Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th Oct 2006 20:44 UTC, submitted by jasper
Red Hat Red Hat has an NDA cooperation with Marvell for the wireless chips that they want to use for the One Laptop per Child-project. The idea of this is that both parties think Marvell will be more open in the future, but this is absolutely not the path they should walk, according to OpenBSD's Theo de Raadt. "I am getting really tired of 'open source' people who work against the open source community. Our little group can probably take credit for having 'opened up' more wireless devices than the rest of the community, and therefore we feel we have a better grasp of the damage OLPC has done here."
Thread beginning with comment 169026
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: find it funny
by mikesum32 on Fri 6th Oct 2006 10:40 UTC in reply to "find it funny"
mikesum32
Member since:
2005-10-22

no, linus is just a hacker. he doesnt care about politics. he said it may times.

No he's already involved. Just look at GPLv3, he complains about it, but doesn't want to be involved in the process officially. You can't have it both ways.

When RMS and Theo speak, I tend to listen.

They are looking it for me, for software freedom, even if they go about it differently. Linus is doing what he does, making linux. You'd think that the biggest success of the GPL would want to help software freedom, but he has tried to distance himself from the FSF.

To qoute Linus

The fact is, the people who whine over this have been totally blind to the fact that Linux is not "Free Software". It never has been. The original source license for Linux was never the GPLv2, it was my own "you have to give back source code".

In other words, Linux has always been "Open Source", rather than the crazy "Free Software" thing. People who complain about that never seem to understand that others can agree with the GPLv2, without actually agreeing with the idiotic philosophies of the FSF.


Linus is not christ.

He does well with Linux, but when I think of software and freedom I trust Theo and RMS.

As for DRM, it's only purpose is to stop me, the purchaser from using what I've bought.

There is already a law to stop me from burning 10,000 dvds of Gili and selling them. It's called copyright law, as in the right to copy. That is another argument though.

To qoute Theo on open hardware specs

We are not your customers. YOU ARE OUR CUSTOMER. Our driver sells your chips.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: find it funny
by ronaldst on Fri 6th Oct 2006 12:41 in reply to "RE[2]: find it funny"
ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

@mikesum32

As for DRM, it's only purpose is to stop me, the purchaser from using what I've bought.

Nope, it's to stop you from abusing the ones who made the content. You nor anyone else have the right to hurt others.


Quote: We are not your customers. YOU ARE OUR CUSTOMER. Our driver sells your chips.

LOL.

"Open Source" devs: We are not your customers. YOU ARE OUR CUSTOMER. Our driver sells your chips.

Chip makers: you, "Open Source" devs, need our stuff (specs.) But we don't need you. We already have (drivers) what you can offer us. You are not our customers because we can't deliver hardware on the terms you want.

Then total silence.

0.000000001% lost sale. Chip makers makes it up by new customers gained from competitors by sales of new Windows and Linux servers.

PS: Here's what I always found weird about OSS preachers. Instead of behaving in a childish manner, protesting rudely and other non productive ways, why not advocate OSS-friendly vendors instead. Is it that hard?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: find it funny
by mikesum32 on Fri 6th Oct 2006 14:21 in reply to "RE[3]: find it funny"
mikesum32 Member since:
2005-10-22

Nope, it's to stop you from abusing the ones who made the content. You nor anyone else have the right to hurt others.

No, that's what copyright law is for.

DRM is about control, and vendor lock-in. You're at the mercy of whomever makes the DRM. They might go under, or maybe they'll decide you shouldn't have rights to the song, software or movie.

Chip makers: you, "Open Source" devs, need our stuff (specs.) But we don't need you. We already have (drivers) what you can offer us. You are not our customers because we can't deliver hardware on the terms you want.


Open specs mean that anyone that wants to make thier own driver can.

Shouldn't I have the right to use hardware I bought on whatever OS I choose ?


Maybe Mr. Chip Maker doesn't want to make drivers for QNX or Haiku or SkyOS.

Well now the community can.

Instead of behaving in a childish manner, protesting rudely and other non productive ways, why not advocate OSS-friendly vendors instead. Is it that hard?

Not protesting rudely ! Advocating OSS friendly vendors is well and good, but that's like preaching to the choir. Why not help (or embarrass) less OSS friendly companies until they change thier minds ?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: find it funny
by vikramsharma on Fri 6th Oct 2006 15:17 in reply to "RE[2]: find it funny"
vikramsharma Member since:
2005-07-06

The chip makers or nay hardware makers are here to sell. Choosing platforms to support is plain stupid of these hardware companies, without proper drivers the hardware is pretty much useless. I use Nvidia card on my Linux box because Nvidia has better drivers on Linux. Until and unless these hardware manufacturing companies realize that they are losing customers because of lack of driver these companies are not going to do anything about it. Why should it matter to Broadcomm, Nvidia, ATI, etc what OS is choose to run, ,their job is to sell their hardware and release optimized drivers. These greedy hardware (I should say moronic)companies neither write the drivers nor do they give out the hardware specs so some one else can do the job that was intended for the hardware manufacturers (rather than reverse engineered drivers). This not about OSS, this is about being professional, hardware companies choosing sides is absolutely non-sensical.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: find it funny
by sbergman27 on Fri 6th Oct 2006 16:17 in reply to "RE[2]: find it funny"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""To qoute Linus"""

Linus has also said that he observes that most of the "discussion" on GPLv3 is driven by people with interests which are purely political. i.e. people who don't actually have any code to put under any license at all, let alone the one they are promoting for their own political reasons.

Can you give us a link to code which you have published under GPLv2, which will be colicensed under GPLv3 when it is released?

Or are you just talking out of your ass like most of us do? (Yes, I include myself in that group.)

I still feel that the very best thing that RMS and the FSF could do is to cut themselves loose from Linux.

RMS has often stated that the Linux kernel was simply the final piece that fell into place to make *his* operating system a reality.

But there is obviously a philosophical gap between RMS's views and the Linux Kernel Developer's views. He is obviously riding on the coat tails of Linux because it is convenient for him to do so, and not because he shares their values. One could almost call him a parasite.

Why doesn't he just finish up The Hurd and go on? It's not as though The Hurd has not benefitted from 16 years of development. It is not as though The Hurd doesn't have a year's head start on the Linux kernel.

Why can't RMS and the FSF come up with an OS of their own after 22+ years?

Could it possibly be because they are driven by motivations which are fundamentally political and not technical?

Edited 2006-10-06 16:20

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: find it funny
by mikesum32 on Fri 6th Oct 2006 17:08 in reply to "RE[3]: find it funny"
mikesum32 Member since:
2005-10-22

But there is obviously a philosophical gap between RMS's views and the Linux Kernel Developer's views. He is obviously riding on the coat tails of Linux because it is convenient for him to do so, and not because he shares their values. One could almost call him a parasite.

One could say the Linus is riding on the coat tails of RMS by using the GNU tools and GNU Compiler in Linux, or using GPL, but not advocating for it.

When people think of Linux usually they don't think of just the kernel, but of a large chunk of GNU tools.

But this is not the place for calling people names or to say who is riding whose coat tails.

What's really important is who is looking out for me.


Why can't RMS and the FSF come up with an OS of their own after 22+ years?

I'm sure he'll do that when Linus makes his own compiler and replaces all the GNU tools, I mean he's had 22 years :-)

Linus has also said that he observes that most of the "discussion" on GPLv3 is driven by people with interests which are purely political. i.e. people who don't actually have any code to put under any license at all, let alone the one they are promoting for their own political reasons.

That's like saying because I believe in freedom of speech, but don't go on protest marches, my opinion is invalid.

Could it possibly be because they are driven by motivations which are fundamentally political and not technical?

A software license is a political thing. It's all about what is free and how it's free.

Going to bed now

Reply Parent Score: 1