thelinuxlink.net

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008 ... -what.html

One thing Gates won't be leaving behind in retirement is his distaste for open source software. After one scientist asked if Gates would consider open source uses in health research, the man who built his $280 billion company on the power of intellectual property bristled.

"There's free software and then there’s open source," he suggested, noting that Microsoft gives away its software in developing countries. With open source software, on the other hand, "there is this thing called the GPL, which we disagree with."

Open source, he said, creates a license "so that nobody can ever improve the software," he claimed, bemoaning the squandered opportunity for jobs and business. (Yes, Linux fans, we're aware of how distorted this definition is.) He went back to the analogy of pharmaceuticals: "I think if you invent drugs, you should be able to charge for them," he said, adding with a shrug: "That may seem radical."

Wow! Up is down! Left is right!

This guy has obviously spouted so much shit, he's losing the ability to distinguish between fact and fiction.

Slashdot just picked this up

http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid ... 0&from=rss

Yet another reason why I believe the "If you want people to respect your license, you gotta respect their license" argument is not a good one, to say the least.

So how can I improve Microsoft's software, other than working for the evil giant?

Oh fu‪ck, Bill, you so eloquently left that part out.

edit: lol wordfilter.

Wow. That's one of the most idiotic things I've ever heard/read, and that's after reading some Steve Ballmer quotes. Congrats Bill, you've raised the bar for stupid quotes from Microsoft's upper management.

Tsuroerusu wrote:Yet another reason why I believe the "If you want people to respect your license, you gotta respect their license" argument is not a good one, to say the least.

Are you saying we should download media from pirate bay ? and not give give a fuck about copyright?

allix wrote:

Tsuroerusu wrote:Yet another reason why I believe the "If you want people to respect your license, you gotta respect their license" argument is not a good one, to say the least.

Are you saying we should download media from pirate bay ? and not give give a fuck about copyright?

Not necessarily, but I don't agree that we should respect every Gestapo-like legal document that greedy bastard businesses put out, just because we have our own licenses. For example, I refuse to abide by the EUCD, if I wanna hack my Xboxes, that I paid for with MY money, then you can be damn sure I'm gonna do it, but it's illegal. So should I respect that? If I wanna watch a DVD that I paid to be able to watch WITH MY MONEY, should I not do that on GNU/Linux or OpenBSD because oh, it's so awful to not abide by another license? I'll leave that up to you to decide. I think that trying to make Mac OS X run on non-Apple hardware, is stupid and a giant waste of time. However if people want to hack their iPhones, I think that's perfectly fine, they paid for it, that piece of hardware is theirs they can, and should be able to do what the heck they want with it, yet it's illegal because you are (In the words of the DMCA) circumventing digital restrictions. If I want to make a backup copy of a DVD that I have paid for, you can be so damn sure I'm gonna do it!