Posted on 06/19/2005 6:41:20 AM PDT by Willie Green
NEW YORK - Theo de Raadt is a pioneer of the open source software movement and a huge proponent of free software. But he is no fan of the open source Linux operating system.
"It's terrible," De Raadt says. "Everyone is using it, and they don't realize how bad it is. And the Linux people will just stick with it and add to it rather than stepping back and saying, 'This is garbage and we should fix it.'"
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Yes, apparently some of them can view 97% of it under certain circumstances. Unfortunate, indeed, but if you're outraged about that, I can only imagine the hysterical frenzy you're going to throw yourself into when you find out there's something called "open source" where everybody over there gets 100% of it, to do whatever they want to with it, not just a select few viewing it. They can ALL copy ALL of it, resell it, rename it, you name it. Incredible, isn't it.
Are you OK? I hope you were sitting down, and didn't break something when I told you.
What "certain circumstances"? If by that you mean "any circumstances" you would be correct. Otherwise, your trying to spin the Microsoft action of giving the Chinese Communist government complete and total access of 97% of Windows source code.
Unfortunate, indeed, but if you're outraged about that, I can only imagine the hysterical frenzy you're going to throw yourself into when you find out there's something called "open source" where everybody over there gets 100% of it, to do whatever they want to with it, not just a select few viewing it.
Which is exactly as it was designed to be. Unlike Microsoft who despises open source, yet lets the Chinese Communist government have their source code, even while American businesses that rely on Microsoft Windows for their data integrity cannot have the very same access to 97% of Windows source code to to check for security issues.
What about American business interests? Don't they have at least as much of a right to verify Windows source code as the Chinese Communists?
Open Source software gives American, Chinese and any other countries a level playing field. No one country's businesses have an edge over another. But Microsoft's actions have given the Chinese Communists an edge over American businesses.
What you are saying is that Chinese business interests are more important than American business interests, provided that it puts money in Microsoft coffers.
Traitor.
so the chi-coms get better treatment from MS than say General Motors or other American companies. From Linux China get no more special benefit than an American company..
Ridiculous. I've already pointed out repeatedly the chicoms get much MUCH more from companies that provide them open source software, like IBM, Red Hat and Novell, which literally GIVE them ownership of the software to do whatever they want with it. Your fixation on Microsoft, who is only allowing them to view portions of the code, under strict circumstances, exposes the complete hypocrisy of your position.
Especially since Microsoft only gave them those partial views as a response to what IBM and others were completely giving them for free as open source. IBM's collusion with the chicoms doesn't end with open source, either. Yet you give them a free pass, since they are support open source to begin with.
If you really cared about stopping technology transfers to the Chinese AT ALL, you'd start with the worst offenders.
Wrong again, you're obviously trying to cover up the transfers of open source which are complete and total transfers. Not everyone in the chicom government has access to view portions of the MS code, only those specifically allowed to have access under specific agreement and circumstances.
But, of course, anyone in the chicom government can get a free copy of Linux from Red Hat, and resell it, rename it, whatever they want to do with it. They don't have to contact Microsoft first, ask permission, setup access, they just go straight to the Red Hat servers and start downloading away. If they eat up all of Red Hat's bandwidth in the process, Red Hat will faithfully add more servers for them, no questions asked.
If you really cared about technology transfers to the Chicoms, you'd start with the worst offenders. Obviously not part of your agenda.
Like anyone who has to work with IBM on a regular basis, I am not too fond of them... But it still holds that MS gives the chicoms special treatment it does not give to Americans, and thats fact..
Your fixation on Microsoft, who is only allowing them to view portions of the code, under strict circumstances, exposes the complete hypocrisy of your position.
If MS let all American customers to look at 97% of the source you would have a point. but Linux is treated the same world wide, Americans have the same access as the Fin who wrote the code in the first place. but if you want to look at 97% of the windows source you need to be either a MS employee or a Chinese communist..
To sum up:
Linux: GM get same treatments as chicoms
MS: chicoms get better treatment than GM
But you'd rather give them a free pass and complain about Microsoft instead who doesn't collude with the chicoms to near the same degree. Yeah, we noticed. It's called hypocrisy.
Oh well if were only letting certain chicom engineers see it than I guess we dont have aproblem.. /dripping sarcasm
LOL you're all twisted in knots, yet again, and prove you don't even know what you're talking about. It shows what you're up to, when you say something completely wrong like that. If you were a Microsoft "MVP", which means you're an engineer that doesn't work for Microsoft, you could have access to the code as well as all the governments can, not just the Chinese. Wrong on basically everything you just said. Typical.
So its only small American business that get lesser access than the chicoms?
Obviously, comparatively speaking, it's not near as big of a problem as letting ALL chicoms have access to ALL of the code, like you support with open source. If China ever takes a 100% free copy of Windows, and renames it Red Flat, and resells it for their own profit, you might have a point. Till then, that's the bigger problem, and you refuse to even admit it, much less address it. You guys can try to divert attention all you want, not going to work when there's such a huge difference in what the chicoms are getting with 100% free Linux.
Even the disidents who want freedom in china? They dont get squat from MS..
You guys can try to divert attention all you want, not going to work when there's such a huge difference in what the chicoms are getting with 100% free Linux.
Not to small American business, linux levels the playing field for them. You dont have to be the chi-coms, a government, or an "all star partner" with MS to get the exact same treatment..
And redhat got their OS free from a fin... Linux levels the playing field for small busnisses.. hell look at linksys as another Linux success story..
Thanks for exposing your motives. So long as *you* can continue to get your free software, you could care less if the chicom government is a greater beneficiary. You run cover for this by attacking closed source vendors, who you'd like to see give everything away to the chicoms as well, so long as you got your own free copy in the process.
Many if not most MVP's work for small businesses, just because you're not one yourself doesn't mean they don't exist, or are ever denied on that basis.
Thanks for exposing your motives. So long as *you* can continue to get your free software,
Huh? I pay for pretty much every copy of Linux in my office, your constant attempts to paint me as some penny pincher who is penny wise and pound foolish don't hold up against the actual facts, as per usual..
You run cover for this by attacking closed source vendors, who you'd like to see give everything away to the chicoms as well
Its not my concern what MS or anyone else does with their IP, I believe first in the right to private ownership because without that everything else it pretty pointless. If Linus wants to use the GPL license, its his material, so be it. If Bill Gates wants to put the code for Windows on a screen that will self destruct after reading it, again thats his right. What I have a problem with is people who claim that the GPL is their terrible thing for America (because someone exercises his human right to own the product of his labor), and give MS a pass for doing nearly the same thing.
Your only point ever made about MS is, oh well what can they do? so who's really giving somebody a special pass here?
so long as you got your own free copy in the process.
Again, Not only do I buy the Operating systems my company uses, we also buy support so stop making yourself look foolish by trying to paint me as something I am not...
Ummm, no. I thought I'd made it quite clear that open source is completely open to everyone, including American businesses. Unlike the Microsoft transfer of technology to the Communists Chinese which leaves American businesses in the dark.
Not everyone in the chicom government has access to view portions of the MS code, only those specifically allowed to have access under specific agreement and circumstances.
During the IBM -> Lenovo discussion, you made it quite clear that you believed that the Chinese Communist government and businesses in Communist China were one and the same. Changing your tune now?
If you really cared about technology transfers to the Chicoms, you'd start with the worst offenders. Obviously not part of your agenda.
And if you really cared about American business interests, you'd be demanding that Microsoft open their source to American businesses like they have to the Chinese Communists.
You know, like Open Source is open to both.
Rather, you'd prefer that the Chinese Communists have a business advantage over Americans.
Good to see that you and Billy G. are on the same page.
What's not so good to see is that you are a traitor for supporting such an act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.