Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 26th Aug 2009 22:23 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source When Windows Vista was launched, the Free Software Foundation started its BadVista campaign, which was aimed at informing users about what the FSF considered user-restrictive features in Vista. Luckily for the FSF, Vista didn't really need a bad-mouthing campaign to fail. Now that Windows 7 is receiving a lot of positive press, the FSF dusted off the BadVista drum, and gave it a fresh coat of paint.
Permalink for comment 380838
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
elsewhere
Member since:
2005-07-13

Because you think you have more rights then legal and real people becaus etheydisagree with your stealing , lying and coward ways ?


You do realize that every time you accuse someone of stealing, or call them a liar, coward or thief, for simply questioning the GPL/FSF/"Free Software", you pretty much reinforce the image of the FSF fostering a movement of zealots and serve to undermine the principles that the FSF advocates, which ultimately advocate user choice? Just wondering.

Because BSD was the First Free Software that failed and did not work , because thieves and liar took over ?


Did it occur to you that the developers contributing to BSD-licensed projects wanted their code to be "free" for developers to use as they wanted? Seems to me it worked pretty well. How can you call it a failure? It has different objectives than the GPL, and the adoption of BSD software by "thieves and liars" underscores its success. Your arguments against it are reminiscent of Microsoft's criticism of the GPL being cancerous. The ultimate freedom lies with developers to choose how their software can be distributed. You don't have a say in that, until you start coding.

Free Software is Open Source , so your point is really that you don't understand what your talking about at all ...

Open Source is about development method where the source is always open to all.


FSF and Free Software support everyone as long as you don't try stealing and closing software and as for major requirement that Free Software be Open Source ...

So they don't pretend anything , actually it's reverso world. The Open Source liar and thieve , usually emphais that Open Source can be closed by them when the permission to do so is not given.


OSS is a development method. Libre software is a philosophy. The two overlap, but once again, developers have the right to decide how their code can be used. The GPL is one choice developers have, among many others. The point is that the FSF is often critical of licenses that don't meet their arbitrary standards of the four freedoms, which is certainly their right, but overlooks the fact that alternative licenses have still powered popular and successful projects that benefit the OSS community, and their users, in general. Doesn't make anyone a liar or thief.

" there's definitely some hostility toward non-GPL-based projects out there amongst the GPL-nuts.


Because your the one who is clearly nuts , you can simply avoid all GPL , by not touching it or try to illegally steal it and use it and close it ...
"

I suspect the irony of your answer is entirely lost.

" I'm not a GPL-hater


Yes , you are.
"

Who are you to say that? Why is your world so black-and-white?

No , you don'. That'S why you want to make exception for yourself and other thieves like you and be able to steal and compromis eit like you did with all those previous atempt at Free Software that came before it ...

But that's ok , if you steal GPL code or really beome a problem for the FSF. The Justice system and penalty come into play.


I don't have a problem with the GPL, either. I've enjoyed the benefits of using linux for a number of years now. I guess that makes me a liar, thief, and coward because I don't spam online forums advocating the superiority of the GPL.

I'm grateful for the work the developers of the software I use have done. I'll respect whatever license they choose to license their software under. Until I can start coding at that level and producing my own software for the community, I'll continue to respect the choice of the developers, rather than inflicting my demands on them. As a user, I have to respect their freedom to choose, and then make my own choice as to what works for me.

It's sad that you have such a burning zealotry that becomes apparent every time a GPL-related post appears here. If you harnessed that energy for advocacy rather than toxic, denigrating and, frankly, obnoxious attacks, you might find yourself actually contributing to the cause you serve.

Reply Parent Score: 8