Posted on 06/12/2006 5:41:51 AM PDT by N3WBI3
Ah, the usual...
I expose Stallman as a leftist, while the flaming dude promotes his philosophy and uses his software. Nothing else need be said.
http://www.stallman.org
Meanwhile, you continue to support such leftist ideals as censorship for the Chinese, abortion, and gay rights. Explain to me how strictly quoting something, without making comment positive nor negative, is promoting it. Or, ignore me again and show your continued ignorance.
"not once" blah blah blah when I've shown those links countless times including your first posts on these threads. not responding to you again.
All bull$#!t.
First, you've shown where I explained the terms of the GPL, nothing more. I didn't express an opinion about it, positive or negative.
If you could find a post where I expressed any sentiment (not fact) about Stallman or GPL, then you'd have a point, other than the one on top of your head. You haven't, you can't, you won't.
Second, those weren't my first posts on these threads, or to you. You just don't remember anything before those, because you don't pay attention to anything anyone says, including your own words, as we've demonstrated countless times.
"not responding to you again."
Well, that's mature. But not unexpected, because you never respond when you're asked to back up any of your inane points of view that were conjured up out of thin air. Why don't you just threaten to hold your breath, or put your hands over your ears and repeat, "I can't hear you, I can't hear you"?
Buying Microsoft means supporting America? Do you have ANY idea how much outsourcing Microsoft does? Sorry to break it to you Mr. Big Patriot, but most of the Microsoft programs you use were probably coded in India or China, or by Indian/Chiense programmers working in the US on H1B visas. Bill Gates is one of the biggest advocates of increasing the H1B visa quota.
Also I fail to see why Torvalds is at fault because his parents are communist supporters, when he is a capitalist himself.
Microsoft is an American corporation headquartered in the US, who employs mostly Americans, pays taxes to America, and doesn't give it's products away to the rest of the world for free. Torvald's product allows communists like China to make free copies, rename them "Red Flag" then resell them across Asia without a dime back to the US. If you want to call that equal, that is your opinion, but don't expect me to agree.
Your posts would indicate otherwise. If not, why do you spend so much effort trolling Linux/OSS/GPL/GNU threads posting your bile about the system?
If you care about the US, use products from the US,
I guess a free market isn't something you promote.
that conform to our intellectual property laws, rather than come from abroad and attempt to turn our laws on their head.
The GPL does not violate our intellectual property laws. In fact, it relies on them for its existence. If there were no copyright laws, then I could GPL a piece of software (actually, I have begun work on a piece of software that, when mature enough, I will post on the web and GPL) and someone like Microsoft or SCO could take my work and incorporate it into a closed source product against my will. With copyright law and the GPL (if I were ever so lucky as to find out, which is debatable; but for the sake of argument...) I can sue them for misusing my property. The GPL is not an absence of intellectual property, but rather a different use for it than what you would like.
here's plenty of other existing software choices already, that don't involve questionable foreigners like Torvalds or radical leftists like Stallman.
Once again, you can use Linux without supporting Stallman in any way and there is nothing questionable about Torvalds except in your own deluded mind. Torvalds is in this country LEGALLY pursuing his dream of kernel hacking (and has made quite a living at it). What problem do you have with that?
They suffer from some twisted view that people should give their property away, and rely on "the community" to support them.
Go read Torvalds's first USENET postings about Linux as well as his debate with Tanenbaum about Monolithic vs. Micro kernels. You obviously don't understand the motivation in the slightest.
If that's your thing, fine, but don't expect it to be mine. See ya.
I couldn't care less what you do. Just don't try to shove anti-Linux down my throat any more than you would want me to shove Linux down yours.
Because I care more for the welfare of my country than I do about bribes of free software from foreigners.
As is the practice of demanding a kickback from every computer sold whether or not it has their OS installed.
Teddy Roosevelt recognized the unethical,illegal practices of Standard Oil and one of the few things B. Clinton got right was recognizing the similar business practices of the Microsoft (Monopoly) Corporation.
Microsoft seldom innovates as I see it. They are masters of marketing and legal manipulation.
Microsoft marketing gimmicks have been used to kill off competing OS and Windows rivals, not technical superiority.
"All this is true and pretty terrible, but it's the fault of the OEMs who make money from including all the trial versions of the various junk. A fresh install of XP from a Microsoft (not OEM vendor) CD includes none of that junk. And if Dell, HP, etc. ever started offering Linux on their home systems, it would have all the junk bundled with it too.
Doesn't matter. All the Linux geeks don't want to hear it.
Wait until Mac people hijack this thread.
"Also I fail to see why Torvalds is at fault because his parents are communist supporters, when he is a capitalist himself."
Because this guy will use any means possible to smear anyone who disagrees with his agenda. It doesn't matter what the truth is, all that matters is that he can take a triviality and totally twist it into a derogatory, slanderous remark, truth be damned. He's done it not only with Torvalds, but with a number of respectable, polite Freepers who happened to fall on the wrong side of his philosophy. That's why he's been banned on multiple occasions.
That's been his M.O. here ever since the "transformation". He used to act like a normal Freeper.
The problem is right off the bat is marketing.
Who wants to get something called "Ubuntu" (I don't even know how to pronounce that)
"Hey Gramma- can I install Ubuntu on your machine so you can email to me?" "Mom, Dad...Can we get a computer with "Ubuntu"?
Some Linux and OpenSource geeks think we should get ALL software for free (very nicely socialist)- Who pays to develop it then?)
Can we rely on programmers (who must have full time jobs) to continue to provide free software to the world when they no longer have full-time programming jobs? (who will pay their salary to build free software)
Some, maybe. But I haven't seen any of those types here on FR. Let's not lump everyone into the same bucket.
Can we rely on programmers (who must have full time jobs) to continue to provide free software to the world when they no longer have full-time programming jobs? (who will pay their salary to build free software)
We have so far--for about 30-40 years now. There will always be free software--both gratis and libre. No one is saying you have to rely on it, but it does make for some good choices--and choice is always good.
You are not one of the zealots that I have seen here.
trust me- I am a progammer and I woRK with these kind of people. They do it for fun in their own spare time, and sometimes while on the clock here at work (they seem to miss that that is like stealing), but fail to recognize that no one would pay them anymore for writing free software.
There you go again. You have yet to prove that these are bribes or that they have anything to do with the welfare of the United States. You just sit here and spout off the same pile of junk.
Your debating skills, incidentally, are atrocious. You present no evidence and ignore (rather than refute) evidence presented against you. You have shown that you are merely a flack against Linux.
Just admit it. You hate Linux. No one here (that I know of) cares about that. We just don't appreciate the slandering of people and projects of which you, apparently, have no understanding.
You've not refuted anything I said, just launched your typical insults.
Linux was created by a foreigner so that he wouldn't have to pay the US software companies for our products. And many years later it is now stealing market share from US products it originally attempted to clone.
If you prefer foreign clones to our existing and superior products, just admit it and be gone. Attacking me isn't doing anything for you, except proving you can't handle the truth.
That's not the reason why he created Linux.
Good grief.
Now we're taking bribes from copyleftists.
LOLOL
We shall see if you keep your word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.