Skip to comments.Is Linux For Losers?
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.
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.
Windows enthusiasts who support Microsoft products in Usenet newsgroups
Well I guess there is little doubt what youre shooting for
Today's program includes more than 1800 MVPs in 55 countries and spans 20 languages and more than 70 Microsoft technologies.
1800 People in the world huh? There are more small business in MSP than that.
Through the MVP Source Licensing Program, Microsoft's Most Valuable Professional (MVPs) are be eligible to receive Microsoft source code components for the following products:
Im looking around here, but how much of the code do these people have access to?
I think its more accurate to say he is indifferent. He will say that he wishes it was not so, but he does not care enough to actually condemn MS for doing it..
You, I, and others on this board are consistant in our opinios on the whole GPL, MS, source code and the chicoms, he is not..
Pretty much does not equal all, besides you admitted just a couple of days ago you've been running a free copy of Red Hat at home. My point is still valid and stands.
Yes, I know, you want all software to be free, for everyone in the world. Got it, long time ago.
My point is still valid and stands.
Sorry chuckko I used to pay for every redhat I used (7/8/9) until redhat eol'd them. And I donate to Fedora usually once a year. Im not using Linux because its free...
You have no legs to stand on with this one, just typical of you to try and peg someone as willing to blow up the world for free software when infact they pay for their software..
Actually, I've seen him be consistant.
He consistantly backs Microsoft, no matter how unethical, immoral or traitorous their actions are.
Even those few times that he's "disagreed" with one of their actions, his critisism of them has been so mild as to be non-existant.
And he consistantly follows the Microsoft "GPL is evil" parade, even when it makes no sense to do so.
Basically, he's a pro-Microsoft shill, unable to see wrong in anything they do and howling about anything that might possibly take a nickel out of their pockets. It matters to him not one bit that many of Microsoft's actions have been anti-competative, un-American or illegal. It matters (to him) only that Microsoft wins.
I have been a consistent advocate of the benefits of Open Source.
I've never stated that I want all software to be free.
In this particular instance, I think that Microsoft should open it's source to anyone that asks. If it ever comes out that any Chinese business recieved information about the source code that Microsoft showed to the Chinese Communist government, I think that Microsoft should be forced to open their source to everyone.
Not because I want it, but because not doing so puts American businesses at a disadvantage.
And also because treason should be punished.
Microsoft could have avioded this by not opening their source to the Chinese Communists.
But they did, and therefore they should grant American businesses the same advantage.
As a self-styled "supporter of American business (unless that American business sells Linux)" you should agree with me.
But you won't, because you don't support any American businesses but Microsoft.
BOGUS. You said CentOS, which is a free copy of Red Hat with the name stripped off. Deny it?
Your claim is that: besides you admitted just a couple of days ago you've been running a free copy of Red Hat at home.
Ill give you a week back (that is more than a couple of days)..
>please find a recent post where I said I ran centOS
Easy, you mention it several times in this thread:
Actually I have done that on CENT-OS
done: having finished or arrived at completion; "certain to make history before he's done"; "it's a done deed"; "after the treatment, the patient is through except for follow-up"; "almost through with his studies"
done is past tense is it not? meaning even a month (not a couple of days ago) I was still talking in the past tense about things I used to do.. So I ask again what do you have to support I was running centos in the recent past?
BTW: lets assume I am running it right now (I'm actually using Fedora) I donated to the CENT-OS project at that time, so am I using it because its free?
Sounds an awful lot like government welfare programs, don't it?
De Raadt is pointing out a phenomenon that every programmer has faced at one point or another: a choice of whether to re-architect and clean out the accumulated crap of a multitude of design decisions addressing different problems; or simply to work with what you've got, and work around the incompatibilities.
Open source stuff is exceptionally vulnerable to this, as by intent the open source designers are scattered hither and yon, making design decisions that first and foremost serve their own needs.
The re-architecting decision is really daunting, but eventually everybody ends up having to bite the bullet and do it. Linux is no exception. De Raadt undoubtedly has a personal agenda here, but I think he's probably correct about the need to clean things up.
Except that just anyone cant drop code into the Kernel, it get put in by a small group of core developers. The idea that some guy in topika just drops code into the kernel is a falkse one..
You said "find a recent post where I said I ran centOS".
I did. You lose. Again.
2) Your initial claim was "besides you admitted just a couple of days ago you've been running a free copy of Red Hat at home."
So your post 299 was 100% incorrect, I did not say a couple of days ago that I was running CENT-OS
3) All of this avoids the real issue (which when dealing with you is par for the course) of "n3wb is running Linux because its free ($)". Given I pay for every copy of linux in my office (with the exception of the one I run fedora on). Given the fact I donate at least once a year to the Fedora project, and given the fact when I used CENT-OS I donated to them am I running Linux for free?
Now you're going to find some way to avoid answering three, and troll around a bit more. You'll dance, you'll bob, you'll weave but in the end your claim that "he runs linux because its free" has been thoroughly proven wrong.. Sorry troll boy, your getting spanked on this one I would let it go before you embarrass yourself some more..
I'm not avoiding anything, just too busy for your childish games. You've admitted you've run free copies of Linux, Red Hat, CentOS, etc, even though you want to claim you pay for them all. Obviously, you do not. Whether it was a few days ago or a couple of weeks ago that you last admitted it is immaterial.
Obviously, you do not.
Based on what? me clicking the donate button and sending money does not count?
Face it child you lost this issue..
Your own posts, which I linked.
None of which said I did not pay for them, care to link some more sparky..
Didn't have to, CentOS and Fedora are only distributed for free. Play games with yourself if you want, but they obviously don't work with me.
Sound familiar, lets read it again
So long as *you* can continue to get your free software
Lets pair it down a bit more
your free software
I pay for my software, period...
Sorry troll boy, try to rephrase things all you want. YOu said I use Linux because I dont pay for it... I do pay for it..
Not according to your previous comments you don't. CentOS and Fedora aren't available for sale, so you didn't pay for them. Either that or you have been lying all along, which obviously shouldn't be ruled out.
Donating to the project development = paying for the software..
LOL, here you are insisting you don't have to pay for Red Hat Enterprise even if you don't want to.
Twisted in knots, like always.
I like your graphic though.
That seems to be the situation when the IT guys show up to "fix" my computer. It's happened a couple of times (once sort'a my fault by clicking on some random registry file by accident that totally snarfed the real registry files). In those cases (I now know better than to call IT), recovery was possible just that in one case it took ~1 day (much less than the cost of lost files) and in the other was done much quicker with the help of Knoppix and a (direct, hex) disk editor.
Its my fault for responding to GE, the Baghdad bob of tech threads...
How would you test to see if GE is really an AI bot?
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.