Real men don't attack straw men

[Joel Wiramu Pauling]

The main annoyance I have had with bittorrent/p2p apps on openbsd is
the relatively low  file open limits. Pumping this is easy enough tho.

On 06/01/2008, Leonardo Rodrigues <leonardovcr2@...> wrote:

> Maybe those watchdog timeouts have nothing to do with bittorrent, and
> are probably more related to nic problems. Have you tried running your
> torrent client with a different network card?
>
>
> On Jan 5, 2008 4:22 PM, Brian <bwaichu@...> wrote:
> > Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent?
> >
> > Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is watchdog
> > timeouts.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       ____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
> > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> An OpenBSD user... and that's all you need to know =)
>
> Please, send private emails to leonardovcr@...

[Reid Nichol]

--- Karthik Kumar <karthikkumar@...> wrote:

> On Jan 6, 2008 1:06 AM, Reid Nichol <rnichol_rrc@...> wrote:
> > --- Karthik Kumar <karthikkumar@...> wrote:
> > > Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your
> > > computer and ethics.
> >
> > Please cite a piece of software that can harm my computer merely
> > because it is "non-free" in the FSF/GNU sense.  And you should
> probably
> > qualify that ethics remark with: Should you be an extremist of
> sorts...
> >
> >
>
> How about nvidia proprietary drivers on OpenBSD?

Unless I'm mistaken, these don't exist.  Of course, if I'm wrong,
you'll be able to provide documentation that they do.  I won't hold my
breath though.


> Should you be an extremist of sorts, you should put it in the ports
> tree and call it "free".

I'm certain that there was some inner dialogue going on while you wrote
this that you're not letting me in on.  Because, I have no idea what
you're talking about here.

> > > On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of
> > > non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk.
> >
> > Sophistry.  If there is problems in logic, etc then one need not be
> of
> > a certain type (with respect to what you're saying) to realize that
> nor
> > point it out.  To say so is asinine (above as well).
> >
>
> No, it isn't. If you're simply preaching to the world that you're
> free, it only makes you political. And that includes you, OpenBSD.

Well OpenBSD is fine here.  But, are you sure about RMS?  Because he
has been contradicting himself all over the place in this thread alone.
 Not to mention his actions, both past and present everywhere.  But, in
his mind (and I imagine yours) it's probably easy to not see this when
what you believe/preach changes from second to second to avoid any
criticism that comes "your" way.

But, I'll also mention that you didn't actually comment on what I
wrote.  You commented on something you made up.  Please read what I
wrote and comment on that should you reply again.



best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Reid Nichol]

--- Shane J Pearson <shane.j.pearson@...> wrote:
> On 06/01/2008, at 3:28 AM, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be
> > putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'
>
> Huh? OpenBSD is built from free software and allows users the freedom
> to do what they please, even if that means running non-free software.
> You have a strange idea of "free".
>
> An OpenBSD user exercising freedom of choice, by choosing to use some
 
> non-free software, does not make OpenBSD non or less free.

No shit!  They go ahead and redefine what 'free' means and they try to
criticise people for still using dictionaries.  Kinda says something
about the level they're working on.


best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Ray Percival-2]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 17:15, "Joel Wiramu Pauling"  
<aenertia@...> wrote:

> The main annoyance I have had with bittorrent/p2p apps on openbsd is
> the relatively low  file open limits. Pumping this is easy enough tho.

rtorrent sorted that for me nicely.

>
>
> On 06/01/2008, Leonardo Rodrigues <leonardovcr2@...> wrote:
>> Maybe those watchdog timeouts have nothing to do with bittorrent, and
>> are probably more related to nic problems. Have you tried running  
>> your
>> torrent client with a different network card?
>>
>>
>> On Jan 5, 2008 4:22 PM, Brian <bwaichu@...> wrote:
>>> Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent?
>>>
>>> Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is  
>>> watchdog
>>> timeouts.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>> ____________________________________________________________________________________

 

>>> Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
>>> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> An OpenBSD user... and that's all you need to know =)
>>
>> Please, send private emails to leonardovcr@...

[Reid Nichol]

--- Karthik Kumar <karthikkumar@...> wrote:
> I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
> like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written
> in a stupid web page until you live up to them.

Which OpenBSD does.  You have failed to show otherwise.

> > We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow
> someone to
> > install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the
> system
> > and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against
> goals,
> > which you do not want to read.
> >
>
> I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> people to use non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.

Where?  Are you refering to the FAQ?  Are you aware of what FAQ means?


> I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased
> towards OpenBSD and you can say what you want but it doesn't make
> your version of the truth any better.

It is the truth though.  But, I'll mention that what you just said
doesn't make your delusion true.


best regards,
Reid Nichol

President Bush says:

War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

[Duncan Patton a Campbell]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 17:28:39 -0800 (PST)
Reid Nichol <rnichol_rrc@...> wrote:

> Well OpenBSD is fine here.  But, are you sure about RMS?  Because he
> has been contradicting himself all over the place in this thread alone.

Richard appears to be falling into a "single point of failure" setup.  
Its like the "Drug Czar" concept where a single man is given enormous
powers and his individual weaknessess, however small and insignificant,
become a mechanism for prying open the whole system.

Dhu

[Theo de Raadt]

> On 1/5/08, Richard Stallman <rms@...> wrote:
> > Does ReactOS recommend non-free software?
> > If so. please show me what it says, and the URL.
>
> I have a better idea.  Why don't you do your own fucking homework.

Oh come now.  You can't expect a hypocrite to do homework that
undermines himself, can you?

[j4nKy]

On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:39:35PM -0600, Duncan Patton a Campbell wrote:

> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 17:28:39 -0800 (PST)
> Reid Nichol <rnichol_rrc@...> wrote:
>
> > Well OpenBSD is fine here.  But, are you sure about RMS?  Because he
> > has been contradicting himself all over the place in this thread alone.
>
> Richard appears to be falling into a "single point of failure" setup.  
> Its like the "Drug Czar" concept where a single man is given enormous
> powers and his individual weaknessess, however small and insignificant,
> become a mechanism for prying open the whole system.

not the same at all.  RMS is not an appointed figurehead.  he is the
founder of the system he represents.

the only setup is Richard's own inability to be convincingly accurate
and consistent.  that is neither small nor insignificant.

--
jakemsr@...
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

[guilt]

On Jan 6, 2008 1:22 AM, Jacob Grydholt Jensen <grydholt@...> wrote:

> On 05/01/2008, Karthik Kumar <karthikkumar@...> wrote:
>
> > I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify "to encourage
> > people to use
> > non-free software", but I see that happening anyway.
>
> And so what? I think you were trying to prove that OpenBSD were not
> living up to their goals. Instead you are repeating what RMS started
> out with. Try actually showing us one of OpenBSD's goals that the
> project is not following.
>
> > Your own claims?
> >
> > 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe
> > flash player vulnerabilities.
>
> What are you on about? As people have tried to explain again and
> again, OpenBSD does not ship with adobe flash player. Did you
> understand the "Secure by Default" mode?
>

Secure by default. Ship with nothing and call it secure. Wow! Maybe it
shouldn't start the network by default, huh? Then that's secure, isn't
it? Start no daemons, start no shells: ZOMG!!! it's secure :P

OpenBSD got pwned a year ago with another remote hole. I hope they
find enough so they can stop bragging about 'Secure by default'.

Do you realize that many people just can not live with 'default'?
Look: people do "use" OpenBSD for things other than plain old fvwm
with xterm. And keeping security as a goal is not just for a stupid
dubious marketing campaign.

>
> Jacob Grydholt
>
>



--
Karthik
http://guilt.bafsoft.net

[Siju George]

On Jan 5, 2008 11:51 PM, Karthik Kumar <karthikkumar@...> wrote:
> > Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated
> > at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read.
> >
>
> I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you
> like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in
> a stupid web page until you live up to them.
>

Karthik, My Friend, You are becoming too stupid and childish because
you keep whining that OpenBSD does not live up the goals stated on
their websites.

Please point out specific instances like

1) .......
2) ........
3) ............

ok?

Otherwise you just sound silly!!!
And again you forgot to cc RMS, I have added him.
I hope your firmware confusion was over with the explanation given in
a mail up in this thread.

If only you will study how much OpenBSD project has contributed to
freeing up documentation for writing free drivers that let you use
free systems ( since you claim you use it ) you would drop your silly
generalization and vague accusations.

If you want to reply any more to this thread please shoe specific
instances where OpenBSD has deviated from its goals. Some body
competent enough can always answer you and clear your confusion. may
be the competition person will be busy coding and might not even read
your mail.

But from your part be serious and state clearly where the deviation
has taken place

[guilt]

> There is no such thing as free as in beer.  This is one of the dumbest
> analogies I have ever heard.  Who came up with it anyway?  Was it the
> FSF by any chance?
>

A guy called it 'Free as in Sex' here. Blame him for the next dumbest term. :P

> >
> > > By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned
> > > that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when
> > > it comes to freedom?
> > >
> >
> > All I see is a set of groups spreading propaganda in their own
> > interests. I take no sides. :-)
>
> Wrong.  One spreads propaganda and accuses the other of bs.  The other
> calls the bs out and proves conclusively that there is (let me use a FSF
> word here) FUD.  Your arguments are stupid and you have been told
> repeatedly so.  Don't like it?  stop replying.  I will continue to point
> out that your arguments are a fallacy.
>

I can keep arguing. Too bad the list has to take all this.

>
> You sound like him.
>

See, i'm not going to play your silly game.

>
> And you have been told by many that your opinion has no bearing.
> Repeating it won't make it so.
>

You're replying to it. Stop replying if it doesn't have a bearing.

[L-9]

On 1/5/08, Marco Peereboom <slash@...> wrote:

> There is no such thing as free as in beer.  This is one of the dumbest
> analogies I have ever heard.  Who came up with it anyway?  
>  

Free as in yeast infection,  not free as in beer.
Free as in idiotic lunacy.
 
A yeast infection occurs in brewing, yeasties replicate for free free FREE!

First ten people to call "b u l l s h i t" on GNU get the following sent
to them:
1. A free sealed, new package of special breed champagne yeast for
making cider/soda/beer
2. instructions on how to use a 2 litre pop bottle to make the cider/soda
3. a small copy of the official FREE definition according to my
Webster's Dictionary.

I pay for shipping and all costs. Compliments of Z505 Software. At my
expense, by Air Mail.

I kid you not.. send your address, country, postal/zip code, etc.
International and P.O. boxes are okay.

If you don't wish to call GNU  b u l l s h i t, or you don't want this
free offer, simply don't reply.

Regards,
L505

p.s. this has nothing to do with women.. a yeast infection AFAIK is the
correct term for brewing. It is not meant to insult anyone except GNU.
And I am 100 percent serious about this offer. First 10 people.

[guilt]

On Jan 6, 2008 4:25 AM, Gilles Chehade <gilles@...> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:42:16AM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
> > > allow them to be redistributed with the system.
> > >
> >
> > You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the
> > whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad.
> >
>
> What has money to do with this ?
> You sound like you have issues understanding, so I will make it as simple
> as I can, please take the time to read a few times, and make sure you get
> it, before replying to this mail:
>
>         - vendor A sells hardware that requires a firmware
>
>         - OpenBSD wants to support that hardware and needs the firmware
>                 to be shipped, say in /etc/firmware/, to have the
>                 hardware work out of the box
>
>         - vendor A says "if a customer wants the firmware, he must go
>                 to out website and fill a registration form online".
>
>         - OpenBSD does not ship the firmware because it is not free
>                 enough.
>
> See ? This is an example, it is unrelated to money, and you still failed
> to show us ONE point where we don't stick to our goals.
>

So registration form = non-free. You failed to prove how it was not
free. I asked if it required OpenBSD to pay money to a vendor, or the
issue was about something else besides the money. I don't see the
registration form being a problem here. Maybe they might simply take
down your name and address for contact details or whatever. I don't
see why a registration form must be non-free here.

[Johan Beisser]

On Jan 5, 2008, at 11:22 PM, Karthik Kumar wrote:

> Secure by default. Ship with nothing and call it secure. Wow! Maybe it
> shouldn't start the network by default, huh? Then that's secure, isn't
> it? Start no daemons, start no shells: ZOMG!!! it's secure :P

Oddly, I find this more sensible than "start with everything wide open  
and on, because a user doesn't know what he might need."

> OpenBSD got pwned a year ago with another remote hole. I hope they
> find enough so they can stop bragging about 'Secure by default'.
>
>
> Do you realize that many people just can not live with 'default'?
> Look: people do "use" OpenBSD for things other than plain old fvwm
> with xterm. And keeping security as a goal is not just for a stupid
> dubious marketing campaign.

Default works pretty well for me:

jb@cerberus's password:
Last login: Sat Jan  5 15:29:22 2008 from 10.10.13.22
OpenBSD 4.1-current (GENERIC) #328: Wed Jul 11 20:22:58 MDT 2007

Welcome to OpenBSD: The proactively secure Unix-like operating system.

Please use the sendbug(1) utility to report bugs in the system.
Before reporting a bug, please try to reproduce it with the latest
version of the code.  With bug reports, please try to ensure that
enough information to reproduce the problem is enclosed, and if a
known fix for it exists, include that as well.

$ pkg_info -ac
Information for inst:lzo-1.08p1

Comment:
portable speedy lossless data compression library


Information for inst:openvpn-2.0.6p0

Comment:
easy-to-use, robust, and highly configurable VPN


Information for inst:pftop-0.6

Comment:
curses-based real time state and rule display for pf


$

[Richard Stallman]

    Developing a program ( real software ) for a non-free platform is big
    encouragement by loud communication ( actions speak better than words
    ) to use or continue using that non-free platform.

There are two issues here: the practical effects, and the message conveyed.

The practical effects are mixed.  Making free apps run on non-free
systems paves the way for some users to migrate to free systems, and
for some users eliminates a motivation to migrate.  So it has both
good and bad effects.  I don't know which effect is bigger, but I
speculate that the good effect is bigger over all.  The negative
effect is limited to power users, people who might switch systems as
if it were an easy thing to do.  Most users are reluctant to change
operating systems at all.

The part of the practical effect that is negative is something we
cannot prevent.  If we were to delete the Windows support from Emacs
or GCC, that would not stop people from running Emacs or GCC on
Windows.  The sort of people that would choose an operating system on
this basis could easily maintain and redistribute such code.

The other issue is the message we convey.  That is something we can
control, but it also shows the difference between these two cases.
Providing a recipe to install a non-free program is very direct and
clear support for its use.  Making your free program work with
something non-free if that's already installed is not such a direct
message of support.  It makes sense to treat the two cases
differently.

[Richard Stallman]

    By the way ( Perhaps, I don't know which ) some of the free drivers
    that Gnuisance has were made possible only through the efforts of the
    OpenBSD project freeing up documentation from the vendors.

I appreciate the work that OpenBSD has done in this area.
It is an important contribution to our community.

[Richard Stallman]

    BUT I WILL STILL GO ON SPREADING THE LIE THAT OpenBSD CONTAINS
    NON-FREE SOFTWARE SO PEOPLE ARE MISLEAD!!!!

I never intentionally said such a thing.  It was a misunderstanding,
because I chose words that were subject to misinterpretation.

I appreciate having been informed about the unclear statement.  To
prevent any further misunderstanding, I have had a clarifying note
posted in the page with the interview.

    > I don't object to general-purpose tools just for being general.

    How about OpenBSD ports system a general purpose tool given by
    developers to the users?

I think the general-purpose ports system framework is fine.  What I do
not want to recommend are the specific ports for specific non-free
programs.

[L-9]

Karthik Kumar wrote:
>> There is no such thing as free as in beer.  This is one of the dumbest
>> analogies I have ever heard.  Who came up with it anyway?  Was it the
>> FSF by any chance?
>>
>>    
>
> A guy called it 'Free as in Sex' here. Blame him for the next dumbest term. :P
>
>  

http://z505.com/gng/

Blame canada.


Regards,
L505

Like, one day, like, I went to google.. and like, I typed in
define:satire, and like. yeah.

[Denis Doroshenko]

On Jan 6, 2008 9:43 AM, Karthik Kumar <karthikkumar@...> wrote:

> On Jan 6, 2008 4:25 AM, Gilles Chehade <gilles@...> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:42:16AM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote:
> > > > Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not
> > > > allow them to be redistributed with the system.
> > > >
> > >
> > > You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the
> > > whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad.
> > >
> >
> > What has money to do with this ?
> > You sound like you have issues understanding, so I will make it as simple
> > as I can, please take the time to read a few times, and make sure you get
> > it, before replying to this mail:
> >
> >         - vendor A sells hardware that requires a firmware
> >
> >         - OpenBSD wants to support that hardware and needs the firmware
> >                 to be shipped, say in /etc/firmware/, to have the
> >                 hardware work out of the box
> >
> >         - vendor A says "if a customer wants the firmware, he must go
> >                 to out website and fill a registration form online".
> >
> >         - OpenBSD does not ship the firmware because it is not free
> >                 enough.
> >
> > See ? This is an example, it is unrelated to money, and you still failed
> > to show us ONE point where we don't stick to our goals.
> >
>
> So registration form = non-free.

yes it is in the case. what's your problems is? if i have purchaised
hardware of this vendor (and with e.g notebooks WRT wifi there is
no much of a choise), why should i have trouble and *find a way*
to go to vendor's site to fill some dumb form (what for? i already
paid them) and then donwlonad the firmware and get my device
running. instead they could allow OpenBSD to redistrubute it
in a form as it is, and i could use my device the second kernel
initializes the device. that would be freedom for me, user of the
hardware. but the vendor wants to restrict my freedom by
making me going to the site otherwise i won't be able to use
the device. i have no choise. is it so complicated so it needs
to be chewed and put to your mouth so i could finally get it?

> You failed to prove how it was not
> free. I asked if it required OpenBSD to pay money to a vendor, or the
> issue was about something else besides the money. I don't see the
> registration form being a problem here. Maybe they might simply take
> down your name and address for contact details or whatever. I don't
> see why a registration form must be non-free here.

the one who failed here is you. how old are you? you sound childish.

"The answer, as I have found out, to all my previous questions is the
notions of god that we have etched into our minds. This is where all
my questions end and I walk the path I know."

it sounds like you stopped learning and perhaps there is no point
to talk to you.

[Tony Aberenthy]

Karthik Kumar wrote:

> So registration form = non-free. You failed to prove how it was not
> free.
Maybe your information is worthless.
Mine isn't.