____/ Mark Kent on Monday 06 August 2007 10:27 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ 7 on Sunday 05 August 2007 01:48 : \____
>>
>>> asstroturfer Peter Köhlmann wrote on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation:
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 04 August 2007 17:51 : \____
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Kent wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>>>>> 64-bit PCs: Drivers wanted
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>>>>>| Microsoft is requiring those device manufacturers to develop 64-bit
>>>>>>>>| drivers if they want their devices to work with the 64-bit edition of
>>>>>>>>| Windows Vista, in an effort to ensure that device drivers are written
>>>>>>>>| to proper standards.
>>>>>>>> `----
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6200517.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> http://s58.photobucket.com/albums/g262
>>> Clyzer/?action=view¤t=Untitled.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The consequences of closed source. More here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And yet, so many people here, in cola, are arguing that proprietary
>>>>>>> drivers are a good thing, even in Linux.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You may now point to the URLs/Msg-IDs of those posts, Mark Hadron
>>>>>> It is amazing how similar your lies are to Hadron Quarks lunacy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jusat to sum it up for the mentally challenged (like you are an extreme
>>>>>> example), it was argued that *not* having any drivers at all, as the
>>>>>> GPL3 would cause, is a "bad thing".
>>>>>> After all, you can't force a vendor to open-source his drivers. The
>>>>>> only, and deserved, answer would be "fuck you, idiot"
>>>>>> The GPL3 would make the situation even worse. *Much* worse
>>>>>>
>>>>>> < snip >
>>>>>
>>>>> Why? Because of Tivoization? If I buy a piece of hardware, I can issue
>>>>> any command and have the device obey it. Why should a device control the
>>>>> user? Sounds like nanny device for spooks. If such a device exists, I do
>>>>> not want it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are free to point to the URL which explains where Tivo does not
>>>> release source code
>>>> They *do* release the source. The obey GPL2 to the point
>>>
>>> You are a dumb fsck! Learn to read!!!
>>> Roy said his device won't obey the commands issued to it.
>>> Dumb fucks like you should explain why when you have source code the device
>>> refuses to communicate with its creators.
>>>
>>>
>>>> While you are at it, please explain how the Tivo "controls the user".
>>>> I am certain it is with that evil "GPL2 mind boggling device"
>>>
>>> You dumb fsck flat foot sock maintainers are all alike.
>>> Idiots to the core.
>>> You explain how you are not being controlled when your
>>> device doesn't obey you its creator, but listens to commands
>>> sent by a corporation.
>>
>> Dude, stop cursing Peter. What's the matter with you?
>>
>
> Why don't you take a look at the abuse Peter K is shovelling at me?
> It's further up in the thread, and is quite unjustifiable. If you're
> going to criticise 7, then you should be consistent about it. Peter is
> at least as bad.
He is at least polite. Without manner, any forum becomes rubbish and then
laughed at. It's also unpleasant for observers, not just those being cursed.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Kernel panic - more exciting than being /.'ted
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 126 total, 1 running, 124 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
