hoarding and price gouging. And there is a name for systems that try to do that, its called communism. Im not afraid of the word communism, its a word that is associated with oppression. But its original intent was to do away with unfair distribution of goods and services. There are communist political parties in western european nations that carry on the cause and make tangible results that affect their society. But unlike RMS, these parties are very open about their agenda and dont try to hide it with americanish slogans like "fight for your freedoms". RMS has succeeded though in getting thousands of unwitting idiots to parrot his slogans of free software and gnu/linux, so Im sure RMS is not going to change is methods any time soon

>>51
Freedom is for the user. RMS's fight for freedom is freedom for the user. The point is about having the individual user retain sovereignty over oneself. The point is about communities of upstanding citizens and their implied right to cooperate. These freedoms were important before the arrival of computers and are still important now that everyone can afford a computer.

The attitude promoted by proprietary software is analogous to slavery: helplessness and social division. The attitude is, "you must first get my permission in order to use my software" and "when you want some improvements to my software, I will decide at my will to help you". The software master asks the user to be helpless and far too often in this age, the user agrees to this bondage. With this attitude, the user cannot live a free life within the age of computers.

This isn't about communism which a form of social structure that abolishes private ownership. It is about USER freedom: permitting an upstanding individual to live a good life, and permitting communities to cooperate.

Consider this: FOSS isn't about achieving some kind of socialist software utopia. It's common business sense.
A company buys proprietary software X to use in its system. But it doesn't have feature Y. Being closed-source, it's impossible to simply alter X in order to make it do feature Y too. The company has to either contact X's manufacturers and request the feature, or find some other software that does Y and use it in tandem with X (needlessly complicating the system).
This increases costs all round and possibly means that X's manufacturers lose business (if the additional software that does Y also happens to have every feature of X).
The sane solution would be to have X use a FOSS license (remember: free as in freedom): this way the company can implement Y themselves and the manufacturers don't have to bother making just one feature that just one client requested.

>>53
your idea is nothing new, industry has been using open standards since the beginning of the industrial revolution. It prevents wasting of resources and re-inventing the wheel to produce common/compatible products. the only difference is that youre calling for all products to be produced to open standards where most people see it as common sense to only use it in certain situations

>>54
No, no. I've just come into this discussion. It appears to be just about software.

BSD LICENCE WAS HERE.
GPL IS LOSER.
_^~nida

>>40
Go back to GNU/Linux/X11/PLT/OOo/Mozilla/4chan/b/, The Stallman.
should be
Linux/GNU/X11/PLT/OOo/Mozilla/4chan/b/, The Stallman.

if you're going from left to right.

>>57
Loonix is just a kernel, The Glorious Name of GNU should appear first!

>>58 dun told you, >>57

/prog/ - Slavery

>>59
noko? GTFO he didn't

fuck you

>>59
Haha! Noko! What a noko ``faggot''.

SAGE THIS SHIT.

NOKO THIS SHIT.

DUBZ LOL

^{Back to /b/, ``GNAA Faggot''}


def learnskill(skill, desiredlevel):
  while (skill < desiredlevel):
    if (skill.level == 0):
      skill()
      break()
    if (skill.level < desiredlevel/2):
      study(skill)
      skill()
      break()
    study(skill)
    skill()
    teach(skill)
  skill=lambda: None
  pass
/forcedindentationofgoto

http://www.ancestry.com.au/facts/Kantor-family-history-sct.ashx
>Cantor is jewish (Ashkenazic) occupational name for a cantor, an official of a synagogue whose duty is to sing liturgical music and leads prayers, from Latin cantor ‘singer’, a derivative of canere ‘to sing’.

I enjoyed reading this thread.