blah blah blah As usual you keep repeating what you said before but it _still_ does not make it so.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 03:30:45PM +0000, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 06:52:56AM -0700, L wrote: > > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > >> On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 02:17:46PM -0600, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > >>> For GPL-licensed software I recommend the term "covenant(ed) > >>> software". So-called "free software", as rms uses the term, is > >>> totally dependent on the GPL, which leverages the State's monopoly on > >>> violence to compel modifiers of the software to offer their mods to > >>> the public. > >> Free Software as Richard Stallman uses the term is BSD. > >> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > >> The GPL is merely a "covenant" license which closes the (mathmatical > >> definition alike) ring of Free Software so all operations don't create a > >> derivate outside that definition. > > > > Ring of Stallmanism, not free software. > > No, the ring of Free Software, as defined by the Free Software > Foundation, which is exactly the same kind of Free used in the OpenBSD > context. > > You may think otherwise, but you should better give evidence instead of > insult, if you want to be taken seriously. > > > Some definitions of free: > > Not under control of another, having liberty, independent > > Able to move in any direction, loose. > > etc. > > Pulled right from a dictionary > > 'free' != 'free software', but anyway: > 1) software is always under the control of another by law > 2) software isn't alive, it's not software who needs the freedom, it's > people > 3) with zangband people are under the control of the zangband authors > 4) with zangband, people haven't the independence to move in the direction > of profit > > etc... > > > I exercise my right to free speech, to be able to say that free software > > shall not be called free software unless it follows the dictionary term. > > The FSF definiton does follow your "dictionary" definition. As I said, > it is *the* *same* as BSD's. > > > What stops me from starting my OWN PERSONAL freedom definition on my site > > and my own PERSONAL 'freedom ring' that only allows people to join who have > > followed MY conditions? That is not freedom, that is Larsism or 505ism > > according to my own PERSONAL opinions. > > You don't seem to understand that the GPL is a ring closure license for > GPL'ed Free Software, not for all Free Software. The day you stop and > cultivate yourself you'll avoid braindead statements like the one below: > > > YOU HAVE ALL BEEN BRAINWASHED. > > THOSE CUTE ANIMALS ON THE GNU WEBSITE WERE A PROPAGANDA TACTIC. > > Cheers. > Rui > > -- > You are what you see. > Today is Sweetmorn, the 59th day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3173 > + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown > + Whatever you do will be insignificant, > | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi > + So let's do it...?
