On 24/01/07, Gabriel Ambuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And besides, the BSDL predates the GPLv1 by a decade.
This is simply untrue.
I have done some research on this:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=%22at%26t+source+license%22+BSD
In 1989 the Networking Tape 1 was released; this was the
Twas brillig at 11:23:52 27.01.2007 UTC+00 when Dave Crossland did gyre and
gimble:
DC The freedom to become less free is a paradox.
DC http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-copyleft.html explains why
DC copyleft licenses like the GPL are better than permissive free
DC software licenses like
BSD people appreciate software companies like Apple coming along,
changing the code, and releasing *non-free*.
On 1/27/07, Mikhail Gusarov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Twas brillig at 11:23:52 27.01.2007 UTC+00 when Dave Crossland did gyre and
gimble:
DC The freedom to become less free is a
On 27/01/07, Gabriel Ambuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 27 January 2007 12:23:52 Dave Crossland wrote:
And besides, the BSDL predates the GPLv1 by a decade.
This is simply untrue.
I have done some research on this:
This is simply untrue.
The fact is, as originally stated, that the BSD preceded the GPL (by two years
or ten) and that free or open source software certainly existed well before
the FSF did. I received system distributions for DECsystem-10s in the 70s,
entirely in source form...
The freedom
On 3:30:45 pm 2007-01-27 David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is simply untrue.
The fact is, as originally stated, that the BSD preceded the GPL (by
two years or ten)
http://www.free-soft.org/gpl_history/
I think they were at most at the same time not one preceded the other.
On 1/27/07 3:33 AM, Mikhail Gusarov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please don't think your opponents are ignoramus. Nearly everyone here
knows very well both the position of BSD people, and essences of GNU
homilies.
Personally, I'd be a lot more impressed if Mr. Crossland were able to
articulate
On 1/27/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BSD people appreciate software companies like Apple coming along,
changing the code, and releasing *non-free*.
That is a freedom which the BSD license allows.
Yes it is.
But I prefer copyleft - the idea of using the law to try and
Twas brillig at 15:10:43 27.01.2007 UTC+00 when Declan Naughton did gyre and
gimble:
DN But I prefer copyleft - the idea of using the law to try and make
DN sure freedom doesn't go away, to giving others the freedom to
DN take it away.
Well, it's your problem, not others one.
--
JID:
On 1/27/07, Mikhail Gusarov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Twas brillig at 15:10:43 27.01.2007 UTC+00 when Declan Naughton did gyre and
gimble:
DN But I prefer copyleft - the idea of using the law to try and make
DN sure freedom doesn't go away, to giving others the freedom to
DN take it away.
On Saturday 27 January 2007 16:10:43 Declan Naughton wrote:
But I prefer copyleft - the idea of using the law to try and make sure
freedom doesn't go away, to giving others the freedom to take it away.
If others take code under the BSDL and put it into a closed system, freedom
doesn't go away
On Saturday 27 January 2007 15:58:46 Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik wrote:
(You've let us know you're not a developer; it's becoming clear you
have no greater level of understanding of legal issues.)
I won't comment on this as IANAL.
This is entirely right (albeit IANAL either). For example, if
If I am free to beat someone up that does not mean the sum total of
freedom for society is increased.
Sorry, pointlessness alert. There's _never_ a freedom to beat someone up,
and--outside of the very limited contexts of, e.g., law enforcement or military
activities--no one can grant one, so
If others take code under the BSDL and put it into a closed system, freedom
doesn't go away at all. It just doesn't necessarily extend any further.
It has gone away for the users of that system.
...who are, of course, being forced to use said system at gunpoint.
Really, what's it to you? If
On 1/27/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
because
capitalists organisations involve authoritative decision making and
the person in authority, paying my wage, tells me I have to be there.
Yawn. So quit. Move to the people's republic of your choice and live in
proletarian
Are you sure you should be on a children's mailing list somewhere?
Renaissance Man
On 27 Jan 2007, at 4:16 pm, David Schlesinger wrote:
Yawn. So quit. Move to the people's republic of your choice and
live in proletarian harmony, giving according to your means and
receiving according to your
Well you managed to miss the point of my *metaphor* (not straw man),
even though I spelt it out for you:
The point is real freedom is measured on a whole picture basis,
not on an individual basis.
How are you less free as a result?
Apple's iPhone, for instance, contains open source
How are you less free as a result?
Apple's iPhone, for instance, contains open source software, but
because it's totally reliant on un-free software I can't add VoIP via
WiFi to it for instance, effectively nullifying the freedom aspect of
the free software component for its users. All the
As you point out, with Apple taking BSD software and 'competing
against BSD', the market share for vanilla BSD is reduced. You can't
however know whether in the medium-long term this is an 'overall good'
which sped up Freedom through other interactions in the future or an
overall bad. Apple geeks
On 1/27/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More importantly (and very relevantly to this list) you can't compete for
consumers on a basis of Not as good, but _more free_. If completely open
phones are going to achieve any sort of dominance, then the same kind of
work will have to go
On Saturday 27 January 2007 08:38, Gabriel Ambuehl wrote:
On Saturday 27 January 2007 16:10:43 Declan Naughton wrote:
But I prefer copyleft - the idea of using the law to try and make sure
freedom doesn't go away, to giving others the freedom to take it away.
If others take code under the
(offlist)
On 27/01/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is simply untrue.
The fact is, as originally stated, that the BSD preceded the GPL (by two
years or ten)
I would really appeciate some evidence of this.
Here my evidence that the original BSD license was first used in
On 1/28/07, Corey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BSDL contains an inherent self-destruct gene, GPL contains a built-in
propagation gene.
And Non-Free Software contains a built-in propagation gene which
cannot evolve its medium (technology) as quickly as the license-gene
for Free Software can.
But
(offlist)
Not.
I would really appeciate some evidence of this...
Fine. You're correct that the GPL and the BSD came out in the same year. In any
case, there was, as I've said, plenty of free software (although few
licenses) a decade and more before any of this.
Now that I've agreed that I
On 24 Jan 2007, at 7:13 pm, David Schlesinger wrote:
Where did I, or anybody else, DEMAND that OpenMoko give credit to
GNU?
Dave Crossland's demanded it on a couple of occasions. Go back and
reread his latest messages, particularly his message of 6:13 am
this morning.
It might help
I think we've heard the viewpoints of both sides...
In my humble opinion, this whole discussion (while it showed some good
viewpoints on both sides) is a bit premature. We haven't seen any
documentation from the Openmoko team that suggests that they use one
notation or the other.
As Sean already
Hi Sean,
On 23/01/07, David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You must be reading a different link. Sean's email most clearly states
in the form of a user's manual that will give credit to GNU. He also
clearly stated We'll just call it OpenMoko.
Could you confirm that if FIC writes that OpenMoko
Gosh, why does this fail to surprise me?
Didn't you get to say your piece already? Why don't you harass the Ubuntu
folks with this, hm? There are many more folks calling it Linux than
GNU/Linux, and very few people who seem to care strongly about your
over-developed sense of history and ethics,
Could you just drop this line of discussion, or pursue it off-list...? If
they refer to it as Linux they'll be in line with pretty much every major
_Linux_ distribution out there.
On 1/24/07 6:11 AM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Sean,
On 23/01/07, David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 17:15, Dave Crossland wrote:
I feel it is misleading to describe code distributed in the 1960s and
70s as 'free software' - because software freedom was not recognised
or enshrined.
Ok, now that's just being ridiculous.
And besides, the BSDL predates the GPLv1 by
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Better still, tell you what: since you're all about the ethics here, go
and get the folks at GNU to change the name of their system to GNU/Mach
and _then_ come back to talk to _us_.
I might ask about that alright.
Why don't you harass
On 1/24/07 9:51 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Better still, tell you what: since you're all about the ethics here, go
and get the folks at GNU to change the name of their system to GNU/Mach
and _then_ come back to talk to
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07 9:51 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Better still, tell you what: since you're all about the ethics here, go
and get the folks at GNU to change the name of
Declan Naughton wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07 9:51 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Better still, tell you what: since you're all about the ethics
here, go
and get the folks at
On 1/24/07, Raymond Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Declan Naughton wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07 9:51 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Better still, tell you what: since you're
On 1/24/07 10:20 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I am aware, OpenMoko is not using the GNU/CMU Mach kernel..
No, they're certainly not. However, GNU _is_ and they're failing to give
appropriate credit to the principal developer of their system. So on what
basis are you
On 1/24/07 11:03 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07 10:20 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I am aware, OpenMoko is not using the GNU/CMU Mach kernel..
No, they're certainly not. However, GNU
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07 11:03 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/24/07 10:20 AM, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I am aware, OpenMoko is not using the GNU/CMU
* Renaissance Man [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 01:38]:
I actually become aware of the FS movement via the GNU moniker, so it worked
on me. For many years I was only aware of the OS movement (through knowing
about Linux).
rant
Guess you wasn't to much interested in the license of the software you
On 22/01/07, Andreas Kostyrka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Renaissance Man [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 01:38]:
I actually become aware of the FS movement via the GNU
moniker, so it worked on me. For many years I was only aware
of the OS movement (through knowing about Linux).
Guess you wasn't to
(sorry for the premature post)
On 22/01/07, Andreas Kostyrka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Renaissance Man [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 01:38]:
I actually become aware of the FS movement via the GNU
moniker, so it worked on me. For many years I was only aware
of the OS movement (through knowing
On 22/01/07, Marcel de Jong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/21/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If more people are aware of why freedom and community matter, then
they will buy more products that support freedom and community, like
more Neos.
How does adding three more letters and
I like to be accurate and know what I am talking about, and I like
others to be too :-)
It simply never ends, does it?
Feel entirely free to call it GNU/Linux, Bob/Linux, Jim/Linux or
whatever you like, okay. But _please_ stop proselytizing.
Have you ever noticed how folks with a zealot-like
David, if you're not interested in the topic take note of the subject
in your inbox and stop reading the thread. Don't troll the thread
with inflammatory arguments and personal attacks.
You may have made up your mind but there are clearly other people who
would like to continue the
I just joined the mailing list but if the point of this thread is
about whether the manual/box/website for openmoko should refer to it
using Linux or GNU/Linux then I am 100% whole heartedly behind
GNU/Linux..
If there were the possibility of replacing the kernel with say a cut
down bsd kernel
On 22/01/07, MR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just joined the mailing list but if the point of this thread is
about whether the manual/box/website for openmoko should refer to it
using Linux or GNU/Linux then I am 100% whole heartedly behind
GNU/Linux.
That's originally what this thead was about,
* Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 21:37]:
That also wouldn't be accurate. The droid, refering to
wikipedia-stable, might instead say:
So, it's something _different_ than Linux?
Well, not really. GNU/Linux is the whole system; Linux is one part of
the system, and it is a very
Feel entirely free to call it GNU/Linux, Bob/Linux, Jim/Linux or
whatever you like, okay. But _please_ stop proselytizing.
Dude, why so prickly? I am not sure why this discussion is making you
so agitated..? We are having a discussion, and if you want it to stop,
just... stop? :-)
I'm not
Let's just call it GNU/Linux and be done with it.
On 1/22/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Feel entirely free to call it GNU/Linux, Bob/Linux, Jim/Linux or
whatever you like, okay. But _please_ stop proselytizing.
Dude, why so prickly? I am not sure why this discussion is
On 1/22/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It simply never ends, does it?
One can hope :-)
Next time I get another argument on this subject in my inbox, I'm
going to simply email this back-to-sender, not the entire list:
http://www.linuxtogo.org/gowiki/OpenMoko/Debate-GNU-Linux
From:
http://www.linuxtogo.org/gowiki/OpenMoko/Debate-GNU-Linux
This debate cannot be won, by either side. Sometimes intelligent
people disagree, this is A Good Thing.
Actually I thought it was pretty clear from Sean's comment on the
matter that, with regard to OpenMoko, that GNU/Linux
I believe we already saw Sean's reply to you and he said GNU would be
credited in the documentation.
-david
p.s. the more people blabber about GNU, the more I try to remove it from
my system and support non-GNU replacements. this is called the point of
where proselytizing is no longer
Most sales droids I know wouldn't even have a clue about either GNU or
Linux :-D
-david
Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
* Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 21:37]:
That also wouldn't be accurate. The droid, refering to
wikipedia-stable, might instead say:
So, it's something _different_
On Monday 22 January 2007 20:07, David Ford wrote:
p.s. the more people blabber about GNU, the more I try to remove it from
my system and support non-GNU replacements.
That's obviously your prerogative, by all means.
But... wow, talk about throwing out the baby with the bath water.
I'm
Hello all,
On this recent discussion on yes/no GNU/Linux, I saw this and that
popped up a question for me:
On 1/21/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
If more people are aware of why freedom and community matter, then
they will buy more products that support freedom and community,
55 matches
Mail list logo
