David H. Lynch Jr. wrote:
Hell, the OpenBSD ports tree should perhaps contain patches which
REMOVE such commercial operating system support. That's a fork
Richard would surely approve of.
Richard, your pants are full of hypocritical poo.
I have no doubt that in some context Richard is hypocritical.
Though most of us would be hard pressed to structure our lives
to be consistent with our beleifs and principles to the extent
that he has.
But this is not about EMACS, nor is it about hypocracy.
RMS made statements first. RMS will pay for his lies.
Why did I even bother.
I was not trying to defend RMS or attack you.
I was actually looking at the possibility that there might be some way
of getting something positive out of this
for OpenBSD. There is an obvious win-win for everybody, but you are
fixated on revenge for imaginary slights.
This sounds like something from my eight year old. You are 30something,
Grow up.
Sounds like an insult from you.
Do you really write your own email, or do you have some kid do them for
you ?
Sounds like an insult from you
It is more important to you to catch Stallman in some mis-statement or
lie than to even figure out what is best for OpenBSD ?
Rather than figure out if there is anyway OpenBSD can benefit, it is
more important to find a way to screw somebody else ?
Sounds like an insult from you.
Every once in a while you show rationality and intelligence, and I think
maybe there is some real value and real hope for
OpenBSD, then you lob off a message like this one.
No. Nothing begs the question of what we do. We are not going to
change our process in any way as a result of what some loony retard
says.
So if Richard adopted the BSD/ISC you would switch to the GPL just
to spite him ?
We know _exactly_ what our principles are, and we are sticking to them
very clearly.
Yes, the screw RMS, Screw the FSF, and screw the world, and screw
ourselves principle.
Because frankly I can't see where you are following any other.
Your position on closed hardware and binary blobs is exactly the same as
Stallman's,
and logically leads to the same position on software.
Yet so far I have gotten no position on software - aside from the claim
that Stallman somehow insulted OpenBSD.
The only way his remarks could be taken as an insult, would be if you
actually have the same principles.
Even then it would be more of an uninformed error than an insult.
It is not an insult for him to claim that you tacitly endorse non-free
software - if you do.
Whatever your principles are you are sticking to them so clearly that I
do not even think most of the OpenBSD
developers know what they actually are - well aside from the screw
everybody else principle. That one seems abundantly clear.
Look up how 'openbsd' was started and learn about the whole 'open' idea.
The open CVS server, open documentation, open drivers, etc.
Hmm maybe RMS won't recommend OpenBSD because it is open.. and being
open implies open source, which.. is not good.. it must be free
software, not open software.
From the perspective of OpenBSD values,
How far does the OpenBSD disdain for non-free software extend ?
Richard does not stand in a position where he can ask that question
to us. Nor do you. We'll do what we want, and your questions don't
change anything.
Forget Richard, Forget me, Forget all the people you think have fucked
you over.
Sounds like a childish insult from you.
Instead of trying to figure out how to extract revenge, figure out what
is best for OpenBSD.
There is nothing wrong with doing what you want.
But it sure as hell looks as if you are more interested in making
certain that you do NOT do anything that richard might want.
That anytime he says black, you are going to say white.
In many circles I am known for having nearly an absolutist position on
Free Speech.
IMO software has nothing to do with speech. It is about open code, open
development and even free of cost code at times to make it wonderful.
Software is like engineering electronic circuit blueprints.. it isn't
like a protest where you hammer on people's doors and talk about the
blood and gory of the protest on 99th street where everyone was holding
big signs and getting beaten by the police for bringing up censorship.
Nobody goes around talking about how grocery stores are censoring our
freedom by not giving us the chemical blueprints of Apples.
So if some guy releases a closed source piece of code and it happens to
work, who cares.. let them do that. It's just an apple without a blueprint.
Instead of just leaving the Apple alone, a free software hacker will
make extra effort to fight the grocery store for giving away an apple
without apple blueprints. Why not just leave it alone, and go on with
your open development and open code? Because free software developers
waste time on fighting the Apple instead of just developing open code.
Free Speech is why 'open' developers don't get along with free
developers.. because the whole free speech thing confuses everyone.
For example, I'd like for all GNU developers to stop censoring their
books, and consulting and stop holding a gun to my head whenever I want
a support contract.. that should be free, as in speech, and I shouldn't
be restricted. So what really is free speech? It is a vague, meaningless
phrase because if I apply free speech to consulting and books, then all
hardcover and paperback books should be opened and freed, as compiling a
book is censoring it only to those who can pay for the book. When you
take free speech to far, everything becomes censorship.. even the apple
in your store and the banana in your store which don't come with
molecular or atomic molecular blueprints.
All boxes of cookies do not come with exact molecular blueprints on
them. They only contain censored ingredients and no build instructions
for the cookies. Reality is free speech could be taken so far as to
demand all cookie boxes contain exact instructions on how every cookie
in the box was cooked and at what temperature. Some cookie vendors
simply don't have time for this nonsense, since they know that most
cookie eaters don't view the cookie as free speech, since the cookie
isn't speech.. just as software is not speech.. software is just code.
So stop the whole free speech nonsense and focus on open code. At least
that's what I do.
Methinks bsd is more of an open OS whereas GNU is more of a political
fight for our anti-censorship kinda toolset.
> Your expressed position is even more absolutist than mine.
Yet here you are telling others we can not even ask questions. My we
have clay feet.
Richard has actually answer the challenges you have thrown at him.
In those instances where someone found that something that he
recommended was not adhering to the standards he established,
he commited to look into it and either fix it or revoke his recommendation.
You refuse to deign to allow anyone else to ask questions.
You are asking them right now, this is email.. anything goes. Stop worrying.
Establish what your principles and policies are or are going to be.
We did. Years ago.
I got it, OpenBSD is good, non-free software is good, but anything
having anything to do with RMS is evil.
Seriously, nothing I have read of any OpenBSD policies and
principles is inconsistent with Richard's on this issue.
If I am wrong about that, then OpenBSD has done a poor job of
expressing its policies and principles.
If I am right you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.
This does not effect me personally one way or another.
I could give a rats ass about the future of OpenBSD.
Nor is this childish spat you seem to be having all by yourself
with Richard
of any consequence to me.
Though I will conceede you are incredibly frustrating,
how the hell can somebody so obviously intelligent,
be so obviously self destructive and stupid at the same time.
If one person calls you an ass, that's there problem.
If ten people call you an ass, maybe you should think about it.
If everyone on the planet outside your own cult calls you an ass,
you are either the messiah or an ass. My money is on the latter.
Did you?
Do you have turrets or aspergers or some other reason why you are
compelled to insult virtually everyone ?
Since when was 'did you' an insult?
Adhere to them and THEN if they are consistent with Richard's
you can insist on his endorsement or burn him as a hypocrit.
We do adhere to our principles very exactly. Richard does not adhere
to what he preaches.
Richard came to our lists on a vendetta of hatred. Richard lied about
our project. Richard continues, and he won't stop, and therefore he
is an asshole. He'll get what he deserves -- we don't drop this issue
now that he's gone so far.
Richard, Richard, Richard. You would think he is the anti-christ.
Forget Richard, look after your own interests.
Though Frankly, I suspect you will find that virtually every human
outside the cult of OpenBSD,
that gives enough of a damn to read Richards remarks would conclude that
nothing he said insulted OpenBSD, and that they were accurate.
I am not part of the OpenBSD cult, I just started using it a couple days
ago and I think that the whole 'openbsd isn't worthy of freedom' is an
insult since OpenBSD developers develop open and free software..but see
it is open and that might tick some people off.. since open is a very
very bad word. It is a swear word, in fact.
If you are unwilling to adopt policies consistent with his,
accept that you are not getting his endorsement and shut this thread
down.
Why do you get to tell people what threads should be shut down?
Fine blather away as you please. Atleast Don Quite was fighting
against windmills for a worthwhile cause.
Why don't you mail Richard and tell him to stop mailing our lists?
Or are you his little brother?
I have e-mailed him. Pretty much the same thing I emailed you.
I sugested that since on this specific issue I could see no conflict
between what I percieve to be OpenBSD values and policies, that there
had to be someway to reach common ground.
But I do not speak for OpenBSD - you do.
And you seem to fixated on revenge for imagined slights to look out
for your own or OpenBSD's interests.
There are values I share with you, some I share with Richard, and
many I hold as my own.
I have had heated private exchanges with Richard on several topics.
But he has always been civil. He is a brilliant and shares many
other traits with you.
But he seems matured past eight, and realize that that whining and
ranting is not going to get him anywhere.
You are ranting about his ranting.
Funny when you look in the mirror.
All ranters are always criticized for ranting, but this rant against
ranting is a rant itself.
Please see:
http://z505.com/cgi-bin/qkcont/qkcont.cgi?p=There-Are-Ranters-or-There-Are-Ranters
There is no cooperation between FSF and OpenBSD, and if Richard keeps
throwing poo at us, we will keep throwing poo right back at him and
his hyporcritical project.
I got it, if the fate of the human race depended on cooperation
between the two of you,
the rest of us need to bend over and kiss our asses goodbye,
You would rather eat dog shit than concede there is any issue on the
planet that Richard is not wrong about.
If god came down and gave you a choice between a heaven with Richard
in it and eternal damnation, you would pick
eternal damnation.
Richard has offered you the oportunity to aquire his endorsement.
That's bullshit. Richard came looking for a fight. I don't think he
expected to look this much like a loser.
Outside the cult of OpenBSD no one else sees it that way.
Actually, I started using OpenBSD a couple days ago. And I see Richard
coming in and encouraging this whole unfriendliness cliche by saying
things like 'can't talk to Theo but I'm on this list' and 'OpenBSD is
not worthy of freedom' and 'OpenBSD encourages non-free stuff so much
that we can't even consider it free'.
Which are all exaggerated lies.. or excuses. The main excuse was that
'can't talk to Theo because he is unfriendly even though if I look in
the mirror I am the same, and any programmer who gets told lies is the
same'.
The few people who are paying attention are trying to figure out why
OpenBSD is more interested
in pissing all over RMS than looking after its own interests,
And Richard only looks stupid for beleiving there was any hope of
rational discourse.
You spelled beleiving wrong.
Bwahahahhaha
Bwahahahhaha
With very little effort OpenBSD could be the most significant OS
with Richard Stallman's impratur
certifying it as totally free.
We are free. We don't need some uneducated guy who climbed up into
some high chair endorsing us; he is jealous of what we do, and that
noone else listens to him anymore.
If he is so jealous, why are you the ones whining because you can't
get anybody to give you any money ?
I read damn little besides sour grapes from the OpenBSD community.
I think Shakespeare might have some advice - "the fault is not in
our stars, but in ourselves".
But what would I know, like Richard, I am just an uneducated twit.
From what I can tell GPL/LGPL projects make up almost 75% of all
FOSS projects, and BSD projects less that 6%.
75% of people have brains the size of a dehydrated pea
75% of people pay taxes to government
75% of people advocate C, the most insecure programming language.
75% of people read newspapers each day and actually believe them
75% of people have TV's, and actually use them
75% of people drink Coke, a drink that has no nutritional value
75% of people have brains the size of a dehydrated pea
> There are nearly as many projects under the new GPLv3 as the BSD
> License.
> Even Torvald's has gone from dead set against the GPLv3 to being
> willing to actually use it in some circumstances.
>
Anytime Torvalds is brought up, it automatically voids the entire email.
All in all Richard has been doing quite well - despite graduating
magna cum laude from Harvard and picking up two honorary doctorates and
1 honorary professorship - this year.
Sounds like you are trying encourage a new jealousy flamewar now.
If he gives a damn about OpenBSD at all, it is because if he could
endorse it, he could use it as an effective club to beat on Linux
distributions to get them to conform to his notions of free software.
While gNewSense might actually be more popular than OpenBSD, OpenBSD is
an actual real OS, with a real history even if it has damn few actual
users. "Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?"
He is not jealous of you. He just wants to use you as a means to much
bigger ends. But god forbid that you might actually benefit from that.
"Alas, alas for you, lawyers and pharisees, hypocrites that you are!
Sure that the kingdom of Heaven awaits you; you will not venture half so
far."
I am not the leader of the RMS fan club, but personally, it seems
like you can't figure out why he has the stature and attention he has,
and you do not.
Sounds like you are trying encourage a new jealousy flamewar now.
Hey I can't figure out why Bill Gates is worth Billions and I am
not. But I am not letting it eat me up.
And while you are mail bombing Stallman - why don't you revive
another childish blast from the past and lob a few kernel binaries at him.
Do you actually read the crap you write ?
Sounds like a childish insult from you, therefore a return favor is
possibly cooking up.
Please tell me that you have aspergers, or are a paranoid schitz, so
that there is a rational explanation for your behavior.
Sounds like a childish insult from you.
What goes around comes around.
This is just email after all.
L505
