Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, 26 May 2010 07:32:58 -0500 Marco Peereboom sl...@peereboom.us wrote: That free beer analogy has never made any sense and never will. I honestly wonder why people keep repeating it. Yes. One of my pet peeves. Free from **wut ? But I do think the BSD model best supports the interests of Liberty, and that's a bond that makes men less to be free of ;-) Dhu On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:32:56PM +0100, Peter Kay (Syllopsium) wrote: From: Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? You'd be better contacting the FSF rather than Stallman directly - don't you think that's overkill? He also may have conducted just one or two interviews and written a couple of articles - just google. Bear in mind that their favoured GPL 'free' software license is not free. It is effectively free as in beer, but not as in free speech[1]. Their definition includes being forced to give away source code, which whilst I understand the viewpoint (of increasing free code), is by any measure a restriction of your freedom. BSD licenses, on the other hand, do not restrict what you can do, although it's good karma to contribute back when using a large amount of free code from others. [1] The GPL allows products to be sold, but seeing as this must include source code, after one sale it only needs someone with a compiler to distribute it freely (as in beer). Peter
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:44:35PM +0200, Francesco Vollero wrote: Il 26/05/10 14.32, Marco Peereboom ha scritto: That free beer analogy has never made any sense and never will. I honestly wonder why people keep repeating it. I hope that in some /parallel/ universe beer is free and bsd is the most used license and *bsd is the most used and active operating system :) -Francesco Free beer is an important part of most village celebrations here in Germany. Schuetzenfest - lots of free beer, Feuerwehr - lots of free beer, Fruehlingsfest - lots of free beer... And the Bavarians might even have more reasons to give away free beer! (I remember one meeting of the GUUG - German Unix User Group - when they took all the attendees to the Augustiner Keller in Munich to get unlimited Mass of beer). So the question is - am I living in a parallel universe? reyk
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 04:28:56PM +0200, Reyk Floeter wrote: On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:44:35PM +0200, Francesco Vollero wrote: Il 26/05/10 14.32, Marco Peereboom ha scritto: That free beer analogy has never made any sense and never will. I honestly wonder why people keep repeating it. I hope that in some /parallel/ universe beer is free and bsd is the most used license and *bsd is the most used and active operating system :) -Francesco Free beer is an important part of most village celebrations here in Germany. Schuetzenfest - lots of free beer, Feuerwehr - lots of free beer, Fruehlingsfest - lots of free beer... And the Bavarians might even have more reasons to give away free beer! (I remember one meeting of the GUUG - German Unix User Group - when they took all the attendees to the Augustiner Keller in Munich to get unlimited Mass of beer). So the question is - am I living in a parallel universe? Simple! yes. reyk
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Marco Peereboom sl...@peereboom.us wrote: On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 04:28:56PM +0200, Reyk Floeter wrote: So the question is - am I living in a parallel universe? Simple! yes. Agreed, in a level IV multiverse at least (before you ask, we need a very good cosmologist to define `at least' here). But don't worry, BSDs are on a de Sitter universe even if some people (Linux kids) think the other way.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
This thread could be more humorous. -Girish On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Igor Sobrado sobr...@openbsd.org wrote: On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Marco Peereboom sl...@peereboom.us wrote: On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 04:28:56PM +0200, Reyk Floeter wrote: So the question is - am I living in a parallel universe? Simple! yes. Agreed, in a level IV multiverse at least (before you ask, we need a very good cosmologist to define `at least' here). But don't worry, BSDs are on a de Sitter universe even if some people (Linux kids) think the other way. -- Gayatri Hitech web: http://gayatri-hitech.com SpamCheetah Spam filter: http://spam-cheetah.com
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
Everyone killed the poor guy with a fork in the eyes! Yepeee! This is why misc@openbsd.org is my mentor! Mess with the Best DIE like the REST so clear! -- Andris Genovez Tobar / Sistemas Elastix ECE - Linux LPI-1 - Novell CLA - Apple ACMT Jabber: bitfr...@asgard.crice.org http://www.crice.org
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On 26 May 2010 23:13, Brad Tilley b...@16systems.com wrote: Julian Acosta wrote: Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? Just talk a lot about open source and the Linux operating system. He'll show up. Yes, one of his minions will stumble across this thread while they are performing Google searches for him and deliver these most important advocacy results to him with freshly hand peeled and pitted grapes.
Help contacting Richard Stallman
Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, Best Regards, Ing. Julian Acosta Instituto Tecnologico de Cd. Cuauhtimoc Departamento de Posgrado
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
I thought that RMS is GNU guy and this is BSD mailing list so maybe you mistyped address? Anyway what's the status of reading and searching ability on universities in Mexico as email of RMS is on his own page http://stallman.org/ ? ;-) On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, Best Regards, Ing. Julian Acosta Instituto Tecnologico de Cd. Cuauhtimoc Departamento de Posgrado -- http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
--- On Wed, 5/26/10, Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com wrote: From: Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com Subject: Help contacting Richard Stallman To: misc@openbsd.org Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 6:18 AM Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, Best Regards, Ing. Julian Acosta Instituto Tecnologico de Cd. Cuauhtimoc Departamento de Posgrado Wrong mailing list.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, Best Regards, Ing. Julian Acosta Instituto Tecnologico de Cd. Cuauhtimoc Departamento de Posgrado Why ask this on a OpenBSD mailing list? OpenBSD has nothing to do with Richard Stallman or GNU. Check www.gnu.org.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:18:03AM -0600, Julian Acosta wrote: Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, To contact him: 1- put a woodstock live CD 2- get rid of all water points 3- sacrifice a goat At this point, the feet-naked hippy should come with his flute ;-) Gilles NB: you're on the wrong mailing-list and it was too tempting. -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
From: Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? You'd be better contacting the FSF rather than Stallman directly - don't you think that's overkill? He also may have conducted just one or two interviews and written a couple of articles - just google. Bear in mind that their favoured GPL 'free' software license is not free. It is effectively free as in beer, but not as in free speech[1]. Their definition includes being forced to give away source code, which whilst I understand the viewpoint (of increasing free code), is by any measure a restriction of your freedom. BSD licenses, on the other hand, do not restrict what you can do, although it's good karma to contribute back when using a large amount of free code from others. [1] The GPL allows products to be sold, but seeing as this must include source code, after one sale it only needs someone with a compiler to distribute it freely (as in beer). Peter
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
At 2010-05-26 11:03:50 Gilles Chehade wrote: On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:18:03AM -0600, Julian Acosta wrote: Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, To contact him: 1- put a woodstock live CD 2- get rid of all water points 3- sacrifice a goat At this point, the feet-naked hippy should come with his flute ;-) Gilles NB: you're on the wrong mailing-list and it was too tempting. -- Gilles Chehade Gilles, Qu'est-ce que water points? Faucets? -- Edward Ahlsen-Girard Ft Walton Beach, FL
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
That free beer analogy has never made any sense and never will. I honestly wonder why people keep repeating it. On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:32:56PM +0100, Peter Kay (Syllopsium) wrote: From: Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? You'd be better contacting the FSF rather than Stallman directly - don't you think that's overkill? He also may have conducted just one or two interviews and written a couple of articles - just google. Bear in mind that their favoured GPL 'free' software license is not free. It is effectively free as in beer, but not as in free speech[1]. Their definition includes being forced to give away source code, which whilst I understand the viewpoint (of increasing free code), is by any measure a restriction of your freedom. BSD licenses, on the other hand, do not restrict what you can do, although it's good karma to contribute back when using a large amount of free code from others. [1] The GPL allows products to be sold, but seeing as this must include source code, after one sale it only needs someone with a compiler to distribute it freely (as in beer). Peter
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
Il 26/05/10 14.32, Marco Peereboom ha scritto: That free beer analogy has never made any sense and never will. I honestly wonder why people keep repeating it. I hope that in some /parallel/ universe beer is free and bsd is the most used license and *bsd is the most used and active operating system :) -Francesco On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:32:56PM +0100, Peter Kay (Syllopsium) wrote: From: Julian Acostaj.acost...@gmail.com Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? You'd be better contacting the FSF rather than Stallman directly - don't you think that's overkill? He also may have conducted just one or two interviews and written a couple of articles - just google. Bear in mind that their favoured GPL 'free' software license is not free. It is effectively free as in beer, but not as in free speech[1]. Their definition includes being forced to give away source code, which whilst I understand the viewpoint (of increasing free code), is by any measure a restriction of your freedom. BSD licenses, on the other hand, do not restrict what you can do, although it's good karma to contribute back when using a large amount of free code from others. [1] The GPL allows products to be sold, but seeing as this must include source code, after one sale it only needs someone with a compiler to distribute it freely (as in beer). Peter
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
Julian Acosta wrote: Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? Just talk a lot about open source and the Linux operating system. He'll show up.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
2010/5/26 Brad Tilley b...@16systems.com: Julian Acosta wrote: Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? Just talk a lot about open source and the Linux operating system. He'll show up. Now he'll definitely come here, because you wrote Linux instead of religiously correct GNU/Linux.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Vadim Jukov persg...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/5/26 Brad Tilley b...@16systems.com: Julian Acosta wrote: Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? Just talk a lot about open source and the Linux operating system. He'll show up. Now he'll definitely come here, because you wrote Linux instead of religiously correct GNU/Linux. No because you wrote GNU/Linux instead of GNU/Hurd :p -- Sylvestre Gallon
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Vadim Jukov persg...@gmail.com wrote: Now he'll definitely come here, because you wrote Linux instead of religiously correct GNU/Linux. Do you mean Apache/BSD/GNU/IPL/MIT/SGI/X11/Linux, right?
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
Igor Sobrado wrote: On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Vadim Jukov persg...@gmail.com wrote: Now he'll definitely come here, because you wrote Linux instead of religiously correct GNU/Linux. Do you mean Apache/BSD/GNU/IPL/MIT/SGI/X11/Linux, right? Wasn't that SCO/Linux?
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
I really laughed when I read this and the discussion that followed You should probably read http://www.openbsd.org/mail.html You should also check your emails before you send them It's Cd. Cuauhtemoc not Cd. Cuauhtimoc (I am from the same city) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 00:18:03 -0600 Subject: Help contacting Richard Stallman From: j.acost...@gmail.com To: misc@openbsd.org Hello! I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his opinion and answer us some questions about free software, How can I contact him? What's his real email? This help affects up to 19 universities from Mexico, Well, I hope you can help me, Really thanks, Best Regards, Ing. Julian Acosta Instituto Tecnologico de Cd. Cuauhtimoc Departamento de Posgrado _ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
I thought that RMS is GNU guy and this is BSD mailing list so maybe you mistyped address? Anyway what's the status of reading and searching ability on universities in Mexico as email of RMS is on his own page http://stallman.org/ ? ;-) At first I tought it was spam. It's quite weird for someone to ask his real mail address here...
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
Vadim Jukov persg...@gmail.com writes: Now he'll definitely come here, because you wrote Linux instead of religiously correct GNU/Linux. Actually it's the other way around - in my experience he's significantly more reluctant to visit if the organizers show a fondness for open source rather than free software and mentions Linux without GNU/ prepended too often. But still the wrong mailing list. - P -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
I thought that RMS is GNU guy and this is BSD mailing list so maybe you mistyped address? Anyway what's the status of reading and searching ability on universities in Mexico as email of RMS is on his own page http://stallman.org/ ? ;-) At first I tought it was spam. It's quite weird for someone to ask his real mail address here... Anyway, as he said above, you can find his real mail on stallman.org, and don't bother contacting the FSF first, just send mail to him directly. But I still think it's weird to ask his email here...
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
It's clearly spam.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
We really need to reason whether he is trolling or not, Even if he is completely clueless about OSS at all, why the hell would he come to an openbsd list ? We all know openbsd isn't the most popular OS in the planet, it's the best, but far from being the most popular. Having that in mind, why didn't he came across a Linux mailing list or a FreeBSD or a my-ass-is-on-fire list ? My point is, what are the odds of an individual asking the completely wrong question on the completely wrong list ? (Think again, asking about RMS on an openbsd list). He is clearly trolling, stop feeding. But wait, thinking again, he is an academic, you can expect anything (be it good or bad) from academics.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert haesba...@haesbaert.org wrote: Having that in mind, why didn't he came across a Linux mailing list or a FreeBSD or a my-ass-is-on-fire list ? My point is, what are the odds of an individual asking the completely wrong question on the completely wrong list ? (Think again, asking about RMS on an openbsd list). He is clearly trolling, stop feeding. I don't think we can assume that he didn't. it's likely that he found multiple mailing lists that all had some tenuous relationship to open-source software, and spammed all of them. but I haven't looked in the archives of any other lists to find out. I'm just not that interested. -ken
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote: We all know openbsd isn't the most popular OS in the planet, it's the best, but far from being the most popular. Great words. +rep for this.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
I don't post on this list often, But I agree about it being the best! OpenBSD is rock solid. Shane -Original Message- From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf Of Leonardo Carneiro - Veltrac Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 1:52 PM To: misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote: We all know openbsd isn't the most popular OS in the planet, it's the best, but far from being the most popular. Great words. +rep for this.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 13:40 -0400, Kenneth Gober wrote: On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert haesba...@haesbaert.org wrote: Having that in mind, why didn't he came across a Linux mailing list or a FreeBSD or a my-ass-is-on-fire list ? My point is, what are the odds of an individual asking the completely wrong question on the completely wrong list ? (Think again, asking about RMS on an openbsd list). He is clearly trolling, stop feeding. I don't think we can assume that he didn't. it's likely that he found multiple mailing lists that all had some tenuous relationship to open-source software, and spammed all of them. but I haven't looked in the archives of any other lists to find out. I'm just not that interested. -ken For what it's worth, I am on a good number of oss lists (including Linux), and there are no other mentions of RMS anywhere. -- Vanessa Kraus Fourman Networks 608-399-2600 http://www.fourmannetworks.com Your Budget VPS Provider
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:52:50PM -0500, Vanessa Kraus wrote: For what it's worth, I am on a good number of oss lists (including Linux), and there are no other mentions of RMS anywhere. Also FWIW, saw a lot of OpenBSD + RMS chatter on the Twitter in the last 24 hours. http://search.twitter.com/search?ands=openbsdphrase=ors=stallman+rms Just stay away from the rest of the thread you may end up linked to. l8rZ, -- andrew - ICQ# 253198 - Jabber: and...@rraz.net - Twitter: @AFreshOne BOFH excuse of the day: Someone's tie is caught in the printer, and if anything else gets printed, he'll be in it too.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote: it's likely that he found multiple mailing lists that all had some tenuous relationship to open-source software, and spammed all of them. but I haven't looked in the archives of any other lists to find out. Cursory googling suggests that we're the only recipient. On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Julian Acosta j.acost...@gmail.com wrote: Best Regards, Ing. Julian Acosta Instituto Tecnologico de Cd. Cuauhtimoc Departamento de Posgrado Never trust an institute of technology that uses a Flash splash screen on their (very slow-loading) web site. http://itcdcuauhtemoc.edu.mx/ Other highlights include: * gratuitous movement! * a visitor counter! * and --believe it or not-- frames! No mention of a Julian Acosta on the institute's web site as far as I could see, but the guy in the red shirt may be him. Maybe. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_pVC9Iw52aTk/SGHjcHjY3hI/AAs/3tafuaaDKUA/s16 00/en%2Bel%2Bcamion%2Bpara%2Bveracruz.JPG Of course, if it *is* him, then I can *completely* understand why he hasn't had time to figure out where to really find RMS. Totally. SCNR. --ropers
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 01:05:01PM -0700, Andrew Fresh wrote: On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:52:50PM -0500, Vanessa Kraus wrote: BLABLABLABLABLABLABLA BLABLABLA So much junk here. Bye bye misc.
Re: Help contacting Richard Stallman
https://twitter.com/marco_peereboom On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 01:05:01PM -0700, Andrew Fresh wrote: On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:52:50PM -0500, Vanessa Kraus wrote: For what it's worth, I am on a good number of oss lists (including Linux), and there are no other mentions of RMS anywhere. Also FWIW, saw a lot of OpenBSD + RMS chatter on the Twitter in the last 24 hours. http://search.twitter.com/search?ands=openbsdphrase=ors=stallman+rms Just stay away from the rest of the thread you may end up linked to. l8rZ, -- andrew - ICQ# 253198 - Jabber: and...@rraz.net - Twitter: @AFreshOne BOFH excuse of the day: Someone's tie is caught in the printer, and if anything else gets printed, he'll be in it too.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Gregg Reynolds wrote: On 1/7/08, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: nicodache wrote: I cannot anything but to appreciate and look how you are able to stay calm and polite when I read some people on this ML talking about crap, fucking duck with tape, shutting up things. I have never seen anyone on this list fuck a duck with a tape. Ever. No no, it's an idiom: fucking duck, not fuck a duck. Kinda like fuckin' A, man, only not. As in Holy fucking duck, man, did you see that!? or You're fucking duck right, I'm pissed! or I'm about ready to kick the fuckin' duck out of this goddam computer with a tape, man! Then again, maybe it was just meant as a plain epithet, as in Donald? I hate that fucking duck. I admit I'm a bit flummoxed by the tape part, though. Maybe the poster meant fucking /duct/ tape? Oh finally! I never thought the never-ending Stallman threads would produce something of value, but now I need to revise my opinion. While ever so obviously OT, this still beats the hell out of all previous posts. /Alexander
Re: Richard Stallman...
On 1/7/08, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: nicodache wrote: I cannot anything but to appreciate and look how you are able to stay calm and polite when I read some people on this ML talking about crap, fucking duck with tape, shutting up things. If if walks like a duck and talks like a duck an f... - wait a minute. Ouch. I have never seen anyone on this list fuck a duck with a tape. Ever. WARNING. Do not look at the duck with the remaining eye. --knitti
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:46:43 -0700 L [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard Stallman wrote: I hope that the other OpenBSD developers will repudiate such conduct. You said the other openbsd developers. In this context, it implies that I am an OpenBSD developer. The other means that I am one myself and relative to me, they are the other developers with me. This is a lie or an error. I am an OpenBSD *user* who has not participated in development. I will in the future be submitting patches and I may become a developer. Not bloody likely! You talk way to much!!
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:58:48 +0800, Koh Choon Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Is the FSF preparing to treat OBSD as one of the free OS they recommend? Who cares. OpenBSD just doesn't like misinformation spread about it. I have no connection to the OBSD project, but I hope it never has anything to do with the FSF and from what I've seen I think that is a safe bet.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:30:58 -0500, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Except, sir, at some point, someone made a mistake. And this mistake has blown up in to this thread with this ongoing argument. Their report was either not as accurate as you seem to think, or you're very badly expressing the contents of the report (which has not been made available to the OpenBSD community). Their report was that OpenBSD contains ports for non-free programs, and that is what I tried to say in the interview. I made a mistake in the way I said it: I used words which were subject to misunderstanding. I have acknowledged this mistake here, and had it corrected, and said so here. Did you miss those messages? You made a mistake in the *way* you said it? OBSD does not contain any non-free software, yet you still maintain that it does. Nowhere have you retracted that statement. Actually, no one gives a rats ass what you say. Just stop spreading misinformation about OBSD. Just STFU and go away.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:31:10AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. Time to back track again, eh Moron. What is the URL of that license page? What a lazy wanker.. Or maybe you are TOO STUPID to use a search engine.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:46:49 -0500 Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? Absolutely. FSF staff checked the BSD versions and told me what found. I do not redo their work after they do it; I trust that they did it well. Their report about OpenBSD was accurate. Perhaps you are placing too much trust in Lawyers? Dhu
Re: Richard Stallman...
Except, sir, at some point, someone made a mistake. And this mistake has blown up in to this thread with this ongoing argument. Their report was either not as accurate as you seem to think, or you're very badly expressing the contents of the report (which has not been made available to the OpenBSD community). Their report was that OpenBSD contains ports for non-free programs, and that is what I tried to say in the interview. I made a mistake in the way I said it: I used words which were subject to misunderstanding. I have acknowledged this mistake here, and had it corrected, and said so here. Did you miss those messages?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 11:18:17PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: Can you tell the FSF web programmers to do more checking for HTML/SQL injection vulnerabilities? I know nothing about that issue, but I will forward your message. Teaching the public about this issue is a good thing to. However, the way you did it was predictably bad. just as you should not have talked without knowing what you were saying, the people who wrote that should not have done so until they knew what they were programming. the only thing consistent in your posts here is that it's ok to spew crap ... By publishing it, and telling only me--not anyone who could fix it--you made sure a day would go by when others know about the problem but our sysadmins did not. It would have been better practice to tell our sysadmins privately first, and give them a couple of days to do something before educating the public. and then complain when the crap is discovered ... I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site to be attacked. and then accuse the people who find the crap of victimizing the crap spewer. hey, I know, why don't you tell people it's unethical to spew crap? it would lead to less security problems in the computer world, and less misinformation in general can only lead to more freedoms. I think many people, both in the computer world and outside, would agree. I'd say you'd even have a larger following than you currentlty do. well, except that you're one of the biggest crap spewers, ever. so, you have to have some other soap box to stand on, since it is far too obvious that you can't run on the no crap spewing platform, because you are a liar and a hypocrit. and here's an example of how I think your general ethics stinks. you are not subscribed to misc@openbsd.org, even though you have stated yourself that you started this thread. I consider it unethical - no I'm not going to use your words. I consider it inhumane to post to a list without subscribing. why? to make sure I get all responses. it's very easy to subscribe and unsubscribe to any list I have ever posted to. I'm the one posting, and I am responsible for that post. had you been subscribed here, you would have seen the URL above long ago. instead, you are _now_ harshly accusing someone of releasing this vulnerability, _after_ it could have already been fixed, were you not so inhumane - well, that's a little harsh - lazy and arrogant that you didn't bother to subscribe before posting. do you really think we are suposed to believe you, a lazy, arrogant, lying hypocrit, because you accuse people discovering facts of being in the wrong? and are we supposed to not believe that you are a lazy, arrogant, lying hypocrit because you have your own definitions, are too busy, rely on other peoples' information, and can't use a normal web browser? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Re: Richard Stallman...
2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while and stopped using it because a proprietary application they depended on was not available; and i know people who would use Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their business and emacs integrates it so well. Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation. If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing to do with the availability of GCC. Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X which only works on Windows, for instance. How is it that stating a fact (that this person knows someone who had made a decision) a play on words and speculation? If it helps to make it clear that it is not speculation, I too know people who have made a conscious decision not to use OpenBSD simply because a program that was absolutely essential to getting something done (be it a personal need or a managerial directive), and only X OS supported that, but not OpenBSD.
Re: Richard Stallman...
There are also quite a few free programs that run only on Windows. (Being able to redistribute a program and its source and modify and redistribute the source doesn't somehow cause it to be instantly ported to other platforms by the grace of God.) These programs can be run on other operating systems with Wine. They can be ported to run on other operating systems with winelib. I didn't say Wine is evil, just counter-productive. And it's totally my own opinion. Its fortunate success, as Free Software, may have enabled some users to use more Free Software, but it may also have enabled some users to continue using non-free software, even when replacements exist. Wine isn't counter-productive if it allows me to run a certain nameless browser on the OS I choose to use as my desktop. Why do I use this browser instead of an alternative? Simply because I have a business _need_ to access a website that does _not_ run on the alternative browsers. When I am not accessing this website, I do indeed use the alternative browsers. If it weren't for wine, I would be forced to use windows simply because I need to access _one_ website that doesn't run in anything other than the nameless browser. Sometimes, just because a free alternative exists to a non-free (or non-open source) application, doesn't mean that it can completely replace said non-free application.
Re: Richard Stallman...
No, Richard. No. This is really getting tired. Their report was that OpenBSD contains ports for non-free programs, and that is what I tried to say in the interview. No, you didnt't. I made a mistake in the way I said it: I used words which were subject to misunderstanding. No, you used words which were lies. I have acknowledged this mistake here, and had it corrected, and said so here. No you didn't, people only called you on your bullshit. In OpenBSD the recommendation for certain non-free programs is in the recipes for installing them. Jesus Christ already ... I could ask someone to find a specific URL, but why take the trouble? The OpenBSD developers have acknowledged that contains ports for non-free programs. There is no dispute about that question. Yes. So WHAT? In gNewsense the recommendation for certain non-free programs is in the _inclusion_ of such non-free parts in their distribution You have not presented any evidence that there are non-free programs in gNewSense. Listen, you lying, hypocrytic asshole: OpenBSD does contain ports that let you install non-free software. That does not make OpenBSD non-free in any sensible sense of the word. In your eyes, it does, right? And that's why you don't recommend OpenBSD (which nobody gives a flying fuck about). Yet you do recommend gNewsense and whatnot, which too contains ports to install non-free software; because in _this_ case, it doesn't make the system non-free. Right? That makes your whole criteria irrelevant, because they are self-contracictory. PERIOD. I don't believe that you are so stupid to not understand that. Pretty fucking please, realize the following: 0. Nobody in the OpenBSD project gives a fuck about whether you recommend OpenBSD (whatever that word means to you today), because it doesn't make any difference. Heck, it doesn't change anything if you DO recommend OpenBSD. 1. OTOH, the OpenBSD people do care a lot whether you spread lies about OpenBSD in interviews. 2. Nobody on this list is gonna buy your double standard of meassuring the freeness of a given system. Your posts to this list lack any point since long ago. 3. Not even reading the few pages of a given system's policies and then repeating your lying propaganda on the very system's mailing list is total lack of respect to people who make that system (which is not me, btw). 4. Not even launching a browser when people ask you to just read a damn webpage (please do not elaborate, nobody cares why) makes you look like a fucking moron. 5. There are people who need to actually read this mailing list, and you drown it in bullshit. Please read the above point over and over until you finally understand that there is not point whatsoever sending any more posts to this list. After you get it, please do the following: (a) Send your last message, with a subject of RMS - apology (so that I can filter out any other message from you), saying, I was a fucking moron. Plese forgive me, I will shut up now and not bother this list again. (b) Read all the documentation you can find on http://openbsd.org (if it's impossible for you to use a browser, have the whole thing printed out and read it on paper). (c) Please kindly consider shutting the fuck up already and never comming back. sincerely yours jan
Re: Richard Stallman...
I wrote: I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site to be attacked. You responded: It was a recommendation of OpenBSD rather than an attack. It was neither a recommendation of OpenBSD nor an attack. Your message did not talk about OpenBSD, but if it had, that would not be an excuse. If you post information about an exploit through which someone's site can be attacked, you can't evade the responsibility by including some opinions in the message. I would not call your message an attack, because encouraging attacks is not the same thing as making an attack. It is not the same, but it goes in the same direction. I hope that the other OpenBSD developers will repudiate such conduct. Surely we can disagree without resorting to encouraging sabotage.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Richard, I don't want not make any comment on all this FUD, instead I'll just tell you this. I cannot anything but to appreciate and look how you are able to stay calm and polite when I read some people on this ML talking about crap, fucking duck with tape, shutting up things. That beeing said, I never liked that purple sweat-shirt of yours. Get an OpenBSD t-shirt instead, the benefits will help us making OpenBSD more free than ever ;-) Cheers, nicodache
Re: Richard Stallman...
nicodache wrote: I cannot anything but to appreciate and look how you are able to stay calm and polite when I read some people on this ML talking about crap, fucking duck with tape, shutting up things. I have never seen anyone on this list fuck a duck with a tape. Ever.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Richard Stallman wrote: I would not call your message an attack, because encouraging attacks is not the same thing as making an attack. It is not the same, but it goes in the same direction. I hope that the other OpenBSD developers will repudiate such conduct. Surely we can disagree without resorting to encouraging sabotage. Thanks Dad, I love you. My message was use openbsd. Right on your website and on Fox News. Are you sure that you have not encouraged sabotage by starting this thread? Because there seems to be a lot of people who would not have gotten angry if you had not started this thread. By coming on here and implying that OpenBSD is not worthy/ethical, you are encouraging sabotage to OpenBSD. I hope that the other GNU developers will repudiate such conduct.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Richard Stallman wrote: I hope that the other OpenBSD developers will repudiate such conduct. You said the other openbsd developers. In this context, it implies that I am an OpenBSD developer. The other means that I am one myself and relative to me, they are the other developers with me. This is a lie or an error. I am an OpenBSD *user* who has not participated in development. I will in the future be submitting patches and I may become a developer - but by implying that I am an OpenBSD developer, you are lying/erring. The line between lying/erring is very very slim. This factual error problem you are having is a significantly visible pattern. It's not a pattern that is starting just now.. rather it is a pattern that can be seen over the period of several years.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 12:15:37PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: I wrote: I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site to be attacked. You responded: It was a recommendation of OpenBSD rather than an attack. It was neither a recommendation of OpenBSD nor an attack. It said Use OpenBSD right on your website... and this was a recommendation of OpenBSD. I'm getting the hint that you didn't even look at the website that I humor hacked. Someone must have looked at it for you, and relayed incorrect information back to you - stating that it was not a recommendation of OpenBSD. This just proves that you are indeed a puppet. Do you know what a puppet is? A puppet is someone that has other people do all their work and research for them.. the puppet then gets held on a string and moves his mouth up and down.. saying things that other people may have made up out of thin air. L505
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 12:15:37PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: I wrote: I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site to be attacked. You responded: It was a recommendation of OpenBSD rather than an attack. It was neither a recommendation of OpenBSD nor an attack. Your message did not talk about OpenBSD, but if it had, that would not be an excuse. If you post information about an exploit through which someone's site can be attacked, you can't evade the responsibility by including some opinions in the message. I would not call your message an attack, because encouraging attacks is not the same thing as making an attack. It is not the same, but it goes in the same direction. I hope that the other OpenBSD developers will repudiate such conduct. Surely we can disagree without resorting to encouraging sabotage. Richard, you've said some stupid things, mangled peoples' words and totally confused the issue on some things, but this takes the cake. he's talking about the attack itself, not the post. further, the attack is not an attack at all. your whole post is just yammering about a non-issue, trying to make your detractor look like a bad person. this is a very clear example of how you operate. you pass unfavorable judgement on people you do not like about things you very clearly do not understand, much less have researched yourself. would you please go away now. please? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Re: Richard Stallman...
On 1/7/08, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: nicodache wrote: I cannot anything but to appreciate and look how you are able to stay calm and polite when I read some people on this ML talking about crap, fucking duck with tape, shutting up things. I have never seen anyone on this list fuck a duck with a tape. Ever. No no, it's an idiom: fucking duck, not fuck a duck. Kinda like fuckin' A, man, only not. As in Holy fucking duck, man, did you see that!? or You're fucking duck right, I'm pissed! or I'm about ready to kick the fuckin' duck out of this goddam computer with a tape, man! Then again, maybe it was just meant as a plain epithet, as in Donald? I hate that fucking duck. I admit I'm a bit flummoxed by the tape part, though. Maybe the poster meant fucking /duct/ tape?
Re: Richard Stallman...
Is the FSF preparing to treat OBSD as one of the free OS they recommend? -- Regards Koh Choon Lin a href=http://profiles.friendster.com/42928535;Best Teacher in Singapore/a
Re: Richard Stallman...
Dude... it is on the endorsement list on gnu.org you talked about in the beginning how you cannot include OpenBSD in it... http://gnu.org/links/links.html Thank you. Now I know where to remove the link if it comes to that. I have a feeling that list is maintained by your 'FSF staff' and you don't have much of an idea of what's included in it? I don't personally do most of our web site maintenance, of course. But I take responsibility for removing this link if it should not be there.
Re: Richard Stallman...
I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? Absolutely. FSF staff checked the BSD versions and told me what found. I do not redo their work after they do it; I trust that they did it well. Their report about OpenBSD was accurate.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 12:56:08AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:34:45PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that is part of the OS. Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains wether it's free software or not. Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't because some user wrote some text on a wiki page). No this is bullshit. OpenBSD does not recommend proprietary software. We have a repository of software that is legally redistributable and that users can install from, but it is a convenience and not a recommandation. 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while and stopped using it because a proprietary application they depended on was not available; and i know people who would use Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their business and emacs integrates it so well. Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation. If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing to do with the availability of GCC. No it is not, it is based on my and other people experiences. There are many businesses that rely on gcc because it is the only good compiler for the architecture they need to cross compile to. Switching to another compiler is hard because it either isn't good enough, does not cross compile to that arch, or costs lots of money. If they have to chose between keeping Windows, which is not centric to their business, or keeping gcc, upon each they heavily rely, they will have their developers switch to linux or any other system JUST to keep their compiler. Most people need their work done prior to any other consideration. Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X which only works on Windows, for instance. No, it can range from money reasons to features reasons. gcc is probably the only compiler that *every* coder knows about and it has features that are not easily found in other compilers if you leave the road of regular-every-user usage. If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows. Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free Software which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's unix (erms...) and pretty, and works and has the apps. It looks like you never had a job ... Most people need their work done and use a computer to help them doing it, if they use a system that prevents them from doing their job, they switch to another system that lets them do so. If you were my employee and you'd come to me saying that you can't finish the work because OpenBSD does not have a feature that Linux has, yet you refuse to use Linux, I'd sack you. And i'm not a Linux fan .. at all. 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works, but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be using a free system and many other free utilities. There needs to be soul into the decision, or else it's just like choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a Free Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get rid of her dependency on proprietary software? I did not do anything to help her get rid of her dependency on proprietary software, this is
Re: Richard Stallman...
So the FSF told you OpenBSD contains non-free software and you said EXACTLY what they told you on the talk? So the FSF are hypocrites and liars! On Jan 6, 2008 12:46 PM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? Absolutely. FSF staff checked the BSD versions and told me what found. I do not redo their work after they do it; I trust that they did it well. Their report about OpenBSD was accurate.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Richard Stallman wrote: I don't personally do most of our web site maintenance, of course. But I take responsibility for removing this link if it should not be there. Can you tell the FSF web programmers to do more checking for HTML/SQL injection vulnerabilities? I have found a vulnerability with your FSF search engine. http://z505.com/gng/fsf-gnu-site-easy-to-hack.htm Your programmers should check POST/GET variables and in many cases only allow alpha numeric characters in by default. Not through javascript but at the server side during processing. Your search engine allows bad characters in.. ones that can damage the site or cause malicious theft of logins or other data through cross site scripting.. by embedding forms/input boxes into the site that post to another domain. In the framework I develop, this problem is secured by default... The functions I use for getting a post/get variables, trim malicious attempts.. while the programmer can choose to use the insecure non default raw function if he really needs to: http://z505.com/cgi-bin/powtils/docs/1.6/idx.cgi?file=getcgivarunit=pwumain http://z505.com/cgi-bin/powtils/docs/1.6/idx.cgi?file=getcgivar_sunit=pwumain I suggest your web programmers read up on how to secure web programs by reading about what my GetCgiVar functions do, or by finding articles on the net that explain how you have to filter/check each incoming POST/GET request carefully each time. I would have sent this privately to you, but many people will find this security info useful and humorous. It is my duty to teach people about web security, and only privately mailing you would mean thousands of people that read this list would miss out on learning about HTML injection. Plenty of large popular websites I visit are insecure in this very manner. Since this vulnerability is unfortunately exposed publicly.. fixing it before too many people notice it would be good. Regards, L505
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 6, 2008, at 2:46 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: Absolutely. FSF staff checked the BSD versions and told me what found. I do not redo their work after they do it; I trust that they did it well. Their report about OpenBSD was accurate. Except, sir, at some point, someone made a mistake. And this mistake has blown up in to this thread with this ongoing argument. Their report was either not as accurate as you seem to think, or you're very badly expressing the contents of the report (which has not been made available to the OpenBSD community). Yes, the port system allows easy installation of non-free and non- opensource software. It does so no less easily than Debians Apt, Redhat's RPM, and other package repositories built for any Linux based distribution that distributes on the Internet. Packages ARE free for distribution, or they wouldn't be available on the FTP site, the CDROM, or distributed at all. If they are not, they're no included. Period. Someone on your staff is a lazy little punk and permitted their own bias to be reflected in your words. In the end, what you said is still what's on record.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Deanna Phillips wrote: Marco Peereboom writes: Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt. Do I need to mail you some maxi pads? Do I need to point out that you've attempted to insult someone by comparing him to some bullshit stereotype about women? Well said. Flinging mud is all well and good as long as it is flung at the right people. To bring in half the human population into this flame fest is at best grossly overeager and at worst extremely and unfairly prejudicial. Breeno
Re: Richard Stallman...
To bring in half the human population into this flame fest is at best grossly overeager and at worst extremely and unfairly prejudicial. Indeed. IMO the most depressing thing about this entire exchange (with the possible exception of the amount of top-posting) is the offhand way in which movements for free software have been assumed by (many) people on both sides to be a boys club, and a particularly misogynistic one at that. Flame me if you want but I'm not sure I can realistically consider someone born in the 20th century with 18th century sexual politics much of an authority on ethics, whether applied to software or anything else. -- steev http://www.daikaiju.org.uk/~steve/
Re: Richard Stallman...
Can you tell the FSF web programmers to do more checking for HTML/SQL injection vulnerabilities? I know nothing about that issue, but I will forward your message. Teaching the public about this issue is a good thing to. However, the way you did it was predictably bad. By publishing it, and telling only me--not anyone who could fix it--you made sure a day would go by when others know about the problem but our sysadmins did not. It would have been better practice to tell our sysadmins privately first, and give them a couple of days to do something before educating the public. I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site to be attacked.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 6, 2008, at 8:18 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: By publishing it, and telling only me--not anyone who could fix it--you made sure a day would go by when others know about the problem but our sysadmins did not. It would have been better practice to tell our sysadmins privately first, and give them a couple of days to do something before educating the public. I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site to be attacked. Most likely, attacks are automated and already have scanned and compromised the systems vulnerable. In this case, prevention is a matter of using good cgi coding practices.
Re: Puffy 'Wizard of OS' (Was: Re: Richard Stallman...)
Eric Furman wrote: Yea, it was the artwork that attracted me to OpenBSD, not all the hard work that was put in creating good, clean, secure code. :-) (no offense Ken). Thanks again Theo and all the other devs. None taken. The quality of the OpenBSD effort goes without saying, although thanks are appropriate and needed from time to time -- thanks! Beyond the practical criteria, I also looked at the ideals and culture of the BSD projects before settling on OpenBSD. Any voluntary choice of an OS is done for emotional reasons, above and beyond the logical ones we like cloak our choices in. If you need proof of this, witness the flame war raging around us! -Ken
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. Rui -- Fnord. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
I note that Richard also says that AROS is a free operating system. I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. Oh really? Did he not notice the web page where AROS includes software which emulates an Amiga perfectly, I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. And did Richard even check their License page, to notice that it has numerous revocation clauses? I don't know if I ever looked for that page. Perhaps an AROS developer said it was free and I took his word for it. But since you say AROS isn't free, I should check it now. You may be right. What is the URL of that license page?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up. Gilles -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:31:10AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: I note that Richard also says that AROS is a free operating system. I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. It is amazing how many corrections you've made here and there since the beginning of this thread. It looks more and more like you barely said a thing that you actually checked facts for ... Oh really? Did he not notice the web page where AROS includes software which emulates an Amiga perfectly, I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. ... And did Richard even check their License page, to notice that it has numerous revocation clauses? I don't know if I ever looked for that page. Perhaps an AROS developer said it was free and I took his word for it. But since you say AROS isn't free, I should check it now. You may be right. ... -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Richard Stallman...
2008/1/6, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I note that Richard also says that AROS is a free operating system. I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. Dude... it is on the endorsement list on gnu.org you talked about in the beginning how you cannot include OpenBSD in it... http://gnu.org/links/links.html Is that not the list you talked about? I have a feeling that list is maintained by your 'FSF staff' and you don't have much of an idea of what's included in it? -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008 11:31 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. http://www.gnu.org/links/links.html Go to Other free operating systems section. What is the URL of that license page? http://aros.sourceforge.net/license.html Greetings.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non-free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up. No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating. Rui -- Wibble. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double check these facts yourself?
Re: Richard Stallman...
That's clearly a rhetorical question. On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:30:36AM -0800, johan beisser wrote: On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double check these facts yourself?
Re: Richard Stallman...
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all Using openbsd is using free software.. using MORE free software than Windows Server 2003. Using default openbsd and having an option to run Google search or ports is the same as using GCC and Emacs on windows with having the option to migrate to gnu/linux.. since ea lot of GCC users have never used linux/gnu ever. Same Thing. Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.
Re: Richard Stallman...
[slight legibility edit] On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:39 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:30:36AM -0800, johan beisser wrote: On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double check these facts yourself? That's clearly a rhetorical question. I've gathered that. I'm hoping for a proper answer.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:53:40PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. I was making a generic statement. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that is part of the OS. 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while and stopped using it because a proprietary application they depended on was not available; and i know people who would use Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their business and emacs integrates it so well. If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows. 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works, but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be using a free system and many other free utilities. By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non-free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done. For the convenience of these users, we provide a subsystem that allows them to install the software they need and *that is not shipped with our system*. The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if they want so. Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages because you tend to mix OpenBSD goals with the ones from the FSF. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up. No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating. It saddens me, but your (that's you and mr Stallman) attitude is very irritating. I would suggest, for the benefit of all, that you both leave as it would lessen your frustration and my irritation ... Gilles -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:53, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non- free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating. So GTFO. Oh and lose the sig on a public mailing list. You don't like us we don't like you. You think we rank up there with baby killers. I will NEVER understand how that works so just FOAD and we can all be happy. Rui -- Wibble. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
Hello mini-RMS, Happy New Year greetings from gnu.misc.discuss! :-) On Jan 5, 2008 6:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm not from the FSF. Yeah, yeah. You're a kind of Richard Bruce Dick Cheney of National Association for Free Software, aren't you? A kind of fsf er.. fsa.pt (National) guy. No? http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=pt_entrurl=http%3a%2f%2fansol.org%2ffilosofia Peace out. regards, alexander.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. It makes good sense to establish principles and stick to them. It makes sense that different people have different principles and will criticize one another on the basis of them. But I think it is important to recognize that what furthers adoption of free software over non-free software is complicated and does not seem to follow from any simple rule. For instance, it seems to you that the Wine project is counter-productive. But the Wine project is inseparable from winelib. If you're not already familiar with winelib, check it out--then I'd be curious to know if you still think the Wine project is counterproductive, considering that there are many free applications that are Windows-only for technical reasons arising out of decisions made early in their development. Separately from this, Wine enables people who retain Windows for a few applications to switch over entirely to other operating systems. How do you balance this effect against your suggested effect of discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down to it, a lot of the arguments about what do and will have what effect don't stand up unless supported with statistical evidence. This is the sort of thing you could publish a paper on, or maybe a book. But there is no reason for anybody to buy any argument about what specific kinds of free software encourage adoption of free software that doesn't provide something approaching hard evidence. It is one thing to say that there is a way for a project to be run that is most ethical. It is another to say that this will have the most ethical effects in the long run. There is no reason to believe that what has the best effects in the long run is necessarily the right thing, but then again, if it turns out that the ethical thing usually leads to unethical results in the long run, it is worth examining one's ethics. -Eliah
Re: Richard Stallman...
Oh, the real troll just arrived (one more list where he get's to the kill file). On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:52:34PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 6:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm not from the FSF. Yeah, yeah. You're a kind of Richard Bruce Dick Cheney of National Association for Free Software, aren't you? A kind of fsf er.. fsa.pt (National) guy. No? http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=pt_entrurl=http%3a%2f%2fansol.org%2ffilosofia Which is a totally disparate entity from the FSF, and only exists through the work of volunteers. It promotes Free Software, be it any BSD operating system or GNU/Linux one, or any other Free Software program. Rui -- This statement is false. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:53:40PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: ... you distribute non-free software. It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that this is a false statement. No, I am a victim Only because you elect to remain uninformed.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 01:51:22PM -0500, Eliah Kagan wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. (...) discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down The world is not made of such extremes, fortunately. It is counterproductive in so far as to promoting the development of Free Software that replaces proprietary programs running on Windows. If this is not clear to you, please help me be more clear. Rui -- Umlaut Zebra |ber alles! Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
I wrote: discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: The world is not made of such extremes, fortunately. It is counterproductive in so far as to promoting the development of Free Software that replaces proprietary programs running on Windows. If this is not clear to you, please help me be more clear. When you say the world is not made of such extremes, do you mean you think the long-term effects of something are always unquantifiable? That these specifically are unquantifiable? Indeed, if you could be more clear, that would be helpful. Suppose someone is unable to use Wine to run a proprietary program on a free operating system. As a result, they never use the free operating system. So they never use all the free programs that are part of that operating system. Well most of those programs fulfill a function that is also fulfilled (or sought to be fulfilled) by proprietary programs. So by enabling them to use their proprietary program in conjunction with a free operating system, they are also using many free alternatives to many other proprietary programs. This seems to promote development of software that replaces proprietary programs. There are also quite a few free programs that run only on Windows. (Being able to redistribute a program and its source and modify and redistribute the source doesn't somehow cause it to be instantly ported to other platforms by the grace of God.) These programs can be run on other operating systems with Wine. They can be ported to run on other operating systems with winelib. What I'm saying is that the matter of what supports replacing proprietary software with free software is complicated and merits a more textured analysis. In response, you seem to be saying that I hold a black-and-white view. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me (though you have managed to quote me in a way that makes it look like I hold and black-and-white view, I will assume that this was not intentional). -Eliah
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 10:28:19AM -0800, Ray Percival wrote: don't like you. You think we rank up there with baby killers. I will NEVER understand how that works so just FOAD and we can all be happy. I think that ranking you mention is 100% your interpretation. :) Rui -- Or is it? Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt. Do I need to mail you some maxi pads? On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 12:56:08AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:34:45PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that is part of the OS. Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains wether it's free software or not. Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't because some user wrote some text on a wiki page). 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while and stopped using it because a proprietary application they depended on was not available; and i know people who would use Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their business and emacs integrates it so well. Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation. If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing to do with the availability of GCC. Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X which only works on Windows, for instance. If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows. Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free Software which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's unix (erms...) and pretty, and works and has the apps. That is: they'd use it without any soul. 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works, but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be using a free system and many other free utilities. There needs to be soul into the decision, or else it's just like choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a Free Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get rid of her dependency on proprietary software? Will she keep using it if (let's hope not) you ever break up? By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non-free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done. Maybe for the desktop case, but then you have a whole sleuth of problems which users have a harder time dealing with than some software (like hardware support which in part because of NDA development *puah* supports a few more hardware). The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if they want so. Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages because you tend to mix OpenBSD goals with the ones from the FSF. Nopes, for what I read they're mostly the same, and these clear cut proprietary cases are hysterically extreme points
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 06:34:49PM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt. Do I need to mail you some maxi pads? Now that you mention it, shortly after this idiotic flame I started receiving tons of spam. I wonder if they're related... Rui -- Or is it? Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:34:45PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that is part of the OS. Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains wether it's free software or not. Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't because some user wrote some text on a wiki page). 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while and stopped using it because a proprietary application they depended on was not available; and i know people who would use Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their business and emacs integrates it so well. Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation. If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing to do with the availability of GCC. Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X which only works on Windows, for instance. If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows. Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free Software which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's unix (erms...) and pretty, and works and has the apps. That is: they'd use it without any soul. 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works, but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be using a free system and many other free utilities. There needs to be soul into the decision, or else it's just like choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a Free Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get rid of her dependency on proprietary software? Will she keep using it if (let's hope not) you ever break up? By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non-free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done. Maybe for the desktop case, but then you have a whole sleuth of problems which users have a harder time dealing with than some software (like hardware support which in part because of NDA development *puah* supports a few more hardware). The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if they want so. Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages because you tend to mix OpenBSD goals with the ones from the FSF. Nopes, for what I read they're mostly the same, and these clear cut proprietary cases are hysterically extreme points of view. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote: Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong. You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in any dictionary fir your accusations. As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of cults seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult too. Rui -- This statement is false. Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008, at 4:56 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Yes. But even if it's legally redistributable, the question remains wether it's free software or not. Fortunately OpenBSD is Free Software. Unfortunately it recommends and distributes proprietary software on it's servers (and it wasn't because some user wrote some text on a wiki page). Recommends? Where does it recommend? Please, show me a single URL where OpenBSD recommends software that's not in the base system. If you said makes available I'd probably not bothered having responded to your ongoing drivel. Only if they were using it like those sissy pseudo-fans of Free Software which changed to Apple MacOS X just because it's unix (erms...) and pretty, and works and has the apps. That is: they'd use it without any soul. Actually, I like OS X just fine. non-free and all. As a workstation, it's hard to beat. Especially since fighting to make KDE or GNOME just work for me in all aspects I need has proven tiresome and annoying. Darwin, for what it's worth, is just as 'free' as Linux or gNewsense. Due to some licensing by Apple, parts of it are not as free as OpenBSD. Then again, I know I don't have a soul. I like stuff that just works with out having to fight to make it work. There needs to be soul into the decision, or else it's just like choosing clothing. Does she use OpenBSD because she wants to use a Free Software operating system? If so, what have you done to help her get rid of her dependency on proprietary software? Explain soul. As in be a 'soul' into the decision. I see you whip another four letter word out, and I suspect it may have a different meaning, much like your odd definition of free. For what it's worth, I've always interpreted OpenBSD's usage of free as Free as in Liberty. You're free to take it, change it, make it your own, and do what you want. You're also free to not return your contributions to a derivative to OpenBSD. So far, nothing you've said that I've read has related to this definition of free. It's always Free as in Costs Nothing, Free as in Comes Without Warranty, and Free, except not really free. All I can speak for, is for myself: if I use OpenBSD because I like its feature set, and if I deploy it as I can... that's the kind of user you want to go away? I'd say you're better off cancelling the project, if it depended on you. Actually, I think the Go Away was more of a shut up you silly little wanker. That doesn't stop you from being in the userbase, it's just a nice way to ask you to keep your trap shut until you have something really useful to say.
Re: Richard Stallman...
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote: Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong. You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in any dictionary fir your accusations. As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of cults seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult too. Rui http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q8.html *81 http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_a8.html#ca_hypocrisy. Hypocrisy* Cult members, including the leader, project their own sins and crimes onto people outside of the cult:
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:46:08PM -0500, Eliah Kagan wrote: When you say the world is not made of such extremes, do you mean you think the long-term effects of something are always unquantifiable? The long term effects of anything are always something left to optimism or pessimism, according to each PoV, short of mathmatical formulas. That these specifically are unquantifiable? Indeed, if you could be more clear, that would be helpful. I think they're unquantifyable. Suppose someone is unable to use Wine to run a proprietary program on a free operating system. As a result, they never use the free operating system. So they never use all the free programs that are part of that operating system. Well most of those programs fulfill a function that is also fulfilled (or sought to be fulfilled) by proprietary programs. So by enabling them to use their proprietary program in conjunction with a free operating system, they are also using many free alternatives to many other proprietary programs. This seems to promote development of software that replaces proprietary programs. People seldom evolute in harsh steps. Before I learned of free software, I only thought GNU/Linux as useful for college. Windows was invaluable for the games. After some time I noticed I didn't have enough space for my music collection and I hadn't booted on Windows for months in a row... never again. This was... about ten years ago... give or take an year. Never went back. There are also quite a few free programs that run only on Windows. (Being able to redistribute a program and its source and modify and redistribute the source doesn't somehow cause it to be instantly ported to other platforms by the grace of God.) These programs can be run on other operating systems with Wine. They can be ported to run on other operating systems with winelib. I didn't say Wine is evil, just counter-productive. And it's totally my own opinion. Its fortunate success, as Free Software, may have enabled some users to use more Free Software, but it may also have enabled some users to continue using non-free software, even when replacements exist. What I'm saying is that the matter of what supports replacing proprietary software with free software is complicated and merits a more textured analysis. In response, you seem to be saying that I hold a black-and-white view. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me (though you have managed to quote me in a way that makes it look like I hold and black-and-white view, I will assume that this was not intentional). Hms, you used the ultimately this ultimately that expression, sorry if I took you for holding that BaW PoV! Rui -- Umlaut Zebra |ber alles! Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 06:18:34PM -0700, L wrote: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:31:00AM -0700, L wrote: Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong. You seem to abuse the word hypocrisy. None of the definitions I find in any dictionary fir your accusations. As such, I can't take your definition or accusations of cults seriously, as you seem to be quite an angry convict of some sort of cult too. Rui http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q8.html *81 http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_a8.html#ca_hypocrisy. Hypocrisy* Cult members, including the leader, project their own sins and crimes onto people outside of the cult: I don't take that as a definition of hypocrisy, but as a list of the hypocrisies commonly found in cults. BTW, one would say that the accusations of cult did not start from me (or Richard), so I'd say you accusers fall straight on the above all that's included in that link: We are not a cult -- all of those other groups are. We work very hard to make sure that our group doesn't turn into a cult like them. Rui -- Grudnuk demand sustenance! Today is Sweetmorn, the 6th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + 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...?
Re: Richard Stallman...
Marco Peereboom writes: Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt. Do I need to mail you some maxi pads? Do I need to point out that you've attempted to insult someone by comparing him to some bullshit stereotype about women?
Re: Richard Stallman...
L wrote: ... The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult members... I assume you are talking about this dreadful thread. Outside this thread the first time I heard cults mentioned was back in the late 1990's in the context of the M$ boosters. + outside the mainstream - yep, especially in the 90's + novel belief system - yep, making bad engineering acceptable + perceived benefits to members - yep, better products consistently avoided + headed by single charismatic leader - yep, though it's taken years of whitewashing full time by several PR firms to dress up an arrogant, condescending, impatient, know-nothing, rich nerd into the cult figure the press paints for us + isolationism - yep, the embrace, extend and extinguish strategy to defeat standards does succeed in cutting off the world. + dangerous and deceptive practices - yep, perjury, false advertising, the works etc. If you look at all the bizarre politics affecting use of technology going on at the state and national levels (US and EU) in regards to not applying rules of commerce or engineering to just that one company, it fits well with how cults operate. MSFTers definitely operate quite far outside a fact-based universe. When dealing with technology, facts are more important than marketing dogma. Of the BSD's, OpenBSD and NetBSD seem the most focused on nice, dry technical material. OpenBSD has the further advantage of taking extra precautions with supplementals tools such as licenses. -Lars
Re: Richard Stallman...
Let me make a sincere apology to all who read that and thought I was drawing a parallel. It obviously was poor choice of words and I am sorry for saying it. I won't even try to explain what my actual intention was since it'll sound hollow. Bad marco. On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:10PM -0500, Deanna Phillips wrote: Marco Peereboom writes: Blah blah blah my feelers are hurt. Do I need to mail you some maxi pads? Do I need to point out that you've attempted to insult someone by comparing him to some bullshit stereotype about women?
Re: Richard Stallman...
Lars NoodC)n wrote: L wrote: ... The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult members... I assume you are talking about this dreadful thread. ... Outside this thread the first time I heard cults mentioned was back in the late 1990's in the context of the M$ boosters. -Lars Sorry.. yes I meant the first time I heard the 'cult' mentioned relating to openbsd... The first time outside this thread I heard of the word cult was when I was in Religion class in school. I didn't like religion class... but I have to admit the warnings they gave me about cults in religion class were very helpful... because it is coming in handy when I study GNU. It was hilarious in class to watch videos of what type of cults were out there.. but now that I look at GNU I laugh every time I see it. By the way.. you stole my name! That's why I have 505 tacked on to the end.. so people can differentiate me from all the fraudulent Lars' out there like yourself! Regards, Lars (L505)
Re: Richard Stallman...
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: BTW, one would say that the accusations of cult did not start from me (or Richard), so I'd say you accusers fall straight on the above all that's included in that link: We are not a cult -- all of those other groups are. We work very hard to make sure that our group doesn't turn into a cult like them. Rui The first time I heard cult mentioned was when people were complaining about open bsd being a cult of open bsd followers, or mean rude cult members. Found it... Several instances of GNU followers accusing OpenBSD as a cult: 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. Outside the *cult* of OpenBSD no one else sees it that way. http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2007/12/14/507176 This was also the same thread where a GNU follower claimed that a hilarious did you? question was an insult. The same hypocrite went on to insult the person who asked the hilarious did you question. The person accusing a person of insult, was an insulter himself.. hence the hypocrisy and irony. Irony and hypocrisy are actually closely related. Take note! L505
