MESSAGE
| DATE | 2004-01-16 |
| FROM | Adam Kosmin
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Re: ogg tutorial
|
At least I'm not a clueless, market fed, idiot who contradicts himself
by being on a mailing list of New York City's most active Free Software
group when in fact, he appears to have no respect or appreciation for the
underlying movement.
What are you doing here?
Adam
Steve Milo (slavik914-at-rennlist.com) wrote:
" Curb your cynism.
"
" Youre not as wise you you have led yourself to believe.
"
" Steve M
"
" >
" >
" > Pick up a pebble and throw it into a puddle. See the ripples?
" >
" > Now think about your question again.
" >
" > Adam
" >
" >
" > Steve Milo (slavik914-at-rennlist.com) wrote:
" > " Explain to me where this is selfish?
" > "
" > " That a company should choose the better product for its survival
" > is
" > "
" > " considerd selfish?
" > "
" > " Did you actually read what I wrote?
" > "
" > " Steve M
" > "
" > " ----- Original Message -----
" > " From: Adam Kosmin
" > " Date: Thursday, January 15, 2004 1:38 pm
" > " Subject: Re: [hangout] Re: ogg tutorial
" > "
" > " > Steve,
" > " >
" > " > This is actactly the kind of attitude that makes me think that
" > " > FOSS will
" > " > never succeed. This entire philosophy is based on selfishness.
" > Are you
" > " > sure you're on the right mailing list?
" > " >
" > " > Adam Kosmin
" > " >
" > " > Steve Milo (slavik914-at-rennlist.com) wrote:
" > " > " > more functional, but it is not good enough because it is
" > not
" > " > free
" > " > " > (as in
" > " > " > speech) and therefore, damages to our society's ability to
" > " > " > collaborate,innovate, and protect our privacy.
" > " > "
" > " > " Actually, more functional is much more than good enough, if
" > the
" > " > better
" > " > " more secure product is available from Microsoft then by all
" > " > means it
" > " > " should be used. Not because it isnt 'free'..as in whatever.
" >
" > " > But
" > " > " because it does the job that is required of it. If the Open
" > " > Source
" > " > " community can come along and create an equal or better
" > product
" > " > then that
" > " > " software has earned its positions. If we are talking about
" > " > widgets then
" > " > " the only thing that MS or any other proprietary company is
" > " > guilty of is
" > " > " defending their products secrets. They havent infringed on
" > " > freedom of
" > " > " speech, they are using freedom to persue 'life and liberty'.
" > If
" > " > MS were
" > " > " to go out and seek a court order to silence its critics that
" > is
" > " > " infringing on freedom of speech. But as far as the widget
" > is
" > " > concerned,
" > " > " MS has everyright to create its product, they can run around
" > and
" > " > let
" > " > " their sales people tell you anything they want to get their
" > " > product in
" > " > " your hands. The fault is not with MS when a network crashes
" > due
" > " > to a
" > " > " virus, but the IT director who chose to use MS. In turn
" > " > compromising
" > " > " the security of their organizations system. No, simply
" > because
" > " > MS is
" > " > " closed source is not a good enough reason to not purchase
" > their
" > " > product
" > " > " and anyone in this day and age will tell you that. The
" > reasons
" > " > to go
" > " > " with Open Source is simply because its better. Its better
" > on
" > " > price
" > " > " point, its better on security, its better on maintenance,
" > its
" > " > better on
" > " > " support. Simply put, GNU/Linux/Open Source is just better
" > and
" > " > for those
" > " > " patriotic souls, is so very American. Open Source got its
" > start
" > " > in this
" > " > " country and is based on the same principles and values that
" > were
" > " > used
" > " > " when this country was founded. But using a better product
" > is
" > " > common
" > " > " sense. If MS creates a better OS than GNU/Linux I would go
" > out
" > " > and buy
" > " > " it. But it doesnt make a better OS, it only has a stronger
" > " > marketing
" > " > " machine. The problem with the Open Source community is that
" > too
" > " > many
" > " > " people are hung up pining away at how MS is bad. We're
" > focusing
" > " > on all
" > " > " the wrong points, the focus has to be turned away from MS
" > and
" > " > back onto
" > " > " Linux. If MS makes a better product thats fine the problems
" > are
" > " > the
" > " > " limitations imposed on reverse engineering for a better
" > product.
" > " > The
" > " > " auto industry does it, the hardware manufacterers do it,
" > " > McDonalds does
" > " > " it. Everyone reverse engineers, its a normal patter of
" > critical
" > " > " thinking. But the DMCA law doesnt allow reverse
" > engineering,
" > " > not even
" > " > " to *not* make a profit.
" > " > "
" > " > " Steve M
" > " > "
" > " > "
" > " >
" > " > --
" > " >
" > " > "Yes, Your Honor. Now, where we are so far, in at least my
" > " > line of reasoning, is I want to walk the Court through enough
" > of our
" > " > complaint to help the Court understand that IBM clearly did
" > " > contribute a
" > " > lot of the Unix-related information into Linux. We just don't
" > know
" > " > whatit is."
" > " >
" > " > -- Kevin McBride SCO vs. IBM 12/05/03
" > " >
" > "
" > "
" >
" > --
" >
" > "Yes, Your Honor. Now, where we are so far, in at least my
" > line of reasoning, is I want to walk the Court through enough of our
" > complaint to help the Court understand that IBM clearly did
" > contribute a
" > lot of the Unix-related information into Linux. We just don't know
" > whatit is."
" >
" > -- Kevin McBride SCO vs. IBM 12/05/03
" >
"
"
--
"Yes, Your Honor. Now, where we are so far, in at least my
line of reasoning, is I want to walk the Court through enough of our
complaint to help the Court understand that IBM clearly did contribute a
lot of the Unix-related information into Linux. We just don't know what
it is."
-- Kevin McBride SCO vs. IBM 12/05/03
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
