Ubuntu To Investigate Digital Rights Management

[j2723]

THANK YOU for admitting the FACT that DRM is part of Qt bu$ine$$ model. This DRM shit pulled from Qts ass is also partly to blame for KDEs reluctance to join a cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack. Being under control by the Puppet Master called Qt will get you down the alley of "compability" to several stacks(Including Qts first priority DRM-infested, patented shit). That is the most sad thing learned from DRM. It fucked free software not by it adoption, but by its existence. Qts DRM shit is like a 2006 fart that keeps smelling. And even today KDE is confused because Qt s a ongoing DRM disaster.

No, DRM is not part of the Qt "bu$ine$$" model. DRM is just a negative side effect of what can happen.

"cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack": can't comment on that, you will have to elaborate…
"Including Qts first priority DRM-infested, patented shit": I'd like you to pinpoint this in the Qt source code for me, where exactly this DRM, of which you speak, lies.

Here's a question for you:
What makes you think people can't implement DRM into their modified GTK, then use that in their proprietary programs?

Guess what, they CAN.

It's not like you can remove the DRM from the modified GTK, when the proprietary programs depend on it! Specifically, you will have to crack those programs, to bypass DRM.
This all assumes, you want to use those proprietary programs that depend on that… otherwise you don't have to use those modified versions.

NO! Go read your own link. KDE is provided with powers to put Qt Free under a more permissive license. Which is so permissive it wont be FOSS anymore.

You are indeed correct, I should have left the F out from the FOSS.

By the way, Qt will always be OSS thanks to the KDE foundation.
http://www.kde.org/community/whatisk...foundation.php

Fixed.

[GreatEmerald]

Why did a topic about Canonical being Apple 2.0 turn into a back and forth about DRM, qt, and piracy?

The first and third come from the title of the thread. The second is just funkSTAR being his usual self.

[GreatEmerald]

== GNU / LINUX QUESTION ==

And I find it funny how strong marketing works when you look on the naming shemes that are official or are mainstream. Nobody even says Android/Linux, so because of his drm stuff, they at least see that its something different, ok with Android/Linux instead of only Android you could understand that, because Linux itself is not a name that stands for free software or something so if there is no GNU/Linux you know it is not at least 99.99999% opensource. But even thats a difficult Term, RMS dont think that a distri even like debian is fully free, so there are a few full free linux versions. basicly you should only call them GNU/Linux or am I wrong here, like tristian Linux or somethign like that.

http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

So would RMS be happier to call a not 100% free linux GNU/Linux because it values his big contributions to the os that is not only the kernel, or would he be unhappy, because someone would use the word gnu meaning non-freesoftware basicly ^^.

It sounded to me that rms wants to call each linux gnu/linux at least if gnu tools are used there. So I find it a bit funny because then they would give their name for stuff they dont want to happen.

So calling ubuntu -> ubuntu/linux and fedora gnu/linux would be funny because even fedora is not really 100% free like rms defines it it also does not only have fully free software included, like the firmwares etc.


But I think too, that ubuntu now defines a new category of linux, it would be easier if they fork also the kernel (more than distries do anyway) than it would be easier than it would be Ubuntu/ukernel or something ^^ than we could call each ubuntu mint its a ukernel System ^^ but thats also only because the term linux did get missused sadly. So now you cant call anything precisly, so android uses a linux kernel and therefor its linux, but its very different from a "normal" linux. it has nearly nothing except its usb-stack that is way better than at least windows 7 its usb stack, and some of its drivers, but others not...

Strange... but yes its a bit hard to now call ubuntu GNU/Linux.

I guess the only way to tell would be to ask FSF themselves. From what I was able to find after a brief look at the issue on Wikipedia, FSF said that Android and uClinux (which does not use glibc and very few GNU packages) should not be called GNU/Linux. But they don't object to Debian officially calling itself "Debian GNU/Linux" at all. The libre distributions (Trisquel et al) are just officially endorsed, I believe.

An interesting interpretation that I have seen of whether to consider a system GNU/Linux or not is to compare the size of all the GNU packages installed by default with the side of the default kernel. If GNU ⪆ Linux, then it's GNU/Linux. If GNU ≪ Linux, then it's not GNU/Linux.

[Ancurio]

now that you open my eyes i just realized DRM is written in C++ too, OMG lets switch all GPL apps to VALA and get rid of that EVIL C++ too

God dammit, I was just about to make the exact same comment. Screw you!

[uid313]

We've established we hate DRM, OK. But the hard fact is, if we want Linux to advance; we need some form of DRM so companies can feel safe.

Do we need Linux to advance?

I use Linux everyday and has been doing so for years and it works great.
I am very satisfied with Linux as it is.

I don't need Linux to advance, it already works great for me and does what I want it to do.

[jrch2k8]

THANK YOU for admitting the FACT that DRM is part of Qt bu$ine$$ model. This DRM shit pulled from Qts ass is also partly to blame for KDEs reluctance to join a cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack. Being under control by the Puppet Master called Qt will get you down the alley of "compability" to several stacks(Including Qts first priority DRM-infested, patented shit). That is the most sad thing learned from DRM. It fucked free software not by it adoption, but by its existence. Qts DRM shit is like a 2006 fart that keeps smelling. And even today KDE is confused because Qt s a ongoing DRM disaster.


NO! Go read your own link. KDE is provided with powers to put Qt Free under a more permissive license. Which is so permissive it wont be FOSS anymore.

as always poor trolling

1.) ok i quote your first fail "Should Nokia discontinue the development of the Qt Free Edition under these licenses, then the Foundation has the right to release Qt under a BSD-style license or under other open source licenses. The agreement stays valid in case of a buy-out, a merger or bankruptcy." from kde foundation

2.) second fail, digia commercial Qt don't provide any DRM inside[as always trolling in fantasies] and you can prove it by downloading the demo for any OS and check the SDK or looking up the symbol table[very unlikely you have the skill to do it], Qt Commertial due to its license can access safely[from a legal POV] the in OS DRM plataform[windows media/itunes SDK/IOS SDK/VxWorks DRM native API] or write your own using Qt but is not inside Qt and Digia is can't be responsible of what you do with their SDK[like KDE foundation can't be blamed for killing kittens if i use Qt LGPL to program my kitten killing machine].

3.) "cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack" <-- WTF, KDE won't do it cuz is insane not cuz digia LOL that is why they focus on FFMPEG/Gstreamer[Default since quite a while ago]/VLC in combo with pulseaudio/sdl which 3 are quite crossplataform and they work just fine with Gnome too. and if you are reffering to phonon, its not a cross DE stack but an internal KDE API to let you use multimedia setting in a KDE fashion regardless the backend AKA you code in phonon API instead of pulseaudio/alsa/OSS/VLC/Xine/ffmpeg/gstreamer/SDL/Cocoa/Win32PE WMP API/etc and phonon will detect/decide wich backend use to fullfil your requirement[pretty much like KDE solid do with lower level drivers or KIO] andwith this with 3 fails in a row, seriously troll your MMO forum, this one is still too much of a challenge for you

[Akka]

I find that today a bit sad, because arch linux packagemanagement tool is a joke, first you have to install with the normla packagemanager another packagemanager yaourt, then the interface from this packagemanager is worse than what I used in gentoo 10 years ago. It looks like a linux-from-scratch helper script or something like that. Also the packages in AUR having often bad quality.

drunk or dumb?
yaourt is not the arch packagemanger....
pacman is.
If you use yaourt to use AUR has nothing todo with how arch package management work. Its exist a shitload of different AUR-helpers, yaourt is one of them. Non of them is official and non is neded. AUR is a place you can distribute your own packagebuilds if you dont understand the difference between that and the packagemanager pacman you should probably not choose arch ither way.

[jrch2k8]

LoL. You are in total denial. Qt is used for DRM on set top boxes. Deal with it.

http://www.discretix.com/corporate/pr080211_Mobile_DRM_for_Embedded_Linux.html

http://www.it-observer.com/beep-science-and-trolltech-team.html

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/GPLd-Linux-stack-supports-touchscreen-phones/

Anyone claiming that Qt is not heavily invovled in the fine art of freedom fucking DRM is in TOTAL DENIAL and need medical attention ASAP.

now that you open my eyes i just realized DRM is written in C++ too, OMG lets switch all GPL apps to VALA and get rid of that EVIL C++ too

[dee.]

uh? actually if the foxes were willing to help they would be the best ones to offer advise on impenetrable chicken coops.

Except that the foxes have a vested interest in making sure chicken coops won't be impenetrable. Conflict of interest does not make for reliable advice.

[blackiwid]

I hope now Ubuntu totaly commits to eveliness, why, because then many of the users that use it today run away, not all but lets say a bit more or less than 50%, maybe the get new windows-daus as replacements maybe even more than the ones that left them, but this 50% userbase of todays ubuntu users (some of them did run away earlier down the road so maybe its not 50% from todays smaller userbase), because we need demand to a new Desktop-ready Linux, or to fix the choices we have.

Today other than ubuntu for desktop users (that dont want to use a 2 year old gnome or something like that) there is basicly fedora or archlinux, and some other distries that base on them. Yes if you like to compile all stuff maybe you could even consider gentoo a desktop alternative, if you have at least a quadcore, or a stronger dualcore. Else at some point you dont have the pations to wait for the updates compiling.

Ok you could switch to something like linux mint, but then you could also just install another ppa to ubuntu and deinstall a few packages and you are at the same point, that does not really help much, or changes much.

I find that today a bit sad, because arch linux packagemanagement tool is a joke, first you have to install with the normla packagemanager another packagemanager yaourt, then the interface from this packagemanager is worse than what I used in gentoo 10 years ago. It looks like a linux-from-scratch helper script or something like that. Also the packages in AUR having often bad quality.

Also fedora just when I give it a shot, fails to stay on par with ubuntu, they supposed to be more bleeding edge and have faster releases to newer stuff, but at the moment the opposite is true, ubuntu will release in a month or so, a release with a more or less complete gnome-shell 3.8 included, fedora will release that several months later. And no using Fedoras Rawhide isnt a alternative, have that updated on my laptop at the moment and that is at least true for a weak, I cant even login to X or Cli...

So its a bit sad, its a bit like Windows gets many hate for vista or 8 and then suddenly in Linux there would start a default-desktop-war. That would be bad timing wouldnt it ^^

== GNU / LINUX QUESTION ==

And I find it funny how strong marketing works when you look on the naming shemes that are official or are mainstream. Nobody even says Android/Linux, so because of his drm stuff, they at least see that its something different, ok with Android/Linux instead of only Android you could understand that, because Linux itself is not a name that stands for free software or something so if there is no GNU/Linux you know it is not at least 99.99999% opensource. But even thats a difficult Term, RMS dont think that a distri even like debian is fully free, so there are a few full free linux versions. basicly you should only call them GNU/Linux or am I wrong here, like tristian Linux or somethign like that.

http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

So would RMS be happier to call a not 100% free linux GNU/Linux because it values his big contributions to the os that is not only the kernel, or would he be unhappy, because someone would use the word gnu meaning non-freesoftware basicly ^^.

It sounded to me that rms wants to call each linux gnu/linux at least if gnu tools are used there. So I find it a bit funny because then they would give their name for stuff they dont want to happen.

So calling ubuntu -> ubuntu/linux and fedora gnu/linux would be funny because even fedora is not really 100% free like rms defines it it also does not only have fully free software included, like the firmwares etc.


But I think too, that ubuntu now defines a new category of linux, it would be easier if they fork also the kernel (more than distries do anyway) than it would be easier than it would be Ubuntu/ukernel or something ^^ than we could call each ubuntu mint its a ukernel System ^^ but thats also only because the term linux did get missused sadly. So now you cant call anything precisly, so android uses a linux kernel and therefor its linux, but its very different from a "normal" linux. it has nearly nothing except its usb-stack that is way better than at least windows 7 its usb stack, and some of its drivers, but others not...

Strange... but yes its a bit hard to now call ubuntu GNU/Linux.