From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Feb 24 10:44: 5 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B73DD37B401 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:44:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailbox.univie.ac.at (mailbox.univie.ac.at [131.130.1.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B18F43FBD for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:44:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from l.ertl@univie.ac.at) Received: from adslle.cc.univie.ac.at (adslle.cc.univie.ac.at [131.130.102.11]) by mailbox.univie.ac.at (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h1OIhtl4213118 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:43:58 +0100 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:43:55 +0100 (CET) From: Lukas Ertl To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: research paper / german news article referencing FreeBSD Message-ID: <20030224193244.X337@leelou.in.tern> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-DCC-ZID-Univie-Metrics: mx1 4241; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi there, -advocacy, the well known german IT magazine "c't" has an article about a paper from Steven Bellovin called "A Technique for Counting NATted Hosts". The paper is about how to find out how many hosts are behind a NAT box, and the technique uses the IP ID field. The paper also states that "recent versions of OpenBSD and some versions of FreeBSD use a pseudo-random number generator for the IPid field" and thus it's harder to track down these OSes. The last paragraph of the german article is quite good for us, as it's says something like (sorry for probably bad translation :-): "The only sure method against this algorithm is to use LAN clients that generate random IP ids. FreeBSD and OpenBSD are some of the more useful representatives of this class..." It's online at . best regards, le --=20 Lukas Ertl eMail: l.ertl@univie.ac.at UNIX-Systemadministrator Tel.: (+43 1) 4277-14073 Zentraler Informatikdienst (ZID) Fax.: (+43 1) 4277-9140 der Universit=E4t Wien http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~le/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Feb 26 12:25:35 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2894837B401 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:25:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from thor.acuson.com (thor.acuson.com [157.226.71.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 624EB43FB1 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:25:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DavidJohnson@Siemens.com) Received: from mvaexch02.acuson.com (mvaexch02.acuson.com [157.226.230.209]) by thor.acuson.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HAX00F73NCEAZ@thor.acuson.com> for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:24:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mvaexch02.acuson.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:17:21 -0800 Received: from dhcp-46-161.acuson.com ([157.226.46.161]) by mvaexch01.acuson.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y2R0T09Y; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:18:38 -0800 Content-return: allowed Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:24:54 -0800 From: Johnson David Subject: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Message-id: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Organization: Siemens Medical Systems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Yes it's true. The Technical Editor of the O'Reilly Network (chromatic@oreilly.com) has apologized for "apparently conflating the BSDs with `Free Software`". See the whole article at . I might expect a comment like that from a Slashdot editor, but it boggles the mind coming from an O'Reilly editor. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 3:44:29 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1557037B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 03:44:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from c009.snv.cp.net (h017.c009.snv.cp.net [209.228.34.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50A4743F3F for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 03:44:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peterwu@canada.com) Received: (cpmta 113 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2003 03:44:24 -0800 Received: from 61.170.159.5 (HELO vanilla.zzz) by smtp.canada.com (209.228.34.130) with SMTP; 27 Feb 2003 03:44:24 -0800 X-Sent: 27 Feb 2003 11:44:24 GMT Received: from vanilla.zzz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vanilla.zzz (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h1RBiAG6001413; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:44:13 +0800 (CST) (envelope-from peterwu@canada.com) Received: (from peterwu@localhost) by vanilla.zzz (8.12.7/8.12.7/Submit) id h1RBiAjb001412; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:44:10 +0800 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: vanilla.zzz: peterwu set sender to peterwu@canada.com using -f To: Johnson David Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" From: Peter Wu Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:44:10 +0800 In-Reply-To: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> (Johnson David's message of "Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:24:54 -0800") Message-ID: <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> User-Agent: Gnus/5.090016 (Oort Gnus v0.16) Emacs/21.2 (i386--freebsd) References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >>>>> "Johnson" == Johnson David writes: Johnson> Yes it's true. The Technical Editor of the O'Reilly Network Johnson> (chromatic@oreilly.com) has apologized for "apparently Johnson> conflating the BSDs with `Free Software`". See the whole Johnson> article at . Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood the story? -- Peter Wu Powered by FreeBSD 4.8-PRERELEASE This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 4:48:14 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A349B37B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 04:48:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from hardtime.linuxman.net (hardtime.linuxman.net [66.147.26.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5F943FB1 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 04:48:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gh@over-yonder.net) Received: from mortis.over-yonder.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hardtime.linuxman.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h1RDdwd21646; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:39:59 -0600 Received: by mortis.over-yonder.net (Postfix, from userid 1012) id 7817420F04; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:48:06 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:48:06 -0600 From: "Daniel M. Kurry" To: Peter Wu Cc: Johnson David , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" Message-ID: <20030227124806.GB17085@over-yonder.net> References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i-fullermd.1 X-Editor: vi X-OS: FreeBSD Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Peter Wu said something like: > >>>>> "Johnson" == Johnson David writes: > > Johnson> Yes it's true. The Technical Editor of the O'Reilly Network > Johnson> (chromatic@oreilly.com) has apologized for "apparently > Johnson> conflating the BSDs with `Free Software`". See the whole > Johnson> article at . > > Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood the story? Both. The author was apoligizing for grouping the BSDs in with the "free as in frufru" "Free" that the GPL crowd has come up with. As he tells us in the commentary, other software mentioned in the article doesn't fit the frufru "Free" description either and including them in the mention of 'conflating' would have made things clearer. Whatever. dan > -- > Peter Wu > Powered by FreeBSD 4.8-PRERELEASE To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 7: 4:27 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E5637B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:04:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net (bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F29A43FA3 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:04:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0140.cvx40-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.42.140] helo=mindspring.com) by bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18oPa8-0003QS-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:04:21 -0800 Message-ID: <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:02:53 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Wu Cc: Johnson David , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a4274669964d88a7edc420df6cffb6b0032601a10902912494350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Peter Wu wrote: > >>>>> "Johnson" == Johnson David writes: > > Johnson> Yes it's true. The Technical Editor of the O'Reilly Network > Johnson> (chromatic@oreilly.com) has apologized for "apparently > Johnson> conflating the BSDs with `Free Software`". See the whole > Johnson> article at . > > Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood the story? He means "Free" as in "Libertine", not "Free" as in "Free". 8-) 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 9: 5:23 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3CB337B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 09:05:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from apollo.laserfence.net (apollo.laserfence.net [196.44.69.138]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C49543FDD for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 09:05:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from will@unfoldings.net) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by apollo.laserfence.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oRSy-000Abm-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:05:05 +0200 Received: from prometheus-p0.datel.laserfence.net ([192.168.255.1] helo=prometheus.home.laserfence.net) by apollo.laserfence.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oRSl-000AbN-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:04:52 +0200 Received: from phoenix.home.laserfence.net ([192.168.0.2]) by prometheus.home.laserfence.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oRSg-000BMK-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:04:46 +0200 Received: from will by phoenix.home.laserfence.net with local (Exim 4.10) id 18oRSe-0007nW-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:04:44 +0200 From: Willie Viljoen To: Terry Lambert , Peter Wu Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:04:44 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: Johnson David , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200302271904.44537.will@unfoldings.net> X-Spam-Score: (/) X-Scanner: exiscan for exim4 (http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/) *18oRSl-000AbN-00*5lh2mCpUwVE* X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020422 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thursday 27 February 2003 17:02, someone, possibly Terry Lambert, typed: > Peter Wu wrote: > > >>>>> "Johnson" == Johnson David writes: > > > > Johnson> Yes it's true. The Technical Editor of the O'Reilly > > Network Johnson> (chromatic@oreilly.com) has apologized for "apparently > > Johnson> conflating the BSDs with `Free Software`". See the whole > > Johnson> article at . > > > > Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood the > > story? > > He means "Free" as in "Libertine", not "Free" as in "Free". Slashdot have the answer in their FAQ, see "Free Software, Free Beer" :) -- Willie Viljoen Freelance IT Consultant 214 Paul Kruger Avenue, Universitas Bloemfontein 9321 South Africa +27 51 522 15 60 +27 51 522 44 36 (after hours) +27 82 404 03 27 (mobile) will@unfoldings.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 11:20: 2 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B852937B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:20:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from thor.acuson.com (ac17859.acuson.com [157.226.71.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B29443FAF for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:19:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DavidJohnson@Siemens.com) Received: from mvaexch02.acuson.com (mvaexch02.acuson.com [157.226.230.209]) by thor.acuson.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HAZ00GWZEZ476@thor.acuson.com> for freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:18:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mvaexch02.acuson.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:11:44 -0800 Received: from dhcp-46-158.acuson.com ([157.226.46.158]) by mvaexch01.acuson.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y2R04Q8Q; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:13:00 -0800 Content-return: allowed Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:19:17 -0800 From: Johnson David Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" In-reply-to: <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <200302271119.17369.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Organization: Siemens Medical Systems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thursday 27 February 2003 07:02 am, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood > > the story? > > He means "Free" as in "Libertine", not "Free" as in "Free". "Libertine" is not really the right word, except in the most cynical sense. Here's a slightly improved statement: He means "Free" as in "regulated", not "Free" as in "unrestricted". It's a fundamental split between basic philosophies of freedom. One side is concerned with the "greater good" or "public weal", and sees no problems with eliminating some freedoms while promoting others, so long as the total freedom is maximized according to their calculus. The other side is concerned with individuals, and sees any reduction of an individuals freedoms to be unacceptable. I hesitate to assign any political labels to the two sides, since there are radical anarchists, extreme authoritarians, and everyone in between, in both camps. It gets interesting in terms of software, because distributing software under both models is a volunteer cooperation. Some members of the second side may indeed wish to maximise the greater good and public weal, but do not see distributing software, as an appropriate vehicle. And some members of the first side may find genuine distaste at regulating the freedoms of individuals, but consider the individual free to choose the authors distribution terms or not. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 12:13:23 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7BE37B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:13:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net (bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B3743F75 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:13:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0009.cvx40-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.42.9] helo=mindspring.com) by bluejay.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18oUP6-0005Kw-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:13:17 -0800 Message-ID: <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:11:36 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johnson David Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> <3E5E289D.500C9704@mindspring.com> <200302271119.17369.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a400ff28a46458add726ca4dc05fa561683ca473d225a0f487350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Johnson David wrote: > On Thursday 27 February 2003 07:02 am, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > Excuse me. But isn't FreeBSD 'Free Software'? Or, I misunderstood > > > the story? > > > > He means "Free" as in "Libertine", not "Free" as in "Free". > > "Libertine" is not really the right word, except in the most cynical > sense. Here's a slightly improved statement: He means "Free" as in > "regulated", not "Free" as in "unrestricted". He means free as in "has been liberated". "Liberated" and "Libertine" and similar words derived from that root have bad political connotations in the U.S., which is why he had to redefine the word "Free" in order to avoid using the technically correct words. 8-). > It's a fundamental split between basic philosophies of freedom. One side > is concerned with the "greater good" or "public weal", and sees no > problems with eliminating some freedoms while promoting others, so long > as the total freedom is maximized according to their calculus. The > other side is concerned with individuals, and sees any reduction of an > individuals freedoms to be unacceptable. The problem with that statement is "according to their calculus", as opposed to "according to a mutually agreed upon calculus". > I hesitate to assign any political labels to the two sides, since there > are radical anarchists, extreme authoritarians, and everyone in > between, in both camps. > > It gets interesting in terms of software, because distributing software > under both models is a volunteer cooperation. Some members of the > second side may indeed wish to maximise the greater good and public > weal, but do not see distributing software, as an appropriate vehicle. > And some members of the first side may find genuine distaste at > regulating the freedoms of individuals, but consider the individual > free to choose the authors distribution terms or not. Actually, it's a lot simpler than that. One side believes people will do what's right, because it is right, and the other side believe people will not do what's right unless their feet are held over a fire. GPL advocates are cynical about other people being willing to "do the right thing", without having to be coerced. 8^p. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 13: 7: 7 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE49037B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:07:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from thor.acuson.com (thor.acuson.com [157.226.71.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47BB043F3F for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:07:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DavidJohnson@Siemens.com) Received: from mvaexch02.acuson.com (mvaexch02.acuson.com [157.226.230.209]) by thor.acuson.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HAZ00GJIJXMJP@thor.acuson.com> for freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:05:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mvaexch02.acuson.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:58:49 -0800 Received: from dhcp-46-158.acuson.com ([157.226.46.158]) by mvaexch01.acuson.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y2R04S9K; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:00:08 -0800 Content-return: allowed Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:06:26 -0800 From: Johnson David Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" In-reply-to: <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <200302271306.26357.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Organization: Siemens Medical Systems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <200302271119.17369.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thursday 27 February 2003 12:11 pm, Terry Lambert wrote: > > "Libertine" is not really the right word, except in the most > > cynical sense. Here's a slightly improved statement: He means > > "Free" as in "regulated", not "Free" as in "unrestricted". > > He means free as in "has been liberated". "Liberated" and > "Libertine" and similar words derived from that root have bad > political connotations in the U.S., which is why he had to redefine > the word "Free" in order to avoid using the technically correct > words. 8-). It's a form of "GNUspeak". If you speak enough GNUspeak, you start to believe what you're saying. For instance, "liberating software". A good analogy is an injured fox in a foxtrap. The BSD camp will "liberate" the fox by releasing it from the trap and letting it go. The GNU camp will "liberate" the fox by releasing it from the trap, then cutting its legs off so it can't get trapped again. > The problem with that statement is "according to their calculus", > as opposed to "according to a mutually agreed upon calculus". Such is the problem with any philosophy that seeks to maximize the greater good. > Actually, it's a lot simpler than that. One side believes people > will do what's right, because it is right, and the other side > believe people will not do what's right unless their feet are held > over a fire. GPL advocates are cynical about other people being > willing to "do the right thing", without having to be coerced. 8^p. Let's see, GNU expects people to steal, so people end up "stealing" from GNU. On the other hand, BSD expects people to give back without being asked, so people end up giving back to BSD without being asked. The best example of this is Steve Jobs. He "stole" GCC by writing a Objective C front end for it, and gave back to BSD in the form of Darwin and numerous bug fixes and improvements. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 13:25:35 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB82D37B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:25:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A8C343FBD for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:25:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown[12.242.158.67]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03) with ESMTP id <20030227212532003009u2hje>; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 21:25:32 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1RLNW5F014777 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:23:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id h1RLNS1F014774; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:23:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: jojo set sender to swear@attbi.com using -f To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 27 Feb 2003 13:23:28 -0800 In-Reply-To: <86bs0yne2d.fsf@vanilla.zzz> Message-ID: Lines: 29 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At least until recently, "Free Software" was (essentially) any software which could be legally distributed as part of a GPLed derivative, i.e., software which is "GPL compatible". (No joke.) It is debatable whether BSD-licensed software meets that test, but almost everyone thinks it does, which is almost as good. (Most people readily interpret the "each and every part" clause to their own advantage. Specifically, they read "the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License" as "the distribution of the whole must be on the terms compatible with this License".) I saw the statement from an anonymous poster claiming that RMS now has a second, more narrow definition of "Free Software" which (I'm guessing) is something like "Copyleft Software". That would mean that public domain software is not "Free Software". I'm very dubious. Anyone have a quote from one of the top copyleftists that would exclude BSD or PD software from their "Free Software" category? As for the meaning of "Free Software", let me just note that these are the same people who say that GPLed software is "freely redistributable under the terms of the GPL"; i.e., they say self-contradictory nonsense which people are expected to learn to interpret with a true meaning, while retaining the psychological advantages of using words like "freely". (Same thing with "non-proprietary" which really means "in the public domain", but which they've trained people to use when they mean "GPL compatible". BSD people should be able to recognize that software which may not be used in a closed-source derivative surely qualifies as "proprietary".) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 13:39:12 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F11537B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:39:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from apollo.laserfence.net (apollo.laserfence.net [196.44.69.138]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1589B43FAF for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:39:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from will@unfoldings.net) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by apollo.laserfence.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oVjx-000C9p-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:38:53 +0200 Received: from prometheus-p0.datel.laserfence.net ([192.168.255.1] helo=prometheus.home.laserfence.net) by apollo.laserfence.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oVjf-000C9i-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:38:36 +0200 Received: from phoenix.home.laserfence.net ([192.168.0.2]) by prometheus.home.laserfence.net with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oVja-000CAt-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:38:30 +0200 Received: from will by phoenix.home.laserfence.net with local (Exim 4.10) id 18oVjY-0008FP-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:38:28 +0200 From: Willie Viljoen To: Johnson David , Terry Lambert Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:38:28 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> <200302271306.26357.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <200302271306.26357.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200302272338.28371.will@unfoldings.net> X-Spam-Score: (/) X-Scanner: exiscan for exim4 (http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/) *18oVjf-000C9i-00*qHLAN7XHbnE* X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020422 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thursday 27 February 2003 23:06, someone, possibly Johnson David, typed: > It's a form of "GNUspeak". If you speak enough GNUspeak, you start to > believe what you're saying. For instance, "liberating software". A good > analogy is an injured fox in a foxtrap. The BSD camp will "liberate" > the fox by releasing it from the trap and letting it go. The GNU camp > will "liberate" the fox by releasing it from the trap, then cutting its > legs off so it can't get trapped again. It's even simpler than that. GNU believe software should be free, as in, nobody can controle the software's development or rights to the software, and if anybody wants to modify the software, the modification must also be free, hence the author of any modification also has no rights to his own work. Under the BSD license, software is free, in the monetary sence. We give it away for free, and people can do with it, well, what ever they hell they like. If they want to port an early version of the KAME project's code, call it "the TCP/IP stack" and sell it as part of Windows 2000, well, that's their business. The GNU folks would have sued Microsoft years ago, we just think it's really cool that they finally figured out that they are too stupid to write their own code, and are using code from FreeBSD instead. The GNU people would have said: "Windows uses our free (liberated) code, thus Windows has been freed, and must now be made open source and available free of charge to the public." We say: "Look at MS, they spent years, and millions, writing their own IP stack, and they ended up using ours, which they could have done in the first place, without paying a cent, they are stupid, and we love it." In all seriousness though. I find the provisions of the GPL anything but "liberating." Infact, I believe the GNU people are nothing but politically acceptable software dictators. Let's say Daimler-Benz AG decided that the automobile with internal combustion engine, which its founders Daimler and Benz invented at the same time, working in seperate workshops, in 1885, was to be an "open source" creation. Let's say the licensed the use of their automobile under something similar to the GPL. Some time later, Volvo takes a look at their car, and think: "Hey, let's install seat belts and keep people from flying through the winshield." If the origional automobile were licensed under the GPL, Volvo would not be able to receive anything other than credit for their idea of adding seat belts, wethere they wanted to charge for the use of the idea, or not. Volvo could ofcourse have "cloned" the Mercedes and added seat belts, which would have been no problem, except that they would have to reinvent the wheel, or the Mercedes, for that matter. Why does a Swede need to build his own version of the Mercedes just to be able to add seat belts to it and charge for this innovation, without a German lawer from Daimler-Benz telling him that seat belts are a modificaiton on their Mercedes, and thus should be free, or liberated, because their Mercedes is free, or liberated. OK, alright, Mercedes and Volvos are both not free, but you get the point. If the Mercedes were licensed under the BSD license however, Volvo would have had alot less trouble getting their seat belt idea implemented, and saving lives, even if they wanted to charge for it. They would just have needed to grab a BSD licensed Mercedes, install seat belts, and sell it for profit as a Volvo. Instead, they had to build a whole new car, from the ground up, just sothat they could have a car into which to install their seat belts, and make money from them. Back to the topic though... The point is that the GNU people's idea of "free" is very distorted, in both its possible meanings. How can they claim that their product is truly free, when it is really only free when this freedom is made use of under their strict terms? Those who license the BSD way, on the other hand, just don't care what you do with the code, the fact that you want the code is enough for them, what you want to do with it (ie, modify it, use it in something you want to sell, sell it, bury it in a chest on a CD-ROM for your grand kids to find), well, that is your business. Will -- Willie Viljoen Freelance IT Consultant 214 Paul Kruger Avenue, Universitas Bloemfontein 9321 South Africa +27 51 522 15 60 +27 51 522 44 36 (after hours) +27 82 404 03 27 (mobile) will@unfoldings.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 15:24:22 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3080637B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net (stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.188]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9236E43FCB for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:24:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0207.cvx40-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.42.207] helo=mindspring.com) by stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18oXNe-0004D9-00; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:23:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3E5E9DBE.12AA2EF6@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:22:38 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Willie Viljoen Cc: Johnson David , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> <200302271306.26357.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <200302272338.28371.will@unfoldings.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a462aa4c0ad09b2da0f000d446e2e9cccca7ce0e8f8d31aa3f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Willie Viljoen wrote: > It's even simpler than that. GNU believe software should be free, as in, > nobody can controle the software's development or rights to the software, > and if anybody wants to modify the software, the modification must also be > free, hence the author of any modification also has no rights to his own > work. That's not "freedom", that's "liberation": synonyms FREE, RELEASE, LIBERATE, EMANCIPATE, MANUMIT FREE implies a usually permanent removal from whatever binds, confines, entangles, or oppresses . RELEASE suggests a setting loose from confinement, restraint, or a state of pressure or tension, often without implication of permanent liberation . LIBERATE stresses particularly the resulting state of liberty . EMANCIPATE implies the liberation of a person from subjection or domination . MANUMIT implies emancipation from slavery . You know, as in "I hacked into Microsoft's CVS server and liberated the source code". 8-) 8-). > If the origional automobile were licensed under the GPL, Volvo would not be > able to receive anything other than credit for their idea of adding seat > belts, wethere they wanted to charge for the use of the idea, or not. They would also be able to accept a minimal fee for installation, and they could charge out the wazoo for a warranty, which no one would buy, because it's cheaper to get a new car, and they could charge for "OnStar" (support). 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Feb 27 17:25:22 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3DB237B401 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:25:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F0043FA3 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:25:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown[12.242.158.67]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with ESMTP id <2003022801251905200pspcde>; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 01:25:19 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1S1NG5F017663; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:23:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id h1S1NAMa017658; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:23:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@attbi.com) X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: jojo set sender to swear@attbi.com using -f To: Willie Viljoen Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: O'Reilly apologizes for calling BSD "Free Software" References: <200302261224.54884.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <3E5E70F8.85AE964@mindspring.com> <200302271306.26357.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <200302272338.28371.will@unfoldings.net> From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 27 Feb 2003 17:23:10 -0800 In-Reply-To: <200302272338.28371.will@unfoldings.net> Message-ID: <4xof4xyz9d.f4x@localhost.localdomain> Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Willie Viljoen writes: > The point is that the GNU people's idea of "free" is very distorted, in both > its possible meanings. An example of that distortion occurs in the GPL where it says "BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, ...". In fact, its license on the right to publish derivatives is NOT free of charge; the charge is a cross-license (under GPL) of the deriver's work, which may have significant value as recognized in copyright law (17 USC): The term "financial gain" includes receipt, or expectation of receipt, of anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works. So don't let anyone tell you that the GPL license is a free-as-in-beer license, in general. (Some rights are licensed for no cost, I believe, but some say even those are licensed for the "consideration" of not holding the licensor liable for damages, bugs, etc.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Feb 28 18:10:38 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75A7137B401 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:10:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B7643FBD for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:10:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rsidd@online.fr) Received: from user-0cev12u.cable.mindspring.com ([24.239.132.94] helo=bluerondo.a.la.turk) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18owSS-0000vw-00 for advocacy@freebsd.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:10:36 -0800 Received: (qmail 887 invoked by uid 1001); 1 Mar 2003 02:10:31 -0000 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 21:10:31 -0500 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Conflating" Retraction Message-ID: <20030301021031.GA841@papagena.rockefeller.edu> References: <7444B958-4B7B-11D7-9511-000393DBC8FE@oreilly.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7444B958-4B7B-11D7-9511-000393DBC8FE@oreilly.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG chromatic said on Feb 28, 2003 at 16:19:23: > Hello Gentlemen, > > I apologize for the unsolicited e-mail, but I would like to ask a > favor. I've written another weblog in response to all of the comments > about my "Free Software" piece. If you have a moment, would you be > willing to look over the response and let me know if you find it > acceptable? > > http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/2854 > > I look forward to your feedback. The update reads fine by me. It's still not totally clear what you meant in your original article, but at least your last paragraph is clear enough. I'm cc'ing advocacy@freebsd.org where someone had pointed out your article, and bcc'ing you to spare you the inevitable barrage of replies. - Rahul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message