Re:yes, but the effect might be different (Score 1)

---You mean Linux doesn't give me the power to live my computing life as I see fit, without spying on me? I didn't realize that you had that freedom in SOVIET RUSSIA.

I was talking about the quantity and quality of consumer software available. Your comment has nothing to do with my point.

---The whole system of Linux... this goes more into this jackass not knowing what he is talking about. Do you mean the kernel? A distribution? Which distribution? Most distributions only include software that works that at least a significant percentage will want. The fact it is included in a distribution negates that entire statement. Massive contradictions in this one paragraph.

I think you're trying to say there's a lot of software included in the distribution. That's true, but irrelevant to the point I was making. How much choice do you have among programs that do a certain thing? How good are those choices? How appealing are they to the average person compared to the Windows equivalent? Address that.

---Linux isn't a communist system. Linux is the capitalist system.

Capitalism without money. I don't think that computes. :)

---With Windows, you are entitled to what Microsoft gives you and no more.

How about the flood of Windows software that isn't written by MS?

---You do not have free access to your hardware anymore, because of DRM.

Really? There's no DRM in Windows, yet. There will be, just like there will be in Linux. Both will probably become effective after being legislatively mandated. Even Linus Torvalds said he had no problem with DRM.

---This is similar to the Soviet government restricting freedom rights on the people.

An anti-theft device does not oppose freedom. It opposes theft. The freedom to steal isn't in the Bill of Rights, no matter how often how many people say it is.

---With Windows, you can't just easily go out and start writing your own program. For any degree of success you have to pay the government, er, I mean Microsoft for a compiler and the development libraries. With capitalinux, you get to start it out with your own sweat and blood. I know you can start a business with very little. I've watched my parents start two and I'm on my first that has a snowballs chance in hell. I could go on and on, but I think it's pretty clear who the evil commie scum is.

Really? If you think paying for a compiler to get started in business is evil, imagine what you think about paying for the computer? Or the desk it sits on? Or the chair you sit on? Of course, they're dwarfed by the spawn of Satan that make you pay rent for office space. Stop being silly.

---I don't know, what is an average thief? What's an above average thief? Why are they stealing it? Are they stealing it to resell it, or because they need the software? What about Microsoft? I think it's easy to see which one they would steal. But, what is the point to this paragraph?

More irrelevant chatter, but to answer the question, I think it's safe to say that if they aren't taking it as some sort of trophy, they're taking it because they'd prefer using Windows and its programs than Linux.

---Apparently you do care if people use Linux.

One could call a monastery communistic, too. So long as it's a voluntary communism, fine by me. I'm pretty skeptical such a force can vanquish the Ravishing Redmonds, but knock yourself out trying to prove me wrong if you care to do so.

---And is there any examples of Linux users stomping on others? Is that why the Half-Life sources were stolen? Because of Linux users? Is this why Microsoft is getting attacked by viruses constantly, and sued? Because of Linux users?

I spoke about extremists doing these sort of things. The problem is those extremists talk your talk, and you don't challenge them as much as you should.

---If that's the case, why are most Microsoft Viruses written in Visual Basic?

The 911 hijackers used American-made planes. Did that make them American? I merely pointed out ideology could sometimes be a factor in what these folks do.

---I don't doubt that were and are very many people who employ you that are smacking their foreheads with this shit. Did you actually put thought into this irrelevant and inflammatory paragraph? They had a dream, the dream is real. An operating system that is free, that anybody can use and enhance. That people can make money off of, without paying royalties.

Yes, the ideologues spoke about a different, more caring, world commons, with everyone sharing and caring and probably singing Kumbaya at their terminals.

But, like any ideology, once it got into the whole world, it mutated and degraded. Were there some good offspring as a result? Sure. But it also had a lot of bad ones. The Kazaa Kiddies (whom you cite approvingly a little later, even though you said you opposed what they do about 98% of time) what are the intellectual descendants of those who felt information should be free. Unintentional consequences? Sure, but consequences nonetheless.

---So, sharing Linux is bad. Because it... uhm.. makes virus writers and code-thieves. Who write viruses in Visual Basic. And it's a warped travesty because it does exactly what it was supposed to do? Could you explain this a bit further.

Try looking at the bad apples, too.

---you are the only one calling it paradise.

You just got finished calling it a dream. Close enough.

---Well, I would call that a quote you made up that was groundless and without merit or factual backing.

What else would you call P2Ping if not "If you will not share, we will make you share?"

---You are labeling a community of millions based on the actions and statements of a few hundred.

Let's connect this with a comment just a few paragraphs down:

---KazAa has 57 million users.

Thank you for being honest and claiming ideological parentage. Those 57 million obliterate not only the last few statements, but your whole argument and validate mine.

Of course, there's a way out of that. Disown them. That's all my article suggest. They are your descendants, but although Linux, et. al, is a sliding slope, it's by no means an irreversible or inevitable one. Just like capitalism doesn't automatically turn into monopoly.

Just don't treat the ones that have slid most or all the way down as brothers. Don't let them claim kinship with you. That's all I asked in the article.