From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 30 01:27:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C78B16A4CE for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 01:27:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from insomnia.benzedrine.cx (insomnia.benzedrine.cx [62.65.145.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513E643D4C for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 01:27:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dhartmei@insomnia.benzedrine.cx) Received: from insomnia.benzedrine.cx (dhartmei@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i9U1R5xF002962 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:27:05 +0200 (MEST) Received: (from dhartmei@localhost) by insomnia.benzedrine.cx (8.13.1/8.12.10/Submit) id i9U1R3L3000835; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:27:04 +0200 (MEST) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:27:03 +0200 From: Daniel Hartmeier To: Sam Leffler Message-ID: <20041030012703.GK3999@insomnia.benzedrine.cx> References: <20041027161650.GA39008@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <200410271003.19047.sam@errno.com> <41829D84.5000903@errno.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41829D84.5000903@errno.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Christian Weisgerber Subject: Re: ACX100 Firmware Licensing X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 01:27:33 -0000 On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 12:44:04PM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote: > And this form of activism also turns off lots of vendors. The open > source market is virtually non-existent to vendors so you will never get > anyone to do anything by arguing they should make a change because it > will increase their sales. All the vendors Theo&co are going after are > bit players with inferior products that are in trouble in one way or > another. The proper way to make things happen is to find a vendor that > is basing a product on an OSS and use their influence to make things > happen. You can crow about your wins but in the long run you will > pollute the enviromment for others that are trying to do similar things > but are not pounding their chest in public and/or exhorting the hords to > a jihad on wireless vendors. If you're telling the hords to sit down, shut up and quit rocking the boat, because you're already sailing smoothly, I'd like to ask where you're heading and how far you already got. That is, will we get firmware that is freely redistributable by anyone for any purpose, for a good number of available chipsets? Or is that not a common goal at all? In your book, what's the difference between grassroots activism asking responsible citizens to voice their opinions in a peaceful and polite manner and exhorting the hords to a jihad? What's the difference between rationally evaluating the success of a strategy and crowing about wins? Intel and TI are 'bit players' compared to whom? Daniel