Posted on 06/28/2004 9:48:52 AM PDT by Golden Eagle
Open source has expanded into the political world, with open software powering the online operations of the Democratic National Committee and Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign.
The DNC has embraced open source to run its online operation, including outreach and fund raising, and has been working on this front since 2001 with New York-based consultant Plus Three LP.
This week, the DNC will launch, at www.democrats.org, the third version of its Web site, which is designed to mobilize voters on a national and grass-roots level, grow the party's online database, and raise funds, said David Brunton, Plus Three's vice president and co-founder.
Plus Three's Arcos technology, a business application suite based on the open-source LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL and Perl) platform, lies at the core of the Democrats' online technology infrastructure, dubbed Demzilla by the DNC.
(Excerpt) Read more at story.news.yahoo.com ...
Still not "BSD". No matter how you try to twist it, OSX is proprietary US software that China doesn't get for free.
(falls asleep reading your nonsense)
'Theft-for-profit' is over the top. The anti-commercial nature of the GPL will hinder it's acceptance in many circles.
There WILL (HAS?) come a point at which it takes longer to become productive in OS development then it takes to become cynical and/or require funds to live. At that point Linux development will stall (has stalled). From there on it will be a struggle to keep 'stable' stable and ship drivers. Immature squabling will be the order of the day (which version of X-windows do you use?).
Every good coder starts out doing it for the shear joy, at some point most of us had to make a living at it. Very few get to write GPL code for a living. Even fewer write GPL code for living supporting a sustainable buisiness plan.
LOL I'm a MFer. Even Linus doesn't make such idiotic claims about MF and super computing as he knows better. Linux does not compete in the area of supercomputing nor even mainframes. I actually like Linus, he's a smart kid with a realistic view of operating systems very much unlike the mindless cult that follows him. And he's not all that thrilled about GPL either, BTW. OTOH, Stallman is a disgusting marxist freak bent on destroying intellectual property rights just like the soviets destroyed real property rights in the revolution of 1917. The same consequences will occur. He's the Michael Moore of the software industry.
Wrong, more the BSD but BSD none the less.
You don't really believe that China pays for commercial software do you?
Piracy rate in Asia is well over 90%.
There are BSD parallel supercomputers running now. Again I remind you 'Google is your friend'.
Since you obviously know what's on the list, why don't you tell me? You'll tell me what I do and don't know, what I do and don't want to do, and when I'm going to do it, so why do you need to ask?
Well, we agree there. Stallman went ballistic when Linus started using the proprietary BitKeeper to manage the Linux kernel. Linus didn't care: best tool for the job, free software or not.
That's because you're incapable of understanding copyright and licensing and compensation in terms other than money.
Wrong. I just tune out when people start justifying communism. And your post said:
The reason for the "commie" restrictions in the GPL is...
Like I already said (how many times now?), if/when they ever do it with a version of BSD, especially develop a top 10 supercomputer on it, let me know.
OSX is not a free version of Unix that China can build supercomputers for free with. That leaves you OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, and whatever else BSD there is. But Apple ain't free, no matter how bad you want to give it to the Chinese for nothing.
Do you realize how it sounds when you keep trying to equate personal and corporate volunteer work and corporate profit-making strategies with communism?
It's a license that relies heavily on IP rights in order to advance the quality and features of the software released under it. You don't get much less communist than that.
Besides, you didn't notice the quotes around "commie"?
If GPL software fails in certain circles, then I don't really care. Quality commercial software will surely fill the gap. I don't care about the GPL. I only like the results it has given, in that it has so far proven to be a good vehicle to get excellent software to the consumers (me) without overly restrictive commercial licenses. Stallman's huge ego might take a hit if the GPL fails to gain ground in certain areas, but then I don't like him anyway.
Every good coder starts out doing it for the shear joy, at some point most of us had to make a living at it. Very
Except that a lot of coding is done by companies intent on making money from Linux. Why pay a fat OS license fee when you can just hire some programmers to customize a current OS for your use?
Maybe. But GE won't complain since it's being done by a corporation rather than the people.
OS X has three parts. The free Mach kernel and BSD operating system (together called "Darwin"), and all the proprietary stuff Apple has built on top of it to make that usable, pretty shell.
For a supercomputer you don't necessarily need all the pretty graphics compositing engines and brain-dead usability of OS X. What you do need is a solid UNIX-like operating system, which the Chinese could have as easily downloaded from Apple as they downloaded their Linux.
Right now you can go to Open Darwin (Darwin 6.6.2, OS X 10.2.6 equivalent) or Apple (Darwin 7.0.1, OS X 10.3 equivalent), download it for free for x86 or PPC (yes, there are non-Apple PPC computers), and start using it as your operating system. If you don't like the command prompt, you can download and install a free GUI.
When a non-Apple BSD system cracks the top 500 give me a ping. And when you actually speak out against the policies and ambitions of Richard Stallman, I'd like to see that as well. Thanks.
You keep moving from theoretical to current events and back. Pick one, please.
And when you actually speak out against the policies and ambitions of Richard Stallman, I'd like to see that as well. Thanks.
Ready my past posts, it's that simple. I've already said I don't like Stallman's socialist visions or leftist rants, but even a stopped clock is right sometimes, and his GPL actually turned out to be useful to an extent. I'm apparently not alone since he tends to have public clashes with more rational-minded people in the free software community (like Linus).
You see, I accept a position or product of his while dismissing the rest, just as you do.
BTW, nice dodge of me clearly showing you were wrong about the possiblity of the Chinese using OS X muscle in a supercomputer for free.
And don't forget the occasional p***ing match with Eric Raymond, the gun-toting libertarian...
No the point you and/or others attempted to make was that BSD was free and also allowed the Chinese to build supercomputers. False.
The other point about not liking Stallman's "socialist views and leftist rants" but still chosing to support his goals doesn't add up. What other lunatic socialists do you not personally like, but whose policies you do?
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.