Slashdot Log In
Linus Not The Father Of Linux, According to Report
Posted by
Hemos
on Mon May 17, 2004 08:39 AM
from the fear-uncertaintity-and-doubt dept.
from the fear-uncertaintity-and-doubt dept.
MrIrwin writes "According to this article on Yahoo, Linus is not the real father of Linux and Open source software is really just code nicked from other sources. " Groklaw has done a dissection of the press release. It's a press release by the Alexis de Toqueville Institution, who gets funding from MSFT, as well as believes that US IT troubles are because of free software. Oh, and terrorism works better because of open source, and the "Star Wars" program was a good idea.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Linus Not The Father Of Linux, According to Report
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 867 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday April 29 2004, @05:55PM)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday April 29 2004, @05:55PM)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Funny)
It should have become the kernel of their new, more advanced version of Windows, but as the code was leaked they decided to abandon it, blamed the leakage to its head developer and fired him - some guy called Stallman - and hired Cutler to his place.
This was a brief history of Windows NT and Linux, and an explanaition why Windows sucks and Linux rocks today. Stallman, on the other hand, felt pissed and took the lead of certain miserable and insignificant foundation called FSF, which developed viral licenses to communistic IP-dishonoring hippies, and later on claimed himself its founder.
By they way, I also heard recently that Linus' file in Finnish citizenship registry keeps magically getting erased at random times ever since the said registry was moved to run on
But now you have to excuse me, as I'm out of crack and my hands are shaking too badly.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft's history of dishonesty and crime (Score:5, Interesting)
Why stop there? Almost every victory that Microsoft can claim has been achieved through dishonest, if not criminal means. Consider...
MICROSOFT DEFEATS DR-DOS BY:
- Fraud: Windows issues a warning about DR-DOS that MS knows is false.
- FUD: The DR-DOS evidence includes Microsoft memos planning the FUD campaign.
- Sabotage: Windows 95 has secret calls to prevent it from running on DR-DOS.
- Sabotage: MS purposely keeps DR-DOS out of the Windows Beta-test program (also documented by evidence).
MICROSOFT DEFEATS GEOWORKS BY:
- Sabotage: New MS-DOS release causes Geoworks to fail.
MICROSOFT DEFEATS WORDPERFECT BY:
- Fraud: MS publicly announces that OS/2 is the future direction.
- Sabotage: MS provides WordPerfect with faulty Windows APIs.
MICROSOFT DEFEATS OS/2 BY:
- Fraud: Microsoft pretends to support OS/2, then abandons it.
- FUD: Microsoft pays people to disparage OS/2 in posts in forums, letters to the editor, etc.
- Suspected Theft: Microsoft is believed to have borrowed OS/2 IP to use in Windows 3.1.
- Suspected Sabotage: Microsoft is believed to have provided less than their best code for OS/2.
MICROSOFT DEFEATS AMIPRO BY:
- Sabotage: Windows 95 causes AmiPro function-keys to break.
MICROSOFT DEFEATS NETSCAPE BY:
- Contract Interference: Microsoft pays sites to stop using Netscape (thus "cutting off Netscape's air supply").
- Extortion: Microsoft threatens VARs who preload Netscape.
- Extortion: Microsoft threatens Apple with the cancellation of MS Office for the Mac, unless Apple drops Netscape.
MICROSOFT ATTEMPTS TO DEFEAT JAVA BY:
- Sabotage: Microsoft tries to "kill cross-platform Java by growing the polluted [J++] Java market."
- Fraud: Microsoft memo shows plan to keep quiet about the incompatibilities so that J++ users will unintentionally create Windows-only code.
AND NOW MICROSOFT IS ATTEMPTING TO DEFEAT LINUX BY:
- Fud: Obviously.
- Fraud: False claims, planted by partners like Toqueville.
- Legal Attacks: Microsoft funded the SCO attack.
- Patents: Future.
- Legislation: DRM, etc.
- Proprietary Internet Protocols: MS Multimedia formats,
- Secret Hardware Protocols: Working with partners like NVidia (closed source drivers), ATI (closed source drivers), and AMD (the unpublished memory-access fix).
- Locking-in Linux: Working with partners like NVidia and ATI (closed source drivers), possibly Trolltech (the proprietary version of Qt, Qt support for
- Infiltration: MS plants joining Open Source projects to cause interference, wearing out the leaders through constant complaining, driving away other developers by acting like jerks, pushing the project in bad directions, etc.
- Infiltration: MS plants joining Open Source projects and pretending to be die-hard supporters, then pushing for overly-tight licensing, convincing others to add special restrictions that limit the software's use (possible examples: DotGNU, XFree86), using LGPL for what should be BSD (CodeWeaver's Wine), using GPL for what should be LGPL (MySQL), and so on.
AND JUST GENERAL DESTRUCTION...
Re:Microsoft's history of dishonesty and crime (Score:5, Informative)
If you insist...
Evidence of sabotage and fraud in The Sun vs Microsoft case [sun.com]:
Memo to Bill Gates from the manager responsible for Microsoft's Java strategy:
> When I met with you last, you had a lot of pretty pointed questions about Java, so I want to make sure I understand your issues/concerns....
> 1. What is our business model for Java?
> 2. How do we wrest control of Java away from Sun?
> 3. How do we turn Java into just the latest, best way to write Windows applications?
> 4. What are we doing to leverage/expose Windows to Java developers?
Microsoft's pricing strategy paper for its VJ++ development suite:
> The "strategic objective" of its new toolkit is to "Eliminate/contain cross-platform Java by growing the polluted Java market," "migrate and lock Java developers to Win32 Java," and ultimately to "kill cross-platform Java by grow[ing] the polluted Java market."
Statement by a Microsoft vice president:
> I would explicitly be different -- just to be different.... [W]ithout something to pollute Java more to Windows (show new cool features that are only in Windows) we expose ourselves to more portable code on other platforms.
Another Microsoft memo:
> At this point its [sic] not good to create MORE noise around our win32 java classes. Instead we should just quietly grow j++ share and assume that people will take advantage of our classes without ever realizing they are building win32-only java apps.
Evidence of contract interference and extortion in The DOJ versus Microsoft case [usdoj.gov]:
> "Content drives browser adoption, and we need to go to the top five sites and ask them, "What can we do to get you to adopt IE?" We should be prepared to write a check, buy sites, or add features -- basically do whatever it takes to drive adoption."
> Gates wrote, "Apple let us down on the browser by making Netscape the standard install." Gates then reported that he had already called Apple's CEO (who at the time was Gil Amelio) to ask "how we should announce the cancellation of Mac Office...."
> In Waldman's words: Sounds like we give them the HTML control for nothing except making IE the "standard browser for Apple?" I think they should be doing this anyway. Though the language of the agreement uses the word "encourage," I think that the spirit is that Apple should be using it everywhere and if they don't do it, then we can use Office as a club.
Evidence of intentional destruction of standard protocols in the Microsoft Halloween Document [opensource.org]:
> "OSS projects have been able to gain a foothold in many server applications because of the wide utility of highly commoditized, simple protocols. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS projects entry into the market."
And so on.
There is so much evidence that this (sabotage, fraud, and extortion) is Microsoft's normal way of operating, that the "zealot" position is anyone who attempts to claim that Microsoft is honest.
As to what Microsoft is currently trying to do to defeat Linux, there was obviously some speculation there, which I indicated by repeated use of the word "possibly."
Re:Microsoft's history of dishonesty and crime (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Sunday October 03 2004, @04:03AM)
- Fraud: False claims, planted by partners like Toqueville.
You have no knowledge that this particular instance was instigated by Microsoft. Microsoft has *definitely* paid off "independent researchers" to come up with misleading studies in the past, but this is not in the least unusual for large companies in the technology industry, much as I hate to say it.
- Legal Attacks: Microsoft funded the SCO attack.
This is certainly worth looking into, but it's not as cut-and-dry as you're making out.
- Secret Hardware Protocols: Working with partners like NVidia (closed source drivers), ATI (closed source drivers), and AMD (the unpublished memory-access fix).
Microsoft has not, to the best of my knowledge, conducted a "secret hardware" campaign or anything of the sort. A lot of the industry is (unfortunately) secretive for competitive reasons -- that doesn't mean that Microsoft is behind it, or even actively encouraging it.
- Locking-in Linux: Working with partners like NVidia and ATI (closed source drivers), possibly Trolltech (the proprietary version of Qt, Qt support for
Absurd. This isn't even remotely plausible. You have no evidence to back this up, numerous statements to the contrary from reputable people (if you think that Miguel de Izca is lying and secretly being paid off by Microsoft for doing Mono, and that TrollTech is in bed with Microsoft (instead of the much more obvious just trying to make a buck on their products)) you're loony.
- Infiltration: MS plants joining Open Source projects to cause interference, wearing out the leaders through constant complaining, driving away other developers by acting like jerks, pushing the project in bad directions, etc.
Sorry. People are jerks on their own. Microsoft may do this in the future on strategically valuable projects (it's clearly a viable and legal strategy), but I doubt it.
- Infiltration: MS plants joining Open Source projects and pretending to be die-hard supporters, then pushing for overly-tight licensing, convincing others to add special restrictions that limit the software's use (possible examples: DotGNU, XFree86), using LGPL for what should be BSD (CodeWeaver's Wine), using GPL for what should be LGPL (MySQL), and so on.
[Laughs] If Stallman and friends, with their pro-GPL rhetoric, are Microsoft shills, they could just revise the GPL. That's absurd.
The most egregious things that we know happened that I think I'd highlight would be:
* Netscape's server compatibility and attacks on the client by servicing MSIE clients first. These are clear, true cases of anticompetitive behavior.
* Microsoft deliberately monkeying around with DR-DOS compatibility in their applications.
* Microsoft working hard to keep protocols and formats closed and avoiding third-party compatibility to promote lock-in. Not that unusual for the technology industry, sad to say. The Kerberos SMB stuff was a good example.
* Driver signing -- the claim that it's "for security" or "reliability" is as ridiculous as the claims of DRM being "to promote end-user security against malware", and everyone involved is quite aware of the fact. It's to give Microsoft a powerful club.
* OEM pressure. Bundling, doing Windows only, etc.
* Using Office support as a club against Apple.
* Microsoft attempts to make Java Windows-specific have not, as far as I kn
Re:Microsoft's history of dishonesty and crime (Score:5, Insightful)
MICROSOFT DEFEATS STACKER (Disk Compression) BY:
- Fraud: Microsoft incorporates the Stacker code, even the comments. MS lawyers drag out their defense of the suit against them until Stacker is bankrupt, then settle when the company has been forced out of business.
Re:Microsoft's history of dishonesty and crime (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://home.centurytel.net/mraymer | Last Journal: Tuesday May 03 2005, @06:13AM)
Also, you didn't use the term "M$" and refrained from calling their employees "cockmasters" which, I must say, is somewhat of a rarity on Slashdot when discussing Microsoft. So bravo, AC. Excellent job. A lot of my Microsoft-loving acquaintances will find the URL to this post in their inbox very soon.
Re:Microsoft's history of dishonesty and crime (Score:5, Interesting)
Also add the undocumented method calls in their 32-bit version of Winsock 1.1 (Win95), used by Powerpoint 4.0 and an Outlook beta, causing customers who used other vendors' Winsock implementations (read: FTP Software's) to run into trouble. Mcrosoft did release patches that removed those method calls from the afflicted programs, though, but it still counts.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.dhanapalan.com/)
"Using the Altair 8800, Bill Gates and Paul Allen develop the first programming language, and begin an extraordinary, history-making journey."
It looks like Bill and Paul were the proud parents of the a bouncing baby programming language, the first one ever!
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Sunday October 03 2004, @06:02PM)
That's on the same level as the Party in 1984 claiming to have invented the steam engine. The Ministry of Truth lives on at MS. I wonder how long before they either a) quietly remove that particular lie, or b) claim that its *obvious* that they meant the first programming language for the Altair, not the first programming language ever. On a side note, I wonder how long it is before someone posts the inevitable "Slashdot slams on MS and the groupthink supports it" post.
Another prime quote from their time-lie: "1997: Microsoft's Internet Explorer 4.0 gives users an unparalleled Internet client solution" Its marketing-speak gibberish running head long against reality. Wot the hell is an "Internet client solution"? I also like the breathless descriptive assumption that the world was just waiting for MS to provide this unparalleled Internet client solution becuase until then no one was actually able to use the net, it was just a vast wasteland until they came along and made it available to the masses.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Informative)
In fact, the Altair 8800 hadn't even been RELEASED yet, when they developed Basic for it: they wrote it to run on the emulator that they had written to run on the PDP-10.
The funny bit? Because it was all emulated, they never needed to actually LOAD Basic onto their test "machine", so they never wrote a loader. Paul Allen wound up coding one up ON THE PLANE TO ALBUQUERQUE to demo the finished product! (hey, it had to be keyed into the unit from the front panel switches, anyway.)
Born in a Whore House (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.linuxstart.com/~thales | Last Journal: Wednesday December 24 2003, @12:06PM)
Why stop at that? Where Micro-Soft's original corporate home was is very intresting. The Sundowner Motel in Albuquerque. The Sundowner was a seedy little Motel that was widely used by drug dealers and Hookers for their business.
Microsoft was born in a Whore House! Dosen't that explain their Business ethics?
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Funny)
*ducks*
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://kelora.org/)
See how quickly the law gets changed. Laws like that are only laws as long as they don't hurt anyone rich.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Offtopic)
(http://www.brendansstudentloans.com/)
Why would the feminists care? Feminists complain about the possibility of a father 'hijacking' a woman's body for 9 months if the father wants the mother to carry a baby to term rather then aborting it... and yet they have no problem with 'hijacking' a man's wallet and life for 18+ years should she want to keep it and he not.
Father's right is a very poorly understood area of law, and an even less fought for one.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Informative)
My dad came up with the perfect solution a long time ago, and when I got Old Enough To Get In Trouble, he told it to me. I'll tell it to you, now.
"Son, unless you want to pay for a kid, keep it in your pants."
I suspect a lot of people on Slashdot follow this advice (whether they want to or not
DNA testing (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday July 22 2005, @05:16PM)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Insightful)
That isn't true. Not everyone _needs_ a perfect house in the suburbs with a thoroughbred mutt, a TV in every room, a cellphone for everyone, digital cable, broadband internet, an SUV with premium gas, brand-name cereal, designer clothes, 5000 watt 7-channel audio, etc. etc. etc.
It is very possible to have a very good quality of life on one income, even a $40K/year income. In fact this just happens to be the median income in the USA. Saving for retirement would be hard, I know (but we have Social Security for that right? at least, that's where 7% of my income goes...), but just getting by pretty well month to month is perfectly doable.
Kids who cry about not getting every PS2 game hot off the presses need to be put in their places, anyway. Spouses who cry about not getting every piece of every place setting for "their pattern" need to have a sock stuffed in their trap. Neighbors who think they are superior because of their Honda lawnmower are just assholes. This really isn't rocket science, folks.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.cynergysoft.com/ | Last Journal: Friday August 27 2004, @10:18AM)
This is almost as funny as that "5 year study" on the Total cost of ownership of Win2K vs Linux that was released in 2001.
Windows Vs. Linux in TCO (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.geocities.com/orion_blastar/contact/ | Last Journal: Tuesday April 03 2007, @07:19PM)
Or how about the Windows vs. Linux report that does not put a cost on the security breaches and malware attacks on Windows systems?
Re:Windows Vs. Linux in TCO (Score:5, Funny)
Just wait until you see it on a Neon server. It'll be a glowing review!
Extremely desperate (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Friday August 17, @05:34AM)
So MS is scared shitless. It knows it has many enemies but believed it had them under control. Linux is removing that control. Linux is turning up in the strangest places. Sony has now several real products on the market with linux inside, not some tiny upstart company hoping to sell a few thousand products world wide but Sony the giant who makes nearly everything. This is not good if you are MS and want the world to think Computers == Windows.
The more linux is out there the more OS might become like diesel vs gas vs petrol. A choice based on your needs. MS doesn't want you to have a choice. People with choice might expect all kind of weird things. Performance. Reliabilty. Security.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.comprank.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday July 05, @10:59AM)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://shawn.redhive.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday May 26 2005, @09:04AM)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.samwel.tk/bart | Last Journal: Sunday November 16 2003, @01:13PM)
1. Since when did NT stand for "Network Technology" instead of "New Technology"?
2. It calls Windows 3.1 "the second OS with a GUI" (after the Mac), as if 3.1 was the first version of windows ever.
3. I quote:
Windows 3.1 was still based on MS-DOS because it was really just a front end. All it did was pass commands to MS-DOS which then passed commands to the kernel.
Excuse me? What is this "MS-DOS" thing that passes things to "the kernel"? The only thing I can think of is that he might mean the MS-DOS prompt. This sounds as if Windows 3.1 did everything by simulating typing on the DOS prompt (i.e., "pass commands to MS-DOS") and letting the DOS prompt pass things on to "the kernel". My take on this: the kernel is actually what "MS-DOS" really is -- the command prompt is just the equivalent of a shell. I have no clue what separation between "MS-DOS" and "the kernel" this guy had in mind.
4. Since when did Windows 98SE stand for "Special Edition" instead of "Second Edition"?
5. Since when was Windows ME a bugfix release for the Y2K problem? I quote: The Y2K (Year 2000) problem was discovered and fixed with the release of Windows ME (Millennium Edition). This is actually funny, so it might be intended as a joke, but I don't think it is.
6. If Windows NT was really based on the source of VMS, M$ would have definitely been sued. And they haven't AFAIK. Instead, M$ had just been done with the OS/2 cooperation debacle, and it's pretty probable that they took quite a bit of code from that to get them started on NT.
There's more I could say, but I think this enough.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:4, Funny)
(http://windex.org/)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Interesting)
AFAIK, they were sued, and they lost, which is why DEC was allowed to modify NT to run on Alpha systems, and to distribute it themselves. It wasn't an outright theft, but code that migrated into NT with several coders that had come from VMS development.
NT == N-Ten (== later Intel i960) (Score:5, Informative)
After it became clear for MS that i960 would never became a generic-purpose processor it was first meant to be, and that its release would get significally delayed, MS started quickly to work with an i386 port of NT. It did not took long, as at that time they did not have much except kernel ready, and it was quick to port as Cutler had insisted portable code without excessive asm optimisations.
(Disclaimer: everything IIRC)
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.hyperlogos.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 18, @08:19PM)
Thanks to "Assembly Language for Intel-Based Computers" by Kip R. Irvine (ISBN 0-13-091013-9) for keeping me factual...
6. Windows NT definitely contains some code from OS/2, which Microsoft ended up licensed to have because of the event you allude to. And, it was authored primarily (in the core) by VMS developers. I'm to lazy to look up which, unfortunately, but the information is readily available.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://zak3056.livejournal.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 02 2004, @08:06AM)
Of course, what REALLY burns me is the line that says For almost thirty years, programmers have tried to build a Unix-like system and couldn't, somehow suggesting that UNIX is like the the tinfoil hat version of the pyramids of Egypt--some mysterious advanced technology that no one understands and couldn't possibly replicate.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, what REALLY burns me is the line that says For almost thirty years, programmers have tried to build a Unix-like system and couldn't, somehow suggesting that UNIX is like the the tinfoil hat version of the pyramids of Egypt--some mysterious advanced technology that no one understands and couldn't possibly replicate.
Apparently BSD isn't written by programmers either.
Re:Seeing as they like history...... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/ | Last Journal: Saturday August 14 2004, @05:03PM)
Linus is an alien. He is a Finnish citizen currently residing in the United States.
(And take a look at the Finnish language. Talk about alien
Linux's actual father (Score:5, Funny)
Thus, by using Linux, you're supporting the terrorists.
Everyone please report to the near Homeland detention center for "reprogramming".
Shenanigans (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA also mentions that Kenneth Brown (braindead author of the book about the study) interviewed RMS, but I fail to see any references to GNU/Linux in the write-up. I call shenanigans. Is it April 1st?
And finally, cheers to Hemos. There five times as many links in the editorial insert than there are in the actual submission. Someone buy this man a beer.
I wish... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.cyberarmy.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday February 13 2007, @01:10AM)
*Ahem* I hate to spoil that nice thought, but Hemos appears to have taken all of those links from my (rejected) submission last night, and then forgot the media transparency [mediatransparency.org] link on where they get their funding. The rest appear to be exactly the same ones I submitted...
Speaking of which, here's an other good source [iwethey.org] of links to information.
Oh, and here's my other post from Groklaw, concerning what I think they're up to by throwing out inane nonsense like this press release:
Someone has to say it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Someone has to say it (Score:5, Funny)
"Bill turns to the OS community and says: 'No... I am you father!'"
Re:Someone has to say it (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.robert.to/)
What a farce. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.grub.net/blog/index.html | Last Journal: Wednesday June 27, @08:48AM)
Read to the bottom of the article:
Brown's study is part a book he is writing on open source software and operating systems. Excerpts from the book will be published at www.adti.net on May 20, 2004.
That says it all. Inflammatory statements preceding the release of a new book. This latest FUD is nothing more than a book promotion in the guise of a press release.
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Interesting)
yo.
Re:What a farce. (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.sff.net/people/Daniel.Dvorkin | Last Journal: Friday October 12, @01:42PM)
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Funny)
yo.
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday December 08 2003, @09:32PM)
Software is developed, not invented. This is also one of the main reasons that the patent world is all screwed up.
Oh well...
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday May 20 2004, @11:53AM)
Do you actually write software? (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's another angle. Chip design these days is usually done completely in a description language like VHDL or Verilog. The engineer does not lay out the transistors by hand. Hence, the engineer's creation is literally software cum hardware. You would have us believe that just because the electrical engineer has produced something he can touch that he is an "inventor" while the software engineer is merely a "developer".
Or perhaps you mean that the pot that cooks AND drains pasta is an invention, and Bayesian spam filtering is just a bunch of 1s and 0s.
Its not invention (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://mysite.verizon.net/tkrotchko/)
Music is "composed".
Software is "developed".
There's nothing "inventable" about software.
Unless you think Hayden should have took out a patent on the "Symphony"
"Collection of music that is played by many musicians such that music is broken into theme, counterpart, resolution in 1 to multiple parts. Music is group together to form a sound picture which is then used to inspire both performer and audience. It includes the following elements:
1) White pages with black dots on them to represent exact musical score
2) Wood or metal instrument which is plucked or blown to create sound
3) Sound in claim #2 is used in accordance with claim #1 to produce sound that has coherence
4) Each musician has a slightly different copy of the music
5) The claims in #4 when performed in exact time increments produces sound variations that are impossible with a single instrument.
6) Additional performer (known as conductor) will stand and wave arms
7) Said conductor in claim 6 will wave arms in unique motion depending on type of time in part 5 above such that there is a distinct way of waving arms according to number of beat in measure
8) As music is broken into movements, time may be taken to give audience a rest. Audience may leave to get drinks in the lobby at this time.
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Interesting)
Last time I checked, ideas themselves are not property and cannot be owned. Now, one may secure a right to capitilize exclusively on a new idea (patents), and one my reserve the right to copy original works (copyright), but nobody can own an idea. You may as well try to own the wind.
In my mind, this is the crux of the matter. Many proprietary software companies want to be able to own ideas, to say, that's my idea and you can't use it unless you fork over all of your dough. They hire pundits and paid-for researchers to make absurd claims as though they are obvious truths.
Linus Torvalds should sue the author (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://jm-smith.com/)
This is not only obviously false (and easilly provable), it is likely that it can be shown that anyone purporting to write a book on the subject (free software) should have had enough brain cells to rub together to do a modicum of background research that conclusively demonstrates what they are saying is false (groklaw for starters, fsf, eff, etc.).
Any profits from this libelous publication should go to the injured parties: Linus, whose professional reputation has been viciously besmirched.
Re:Linus Torvalds should sue the author (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://jm-smith.com/)
That is quite likely true. Nevertheless, financially bankrupting the author for his libellous actions would discourage others from throwing themselves on the grenade for MSFT and friends...which is exactly how the law is intended to function in these cases.
I would frankly nail the libellous sons-of-bitches to the wall, profit or no.
Re:Linus Torvalds should sue the author (Score:5, Funny)
I would frankly nail the libellous sons-of-bitches to the wall, profit or no.
I thing you meant libellous bastards [adti.net].
Re:Linus Torvalds should sue the author (Score:5, Insightful)
If you RTFA, you'll see there's a whole lot of conditionals in there. AdTI might be a bunch of idiot sheep, but I bet they have a halfway competent legal department that would make them stop short of anything that could get them sued. And we don't know the sources. I mean, I could go find a bunch of conspiracy mags and websites and use them as a source to write a press release that says "Surgeon General might be controlling minds with flu shots". Heck, I have my "sources". And I didn't make any accusations, just threw the idea out there. I'm pretty sure the surgeon general can't sue me for that. (The government can throw me in Guantanamo Bay, but that's different).
What Linus _should_ do is write a well-thought-out rebuttal and get it into the major news outlets to let everyone know how ridiculous these claims are. This is one of the few times when something ridiculous does merit a response. If it was from some wacko on Usenet, sure, ignore it, no one will care. But rebutting their claim and providing solid proof will help publically discredit this istitute, which is exactly what is needed.
No rebuttal necessary (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think Linus should bother. As it is, everyone who matters can see how ridiculous that is. If Linus places a rebuttal in major news outlets, it'll give credibility to these people (or at least more public controversy, as they will post a response themselves, then Linus will have to reply, and this will continue to go on fueling publicity for Brown's book). They WANT people to take them seriously and reply. They're powerless if we don't.
Really...I'd just rather see Linus's usual witty replies in a board somewhere, definitely not in a major news outlet. It won't give them fuel to their campaign and I'll be able to laugh, perhaps as much as I laughed after reading their press release.
NASA probably wrong. Moon may be made of cheese. (Score:5, Funny)
I tell all in my soon-to-be-released book.
Find out how NASA lied!
Excerpts to be published on my website.
(Note: This is not a shameless self-promotion gimmick. It's not. Really.)
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Wednesday January 05 2005, @01:10PM)
"Yeah - we can kill two birds with one stone: write a book to make more money for our 'institute'.."
"..I thought it was a 'foundation'..."
"Whatever..."
"...and throw out more FUD at the OS communists!!"
"BRILLIANT!!"
"Dude!! Are you goin' to Bogart that?"
Re:What a farce. (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday November 09 2006, @12:02PM)
To karma whore for a little and quote the article
While you cannot group all open source programmers and programs together; many are rigorous and respectful of the intellectual property rights, while others speak of intellectual property rights with open contempt."
But just because you think software patents are evil doesn't mean that you're breaking the rules with your stuff. It just means that you have an idology, and possibly a big mouth. Open source code depends on people obeying the rules on IP. Saying that linux is an unlicensed or "stolen" dirivitive work based on Unix is an awfully big claim to make without showing a line of code. I think this guy is either an idiot, or trying to capitalize on the mess with SCO. Obviously there are people that read this stuff.
BLASPHEMY! (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.serversunderthesun.com/tin/ | Last Journal: Saturday May 15 2004, @01:26PM)
My initial reaction? (Score:5, Insightful)
"New Study" (Score:5, Insightful)
There are so many studies on the same topics that the public never hears about, what good is the information in the few that the media choose to cover?
Linus not Father of Linux... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.planetquake.com/wvw/ | Last Journal: Monday January 19 2004, @02:13AM)
It's gotta be Darl (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's gotta be Darl (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Saturday January 31 2004, @05:25PM)
By the way,Darl is becoming more and more like that paperboy from Better off dead. "I - want - my - 2 dollars!!!". I wonder if he will meet a similar fate in the end?
AdTI: -1 Troll (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.xipe.nu/ | Last Journal: Monday May 17 2004, @09:45AM)
Re:Mud Slinging (Score:4, Funny)
You're FUCK thinking of FUCK Tourettes Syndrome
Dan.
Strawman.. (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday December 06 2004, @10:11AM)
(i.e. claiming the other is saying something they're not, and then showing that it is false)
Their straw-man seems to be the idea (which noone, of course, has claimed) that Linux somehow was created in a vacuum.
From there they proceed to show how Linux was (*shock*) a clone of Unix!
(Probably leaving out the fact that there are literally dozens of them.)
Re:Strawman.. (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday April 30 2004, @05:37AM)
I thought the whole idea of SDI was for lasers to be created in a vacuum.
Publicity Stunt (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.slashdot.org/~lukewarmfusion/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday August 02 2005, @02:49PM)
Sounds more like MS/DOS (Score:3, Informative)
He also admits to reading the assembly listings from for DEC Basic before writing his own completely original Basic interpreter.
I do wish this "institute" was based in France where it is illegal to falsify history.
Re:Sounds more like MS/DOS (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sounds more like MS/DOS (Score:4, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Monday November 26, @06:56PM)
QDOS, while a ground-up rewrite, and while having some differences, was very clearly heavily influenced by CP/M, to the point that most CP/M programs could be ported without major changes (with about as many, indeed, as you'd expect between SysV and GNU/Linux.)
It's all kind of bizarre really, isn't it.
Re:Sounds more like MS/DOS (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.manu.com.au/)
I think that is entirely the point. Linux was also written from scratch[1] but based upon UNIX design and philosophy[2]. It (Linux) looks similar to UNIX but it's an entirely different OS.
The analogy is entirely apt. Microsoft got its big break by selling a CP/M knockoff. Linux is a UNIX knockoff. So what? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Perhaps somebody should release a whitepaper: "Bill Gates is not the father of MS-DOS". Could equally well follow that up with "Bill Gates is not the father of MS-Windows".
[1] Pedant Points: Linus says that the early (never distributed) versions of Linux contained Minix code but all that code was removed before the first ever public release.
[2] More Pedant Points: Some people might say Linux was based on Minix design, but Linus early on said he wanted to follow POSIX specs. So Linux is more correctly a POSIX wannabe.
Star Wars (Score:3, Funny)
(http://dorward.me.uk/ | Last Journal: Monday March 15 2004, @02:20AM)
Just wait 20 years, we'll get Linux FUD Special Edition.
then again... (Score:5, Funny)
Short Summary..... (Score:5, Funny)
As far as I can tell, the true father of Linux is in fact Al Gore. He invented it shortly after his fledgling idea of a net-inter caught on and became what we know now as the internet. It was originally called Alix, but had to be renamed due to copyright issues involving a book [adti.net] about wonderland....
De Tocqueville (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday December 09 2003, @02:47AM)
Anyway, it's way too early in the morning for me to pull out a page reference, but one of the major themes in his _Democracy in America_ is that American society functions well due to the large number of volunteer organizations that Americans joined in, fire departments, sewing circles, sports clubs, free publications and that sort of thing. These things raise community awareness, and allow the democratic process to work, since he believed that it would fall apart if all democracy was was everyone voting their own pocketbook.
Anyway, I'd say the Free Software movement in America is certainly a continuation of that civic spirit.
Re:De Tocqueville (Score:5, Insightful)
This concept scares away potential conservative allies - I know that people like the FSF probably don't care since they have a "with-us-or-against-us" sort of attitude that denies the middle ground. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure the ideological connections being drawn here fit - this condemnation of Linux and Linus as a person is despicable and I hope to God these people take a massive public beating over making these kinds of rhetoric-filled accusations.
Re:De Tocqueville (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Wednesday May 11 2005, @09:01AM)
My stock! (Score:3, Funny)
OK, so first of all, wasn't the GNU project underway by the time Linux was written, thus making RMS much more of the "Father"?
In addition, according to the article: "Brown suggests the invention of Unix is an integral part of the Linux story," but isn't that the point of a Unix-like OS developed for the PC?
Oh, wait. I'm supposed to buy in to FUD tactics.
Mods? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Saturday November 08 2003, @02:47PM)
Jesus Christ, posted on the front page of
Next story::
Tinfoil hats, snazzy wardrobe accessory or anti-M$oft mind-control device?
Or::
Bill Gates wants to control your fridge with NT4.0.
[/rant]
Re:Mods? (Score:5, Insightful)
You should always be informed about the moves of your opposites.
Now we know why SCO's going away (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.michaelchaney.com/)
Get used to it, folks, it's not going to get any better anytime soon. That's good news, too, since the credibility of this sort of stuff has been mostly destroyed by Darl's loud mouth.
Obvious problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's one immediate problem with the way this guy thinks - the two groups of programmers he mentions are not mutually exclusive as he implies. One can speak out about the problems with IP rights and still be respectful and careful about not violating them.
Register article.... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.comprank.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday July 05, @10:59AM)
The road goes both ways (Score:5, Interesting)
I can prove Linux didn't come from Linus! (Score:5, Funny)
And since Lemma 1.7 says "no communist is worth his own weight in dog excrement," it naturally follows that Linux must have originated elsewhere.
I propose one of the following:
I think you'll see the logic in all of this immediately.
Re:I can prove Linux didn't come from Linus! (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.comprank.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday July 05, @10:59AM)
Cthulhu will not be pleased.
Read deeper... if the links work... (Score:3, Insightful)
I really like the last puff piece they promoted: are MCSEs good? 87-percent of HR mananger are aware of the program. 55-percent feel that an MCSE is more successful than a college grad. I guess it depends on how you define successful. Either way, it doesn't seem to point to the real truth about MCSEs, which is that the only valuable measure of their potential in your workplace is their experience.
Also, I'd like to find out more about the board members and their affiliations. That would be most helpful. The funny thing is to read the mission statement about "omnicurious journalism" and keeping alive certain liberal ideas. Yeah, lots of "liberal" ideas about business involve taking it in the
Libel / Slander? (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.slashcode.org/)
But surely they should be entitled to sue for libel or slander or whatever it is.. everyone knows that Linus coded the original kernel way back in the day. Why can't these companies understand this?
Re:Libel / Slander? (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.polyprecords.com/ | Last Journal: Friday October 03 2003, @02:20PM)
Linux origins originally came from an educational book called "Operating Systems: Design & Implementation" The book came with illustrative examples called Minix. It could potentially be argued that the father of Linux is therefore the author of Minix Andrew Tanenbaum.
An interesting quote from the book. Tanenebaum (in response to a ban on discussing Unix code) : "He realised that the only way to make somenthing comparable available to his students was to write an operating system on my own that would be system call compatible with Unix" -- that is, working in exactly the same way -- "but which was my own code, not using any AT&T code at all."
Linus spent some time hacking with Minix but eventually found that he wanted something more "a better Minix, than Minix" thus the idea was borne.
Anyway go read the book [amazon.com] its fascinating
"Scrupulous" Imitation (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.traxel.com/)
I guess he's saying this to contrast the way Microsoft unscrupulously imitated CPM/DOS, Lotus 1,2,3, Macintosh, WordPerfect, Stac . . .
Ok, I'll bite (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.jaymzworld.com/)
_Star Wars_ was a good idea. The same way successive U boat campaigns against the British were a good idea, the same way Sherman's march to the sea was a good idea. IOW, hit them in the wallet or flatten their production capability. Because of the great debate on Star Wars and the intransigence of the Reagan administration on the issue, the Sovs had to take it as something plausible, and thus we were able to force them to divert funds and resources to a possible chimera.
It doesn't matter whether you think Star Wars can work now or not, it's been almost 20 years since it was first proposed, so the reality now has no bearing on then. For what it was used to accomplish, Star Wars was a great idea.
AdTI: Handouts for Neocons (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Wednesday June 23 2004, @07:51PM)
Fact: AdTI employs John Norquist [adti.net], the not-so-big-time younger brother of big-time conservative activist Grover Norquist [mediatransparency.org].
Fact: AdTI president Ken Brown's sole research qualification is a BA in English from George Mason [digital-law.net]. He has built a career out of milking shady publications [washingtontimes.com], agent-of-foreign-power lobby groups [americanswiss.org], and dubious business-academica-government incest groups. [city.ac.uk]
Half of the links from the AdTI front page are broken. The other half send you to repositories of op-eds and recorded radio shows.
This is not a research institute. Not even a bad research institute. This is a demi-journalistic hack shop where goldbricking bottomfeeders of right-wing policy studies and editorial-writing filch cash from gullible corporations in return for hastily-written hokum.
Please do not post any more from these con artists. I'm sure they get paid by the hit.
Re:AdTI: Handouts for Neocons (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.sigma-star.com/)
Using John Norquist as the example here is a bad idea, since (even though his brother may be conservative) John Norquist is in fact quite the liberal (Up until a few months ago, he was mayor of Milwaukee, where I live, for many,many years).
Hardly the "Neocon" you claim him to be.
"+5 Insightful" to whom? Gullible lib-lefties? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://perry.kundert.ca/)
Not to belabour an obvious point, but... Not everyone who is stupid is a conservative, and not every conservative is stupid. You aren't helping your cause (whatever that is), by picking up some limp hack, and shaking him about as an example of the "Evil Neocon".
In an attempt to paint all conservatives with the AdTI brush, you have made the same error that AdTI makes -- taking a shallow understanding of a concept, and make inflamatory generalisations about a group.
As both a conservative and a supporter of software Libre, I find your persistent rantings both tiring, and comical. Surely all "liberals" can't be as shallow as you are? If you are going to continue searching for examples of "Neocon" evil, at least try to come up with some examples worthy of disdain, instead of derision.
Uh huh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
SCO, condensed (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.northarc.com/~ke6isf | Last Journal: Tuesday November 23 2004, @01:32AM)
What everybody fears ... (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.friesoft.nl/)
Enter Bill Gates
[Darth Vader voice] Linux ... I am you father [/Darth Vader voice]
The Beast is more afraid of us than we of it (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://wcmi.myftp.org/)
Linux is Microsoft's latest, last, and to date, MOST DANGEROUS competitor. NONE of Microsoft's classic tactics can defeat it, as:
1. Linux is cheaper (how do you get cheaper than free
?).
2. Linux is regarded to be as good if not better in quality and functionality.
3. Linux cannot be bought.
4. Linux cannot be "embraced, extended, extinguished" because of the GPL license.
So, what MS has tried to do over the years is slander it. Which, even they have admitted hasn't worked.
I'm abut this cynical... I think that MS backed SCaldera merely so the could try to make the "Linux has higher TCO" argument fly... Then, when Darl proved to be his own worst enemy, they've pulled the plug and now are back to slander.
This piece is out and out slander and defamation against Linus Torvalds. This "institute" which I won't name because they are slandering yet another great name by using it needs to be sued.
Why those muckrakers! (Score:5, Funny)
He didn't.
Pedantry and Deliberate Misinterpretation (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ | Last Journal: Friday August 27 2004, @06:36AM)
Linus is being attacked because of common perception built upon a basis of ignorance. This is a common tactic used to discredit and undermine support for anyone who stands at the forefront of a collection of ideas which challenges the established financially successful, and often monopolistic, "powers-that-be".
If this even bothers Linux, if he even takes more than a few moments out of his day to be concerned with it, then I can empathize with him. For his sake I hope he takes the higher road: ignore it and concentrate on what he does best.
DUH! (Score:3, Funny)
SCO Named to the SD Times 100 (Score:3, Informative)
Murky FUD (Score:5, Informative)
"As I mentioned a month(?) ago, I'm working on a free version of a minix-lookalike for AT-386 computers."
I think the lineage to Unix via minix is obvious. Linus wrote his own kernel. The other pieces may have already existed, but the kernel was new. Unless he stole it from another Linus who conveniently named the project "Linux" after himself.
Over the last 13 years, many others contributed to the kernel and development which, according to SCO, may have included some questionable copy-paste commands, but I think the beginning is clear and the origins are clearly cited.
See here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1991O
I'm not sure the author of the article really understands what Linux is and what Linux is not. He is right about varying degress of fanaticism and the very loose definition of "open source." No matter where you get your software, you're at the mercy of the developer to maintain it--commercial or open source. For example, I think the Linux community has been very good about responding to security issues compared to much larger corporations who have a very loose definition of quality control. When those corporations begin to loose money to smaller groups who out perform, then those corporations pay for studies that skew the truth and spread FUD.
Read the article--the math isn't all that fuzzy.
It's amazing how many misunderstand the GPL... (Score:3, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday September 12 2006, @03:31PM)
Right, just like it could be immensely valueable "intellectual property" if you were to be able to get away with selling thousands of pirated copies of Microsoft Software.
People who want to be able to what they want with GPL source code with no strings attached seem to be forgetting that other people wrote that code, and that they categorically do _NOT_ have permission to release any of it without the permission of the copyright holder(s). As for why derivative works should also be subject to the GPL, it's because said works would certainly still contain a lot of code that was written by those original copyright holders, and even though you have the right to do with your own code as you please, that doesn't include the right to do what you want with other people's code, even if that code is required in order for your own code to be useful
People like these need to get a clue.... it's called "Copyright", and it's a good thing.
I finally get Microsoft's and SCO's business model (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Monday February 13 2006, @07:11PM)
IT Industry Believes its Own Hype (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.flying-rhenquest.net/)
I have been on several projects where millions of dollars have been spent to force exceptionally complex solutions into very simple jobs, often because someone thought the project would look cool on their resume. And most of the time those projects run years late and way over budget and the company won't kill the project because "The IT Guys said this is the way we have to do it."
This guy is obviously just another IT guy who thinks he's better than everyone else when in reality he just sucks.
Terrorism? (Score:4, Funny)
Complimentary tin-foil considerations (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ | Last Journal: Friday August 27 2004, @06:36AM)
-----
"The report," according to Gregory Fossedal, a Tocqueville senior fellow, "raises important questions...While you cannot group all open source programmers and programs together; many are rigorous and respectful of the intellectual property rights..."
-----
Could this be a movement to undermine Linus' right to release Linux under GNU/GPL? Could this even be the beginning of legal research to undermine GNU/GPL itself?
If enough lawyers and businessmen can be swayed to believe that Linux itself is a product of UNIX then, though a convoluted interpretation of patent law and prior art, is it possible to invalidate GPL as it applies to programs written to conform to POSIX standards? Can the publishing rights for POSIX compliant programs then be assigned to the creators of the POSIX standards or the organizations that have implemented them first: ie. Bell Labs, AT&T, and UNIX?
Consider that MS didn't invent HTML, TCP, SMTP, or other common standardized protocols yet they seem to have an enormous amount of intellectual property assigned to them which prevents other people from producing software which competes with them in those arenas on the MS platform. I don't know the nature of the POSIX organization, where it's funded, or how cohesive it is with respect to legal and business support. However it does seem possible that malicious lawyers could argue that *NIX type operating systems, patented by corporate entities, are the first major implmentation of POSIX standards and that any products which come afterwards are an infringement of those intellectual property rights. This then leads to the arena of the status and age of the patents and how willing the original patent holders would be in funding the legal endeavor to pursue this track.
It sounds far-fetched but we all know that this similar roundabout claim of intellectual property has been pursued by SCO. With MS grasping for straws to slow the advance of Linux it could be a legal filibuster to sandtrap Linux. MS and their allies can afford enormous teams of lawyers that can turn out legal briefs by the thousands and the stories of their rapid acceleration of patent submission have also become popularly known. With enough patent filings and a popularly accepted, however untrue, argument about the nature and origin of Linux and its right to be distributed under GPL it might be their strategy to legally discourage organizations from adopting it.
With enough legal clout it is conceivable that, if the legal community could assign POSIX standards and *NIX operating systems as prior art preceding Linux, that they could force Linus to legally accept being bought out by the major operating system vendors who could choose to shelf it or turn its direction into nonproductive, bloating development.
The 100 mpg carburetor may be tin-foil but this situation is certainly real.
Consider this analogy: intellectual property is like a liquid beverage. It's everywhere and everyone has some. One day a large corporation patents lemonade. A week later a local company begins producing lemonade and giving it away for free charging only for the cost of distribution and the container (a cup, glass, mug, whatever). A month later the large corporation claims that its lemonade patent incorporates the property of any similar beverage based on lemons and sends a team of lawyers to shut down the local lemonade company. In this analogy software is a beverage. POSIX is a lemon based beverage. The large corporations would be those who made *NIX type operating systems and the local distributor would be Linux.
I speak against IP with contempt (Score:3, Interesting)
If the government gave someone a monopoly on growing grapes, and then called it a free makket property right because people could buy and sell shares of that monopoly - most right minded business people would see it for what it is - another bullshit government regulation that inteferes with free markets, and in the long run hurts business and consumer alike. Well it is even more so with 'intellectual' 'property'. It is not property at all, it is a fraud at best, and destroyes lifes and culture to say the least.
Unix as integral part... (Score:4, Insightful)
If this is the best controversy this idiot can come up with to promote his book, he's in deep shit and needs to get a real job.
Hype to sell a book (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.meowpawjects.com/ | Last Journal: Monday December 18 2006, @09:12AM)
He's doing this to hype it.
I mean if he actually did print this stuff in detail there are already a number of security experts who'd trash his butt.
In the end however this book belongs with such greats as Madonas sex book, OJs "I didn't do it" book and the Green Card spam lawyers book on e-commerce.
If his book did actually contain thies suggestions then I think some of the chapers in the book are
Security by obscurity: Sticking your head in the ground.
Back doors: Pretend they don't exist.
Ignore the man behind the curtan: If he's selling something he's honnest if he has nothing to gain by lying then he's lying.
And of course
Buy everything: If it's free it sucks if it's for sale it's good. Now my kid sister sells a program just like the free one you can get from the top rated security experts.
Only hers is better becouse she's selling it.
For a "hippy like" community we are pritty paranoid.
You would be too if you were told you aren't allowed to know what is happening on YOUR OWN COMPUTER.
The very software your trusting to do your taxes and run your home yet your not trusted with the terrable secret of how it works?
I'm going to trust you over someone who gives away the code for free and let's me see how it works.
You know what? You want you trust the "Space robots" and stand at the top of the stairs while I'll do the Hampster Dance.
Unfortunate phrasing (Score:3, Funny)
If it's all the same, I'm with them in spirit but am going to take a pass on the call to beat off the dark side.
"Luke, I am your . . . ohhhhh, that's it, that's it, a little faster, ohhhhhhh . . .
Hey, the same slander worked on Al Gore (Score:4, Interesting)
Alexis de Toqueville? (Score:3, Funny)
Amazing FUD (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://libreria.sourceforge.net/)
Wow, that is some really amazing FUD:
By this logic, MSWindows and MacOS were invented by Xerox. Notice how they do not speak about the fact that only the kernel was invented by Linus. They also leave out the fact that just because something can run Unix programs does not make it Unix and the fact that running Unix programs does not magically change the OS into Unix.This quote is fun, too:
Who cares if programmers have "open contempt" for "intellectual property"? Abiding by the law is not the same as agreeing with it. Since when does everybody have to believe that all laws are good? Is this a communist system where no dissent is allowed? I hope we still have the freedom to think and say what we want. They are trying to say "borrowing = stealing". Even copyright (as opposed to maritime) piracy is not theft.This article is really a work of art. The fact that someone could say this about Linux and not the BSDs, which are genetic unices, blows my mind. Then again, the BSDs have already cleared themselves in court.
Star Wars did what it was supposed to do. (Score:3, Informative)
(Last Journal: Friday November 02, @02:49PM)
Gosh, Hemos. Last time I looked the Star Wars program had done EXACTLY what it was intended to do: Convince the Soviet Union / Russian Empire that it could no longer afford to play the superpower game. This led to its attempt to give the people JUST ENOUGH freedom to get some innovation done, and from there to its collapse without a thermonuclear shot fired.
Maybe the Star Wars program would never have been able to shoot down incoming ICBMs. Or maybe it would have. Or maybe it would have but not enough of them (and missing even one would ruin a lot of people's whole day). We'll never know. But it definitely ended the Cold War without having to fight WW III.
"Ultimate excellence lies not in winning every battle but in defeating the enemy without ever fighting." Sun Tzu would be proud.
MS did not invent MSDOS, Windows, Office, and NT (Score:3, Insightful)
Windows was a reaction to the first MacIntosh. Bill wanted top copy and embrace the PC graphic interface market. Apple is not blameless in hijacking Xerox Parc technology and employees in this regard.
Other groupls wrote the first graphical word processor (Xerox), spreadsheet (Visicalc), slideshow program (Harvard), and so on. MicroSoft perfected them and integrated them fairly well.
NT was developed by Digital Equipment Corp emigrees to MicroSoft. Lets just say that if Daryl McBride worked for DEC, he'd have stronger case of matching code
Obligatory "Star Wars" reference (Score:5, Funny)
LINUX: They told me enough! They told me you killed him!
SCO: No, Linux. I am your father!
LINUX: NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Offensive (Score:3, Insightful)
The truth is.... (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday October 22 2002, @08:13AM)
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
I believe it's only a matter of time. It doesn't mean we're complacent, we still have to continue our efforts at debunking the FUD.
Right-wing nutcases (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://moreminimal.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday March 15 2003, @06:24PM)
But we really don't need a Microsoft link to demonstrate the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's grotesque ideological bias. While the think-tank positions itself as an independent, libertarian research group designed to "study, promote, and extend the principles of classical liberalism: political equality, civil liberty, and economic freedom," they function, more often than not, as a shill for Big Business and the far political right.
AdTI is a fellow-traveler of neoconservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and shadowy groups like the "Defenders of Property Rights," with whom they are aligned as part of an anti-Clean Air Act hit squad ironically misnamed the Cooler Heads Coalition [disinfopedia.org]. These are the folks who have been grinding out the industrialist propaganda which has allowed the Bush Administration to roll back environmental laws a couple of decades.
The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute can always be counted upon for a convenient white paper discounting the risks of tobacco smoking [ucsf.edu] or in favor of vastly expensive weapons programs [fas.org] of dubious utility.
It's tough to source the funding of private institutes, but the folks at Media Transparency have taken a stab at AdTI [mediatransparency.org]. Big sugar daddies include the Bradley Foundation [mediatransparency.org], which gives away millions each year to attack social programs and support the privatization of government services. There's also the John M. Olin Foundation [mediatransparency.org], which has lavishly funded a host of robber baron nonprofits over the years.
So it's no surprise that the Alexis de Tocqueville Institiute -- which seems to exist to provide a moral compass for the richest and most powerful interests in the West -- should be seen to carry water for anti-Open Source reactionaries. What's bad for big business must be bad for the nation. Linux must be discredited before it causes more distress for the market planners at Microsoft.
The only freedom being defended by groups like AdTI is the feedom to buy what the Establishment is selling. And at a price they decide.
Turnabout (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.twobirches.com/)
Linus has weighed in on this (Score:5, Informative)
Tannenbaum was first with Minix (Score:3, Informative)
(http://www.terminal.dk/)
I still have the binder and all the floppies. Wonder if they can still be read.
That was surely open source unix before Linux
Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyhow, the Disinfopedia wiki keeps track of organizations such as the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution [disinfopedia.org]. It is a wiki, so anyone can add information about them (including you).
My take. (Score:5, Interesting)
"Popular but controversial 'open source' computer software, generally contributed on a volunteer basis, is often taken or adapted from material owned by other companies and individuals, a study by the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution finds."
I think the whole point of this was to get out the adjective "but controversial". The adjective was repeated verbatim in the Yahoo article without a quote attribution. That means that everyone who read it on Yahoo thinks that the reporter is making that characterization.
I think MS has a new strategy, one borrowed from the Bush administration: In the run-up to the Iraq war Bush and his cronies would answer every question about Iraq using the words 'war on terrorism' and 'september 11th'. Even though they never once claimed that Iraq was involved in 9-11, just from word association 53% of Americans believe Hussein was personally involved in it [cbsnews.com] and 44% believe that most or some of the hijackers were Iraqis [csmonitor.com].
I think MS wants to put this word-association strategy to work for itself. By getting attack dog think-tanks to put out press releases connecting Linux with words like 'controversial' or 'unscrupulous' in the first paragraph, MS would be able to damage Linux's credibility without having to put forth an actual argument. If they can get their blurbs read often enough, it might even stick.
open contempt... (Score:4, Insightful)
"many are rigorous and respectful of the intellectual property rights, while others speak of intellectual property rights with open contempt."
Since when is speaking with contempt of something wrong? Does that make you a "software pirate"? Let's see how these guys define "intellectual property" in a previous publication about intellectual property theft linked by Slashdot:
"Today, intellectual property is not just patents, copyrights and trademarks, it is processes, techniques, methodology and talent; described by many experts as intellectual capital."
This apparently means that:
1. My talents are the property of my employer because the value of my talents is part of the capital valuation of the company on the market. If I leave that constitutes intellectual property theft.
2. If intangible capital valuation on the market decreases because someone else is doing the same things better or cheaper than you that constitutes intellectual property theft (instead of competition).
I do not know what they are trying to promote, but it surely is not freedom or competition. This conception of intellectual property is based on a fundamental misconception of the value of knowledge. It is also a great threat to freedom and world peace.
The World According To AdTI (Score:5, Insightful)
In a close sourced patented world of the AdTI's making, Henry Ford makes a car with 4 circular wheels and 100 years later, we're arguing about whether the car should have 3 or 5 square wheels.
Unix is a 30-year-old idea because Unix is a 30-year-old good idea... enough said.
That is not terribly accurate (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://jm-smith.com/)
There is nothing to "admit." Linus wrote Linux as a i386 replacement for MINIX (which only ran on 80286 machines) because he wanted a UNIX he could use and play with on his hardware. He wrote the entire thing from scratch
Anyone looking at the old Tannenbaum book (which has the source code to MINIX in it) and the early Linux kernel code can easily tell they were written independently of each other. Anyone, that is, without an anti-free software agenda and ax to grind...
Calling Linux a MINIX clone is about as accurate as calling Linux an AT&T Sys V or generic UNIX clone
Re:That is not terribly accurate (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.petermccombs.com/)
Linus was never an intern at Bell Labs.
Linux was originally written in Linus' bedroom at his mom's apartment in Helsinki, Finland. Linus was attending University at the time.
Linux started out as a little terminal program for reading Linus' email - I believe he could boot right into it without having to load MINIX. Linus kept adding features to it until it became more of an OS Kernel, and then other people started helping out with development.
Linus was impressed with the Unix philosophy and design, but saw limits in MINIX.
Linux never had MINIX code in it.
Linux was already very popular by the time Linus moved from Finland to California. Linus went to work for Transmeta. More recently, Linus moved to OSDL.
As far as we know, Linus has never worked around actual Unix System V source code, nor with AT&T or Bell Labs.
Linux was written to published POSIX standards.
There is no reason to believe that Linux contains anything but 100% original code, donated by Linus and a group of volunteers around the world. It does look like SGI once mistakenly contributed a small amount of System V code in one of their hardware drivers, but that code was redundant and soon removed from the kernel.
Audits on Linux code have now been performed by SGI and by a an open-source "insurance" firm. Probably others have also done audits.
These comparisons done between Linux and Unix have revealed very little similarity at the code level. Even SCO's lawyers now admit that there are no significant code similarities between Linux and System V. You will recall that SCO was not able to produce the apparent "millions" of lines of stolen code when ordered to do so by the Judge. Of course we can't find the code, SCO, said, because it's from AIX, not from System V.
Re:FUD not a serious threat to Linux at this stage (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://surazal.nerp.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday March 30 2004, @12:09AM)
Re:FUD not a serious threat to Linux at this stage (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~karevoll)
Hehe, its really funny seeing a post like this parents getting modded +5 interesting, and not +5 funny..
The first paragraph is obviously read by the moderators, whilst the second (which is twice the size) are just beeing skimmed, and not read with a critically mind. (Noticed this username and post-record?) Nice work :)
But yeah, the parent is right about that FUD isn't a serious threat to Linux, and it probably never has been.. An OS survives by being good, not by how its being received by other competitors in the market