Making the radeon kernel module work again
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
No, you're just repeating the same nonsense ad nauseam, even copying and pasting your old posts in multiple places. And the last one, you didn't even address my post at all. This is boring.
This thread has reached 100 posts. cooloutac was successful in his goal of hijacking this thread about the radeon patch. Please stop replying.
noone was trying to hijack the post. All the talk in the irc channel about needing to use debian for non free drivers and modules, and the arguments that security and privacy are not as important as other things and removing some of thenm to improve usability. made me assume wrong. I apologized for that already.
"You mean, except for the ones who can't feel pain, because their nervous systems are defective?"
This was the only thing you were left saying. But I said I agree with that statement.
Posted by mistake
I am a translator!
..this coming from a guy who wanted to convince me that Windose is more secure than GNU linux..
X-)
See my above post. You're vilifying the wrong person here. If it is true that he uses proprietary drivers or firmware (I don't know if it is; I got the impression that he uses Debian for other reasons), then the party which is in the wrong is whoever manufactured his hardware which requires that proprietary driver or firmware.
He uses prop video drivers for no reason at all. He uses it so he can see higher fps numbers on the screen.
Well, that is a reason. If that is true, I feel sad that he does no value his freedoms more than a higher frame rate. Yet, that does not make him a bad guy.
I would only agree if it was necessary for him to use said prop software. Such as the case with many wireless cards to function.
But it isn't necessary in his case. He uses it out of preference. Because he wants 3d acceleration in a vm, and because he wants see high fps numbers on the screen in games like xonotic. I have nno qualms about giving up some small conveniences or pretty things. I can still play xonotic and thats all that matters to me, even if i can't put it on the highest settings and get = to the highest fps numbers people can get. And i am a hardcore gamer, and had no issues. Nothing was noticeable at all. And his cpu is way better then mine.
But whats worse, is he is constantly putting down trisquel in favor of debian for these same reasons in the irc channel. Contrary to how he portrays himself on these forums. I can no longer be around him and others without losing my cool.
God, you're like the ultimate wet dream of the open source anti-libre hipsters who want to portray the libre software movement as a religion that gets mad at people for daring to run proprietary software. Constantly vilifying innocent people because supposedly they suffer abuse. Like, you've got a battered husband who just can't find the will to leave, and rather than telling his wife to stop beating him or giving the husband encouraging words or otherwise helping him find the will to leave, you yell at the husband, "How dare you get beaten by your wife?! Shame on you! You say you are against husband-beating?! Well, stop getting beaten by your wife, then, hypocrite!!"
I don't know what you are implying, your post went right over my head, but I'll just re-post a previous comment of mine.
"Using proprietary software when you don't have to is hypocritical. Removing free software in favor of proprietary software, when it is unnecessary to do so, is hypocritical. Promoting proprietary software over free software to new users is hypocritical."
When you defend people like this in your ranks, its no wonder your movement is so easily kept down and unpopular. Its part of the reaosn I can long be around some of the people in the irc channel, because i cannot keep quiet about it. I go there to promote trisquel, not put it down or turn off new users. And I can't be quiet when others do. Once you stop replying to me on these forums, you won't have to worry about hearing from me again.
Quoting yourself doesn't make what you said any more accurate or meaningful. Just because you use proprietary software doesn't mean your statement of belief that proprietary software is unethical is a lie.
I am a translator!
First, I have used very happily Trisquel 7 for five months (since day one it came out). Now I use Debian stable with Xfce and I love it.
Second, I use 0 as in ZERO proprietary software on my computer and my Debian installation is libre 100%.
I switched the wifi adapter and don't have video acceleration on my ati crap but I have freedom and control over my computing.
As we repeatedly and pointlessly tried to explain you, jsxelf did not introduce a non free proprietary blob in the linux libre kernel. The linux libre kernel packaged and patched by jxself is..yes..LIBRE.
Third, For a guy who already made up his mind, believes Windo$e is more secure than GNU and has decided to "leave Trisquel", you seem to spend a lot of energy and time trolling on this forum..Because for some reason or another which I ignore, that is what you do CoolOut.
Still insist that Windows is more secure than GNU? Still claim to (but don't
actually) give a fuck about software freedom? Still make completely unfounded,
smug accusations about proprietary software usage? Get out. Even if Calinou and
SuperTramp83 did use proprietary firmware (which they don't) it's still
infinitely better than running a whole non-free OS- oh, wait.
That's exactly what *you* do. You have literally no right to criticise or even
imply anyone's usage of non-free software, because you yourself don't even give
a fuck about software freedom. What do you do? Yes, that's right. You're a
Windows user. You are the very definition of a hypocrite- on the one hand being
all holier-than-thou about software freedom and on the other hand using OpenBSD
and Windows.
Get the fuck off this forum. If there's anything that makes this community look
bad, it's whining trolls like you.
Calinou actually admits he does publicly. Not only does he use them, he argues in their favor, for things like xonotic and vbox, when imo they are not necessary to have to use those programs a tall. He is also always putting trisquel down like many so called users, arguing in favor of debian. SO for you to say he doesn't, really makes you a sad fucking fool and I feel sorry for you.
Windows is not my main O/S and accounts for maybe 10% of my pc usage, although less lately. Unlike Supertramp and Calinou where debian and their proprietary drivers are 100% of their cpu use. And all the programs they run, don't even require them! Unlike the video games I own that require windows.
You are the one who is a whiny troll right now. Stop your crying and stop replying to me if you don't want me posting here anymore....
I thought you were leaving Trisquel?
Free software is a necessity thanks to privacy protection, regardless of where one stands on the political spectrum. Added bonus: focusing on privacy also leads to a wider adoption, it appeals to more people. And consequently improves privacy globally.
Privacy is the lowest common denominator.
I'm not saying that the political/ethical/social aspects don't matter, or are not linked at all to free software.
I'm just saying that it's another (overall) separated subject (despite it's history), possibly belonging to a subforum. Because from there we're talking about political opinions, like on a political forum. I personally don't want to do that. But it's a free forum, I won't talk about that anymore because I finally managed to simply explain my point of view.
"Privacy is the lowest common denominator."
But isn't why free software was started back in 1983. This is a continuation of a conversation from IRC where I was discussing this with cooloutac where cooloutac claimed free software was started for privacy and security purposes. I tried showing where RMS made his case about why he started the free software movement but cooloutac rejects it. (Look at the GNU Manifesto for example and not once does he talk of privacy being his motivating factor in the section Why I Must Write GNU ("Software sellers want to divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this way...") He also covers the motivations for starting free software in his talks, which cooloutac also also declined to listen to and kept going on that RMS started it for privacy and security. Yes, privacy and security do intersect with free software but is not why he started it. But, it seems cooloutac can't grasp that free software just might have been started for reasons other than those cooloutac cares about.
Yes, that's what I call "historical reasons" in my previous post. I don't feel comfortable not clearly understanding the political agenda(s) in the free software community. I don't want to be associated to a specific political movement just because I'm a free software suporter.
Well rms seems kinda clear, at least on what he personally isn't (an anarchist). But even his political views are on his personal website, not anywhere else. Regardless, his views belong to him, and may or may not be mine. It's irrelevant. To me free software is about privacy, which is an ethical and social issue in itself, yet it's overall apolitical. Or at least it isn't related to specific political movements.
I didn't know about the reasons of this conversation with cooloutac though.
Either way, you said it best (quoting you): "So we're really on the same side: For 100% free software. Just for different underlying reasons."
I wholehartedly agree. We have a common ground, and that's what matters.
Who know, maybe as a learn more about the free culture, I might join in (or not, or partly).
I think these books might help you understand. (You can donwload or buy.) http://shop.fsf.org/product/book_bundle/
Thanks, I'll definitely check these out.
I don't want to be associated to a specific political movement just because I'm a free software suporter.
The free software movement is a specific political movement.
If so, provided I disagree with the agenda, I might be leaning towards open-source instead of free software.
Or simply a free supporter but not for the same reasons.
These books look interesting either way.
I never claimed why it was started? You kept bringing it up to argue privacy and security shouldn't be the main reasons for using free software.
I was quoting rms well known statement about more eyes on the code. And just to play devi's advocate, I mean back at MIT, he also cracked peoples passwords to prove source code should be open. didn't he? or was there another reason. If he did it to show passwords could never be secure, the world is coming to that realization now.
" I mean back at MIT, he also cracked peoples passwords to prove source code should be open. Did you forget that too?"
Yes, I'm aware of the password stuff at MIT but the motivations for this were not "to prove source code should be open" so please don't mischaracterize things. Rather, it was because he saw passwords as being unethical - a way to deny people access to using the computer. So, he started giving his password out to quote from the Free As In Freedom:
==============
Cadging passwords and deliberately crashing the system in order to glean evidence from the resulting wreckage, Stallman successfully foiled the system administrators' attempt to assert control. After one foiled "coup d'etat," Stallman issued an alert to the entire AI staff.
"There has been another attempt to seize power," Stallman wrote. "So far, the aristocratic forces have been defeated." To protect his identity, Stallman signed the message "Radio Free OZ."
The disguise was a thin one at best. By 1982, Stallman's aversion to passwords and secrecy had become so well known that users outside the AI Laboratory were using his account as a stepping stone to the ARPAnet, the research-funded computer network that would serve as a foundation for today's Internet. One such "tourist" during the early 1980s was Don Hopkins, a California programmer who learned through the hacking grapevine that all an outsider needed to do to gain access to MIT's vaunted ITS system was to log in under the initials RMS and enter the same three-letter monogram when the system requested a password.
"I'm eternally grateful that MIT let me and many other people use their computers for free," says Hopkins. "It meant a lot to many people."
This so-called "tourist" policy, which had been openly tolerated by MIT management during the ITS years,6 fell by the wayside when Oz became the lab's primary link to the ARPAnet. At first, Stallman continued his policy of repeating his login ID as a password so outside users could follow in his footsteps. Over time, however, the Oz's fragility prompted administrators to bar outsiders who, through sheer accident or malicious intent, might bring down the system. When those same administrators eventually demanded that Stallman stop publishing his password, Stallman, citing personal ethics, refused to do so and ceased using the Oz system altogether.
"[When] passwords first appeared at the MIT AI Lab I [decided] to follow my belief that there should be no passwords," Stallman would later say. "Because I don't believe that it's really desirable to have security on a computer, I shouldn't be willing to help uphold the security regime."
if thats true, then I guess like linus, stallman also doesn't care about security, and its no wonder the world is getting more and more hacked around us. He said that in the 80s, but even Linus doesn't care much about security even nowadays. "it just gets in their way" SO we are probably all doomed.
And I don't know if I feel comfortable using gnulinux software over windows for more privacy and security, when even its founders and leaders don't believe I should use it for those reasons. It makes me wonder if I am mistaken to even believe that its more secure at all.
Kind of contradicting though to be against secrecy, and claim that has nothing to do with open source, though, doesn't it?
Of course he cares about both privacy and security, but from the user's point of view.
Using GNU/Linux over Windows for more privacy is a no-brainer. Windows blatantly stated that they will do whatever they want with your data with Windows 10.
For security, same thing.
After all, most servers are GNU/Linux servers.
I am a translator!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpAKasXdrXI
Skip to 3:30 mins if you want to skip the lulz and there he tells it very clearly what is free software all about.
I"ve seen this video before. so "freedom to control your own software, and to cooperate/share with others"
I think the problem is most people think "freedom to control your own software" only applies to corporations and gov'ts and not unaffiliated malicious hackers. I truly believe the saying a backdoor for the so called good guys is also a back door for the bad guys. Its a backdoor for everyone who is looking for one.
I think some people believe they need the freedom to control their own software for "ethical" reasons without actually understanding why or what makes it "unethical" To me it boils down to well, who is controlling it, if you aren't? Who designed it to limit you if not you? And then one can understand why the freedom is important.
As for being able to share software with others and not being considered a pirate, yes of course I'm all for that. Pretty straightforward.
I was quoting rms well known statement about more eyes on the code.
Do you mean Linus' law? That: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus%27s_Law
That is not rms'.
RMS is the one who says that himself in the documentaries "the code" and "revolutionary os"
Yeehaw! Thank you GNUtoo and thank you jxself!
*does the freedom boogie*
you're doing the freedom boogie for a non-free module? Well maybe i'm making a big deal over nothing but don't think we can claim 100% free if its added to the trisquel kernel. At least its not closed source tk goodness. Hey maybe supertramp will start using trisquel now? lol. Hopefully we don't turn into debian.
Ok great to hear, tks for the reply. Sorry for the confusion.
Hey Jason,
Do you know if this is being published upstream to the main Linux kernel or at least to the Ubuntu ones? That way it makes its way down and not just for Linux Libre. :-)
I am not aware of any plans to do that. I imagine that e.g. Ubuntu and such are quite happy with the proprietary firmware. Even though it works it's more of a hack anyway than a proper fix so I doubt it'd be accepted anyway.
How about Debian then? Their kernel is libre by default right?
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios