On Dec 21, 2006, at 11:45 PM, Jimen Ching wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Jim Thompson wrote:
Eben Moglen has participated in a great many technical discussions.
Its part of his vocation (job) and avocation (the thing he loves).
Do we have the same definition of technical?
Likely.
I'm talking about technical software discussions. I.e. design,
implementation, etc. If Eben Moglen participates in these
discussions, then this is the first time I've heard of it. Are
there any references? I would be very interested to hear his
thoughts on OOP.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that all lawyers are non-
technical. I've dealt with lawyers (patent attorneys, mostly) who
are sharp-as-tacks when it comes to both hardware and software.
And don't make the mistake that one has to have a CS degree to grok
software either.
Scott didn't say "LUAU = HOSEF; HOSEF = LUAU;", I did.
http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2006-December/017515.html
<qoute>
Jim is correct that HOSEF=LUAU, and you are correct that LUAU is
not owned
by HOSEF.
</qoute>
Exactly my point. Thanks for making it for me. :-)
I never said that I (or anyone, including "HOSEF", the
organization) "ows" LUAU.
As you can see from Scotts qoute above; even he recognizes that I
know HOSEF doesn't own LUAU. I don't know why you insist on
repeating something that I already know and agree with.
At this point, I'm wondering what your problem might be.
Finally, in order to steer this back to a topic we can all engage
in, "Free Software" is expressly *NOT* about creation of source
code and the sharing of this source code.
Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy,
distribute, study, change and improve the software. More
precisely, it refers to four kinds of freedom, for the users of
the software:
You know what amazes me. Even when we basically agree, you have to
disagree with me.
When I say "sharing of this source code", doesn't it connote "copy,
distribute, study, change and improve?" I mean, these are the
exact activities that sharing source code will benefit. I'm just
curious, what did you think I meant when I said 'sharing of this
source code?"
I knew you had an incomplete definition for Free Software.
Looks like disagreeing with me has become your hobby...
--jc
P.S. Just as an experiemt: 2 + 2 = 4. And I mean it too! :)
As the saying goes, "2 + 2 = 5, for sufficiently large values of 2"
Slashdot doesn't think so: http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topiced.gif
I'm buying you one of these: http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/generic/
60f5/
What size do you weear?
(Oh and its experiment).
_______________________________________________
LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list
http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
