Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 10, 2008 2:41 AM, bofh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious if you know how Kevin Mitnick was tracked down and captured? i don't. by tracking his switched off cellular phone?
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Cell phone systems keep track of the location of the phone, and they can record the information permanently. They can do this even when the phone is switched off, because it still transmits. That information comes from the Palestine Information Technology Association. In Palestine, being tracked often means you get killed by a missile that wounds or kills other people passing by. I am unable to find the paper. Anyone has it? -- Regards Koh Choon Lin a href=http://profiles.friendster.com/42928535;Best Teacher in Singapore/a
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On 10/01/2008, bofh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 9, 2008 8:45 PM, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/9/08, bofh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious if you know how Kevin Mitnick was tracked down and captured? did the police go to the billing address of the cell phone he was using and paying for? Heh. A simple search for kevin mitnick capture will give you tons of links. Here's one: http://www.takedown.com/coverage/prince-hackers.html I do apologize in advance for the link though - it was written by markoff. There were... ethical issues with what he subsequently did. Indeed. Here's a better link: http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3429504/Freedom_Downtime_(2004_version)_-_Story_of_Hacker_Kevin_Mitnick And no, to the best of my knowledge this is not copyright infringement, because Emmanuel Goldstein of 2600 has mentioned on Off The Hook sometime that he doesn't object to such copying, and 2600/Emmanuel is the copyright holder. Or just email him at 2600.com if you're still unconvinced. Of course if you want to support 2600 magazine, an action I heartily encourage, you can also buy the DVD (which is full of hidden features, cf. http://www.2600.com/easter/eggs.html ) at http://store.2600.com/film.html
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 01:21:04PM +0100, chefren wrote: Look around, somewhat further than your relatives and friends... If it's not programmed well, it's stupid. Stupidity implies sentience... HAL, you there? -Toby. -- [100~Plax]sb16i0A2172656B63616820636420726568746F6E61207473754A[dZ1!=b]salax
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On 1/10/08 1:09 AM, Tobias Weingartner wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], chefren wrote: On 1/8/08 11:28 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: 2. Same NIC without flash/ROM bad Eh, that's just a meaningless pile of transistors. Surely you jest? An FPGA is a meaningless pile of transistors? Weird... Without software loaded to it? Certainly. Just stupid silicon. +++chefren
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:33:41AM +0100, chefren wrote: On 1/10/08 1:09 AM, Tobias Weingartner wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], chefren wrote: On 1/8/08 11:28 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: 2. Same NIC without flash/ROM bad Eh, that's just a meaningless pile of transistors. Surely you jest? An FPGA is a meaningless pile of transistors? Weird... Without software loaded to it? Certainly. Just stupid silicon. +++chefren It has the capability to be programmed. I would not call that stupid. -Otto
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On 1/10/08 11:10 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:33:41AM +0100, chefren wrote: On 1/10/08 1:09 AM, Tobias Weingartner wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], chefren wrote: On 1/8/08 11:28 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: 2. Same NIC without flash/ROM bad Eh, that's just a meaningless pile of transistors. Surely you jest? An FPGA is a meaningless pile of transistors? Weird... Without software loaded to it? Certainly. Just stupid silicon. It has the capability to be programmed. I would not call that stupid. ROFL Look around, somewhat further than your relatives and friends... If it's not programmed well, it's stupid. +++chefren
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], chefren wrote: On 1/8/08 11:28 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: 2. Same NIC without flash/ROM bad Eh, that's just a meaningless pile of transistors. Surely you jest? An FPGA is a meaningless pile of transistors? Weird... -Toby. -- [100~Plax]sb16i0A2172656B63616820636420726568746F6E61207473754A[dZ1!=b]salax
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 8, 2008 2:27 PM, Eric Furman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:18:15 -0500, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Yes, that is my view of things. Using the phone could be convenient for me. (I think it would be convenient for me.) But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance, as well as proprietary software). These problems continue because people tolerate them. To solve them, we have to stop tolerating them. Bwa ha ha ha. I love these replies. they just show what a freaking nutjob idiot you are. Now pleease, STFU and go away. Just curious if you know how Kevin Mitnick was tracked down and captured? -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity. -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted. -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1G-3laJJP0feature=related
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On 1/9/08, bofh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious if you know how Kevin Mitnick was tracked down and captured? did the police go to the billing address of the cell phone he was using and paying for?
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 9, 2008 8:45 PM, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/9/08, bofh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious if you know how Kevin Mitnick was tracked down and captured? did the police go to the billing address of the cell phone he was using and paying for? Heh. A simple search for kevin mitnick capture will give you tons of links. Here's one: http://www.takedown.com/coverage/prince-hackers.html I do apologize in advance for the link though - it was written by markoff. There were... ethical issues with what he subsequently did. -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity. -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted. -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1G-3laJJP0feature=related
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:18:15 -0500, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. So if it is a new model of cell phone and if the owner teaches you how to use it and make life easy for you will that be 1) Wrong on his part to encourage you to using a device you don't use? 2) Wrong on your part to take his advice and help to use it? Yes, that is my view of things. Using the phone could be convenient for me. (I think it would be convenient for me.) But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance, as well as proprietary software). These problems continue because people tolerate them. To solve them, we have to stop tolerating them. OpenMoko will make substantial progress on both problems. I might be willing to carry an OpenMoko phone, but I would keep its antenna switched off most of the time. But some where ( just like you use take help from the mobile phone owner to use it ) in the ports system are instructions to install a non-free software which is not mandatory for users to use. The cases are similar, and my view on the two cases is similar. Bwa ha ha ha. I love these replies. they just show what a freaking nutjob idiot you are. Now pleease, STFU and go away.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:46:37 -0500, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: You shouldn't use them, because of the software, but also, because your cell phone is a tracking device, even when it is turned off, Stallman said. Interestingly, in the minutes before the talk began, Stallman padded up one aisle in his stocking feet talking into what looked like a mobile telephone. I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. In the same sense, I would consider it wrong for me to have a machine with Windows on it, or to use one regularly, but I see nothing wrong in using someone else's Windows machine for a few minutes. I don't think the words quoted are my exact words. Reporters often change quotations. Blah blah blah. All this does is demonstrate what a moron you are.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 02:06:31PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: So you are basically saying that being a bum is ethical. I see nothing wrong with it, but recall that bum means a person who does no useful work. I work most of my waking hours, and the people who support me in various ways do so because they appreciate my work. I am sure some people appreciate their windshields being cleaned for $1. I am also sure some people are happy they can buy a rose at a traffic light. It still is not considered useful and even legal work. It is up to the beholder to determine if it is useful or not. I'd say that you ranting on my lists is not useful work. Bum also implies a person who asks for handouts. When hosts pay for my meals, they do so by their own initiative. I do not ask individuals to give anything to me personally, but some wish to. Sure, I give might be inclined to have my windshield washed for $1 too. Don't see any difference. It is ok to use someone else's cell phone but it is not ok to have your own. Exactly. If you carry a cell phone, the system tracks you. If you borrow someone else's cell phone and make a call, that confuses the tracking records. As a person who believes in the dictionary definition of liberty and freedom (that is not you btw) I am sensitive to this tracking argument however it is completely besides the point. You are bumming someone else's gear that was paid for with blood money and call that A OK. I find that odd at best. It is ok to use someone else's windows machine but it is not ok to have your own. If I wanted to be totally rigid, I would say that people shouldn't use a Windows machine even for a minute. But I don't see a need to be so inflexible. If you use someone else's machine for a little while, I don't think you are doing any harm. You can't migrate it to free software. The person who owns or controls the machine is the one who ought to do that. Again you are talking about something different. I am talking about you bumming other people's resources. Unethical resources no less. It is ok to write software and give it away but it is not ok to make a living writing software. A circuit is a circuit when it has a flash part but not if it doesn't. Please recheck my previous mail for what I actually said. I honestly don't understand what you are talking about. Let me break down how I understand your point. 1. NIC with flash/ROM good 2. Same NIC without flash/ROM bad Is that what you are saying?
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On 1/8/08 11:28 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: 2. Same NIC without flash/ROM bad Eh, that's just a meaningless pile of transistors. +++chefren
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Richard Stallman wrote: I see nothing wrong in using someone else's Windows machine for a few minutes. Great!, Now go down to your local public library.. assuming they offer free Internet access.. Do you're own fucking research! Helpful resources: http://en.wikipedia.org/ http://www.google.com/ ..etc -Nix Fan.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Richard Stallman wrote: But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance,...) Are you seriously that paranoid? Do you wear a tin foil hat by any chance? :-) Richard Stallman wrote: The cases are similar, and my view on the two cases is similar. So answer this question, did you ask to use the phone? or did the fact someone had one lure you into the dark side by using proprietary software? You're an old man way out of date, disconnected from reality, technology and your sanity.. Please, do us all a favour and retire from computing.. You're in no position to attack free operating systems, you don't can't even keep your definition strait. Note: The proceeding licence only applies to Richard Matthew Stallman's viewing. UPL(Unixfan public licence), You are not free to read this message, by doing so, you have violated my licence and are required to urinate publicly. Thank you. -Nix Fan.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 7, 2008 9:48 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. So if it is a new model of cell phone and if the owner teaches you how to use it and make life easy for you will that be 1) Wrong on his part to encourage you to using a device you don't use? 2) Wrong on your part to take his advice and help to use it? Yes, that is my view of things. Using the phone could be convenient for me. (I think it would be convenient for me.) But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance, as well as proprietary software). These problems continue because people tolerate them. To solve them, we have to stop tolerating them. So you call yourself a Freedom Zealot and whenever is is connvinent to use the very things you recommend against. And condemn others if they do the same or much even less. No wonder you are called a hypocrite often in this issue ( and others ) But some where ( just like you use take help from the mobile phone owner to use it ) in the ports system are instructions to install a non-free software which is not mandatory for users to use. The cases are similar, and my view on the two cases is similar. So what did you do when you used a mobile phone for the first time/ You must have got instructions from somebody or some body must have dialed for you or you must have got the information from a manual some body has prepared for you right? of course unless you have asp or some paranormal phenomenon for knowing things. Your logic is perfectly this. You are a prejudiced individual with a lot of ambition and aspirations. And you would do anything you want when it is convenient but would condemn other who does the same or even less and preach at he top of your voice against the very things you practice and mislead a whole lot of people who just like you don't research enough to know the facts. And you will twist your own words to justify your violations of your own standards. Addition, Deletion, and Distortion of your own standards/policies, which you impose on others to follow, when you yourself break it because it is not practical is your main Job.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Has anybody thought of this... the ports system is a facility that one can 'borrow' and use on a OpenBSD system that _is_ used for their own 'convenience'!!! You can just improve it and give back your changes, and most of the stuff you'll ever do with it has much to deal with free software anyway - much better than that evil proprietary crap on the mobile phone that will eat your child and shrink your penis, and possibly organ damage!!!
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance,...) Are you seriously that paranoid? Do you wear a tin foil hat by any chance? :-) Cell phone systems keep track of the location of the phone, and they can record the information permanently. They can do this even when the phone is switched off, because it still transmits. That information comes from the Palestine Information Technology Association. In Palestine, being tracked often means you get killed by a missile that wounds or kills other people passing by. If you consider this a joking matter, the joke will be on you. The cases are similar, and my view on the two cases is similar. So answer this question, did you ask to use the phone? or did the fact someone had one lure you into the dark side by using proprietary software? Do you think it is wrong to borrow someone's computer if it has proprietary software in it? If so, your position is much more extreme than mine.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
So you are basically saying that being a bum is ethical. In other words, using others resources that might even be blood money. It is ok to use someone else's cell phone but it is not ok to have your own. It is ok to use someone else's windows machine but it is not ok to have your own. It is ok to write software and give it away but it is not ok to make a living writing software. A circuit is a circuit when it has a flash part but not if it doesn't. So it is ok for you to bum everyone's resources and that is perfectly ethical even though they are paid for by unethical behavior (aka writing code for a living). I tell you what, I find it unethical to use someone else's resources and relying on others to take care of oneself. You are basically saying I am not responsible for my own well being; others have to take care of me. It is unethical of them to not help me. Am I the only one that can not follow this logic? On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 11:18:15PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. So if it is a new model of cell phone and if the owner teaches you how to use it and make life easy for you will that be 1) Wrong on his part to encourage you to using a device you don't use? 2) Wrong on your part to take his advice and help to use it? Yes, that is my view of things. Using the phone could be convenient for me. (I think it would be convenient for me.) But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance, as well as proprietary software). These problems continue because people tolerate them. To solve them, we have to stop tolerating them. OpenMoko will make substantial progress on both problems. I might be willing to carry an OpenMoko phone, but I would keep its antenna switched off most of the time. But some where ( just like you use take help from the mobile phone owner to use it ) in the ports system are instructions to install a non-free software which is not mandatory for users to use. The cases are similar, and my view on the two cases is similar.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
You shouldn't use them, because of the software, but also, because your cell phone is a tracking device, even when it is turned off, Stallman said. Interestingly, in the minutes before the talk began, Stallman padded up one aisle in his stocking feet talking into what looked like a mobile telephone. I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. In the same sense, I would consider it wrong for me to have a machine with Windows on it, or to use one regularly, but I see nothing wrong in using someone else's Windows machine for a few minutes. I don't think the words quoted are my exact words. Reporters often change quotations.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 6, 2008 11:46 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You shouldn't use them, because of the software, but also, because your cell phone is a tracking device, even when it is turned off, Stallman said. Interestingly, in the minutes before the talk began, Stallman padded up one aisle in his stocking feet talking into what looked like a mobile telephone. I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. In the same sense, I would consider it wrong for me to have a machine with Windows on it, or to You must mean Losedows (I've noted your habit of labeling Win32 as Lose32... the motto must be: You can't WIN if you use LOSEdows), right? use one regularly, but I see nothing wrong in using someone else's Windows machine for a few minutes. Wow. Nice to know that you can sustain a few minutes of nonfreedom, irregularly. regards, alexander.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 6, 2008 4:16 PM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You shouldn't use them, because of the software, but also, because your cell phone is a tracking device, even when it is turned off, Stallman said. Interestingly, in the minutes before the talk began, Stallman padded up one aisle in his stocking feet talking into what looked like a mobile telephone. I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. So if it is a new model of cell phone and if the owner teaches you how to use it and make life easy for you will that be 1) Wrong on his part to encourage you to using a device you don't use? 2) Wrong on your part to take his advice and help to use it? In the same sense, I would consider it wrong for me to have a machine with Windows on it, or to use one regularly, but I see nothing wrong in using someone else's Windows machine for a few minutes. In the same sense OpenBSD does not promote the use of non free software. It would be wrong if their distribution contained non-free software. But some where ( just like you use take help from the mobile phone owner to use it ) in the ports system are instructions to install a non-free software which is not mandatory for users to use. Do you get the logic at least now? Can you see through the hypocrisy? I don't think the words quoted are my exact words. Reporters often change quotations. More than that you change your quotations
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
I don't carry a mobile phone, but I don't see anything wrong in borrowing one from someone to make a call. So if it is a new model of cell phone and if the owner teaches you how to use it and make life easy for you will that be 1) Wrong on his part to encourage you to using a device you don't use? 2) Wrong on your part to take his advice and help to use it? Yes, that is my view of things. Using the phone could be convenient for me. (I think it would be convenient for me.) But it also perpetuates serious problems (totalitarian surveillance, as well as proprietary software). These problems continue because people tolerate them. To solve them, we have to stop tolerating them. OpenMoko will make substantial progress on both problems. I might be willing to carry an OpenMoko phone, but I would keep its antenna switched off most of the time. But some where ( just like you use take help from the mobile phone owner to use it ) in the ports system are instructions to install a non-free software which is not mandatory for users to use. The cases are similar, and my view on the two cases is similar.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
When someone asked him how to make a living of IT without using or promoting non-free software, his answer was that you don't have to work in the IT field to contribute to free software, and he'd prefer see a kernel contributor being a taxi driver than administrating Windows workstations (It may not be the very same words, but the intent is the same). Luckily for Linux RMS doesn't have a say in who works on the kernel. If he had I guess Linux would now have been what GNU HURD is: unknown and irrelevant. --- Lars Hansson
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 4, 2008 11:41 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. http://technews.acm.org/archives.cfm?fo=2007-04-apr/apr-09-2007.html#306282 --- Cell phones also came under attack, for their ability to be used as a tracking device, even when it is turned off. In summing up a broader philosophy, Stallman suggested, Don't buy a house, a car, or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have to spend all your time making money to pay for them. --- http://ia310134.us.archive.org/1/items/The_Basement_Interviews/Richard_Stallman_Interview.pdf --- RP: So how do you fund yourself today? RS: I get paid for some of my speeches. In addition, when I am travelling in a lot of places people don't let me pay for anything, so life is cheaper. This is sort of amusing and makes me a little bit like a medieval king. Medieval kings had to keep travelling all the time because if they stayed in one place they would burden the people there so much that the people would eventually get mad! RP: Is that an adequate way of funding yourself? RS: Loads of people invite me to visit them, and if I am there for a few days they are happy to do things like pay for my food, and they pay for me to go there, because otherwise I would go somewhere else instead. And some of them also pay a fee. --- regards, alexander.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
In response to off-band inquiries... On Jan 5, 2008 4:41 PM, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 11:41 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. http://technews.acm.org/archives.cfm?fo=2007-04-apr/apr-09-2007.html#306282 --- Cell phones also came under attack, for their ability to be used as a tracking device, even when it is turned off. In summing up a broader philosophy, Stallman suggested, Don't buy a house, a car, or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have to spend all your time making money to pay for them. --- Original linuxinsider.com article seems to be gone but full copy is still available courtesy of chineselinuxuniversity.net. (I'm quoting it in full below for the sake of convenience to RMS -- all those remote wget burdens, y'know.) http://www.chineselinuxuniversity.net/news/3308.shtml --- ;6S-Dz=xHkVP9zLinux4sQ', D?G0NRCG5DW\W2aSC;'J} 6227, W\5c;wJ} 7840636 Google6(VFKQKw: 2008Dj1TB5HU PGFZAy UPF8PEO Linux4sQ' | PBNE | JuNDUB | 5gWSJiSkHm~ | WJT4U5c | V\1(:MTSV | DZ:K296! | HK2EVPPD | WTSIJ1?U Free Software Foundation's Richard Stallman: 'Live Cheaply' U*WT: linuxinsider.com 1;TD6A4NJ}: 68 SI yangyi SZ 2007-04-05 14:04:18 La9) Speaking at Lehigh University last week, Free Software Foundation Founder Richard Stallman urged his audience to make open source not just a way of computing, but a way of life. Using commercial proprietary software leaves users divided because we can't make copies to help our neighbors and helpless because we can't see the source code, Stallman said. Free WiFi Hotspot Locator from TechNewsWorld Wondering where to find the nearest publicly available WiFi Internet access? Our global directory of more than 100,000 locations in 26 countries is a terrific tool for mobile computer users. Richard Stallman doesn't own an MP3 player. He doesn't own a mobile telephone. In fact, this techno-visionary -- a founder of the Free Software Foundation -- doesn't use any of the usual computer programs many people use. He spent the better part of two hours last week, before a mostly supportive audience at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pa., explaining exactly why he has made these choices, which he couched not in technical but in ethical terms, and why his foundation works to promote what's called free software -- software that can be legally copied, altered and exchanged. With his long, slightly unkempt, dark, shoulder-length hair and his rumpled demeanor, Stallman, 53, looked more a 1960s rock guitarist than a software guru. His minimalist attire, a creased, logo-free red knit shirt, khaki pants and stocking feet, emphasized the counterculture associations. He parked his shoes, side-by-side, next to the podium in Lehigh's Whitaker auditorium, where he addressed about 150 in a voice tinged with a slight New England accent. Free Software, Free Markets As the afternoon unfolded, the counterculture connections seemed more than appropriate as he spoke of his role in creating an alternative to a computing environment dominated by corporations and their operating systems and software, loaded with hidden features and restrictive limitations. However, there were other times when Stallman's words seemed to conflict with his image. He spoke approvingly about the merits of people making money on their efforts and suggested free software encouraged more of a free market than the restrictive aspects of the proprietary software world. Stallman is also one of the creators of the GNU/Linux operating system Forge ahead and stay on budget with simple to install HP server technology., which runs most computers and Internet servers not run by commercial giants Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) Free 30-Day Trial. Seamlessly Integrate UNIX Linux systems with Active Directory. Latest News about Microsoft Windows and Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) Latest News about Apple Macintosh Latest News about Macintosh. People choose computer software for reasons that have to do with convenience, reliability, ease of use and cost, he says, but he called those choices a fundamental mistake because they don't allow us to see what is important. The source code for such programs should be easily visible to all users so they can change, adjust or improve upon programs or operating systems they create, he says. With proprietary software, the guts of the programs are a well-guarded secret, and such tinkering is illegal. A Call for Change Using commercial proprietary software leaves users divided because we can't make copies to help our neighbors and helpless because we can't see the source code, Stallman says. Stallman urged his audience, mostly Lehigh
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
For some reason, earlier mail on the strawllman-thread did not make it to the list. I'm copying parts of some of these mails inline. Note that both mails were CC:'ed to misc@ (so they were intended to end up on the list. As such, i don't think using them inline here is a problem) On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:31:51PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: | Don't worry. You can ask rms if your behaviour is ethical. He'll set | you straight, and tell you to stop working for those companies and | instead suckle off your McArthur Idiot grant. Quiting your job at those companies is just 'some discomfort' : On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:16:02PM +0100, Paul de Weerd wrote: Helping people install non-free programs puts food on my plate. In fact, it enables me to make financial contributions to OpenBSD. It is of vital importance to me that I can install non-free programs, I literally need it to survive. I don't think you will step up to the plate to support me financially when I decide to denounce non-free software and get fired as a consequence. So I do think I should help people install non-free programs. They want me to do so, so I do it. On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 07:53:12PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: Helping people install non-free programs puts food on my plate. In fact, it enables me to make financial contributions to OpenBSD. It is of vital importance to me that I can install non-free programs, I literally need it to survive. If someone points a gun at you and tells you to install non-free software, I would not criticize you for going along with him. I wouldn't ask anyone to lay down his life for the free software movement. However, I expect you're exaggerating when you say that your situation is that grave. There are many jobs people can do in the Netherlands. If you lost this particular job -- which could happen for many reasons -- the result would most likely just be some discomfort. [note that, although I am Dutch, I currently do not live (or work) in the Netherlands] In the real world, people have jobs that, at the end of the day, pay for the food on their plates and the roofs over their heads. In our current world there are *very few* jobs in IT that do not deal with non-free software in one way or another. From my own experience, I've started as a Windows and NetWare guy. Totally non-free software. I moved to supporting UNIX systems (HPUX, Solaris and AIX with some Linux systems (with non-free parts added) mixed in), mostly non-free software. I moved on to be admin of a mail platform for a Dutch ISP. Much FreeBSD and other free software but we had to use Windows for certain (administrative) tasks and were required to use non-free anti-virus solutions. Then, I moved to another ISP where I did UNIX support (for many different types of UNIX, both free and non-free) and network admin for Cisco IOS and Junipers JunOS (cisco routers and switches and juniper equipment could be considered appliances like a microwave, still the software that runs on them is non-free). I'm currently working for an American software company in Switzerland, using mostly Linux for its servers. The software my colleagues create (and ask me to install on those Linux servers) is highly proprietary. I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. I very much enjoy working with free software. Some of that stuff is simply amazing. But it is not of this world to think that more than a handful of people can make their living without ever touching non-free software in this world. If you're waiting for this to happen : dont hold your breath. Yes, there are many jobs people can do in the Netherlands (and in other countries). My point is that most (if not all) IT-jobs require the employee to somehow interface with non-free software. In the general case, you can not simply refuse to work with non-free software and expect to keep your job. Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd | On Jan 4, 2008 9:48 AM, Ioan Nemes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | You confusing the issue! The software market - where you sell your product | (i.e., software) is unethical, | distorted and manipulated, and not by the ethical software crafters! | | Why is the software market unethical? Because there are some bad | apples? Gee, that makes pretty much every single business sector | unethical. Unless you're trying to say that selling software in itself | is unethical but that's bullshit. | Who are the ethical software crafters? Does simply not charging money | for your software make you ethical? | Most OSS, for example, can be, and is, used by governments to oppress | the people. Does that make working on OSS unethical? | | --- | Lars Hansson | -- [++-]+++.+++[---].+++[+ +++-].++[-]+.--.[-]
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 4, 2008 11:41 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For some reason, earlier mail on the strawllman-thread did not make it to the list. I'm copying parts of some of these mails inline. Note that both mails were CC:'ed to misc@ (so they were intended to end up on the list. As such, i don't think using them inline here is a problem) However, I expect you're exaggerating when you say that your situation is that grave. There are many jobs people can do in the Netherlands. If you lost this particular job -- which could happen for many reasons -- the result would most likely just be some discomfort. I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. I very much enjoy working with free software. Some of that stuff is simply amazing. But it is not of this world to think that more than a handful of people can make their living without ever touching non-free software in this world. If you're waiting for this to happen : dont hold your breath. Yes, there are many jobs people can do in the Netherlands (and in other countries). My point is that most (if not all) IT-jobs require the employee to somehow interface with non-free software. In the general case, you can not simply refuse to work with non-free software and expect to keep your job. Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd In February 2004, Mr Stallman did a keynote at an event held in Paris called Solutions Linux (or stg along theses lines) about free software. When someone asked him how to make a living of IT without using or promoting non-free software, his answer was that you don't have to work in the IT field to contribute to free software, and he'd prefer see a kernel contributor being a taxi driver than administrating Windows workstations (It may not be the very same words, but the intent is the same). FOS projects being what they are, they do not require any kind of qualification to participate, only the final product (code, doc) is taken in account. So I could be a gardener and contribute to projects I estimate worthy. From a very abstract point of view, that's coherent. But contributing is not an abstract process: a contributor has to run into a problem to solve it. Personnally, I never managed to solve a problem I couldn't grasp. And as a gardener, I'm not sure software will be my first source of problems. Another point is if contributions are my only contact with software, the range of my perceptions will be greatly narrowed. You can't expect creativity to come from this overconstrained setup: solutions often come from the 10.30 coffee break, when you discuss with your colleagues. So, I'm the first one to say we should judge on the results not the look, but I think it's way harder to write quality code when not in IT. -- Vincent
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 4, 2008 5:47 PM, dermiste [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 11:41 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For some reason, earlier mail on the strawllman-thread did not make it to the list. I'm copying parts of some of these mails inline. Note that both mails were CC:'ed to misc@ (so they were intended to end up on the list. As such, i don't think using them inline here is a problem) However, I expect you're exaggerating when you say that your situation is that grave. There are many jobs people can do in the Netherlands. If you lost this particular job -- which could happen for many reasons -- the result would most likely just be some discomfort. I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. I very much enjoy working with free software. Some of that stuff is simply amazing. But it is not of this world to think that more than a handful of people can make their living without ever touching non-free software in this world. If you're waiting for this to happen : dont hold your breath. Yes, there are many jobs people can do in the Netherlands (and in other countries). My point is that most (if not all) IT-jobs require the employee to somehow interface with non-free software. In the general case, you can not simply refuse to work with non-free software and expect to keep your job. Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd In February 2004, Mr Stallman did a keynote at an event held in Paris called Solutions Linux (or stg along theses lines) about free software. When someone asked him how to make a living of IT without using or promoting non-free software, his answer was that you don't have to work in the IT field to contribute to free software, and he'd prefer see a kernel contributor being a taxi driver than administrating Windows workstations (It may not be the very same words, but the intent is the same). FOS projects being what they are, they do not require any kind of qualification to participate, only the final product (code, doc) is taken in account. So I could be a gardener and contribute to projects I estimate worthy. From a very abstract point of view, that's coherent. But contributing is not an abstract process: a contributor has to run into a problem to solve it. Personnally, I never managed to solve a problem I couldn't grasp. And as a gardener, I'm not sure software will be my first source of problems. Another point is if contributions are my only contact with software, the range of my perceptions will be greatly narrowed. You can't expect creativity to come from this overconstrained setup: solutions often come from the 10.30 coffee break, when you discuss with your colleagues. So, I'm the first one to say we should judge on the results not the look, but I think it's way harder to write quality code when not in IT. I thought you were leading up to a last clause of, but I think it's way harder to know which quality code to write, when not in IT. To which I would have answered, But what about the public bug tracking system? Wouldn't that suffice for highlighting, to a person not employed in IT (but still a hacker), the code that needs to be written? Todd
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Todd Alan Smith wrote: When someone asked him how to make a living of IT without using or promoting non-free software, his answer was that you don't have to work in the IT field to contribute to free software, and he'd prefer see a kernel contributor being a taxi driver than administrating Windows workstations (It may not be the very same words, but the intent is the same). ... So I could be a gardener and contribute to projects I estimate worthy. From a very abstract point of view, that's coherent. ... And as a gardener, I'm not sure software will be my first source of problems. A gardener? Replicating vegetables and charging for them is unethical and antisocial. Seeds and plants can be replicated at virtually no cost, and it is fun to do. http://z505.com/gng/free-gardening.htm And charging for consulting about the gardening.. is being a prostitute. Why would you want to unethically charge an hourly fee to discuss gardening? You are holding back something that you should be giving all your head to, for free. When I speak of freedom, I speak of free sex, not cost. http://z505.com/gng/
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
And as a gardener, I'm not sure software will be my first source of problems. L, the above quoted text is not mine. You need to be more careful in the configuration of your replies. I, for one, would appreciate it. Todd Sincere apologies.. It was a double and your name should have been removed, or the original person should have been left above you. I am getting used to Thunderbird, but it is definitely my fault for confusing that conversation. L505
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 4, 2008 10:14 PM, L [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Todd Alan Smith wrote: When someone asked him how to make a living of IT without using or promoting non-free software, his answer was that you don't have to work in the IT field to contribute to free software, and he'd prefer see a kernel contributor being a taxi driver than administrating Windows workstations (It may not be the very same words, but the intent is the same). ... So I could be a gardener and contribute to projects I estimate worthy. From a very abstract point of view, that's coherent. ... And as a gardener, I'm not sure software will be my first source of problems. L, the above quoted text is not mine. You need to be more careful in the configuration of your replies. I, for one, would appreciate it. Todd A gardener? Replicating vegetables and charging for them is unethical and antisocial. Seeds and plants can be replicated at virtually no cost, and it is fun to do. http://z505.com/gng/free-gardening.htm And charging for consulting about the gardening.. is being a prostitute. Why would you want to unethically charge an hourly fee to discuss gardening? You are holding back something that you should be giving all your head to, for free. When I speak of freedom, I speak of free sex, not cost. http://z505.com/gng/
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Good for google! They hire themselves into fame and therefore look good in the process. If the individual thinks that the money is worth it for him/her we have a transaction. Nowhere do I see any ethical questions. Google is in it for the money and someone needs to pay a mortgage. End of transaction. Both parties benefit. I am going to say something that most people will frown upon but here goes. Writing open/free source code is mostly a selfish activity. That's right I said it. I'd bet money that most people that write code and give it away do it because they can and make themselves feel better in the process (resume padding, fame, power in the community, $my_reason_for_writing_free_code etc). They don't do it for altruistic reasons like ZOMG I am stopping world hunger with OMGOS. I am of the opinion that all these so called ethical questions are trivial and uninteresting. A company selling software is in no way shape or form unethical provided they abide by the law. You might disagree with their way of doing business but that really doesn't make it unethical; maybe questionable behavior or unwanted behavior but really ethics are really only applied to much more interesting life events. Ask yourself this question. Do you really believe that someone who sells a product which was developed within the lawful frame work is unethical? Also ask yourself the question if you like computers and the internets and if it would exist if it wasn't for some people making money of it. Do you work in the field of IT? Are you therefore unethical? On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 09:44:00AM -0700, Jack J. Woehr wrote: A professional peer of mine wrote the following article: http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/23417 which contains the following paragraph: Google's hired great open source developers from projects like Linux, Firefox, Samba and Apache. They all still have ties back into those projects. Now these key hires can help influence open source development projects that happen to indirectly benefit Google. Plus, open source developers would love to help improve their projects and displace Microsoft. A win-win. I'd like to ask the community what they think: Is the hiring of open source star coders in expectation of ancillary benefit from their influence in Open Source projects a win-win form of voting with your feet or is it an ethical conflict? I'm curious how we all see this. -- Jack J. Woehr Director of Development Absolute Performance, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 303-443-7000 ext. 527
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Ask yourself this question. Do you really believe that someone who sells a product which was developed within the lawful frame work is unethical? You confusing the issue! The software market - where you sell your product (i.e., software) is unethical, distorted and manipulated, and not by the ethical software crafters! A `win-win` case? No, I don't think so, it smells like a Fridmanite axiom to me. ioan This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) named and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it immediately and notify the sender. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of Fairfield City Council.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 12:48:57PM +1100, Ioan Nemes wrote: Ask yourself this question. Do you really believe that someone who sells a product which was developed within the lawful frame work is unethical? You confusing the issue! The software market - where you sell your product (i.e., software) is unethical, distorted and manipulated, and not by the ethical software crafters! A `win-win` case? No, I don't think so, it smells like a Fridmanite axiom to me. Many things sold by big business in the business market place have some ethical problems. For example, I personally don't shop at WallMart and avoid as much as possible buying things from China. However, I was unable to find a new MB that was NOT made in China. The only thing good about WallMart is that in most small towns it promts the town to remove parking meeters downtown. Don't confuse legal with ethical. They are, unfortunatly, totally distinct. Many ethical things are legal and many legal things are ethical but there are a times when an ethical act may be illegal and there are many many times when an unethical act is legal. An individual who goes into the widget-invention business to put food on the table is not inherently unethical if the widget in question is a piece of software. If the widge were a fax machine, I could sit down in a machine shop and make an exact physical replica but unless I can read the chips I can't duplicate the software on those chips that make the fax machine anything more than a paperweight. It is this distinction which generates some philisophical debate. Just as the phyicality of the fax machine is open source where I could improve on it, I couldn't then sell my improved version due to a likely patent on that model of fax machine unless I did something totally new, patented it myself, and made my fax machine look nothing like its inspiration. Sure, as the designer of a new-and-better fax machine, it would be nice to have the source for those chips, the company doesn't have any incentive for giving me that source even if it came with a license clause that forbade distributing modified versions. I don't see, though, how the company's refusal to give me the source for the fax machine software is unethical. Dou Sure, as the designer of a new-and-better fax machine, it would be nice to have the source for those chips, the company doesn't have any incentive for giving me that source even if it came with a license clause that forbade distributing modified versions. I don't see, though, how the company's refusal to give me the source for the fax machine software is unethical. Doug.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On 3-Jan-08, at 8:48 PM, Ioan Nemes wrote: Ask yourself this question. Do you really believe that someone who sells a product which was developed within the lawful frame work is unethical? You confusing the issue! The software market - where you sell your product (i.e., software) is unethical, distorted and manipulated, and not by the ethical software crafters! A `win-win` case? No, I don't think so, it smells like a Fridmanite axiom to me. ioan How can a software market be unethical? It's not unethical for someone to write software and not give away the code because you have the option of not using it. It wouldn't be unethical for Google to hire away every OpenBSD developer and then stop them from writing any more free code because a) we as users have no inherent right to the code and b) even if we did, what we've already got will always be free and c) we have no inherent right to expect the devs to keep giving us code in the future. Nevermind that they would probably mostly quit rather that stop releasing free code anyway. This is so far from infringing on anyone's freedoms, I don't even understand how the word ethics got into the discussion. Jeremy
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 4, 2008 9:48 AM, Ioan Nemes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You confusing the issue! The software market - where you sell your product (i.e., software) is unethical, distorted and manipulated, and not by the ethical software crafters! Why is the software market unethical? Because there are some bad apples? Gee, that makes pretty much every single business sector unethical. Unless you're trying to say that selling software in itself is unethical but that's bullshit. Who are the ethical software crafters? Does simply not charging money for your software make you ethical? Most OSS, for example, can be, and is, used by governments to oppress the people. Does that make working on OSS unethical? --- Lars Hansson
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
Don't worry. You can ask rms if your behaviour is ethical. He'll set you straight, and tell you to stop working for those companies and instead suckle off your McArthur Idiot grant. On Jan 4, 2008 9:48 AM, Ioan Nemes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You confusing the issue! The software market - where you sell your product (i.e., software) is unethical, distorted and manipulated, and not by the ethical software crafters! Why is the software market unethical? Because there are some bad apples? Gee, that makes pretty much every single business sector unethical. Unless you're trying to say that selling software in itself is unethical but that's bullshit. Who are the ethical software crafters? Does simply not charging money for your software make you ethical? Most OSS, for example, can be, and is, used by governments to oppress the people. Does that make working on OSS unethical? --- Lars Hansson
