On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 17:49 +0000, Andy Green wrote: > Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > > > No man I don't work or have any interest in Nvidia. In fact I've > > Okay then let us establish you are not quite in fact "like Lonni". > > >>>> I think Kim has a point > > > >> Yeah he has a point. > > > No, he does not have a point because 1) he is running a test kernel 2) > he has test-updates enabled 3) You don't run bleeding edge stuff on a > production machine 4) You do not expect Nvidia to release drivers for > test kernels and 5) a fully functional already compiled version of the > Nivida drivers is available on the Livna repository. It's HIS foul by > using test stuff, not ours. > > > > > > Where did "ours" come from? This is a binary blob delivered by a > commercial operation which has taken an explicit decision to keep the > sources from "us". It's the opposite of "ours". Look man I can't help you with your reading comprehension. It's pretty clear that the direct object of the verb (foul) is referencing the Fedora distribution and not the drivers. Go back to school and get your GED, get back with me when you learn to read. Be that as it may, what the hell does it matter if Nvidia's decision was explicit, implicit, implied, decried, or refried? It doesn't frakking matter. Nvidia can do whatever the hell it likes with it's intellectual property, that is their RIGHT. They can either put it at the top of the empire state building or they can sit on it take a dump. Who gives a shit? It's THEIR property, NOT YOURS. > > > If you want to help in the development of the distro, you use the test > > The nVidia binary blob is explicitly NOT part of the distro, nor is its > use supported by RHAT. You put things in binary-only because you want > to disempower people from being able to copy it around and modify it. I never said it *was* part of the distro, that's the whole reason *WHY* the thread was stupid to start with. I'm glad you're mentally catching up to the rest of us; finally. In addition to having a stupid juvenile title, it was written by an idiot that doesn't even understand where to post stuff of that nature; which btw would have been the Nvidia forums. BTW I don't need for you to make speeches for me, I am perfectly capable of doing that myself without your help so thanks but no thanks. More pointedly; I never said jack about binary-only, what I said was the following: ________________________________________________________________________ What I *do* have an interest in is supporting the right of people to own their own intellectual property. You call it a "binary blob", Nvidia calls it intellectual property. And like I've already said, they have the right to their intellectual property; this isnt communist China and we aren't the ChiComs. This is the US and it's United States law. The flaw is not with people owning their own intellectual property, it's with your socialist-communist mode of thinking. Also: Since their "binary blob" is their intellectual property, and since you don't OWN their intellectual property (nor should you since you don't have jack invested in it), you simply need to either suck it up and get your shit to work or change your thinking. Preferably both. _______________________________________________________________________ Like Linus Torvalds I believe that programmers should be able to license their code any damn way they well please; it's their work. That means either binary-only or open source, either one; their code, their choice of license. You on the other hand, think that everyone should be forced to give their shit away for free and that they don't have the right to own their own code. That's the difference between you and me. > > Well thanks for the clarification. If nVidia choose to not openly > license some of their code, it's up to them: but equally I am able to > point out their lack of openness and disrespect it. You can "disrespect" it all the hell you want, here's a box of tissues to cry on. But like I said, as long as this is the United States and not some people's republic of communism, any programmer has the right to own his own code. That right extends to companies. Like I just stated, Linus Torvalds supports the right of any programmer to license his code any way he wants. Nvidia pays their programmers for their work, and since they bought that programming work with Nvidia money, they are fully within their right to claim their code as their own. You on the other hand, are NOT paying any Nvidia programmers for anything, are you? OR for that matter do YOU own stock in Nvidia? What right exactly do you have to bitch and complain in the first place, AAMOF? It ain't your damn work! Furthermore the assertion that you should automatically OWN THEIR WORK for free is a SOCIALIST attitude. They gave you a product and were nice enough to supply linux drivers for it. Beyond that THEY DON"T OWE YOU JACK. Buy it or don't buy it but for God's sake quit your bitching and whining. > > Since their "binary blob" is their intellectual property, and since you > > don't OWN their intellectual property (nor should you since you don't > > have jack invested in it), you simply need to either suck it up and get > > your shit to work or change your thinking. Preferably both. > > I don't have any nVidia graphics cards that I used for 6 months and > more: I really don't have "jack invested in it". You can keep your > advice to suck stuff up: Kim has a point that binary blobs cause > unnecessary problems, nothing that you said gainsaid it. By all means > have another go! > > -Andy Again your comprehension is lacking, like I said you need to either finish your education or demand your money back for what you got. His point never was a political stance about "binary blobs"; that is YOUR political parade. Don't try to get people confused about what he was saying; the fact is that he didn't give a rip about binary blobs or intellectual property, all he wanted was for it to work in a development level stage with no user effort. In fact he expected EVERYTHING to work perfectly at a testing stage which is patently stupid. LX -- °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. -- Proverbs, 26:5 Registered Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/ °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
