Linux-Advocacy Digest #412, Volume #28 Tue, 15 Aug 00 01:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates)
Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (Chris Lee)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (Chris Lee)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why Linux will crash and burn..... (Chris Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why Linux will crash and burn.....
Re: Another satisfied Linux user (nf)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:15:48 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8na413$akh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8n98oh$h71$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >
> >It also makes it possible to discard the windowing system when it is not
> >needed. It also make is possible to replace th windowing system with a
> >different one. Lets say someone developes a new Windows style windowing
> >system to run on unix, one that is not built on X, it could be installed
> >on a working unix platform and X could be removed and the OS would not
> >care one way or the other. Try that with Windows.
>
> Replacing the EXPLORER.EXE with another interface?
>
> I've already done it many times. It's quite possible
> to kill EXPLORER.EXE, and fire up another interface.
Not just explorer.exe, replace or remove the *entire* GUI including all
graphical drivers and their support libraries with just what comes with the
Windows distribution.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:30:04 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I got it as well.
>
> If you post frequently enough, you will be harvested and it will get
> worse and worse as they pass the lists of good addresses along to
> other spammers.
>
> God help you if the P.H.E.R.M.O.N.E. king get's your address. He posts
> tens of thousands of messages a day to various groups and has been
> doing so for years.
>
> Munging your address is the only sure fire way. Just make sure you
> don't make the same mistake I unwillingly did by using an address that
> became a real one, for someone else :(
>
> Good luck...
>
> Claire...
>
> And see, sometimes we do agree on things :)
I guess to every rule there is an exception. And we have had these
exceptions before ;-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lee)
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: 15 Aug 2000 02:59:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>m just saying I don't want it to happen.
>
>As for your alienates CLI fans comment, I was speaking on the premise
>that there are a huge number of computer illiterate people that have an
>*interest* in Linux at the moment. These people are saying that the GUI
>should be integrated in the kernel, that Corel has the best distro ever,
>and that everything should be *just like Windows*. These are the people
>I am speaking against. There are some concepts that can be 'borrowed'
>from Windows. I'm not so against Windows that I fail to see the few
>good ideas that are present. I just don't want Linux to turn into a
>Windows clone. Am I really such an idiot for saying that?
Yes, because the people you are talking about have *ZERO* influnce over the
direction Linux goes in. They can scream all they want, but it doesn't mean
we have to listen to them.
This is what is so great about linux and bsd. The Jerry Pournells of the
world along with the ZDNET shills can bitch and moan about how hard to
use linux and bsd are and it won't make a wit of difference as the past
couple of years of growth have shown
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 15 Aug 2000 03:16:26 GMT
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:24:48 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>not people. If you refuse to judge abstractions, because you refuse to
>judge people, I can understand that. I can't understand your refusing
>to let others do so.
I'm not sure where I "refuse to let others do so".
>How so? You stated that ethics (which I define as morals in this
>context, as 'ethics' must take the lab rat's perspective into account)
>were entirely self-referential. If the advanced creatures' social
>environment allowed them to use us as lab rats, then they would be
>"ethical" in doing so. Have I missed something?
OK, I thought you meant that I was defending their society. Yes, you're
correct, I wouldn't consider individuals in that society much less ethical
than I consider conformists in our society.
>>>One doesn't. One has the brain-power to realize that being able to
>>>define a flawed morality is sufficient.
>>
>>Only if this definition is exhaustive. Most societies lack the level
>>of introspection required to provide an adequate definition.
>
>All societies are little more than an on-going attempt to refine what we
>hope is an adequate definition. Thus, we are more ethical than our
>ancestors, and this can be said without condemnation of their choices or
>prideful absolutism concerning our own choices.
Sure, societies can refine and gently reform themselves. The problem is
that they can only evaluate themselves within the limited context of
their own morality. This doesn't make refinement impossible, but it
greatly limits the ability of society to transform itself.
One might also wonder how much of our moral "progress" can be attributed
to economic success. Even in todays "civilised" world, barbarism can prevail
when countries decline.
>An almost comprehensive reduction of post-modernist delusion. There
>isn't any value in it, but it can't easily be refuted. That's because
>it is unfalsifiable, though, not because it is irrefutable.
Not sure what you mean. A big problem for philosophers though is that
you can only prove assertions about mathematics, and that's because
the things you are proving don't say anything about the "real world".
>>>Doesn't that give them a rational basis for their beliefs? That, and
>>
>>What, that other people share their beliefs ? Not really.
>
>Why not? Are you under the impression that there is an absolute
>morality inherent in the universe, or that there is no such thing as
>ethics?
Morality is not absolute, but "rationality" is.
>Whatever. You seem to believe that since ideals have no physical
>presence, they don't exist. Or that since there is no absolute
>morality, we cannot derive ethics by reason.
We can derive *anything* by way of reason if we are prepared to make
certain assumptions or axioms. It boils down to what we are prepared
to assume.
But the fact that others share an opinion is not a derivation by way
of reason, it's more like derivation by way of a herd mentality.
>>The problem is not reality being "redefined" so much as it is reinterpreted.
>
>I do not interpret reality; I perceive it.
And interpret it.
>mumbo-jumbo. Yes, we are all stuck inside our heads. No, that doesn't
>mean the entire universe might be inside my head.
Actually, it means precisely that, though I don't wish to debate this now.
If you can prove that it's not the case, write a book. If someone else
has done so, provide me with a reference, and I'll take a look.
>If you think it is only your own value system which must be referenced
>for determining blame, then you should consider anarchy to be a workable
>social system.
Not at all. The fact that I believe my value system to be superior does not
mean that I fail to recognise that it is impossible for everyone's value
system to prevail simoultaneously. For a social system to be effective,
it must have a consistent value system, and anarchy does not facilitate
that.
> Each person would be free to pass judgement on others
>according to his own value system, rather than the laws or any consensus
>of what constitutes ethical behavior.
Everyone is certainly free to pass judgement on others, and they do it
all the time. There's no law against being judgemental.
If you mean that everyone has the right to punish others for perceived
crimes or wrongs, well see above -- the only fair system would be for
a single value system to prevail. Obviously, I'd like that to be my
own, but I'd rather have a slightly inferior value system enforced
consistently than an ambiguous system where people are forced to avoid
infringing with respect to conflicting doctrines ( even if one of those
conflicting doctrines was indeed superior ).
Of course, most of us are pragmatic enough to know that we can't have it
all our own way, and we make compromises where we consider it in our best
interests to do so. But that doesn't mean that we put other value systems
above our own.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lee)
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: 15 Aug 2000 03:24:45 GMT
In article <8n9sh9$jc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>
>
>
>Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> People can bitch all they want, and the rivers will keep flowing
>> downhill :-)
>
>until the U.S. Army corp of engineers build dams, install flow regulators
>and pumps to make the water flow to reverse it normal course because enough
>moron with influence wanted it that way.
>
>> I have NEVER seen this. Where did you see it?
>
>Take a look in the back posts in alt.linux, take a look at the industry
rags
>and take a look at a thread in this NG that you were a part of a little
>while back.
Your problem is that you think the industry rags matter. They don't.
Ziff-Davis/ZDNET attempts to derail Linux have been an utter failure for
instance.
These publications,along with their "editors" and "journalists" have found
out to their regreat that Linux users are nothing like the Amiga and OS/2
users were. Fuck with us and we'll hand you your head back on a pike and
take pride in doing so.
Just ask Bob Metcafe and quite a few other Mircosoft shills who made the
mistake of trying to pick a fight with the Slashdot Crowd.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:28:45 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> Ironically, Gary, your problem all along has been that you simply aren't
>> prepared to give me enough information to be useful, let alone even
>> imagining giving me more than I can handle. Of course, there's only so
>> many hours even in my day, and the number of references is obviously
>> severely curtailed, and further restricted by the variety of sources and
>> issues I wish to explore.
>
>And there are only so many hours in my day and I have better things to do than
>teach you.
I know how you feel.
>> But you have certainly never even begun to approach giving me more than
>> I can "handle", bro.
>
>Your posts prove just the opposite.
Still haven't caught up yet, huh?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:28:47 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> I understand them just fine. I merely didn't have them all memorized.
>>
>> Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
>
>Why don't you install Linux on your machine so you can learn on your own?
Because it is more trouble than its worth at this moment, since my
machine has to have Windows for professional reasons. I have a Linux
box at work (an old Gateway laptop which I wanted to use as a server)
but that hasn't panned out due to non-technical issues. Mostly I just
use Solaris and some HP-UX on workstations.
But you seem to have missed my point; I had no need to learn about
sticky bits in permissions. Which is why I didn't have them memorized.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lee)
Subject: Re: Why Linux will crash and burn.....
Date: 15 Aug 2000 03:35:48 GMT
In article <8n9ngk$oc6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>
>
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 14 Aug 2000 08:48:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C.
>
>> Shradrakaii) wrote:
>> > (Why doesn't
>> >Windows come with basic archive tools?
>>
>> I think they got into some conflict with PKWare way back when and
>> backed off. This was during the Stac fiasco, where they stole their
>> software.
>
>Then, why couldn't they go with infozip? Or develop their own from
scratch?
You're talking about people who couldn't manage to get something as simple
as DOS right and you still ask this question?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 22:58:15 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>>>The customer generally pays only the long distance fee; the
>>>Quicken/Microsoft/whoever pays the tech support person to answer the
>>>phone and support you with any problems.
>>>
>>>That was pretty obvious....
>>
>>Really?? Microsoft provides free tech support over the phone?? That's
>>news to me. How do I get it??
>Call their numbers and you'll get it.
If there WAS A FREE support number you have the guts to tell us. Unless of
course, you're just a talking idiot.
--
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:05:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >
>> >> They're trying it in the US schools with this "invented spelling"
>> >> bullshit.
>> >>
>> >> And look at how stupid these kids are now that they are graduating.
>> >> ...or should I say...being shoved out the door, as a mass of
>> >> uneducated boobs.
>> >
>> >That sound just like the attempt to elevate gutter talk to the level of a
>> >language and calling it ebonics. They are now starting to teach it in
>> >schools as a foreign language in the place of traditional foreign language
>> >studies.
>>
>> I doubt you could pack more misrepresentative sentiments into a single
>> post without mentioning Microsoft.
>
>It is happening:
>
>http://www.cal.org/ebonics/
>http://members.tripod.com/~cdorsett/ebonics.htm
>http://www.stanford.edu/~rickford/
I didn't see anything on any of these pages to substantiate an argument
that eubonics is being taught in place of traditional foreign languages.
Perhaps you've fallen for the common rhetoric which misrepresents the
Oakland School Boards resolution from several years ago, extending
"English as a second language" assistance to children *as if* eubonics
was a foreign language. I'd thought there might be some current news,
rather than this tired straw man.
>> Does any of this supposition have rational support, or is all just
>> reports from the birch grove?
>
>I don't understand your reference to the birch grove.
It is a reference to the John Birch Society, a right-wing reactionary
group.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:11:11 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>> I don't understand your reference to the birch grove.
>
>Anybody who mentions the fact that the US's education is being
>DELIBERATELY destroyed by the teaching establishment is *supposedly*
>a member of the John Birch society, [...]
Anybody who thinks that the education system is being destroyed by the
educators is an idiot.
>[...]an
>organization which is ridiculed by leftists to such an extent that
>I can only assume that it is out of utter fear.
Well, I must admit there's an underlying fear that such a poor excuse
for intellectual effort will become more popular. Mostly, though, I
think the JBS gets ridiculed because it is ridiculous, I'm afraid.
>Fear of what, I do not know...but quite obviously, the JB society is
>the biggest of all boogey-men in the mind of socialists, communists,
>statists, and other creeps.
No, just narrow-minded ultra-conservatives with regressive ideas about
social justice in the minds of liberals, moderates, and even some
conservatives.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux will crash and burn.....
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:05:59 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Chris Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8nadqk$67j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8n9ngk$oc6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
> >
> >Then, why couldn't they go with infozip? Or develop their own from
> scratch?
>
> You're talking about people who couldn't manage to get something as simple
> as DOS right and you still ask this question?
>
It was as much a statement as it was a question. Dos? That was not all
that bad, for a really bad "OS" look at Applesoft.
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Another satisfied Linux user
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:43:06 -0400
In article <slrn8pgs8i.229.TheCentralScrutinizer.201@C298344-
A.arvada1.co.home.com>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 18:22:09 -0400, Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 13:12:05 -0400, Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>"...a lot securer than Windows NT or Windows 2000"
> >
> >How so?
>
> maturity and open source.
>
> MS has never given a shit about security and they've never understood
> the difference between a LAN and a WAN. They think the entire world can
> be treated as one happy family on the LAN to be given complete trust.
>
>
Come now ..... you only trust executables with *certificates*! <GRIN>
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:44:03 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said void in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 15:21:23 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Correction: I'm unwilling to do any more independent reading unless
>>someone can give me some specific understanding of what reading would be
>>most useful and how to efficiently find it.
>
>I've given you that and more.
Sure you have. Heh.
>>You only have to do enough
>>reading to see that even experts can disagree on some things before you
>>stop trying to rest your arguments on referral to authority.
>
>Experts disagree on topics like how to best design remote filesystems,
>not on topics like "what does the sticky bit do?". Once again, your
>contempt for your betters is showing.
You're an idiot; I'm just un-knowledgable.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:44:04 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>I just have no idea of what you are saying. Are you saying my answer was
>not an accurate answer to your question? How am I supposed to answer to
>"was he mistaken?" if not by "yes, he was"?
It is lost in the mist of time, Roberto. I don't have time or patience
to backtrack to review your pedantic point. Suffice it to say that some
answers are technically correct, and still not simply useless, but
wrong, within the context of the discussion.
>> I didn't insult you for answering; I insulted
>> you for pretending to answer while providing no useful information.
>
>So, I was just pretending to answer. You are a gem. I suppose
>you are just pretending to post, too.
Perhaps.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:44:06 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said void in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 01:36:08 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Said void in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>>>
>>>>Can I get my ten dollars now?
>>>
>>>Sure, send me your address.
>>
>>I'm sorry, you've lost the bet. Are you putting your money where your
>>mouth is? [...]
>
>This represents *perfectly* the difficulties of trying to communicate
>with T. Max Devlin.
What, that Usenet conversations are sometimes hard to follow,
particularly when the quoting gets creative? This is my fault?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 00:44:10 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Pat McCann in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The question, for me, is whether the FSF's position is that the
>> GPL says that you cannot alone and without reference to the concept of
>> "derivative intellectual property", or whether the GPL merely reflects
>> their opinion that a "program is derivative of the library" in
>> accordance with copyright law. I wasn't aware until the latter part of
>> the discussion that there might be a difference.
>
>I just had a GPL proponent telling me that the GPL doesn't impose
>restrictions that aren't already restricted by copyright law, as
>opposed the the new-fangled UCITA-supporting licenses that try to
>restrict things that would otherwise be allowed like decompiling.
>
>That sounds reasonable and like it could be FSF doctrine. If it is,
>that would answer your question. Just keep in mind that the FSF's
>position isn't always worth anything. Often, the understanding of
>the licensor, licensee, and court are the only things that count.
AFAIK, there is never any other understanding that counts to begin with.
The question was what the FSF's position is, not whether it would stand
up in court. To be honest, I take that as a given, since they have no
purpose in presenting an opinion which is contradicted by law. They
don't make money on GNU software, after all.
So provisionally we'll presume that the FSF concept of 'derivative' is
identical to the legal understanding. This fits my theories, though it
will give Lee Hollaar a fit, I'm sure.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
