Fsf-friends December 2003

fsf-friends@gnu.org.in

43 participants
89 discussions

RE: [Fsf-friends] No warranty
by Senthil_OR＠Dell.com 23 Dec '03

23 Dec '03

Dear FSF-Friends, I am good comp-sci guy. My head is paining with this. Please provide me some "Free" water, atleast. :) Senthil > Ramanraj K wrote: > > NO WARRANTY > > 11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE > IS NO WARRANTY > FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. > EXCEPT WHEN > OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES > PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, > EITHER EXPRESSED > OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF > MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE > ENTIRE RISK AS > TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE > PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY > SERVICING, > REPAIR OR CORRECTION. > > </quote> > > The GPL, under clause 11 says: > > "THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE > PROGRAM IS WITH YOU." > > >

2 1

Re: [Fsf-friends]
by Rajkumar S 23 Dec '03

23 Dec '03

> Its true that redhat is partly proprietary. Why do you say that? Which non free software are they distributing ? I have never heard some one describing RH as prop. raj

1 0

Wealth by copyleft... creativity in the digital age
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 22 Dec '03

22 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- Call for Contribution ===================== Wealth by copyleft ================== Creativity in the digital age ============================= 3. Oekonux Conference May 20th-23rd, 2004 Department of Philosophy at Vienna University ______________________________________________________________________ Project Oekonux --------------- In Project Oekonux [http://www.oekonux.org/] and in the neighboring OpenTheory [http://www.opentheory.org/] different people with different opinions and different methods study the economic and political forms of Free Software. An important question is, whether the principles of the development of Free Software (without exchange in the core, self-organized, common and unlimited participation in the production knowledge) may be the foundation of a new economy which is no longer based on the dogma of economic scarcity. New economy may also mean the basis for a new form of society. So Oekonux is not only concerned with Free Software but with the relation of Free Software and transformation of society. From the far ranging Oekonux debate new views on past transformation processes of society and a completely new theory of transformation of society emerge - e.g. the germ form hypothesis. A closely related question is, whether, where and how in the given economic and societal framework a culture of Free Information Goods emerges and thus makes the principles of the development of Free Software fruitful for other areas. Are the principles of the development of Free Software a temporary or integratable phenomenon or do they spread in other areas of society sooner or later. The conference -------------- The motto of the conference "Wealth by copyleft -- Creativity in the digital age" points especially to these questions: o How do the production methods of Free Software affect science, art, education, production? o Does the wealth of the information society come from patents and "Creative Industries"? Or does Copyleft gain legitimization for a more powerful and sustainable source of wealth beyond the logic of money? o Which coalitions do evolve in these processes and on which basis do they work? o Special interest receives the relation of Free Selbstentfaltung and societal agreements: How do self-organized societal relations come into being and how do they grow? How does cooperation and self-organization function at all? Especially: How are conflicts and power handled? Meanwhile for these and similar questions the Oekonux community became an internationally recognized focus point. From the simple mailing list this virtual community slowly develops into a collective research project - without a prior project management. Factual needs and their perception shall determine the next step. A slowly emerging consensus and the work of accepted maintainers are the moving spirit. This is producing theory just as Free Software. After the success of the 1. [http://erste.oekonux-konferenz.de/] and 2. [http://second.oekonux-conference.org/] Oekonux conference the 3. Oekonux conference [http://www.oekonux-conference.org/] takes place in cooperation with the Institute for Philosophy in Vienna. Besides the questions raised above contributions to these topics are welcome. o Free Software Experiences from projects, success stories, but also conflicts, contradictions (for example making money vs. self-unfolding, wage labor vs. Free Doing, etc.) as well as studies about the phenomenon of Free Software. o Technological development Examples of development of technology with a potential similar to Free Software. What significance do Free Standards have? What may such a technological development mean for ecological questions? o Alternative and anti-economy Theoretical models of the abolition of exchange, labor, and money. Practical experiences in projects on the height of the technological and social development. Contradictions of theory and practice. o How can Oekonux become practical? Interesting are suggestions for concrete projects, which try to practice our ideas. Free Licenses for other fields, gratis shops, ... For all contributions the relation to the topic field of Oekonux should be recognizable. The planned conference shall give room to bundle, collectively re-discuss and make fruitful for all, thoughts which developed in different places independently. Besides getting to know one other in talks and workshops the respective current state of the discussion shall be presented. Moreover there will be a concentrated introduction in the content of the Oekonux debate. Speakers wanted --------------- People interested in giving a talk, preparing a workshop or moderate a discussion round please submit a short outline of their intentions to Project Oekonux [mailto:projekt@oekonux.de]. (Mails to this address are archived on the web. Please ask there if there is a problem with this.) If someone wants to add some other kind of contribution please also contact this address. Deadline for such outlines is March 1st, 2004 Decision about the chosen contributions is until March 31th, 2004. The conference languages are German and English. Translators are needed! --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- FORWARDED THROUGH INDIA BY: -- Frederick Noronha : http://www.fredericknoronha.net Ph 0091.832.2409490 Freelance Journalist : http://www.bytesforall.org Ph 0091.832.2409783 http://fredericknoronha.blogware.com Cell 0 9822 122436

1 0

Morphix-GIS
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 22 Dec '03

22 Dec '03

Anyone wants this CD? We can arrange to distribute it via our low-cost CD store run by Aniket <aniket at gmx.net>: MORPHIX-GIS: This CD contains two GIS applications and other useful software that can be freely distributed. The CD is bootable. It contains a full networked operating system with applications. All applications can be used from the CD itself. You can also install it on your hard disk. the CD autoruns in MS Windows, showing a help file. This CD has been compiled with special emphasis to GIS packages. Two mature GIS applications (GRASS and SPRING), a map viewer (Thuban) and several other applications. The directory /usr/local/Gisdoc gives some tutorial files for the GIS applications. The directory /usr/local/Gisdata gives some example data files for Thuban. For limited help with the CD, mail to: Dr C M Harish cmharic at postmark.net or Dr V Sasi Kumar vsasi at hotpop.com I am grateful to Dr Harish at Thiruvananthapuram for sending me a copy, gratis. -- Frederick Noronha : http://www.fredericknoronha.net Ph 0091.832.2409490 Freelance Journalist : http://www.bytesforall.org Ph 0091.832.2409783 http://fredericknoronha.blogware.com Cell 0 9822 122436

1 0

Interesting speech by RMS
by fjsylvester 22 Dec '03

22 Dec '03

hi friends, I found this speech by RMS on the net I forgot the url from were I saved it on my pc. Can you trust your computer? By Richard Stallman - Who should your computer take its orders from? Most people think their computers should obey them, not obey someone else. With a plan they call "trusted computing," large media corporations (including the movie companies and record companies), together with computer companies such as Microsoft and Intel, are planning to make your computer obey them instead of you. Proprietary programs have included malicious features before, but this plan would make it universal. Proprietary software means, fundamentally, that you don't control what it does; you can't study the source code, or change it. It's not surprising that clever businessmen find ways to use their control to put you at a disadvantage. Microsoft has done this several times: one version of Windows was designed to report to Microsoft all the software on your hard disk; a recent "security" upgrade in Windows Media Player required users to agree to new restrictions. But Microsoft is not alone: the KaZaa music-sharing software is designed so that KaZaa's business partner can rent out the use of your computer to their clients. These malicious features are often secret, but even once you know about them it is hard to remove them, since you don't have the source code. In the past, these were isolated incidents. "Trusted computing" would make it pervasive. "Treacherous computing" is a more appropriate name, because the plan is designed to make sure your computer will systematically disobey you. In fact, it is designed to stop your computer from functioning as a general-purpose computer. Every operation may require explicit permission. The technical idea underlying treacherous computing is that the computer includes a digital encryption and signature device, and the keys are kept secret from you. (Microsoft's version of this is called "palladium.") Proprietary programs will use this device to control which other programs you can run, which documents or data you can access, and what programs you can pass them to. These programs will continually download new authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules automatically on your work. If you don't allow your computer to obtain the new rules periodically from the Internet, some capabilities will automatically cease to function. Of course, Hollywood and the record companies plan to use treacherous computing for "DRM" (Digital Restrictions Management), so that downloaded videos and music can be played only on one specified computer. Sharing will be entirely impossible, at least using the authorized files that you would get from those companies. You, the public, ought to have both the freedom and the ability to share these things. (I expect that someone will find a way to produce unencrypted versions, and to upload and share them, so DRM will not entirely succeed, but that is no excuse for the system.) Making sharing impossible is bad enough, but it gets worse. There are plans to use the same facility for email and documents -- resulting in email that disappears in two weeks, or documents that can only be read on the computers in one company. Imagine if you get an email from your boss telling you to do something that you think is risky; a month later, when it backfires, you can't use the email to show that the decision was not yours. "Getting it in writing" doesn't protect you when the order is written in disappearing ink. Imagine if you get an email from your boss stating a policy that is illegal or morally outrageous, such as to shred your company's audit documents, or to allow a dangerous threat to your country to move forward unchecked. Today you can send this to a reporter and expose the activity. With treacherous computing, the reporter won't be able to read the document; her computer will refuse to obey her. Treacherous computing becomes a paradise for corruption. Word processors such as Microsoft Word could use treacherous computing when they save your documents, to make sure no competing word processors can read them. Today we must figure out the secrets of Word format by laborious experiments in order to make free word processors read Word documents. If Word encrypts documents using treacherous computing when saving them, the free software community won't have a chance of developing software to read them -- and if we could, such programs might even be forbidden by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Programs that use treacherous computing will continually download new authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules automatically on your work. If Microsoft, or the U.S. government, does not like what you said in a document you wrote, they could post new instructions telling all computers to refuse to let anyone read that document. Each computer would obey when it downloads the new instructions. Your writing would be subject to 1984-style retroactive erasure. You might be unable to read it yourself. You might think you can find out what nasty things a treacherous computing application does, study how painful they are, and decide whether to accept them. It would be short-sighted and foolish to accept, but the point is that the deal you think you are making won't stand still. Once you come depend on using the program, you are hooked and they know it; then they can change the deal. Some applications will automatically download upgrades that will do something different -- and they won't give you a choice about whether to upgrade. Today you can avoid being restricted by proprietary software by not using it. If you run GNU/Linux or another free operating system, and if you avoid installing proprietary applications on it, then you are in charge of what your computer does. If a free program has a malicious feature, other developers in the community will take it out, and you can use the corrected version. You can also run free application programs and tools on non-free operating systems; this falls short of fully giving you freedom, but many users do it. Treacherous computing puts the existence of free operating systems and free applications at risk, because you may not be able to run them at all.Some versions of treacherous computing would require the operating system to be specifically authorized by a particular company. Free operating systems could not be installed. Some versions of treacherous computing would require every program to be specifically authorized by the operating system developer. You could not run free applications on such a system. If you did figure out how, and told someone, that could be a crime. There are proposals already for U.S. laws that would require all computers to support treacherous computing, and to prohibit connecting old computers to the Internet. The CBDTPA (we call it the Consume But Don't Try Programming Act) is one of them. But even if they don't legally force you to switch to treacherous computing, the pressure to accept it may be enormous. Today people often use Word format for communication, although this causes several sorts of problems (see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html). If only a treacherous computing machine can read the latest Word documents, many people will switch to it, if they view the situation only in terms of individual action (take it or leave it). To oppose treacherous computing, we must join together and confront the situation as a collective choice. For further information about treacherous computing, see http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html. To block treacherous computing will require large numbers of citizens to organize. We need your help! The Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) and Public Knowledge (www.publicknowledge.org) are campaigning against treacherous computing, and so is the FSF-sponsored Digital Speech Project (www.digitalspeech.org). Please visit these Web sites so you can sign up to support their work. You can also help by writing to the public affairs offices of Intel, IBM,HP/Compaq, or anyone you have bought a computer from, explaining that you don't want to be pressured to buy "trusted" computing systems so you don't want them to produce any. This can bring consumer power to bear. If you do this on your own, please send copies of your letters to the organizations above. Postscripts: 1. The GNU Project distributes the GNU Privacy Guard, a program That implements public-key encryption and digital signatures, which you can useto send secure and private email. It is useful to explore how GPG differs from treacherous computing, and see what makes one helpful and the other so dangerous. When someone uses GPG to send you an encrypted document, and you use GPG to decode it, the result is an unencrypted document that you can read, forward, copy, and even re-encrypt to send it securely to someone else. A treacherous computing application would let you read the words on the screen, but would not let you produce an unencrypted document that you could use in other ways. GPG, a free software package, makes security features available to the users; they use it. Treacherous computing is designed to impose restrictions on the users; it uses them. 2. Microsoft presents Palladium as a security measure, and claims that it will protect against viruses, but this claim is evidently false. A presentation by Microsoft Research in October 2002 stated that one of the specifications of Palladium is that existing operating systems and applications will continue to run; therefore, viruses will continue to be able to do all the things that they can do today. When Microsoft speaks of "security" in connection with Palladium, they do not mean what we normally mean by that word: protecting your machine from things you do not want. They mean protecting your copies of data on your machine from access by you in ways others do not want. A slide in the presentation listed several types of secrets Palladium could be used to keep, including "third party secrets" and "user secrets" -- but it put "user secrets" in quotation marks, recognizing that this is not what Palladium is really designed for. The presentation made frequent use of other terms that we frequently associate with the context of security, such as "attack," "malicious code," "spoofing," as well as "trusted." None of them means what it normally means. "Attack" doesn't mean someone trying to hurt you, it means you trying to copy music. "Malicious code" means code installed by you to do what someone else doesn't want your machine to do. "Spoofing" doesn't mean someone fooling you, it means you fooling Palladium. And so on. 3. A previous statement by the Palladium developers stated the basic premise that whoever developed or collected information should have total control of how you use it. This would represent a revolutionary overturn of past ideas of ethics and of the legal system, and create an unprecedented system of control. The specific problems of these systems are no accident;they result from the basic goal. It is the goal we must reject. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html. Copyright 2002 Richard Stallman Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted without royalty in any medium provided this notice is preserved. regards, sylvester

2 1

Re: [Fsf-friends] WSF, RMS
by Senthil_OR＠Dell.com 22 Dec '03

22 Dec '03

> --- Arun M <arun(a)gnu.org.in> wrote: > > > > RMS should be in india from Jan 16 to Feb 2nd. > > Will be participating in WSF. Could you please provide the itenerary of RMS. I think many like me, would be eager to know. wsfindia.org currently is down. Welcome to India, RMS! Senthil

3 2

WSF, RMS
by Arun M 22 Dec '03

22 Dec '03

Hi, RMS should be in india from Jan 16 to Feb 2nd. Will be participating in WSF. regards, arun.

7 18

Links to why RMS is an Inspiration to
by fjsylvester 21 Dec '03

21 Dec '03

I enjoyed reading the belowlinks http://www.mayin.org/aragorn//RMS/ http://www.hackgnu.org/rms_trip_log.txt regards sylvester

1 0

No Loop
by Ramanraj K 20 Dec '03

20 Dec '03

Ramanraj K wrote: > Is the Mailman in a Loop? Hope Mailman is OK. I wonder what Suraj has > to say about this? > My last mail was delivered correctly. Mailman is OK. May be Rakesh and Pai sent mail twice.

1 0

Welcome Rms
by fjsylvester 20 Dec '03

20 Dec '03

Dear friends, Merry Christmas season It will be great to see RMS in india in the new year Will he be coming to bombay ? I came to know about RMS when his photo and article was published inthe times of india ciao regards sylvester

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Fsf-friends December 2003