Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Richard Stallman Calls LLVM A "Terrible Setback"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • brad0
    replied
    Originally posted by brosis View Post
    Prohibiting removal of freedom, is a good thing for freedom itself. GPL is a free license, it is not anarchic license.

    GPL restricts anarchy, but it does not restrict freedom.
    Strings attached is NOT freedom.

    And don't even get me started on the ridiculous bullshit of versions of GPL being incompatible with other versions of the GPL. What a complete joke.

    Leave a comment:


  • brosis
    replied
    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
    If you know how to use a dictionary, why are you having so much trouble with someone pointing out that the GPL is not a free license?
    Prohibiting removal of freedom, is a good thing for freedom itself. GPL is a free license, it is not anarchic license.

    GPL restricts anarchy, but it does not restrict freedom.

    Leave a comment:


  • carewolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Truth View Post
    Don't be silly, of course the GPL imprisons you, it's no different to the NSA/TSA/Patriot Act. It takes away your freedom to "protect the freedom" of some other entity [software|america] from some vague threat [proprietary|terrorists].

    Why do you think FSF false-flagger shills try to redefine words or use weasel words like "software freedom"? It's the same wool the government tries to pull over your eyes to blind you to their abuses.

    Open your eyes, or do we need a software-snowden in here?
    You are being sarcastic right?

    I know I shouldn't ask, but there are people out there insane enough who would write something like you did and mean it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Truth
    replied
    Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
    I know how to use a dictionary, I just skimmed over the general context definitions. I correct myself, there are around five definitions that are vague enough to fit. Do the GPL imprison or enslave you? Because one definition of freedom in your link is just to not be imprisoned or enslaved.
    Do you happen to look for the meaning of love in dictionaries too? Or the meaning of life?
    Don't be silly, of course the GPL imprisons you, it's no different to the NSA/TSA/Patriot Act. It takes away your freedom to "protect the freedom" of some other entity [software|america] from some vague threat [proprietary|terrorists].

    Why do you think FSF false-flagger shills try to redefine words or use weasel words like "software freedom"? It's the same wool the government tries to pull over your eyes to blind you to their abuses.

    Open your eyes, or do we need a software-snowden in here?

    Leave a comment:


  • yogi_berra
    replied
    Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
    I know how to use a dictionary, I just skimmed over the general context definitions. I correct myself, there are around five definitions that are vague enough to fit. Do the GPL imprison or enslave you? Because one definition of freedom in your link is just to not be imprisoned or enslaved.
    If you know how to use a dictionary, why are you having so much trouble with someone pointing out that the GPL is not a free license?

    Leave a comment:


  • mrugiero
    replied
    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
    You should learn how to use a dictionary before you continue making a fool out of yourself.
    I know how to use a dictionary, I just skimmed over the general context definitions. I correct myself, there are around five definitions that are vague enough to fit. Do the GPL imprison or enslave you? Because one definition of freedom in your link is just to not be imprisoned or enslaved.
    Do you happen to look for the meaning of love in dictionaries too? Or the meaning of life?

    Leave a comment:


  • yogi_berra
    replied
    Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
    Did you happen to click it yourself? Because the fact there are around twenty definitions inside that link proves how ambiguous that term is.
    You should learn how to use a dictionary before you continue making a fool out of yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • erendorn
    replied
    Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
    Also, please, tell me who defined it.
    Dictionary people.
    Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
    To fit what ideals?
    The correctness of the English language.


    :P

    Leave a comment:


  • mrugiero
    replied
    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
    I already did, you bloviating twerp. Scroll up, click the link, and kindly stop redefining the language to fit your ideals.
    Did you happen to click it yourself? Because the fact there are around twenty definitions inside that link proves how ambiguous that term is.
    Also, please, tell me who defined it. To fit what ideals? You talk like it is all written in stone, when freedom is a philosophical concept.

    Leave a comment:


  • yogi_berra
    replied
    Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
    So, come on, define freedom for all of us.
    I already did, you bloviating twerp. Scroll up, click the link, and kindly stop redefining the language to fit your ideals.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X