MESSAGE
| DATE | 2004-01-16 |
| FROM | From: "Steve Milo"
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Re: ogg tutorial
|
I'm tired of listening to people pine away at how bad this that or the
other thing is.
Your sarcasm and cynism is really sickening.
You can mince words Adam, but I wont.
Youre welcome,
Steve M
PS. Tell your ancestry to go back from where they came from, because
they didnt study the Constitution of the United States. Jack ass.
> I know. I'm just sick of this Open Source mentality. The more I think
> about it, the more I realize what a true cop out it really is. As a
> subscriber to the Open Source way of thinking, I don't have to
> have any
> conviction, I don't have to have any morals, I don't have to have any
> conscious awareness as to the role my computing habits play in our
> society.
>
> I can see why this is so successful in business.
>
> Adam
>
>
> Mike Richardson - (NYLXS: President) (miker-at-mrbrklyn.com) wrote:
> " Adam the philosphy of Free Software has to be taught as an ongoing
> " repetaive lesson. You have New People who don't know, and those
> who speak
> " about freedoms but have not read the defination of Free Software
> or the
> " GPL in a while.
> "
> " On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Adam Kosmin wrote:
> "
> " >
> " > 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.
> " >
> " > This is bullshit. This is exactly the kind of thinking (common
> to people
> " > who subscribe to the Open Source philosophy) that threatens
> the adoption
> " > of Free Software and (if not stopped) will allow Microsoft to
> build" > whatever toll gates they desire upon the virtual roads
> that we use to
> " > collaborate and communicate.
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " > Not because it isn't '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.
> " >
> " > Free as in whatever? How can you not appreciate the freedoms
> granted by
> " > the GPL? This stuff is critical and I'd expect anyone
> subscribed to this
> " > list to be well versed in the benefits.
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " > 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 haven't 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.
> " >
> " > I don't blame Microsoft for wanting world domination. I blame
> the idiots
> " > who aren't bright enough to choose a different path and who
> are so
> " > obsessed with fulfilling their own selfish short term agendas
> despite the
> " > costs to innovation.
> " >
> " >
> " > 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.
> " >
> " >
> " > No one who understands and agrees with the goals of the Free
> Software" > movement will tell me this crap. Whether you realize
> it or not, your
> " > statement and thinking has been fed to you by Open Source friendly
> " > marketing departments. From where I'm sitting, I see that this
> is going
> " > to be a HUGE problem going forward. People are jumping on the
> Linux" > bandwagon for all the wrong reasons. It's like inviting
> foreigners to
> " > come over to the United States of America without studying the
> " > Constitution!!!
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " > 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.
> " > "
> " >
> " > Obviously you know very little about the history of Open
> Source since
> " > you seem to think that it even has one. The term "Open Source" is
> " > nothing more than a recently created buzz term to sell Free
> Software to
> " > people that don't have the capacity to understand the moral
> arguements of
> " > the Free Software movement. That's it! (if you didn't get that
> last" > statement, read it over and over until it sinks in).
> " >
> " >
> " > Adam Kosmin
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " >
> " > " 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 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
> " >
> "
> "
>
> --
>
> "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
> ____________________________
> NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> Fair Use -
> because it's either fair use or useless....
> NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
>
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
