Fascinating interview by Richard Stallman on Russia TV
in [Lisp]
|
From: Emmy Noether on 17 Jul 2010 19:44 On Jul 17, 2:49 pm, Cor Gest <c...(a)clsnet.nl> wrote: > Some entity, AKA David Kastrup <d...(a)gnu.org>, > wrote this mindboggling stuff: > (selectively-snipped-or-not-p) >>> Software is a puzzle and it must be explained to be able to do that, >>> its like a lock >> There is no unfreedom involved here. Freedom does not hand you a free >> ride. Only a free road. No one asks for a free ride. A free road is good enough. If RMS used other people's free roads (gnu is not the first free thing. the first free thing is what he got at AI labs at TAX Payer money. I read his interview where he said that the hackers would break into professor's offices. Perhaps we do the same to him and break into his FSF office and leave a "friend" note we came to get the docs he has not released.) which has proper signs, proper references, and he could ask profs proper questions, and get straight answers, he must do the same in return. The concise answer: We want a free road but not a free puzzle. Perhaps, next time when he is sick he take his DNA code and parse it using bison. Now, dont run away from this argument and bring each and every of the boys from his mailing list to tackle this question. He is a manager and he can put the volunteers to the task of documenting, illuminating and revealing the operation of his softwares and its evolution. He owes it to others [just like he got for free , I bet ya he could never afford any of his machines on his own money at that time when they were so rare so it must be public money. Even a company like IBM gets public funding. Its all issue of ethics, not of free software. Its issue of two way road. Or else our society would die. People all away in Africa are beginning to agitate from the theft of their resources and evolutionary time by europeans led by jews and so you gotta give them back by fully disclosing technologies. I know you can bribe say a big player like india. We dont want anti-semitism to spread and want the same ethical requirements for everyone.] to describe the algorithms used, references, or else, describe them if he dont want to give references. He need to give priorty to the past undocumented tools. Automatically, more volunteers will come. Right now, the mistrust of Richard Stall man and FSF is growing everywhere. Strength of my arguments stand on their validity. I repeat, no one wants a free ride. We want a free road that you seemed to offer. But we dont want a free puzzle. Or else, ask him to decode his own DNA alone in reasonable time. Its nothing but a code. > You know, nowdadys many 'people' are used to get everything on a platter > any mental incovieniences are circumvented as much as possible, so is > any try for independent thinking about anything strongly dissuaded. > > The last 25 years, since click-tah-icon-software emerged > "the dumbing down of programming" [1] has been on a rampage. > > [1]http://www.salon.com/21st/feature/1998/05/cov_12feature.html
From: Emmy Noether on 17 Jul 2010 20:16 The XEMACS programmers have documented in writing that Richard Matthews Stallman asked them to explain every single line of code. They got exasperated and would explain him blocks. I suspect that they were playing the same game as him - perhaps giving him the same medicine. If he was NEEDY of an explanation of every single line, isn't it UTTERLY SHAMELESS of him to deny others similar information and give them such a puzzle ? We have the right to tell the people what it really is all about. By writing the GNU license, he eliminated the competition only from those one-in-a-million who were persistent enough to read his code and figure it out. This is because by not documenting and describing his softwares, he ensured that there is little chance that the multitude would be able to take the code and do anything with it. But by writing the GNU license, he made sure that those few who can understand it cant take it away and build on it. An new type of license is needed that requires concurrent documentation with each release, even if hand-written. Scans can be put together in a pdf and diagrams drawn with hand.
From: Rui Maciel on 17 Jul 2010 20:34 Emmy Noether wrote: <snip nonsense/> > Mackenzie, bring a properly written documentation by FSF for example > on emacs of gcc. I want to see where RMS got his ideas ? Did he > invent > all of them himself ? Is he giving proper references to the sources > of > the ideas ? Is that plagiarism ? > > I am sick of such jews/zionists like RMS, Roman Polansky, Bernard > Madoff, Larry Ellison (he had to pay 100K in court to a chinese girl > he screwed), Stephen Wolfram, Albert Einstein spreading anti-semitism > by their flagrant unethical behaviour. <snip more nonsense/> You are a lousy troll. Rui Maciel
From: David Kastrup on 18 Jul 2010 03:27 Emmy Noether <emmynoether3(a)gmail.com> writes: >> Some entity, AKA David Kastrup <d...(a)gnu.org>, >> wrote this mindboggling stuff: >> (selectively-snipped-or-not-p) > >>>> Software is a puzzle and it must be explained to be able to do that, >>>> its like a lock > >>> There is no unfreedom involved here. �Freedom does not hand you a free >>> ride. �Only a free road. > > No one asks for a free ride. A free road is good enough. Obviously you don't understand what you are talking about. > Perhaps we do the same to him and break into his FSF office and leave > a "friend" note we came to get the docs he has not released. You can't "get" anything that has not been written. > The concise answer: We want a free road but not a free puzzle. You have the freedom to walk the forest you perceive. You have the freedom to build the road that you want, in that forest. If it is a puzzle to you, that is your own problem. It is not a puzzle because somebody would have cut a whole into pieces and scattered them around. It is a puzzle because nobody put it together yet. Feel free to do so, doing others the service you want done. > Now, dont run away from this argument and bring each and every of the > boys from his mailing list to tackle this question. He is a manager > and he can put the volunteers to the task of documenting, illuminating > and revealing the operation of his softwares and its evolution. You want a free ride, very obviously. > He owes it to others And you think your whining entitles you to it. What did you ever do to _deserve_ others working for you? -- David Kastrup
From: Nick on 18 Jul 2010 04:09 Emmy Noether <emmynoether3(a)gmail.com> writes: > On Jul 7, 1:57 pm, bolega <gnuist...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> "Democracy is sick in the US, government monitors your Internet"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BfCJq_zIdk&feature=fvsr >> >> Enjoy ..... > > In this video, Stall man makes 4 promises to public but stalls on 2nd > of them. I have no idea of the rights or wrongs of this case. But I've found through experience that when someone uses a "witty" misspelling of someone's name, they are almost always the one in the wrong. 5 lines in and here we are - so if your case has merit, think about whether you want to do this. BTW - Did you see what I did there? I snipped all the rest of the post as it wasn't relevant. I know several people have asked you to do it, but you seem to be having difficulty with the concept, so I thought I'd give you a practical example. -- Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: reusing places and values Next: Fascinating interview by Richard Stallman on Russia TV |