Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:19:21 -0400 in <9boeru$ej9$1 at news.udel.edu>, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> spake: >>I loathe and despise the communist types like St*llm*n who >> want to prevent anyone from owning their own software. >Have you actually *read* Stallman's own (philosophical) writings? Yes, I have, but apparently you haven't. He wants to destroy ownership of intellectual property. He's stated this up front too many times to count. And of course, everyone has the right to put their own code under whatever license he likes... But using a virus license like his that takes away other peoples' rights to their own software, just by being mixed with his, is just vile. Like Karl Marx, it'd do him and his cult worshippers a world of good to go out, get jobs, and work for a living for a while. Might put some of his deranged notions in proper perspective. Go reread what he's written without the rose-tinted glasses. Or even better, forget about him. He's just some loser who can't even get a real job, and wrote a slow, bloated editor many years ago. Some people like it, I'm told; tastes vary, so that's fair enough. But NOBODY deserves any attention unless they produce new stuff, and then only in proportion to how good that stuff is. What has he done for us (instead of to us) *lately*? Nothing. He's a waste of meat. Compare, for instance, to Linus or Guido. They write code. Any fame they get is justified, because they've written *GOOD* code. Eric S. Raymond is a borderline case; he does write code, sometimes very useful code (and sometimes stuff like C-Intercal...). But he's also a shameless exhibitionist, and needs about a 99% fame reduction. > (As >opposed to charicatures by others, such as yours)? Caricature. And as opposed to YOUR caricature of him as a benevolent guru. > For a programmer to >'own his/her own software' means, in practical terms, to be able to release >it under exactly the license terms he/she wants, and have those terms >respected/enforced. That is what he and collaborators have done with the >GPL license and what you have done with yours. Until someone infects some non-GPL code with the GPL. Then it's been stolen. > Based on my reading of his >writings, I believe he would respect your right to do as you have done as >long as you have not used FSF software and violated its license -- in Not bloody likely. Cult leaders respect nobody. Have you *read* his public statements? He is the enemy of anyone who doesn't use the GPL on all software, and of anyone who wants to own information. "By contrast, copying useful, enlightening or entertaining information for a friend makes the world happier and better off; it benefits the friend, and inherently hurts no one. It is a constructive activity that strengthens social bonds." -<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/reevaluating-copyright.html> He is a thief, plain and simple. And like the communist thieves, he doesn't just want to steal from one victim for his own benefit, he wants to steal everything from everyone. -- <a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a> "I will tell you things that will make you laugh and uncomfortable and really fucking angry and that no one else is telling you. What I won't do is bullshit you. I'm here for the same thing you are. The Truth." -Transmetropolitan #39
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4