Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
when i took up the practice of law, I was advised: 'if you have no
facts and a weak case, abuse your opponent'.
Really? I, on the other hand, was taught to rely on the logical analysis of
facts and evidence.
I think we'll stop here.
Yeah, ok.
Sandip Bhattacharya [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind your
theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too many
people throw the BSD networking stack as an example whenever this
discussion comes up, but are at a loss when
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
facts please.
[snip]
again, show one
[snip]
again - facts please
I don't think this is leading anywhere useful.
I and others have already spoonfed you with enough facts along with the
reasoning behind them.
You, on the other hand, keep doing the internet equivalent
PJ wrote:
Maybe the proprietary OSX UI layer would count, since it wraps a BSD based
system. But I'm not sure it really matters, since it is just a wrapper, so
you could do the same to a GPL based system. I'll only really worry about
usurping if Apple becomes dominant, rather than the 2nd tier
On 10-May-07, at 5:25 PM, PJ wrote:
You, on the other hand, keep doing the internet equivalent of
fingers in ears
La La La - I can't hear you - La La La
/fingers in ears
when i took up the practice of law, I was advised: 'if you have no
facts and a weak case, abuse your opponent'. I
On 09-May-07, at 10:38 AM, PJ wrote:
BSD style licencing is better than most, but such licences have had a
role in helping MS Windows to its current position (which is why Bill
Gates favours them).
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
and which is why apache is running rings
On 09-May-07, at 1:49 PM, PJ wrote:
Other less-established but important projects under any BSD style
licence are
still at risk.
Kenneth Gonsalves writes:
name some. or name at least one or two (stick to those without lucky
and talented developers because we have already established
PJ wrote:
Kenneth Gonsalves writes:
name some. or name at least one or two (stick to those without lucky
and talented developers because we have already established that bsd
+luck+talent != danger)
2. Use your clairvoyance to figure out which project is going to be unlucky
and
On 09-May-07, at 5:34 PM, PJ wrote:
name some. or name at least one or two (stick to those without lucky
and talented developers because we have already established that bsd
+luck+talent != danger)
Sure.
I just need a list of names of projects that are important that
will be unlucky
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many people throw the BSD networking stack as an example whenever
this discussion comes up,
On 09-May-07, at 7:15 PM, Raj Mathur wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many people throw the BSD networking stack as
Raj Mathur wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many people throw the BSD networking stack as an example whenever
this
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
so, in short, your statement that many important BSD projects are in
danger is not based on any factual knowledge or research.
I've told you a principle that has been shown to hold true (viz. danger of BSD
projects being usurped for all projects
Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many people throw the BSD networking stack as an
Quoting Sandip Bhattacharya [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Raj Mathur wrote:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many people throw the
Quoting PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
so, in short, your statement that many important BSD projects are in
danger is not based on any factual knowledge or research.
I've told you a principle that has been shown to hold true (viz. danger of
BSD
Quoting PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Raj Mathur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
[snip]
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 18:15, Sandip Bhattacharya wrote:
I have a feeling that Kenneth is just asking for some facts behind
your theory of how BSD code is being abused by M$ and its ilk. Too
many people throw the BSD networking stack as an example whenever
this discussion comes up,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FTP is software? I always thought it was a protocol
Sigh. Frederick, I know you're smarter than this.
You are being deliberately dense here, which makes rational discussion hard.
For:
FTP
read:
The implementation of the FTP protocol in the software named
You are being deliberately dense here, which makes rational discussion hard.
For:
FTP
read:
The implementation of the FTP protocol in the software named ftp.exe on win98
for
example.
and how did that affect the FTP protocol?
It did not (AFAIK) and I did not claim it did. I
Kenneth Gonsalves writes:
in short, people who use BSD licenses are talented and lucky - I
could live with that
PJ writes:
Not relying on luck in the first place would seem wiser.
I would also suggest that the hall-of-shame type of sites; spam;
viruses and evil botnets are a consequence
On 09-May-07, at 10:38 AM, PJ wrote:
BSD style licencing is better than most, but such licences have had a
role in helping MS Windows to its current position (which is why Bill
Gates favours them).
and which is why apache is running rings around IIS - please mix in a
few facts also into
On Monday 07 May 2007 11:36, Anant Narayanan wrote:
[snip]
Anything is excess is bad, and in a world where good is a relative
term, it is not tough to interpret FSF's actions as monopolistic.
Basically you could say that the FSF is the Microsoft of the other
side :)
I fail to see the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 07 May 2007 11:27, Anant Narayanan wrote:
[snip]
When someone makes minor changes to BSD-licensed code it is unlikely
that they are going to make millions of dollars out of it. If they
are, chances are that they've made significant
All you guys are fucking imbeciles.
P.
--
Wir wollen dass ihr uns alles glaubt.
___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi
On 07-May-07, at 9:55 PM, PJ wrote:
Incidently how come things like apache
and postgresql are surviving inspite of bsd style licenses - not
to speak about
perl, php, python etc etc. Or are the authors of all these morons
who dont
understand what is freedom?
The authors of these were
On 07-May-07, at 10:13 PM, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
All you guys are fucking imbeciles.
My goodness. Such a perfect example of looking into a mirror.
more like a microsoft marketing slogan - eye-catching, grammaticaly
correct but contributes nothing to the discussion
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
in short, people who use BSD licenses are talented and lucky - I
could live with that
Not relying on luck in the first place would seem wiser.
PJ
___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
Thanks for the responses all. Lots of threads, lots of
people, I'm going to mix and match responses here.
Mine begin inline, with a ==
PJ:
.. I am unsure of your objection. Logically, being
freed doesn't mean that you
are forever free. You still run the risk of being
enslaved again...
== We
On 5/5/07, PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The GPL [...] has a restriction that is designed to prevent
non-sharing of code.
Shakthi Kannan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How?
I am unsure if that was a rhetorical question.
GPL has four freedoms:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
The
Anant Narayanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
GPL has redefined the word freedom. True freedom means that anyone can
do whatever they want with code. Hence the BSD style licenses are truly
free. GPL-like freedom, on the other hand is forced freedom. Forced
freedom, IMHO, is as good as no
Quoting PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I would not agree that Freedel has been on a reasonable footing.
Edition 2 was a bit of a flop.
Why do you say that?
i wasnt there, but was told that especially on the second day attendance was
extremely thin. If I was misinformed, my apologies
regards
kg
Quoting Anant Narayanan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well, in software,
there are several known examples where Microsoft has taken BSD code,
altered
it, and tried to lock users in to their way of doing things so that they
can
exploit them forever after. To an extent they have succeeded more than
Viksit Gaur wrote:
Freed elicits, atleast in me, notions of a bunch of
previously subjugated people now unshackled by
something. Not necessarily with respect to FOSS. It
could be a revolt, a coup de etat or whatever. Freed
2007 would make a great libertarian conference, going
On 05-May-07, at 11:31 AM, PJ wrote:
Anyway, attend the meetings if you have an interest in the
reasoning behind
ilugd decisions - it's open to all GNU/Linux users, we welcome
inputs, and all
proposals can be questioned/modified etc.
what about those who object to the name GNU/Linux?
Anyway, attend the meetings if you have an interest in the reasoning behind
ilugd decisions - it's open to all GNU/Linux users, we welcome inputs, and all
proposals can be questioned/modified etc.
I would attend it if it is possible. I realize I don't have the right to dispute
decisions if I
Viksit Gaur wrote:
Hullo,
I'm trying to figure out what this name embodies.
Freed elicits, atleast in me, notions of a bunch of
previously subjugated people now unshackled by
something. Not necessarily with respect to FOSS. It
could be a revolt, a coup de etat or whatever. Freed
2007
Of course you have every right to discuss any decision on the mailing list,
and even dispute it for that matter. However, I hope you realise that it is
difficult to cater to every demand on this list. For example, it took me
nearly two hours to prepare the minutes that you describe as too
Sudev Barar wrote:
Yep, one of the LUGD-Bang guys. Howdy.
Hey, Sudev. How are ya? ;)
FREED : My take is that it can be one or the other. Domain
availability was one not so smal consideration.
One thing that escapes me. Do we absolutely need to have a separate
domain for the event? A
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 05-May-07, at 11:31 AM, PJ wrote:
Anyway, attend the meetings if you have an interest in the
reasoning behind
ilugd decisions - it's open to all GNU/Linux users, we welcome
inputs, and all
proposals can be questioned/modified etc.
Sandip Bhattacharya [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Note that I am not saying that it is obligatory for anybody present to answer
these queries.
I am only saying that we are not rebuffed with a canned you should have been
at the meeting
answer.
You're quite right. A canned response like that is
On 05-May-07, at 3:25 PM, PJ wrote:
Good point Kenneth.
I don't know if the (constitutional type) of rules of ILUGD say that
ILUGD should be about Linux rather than GNU/Linux.
I choose to use the label GNU/Linux (if I can remember to) because
for me
the concept of freedom embodied by
I wrote:
I'm interested in the free as in freedom part of what ILUGD is
about. The
impression I get is that ILUGD tends to be heavily focussed on the
free as
in freedom part.
Kenneth Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in which case you have to focus on FOSS - regardless of
Hi,
Not sure if this is going off-topic. Anyways, my thoughts below:
On 5/5/07, PJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Me and some others regard the extra freedom of the BSD style licences as being
analogous to the granting freedom to a plantation holder to own slaves,
Isn't that cruel?
The GPL, for
Well, in software,
there are several known examples where Microsoft has taken BSD code, altered
it, and tried to lock users in to their way of doing things so that they can
exploit them forever after. To an extent they have succeeded more than
failed.
This is the reason why GPL is
Anant Narayanan wrote:
Well, in software,
there are several known examples where Microsoft has taken BSD code, altered
it, and tried to lock users in to their way of doing things so that they can
exploit them forever after. To an extent they have succeeded more than
failed.
This is the
On Sun, 06 May 2007 02:05:40 +0530, Sandip Bhattacharya said:
Anant Narayanan wrote:
Well, in software, there are several known examples where Microsoft
has taken BSD code, altered it, and tried to lock users in to their
way of doing things so that they can exploit them forever after. To
an
On 06/05/07, Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 06 May 2007 02:05:40 +0530, Sandip Bhattacharya said:
Anant Narayanan wrote:
Well, in software, there are several known examples where Microsoft
eeer no [OT] or {WayOT] tag there??
Important stuff this and refreshing
we should always emphasize that fighting for freedom is a lifelong process
-
as they say Fighting to get freedom is not enough, we have to keep
fighting
forever to preserve it.
that's why the name Free-d -- as in daemon (aka ftpd, telnetd, sshd). So
it keeps waking up in intervals, fights
Viksit Gaur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Freed elicits, atleast in me, notions of a bunch of
How come nobody thought that this is a type for `Fred'?
g.d.r
--
Mahesh T. Pai http://paivakil.blogspot.com/
Learn from the mistakes of others.
You won't live long enough to make all of them
Viksit Gaur wrote:
Hullo,
I'm trying to figure out what this name embodies.
Freed elicits, atleast in me, notions of a bunch of
previously subjugated people now unshackled by
something. Not necessarily with respect to FOSS. It
could be a revolt, a coup de etat or whatever. Freed
2007
51 matches
Mail list logo
