Linux-Advocacy Digest #560, Volume #27 Mon, 10 Jul 00 04:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Russ Allbery)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Linux Hardware Compatibility Lists - Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Pete Goodwin)
Open source video streaming system seeks help (owillis)
Re: Where did all my windows go? (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 02:57:31 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Austin Ziegler from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Sat, 8 Jul 2000
>On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> Quoting John Dyson from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Wed, 05 Jul 2000
>> [...]
>>> The GPL is yet another commercial license (with source code available)
>>> in sheeps clothing :-).
>> I think that is a very adequate and agreeable way of putting it. I will
>> point out, however, that there is no monetary cost for a GPL license, so
>> your statement that it isn't "free" isn't very clear to me.
>
>Actually ... there can be monetary cost involved in the purchase of GPL
>licensed code; it just so happens that most of it is free of cost.
It slipped my mind entirely that this wasn't an explicit requirement,
but isn't it a fact that all open source software is essentially "free"
in this regard? I think "it just so happens" is understating the case.
You might pay for distribution, or maintenance, or something, but you're
not paying for the license, AFAIK, because open source and for-profit
licensing don't make any sense at all together. For-profit licensing
requires secret code.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 06:47:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > That statement isn't consistant with the result, since the GPL
>> > isn't free.
>>
>> Yes it is.
>>
>No it's not. :-).
Is so.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 06:56:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>According to some opinion's (say, Mr. Dyson's and lately, my own)
>the GPL is not free in several meaningful ways.
Agreed (the point in general). It is not free in meaningful ways, and
it free in meaningful ways. Which particular ways are obvious to all
to this point.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 06:45:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That statement isn't consistant with the result, since the GPL
>isn't free.
Is so.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 03:10:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Hyman Rosen from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 09 Jul 2000 17:57:01
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The choices was not to give away services or not; the leagues were
>> making money already. Why should we assume that profiteering is
>> acceptable behavior?
>
>Because we believe in private property. The owner of a commodity
>may attempt to sell it for any price he wishes. The consumer may
>choose to buy it or not. Neither the owner nor the consumer has
>the "right" to set a price and force it to be accepted.
Profiteering is making exorbitant profits, especially from scarce or
rationed goods. I'm merely extending it here to "restricted goods",
being closed source software. I believe in private property. I don't
believe in exacting exorbitant profits from the intentional
disadvantagement of consumers who don't have access to something they
require. The "owner" of software doesn't sell it; he sells a license to
it, and this is an essentially unlimited commodity. But software isn't
a commodity; it is intellectual property, protected by copyright. But
software isn't published and accessible like all other copyright works,
instead the source code is kept secret, and only the object code is
licensed, with a restriction which prevents the purchaser of the license
from gaining access to and potential benefit from the very thing which
he licensed. The secret code sets up a purposeful rationing system, and
the owner of the software profiteers from it by charging hundreds and
thousands of times (at least) what the "contributed value" of the
'commodity' actually is.
>At best, one may consider "profiteering" to be immoral during
>grievous situations such as wartime or natural disaster.
Spoken like a true profiteer. Its a fricken' *killing offense* during
wartime and natural disasters. That doesn't make it acceptable at any
other time. At best, on may consider profiteering "merely" immoral.
>To apply
>it to football games means that you have abrogated any concept of
>private property, and are asking the state to set prices, on a
>basis that I can't even imagine. I would strenuously object to,
>and vote against, a proposal for such a system.
Well, don't go to England then. Over there, they expect the government
to do things like regulate commerce for the benefit of the entire
nation, instead of just those who can worm themselves into a position to
profiteer.
[...]
>> If you don't know, then all you can say is he is correct.
>
>No, because I can attempt to apply my knowledge of similar situations,
>and my judgement of his opinions from what I have read so far.
I thought you said you didn't know?
> One is
>not required to take statements at face value.
Yea, I know. I'll admit it. I was baiting you.
[...]
>> This kind of self-serving teflon coated mockery of responsibility is
>> offensive.
>
>I'm sorry, but I don't see how this applied to what I said.
[remainder of post snipped; it was interesting obfuscation, but not
worth repeating]
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 03:13:30 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Hyman Rosen from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 09 Jul 2000 17:28:34
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> That would depend entirely on the actual numbers, which you don't have,
>> and are merely assuming would work out. There's every likelihood these
>> days with the growing "force" of huge media corporations, this is simply
>> profiteering. It would be dishonest to suggest that it should not be
>> examined rather than assumed it is reasonable, I think.
>
>What is "profiteering"? The owners of a commodity are free to charge
>whatever price they want, and the consumers are free to buy or not to
>buy it.
Owners are only "free to charge whatever price they want" when they are
willing to accept the social and civil responsibilities of engaging in
commerce, which includes dealing fairly and equitably with their
customers and refraining from profiteering. Without this inherent
compact, there can be no free markets, no capitalism, and, finally, no
ownership of property.
I'm bored, its late, and that's all I have to say on the subject for
now.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:02:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Frankly, I tend to like something like GPL-free (to qualify the
>term 'free' -- coining the term),
I think GPL-free is a fine term. I think it is likely to convey what
one wants to convey, and it is mostly unambiguous. It can be used in
more contexts than the simpler term free can be used.
Another term, is to just call it GPLed software. This doesn't have
the loaded term free next to it, and is yet more preferable to even
more people I suspect.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 03:16:45 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Hyman Rosen from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 09 Jul 2000 17:07:03
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "In the US, anyone may start a newspaper" is a separate statement from
>> "in the US, anyone can start a newspaper" and the practical difference
>> is all-important. One gives lip service to liberty, one is evidence of
>> a democratic access to capital.
>
>"Democratic" access to capital sounds an awful lot like people voting
>to take for themselves capital that is owned by others.
Its not, though that is a common FUD tactic by those who currently have
productive access to capital.
>Fortunately,
>that is for the most part impermissible in the US. In the US anyone
>_can_ start a newspaper. In the beginning, that newspaper will be
>printed on your inkjet printer at home, and run off at the copy shop.
>That's only fair - what possible justification is there for forcing
>anyone else to spend their money on your newspaper?
There is no justification for forcing anyone else to spend their money.
There is some justification for "forcing" someone to invest their money.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:11:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So this "old" PC had a Voodoo 5 on it?
No it had a RIVA TNT card.
> Was this before or after the Voodoo 5?
I bought the Voodoo 5 recently. It never occured to me that Linux may
not support it - I had heard of this some time ago. Now, I descover the
5500 is something relatively new. There are drivers for Windows 95/98
and beta drivers for 2000.
I downloaded XFree86 4.0.1 and managed to get that working with my
Voodoo 5 card. That took a little more effort than Windows 2000, because
there appear to be missing pieces in Linux (XFree86 4.0.1) integrated it
all together. For instance, it took me a while to get the KDE desktop
back.
Also, there's a noticeable flicker on the picture on Linux - something
that did occur on the Windows version but was corrected when I sorted
out the monitor settings and resolution. That's something I need to do
on Linux to get it to work better.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 10 Jul 2000 00:19:17 -0700
In gnu.misc.discuss, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think GPL-free is a fine term. I think it is likely to convey what
> one wants to convey, and it is mostly unambiguous. It can be used in
> more contexts than the simpler term free can be used.
I think FSF-free is slightly better, since it more obviously includes
BSD-licensed software, public domain software, and all the other types
that are defined by the FSF as being free. GPL-free may to some folks
imply GPL-compatible or some other more restrictive set.
> Another term, is to just call it GPLed software. This doesn't have the
> loaded term free next to it, and is yet more preferable to even more
> people I suspect.
This too doesn't include BSD-licensed software.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:17:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>-f, yes, RMS *does* walk on water, doesn't he?
I've seen him go about 50 feet before falling in.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:18:55 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 8 Jul 2000 02:11:59 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>blah blah blah repeat assertion blah blah blah repeat assertion blah
>>blah blah repeat assertion blah blah blah repeat assertion blah blah
>>blah repeat assertion blah blah blah repeat assertion blah blah blah...
>
>"I know you are, but what am I?"
Point Jay. [ rotfl ]
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Hardware Compatibility Lists - Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:19:25 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IIRC you said elsewhere this was a Plug and Play card. There's your
> trouble; Linux PnP support isn't mature. I had much the same issue
> with my ISAPnP modem. (Beats the crap out of ending up with a
> LoseModem of course.)
If ISAPnP isn't mature then this fits with the statement "Linux hardware
support lags behind Windows".
> BTW, you never mentioned any ISAPnP issues with this card. I assume
it's
> a jumper-configured ISA card? That's why you had to set those
parameters
> manually. If the Windows driver configures itself, then either
there's
> some possibly-undocumented way of querying the card for its settings,
or
> the Windows driver is probing the possible I/O addresses.
I did try letting Linux auto detect this card, as the card is PnP, but
it could never find it. So I tried the manual string and that made it
work.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Subject: Open source video streaming system seeks help
From: owillis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 00:32:15 -0700
Humancating
http://sourceforge.net/projects/humancasting/
Looking for C/C++ or Java programmers to help develop this
combination video streaming/file sharing application.
The project will be based on the Napster and RTSP protocols. For
more info, please email me.
===========================================================
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go?
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 07:32:07 GMT
In article <8kblh1$vfc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hey, If the shoe fits.... Yes, you are a troll. Claiming that Linux
lags
> because one APPLICATION crashes without sending an error message is
just
> plain STUPID! The fact that you continue to try to stand behind that
> STUPID claim means that you are either a toll or stupid. Take your
pick.
And if you bother to read other posts you will see I am not claiming
Linux lags behind Windows simply because of one application crashing,
but because of a whole number of reasons.
> You do not discuss that actual points made. The fact is in many ways
> Linux is FAR superior to W2K. Do you have a choice of desktops???? Or
> are you stuck with the desktop and GUI that comes with w2k if you like
> it or *NOT*???? Can you run WITHOUT a GUI if it meets your needs???
> No??? how out dated!
Calm down, there's no need to get so excited.
Windows has one desktop which can be replaced - I've seen other choices.
True, there are far fewer than Linux, but then, why are a lot of these
desktops there? Are they there because someone decided that it would be
cool to offer all these desktops - or for a far more obvious reason:
there was no open source desktop available so a whole bunch of them came
into being. There's no overall coordinator, so chaos ensued. Now we have
KDE and Gnome as the biggest desktops with a whole bunch of others
which are fairly primitive in what they do.
I realise someone will quite rightly say "but desktop XYZ does what I
want it to do for me" and "how dare you suggest that every desktop
should be IJKL!". Then I will hear "it's about choice, something you
don't get on Windows".
However, I don't think all these desktops came about because of offering
the user choice. They came about due to a lack of control and a lack of
standards. The fact that the side effect is to offer a choice is merely
an accident.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
