Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Sep 2011 22:22 UTC, submitted by kragil
Thread beginning with comment 490836
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Yet another GPL/RMS fail. You can't even sign compiled GPL code? Wow. There comes a time when a license is too restrictive to be of use. Instead of Linux fanboys demanding that everyone else live within the restrictions of RMS/GPL religion, why not dump GPL and pick a different OSI-approved open source license?
An opposing (and rational) viewpoint from Ross Anderson, security engineering professor at Cambridge University, can be read here:
http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2011/09/20/trusted-computing-2-0...
"The extension of Microsoft’s OS monopoly to hardware would be a disaster, with increased lock-in, decreased consumer choice and lack of space to innovate. It is clearly unlawful and must not succeed."
Edited 2011-09-26 23:56 UTC




Member since:
2006-07-04
Yet another GPL/RMS fail.
You can't even sign compiled GPL code? Wow.
There comes a time when a license is too restrictive to be of use.
Instead of Linux fanboys demanding that everyone else live within the restrictions of RMS/GPL religion, why not dump GPL and pick a different OSI-approved open source license?