Linux-Advocacy Digest #657, Volume #32 Mon, 5 Mar 01 14:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: GPL Like patents. (mlw)
Re: Goodwins Law: Thread now dead (Was: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else)
("Edward Rosten")
Re: KDE or GNOME? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: So, here's something to chew on... ("Masha Ku'Inanna")
Re: KDE or GNOME? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: GPL Like patents. (Roberto Alsina)
Re: KDE or GNOME? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: GPL Like patents. (Roberto Alsina)
Re: NT vs *nix performance (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: KDE or GNOME? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Virus Alert : "A Virtual Card for You" + "An Internet Flower For
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: State of linux distros ("Masha Ku'Inanna")
Re: KDE or GNOME? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Joke (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 13:34:33 -0500
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
>
> > Craig Kelley wrote:
> >>
> >> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > Encourage development by protecting the results of investment.
> >> > Make public inventions so that industry can prosper.
> >>
> >> How about providing for free code so that *anyone* can prosper? The
> >> GPL doesn't allow that because it is predjudiced against certain
> >> classes of developers (intentionally).
> >
> > Ahh, and how would you prosper? By taking code you didn't write and don't
> > own, and charging money for it and NOT properly compensating the original
> > authors.
>
> This is so-typical GPL advocacy.
If you didn't have the code, you couldn't take it could you? It makes no
difference what I do with MY code. If you don't like the rules by which you
gain use of it, then it don't use it. What is so hard to understand about that?
It ain't yours.
[BSD drivel snipped]
This is about GPL, not BSD. As a developer, I will never release under the BSD
license because it does not afford me enough control over my work. They may be
similar in nature, but not analogous.
The last thing I want to happen is to create something for the open source
community and have it cooped by M$, ala kerberose.
The GPL is about the rights and freedom of developers and the code they
produce.
--
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time.
The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of
consistency.
-- Albert Einstein
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.test,misc.test,uk.test
Subject: Re: Goodwins Law: Thread now dead (Was: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or
Else)
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:46:43 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
>> <AK>
>
>> *******FUCK******* Goodwin
>
>> </AK>
>>
>
> WHO?????
Aaron Kulkis.
This is his response to any hint of a mention og Goodwin's law.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: KDE or GNOME?
Date: 5 Mar 2001 18:48:48 GMT
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:07:13 -0300, Roberto Alsina wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>Actually, no. you don't :-)
>You might need to tweak a bit the building system, but you really don't.
I thought it depended on ICE ?
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Masha Ku'Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So, here's something to chew on...
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:54:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Masha Ku'Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Ash Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >>
> >> Hell, I miss my old Amiga. :>
> >>
> I still have my old Amiga....and it still works too!!
Mine is still back at home, gathering dust, unfortunately.. :/ my mom has no
idea what a good computer is. *laughs*
I saw a website that was looking at doing a version of "Scorched Planet,"
the Amiga version written for PC's...
THAT was a fun game. :D I know it was a port of a DOS game, but it was such
a vast improvement. :>
I remember spending hours on that game, while at college, on the net (Umass'
OpenVMS system at the time), and writing an essay for "Good vs Evil, East
and West views".
Never crashed. :D
Ah, the good old days..
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE or GNOME?
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:51:53 +0000
In article <TDdo6.5994$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Spicerun"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <97rm95$r2vgc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jakob Kosowski"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] BOZOIZED!> wrote:
>> Why do so many people use Winblows? There must be a good reason for
>> that
>> :-|
>
> It certainly had nothing to do with choice!
>
> <plonk>
Jesus christ! You're being a little intolerant at the moment!
Give the guy a break, there is nothing that much wrong with what he said.
there is much worse crap on COLA than this.
And I have to agree, many people use windows because they have no choice
(or don'k know of the choice. same effect).
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 15:51:42 -0300
mlw wrote:
> Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> mlw wrote:
>>
>> > Craig Kelley wrote:
>> >>
>> >> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Encourage development by protecting the results of investment.
>> >> > Make public inventions so that industry can prosper.
>> >>
>> >> How about providing for free code so that *anyone* can prosper? The
>> >> GPL doesn't allow that because it is predjudiced against certain
>> >> classes of developers (intentionally).
>> >
>> > Ahh, and how would you prosper? By taking code you didn't write and
>> > don't own, and charging money for it and NOT properly compensating the
>> > original authors.
>>
>> This is so-typical GPL advocacy.
>
> If you didn't have the code, you couldn't take it could you? It makes no
> difference what I do with MY code. If you don't like the rules by which
> you gain use of it, then it don't use it. What is so hard to understand
> about that? It ain't yours.
>
> [BSD drivel snipped]
Way to go. Remove every trace of my position, then pretend that you are
addressing it. Not to mention calling it drivel. I'd say it was not drivel,
I'd say it was something you don't want to cope with.
> This is about GPL, not BSD.
Actually, it's about both.
Let's see: what license do you think is being promoted with "How about
providing for free code so that *anyone* can prosper? The GPL doesn't
allow that because it is predjudiced against certain
classes of developers (intentionally)."?
What license were YOU referring to when you said "Ahh, and how would you
prosper? By taking code you didn't write and don't own, and charging money
for it and NOT properly compensating the original authors."?
NOT the GPL, I'd say?
Was that paragraph of yours also "BSd drivel"?
> As a developer, I will never release under the
> BSD license because it does not afford me enough control over my work.
> They may be similar in nature, but not analogous.
The BSD license and the GPL are not similar in nature. Not even close. For
example, "control over work" is the classical purpose of PROPRIETARY
licenses. Doesn't it hint that you prefer the GPL because it's more
proprietary? Less free?
And you are free to license your stuff under the GPL or not. And others
are free to take the other road. These "freedoms" are not the issue. Those
freedoms are not in discussion.
The issue is what's a better thing to do? And why? I gave reasons why I
thought the GPL is the worse idea. You deleted them. You are preventing
rational argument. You insult me. WHY?
> The last thing I want to happen is to create something for the open source
> community and have it cooped by M$, ala kerberose.
Kerberos was not stolen. Kerberos is right were it always was. What damage
was done to Kerberos? What damage was done that would not have been done if
MS had just used a different protocol? What damage was done that the GPL
would have prevented, SINCE MS DIDN'T USE THE ORIGINAL IMPLEMENTATION, BUT
REIMPLEMENTED IT FROM SCRATCH?
The only thing that could have prevented the Kerberos thing was a patent. A
software patent. You know, those eeeevil software patents?
> The GPL is about the rights and freedom of developers and the code they
> produce.
The code is inanimate. The code has no rights. The GPL can't be about
something that doesn't exist.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE or GNOME?
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:52:52 +0000
In article <9805dg$rhpn0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jakob Kosowski"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Spicerun wrote:
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] BOZOIZED!> wrote:
>
> ?
>
>> > Why do so many people use Winblows? There must be a good reason for
>> > that
>> > :-|
>> It certainly had nothing to do with choice!
>
> ?
>
>> <plonk>
>
> I just said that there needn't to be a reason. Because I'm not very good
> at English I maybe didn't get the point and wrote something silly or
> offending, but why do you *plonk* me? It was my first post ever on
> c.o.l.a. Do you hate newbies or what?
He must have been in a real bad mood.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 15:28:02 -0300
mlw wrote:
> Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> mlw wrote:
>>
>> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > > But you do care if you release GPL'd code. You are insisting that
>> >> > > any code that is used in combination with yours in a way that
>> >> > > might be considered a derived work (and the FSF considers linking
>> >> > > a library to make all the linked code a derived work) must also be
>> >> > > licensed according to your choice, not the author(s) of the other
>> >> > > compnents.
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes I do. If the people who wish to create a "derived work" and want
>> >> > to
>> >> use my
>> >> > code in a way I do not wish them too, then use someone else's code.
>> >> Absolutely,
>> >> > you have the freedom not to use it.
>> >>
>> >> So, if I write 10 million lines of code, and use 1 function from your
>> >> code, you have the right to dictate what I do with 9,999,900 other
>> >> lines of code that never even touch your code or could be considered a
>> >> derived work of your code?
>> >
>> > Yup. Don't like it? Don't use my code, but you are exaggerating the
>> > impact. There are very reasonable ways of using GPL software.
>> >
>> > If you want to modify a library, modify the library and release your
>> > modifications. You can still use the library without releasing all your
>> > 10 million lines of code.
>>
>> Actually, that's what RMS says.
>> He says, if the library is GPLd, that you must, if you ever distribute
>> those 10 million LOCs, distribute them under the GPL.
>>
>> Further, he has told me, that if a non-identical clone of that library
>> exists under another license, and even if you did all development using
>> the clone, as long as your 10 MLOC try to use any functionality that is
>> not in the clone, (say, calling a database as shared when the clone
>> doesn't support sharing), your 10MLOC should be distributed under the
>> GPL.
>>
>> Further, he has told me that if an identycal clone exists of that
>> library, which is licensed under a really free license, but that clone
>> uses the original GPL'd library to provide the functionality (check the
>> BSD readline hack) through what is usually considered a non-contaminating
>> interface (pipes), the 10MLOC should be under the GPL.
>>
>> Scared already?
>
> What RMS says and what the law demands can be different.
Sure. However, when I was flamed to hell and back about linking my own code
to GPLd code and Qt, I was told "ask RMS". I did. That's what he said.
> Why don't we just
> look at section 2 of the GPL shall we, it clearly refutes much of the
> garbage people say about GPL:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
[snip section 2 of the GPL]
> This section makes it VERY clear that the doom and gloom people are
> claiming GPL will do is utter non-sense.
Actually, I have my own copy of the GPL, thank you ;-)
It would be much more clarifying if instead of just quoting 100 lines of
text, you quoted with interspersed comments, explaining how, in your view,
linking with a tiny GPLd library doesn't make your code GPLd. I'll promess
to do my best to repeat the crap GPL advocates told me in the past.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:56:09 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 04 Mar 2001 23:57:26 GMT
<GDAo6.15430$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Alan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 16:02:08 GMT, "Chad Myers"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Nowhere in the cites you provided does it say that one can distribute
>> >the copies one has made of the media.
>> >
>> ** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
>> material is distributed, without profit, for research and educational
>> purposes only. ***
>
>Ok, for research and educational purposes, but not recreational
>or entertainment purposes.
>
>Like I said, you still can't burn a copy of a CD for a friend legally.
>The police aren't going to bust your door down, but technically
>it's still illegal.
Technically, nothing; it's illegal, period. It's clear that what
Napster users are doing is NOT for research and educational purposes
(except for news reporters checking on the service, perhaps, as they're
presumably researching a story; as of 3/5, Napster is still breaking
the law).
Whether one gets caught, of course, is an issue. The same issue
exists for Windows products duplicated in the USA (those duplicated
overseas may have their own issues; China in particular is a problem
as they don't really have copyright law AFAIK).
>
>-c
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 28d:18h:10m actually running Linux.
No electrons were harmed during this message.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE or GNOME?
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 15:55:37 -0300
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:07:13 -0300, Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>
>>Actually, no. you don't :-)
>>You might need to tweak a bit the building system, but you really don't.
>
> I thought it depended on ICE ?
Yes. And ICE doesn't depend on X. They are just distributed together.
Some versions of the ICE headers include X headers they don't need, and
some include them to define constants, but there is no functional
dependency.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Virus Alert : "A Virtual Card for You" + "An Internet Flower For
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 19:01:39 +0000
Brian Langenberger wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> <snip!>
>
> : Does it harm Linux? And if not WHY TELL US!
>
> Hell, it doesn't even harm Windows. There is no such article on cnn.com,
> nor has there ever been. It's a hoax.
That was meant to be sarcastic
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: "Masha Ku'Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 14:02:59 -0500
Reply-To: "Masha Ku'Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> But unlike MS, IBM has had some *real* innovations in its time (such as
> the hard disk, etc)
>
>
<snicker>
Aw c'mon! MS has that innovative 5 button optical mouse/brick!
</snicker>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: KDE or GNOME?
Date: 5 Mar 2001 19:01:13 GMT
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 12:26:42 -0300, Roberto Alsina wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>>>So, how does CORBA stack up against DCOP?
>>
>> Well for one, CORBA is standard and DCOP is not.
>
>If we are going to talk standards, GNOME should drop Bonobo. There *is* a
>standard Corba Object Model, and Bonobo ain't it.
Haven't used Bonobo, so I'll take your word for it.
>DCOP is not dependent on X. DCOP depends on libICE. libICE doesn't require
>a running X server. To build libICE you don't need any X sources.
>
>The only connection between libICE and X is that they are usually
>distributed together.
I see. Hence the confusion. I didn't realise that ICE didn't have anything
to do with X.
>There's also another thing. The method of error propagation when you code
>C++ with CORBA is exceptions. That means that EVERY call to any function
>that MIGHT go over CORBA had to be in a try/catch block.
>
>That made the code fucking ugly and dense.
How else would one solve this problem though ? The problem seems
intrinsic -- I mean, any call that might go over CORBA (or any replacement
for CORBA) might also fail, and there needs to be a way to handle failure.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 19:08:13 +0000
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> Perry Pip wrote:
> >
> > Donn,
> >
> > I'll bet when you were in school you were smarter than other
> > students. Imagine if you were forced to take a course for the slower,
> > not as bright students when you should have been in the advanced
> > class. Is that how you feel when you use Windows?? Dumbed down??
> >
> > Special education classes for students who aren't very bright are a necessity
> > for those who need them, as is Windows for those who need it.
>
> This is what horrified me the first time I saw a Macintosh demonstrated
> at Purdue in August 1983.
> ... you can only do what the BUTTONS let you do. UGH!!!
>
Well, at least a Mac stays up longer than windoze.
Not a patch on Unix though...
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: 5 Mar 2001 19:08:48 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jon Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:97sekk$8ms$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Keldon Warlord 2000
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Q. Why does the Linux user constantly obtain
>> >> upgrades of the kernel and other OS facilities?
>> >>
>> >> A. Because he can.
>>
>> > wrong answer.
>>
>> > the real answer is: because he has to.
>>
>> Really now? Why exactly does he HAVE to?
>>
>> I am in control of two webservers and a mail server which are all running
>> redhat linux, and havent had any kind of upgrade in 290 days.
>>
>> Never hacked, never down, never fail.
> You left off, respectively:
> Not worth hacking, never worked hard, no one would notice.
You truly are an idiot, arent you? You've never actually *worked*
with computers, have you?
35,000 people would notice instantly if the mail server went down,
and just shy of that would notice the two webservers suddenly
disappearing.
Whats that? How many email accounts can you manage with Exchange?
And on what kind of hardware?
Whats that? Theres not a machine on the planet capable of driving IIS
to serving over 2000 websites, let alone 15000?
The hell you say.
You moron.
=====.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
