Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 14:30:21 -0700 From: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk <m.e.sanliturk@gmail.com> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: jd1008 <jd1008@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Questions Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Microsoft Now OpenBSD Foundation Gold Contributor Message-ID: <CAOgwaMs=bV4=eb3XTKZKGb62ds7mr_vZ37=0myjw1id7MKtY4w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20150710212456.70c0d1db.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <BLU437-SMTP2B8F14BE7B4D30D13EC96809F0@phx.gbl> <559FF775.7030204@mgm51.com> <33650.128.135.70.2.1436549147.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> <55A00F43.90908@gmail.com> <20150710212456.70c0d1db.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 12:30:27 -0600, jd1008 wrote: > > A friend of mine commented about this to me: > > > > "[...] > > I've always wondered whether consumer hardware / embedded devices would > > start migrating over to BSD, since GPL compliance is such a hassle for > > many vendors. Obviously Android went this way several years ago." > > Due to the licensing terms of the BSDL, we will never really > find out how many embedded devices (routers, home alarm systems, > crypto applicances, entertainment solutions and so on) already > contain a BSD operating system at their heart. The vendor is > not forced to tell anyone that they're using a BSD, and they > do not make their source code public. It can therefore contain > backdoors, spyware, and other means of invading user privacy. > Unlike the GPL which somewhat requires "contributing back", > the BSDL does not do so. So it's a perfectly viable basis for > building a closed-source product that caters the government, > the security organisations and the "market" more than its > buyers and users. > > > -- > Polytropon > Magdeburg, Germany > Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 > Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... > _______________________________________________ > > Is there a "Natural Law" that enforces to supply "equivalent" "source code" and "machine code" for copy - left licensed software ? Who can "prove" that the supplied "source code" is "different" from the supplied "machine code" ? This is an "Undecidable" problem which is "Turing's Halting Problem" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem in a form to try to prove that two "programs" are equivalent or not ( they pass the same execution points or not ) . This means that , claiming that "copy-left licensed software is more secure than permissive licensed software" is a groundless and incorrect claim . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOgwaMs=bV4=eb3XTKZKGb62ds7mr_vZ37=0myjw1id7MKtY4w>