What do you people think of this?
-
What I was protesting to was using the name of the site where the article was posted as an argument on discarding its message. That you think the article is crap is a personal opinion, but to label everything at gnu.org as crap is the same thing Linux users do when they say everything Micro$oft is evil. I don't condone either practice.
---------- Siderite
My mistake in speedreading. Apologies.
-
I sure hope that this never gets put into people's computers. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html[^]
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
-
The artical said
Programs that use treacherous computing will continually download new authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules automatically on your work. If Microsoft, or the US government, does not like what you said in a document you wrote, they could post new instructions telling all computers to refuse to let anyone read that document. Each computer would obey when it downloads the new instructions. Your writing would be subject to 1984-style retroactive erasure. You might be unable to read it yourself.
Think about the evils that can be done with TRM. Think more thoroughly about things and you will notice a lot more about everything.
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
Henize wrote:
Think about the evils that can be done with TRM.
Evil? You seriously think that? Rape, torture, killing for pleasure, those things are evil in my world. Companies that put their heart and sould and their balls on the line to publish useful or entertaining things to the rest of the world wanting to be remunerated for it surely doesn't fall into the category of evil except in a socialist state the likes of which we haven't seen in several decades.
-
Henize wrote:
Think about the evils that can be done with TRM.
Evil? You seriously think that? Rape, torture, killing for pleasure, those things are evil in my world. Companies that put their heart and sould and their balls on the line to publish useful or entertaining things to the rest of the world wanting to be remunerated for it surely doesn't fall into the category of evil except in a socialist state the likes of which we haven't seen in several decades.
Think about the evils that can be done with it. You listed the usage its designed for. You obviously didnt think about the evils so why did you reply?.
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
-
I sure hope that this never gets put into people's computers. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html[^]
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
I think the article is well-thought-out and written. I think the author is naive if he/she thinks all software will come with source code. It's neither likely nor appropriate. I do think that DRM is a slippery slope. We should be on guard against the possibility that the wheels of justice could be subverted by "disappearing" email messages, etc. Still, we're not there yet.
-
Think about the evils that can be done with it. You listed the usage its designed for. You obviously didnt think about the evils so why did you reply?.
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
-
Evil - immoral, corrupt, corrupting, inhumane, selfish, and wicked.
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
Hmmm...I'd set the bar a little higher for my personal definition of evil, I don't see selfish as being "evil" per-se and immoral is the most slippery concept in the world. By that definition just about any thing or any one could be called evil. So I guess I understand where you're coming from.
-
I think the article is well-thought-out and written. I think the author is naive if he/she thinks all software will come with source code. It's neither likely nor appropriate. I do think that DRM is a slippery slope. We should be on guard against the possibility that the wheels of justice could be subverted by "disappearing" email messages, etc. Still, we're not there yet.
Jim from NoVA wrote:
I do think that DRM is a slippery slope. We should be on guard against the possibility that the wheels of justice could be subverted by "disappearing" email messages, etc. Still, we're not there yet.
ISP's are required by law to keep all eMail messages and they can be granted access to if they are relevant to a lawsuit or criminal investigation and a subpoena has been granted Roswell
"Angelinos -- excuse me. There will be civility today."
Antonio VillaRaigosa
City Mayor, Los Angeles, CA -
Jim from NoVA wrote:
I do think that DRM is a slippery slope. We should be on guard against the possibility that the wheels of justice could be subverted by "disappearing" email messages, etc. Still, we're not there yet.
ISP's are required by law to keep all eMail messages and they can be granted access to if they are relevant to a lawsuit or criminal investigation and a subpoena has been granted Roswell
"Angelinos -- excuse me. There will be civility today."
Antonio VillaRaigosa
City Mayor, Los Angeles, CAThank you. I think we will continue to see these types of safeguards, so the slope may not be as slippery as it might appear. I should ask, though, how is the employee of a company protected when he executes an emailed order, but the email can't be referenced later because the company won't produce it (since they're covering their butts...)?
-
So if you automatically discard the validity of the article, should others do the same to your comment, because you're a Microsoft MVP?
---------- Siderite
That's just dumb. What makes you think that a - I 'automatically' discarded it ( i.e. that I didn't consider it before deciding it was rubbish ) and b - that I ever implied anyone should be influenced by my opinion because of the MVP ? Are you suggesting that being an MVP means I'm not allowed to state my opinions ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
Everything on gnu.org, written about Microsoft is crap. They hate Microsoft, especally Stallman who wrote the article we talk about.
- Anders My new photo website[^]
That was pretty much my point - I'm sure there's stuff on gnu.org that makes sense and/or is cool, but they obviously have an anti MS agenda.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
Henize wrote:
Think about the evils that can be done with TRM.
Your government has an army . Think of the evil a government can do with an army. Does that mean they can't have one ?
Henize wrote:
Think more thoroughly about things and you will notice a lot more about everything.
I think you mean 'wear a tin foil hat'.... The tone of the article was building from what it regards as present day evils, and all of them related to software not being open source, and people who create intellectual property getting paid. Oh, or people who use download programs for piracy getting a little of what they deserve as a result.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Christian Graus wrote:
The tone of the article was building from what it regards as present day evils, and all of them related to software not being open source, and people who create intellectual property getting paid.
The point of the article was the trouble you get in when someone else controls your computer. When someone else can decide what you can do with *your* stuff, the things *you* create. F.x. a document that can't be read next month. Say you've written your code with Visual Studio 2010, and when version 2011 comes out, you just decide to go with Mono, or whatever. But, unfortunately, the code is stored 'safely', and without the key, which your computer controls, you can't read your own code. So it's upgrade or die, basically. Will Microsoft, or anyone else, do this? Well, they're doing it already. Want to read that 5-year-old Word document you wrote? Buy Word from Microsoft. Want to listen to that music you bougth before your computer crashed? Buy it again (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523). The format is secret, you have to pay someone to access your own stuff. Unless we, as citizens and consumers, stand up for our rights, someone else will control what we can do with our own stuff. And all the culture we create today will be lost in 10 years. Remember that we can read books that are thousand of years old today. How many of today's books can be read in 3006? M. PS. There's no relationship between 'open source', 'creating intellectual property' and 'not getting paid'. This can be combined in various ways. F.x. Red Hat makes money (open source, creates) as does Microsoft (not open source, creates). Most artists don't (not open source, creates), but the records companies does (not open source, not creates).
-
Siderite Zaqwedex wrote:
So if you automatically discard the validity of the article, should others do the same to your comment, because you're a Microsoft MVP?
I fail to see how his MVP status has anything to do with it. That article was written either by an overly paranoid user or someone who is desperately trying to promote Linux through the use of scare tactics (which may work on your average Joe Public but is less likely to affect the techy types that hang out here). I hold no MVP and think it's bull. Now, does that making me a sheep or demonstrate that the capacity for reasonable thought, not believing everything I read on the internet?
don't believe everything that you breathe
you get a parking violation and a maggot on your sleeve...
- Beck:Loser -
Christian Graus wrote:
The tone of the article was building from what it regards as present day evils, and all of them related to software not being open source, and people who create intellectual property getting paid.
The point of the article was the trouble you get in when someone else controls your computer. When someone else can decide what you can do with *your* stuff, the things *you* create. F.x. a document that can't be read next month. Say you've written your code with Visual Studio 2010, and when version 2011 comes out, you just decide to go with Mono, or whatever. But, unfortunately, the code is stored 'safely', and without the key, which your computer controls, you can't read your own code. So it's upgrade or die, basically. Will Microsoft, or anyone else, do this? Well, they're doing it already. Want to read that 5-year-old Word document you wrote? Buy Word from Microsoft. Want to listen to that music you bougth before your computer crashed? Buy it again (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523). The format is secret, you have to pay someone to access your own stuff. Unless we, as citizens and consumers, stand up for our rights, someone else will control what we can do with our own stuff. And all the culture we create today will be lost in 10 years. Remember that we can read books that are thousand of years old today. How many of today's books can be read in 3006? M. PS. There's no relationship between 'open source', 'creating intellectual property' and 'not getting paid'. This can be combined in various ways. F.x. Red Hat makes money (open source, creates) as does Microsoft (not open source, creates). Most artists don't (not open source, creates), but the records companies does (not open source, not creates).
blirp wrote:
a document that can't be read next month
YEah, but the point is, that's just hysteria. It's *not gonna happen*.
blirp wrote:
Say you've written your code with Visual Studio 2010, and when version 2011 comes out, you just decide to go with Mono, or whatever. But, unfortunately, the code is stored 'safely', and without the key, which your computer controls, you can't read your own code. So it's upgrade or die, basically.
Would YOU upgrade to that IDE ? I sure as hell wouldn't. And that's the point. None of these supposed products would survive in the marketplace. One major reason this just ain't gonna happen.
blirp wrote:
Want to read that 5-year-old Word document you wrote? Buy Word from Microsoft.
How does that make sense ? If I wrote it in Word, I own Word, and I can still run it.
blirp wrote:
Want to listen to that music you bougth before your computer crashed? Buy it again (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523). The format is secret, you have to pay someone to access your own stuff.
Copyright on music is another question - if you're dumb enough to pay the price of a CD to download mp3s then that's your problem. If your PC contains your licence and it crashes, that's your fault, too. I buy all my music, I buy it all on CD. I have a CD, no-one can take it from me.
blirp wrote:
Unless we, as citizens and consumers, stand up for our rights, someone else will control what we can do with our own stuff.
But we *will*. The examples you give are silly, and the future vision you have is one that is never gonna happen, because no-one will buy into it.
blirp wrote:
And all the culture we create today will be lost in 10 years. Remember that we can read books that are thousand of years old today. How many of today's books can be read in 3006?
More hysteria. All of them can be read in 3006, I have no doubt of that.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
kulazfuk wrote:
That article was written either by an overly paranoid user or someone who is desperately trying to promote Linux
RMS dislikes Linux as well as Open Source. If you want to ridicule someone, at least get some of the facts straight. M.
blirp wrote:
If you want to ridicule someone
:wtf: Ridicule? Where? How?
-
blirp wrote:
If you want to ridicule someone
:wtf: Ridicule? Where? How?
-
That's just dumb. What makes you think that a - I 'automatically' discarded it ( i.e. that I didn't consider it before deciding it was rubbish ) and b - that I ever implied anyone should be influenced by my opinion because of the MVP ? Are you suggesting that being an MVP means I'm not allowed to state my opinions ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Quoting from yourself: >> http://www.gnu.org/, Gee - who'd have thought they would be the ones publishing this drivel. And you're right, that's just dumb. I consider this discussion over.
---------- Siderite
-
blirp wrote:
a document that can't be read next month
YEah, but the point is, that's just hysteria. It's *not gonna happen*.
blirp wrote:
Say you've written your code with Visual Studio 2010, and when version 2011 comes out, you just decide to go with Mono, or whatever. But, unfortunately, the code is stored 'safely', and without the key, which your computer controls, you can't read your own code. So it's upgrade or die, basically.
Would YOU upgrade to that IDE ? I sure as hell wouldn't. And that's the point. None of these supposed products would survive in the marketplace. One major reason this just ain't gonna happen.
blirp wrote:
Want to read that 5-year-old Word document you wrote? Buy Word from Microsoft.
How does that make sense ? If I wrote it in Word, I own Word, and I can still run it.
blirp wrote:
Want to listen to that music you bougth before your computer crashed? Buy it again (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34523). The format is secret, you have to pay someone to access your own stuff.
Copyright on music is another question - if you're dumb enough to pay the price of a CD to download mp3s then that's your problem. If your PC contains your licence and it crashes, that's your fault, too. I buy all my music, I buy it all on CD. I have a CD, no-one can take it from me.
blirp wrote:
Unless we, as citizens and consumers, stand up for our rights, someone else will control what we can do with our own stuff.
But we *will*. The examples you give are silly, and the future vision you have is one that is never gonna happen, because no-one will buy into it.
blirp wrote:
And all the culture we create today will be lost in 10 years. Remember that we can read books that are thousand of years old today. How many of today's books can be read in 3006?
More hysteria. All of them can be read in 3006, I have no doubt of that.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Christian Graus wrote:
Would YOU upgrade to that IDE ? I sure as hell wouldn't. And that's the point. None of these supposed products would survive in the marketplace. One major reason this just ain't gonna happen.
You wish. But remember the big players in the industry wants a subscription-based model. So that 2010-version of the IDE will simply stop working if you don't pay.
Christian Graus wrote:
How does that make sense ? If I wrote it in Word, I own Word, and I can still run it.
As above. You won't *own* Word. You don't even own Word today. Read the EULA.
Christian Graus wrote:
I buy it all on CD. I have a CD, no-one can take it from me.
Luddite! :-D But seriously, how can you claim this? All the record companies add all sorts of ugly DRM on the CD's these days, creating all sorts of ugly problems. I mean, they actually use the error correction algorithm to try to stop you from making a backup. Now the first little scratch destroys the album. No, DRM and Trusted Computing will make us pay more for stuff we take for granted today. It will lock us to single vendors where a markedplace exists today.
Christian Graus wrote:
The examples you give are silly, and the future vision you have is one that is never gonna happen, because no-one will buy into it.
No-one buying into it? What's iTunes doing these days? Zune? XBox? That future is already here.
Christian Graus wrote:
All of them can be read in 3006, I have no doubt of that.
The ones on paper? Maybe. The digital ones? No chance. Because you don't own it, you just have a lisence to read it. Once or thrice. M.