Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 177

Thread: Richard Stallman Calls Ubuntu "Spyware"

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ElderSnake View Post
    Isn't that splitting straws a bit though? I mean I see your point, but with a web browser even the most basic user knows that the browser will be generally connecting them to the World Wide Web.

    Most users, I assume, would generally assume a local search to be just that, a local search. Not have their queries for even the Terminal to be sent somewhere else.

    However, this could be opt-in as you describe, if they would just put a notice giving the information or dialog asking permission for this feature at the time of installing, so no-one can be possibly left in the dark. I don't see why Canonical could consider this unreasonable.
    I fully agree with you. I just meant that this isn't something linear, just like you said, the same logic cant be applied everywhere. There will always be a line that separates when you should assume the software will not violate your own ideals of privacy or not. Since this line is obviously different from user to user, and there's no considerable harm done (plus, most average users probably don't care), i can see why canonical thinks Stallman is exagerating, and I agree with them.

  2. #132
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BSD Sucks and Dies View Post
    RMS IS ALWAYS CORRECT AND THOSE WHO DISAGREE ARE MICROSOFT/APPLE DRONES AND ARE LIERS!!!!!!!

    I admire the efforts of people like crazycheese, kraftman and asdx. I feel the pain and burden they have to go through to deal with/reply to the crap put out by all the Anti-Stallman (which are also freedom hating) people and BSD trolls/zealots in this forum.

    I like Pawlson and ArchLinux's come back at the BSD MORON Cthulhux.

    Cthulhux, you should be totallly a shame of urself for using and advocating such a SHIT-PATHETIC and yet EVIL FREEDOM HATING ENSLAVING OS. Everyone here that BSD particularly FreeBSD exist only to voluntarily help the efforts of Evil empires aka M$ and rotten apples suprise and kill freedom and stallman so anyone who uses their horrors (BSD) are guilty of facilitating that effort.

    You make me SICK Cthulhux, --> SICK!!!! <--
    It's sad that bsd fanboys are so blind they don't notice their stupidity. In yours logic everyone is bad, except bsd boys who can throw shit whenever they like and those poor boys are victims of EVIL Penguins from the Moon who dare to prove them wrong. Go for therapy or something. Btw. I consider Stalman is right only in few things, so this shows how inacurate yours reply is. Furthermore, ArchLinux' posts are very generous and sane why Cthulhux was acting like a trolly fanboy, but you didn't see this which is something natural for freebsd blinded crowd.

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BSD Sucks and Dies View Post
    I admire the efforts of people like crazycheese, kraftman and asdx. I feel the pain and burden they have to go through to deal with/reply to the crap put out by all the Anti-Stallman (which are also freedom hating) people and BSD trolls/zealots in this forum.
    Wait, doesn't IE already suck?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrMOBKHqqc8

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BSD Sucks and Dies View Post
    RMS IS ALWAYS CORRECT AND THOSE WHO DISAGREE ARE MICROSOFT/APPLE DRONES AND ARE LIERS!!!!!!!

    I admire the efforts of people like crazycheese, kraftman and asdx. I feel the pain and burden they have to go through to deal with/reply to the crap put out by all the Anti-Stallman (which are also freedom hating) people and BSD trolls/zealots in this forum.

    I like Pawlson and ArchLinux's come back at the BSD MORON Cthulhux.

    Cthulhux, you should be totallly a shame of urself for using and advocating such a SHIT-PATHETIC and yet EVIL FREEDOM HATING ENSLAVING OS. Everyone here that BSD particularly FreeBSD exist only to voluntarily help the efforts of Evil empires aka M$ and rotten apples suprise and kill freedom and stallman so anyone who uses their horrors (BSD) are guilty of facilitating that effort.

    You make me SICK Cthulhux, --> SICK!!!! <--
    I couldn't agree more

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    914

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fazer View Post
    I can't stand his opinions, he is the reason people hate closed software and think their developers are evil. The world doesn't work like that. There are no good or evil people.
    ähh yes... you are right there are no bad people at alle... that are completly evil, but there are people who do bad or good things... and if you let your code get or do it yourself under a closed source lisense you do a evil thing... that makes you not a totaly evil person... but there you harm people...

    maybe you integrated no malicious code but you help somebody a company to bring more people to use that software, and maye when thats the big market leader they hire some people to integrate malicious code... or even if they dont... they have total controll they often vendor lockin with formats... or kill the need to make a free version of this software... then they say maybe ohh you want that this mini feature will get integrated in the software 3 lines of code... pay us a trillion... such stuff... yes you can look on the gnu sites what else for problems you generate and why its evil to develop and release such stuff...

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BSD Sucks and Dies View Post
    Cthulhux, you should be totallly a shame of urself for using and advocating such a SHIT-PATHETIC and yet EVIL FREEDOM HATING ENSLAVING OS.
    If you hate slavery, why do you advocate the GPL?
    http://noordering.wordpress.com/2009...l-is-not-free/

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    If you hate slavery, why do you advocate the GPL?
    http://noordering.wordpress.com/2009...l-is-not-free/
    GTFO outta here and take your fail piece of shit os with you

    Nobody wants you here

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    220

    Default

    Don't worry, your mommy will be here soon.

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Heh. Now I'm a FSF member, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt.

    I really find reading these threads very entertaining. There is a lot of people who focus on personal attacks against Stallman, but that happens in every discussion. Those opinions are similar to anti-Poettering-ism, usually not fact-based and emotionally fuelled, and can be very quickly discarded.

    Another large group of people might understand the issue partially, but gets sidetracked somewhere midway through what the mission of the FSF was. To all of these people, I honestly recommend reading up on the history of GNU, and some of Stallman's essays (the Free Software, Free Society collection for example). This same group of people has issues with real world logic, where anything is (according to them) defined as a "love or hate" relationship.

    GNU and by extension the FSF were started as an idealistic project. The idea of the whole shebang is to provide "free as in freedom alternative" to proprietary IT solutions - a version of a popular text editor, which is guaranteed to be available forever. A compiler collection, which anyone can use. A de-facto reference C-library implementation, available to anyone. All that under one condition - whatever you do to the code, if you decide to publish the (modified or verbatim) code, it has to be "free as in freedom".

    Now, the idea of all that was never to be the one and only option, to burn and erase all other proprietary softwares, and to make sure you can run only the "tagged" stuff. It was actually the exact opposite - to provide you with the (true) freedom of choice, with an alternative. It's like free range vs caged chicken - arguably, there the benefits of each are more clearly cut (conscience vs cost). And it also describes the current goal of FSF - you wouldn't want to buy free range eggs, only to find out that only 95% of them are really free range, and that it's at the distributor's disposal whether he decides to swap some eggs in your package for caged ones...

    For a realist / pragmatist, Stallman's point of view is probably far too idealistic to be practicable. What is honourable about RMS is, though, that he eats his cake too - he doesn't use proprietary software (or hardware), he truly drinks water while preaching water. It were the pragmatists who took the GNU bits, the BSD bits and the kernel, and started making distributions. It took long time to have first true "GNU/Linux" distribution, and no one really insists on you using it - it's your choice - but you can't say you're eating organic, when your corn comes from a Monsanto seed.

    Stallman and people at FSF usually assume that people reading their statements are not retarded and can perform a critical analysis. I would be very surprised, if in any of their publications you found recommendations on what you "generally should and shouldn't do" (as opposed to "do to remain truly FSF-free"). In any case, I do believe what Stallman says to be incredibly relevant, especially as he is one of the only people taking such a critical stance. I do not pretend I do what he suggests I do, but I do not pretend I am running only FSF-compatible stuff either.

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    914

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterKraus View Post
    Heh. Now I'm a FSF member, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt.
    I dont agree to your statement Stallman thinks that you do harm people and he also things that government should forbit proprietary software... so he is not of freedom of choice at least not in that definition. I agree with what he says but he is not a use whatever you want but dont call yourself a fsf-guy or something like that, what you tried to say...

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •