On 10/10/06, Jacob Yocom-Piatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> advantage between children who have laptops and those who don't. it is no
> different than the One Magnifying Glass Per Child or the One Knife Per
> Child
I'm here by starting the One Slap Upside the Head for Morons (OSUHM) project
for
Original message
>Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 01:37:01 +0100
>From: Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Letter to OLPC
>To: OpenBSD
>
>On 2006/10/05 15:47, Bob Beck wrote:
>> It is completely shameful. One Laptop Per Citizen - controlled
On 2006/10/05 15:47, Bob Beck wrote:
> It is completely shameful. One Laptop Per Citizen - controlled by
> the cabal.
The cabal with their bios-signing keys. I guess heretics need not apply.
http://www.olpcnews.com/software/operating_system/a_secure_2b1_bios_up.html
http://www.olpcnews.com
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
[..]
> Let me put it better then. I use their GPL part here ONLY to show how
> more ridiculous the answer was and oppose to what you say, they wrote
> and quote "A GPL Linux device driver for the Marvell wireless chip..."
> and then at the same time, they say they can't releas
Jeroen Massar wrote:
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
[.. a part that you didn't want to make a 'point' about anyway..]
Men,
I must be pretty darn stupid I have to say.
My point wasn't about the dam licenses or comparing GPL to BSD for
crying at loud!
Then don't mention it. Also learn how to reply to
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 02:22:35PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Theo de Raadt wrote on Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 02:55:22PM -0600:
> > Adriaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> See Jim Gettys defense at
> >> http://www.gettysfamily.org/wordpress/?p=27
> [...]
> > You can't say anything bad about the chil
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 02:22:35PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>
> So those children will get laptops before their families
> have electricity? Had they any choice, how many of them
> would choose that way? Given the effort and money used
> for the OLPC project - on what would those people like
Theo de Raadt wrote on Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 02:55:22PM -0600:
> Adriaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> See Jim Gettys defense at
>> http://www.gettysfamily.org/wordpress/?p=27
[...]
> You can't say anything bad about the children, can you?
Just as your rhetorical question suggests, indeed you can.
Jeroen Massar wrote:
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
What strike me, among many things wrong and unreal here is the specific
part as well:
"Marvell is not in a position to open their wireless firmware as it is
currently dependent on the third party operating system kernel that they
do not own. A GPL Lin
Adriaan wrote:
On 10/5/06, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have decided to make public this letter which I sent to the OLPC
("One Laptop Per Child" group, which is strongly associated with Red
Hat.
[snip]
See Jim Gettys defense at http://www.gettysfamily.org/wordpress/?p=27
=Adriaa
Original message
>Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2006 14:55:22 -0600
>From: Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Letter to OLPC
>To: Adriaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: misc@openbsd.org
>
>> On 10/5/06, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
> On 10/5/06, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have decided to make public this letter which I sent to the OLPC
> > ("One Laptop Per Child" group, which is strongly associated with Red
> > Hat.
> [snip]
>
> See Jim Gettys defense at http://www.gettysfamily.org/wordpress/?p=27
He cle
On 10/5/06, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have decided to make public this letter which I sent to the OLPC
("One Laptop Per Child" group, which is strongly associated with Red
Hat.
[snip]
See Jim Gettys defense at http://www.gettysfamily.org/wordpress/?p=27
=Adriaan=
> "U. S. Foreign Policy - even a child can understand it!" post comes to
> mind:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/uk.rec.humour/msg/0059c3a5a272af46
And this has what to do with OpenBSD?
Politics forums are over there -->>> or wherever. Don't care. It's
not here.
--
"Don't ping my cheese w
On 06/10/06, Diana Eichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Bob Beck wrote:
> Unfortunately, fixing the government while maintaining the universal
> democracy that is practically insisted upon by the USA as world
> uber-cop makes that a very difficult task. Democracy gets yo
I totally agree with Siju on this. Living in a 3rd world country, as I
guess he also lives, I am pretty sure that a laptop isn't at all
important for disadvantaged children, as said.
REAL need in our countries are, as previously said, for food, health
care and good education. The most urgent of t
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Bob Beck wrote:
> Unfortunately, fixing the government while maintaining the universal
> democracy that is practically insisted upon by the USA as world
> uber-cop makes that a very difficult task. Democracy gets you the
wait, wait, it's only insisted on as long as you
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 01:24:13PM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:
> > if they want to fix third world countries they should start with the
> > governments, this seems more like a marketing excercise
>
> Unfortunately, fixing the government while maintaining the universal
> democracy that is practica
> if they want to fix third world countries they should start with the
> governments, this seems more like a marketing excercise
Unfortunately, fixing the government while maintaining the universal
democracy that is practically insisted upon by the USA as world
uber-cop makes that a very d
Hi Sij
>
> Getting a laptop to a child for low cost seems to be a noble idea on
> the outside.
> add a *3rd-world country* phase and you get a more polished *charity
> painted/noble* image.
Here that is a called charity bizness and unfortunately it s common fact
> I don't think OLPC it that gre
On Oct 6, 2006, at 6:57 AM, Girish Venkatachalam wrote:
>> Mostly people who applaude such endeavours *do not have any idea* of
>> the issues of the third world countries.
>>
>> I am not angry Jack.
>> But When I find people *over nobleizing* at the expense of the 3rd
>> world countries I think I
On 10/6/06, Girish Venkatachalam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, coming to this particular issue of laptops I wholeheartedly agree with Siju.
In fact this is >nothing different from that idiot Bill Gates who came to India
saying that he wanted to help
India tackle the AIDS disease.
Little d
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:41:32PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> In a private reply to my initial mail Jim Gettys (OLPC / Red Hat) said:
>
> Free and open software is a means to an end
>
I didn't find the new slogan on OLPC/Red Hat's site. Maybe I should
check again tomorrow.
Anyway, I hope
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 04:06:35PM +0530, Siju George wrote:
> If the real concern is for *disadvantaged children* in third world
> countries then giving them a laptop is the most ridiculous idea ever
> orginated!
>
> Some time back I saw a cartoon. One of the 3rd world countries blasted
> their n
hr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "OpenBSD"
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Letter to OLPC
> On 10/6/06, Jack J. Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> > > sole end
Hey Siju,
> If the real concern is for *disadvantaged children* in third world
> countries then giving them a laptop is the most ridiculous idea ever
> orginated!
I guess nobody thought of the idea to ask the 'third world' what *they*
would like to have. Indeed, what a silly notion!
For the 'fir
On 10/6/06, Jack J. Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> sole end unto itself for OLPC.
>
> I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> says, is exactly what is going on.
Hmm, sounds like you are sayi
Hi,
> I have decided to make public this letter which I sent to the OLPC
> ("One Laptop Per Child" group, which is strongly associated with Red
> Hat.
Thank you, Theo, for doing what you do.
There is indeed a "big difference between kneeling down and bending
over" (FZ).
Be well... Nico
2006/10/5, Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I have decided to make public this letter which I sent to the OLPC
("One Laptop Per Child" group, which is strongly associated with Red
Hat.
OLPC seems to be in fact "One Laptop Per Customer". I'm tired of this
wonderful human capacity to transform
Jack J. Woehr wrote:
> Hmm, sounds like you are saying that abstract goal of unlimited
> software freedom is a higher goal than providing access to
> modern technology to disadvantaged children in 3rd-world
> countries.
No, all he wants is to make sure those disadvantaged children
don't get a vend
Kian Mohageri wrote on Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 04:46:41PM -0700:
> On 10/5/06, Ingo Schwarze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The structure of the OpenBSD project suggests that this project
>> might be able to resist better than others. It is no company.
>> It is no charity. It is not so small that it
On Oct 5, 2006, at 7:17 PM, Karsten McMinn wrote:
On 10/5/06, Aaron Hsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So in the end, we can't expect anything to happen if a people don't
really care. People can't put in external protections to assure the
safety of their ideas, it is the responsibility of people t
On 10/5/06, Aaron Hsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So in the end, we can't expect anything to happen if a people don't
really care. People can't put in external protections to assure the
safety of their ideas, it is the responsibility of people to ensure
that such things are protected, and right n
On Oct 5, 2006, at 6:05 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
But they were wrong. To guard your Self against corruption, legal
means are ineffective. Which means, then, might be effective?
That is one of the most difficult questions i heard of. I cannot
yet come any closer than this: Don't let people put
On 10/6/06 1:05 AM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
The structure of the OpenBSD project suggests that this project
might be able to resist better than others. It is no company.
It is no charity. It is not so small that it needs to grasp at
every straw to survive. It is not so large that any of the big
On 10/5/06, Ingo Schwarze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> The structure of the OpenBSD project suggests that this project
> might be able to resist better than others. It is no company.
> It is no charity. It is not so small that it needs to grasp at
> every straw to survive. It is not so large
On Oct 5, 2006, at 5:05 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>It is not so small that it needs to grasp at
>every straw to survive. It is not so large that any of the big
>players will put any real effort into trying to corrupt it.
My man, I think you just discovered the secret of a happy life.
--
Jack J.
On 10/5/06, Jack J. Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> > sole end unto itself for OLPC.
> >
> > I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> > says, is exactly what is going on.
>
> Hmm, sounds like
Bob Beck wrote on Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:47:14PM -0600:
> Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> In a private reply to my initial mail Jim Gettys (OLPC / Red Hat) said:
>>> Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
>>> sole end unto itself for OLPC.
>> I was totally stunned by this admission
On Oct 5, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
In the end, all this only make me fell even stronger about my
choice of OpenBSD and what it's stand for!
What makes me feel strong about my choice of OpenBSD is that,
whatever moral suasions operate in Theo
and the gang, these suasions are
On Oct 5, 2006, at 4:53 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Get out from under the rock!
Well, see, I was an early Cygnus employee so I still find it hard to
think
ill of RedHat. Even though dealing with them at all these days gives
me gas :-)
--
Jack J. Woehr
Director of Development
Absolute Performa
> > Does Red Hat making under-the-table deals with closed-source vendors
> > to give them special access to hardware docs
>
> If this is in fact what the sum of the matter is, that is indeed
> quite naughty.
Oh come on. Everyone knows that Red Hat makes deals with closed
vendors. They have SI
Paul de Weerd wrote:
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:54:47PM -0600, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
| > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
| > sole end unto itself for OLPC.
| >
| > I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
| > says, is exactly what is
On Oct 5, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Niall O'Higgins wrote:
>
> Does Red Hat making under-the-table deals with closed-source vendors
> to give them special access to hardware docs
If this is in fact what the sum of the matter is, that is indeed
quite naughty.
--
Jack J. Woehr
Director of Development
A
>>> The attitude that the end (hardware support) justifies the means
>>> (complete sacrifice of the principles the thing was written under
>>> in the first place) has to stop.
>>
In a private reply to my initial mail Jim Gettys (OLPC / Red Hat) said:
Free and open software is a means to an e
On Oct 5, 2006, at 4:06 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Please
don't automatically suggest that people who try to do good, end up
doing good.
Oh, I would not at all suggest such a thing. I run for office, and know
that in public policy, intent is meaningless, it's only effect that
counts.
Let
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:54:47PM -0600, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
> > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> > sole end unto itself for OLPC.
> >
> > I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> > says, is exactly what is going on.
>
> Hmm, so
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Jack J. Woehr
> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 2:55 PM
> To: OpenBSD
> Subject: Re: Letter to OLPC
>
> > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
&
On 10/5/06, Bob Beck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is completely shameful. One Laptop Per Citizen - controlled by
the cabal.
indeed. If you (misc@) haven't already, send an email, post
the outrage somewhere, voice your concern. Marvell would
open in a second if it meant they were g
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:54:47PM -0600, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
| > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
| > sole end unto itself for OLPC.
| >
| > I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
| > says, is exactly what is going on.
|
| Hmm, sou
> > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> > sole end unto itself for OLPC.
> >
> > I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> > says, is exactly what is going on.
>
> Hmm, sounds like you are saying that abstract goal of unlimited
> so
* Jack J. Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-05 16:03]:
> > Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> > sole end unto itself for OLPC.
> >
> > I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> > says, is exactly what is going on.
>
> Hmm, sounds li
> Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> sole end unto itself for OLPC.
>
> I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> says, is exactly what is going on.
Hmm, sounds like you are saying that abstract goal of unlimited
software freedom i
> In a private reply to my initial mail Jim Gettys (OLPC / Red Hat) said:
>
> Free and open software is a means to an end, rather than the
> sole end unto itself for OLPC.
>
> I was totally stunned by this admission. "morally bankrupt", as Bob
> says, is exactly what is going on.
>
> The attitude
> that the end (hardware support) justifies the means (complete
> sacrifice of the principles the thing was written under in the first
> place) has to stop.
I will quote one little sentence from a private mail with the OLPC
team.
* Travers Buda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-05 14:56]:
> It sure seems that OpenBSD and a few others with the FSF are
> the last bastions of freedom. I guess no one else understands how it
> serves their interests to demand openness. Was it always this way or
> have we somehow lost the picture?
>
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 12:36:26 -0700
"Greg Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hear, hear, or here, here, or whatever it's supposed to be. For some
> reason hypocrisy is one thing that pisses me off more than anything
> and these other projects are just freakin' filled with hypocrisy. To
> them t
On 10/5/06, Wijnand Wiersma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Good job Theo, now we as a community should start spread the word again.
Thank you for being the leader of Openness!
Hear, hear, or here, here, or whatever it's supposed to be. For some
reason hypocrisy is one thing that pisses me off mor
Good job Theo, now we as a community should start spread the word again.
Thank you for being the leader of Openness!
Wijnand
I have decided to make public this letter which I sent to the OLPC
("One Laptop Per Child" group, which is strongly associated with Red
Hat.
There have been replies to it by both Jim Gettys (argueing that their
expediency is justified) and RMS (agreeing strongly with my point of
view), but I will
60 matches
Mail list logo
