MESSAGE
| DATE | 2004-01-16 |
| FROM | Adam Kosmin
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Re: ogg tutorial
|
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 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
|
|
