MESSAGE
| DATE | 2004-01-16 |
| FROM | From: "Steve Milo"
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Re: ogg tutorial
|
Is that an indirect threat Adam?
Steve M
----- Original Message -----
From: Adam Kosmin
Date: Friday, January 16, 2004 8:18 am
Subject: Re: [hangout] Re: ogg tutorial
>
> I'm looking forward to meeting you. When can we arrange that?
>
> Adam
>
>
> Steve Milo (slavik914-at-rennlist.com) wrote:
> " Obviously a sign of a small mind, when someone resorts to name
> calling
> " and insults.
> "
> " Steve M
> "
> " >
> " > Steve,
> " >
> " > I've had enough of your spoon-fed crap. You're obviously an idiot.
> " >
> " > Adam
> " >
> " >
> " > Steve Milo (slavik914-at-rennlist.com) 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
> " > " > peoplewho 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.
> " > "
> " > " Hey, if I'm the 'common person' who subscribes to the Open
> " > Source
> " > " philosphy thats sits fine with me. I know just a little
> more
> " > than the
> " > " common person though. Sounds like you missed a chance to
> " > convince this
> " > " 'common person' of how to think.
> " > "
> " > " >
> " > " > 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.
> " > "
> " > " I expect anyone who subscribes to this list to be not only
> well
> " > versed
> " > " in the freedoms granted by the GPL. But to also have an
> " > understanding
> " > " of how the judicial and capitalist system of this country works.
> " > "
> " > " > 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
> " > " > idiotswho 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.
> " > "
> " > " Yeah, its called the cost of convenience. Many company's
> are
> " > willing to
> " > " shell out a few extra bucks for convenience.
> " > "
> " > " You missed another chance to convince this 'idiot' to
> believe
> " > otherwise."
> " > " But you also missed a whole other point, MS's 'strength'
> lies
> " > not in its
> " > " product but in its marketing.
> " > "
> " > " >
> " > " > 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.
> " > "
> " > " Yeah, and for the rest of the world they will buy what they
> " > think works.
> " > "
> " > " 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
> " > " > goingto be a HUGE problem going forward.People are jumping
> on
> " > the
> " > " > Linuxbandwagon for all the wrong reasons. It's like
> inviting
> " > " > foreigners to
> " > " > come over to the United States of America without studying the
> " > " > Constitution!!!
> " > "
> " > " Maybe you should tell your ancentry that came over on the
> boat
> " > to go
> " > " back. Somehow I doubt they learned to appreciate the
> " > Constitution
> " > " before they hit these shores.
> " > "
> " > " Either way your sending mixed messages. One the one hand
> you
> " > want to
> " > " close the borders off to any new comers, which by itself is
> " > unAmerican.
> " > " But on the other hand you state how anti American Microsoft
> is,
> " > an
> " > " American company.
> " > "
> " > " Still more hypcritical is how you preach freedom of speech
> but
> " > you want
> " > " to it cut off from people who dont agree with your point of
> " > view. So am
> " > " I to believe that freedom of speech applies only to those
> who
> " > think like
> " > " you? If thats true why dont we all just get the first plane
> to
> " > North
> " > " Korea, they will appreicate us there. Oh and that should
> " > satisfy your
> " > " requirment for joining on the 'Linux Bandwagon' too, they're
> all
> " > " elitists there also.
> " > "
> " > " >
> " > " >
> " > " > 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).
> " > "
> " > " Lets leave morals in the gutter where they belong. Get off
> your
> " > high
> " > " horse for a few moments. There are times when no one really
> " > cares about
> " > " your strong point of view peppered with curse words and
> indirect
> " > " insults. It becomes tiring and annoying and counter productive.
> " > "
> " > " As far as history goes, BSD seems to have been around for
> quite
> " > a few
> " > " years. GNU/Linux has been making some pretty strong
> inroads.
> " > As far as
> " > " I can recall they're both Open Source..or maybe more
> properly
> " > open
> " > " source. Dont bother correcting me, I'm not interested in
> your
> " > point of
> " > " view peppered with inderect insults.
> " > "
> " > " >
> " > " > Adam Kosmin
> " > "
> " > " Overall you have made an interesting effort to pervert what
> I
> " > was trying
> " > " to say. You have managed to completely mangle anything I
> was
> " > trying to
> " > " say. While at the same time trying to insult me inderectly.
> " > "
> " > "
> " > " 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
>
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
