Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Feb 2006 21:15 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source Linus Torvalds, father of the Linux kernel, has fleshed out his unhappiness with GPLv3 in three recent posts on the Linux Kernel Mailing List. Torvalds previously stated that the kernel will remain under the licensing terms of GPLv2. Yesterday, Torvalds offered his opinion as to where the battle over DRM should take place.
Thread beginning with comment 92279
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Linus gets it
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 00:42 UTC in reply to "Linus gets it"
Member since:

Agreed. This is part of why Linus has been viewed as much more of a leader in all of this than Stallman has.

Stallman is a whackjob. Every time he speaks it's diarrhea of the mouth. Stallman's ideology is one of the biggest roadblocks to both Linux on the desktop, and OSS on the desktop. And when it's seemingly that we've come across one roadblock, Stallman erects another one.

Linus looks at all of this from a pragmatic approach, from a productivity approach. From a realistic approach.

You said: -----To eradicate DRM:

1) Compete in the marketplace. Create 'open' content to challenge 'closed' content.-----------

Bra-friggen-vo. It seems that Linus grasps the market concept. Make a better product and show people why linux is better. That's how we've made it so far.

Stallman just wants to ram it down your throat.

Edited 2006-02-03 00:51

Reply Parent Score: 4

Here's what I mean
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 11:57 in reply to "RE: Linus gets it"
halfmanhalfamazing Member since:

-----------------Richard Stallman: The Free Software Movement *Is* Politics--------------

Heh, that's all you need to see.

Stallman has zero interest in making better software. He just wants to win some ideological fight, and for some odd reason thinks he can ram it and people will somehow be ok with that.

"I'm louder than you, so obviously I'm right." Sorry Richie, that doesn't work either.

What he's not realizing is that by making the better software, the people will come. He's gonna win this fight at the keyboard, not at the microphone. But he's not at his keyboard coding. So....................

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Here's what I mean
by jaylaa on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 12:49 in reply to "Here's what I mean"
jaylaa Member since:

Better software isn't the only reason for open source. What if the closed sourced model actually did produce better software, and everyone knew it. You're saying there would be no need for open source software?

What about voting machines? That code needs to be seen so the voting process is transparent. What about software that various governments use? No government wants to put the security of their country in a foreign company's hands. What about your right to know what's going on in your computer? These are all political issues. It's not just about better software.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Here's what I mean
by msundman on Fri 3rd Feb 2006 14:56 in reply to "Here's what I mean"
msundman Member since:

> What he's not realizing is that by making the better software,
> the people will come.

Sure, people would use the software for a while, until everything runs on computers that are no longer under the control of the users themselves. One could help prevent this by writing good software that explicitly retains the freedom of the user. But for that you'd need such a license, which is exactly what RMS is trying to make.

So, exactly why don't you want him to create a license that anyone may use (freely) for the software that he/she creates?

If you find a better way of fixing this whole mess that the current laws are then be my guest. In the meantime governments around the world continue to give away their citizens' basic freedoms to corporations. Maybe you don't mind being stripped of your basic freedoms, but why shouldn't I be allowed to try to keep some of those freedoms of mine? At least the ones related to the software I write myself.

Reply Parent Score: 1