North Korea might now have The Bomb, but it doesn't have much electricity
Posted on 10/10/2006 4:56:51 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
Linux or open source seems to thrive wherever Left governments rule. And as Kerala schools log Microsoft out and boot open source systems, Linux world is buzzing with excitement over possibilities in the communist-ruled states. Though West Bengal and Tripura have to go whole hog to adopt a free software model, ideological closeness is more than evident. Kerala, most insiders’ feel, is turning out to be Richard Stallman's happiest hunting ground. His personal vibes with Velikakathu Sankaran Achuthanandan, even from VS's pre-chief minister era, are in play. It’s a picture watching the duo cozying together in a similar attire — Stallman in a crumbled white T-shirt and VS in homely sleeveless white banian. Secretly, people do wonder what Class VII drop-out Marxist patriarch chitchats with whiz-kid of the Red Hat business-model. However, those who attended a Stallman seminar on FOSS, could clearly see that Linux and Left are on the same wavelength.
(Excerpt) Read more at financialexpress.com ...
OK, I stand corrected.
Interestingly, this restriction of theirs was only for electronic transmissions. If you were to put the exact same text and mail it to a friend in Britain, it would be perfectly legal, but if you were to send it in an email, you'd have committed a felony. WooHoo!
That's the part I can't figure out. How can electronic transmission be illegal, but printing it out on real paper and sending it via mail be legal?
Did they think that foreigners were unable to fat-finger source code into a computer? Hell, I did that all the time with Computer Gazette. C64 RULZ D00DZ!
Golly gee, it took 2 seconds on Google.
http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/policy_export.html
EAR 734.2 (9) Export of source code and object code software...is prohibited to any country in Country Group E:2 of the EAR, to any military end-user/end-use in any country in Country Group D:1 of the EAR, and to any other destination or end-user specifically prohibited under the EAR unless such export has been first specifically authorized by a written export license or other authorization in accordance with the requirements of the EAR.
You are so dense it's amazing you don't sink right to the core of the planet.
The point, as you know quite well, but are just arguing for the sake of being the wanker that you naturally are is that there is no easy way to define the difference between "speech" and "code". That is especially true when one takes into account the fact that the difference between what would appear to one person to be unintelligable garbage and to another, elegant coding is based largely upon the listener.
You could pull anyone who can read off the street and hand him a postcard with RSA in 3 lines of perl, (which btw didn't quite format correctly before because of htmlisms), and he could read it to someone with an advanced knowledge of perl, and the listener could describe what it is and what it does far better than could the vast majority of listeners.
The above explanation was for other folks who might be enjoying this thread, not for you, you freaking wanker.
That doesn't support your thesis that the government had any power of prior restraint on publication.
(Again, note that embassies can and do subscribe to magazines, journals, and other publications, and that they can send people down to Borders Books to buy books.)
In case you failed to notice, the lambda calculus example is actually a Scheme program, which means that, drumroll please, it is source code AND mathematics (Scheme is an interpreter of an extended lambda calculus).
It's very simple as code can be compiled into a technological tool or entity, whereas regular speech cannot. You call that hard to distinguish? Not to mention even regular speech can be controlled by the government, there are certain keywords or codes that describe classified programs which cannot be uttered indiscriminately under penalty of law. They are usually something not normally tied together and sound idiotic like "brass buzzard". That could represent a top secret program and if you were overheard mentioning that by the right person at the wrong location could find yourself in shackles.
LOL, whatever, you were so far out in left field your own friend shot you down. More amazingly, he was actually right.
If you were trying to sound smart it didn't work, until you change your apparent position that it is wise to give technology to your enemies for free most actually intelligent people will question your sanity.
Another thing that he utterly failed to notice was the complete and abject failure of ITAR restrictions to essentially ban an entire area of what is essentially mathematics from export.
ITAR was abhorrent to everything freedom-loving Americans
hold dear. Prior restraint of abstract ideas. No wonder he supports it.
The ITAR restrictions were a blight upon the land, and was eventually dropped by the Clinton administration because it was perfectly clear that it was both unconstitutional and unenforcable. That such regulations existed does not mean that they had any validity at the time, or in the present. Many laws have existed on the books that have been struck down for that exact reason. The only reason this did not make it to the point of outright dismissal by the court was that the administration was too chicken to press the point to its final resolution.
That one page that I linked to demonstrates perfectly that source code is speech by the many and various ways the same theme was expressed.
Also, you'll notice that, (to finally bring this back to the initial subject), code covered by the GPL, is protected by copyright, just like books, magazines, and newpapers. QED
You've been utterly buried on this thread. Time to give it up.
North Korea might now have The Bomb, but it doesn't have much electricity
It must be a bitch to turn off those clusters at 9:00 PM.
That is unless they are running it on laptops.
You need to look at SE Linux and determine WHY the additional code was added. But then Security enhancements? Non-US actors have done the same - and thee are even open source OSes that are made for security with little to no US influence (OpenBSD).
You also need to read the GPL, for clearly you have not.
You only NEED to distribute back the code if you distribute. There is NOTHING stopping the NSA from taking Linux, putting in their enhancements and never letting those enhancements see the light of day. The question is whether NSA really contributed everything it implemented (which, my guess is, it didn't), and whether it was stuff that is that important to a nuclear or military program.
The question is - why did the NSA make the contributions to Linux that it did? You may be suprised by the answer.
At the same time, tell me how much of the functional Linux OS was developed by the US Government.
Not at all. You clearly also need to read up on what is required for a Patent filing. Patents give protection at the expense of full disclosure. Don't believe me? Look up a patent sometime in the freely available system.
Another link in case the above doesn't work.
Here's the part that messes you up: it would never have become that sophisticated software if not for its open nature. It was improved over time by programmers all over the world. Also, Beowulf could not exist cheaply if not for the open nature of Linux, which allowed them to directly modify the kernel in order to achieve their goals.
I know, you would have preferred they give millions of our tax dollars to Cray instead as a corporate subsidy, but as a conservative I prefer when the government doesn't waste my money.
It's a bit stranger than that, as this is our government we're dealing with after all.
The seminal cryptography textbook Applied Cryptography could be exported, including the source code in it for advanced encryption algorithms. However, the associated disk could not be exported. People typed it in overseas and posted it, and that electronic version was perfectly legal. Essentially the same thing happened with PGP.
Basically, these export controls hurt our high-tech businesses. Our companies could build high-strength encryption into their software sold here, but had to dumb-down or remove it for overseas sales. This allowed foreigners -- who were equally capable of turning basic public cryptographic knowledge into algorithms -- build encryption into their software, thus giving them an advantage in foreign markets.
He doesn't answer my questions. I will keep at it until he does.
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.
