Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Mar 2012 22:47 UTC
Linux "If you meet Linus Torvalds, he comes off as a mild-mannered, down-to-earth Finnish-American. He lives with his wife Tove, three kids, a cat, a dog, a snake, a goldfish, a bunny and a pet rat in a comfortable 6000 square foot home just north of Portland's tony Lake Oswego neighborhood. The house is yellow - his favorite color - and so's the Mercedes. But he's not really like any of his neighbors. He drives his Mercedes fast, slamming the car into gear and flooring it. There's no coaxing, no hesitation. Either the hammer is down, or the car is at rest. And he has an abnormal number of stuffed penguins on his mantle." Yup, sounds like the to-the-point Fin we all know and love.
Thread beginning with comment 511323
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: I like Linus
by WorknMan on Wed 21st Mar 2012 00:57 UTC in reply to "RE: I like Linus"
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Stallman strong believes have done a lot of the world.

Without it, Linux wouldn't exist in it's current form.

Just as an example gcc. It might not produce the best performing code. But it does produce code for a lot of architectures.


Stallman's strong beliefs haven't done shit for the world. Stallman (and his followers) wrote a lot of code and then gave it away, and THAT did a lot for the world. Linus did the same thing as Stallman, but doesn't have the same religious beliefs. In other words, if we'd have had more CODE from the FSF and less religion over the years from them, they'd probably have gotten a lot further than they are now.

Even some of the most religious fanatics have done good works, but that doesn't say anything about the validity of their religion. If a bunch of Christians (or Muslims) set up and run a homeless shelter, does that mean their god is real?

People complain about articles about patents on OSNews, maybe without Stallman it would have been even worse.


What does patents have to do with software licenses? Especially since even open source projects like Android are getting sued for patent violations. That is a COMPLETELY separate issue. Just because somebody patents 'slide to unlock' and sues over it doesn't mean the world needs to stop using non-free software.

Edited 2012-03-21 00:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: I like Linus
by Lennie on Wed 21st Mar 2012 09:02 in reply to "RE[2]: I like Linus"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Without his beliefs, Stallman wouldn't have created that code.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: I like Linus
by Kebabbert on Wed 21st Mar 2012 10:58 in reply to "RE[3]: I like Linus"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

This is ridiculous. Linus T has attitude problems and very big ego. How can someone say the likes Linus? That is over most peoples head.

Why would someone call OpenBSD developers "masturbating monkeys" for focusing on security? There are many other quotes from Linus, showing his attitude problems.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[3]: I like Linus
by r_a_trip on Wed 21st Mar 2012 12:52 in reply to "RE[2]: I like Linus"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Just because somebody patents 'slide to unlock' and sues over it doesn't mean the world needs to stop using non-free software.

Need is a strong word. But if every end user rejected proprietary software, there wouldn't be proprietary outfits left who think patenting 'slide to unlock' is a good thing.

There is no particular incentive to patent stuff if your own licensing stipulates that patent grants are perpetual, sub-licensable, worldwide and royalty free.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: I like Linus
by kwan_e on Wed 21st Mar 2012 15:12 in reply to "RE[2]: I like Linus"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"Stallman strong believes have done a lot of the world.

Without it, Linux wouldn't exist in it's current form.

Just as an example gcc. It might not produce the best performing code. But it does produce code for a lot of architectures.


Stallman's strong beliefs haven't done shit for the world. Stallman (and his followers) wrote a lot of code and then gave it away, and THAT did a lot for the world. Linus did the same thing as Stallman, but doesn't have the same religious beliefs. In other words, if we'd have had more CODE from the FSF and less religion over the years from them, they'd probably have gotten a lot further than they are now.

Even some of the most religious fanatics have done good works, but that doesn't say anything about the validity of their religion. If a bunch of Christians (or Muslims) set up and run a homeless shelter, does that mean their god is real?
"

Firstly, I say Stallman and the FSF has done more than most religions in terms of contributing positively to humanity.

Secondly, you keep using religion to describe the activities of the FSF, but an actual explanation of why it's an accurate description is conspicuously absent. Just because everyone says it is doesn't make it so.

Thirdly, the FSF does more than code. Raising awareness is very important. In case you haven't noticed in the past 20 years, lobbyists have forcibly injected politics into technological issues and you'd be fool to focus on the code while your freedom to move is being taken from you.

Fourthly, your last argument is just pathetic and irrelevant. The FSF and Stallman's activities have measurable impact as a direct result of their stated goals. Your last argument is irrelevant and is no more than an excuse to restate that you think they're religions without having to back up that argument.

"People complain about articles about patents on OSNews, maybe without Stallman it would have been even worse.


What does patents have to do with software licenses? Especially since even open source projects like Android are getting sued for patent violations. That is a COMPLETELY separate issue. Just because somebody patents 'slide to unlock' and sues over it doesn't mean the world needs to stop using non-free software.
"

Patents have everything to do with copyright because they are forced into the Intellectual Property umbrella which is a debatable concept, but nonetheless exists due to lobbying.

Technically, you are right, but the people seeking to take away basic freedoms aren't playing a technical game. They are playing a political game.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: I like Linus
by WorknMan on Wed 21st Mar 2012 21:35 in reply to "RE[3]: I like Linus"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Fourthly, your last argument is just pathetic and irrelevant. The FSF and Stallman's activities have measurable impact as a direct result of their stated goals. Your last argument is irrelevant and is no more than an excuse to restate that you think they're religions without having to back up that argument.


This is very easy to explain. Folks like Linus use the GPL for practical reasons, because he believes that is the best license for what he is doing. Stallman and his followers use the GPL for moral reasons, regardless of whether it is practical or not, because to use a non-FSF approved license would be akin to commiting sin. He's already said everyone should use free software, regardless of whether or not is is technically superior to the non-free alternatives. If that isn't religion, I don't know what is.

Patents have everything to do with copyright because they are forced into the Intellectual Property umbrella which is a debatable concept, but nonetheless exists due to lobbying.

Technically, you are right, but the people seeking to take away basic freedoms aren't playing a technical game. They are playing a political game.


Again, you can give out the source code to something like a codec and still demand royalties for their use, so I'm not seeing how the discussion of patents is relevant to this topic. Even DRM has been used in open source software, hence the creation of the GPL v3. Every time the discussion of non-free software comes up, Freetards feel the need to bring up patents and DRM as the main reason not to use said software, even though most non-free software devs are not patent holders, and most non-free apps have no DRM at all. These things are NOT mutually exclusive. It would be like saying that since a lot of shitty, 'v0.1' alpha/beta software happens to be open source, then we should just quit using FOSS altogether to avoid these kinds of apps.

Even if you believe strongly that DRM and patents are evil and should be done away with, it doesn't help your cause to paint all non-free software devs as seal-clubbing bastards who are out to take away your freedoms, just because a select few happen to fall under this category. Most of them just want to get paid for their work, and they aren't going to make a lot of money selling support or custom versions of a $2 phone app.

Reply Parent Score: 1