Andy Green wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
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.
Um, "disempower" appears to be a coined term, but the use of the prefix
dis·em·pow·er (dĭs'ĕm-pou'ər) pronunciation
tr.v., -ered, -er·ing, -ers.
To deprive of power or influence.
http://www.answers.com/disempower&r=67
Somebody coined it, but not me. As I said according to this definition,
nVidia made a decision to "deprive" recipients of their code "power or
influence" to modify it and redistribute it.
Then by this definition, you misused the term.
deprive: v.t. to take something away from ; disposses; divest.
[snip]
I see no point in disrespecting someone exercising what is their
right. It would make as much sense as for me to "disrespect" you
"disempowering" me from driving your car around whenever I like
Sure you see that point, people daily make a decision about what is in
their rights to do compared to what is actually right. You are within
your rights to sue 100 people today but you don't choose to, to your
credit.
No, I would not be within my rights to sue 100 people today, as
I have no cause for action. Such suits are called "nuisance suits"
and can get one fined or put into jail.
BTW, you did not address my point.
Refusing to buy their product is the best way to convince them to
change. Voting with one's feet is the most convincing argument
Right -->
Well, I'm glad we agree on *something* :-)
to any businessman. Disrespecting people's exercising their rights
isn't an activity likely to cause them to change their minds.
Some people are in a position where the inherit or worse are in an an
ongoing purchasing arrangement where they cannot do other than end up
with nVidia cards. Sometimes the best way is to accept that the
Erm? Such agreements are entered into, presumably, by adults who
are compus mentis.
advanced capabilities are closed off and nv will do fine. Other times
you should accept that eating the binary restrictions is the best way
through becuase it delivers a larger benefit.
This just sounds like a realistic approach to life.
That is to say one has to deal with the situation one finds oneself in.
One has to respect nVidia's IP rights by force of law, but that doesn't
stop you disrespecting nVidia's decision about where they drew the line,
Now we begin to diverge again. I would no more disrespect them for
drawing the line where they want, than I would you specifying under
what terms I may drive your car.
nor does it stop you denigrating nVidia or their products, which sup Kim
has supped deeply from. Since nothing that I do will "cause them to
Well, denigrating products I would do only on a technical basis, not
on preference with regard to OSS.
change their minds" they might as well hear my unadulterated opinion,
hopefully affecting the opinion of others to avoid nVidia. What is your
proposal I should have done instead?
How does posting here cause them to hear any opinion at all?
I suggest you write a letter to their Marketing Department
or post over on their user forum and politely express your
opinion.
I object to your victim stance on this matter. There is something
you can do to cause them to change their minds. Refuse to buy their
product.
I happen to believe that only individuals acting on their beliefs
with faith can make a difference. Masses of people sitting around
complaining accomplish nothing.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
