Enough, already!
Mike McCarty
Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net
Fri Nov 10 20:26:53 UTC 2006
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!
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list