Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Hypocrite Homer, how much money will magically open up your "very busy schedule"?
2 views
Skip to first unread message
DFS
Feb 10, 2012, 10:50:16โฏAM2/10/12
to
"I would very much appreciate donations to assist me with the hardware
and software costs associated with maintaining my build systems and test
systems, and also so I can justify dedicating more of my very busy
schedule to maintaining the Fedora Tripwire package. Thank you very much
for your donation. Regards, Keith G. Robertson-Turner."
http://sourceforge.net/donate/?user_id=591294
I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
and software costs associated with maintaining my build systems and test
systems, and also so I can justify dedicating more of my very busy
schedule to maintaining the Fedora Tripwire package. Thank you very much
for your donation. Regards, Keith G. Robertson-Turner."
http://sourceforge.net/donate/?user_id=591294
I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
Ezekiel
Feb 10, 2012, 11:14:11โฏAM2/10/12
to
"DFS" <nos...@dfs.com> wrote in message news:jh3ec2$71s$3...@dont-email.me...
What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100% free
software? Seems that it's okay to justify his lies if it means an extra
donation or two.
And all it takes is some more money for him to "justify dedicating more of
his very busy schedule." Looks like "money" is the only justification he
needs.
Foster
Feb 10, 2012, 1:38:51โฏPM2/10/12
to
they really are.
Homer
Feb 10, 2012, 8:42:13โฏPM2/10/12
to
Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to run
software without restriction, learn from and reuse the corresponding
sources to that software, and distribute that software and any modified
versions of it.
Nothing there about /money/.
My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
than "money". Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software,
and in no way contracts it. In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful
lot of money selling Free Software. The bit where they get paid is not
altruistic. The bit where they grant you the freedom to reuse their
sources without restriction (except the single restriction that you
can't impose restrictions on others either), is.
Is any of this penetrating your thick, inbred skull yet, DooFuS?
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
Being paid, or even just soliciting voluntary donations, for writing
Free Software, does not somehow make that software non-Free.
Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
donations too.
What a goon.
--
K. | "You see? You cannot kill me. There is no flesh
http://slated.org | and blood within this cloak to kill. There is
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on ลกky | only an idea. And ideas are bulletproof."
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 9 days | ~ V for Vendetta.
>
> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to run
software without restriction, learn from and reuse the corresponding
sources to that software, and distribute that software and any modified
versions of it.
Nothing there about /money/.
My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
than "money". Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software,
and in no way contracts it. In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful
lot of money selling Free Software. The bit where they get paid is not
altruistic. The bit where they grant you the freedom to reuse their
sources without restriction (except the single restriction that you
can't impose restrictions on others either), is.
Is any of this penetrating your thick, inbred skull yet, DooFuS?
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
Being paid, or even just soliciting voluntary donations, for writing
Free Software, does not somehow make that software non-Free.
Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
donations too.
What a goon.
--
K. | "You see? You cannot kill me. There is no flesh
http://slated.org | and blood within this cloak to kill. There is
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on ลกky | only an idea. And ideas are bulletproof."
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 9 days | ~ V for Vendetta.
Big Steel
Feb 10, 2012, 9:44:26โฏPM2/10/12
to
On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Homer wrote:
>
> My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> than "money".
Let's see this clown pay any of his chump bills without money but rather
>
> My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> than "money".
with his intellect. Let's see if he can go to UK Taco Bell and get a
free taco with his intellect.
The guy is full crap upto his eyeballs.
-hh
Feb 10, 2012, 10:08:10โฏPM2/10/12
to
On Feb 10, 9:44ย pm, Big Steel <BigSte...@SteelBig11.net> wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Homer wrote:
>
>
>
> > My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> > than "money".
"I would very much appreciate donations to assist me...and also so I
> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Homer wrote:
>
>
>
> > My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> > than "money".
can justify dedicating more of my very busy
schedule ..."
Nothing about altruistic principles in the solicitation.
> Let's see this clown pay any of his chump bills without money but rather
> with his intellect. Let's see if he can go to UK Taco Bell and get a
> free taco with his intellect.
>
> The guy is full crap upto his eyeballs.
why we're still waiting to be "regaled" on how impressive his "life"
supposedly "is". Or perhaps its just those double shifts down at Mr
Cod.
-hh
Homer
Feb 10, 2012, 10:06:22โฏPM2/10/12
to
Verily I say unto thee that EZKill spake thusly:
> And all it takes is some more money for him to "justify dedicating
> more of his very busy schedule." Looks like "money" is the only
> justification he needs.
Yes, a "very busy schedule" that included ... maintaining other Free
Software. IOW there are only so many hours in the day, and hosted CPU
cycles and bandwidth cost money, therefore I had to prioritise which
projects took precedence: the ones people actually used, for which I
solicited no donations at all, or the one that nobody seemed to care
about (Tripwire), which required a major overhaul, and thus a lot of
time and money to work on. Since the sort of people who usually care
about software like Tripwire tend to be enterprise users, it was not
entirely unreasonable to assume that they'd be able to fund my efforts,
if they actually cared enough to do so, without incurring much hardship.
Ultimately Fedora depreciated Tripwire for a better solution, so my
efforts weren't required, and therefore neither were any donations.
And as I had to explain to that other fuckwit, DooFy, being paid does
not magically transform Free Software into proprietary software. The
cause of my altruism is Intellectual Freedom, not financial martyrdom.
Is Oxfam supposed to go bankrupt, just to "prove" its altruism? Is it
not allowed to solicit donations either? How do you think charities
work, exactly?
In addition to my support of Free Software, both in terms of advocacy
and development, I also donate money to charities on a regular basis -
something I can only do because I get paid.
See how it works?
Idiot.
Apparently the best that Microsoft "evangelism" has to offer, is trying
and miserably failing to pick holes in the minutiae of Linux advocates'
lives, and all in the name of defending a bunch of corporate gangsters.
Oh look, a Free Software developer gets paid, therefore it's perfectly
"OK" for Microsoft to sabotage the OLPC charity, bribe OOXML delegates,
bribe Nigerian officials to remove Mandriva from schoolkids's PCs, force
OEMs to "pay a Windows royalty on every PC shipped, even if it didn't
include Windows", sabotage DR-DOS with fake error messages, exploit the
Japanese tsunami/earthquake/nuclear disaster for marketing purposes,
"knife [Apple's] baby", "cut off [Netscape's] air supply", "tilt Lotus
into the death spiral", "fucking kill Eric Schmidt" and "Screw Google".
Yeah, my being paid to develop Free Software, a principle that's
actively encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, fully justifies
Microsoft's gangster behaviour. Honest.
What a bunch of evil scumbags.
>
> -- "to assist me with the hardware and software costs"
>
> What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100%
> free software?
The cost of hosting a buildsystem on a virtual server, fuckwit.
> -- "to assist me with the hardware and software costs"
>
> What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100%
> free software?
> And all it takes is some more money for him to "justify dedicating
> more of his very busy schedule." Looks like "money" is the only
> justification he needs.
Software. IOW there are only so many hours in the day, and hosted CPU
cycles and bandwidth cost money, therefore I had to prioritise which
projects took precedence: the ones people actually used, for which I
solicited no donations at all, or the one that nobody seemed to care
about (Tripwire), which required a major overhaul, and thus a lot of
time and money to work on. Since the sort of people who usually care
about software like Tripwire tend to be enterprise users, it was not
entirely unreasonable to assume that they'd be able to fund my efforts,
if they actually cared enough to do so, without incurring much hardship.
Ultimately Fedora depreciated Tripwire for a better solution, so my
efforts weren't required, and therefore neither were any donations.
And as I had to explain to that other fuckwit, DooFy, being paid does
not magically transform Free Software into proprietary software. The
cause of my altruism is Intellectual Freedom, not financial martyrdom.
Is Oxfam supposed to go bankrupt, just to "prove" its altruism? Is it
not allowed to solicit donations either? How do you think charities
work, exactly?
In addition to my support of Free Software, both in terms of advocacy
and development, I also donate money to charities on a regular basis -
something I can only do because I get paid.
See how it works?
Idiot.
Apparently the best that Microsoft "evangelism" has to offer, is trying
and miserably failing to pick holes in the minutiae of Linux advocates'
lives, and all in the name of defending a bunch of corporate gangsters.
Oh look, a Free Software developer gets paid, therefore it's perfectly
"OK" for Microsoft to sabotage the OLPC charity, bribe OOXML delegates,
bribe Nigerian officials to remove Mandriva from schoolkids's PCs, force
OEMs to "pay a Windows royalty on every PC shipped, even if it didn't
include Windows", sabotage DR-DOS with fake error messages, exploit the
Japanese tsunami/earthquake/nuclear disaster for marketing purposes,
"knife [Apple's] baby", "cut off [Netscape's] air supply", "tilt Lotus
into the death spiral", "fucking kill Eric Schmidt" and "Screw Google".
Yeah, my being paid to develop Free Software, a principle that's
actively encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, fully justifies
Microsoft's gangster behaviour. Honest.
What a bunch of evil scumbags.
Snit
Feb 10, 2012, 10:12:05โฏPM2/10/12
to
Homer stated in post lktg09-...@sky.matrix on 2/10/12 6:42 PM:
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>>
>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>
> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>
> The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to run
> software without restriction, learn from and reuse the corresponding
> sources to that software, and distribute that software and any modified
> versions of it.
Even if it is not yours. Right. You are "free" to take other's property,
against their wishes, and do with it as you please.
They is tyranny... not freedom. You are using the wrong word.
> Nothing there about /money/.
It is about power... you wanting the power to take what belongs to others
because you do not see how it harms them.
> My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> than "money".
Your desire to take other's property is not "altruistic". That is simply a
lie.
> Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software, and in no way
> contracts it. In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful lot of money
> selling Free Software.
They sell support.
> The bit where they get paid is not altruistic. The bit
> where they grant you the freedom to reuse their sources without restriction
> (except the single restriction that you can't impose restrictions on others
> either), is.
I have no problem with they - or you - wanting to give your property to
others. But when you demand others give their property to you that is not
altruism... it is your wish for private property to be forced to be
communal.
Communism. Nothing short of that (in that area).
> Is any of this penetrating your thick, inbred skull yet, DooFuS?
The fact you support communism in this area is clear.
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
>
> Being paid, or even just soliciting voluntary donations, for writing
> Free Software, does not somehow make that software non-Free.
And insisting others should give you stuff for free is not "altruism" or a
support of "freedom"... it is the support of communism.
> Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
> donations too.
>
> What a goon.
I just wish you could be honest about your views and not use absurd
double-talk and lies.
--
๐๐๐
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>>
>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>
> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>
> The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to run
> software without restriction, learn from and reuse the corresponding
> sources to that software, and distribute that software and any modified
> versions of it.
against their wishes, and do with it as you please.
They is tyranny... not freedom. You are using the wrong word.
> Nothing there about /money/.
It is about power... you wanting the power to take what belongs to others
because you do not see how it harms them.
> My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> than "money".
lie.
> Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software, and in no way
> contracts it. In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful lot of money
> selling Free Software.
> The bit where they get paid is not altruistic. The bit
> where they grant you the freedom to reuse their sources without restriction
> (except the single restriction that you can't impose restrictions on others
> either), is.
others. But when you demand others give their property to you that is not
altruism... it is your wish for private property to be forced to be
communal.
Communism. Nothing short of that (in that area).
> Is any of this penetrating your thick, inbred skull yet, DooFuS?
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
>
> Being paid, or even just soliciting voluntary donations, for writing
> Free Software, does not somehow make that software non-Free.
support of "freedom"... it is the support of communism.
> Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
> donations too.
>
> What a goon.
double-talk and lies.
--
๐๐๐
Big Steel
Feb 10, 2012, 10:59:56โฏPM2/10/12
to
On 2/10/2012 10:06 PM, Homer wrote:
> Yeah, my being paid to develop Free Software, a principle that's
> actively encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, fully justifies
> Microsoft's gangster behaviour. Honest.
>
> What a bunch of evil scumbags.
>
OMG! Here ladies and gentlemen is a crazed lunatic with the COLA gospel
> Yeah, my being paid to develop Free Software, a principle that's
> actively encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, fully justifies
> Microsoft's gangster behaviour. Honest.
>
> What a bunch of evil scumbags.
>
Rev Homer Simpleton trying to preach to COLA church choir.
The COLA donation plate is being passed around so give generously COLA
people give generously.
By the way, there is a COLA Freedom ride scheduled at the end of the
month COLA people. So make sure you have your COLA flyers packaged and
ready to handout on the freedom ride.
DFS
Feb 11, 2012, 1:17:42โฏAM2/11/12
to
On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Hypocrite Homer babbled:
under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
Funny enough, you'll shift more of your resources (knowledge and time)
in exchange for more money. More Freedom for more money?!?!? Isn't
that special? Sounds like the US Congress you keep whining about...
Even more special is you don't own your Linux knowledge (intellectual
freedom remember?), yet you charged for it your entire career, and you
continue to ask for money in exchange for what's not yours to sell in
the first place.
Whazzup with that?
> The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to run
> software without restriction, learn from and reuse the corresponding
> sources to that software, and distribute that software and any modified
> versions of it.
>
> Nothing there about /money/.
OK. I never said differently. So why does money dictate your "very
busy schedule"?
Must be your special brand of altrui$m...
> My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> than "money".
There's already more "Intellectual Freedom" in the world than you or
anyone else would know what to do with in 1000 lifetimes. Having access
to Microsoft's and Apple's and Oracle's source code won't change that a
bit. What it will do is nearly destroy the most valuable companies in
technology, companies that employ hundreds of thousands around the world.
It will NEVER happen, of course. You'll "fight" for it tooth and nail -
I mean rant and rave and smoke cigs for it - but your world will turn
black and fade out long before "Free Software" replaces proprietary.
> Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software,
> and in no way contracts it.
contradict? Of course it does - right here we see you're willing to
spend more time on "Free Software" in exchange for more money.
The time and effort people expend on Free Software has an opportunity
cost, and money, whether you like it or not, is the ONLY way to
universally measure that opportunity cost.
> In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful
> lot of money selling Free Software.
They make not one cent selling software code or binaries. Because of
the insano GPL, RedHat has to make all their source available for free,
which means nobody will pay for it.
RHT makes money packaging it, distributing it, teaching it and
supporting it. (1/2 their money anyway, the other 1/2 deriving from
financial activities unrelated to "Free Software").
> The bit where they get paid is not
> altruistic. The bit where they grant you the freedom to reuse their
> sources without restriction (except the single restriction that you
> can't impose restrictions on others either), is.
It's a clever ruse, that GPL is: in exchange for not allowing anyone to
control the code, the FSF will take copyright of your work, give you a
fuzzy GNU head costume and a dozen stale donuts, and sit back and let
the market value of your 3 years of work crash to $0.00.
Sweet!
What kind of brainwashed freakin' idiot would agree to such a thing?
Well, the kind that develops the lousy, derivative, clumsy open source
hobbyware we see floating around: OpenOffice Base, PiTiVi, Gambas, Dia,
F-Spot, gnucash, CinePaint, etc.
> Is any of this penetrating your thick, inbred skull yet, DooFuS?
>
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
>
> Being paid, or even just soliciting voluntary donations, for writing
> Free Software, does not somehow make that software non-Free.
No need to keep harping about something I never said.
> Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
> donations too.
They help truly needy people, not truly greedy people.
Oxfam and Gates Foundation: giving $billions to help
Homer: wants to be paid maintain one open source project for one Linux
distro.
What's wrong with this picture?
> What a goon.
How much did you collect in donations from your Fedora beg page (which
you immediately took down after I exposed your little scam)? Low three
figures I bet, given the generous nature of the Linux "community".
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>
>
>> "I would very much appreciate donations to assist me with the
>> hardware and software costs associated with maintaining my build
>> systems and test systems, and also so I can justify dedicating more
>> of my very busy schedule to maintaining the Fedora Tripwire package.
>> Thank you very much for your donation. Regards, Keith G.
>> Robertson-Turner."
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/donate/?user_id=591294
>>
>> hardware and software costs associated with maintaining my build
>> systems and test systems, and also so I can justify dedicating more
>> of my very busy schedule to maintaining the Fedora Tripwire package.
>> Thank you very much for your donation. Regards, Keith G.
>> Robertson-Turner."
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/donate/?user_id=591294
>>
>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>
> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free Software"
>
> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
Funny enough, you'll shift more of your resources (knowledge and time)
in exchange for more money. More Freedom for more money?!?!? Isn't
that special? Sounds like the US Congress you keep whining about...
Even more special is you don't own your Linux knowledge (intellectual
freedom remember?), yet you charged for it your entire career, and you
continue to ask for money in exchange for what's not yours to sell in
the first place.
Whazzup with that?
> The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to run
> software without restriction, learn from and reuse the corresponding
> sources to that software, and distribute that software and any modified
> versions of it.
>
> Nothing there about /money/.
busy schedule"?
Must be your special brand of altrui$m...
> My altruistic cause is Intellectual Freedom, which is far more valuable
> than "money".
anyone else would know what to do with in 1000 lifetimes. Having access
to Microsoft's and Apple's and Oracle's source code won't change that a
bit. What it will do is nearly destroy the most valuable companies in
technology, companies that employ hundreds of thousands around the world.
It will NEVER happen, of course. You'll "fight" for it tooth and nail -
I mean rant and rave and smoke cigs for it - but your world will turn
black and fade out long before "Free Software" replaces proprietary.
> Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software,
> and in no way contracts it.
spend more time on "Free Software" in exchange for more money.
The time and effort people expend on Free Software has an opportunity
cost, and money, whether you like it or not, is the ONLY way to
universally measure that opportunity cost.
> In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful
> lot of money selling Free Software.
the insano GPL, RedHat has to make all their source available for free,
which means nobody will pay for it.
RHT makes money packaging it, distributing it, teaching it and
supporting it. (1/2 their money anyway, the other 1/2 deriving from
financial activities unrelated to "Free Software").
> The bit where they get paid is not
> altruistic. The bit where they grant you the freedom to reuse their
> sources without restriction (except the single restriction that you
> can't impose restrictions on others either), is.
control the code, the FSF will take copyright of your work, give you a
fuzzy GNU head costume and a dozen stale donuts, and sit back and let
the market value of your 3 years of work crash to $0.00.
Sweet!
What kind of brainwashed freakin' idiot would agree to such a thing?
Well, the kind that develops the lousy, derivative, clumsy open source
hobbyware we see floating around: OpenOffice Base, PiTiVi, Gambas, Dia,
F-Spot, gnucash, CinePaint, etc.
> Is any of this penetrating your thick, inbred skull yet, DooFuS?
>
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
>
> Being paid, or even just soliciting voluntary donations, for writing
> Free Software, does not somehow make that software non-Free.
> Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
> donations too.
Oxfam and Gates Foundation: giving $billions to help
Homer: wants to be paid maintain one open source project for one Linux
distro.
What's wrong with this picture?
> What a goon.
How much did you collect in donations from your Fedora beg page (which
you immediately took down after I exposed your little scam)? Low three
figures I bet, given the generous nature of the Linux "community".
Chris Ahlstrom
Feb 11, 2012, 7:01:00โฏAM2/11/12
to
Homer wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> Verily I say unto thee that EZKill/DFS/Flounder/Hadron spake thusly:
> The cost of hosting a buildsystem on a virtual server, fuckwit.
Indeed.
>> And all it takes is some more money for him to "justify dedicating
>> more of his very busy schedule." Looks like "money" is the only
>> justification he needs.
Character assassination.
Poisoning the well.
> <snip>
> Oh look, a Free Software developer gets paid, therefore it's perfectly
> "OK" for Microsoft to sabotage the OLPC charity, bribe OOXML delegates,
> bribe Nigerian officials to remove Mandriva from schoolkids's PCs, force
> OEMs to "pay a Windows royalty on every PC shipped, even if it didn't
> include Windows", sabotage DR-DOS with fake error messages, exploit the
> Japanese tsunami/earthquake/nuclear disaster for marketing purposes,
> "knife [Apple's] baby", "cut off [Netscape's] air supply", "tilt Lotus
> into the death spiral", "fucking kill Eric Schmidt" and "Screw Google".
>
> Yeah, my being paid to develop Free Software, a principle that's
> actively encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, fully justifies
> Microsoft's gangster behaviour. Honest.
>
> What a bunch of evil scumbags.
Logically, these clowns are not trying to justify MS, just trying to
unjustify you, an advocate of a kind of freedom they find offensive.
This guy has a vivid imagination:
--
Hadron has slapped you around multiple times when it comes to Linux
issues Linosuck and dont you forget it you whining little weenie.
-- "Hadron" <ii6tdu$pdf$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
> Verily I say unto thee that EZKill/DFS/Flounder/Hadron spake thusly:
>>
>> What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100%
>> free software?
LMAO.
>> What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100%
>> free software?
> The cost of hosting a buildsystem on a virtual server, fuckwit.
>> And all it takes is some more money for him to "justify dedicating
>> more of his very busy schedule." Looks like "money" is the only
>> justification he needs.
Poisoning the well.
> <snip>
>
> Apparently the best that Microsoft "evangelism" has to offer, is trying
> and miserably failing to pick holes in the minutiae of Linux advocates'
> lives, and all in the name of defending a bunch of corporate gangsters.
Creepy, ain't it?
> Apparently the best that Microsoft "evangelism" has to offer, is trying
> and miserably failing to pick holes in the minutiae of Linux advocates'
> lives, and all in the name of defending a bunch of corporate gangsters.
> Oh look, a Free Software developer gets paid, therefore it's perfectly
> "OK" for Microsoft to sabotage the OLPC charity, bribe OOXML delegates,
> bribe Nigerian officials to remove Mandriva from schoolkids's PCs, force
> OEMs to "pay a Windows royalty on every PC shipped, even if it didn't
> include Windows", sabotage DR-DOS with fake error messages, exploit the
> Japanese tsunami/earthquake/nuclear disaster for marketing purposes,
> "knife [Apple's] baby", "cut off [Netscape's] air supply", "tilt Lotus
> into the death spiral", "fucking kill Eric Schmidt" and "Screw Google".
>
> Yeah, my being paid to develop Free Software, a principle that's
> actively encouraged by the Free Software Foundation, fully justifies
> Microsoft's gangster behaviour. Honest.
>
> What a bunch of evil scumbags.
unjustify you, an advocate of a kind of freedom they find offensive.
This guy has a vivid imagination:
--
Hadron has slapped you around multiple times when it comes to Linux
issues Linosuck and dont you forget it you whining little weenie.
-- "Hadron" <ii6tdu$pdf$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
ahls...@xzoozy.com
Feb 11, 2012, 8:24:16โฏAM2/11/12
to
On 2/11/2012 7:01 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Homer wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> Homer wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> What a bunch of evil scumbags.
>
> Logically, these clowns are not trying to justify MS, just trying to
> unjustify you, an advocate of a kind of freedom they find offensive.
>
> This guy has a vivid imagination:
>
You live in the US you clown, and you should act like a man. You should
>
> Logically, these clowns are not trying to justify MS, just trying to
> unjustify you, an advocate of a kind of freedom they find offensive.
>
> This guy has a vivid imagination:
>
stop acting like a British lapdog every waking moment of your stinking
life. You should stop kissing COLA, English, and European ass every
moment of your stinking life.
Chris Ahlstrom
Feb 11, 2012, 10:18:54โฏAM2/11/12
to
fake ahls...@xzoozy.com wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
Get hammered, ya little bigot.
On the soccer field, I meet and befriend people from all over the
world... Egypt, Morocco, France, Britain, Bulgaria, Russia, Turkey,
Germany, Australia. And most of them are nice people, charming
conversationalists, smart and with good humor, and often very good
players.
Much better people than you and your trollfriends.
--
Most of us are sensible and experienced enough to know that all SW
has errors. But according to the COLA faithful., errors and bugs and
vulnerabilities are the domain of closed source SW.
-- Hadron Quark, (again) lying about what advocates have claimed.
On the soccer field, I meet and befriend people from all over the
world... Egypt, Morocco, France, Britain, Bulgaria, Russia, Turkey,
Germany, Australia. And most of them are nice people, charming
conversationalists, smart and with good humor, and often very good
players.
Much better people than you and your trollfriends.
--
Most of us are sensible and experienced enough to know that all SW
has errors. But according to the COLA faithful., errors and bugs and
vulnerabilities are the domain of closed source SW.
-- Hadron Quark, (again) lying about what advocates have claimed.
Foster
Feb 11, 2012, 10:18:53โฏAM2/11/12
to
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:18:54 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> On the soccer field, I meet and befriend people from all over the
> world... Egypt, Morocco, France, Britain, Bulgaria, Russia, Turkey,
> Germany, Australia. And most of them are nice people, charming
> conversationalists, smart and with good humor, and often very good
> players.
Yea, but what do they think of *you* Chris Ahlstrom?
> On the soccer field, I meet and befriend people from all over the
> world... Egypt, Morocco, France, Britain, Bulgaria, Russia, Turkey,
> Germany, Australia. And most of them are nice people, charming
> conversationalists, smart and with good humor, and often very good
> players.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAa!
Ezekiel
Feb 11, 2012, 12:22:05โฏPM2/11/12
to
"Homer" <use...@slated.org> wrote in message
news:ei2h09-...@sky.matrix...
> Verily I say unto thee that EZKill spake thusly:
>>
>> -- "to assist me with the hardware and software costs"
>>
>> What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100%
>> free software?
>
> The cost of hosting a buildsystem on a virtual server, fuckwit.
So exactly what software did you have to buy and how much did it cost?
>>
>> -- "to assist me with the hardware and software costs"
>>
>> What exactly are "software costs" since he claims to only run 100%
>> free software?
>
> The cost of hosting a buildsystem on a virtual server, fuckwit.
A build system doesn't cost anything. (compilers, build tools, etc are
free). Virtualization software should cost anything either. So what software
did you need to spend money on.
> Software. IOW there are only so many hours in the day,
> and hosted CPU cycles and bandwidth cost money,
What's the point in paying someone to host a server if you already own the
hardware.
I wouldn't call this cost "software" - it sounds more like "hosting fees" to
me.
> And as I had to explain to that other fuckwit, DooFy, being paid does
> not magically transform Free Software into proprietary software. The
> cause of my altruism is Intellectual Freedom, not financial martyrdom.
intellectual freedom on the project page.
Homer
Feb 11, 2012, 3:27:45โฏPM2/11/12
to
Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Hypocrite Homer babbled:
>> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>>
>> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>
> You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free
> Software" under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
And you're the idiot who's suggesting that Free Software can only be
>>
>> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>
> You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free
> Software" under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
"altruistic" if it's also given away for free.
Apparently you don't understand altruism either:
[quote]
altruism
noun
1.
the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the
welfare of others
[/quote]
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/altruism
Nothing there about money either, DooFuS.
Free Software is not about alleviating poverty, it's about promoting
Intellectual Freedom. /That/ is the "welfare" that concerns me. /That/
is its altruism. Financing that goal, by whatever means, is entirely
irrelevant to that altruistic purpose. It's also entirely unselfish,
given that the core of this principle is equality. What /is/ selfish is
taking the amalgam of ever-accreting knowledge derived from prior art,
and monopolising it into this greedy, fraudulent and sinister thing
called "IP".
> Funny enough, you'll shift more of your resources (knowledge and time)
> in exchange for more money. More Freedom for more money?!?!?
summon up more time and money than I have available. And the "shift"
you're referring to was from other equally altruistic undertakings. IOW
if I'd supported Tripwire purely with my own time and money, then I'd
have had to reduce my commitments to other projects. That's not an
ultimatum, it's simply the physical limits of my own resources.
> Even more special is you don't own your Linux knowledge (intellectual
> freedom remember?), yet you charged for it your entire career, and you
> continue to ask for money in exchange for what's not yours to sell in
> the first place.
other worker who gets paid.
Is that such an alien concept?
>> The altruism of Free Software is that it grants you the freedom to
>> run software without restriction, learn from and reuse the
>> corresponding sources to that software, and distribute that software
>> and any modified versions of it.
>>
>> Nothing there about /money/.
>
> OK. I never said differently.
Software is hypocritical?
> Must be your special brand of altrui$m...
Not only have I dedicated years to both developing and advocating Free
Software, but I give away nearly all my disposable income in the process
(to this, and other causes). This is precisely why I solicit donations
in the first place, since anything beyond my subsistence level requires
resources that I don't have (because I choose to give them away).
Not that I mind, since that was in fact my intention all along. I
believe in subsistence, not greed. I have everything I need, and already
live very comfortably, so anything more would be wasteful and greedy.
But the point of my Free Software endeavours is not to "give away
money". I promote something far more valuable: Intellectual Freedom.
And yes, it costs money to do so, some of which I have to solicit from
others in the form of voluntary donations, if any given undertaking
exceeds my available resources at the time.
> There's already more "Intellectual Freedom" in the world than you or
> anyone else would know what to do with in 1000 lifetimes.
don't do what I do because I'm trying to reach some imaginary target, I
do it because it's right.
Trust a fascist like you to think of freedom in terms of numbers.
> Having access to Microsoft's and Apple's and Oracle's source code
> won't change that a bit. What it will do is nearly destroy the most
> valuable companies in technology, companies that employ hundreds of
> thousands around the world.
>
> It will NEVER happen, of course. You'll "fight" for it tooth and nail
re-release its entire portfolio under the GPL, and issue a worldwide
royalty-free patent license for all of it, I still wouldn't touch it
with a bargepole. First, because it's a steaming pile of shit, no matter
what the license, and second because I have no interest in doing
anything for the benefit of gangsters like Microsoft.
> your world will turn black
sunlight, and thus vaporise its sub-human inhabitants.
>> Money, if any, is purely coincidental to Free Software, and in no way
>> contracts it.
>
> contradict? Of course it does - right here we see you're willing to
> spend more time on "Free Software" in exchange for more money.
has abandoned it. Freedom is a principle, not a stock portfolio.
> The time and effort people expend on Free Software has an opportunity
> cost, and money, whether you like it or not, is the ONLY way to
> universally measure that opportunity cost.
One does not "measure" principles, one either believes in them or not.
>> In fact companies like Red Hat make an awful lot of money selling
>> Free Software.
>
> They make not one cent selling software code or binaries.
like it or not.
What you mean is, they don't sell software /licenses/.
In fact they sell a "bundled" product, comprising software and support.
Surely I don't need to explain "bundling" to a Microsoft shill.
> Because of the insano GPL
It's far more sane than a license which fraudulently lays claim to the
"exclusive rights" to derivative knowledge.
> RedHat has to make all their source available for free
No one is holding a gun to its head.
> which means nobody will pay for it.
very successfully:
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-secret-to-red-hats-billion-dollar-success-everyones-the-boss-2012-2
> It's a clever ruse, that GPL is: in exchange for not allowing anyone
> to control the code, the FSF will take copyright of your work
The FSF does not "take copyright" of anyone's work. The /GNU/ Foundation
has various projects, to which contributors must assign copyright /if/
they choose to contribute to them.
Again, no one is hold a gun to their head and forcing them to contribute
code to the GNU Foundation's projects.
It's a similar story with other projects entirely unrelated to GNU.
OTOH, those who write their own software from scratch, as opposed to
merely contributing to others', get to choose their own license. And
again, those who chose the GPL do so of their own free will.
There is no law that forces anyone to release their own software under
the GPL, and there's no law that compels people to contribute to others'
software either.
> the market value of your 3 years of work
donate?
> What kind of brainwashed freakin' idiot would agree to such a thing?
people freely choosing to donate something to an altruistic cause?
> Well, the kind that develops the lousy, derivative, clumsy open source
> hobbyware we see floating around
hideously bloated, excruciatingly slow, spyware and DRM infested
steaming pile of toxic garbage we see coming from Microsoft?
>> Next you'll be claiming Oxfam isn't altruistic, because it solicits
>> donations too.
>
> They help truly needy people
cause, it's just the particular altruistic cause /itself/ that you
despise. Or IOW you hate freedom.
Big surprise. A frothing, inbred, Redneck hates freedom.
>> How much did you collect in donations from your Fedora beg page
>> (which you immediately took down after I exposed your little scam)?
years. In fact I'd completely forgotten about it until you "exposed" it
with your puerile attempt to attack freedom with the shocking revelation
that a Free Software developer gets paid.
Oh, the humanity!
> Low three figures I bet, given the generous nature of the Linux
> "community".
refunded the difference.
However, the most generous donations of all, on that and many other
projects, were from those who donated their skills - another thing
that's worth far more than mere "money". The fact that so many people
dedicate their time, effort and skills to developing and promoting Free
Software, paid or unpaid, is by far the best contribution they could
make.
But I wouldn't expect a bug-eyed, money-obsessed, gangster worshipper
like you, who despises freedom and altruism, to understand that.
Torre Starnes
Feb 11, 2012, 3:37:33โฏPM2/11/12
to
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:27:45 +0000, Homer wrote:
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Hypocrite Homer babbled:
>>> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>
>>>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>>>
>>> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>>
>> You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free
>> Software" under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
>
> And you're the idiot who's suggesting that Free Software can only be
> "altruistic" if it's also given away for free.
>
> Apparently you don't understand altruism either:
>
> [quote]
> altruism
>
> noun
> 1.
> the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the
> welfare of others
> [/quote]
Nice try psycho but you are the one who hates corporations, hates
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Hypocrite Homer babbled:
>>> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>
>>>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>>>
>>> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>>
>> You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free
>> Software" under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
>
> And you're the idiot who's suggesting that Free Software can only be
> "altruistic" if it's also given away for free.
>
> Apparently you don't understand altruism either:
>
> [quote]
> altruism
>
> noun
> 1.
> the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the
> welfare of others
> [/quote]
success, hates capitalism and yet hides behind terms like "altruism"
and others when in fact your life and prior attitude is far from
that.
> But I wouldn't expect a bug-eyed, money-obsessed, gangster worshipper
> like you, who despises freedom and altruism, to understand that.
a labor of love.
After all, nobody was forcing you to manage the tripwire package,
[Homer].
You took that burden upon yourself and then you have the nerve to
ask people to donate money to you so you can continue to manage the
package?
You've got to be fscking kidding, but I know you're not.
[Homer], when I volunteer my Xmas music to the children's cancer
ward at several very well known hospitals, I *don't* have the tip
cup on the piano. I play the tunes, even sing a little despite my
awful voice and try to hold back the tears. Every year I do this FOR
FREE ON MY OWN DIME.
What I do, in that instance falls under the definition of altruism.
What you did/do falls under the definition of hypocrisy.
You are a real piece of work [Homer]....
Snit
Feb 11, 2012, 3:47:34โฏPM2/11/12
to
Homer stated in post 1jvi09-...@sky.matrix on 2/11/12 1:27 PM:
>
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Hypocrite Homer babbled:
>>> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>
>>>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>>>
>>> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>>
>> You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free
>> Software" under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
>
> And you're the idiot who's suggesting that Free Software can only be
> "altruistic" if it's also given away for free.
>
> Apparently you don't understand altruism either:
>
> [quote]
> altruism
>
> noun
> 1.
> the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the
> welfare of others
> [/quote]
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/altruism
And that is the exact opposite of your views... where you think it is
immoral for people to not make their own, personal property communal.
Your view is selfish and tied to the concern for yourself and what you can
get.
> Nothing there about money either, DooFuS.
>
> Free Software is not about alleviating poverty, it's about promoting
> Intellectual Freedom.
If you want to make your property communal I am all for that. Great.
But your push for others to do so and your absurd claims it is immoral for
them not to is not about freedom in any way. When you claim it is you are
lying.
> /That/ is the "welfare" that concerns me. /That/ is its altruism. Financing
> that goal, by whatever means, is entirely irrelevant to that altruistic
> purpose. It's also entirely unselfish, given that the core of this principle
> is equality.
When people opt to make their property communal I agree it is unselfish and
altruistic. But that is not what the FSF is about... it is about belittling
others who do not do so and claiming they are wrong to want to keep what is
theirs. That is not about freedom nor about altruism. It is about greed
and an attitude that the world owes you. When you call *that* "freedom" it
is a lie.
> What /is/ selfish is taking the amalgam of ever-accreting knowledge derived
> from prior art, and monopolising it into this greedy, fraudulent and sinister
> thing called "IP".
See: you belittle others for keeping their own property as their own...
nothing to do with freedom. Your claim of supporting freedom is a lie. You
support, in this area, communal ownership - Communism. Communism is not
about freedom, no matter how much you try to twist it.
>> Funny enough, you'll shift more of your resources (knowledge and time)
>> in exchange for more money. More Freedom for more money?!?!?
>
> It's a simple prioritisation of available resources. I can't magically
> summon up more time and money than I have available.
But you can demand others owe you their property... and then falsely claim
this under the name of "freedom". And that is what you do. Repeatedly.
...
--
๐๐๐
>
> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>> On 2/10/2012 8:42 PM, Hypocrite Homer babbled:
>>> Rabid anti-freedom nut DooFuS sneered:
>
>>>> I know you're "altruistic" and all, but even a freak has to eat...
>>>
>>> What does freedom have to do with money, DooFuS?
>>
>> You tell me. You're the one asking for money to develop "Free
>> Software" under your oft-stated umbrella of "altruism".
>
> And you're the idiot who's suggesting that Free Software can only be
> "altruistic" if it's also given away for free.
>
> Apparently you don't understand altruism either:
>
> [quote]
> altruism
>
> noun
> 1.
> the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the
> welfare of others
> [/quote]
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/altruism
immoral for people to not make their own, personal property communal.
Your view is selfish and tied to the concern for yourself and what you can
get.
> Nothing there about money either, DooFuS.
>
> Free Software is not about alleviating poverty, it's about promoting
> Intellectual Freedom.
But your push for others to do so and your absurd claims it is immoral for
them not to is not about freedom in any way. When you claim it is you are
lying.
> /That/ is the "welfare" that concerns me. /That/ is its altruism. Financing
> that goal, by whatever means, is entirely irrelevant to that altruistic
> purpose. It's also entirely unselfish, given that the core of this principle
> is equality.
altruistic. But that is not what the FSF is about... it is about belittling
others who do not do so and claiming they are wrong to want to keep what is
theirs. That is not about freedom nor about altruism. It is about greed
and an attitude that the world owes you. When you call *that* "freedom" it
is a lie.
> What /is/ selfish is taking the amalgam of ever-accreting knowledge derived
> from prior art, and monopolising it into this greedy, fraudulent and sinister
> thing called "IP".
nothing to do with freedom. Your claim of supporting freedom is a lie. You
support, in this area, communal ownership - Communism. Communism is not
about freedom, no matter how much you try to twist it.
>> Funny enough, you'll shift more of your resources (knowledge and time)
>> in exchange for more money. More Freedom for more money?!?!?
>
> It's a simple prioritisation of available resources. I can't magically
> summon up more time and money than I have available.
this under the name of "freedom". And that is what you do. Repeatedly.
...
--
๐๐๐
DFS
Feb 12, 2012, 12:54:06โฏAM2/12/12
to
I see those Batman signs flying left and right: BAM! POW! SOCKO!
Foster
Feb 12, 2012, 10:49:51โฏAM2/12/12
to
discredit him.
The herd can't deal with facts, logic and reason.
They prefer to lie.
0 new messages