Then watch you some Braniacs. Much more science and much more fun.

You cann't force people to want to sacrifices something for their freedom.

If a person does not want to be free and is happy with his computer being a jail for his thoughts, then he can happily buy an iPad or a Win7 laptop and be with it. If, however, a person does want freedom and is prepared to sacrifice something for it (time, more limited features, ...) then he is already prepared to do what is required to get a Linux desktop up and running. And such a feat requires less and less sacrifice and provides more and more benefit with every passing year.

Linux is not useless of dying. It is liberating peoples minds one by one, when these people prove with action that they deserve their freedom.

You fill the whole hard drive with garbage - all 1 Tb of the drive is completely random. No you create 20 encrypted partitions on that drive: with no headers, no partition table, random offsets, semirandom size, the random partitions take up barely 700 Gb all together. 2-3 partitions are designated decoys - they are large and contain ebarassing and private data, but nothing criminally incriminating or trully secret. If you are ever questioned you (after much negotiation) give the offsets, algorythms and passwords to the decoy partitions and say that the rest of the drive is just random noise you made to hide these 3 partitions. Disk space is cheap you did not need so much yet and you planned to use more of it later as needed.

The question is if NSA can tell or prove that there is more decryptable information on that drive besides the parts that you already told them about?

It's called "government regulation". It actually works outside the United States of corporAtions. FCC can not stop Comcast, because Comcast paid lobbyists who paid congressmen to remove any punishing powers from FCC before it even got them. In any normal country, if the cable operators would be doing to Internet what they are doing now in the US the government would step in and either fine them obsene amounts of money (not a million, but something like 10% of their income until they fix the problem) or just take them over and split up the monopolistic companies. So that the ISPs would not be allowed to do any other business but to only be dumb pipes selling guaranteed-minimum bandwidth slices to all willing customers (no bandwith, only speeds). And force all companies that put wires into peoples homes (telefone, cable, electrical, ...) to give access to such wires to any other company that the customer wants, so that you control the last mile and not the company that brings you a service over it.

It has been done all over the world and it works pretty well.

That is not correct. The service is actually adretised as '1 Mbit/s' or '10 Mbit/s' service and in such case it is reasonable to expect that I should be able to get what I paid for - such as 1 Mbit per second for the whole duration of the contract (and the 128 Kbit upload too).

Swifter, no swifting!!!

One word makes the whole difference - why most _successful_ terrorists are engineers? Because in a developing country most smart people go to engineering professions and being smart makes you much more likely to be successful at carrying out a terrorist act, especially when chemicals and bombs and/or air planes are involved. A pretty simple explanation that does not make all engineers terrorists.

True. And copyright infringement is not theft. Plain and simple. When A steals a bike from B, B has no bike anymore. It's just unauthorised sharing.

"DRM-free game reaches 10 times larger audience, offers a discount."

If the code does not do what is supposed to do and noone can actually explain what it actually does and how, then he has a point. Some teams spend months designing object hierarchies and charting all kinds of UML diagrams to decide which class should subclass what other class. Other teams spend a week writing a simple, procedural, hackish program that does the job (poorly) and passes the tests (mostly) and after that spend a month or two re-factoring it into something proper, understandable, maintainable and documented and adding polish (passing all the tests, tweaking UI colors, adding the functions that user just though of as critical, ...)

You can do whatever you want with GPL software, as long as you give your users the same freedoms that GPL software gave to you - which means you should licence that under GPL as well. If you want to restrict your users and grant them less rights, well then you are on your own and you should get legal advice.

While you might argue that in Slashdot, it will not fly in the courts. There is no difference between compiled and interpreted code as far as law is concerned.

You have no rights to use the GPL code, unless you agree to the GPL licence and thus its provisions regarding the derrived works. This is well established in legal precedents.

I don't think so. For one pirates are cool. So your argument is invalid. Also it is much easier to counteract MAFIAAs message if we 'embrace and extend' their message against them. They call us pirates, so we have fun like all the cool pirates do. If they can make stuff up, so can we! Piratez of the world unite and fight back the ninjas of MAFIAA! For the boooty!

GPL is a clever hack of the copyright system created because people did not agree with the predominant (then) system of knowledge lockdown. Stallman has stated in the past that if he would have the power to abolish copyright, he would do so, even considering the fact that this would also kill the power that GPL depends on, because this is what GPL was created to defeat in the first place. By hacking around it.