Send cypherpunks mailing list submissions to
cypherpunks@cpunks.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cypherpunks-request@cpunks.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cypherpunks-owner@cpunks.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cypherpunks digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...] (Cathal Garvey)
2. Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...] (Mark Steward)
3. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL] (grarpamp)
4. Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...] (Cathal Garvey)
5. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
(Georgi Guninski)
6. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL] (Cathal Garvey)
7. Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...] (Griffin Boyce)
8. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL] (grarpamp)
9. What is offtopic and what should be avoided on this list?
(Georgi Guninski)
10. Re: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...] (stef)
11. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
(Georgi Guninski)
12. Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
(Georgi Guninski)
13. Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...] (grarpamp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 10:21:42 +0000
From: Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>
To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...]
Message-ID: <54AD08B6.1070603@cathalgarvey.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> You know the history and reasons the internet has against top
> posting, especially on newgroups and mailing lists.
I know the reasons but they don't apply to me, nor to a growing majority
of users who don't use text-only clients. Most clients these days are
pre-configured to hide replied-to text unless directly quoted, making
pre-quoted text actually more irritating than sub-quoted.
Despite this, I *do* use text-only mode, and nevertheless find scrolling
down to find replies inline irksome.
So, as I mentioned previously, this is a cultural difference; I find
your preferred mode annoying, and you find mine annoying. Tough; you
don't own the internet, and neither do I. I won't waste my time
conforming to your expectations, and you won't to mine. So we get over
it and move on.
..did you really call top-posting "abuse of other people"? Dude, get
some perspective!
On 07/01/15 10:07, grarpamp wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
>>
>> However, sorry, but I'll continue emailing as I always have done; if I
>> come from a different internet culture to you, and if top-posting is
>> anathema to you but not I, that's just
>
> ... lazy.
>
> You know the history and reasons the internet has against top
> posting, especially on newgroups and mailing lists. You and everyone
> else top posting are just lazy culture at the expense/abuse of other
> people, in particular the brain power needed to decipher your
> messages in both direction and context. Stop wasting hundreds of
> other people's cycles and invest some of your own. Learn trimming
> and interleaving replies, google it, make your mail art, not dog shit.
>
> (: shitter a as but
> asses lazy your
> to cost no it's
> all After. off else
> everyone pissing on
> keep, want all you
> what that's if But.
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 10:37:43 +0000
From: Mark Steward <marksteward@gmail.com>
To: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>
Subject: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...]
Message-ID:
<CAPyX2ncw3jDRW43TvK8OA5+FE43TX8orPQG3wnKSczRO07d7ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
UNSUBSCRIBE
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 10:07 AM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Cathal Garvey <
> cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
> >
> > However, sorry, but I'll continue emailing as I always have done; if I
> > come from a different internet culture to you, and if top-posting is
> > anathema to you but not I, that's just
>
> ... lazy.
>
> You know the history and reasons the internet has against top
> posting, especially on newgroups and mailing lists. You and everyone
> else top posting are just lazy culture at the expense/abuse of other
> people, in particular the brain power needed to decipher your
> messages in both direction and context. Stop wasting hundreds of
> other people's cycles and invest some of your own. Learn trimming
> and interleaving replies, google it, make your mail art, not dog shit.
>
> (: shitter a as but
> asses lazy your
> to cost no it's
> all After. off else
> everyone pissing on
> keep, want all you
> what that's if But.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20150107/8faaa793/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 06:04:15 -0500
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
Message-ID:
<CAD2Ti28cjFjavRrN_5vVtFo2-CpJKj+MBROh+0s+L0BDpAXxpA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:48 AM, Cathal Garvey
<cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
> Patents and profiting
> from patents is an unrelated discussion to copyright-based licensing.
Patents came about a bit before copyright. Today patents
talk about licensing, and copyright talks about patent. They're
not exactly inseparable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
> But there are plenty of people out there willing to Embrace Extend
> Extinguish, which GPL protects against (patent clauses and copyleft) and BSD
> does not.
You cannot extinguish BSD software. You may close your
copy. However the original branch unaffected by that. Nor can
you patent your copy of BSD code, the code itself exists as prior art.
Copyleft or not is of no concern to actual extinguishment.
Patenting your subsequent mods to code may yes block
others from moving in that same direction. That's really a
question of patent reform, not license. Restricting patents
in license like GPL is interesting and useful (presuming
tested as enforceable) if you're worried about direction.
Don't mistake patent restrictions as freedom though.
As Juan may tell you, both patents and license are bullshit,
at least to some people.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 11:16:17 +0000
From: Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>
To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...]
Message-ID: <54AD1581.9080108@cathalgarvey.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
AFAIC there's nothing left to say, so you'll hear no more from me.
Sorry, not something I especially like discussing nor seen discussing. I
did enjoy writing the one-liner though.
On 07/01/15 10:37, Mark Steward wrote:
> UNSUBSCRIBE
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 10:07 AM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com
> <mailto:grarpamp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Cathal Garvey
> <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me <mailto:cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>>
> wrote:
> >
> > However, sorry, but I'll continue emailing as I always have done;
> if I
> > come from a different internet culture to you, and if top-posting is
> > anathema to you but not I, that's just
>
> ... lazy.
>
> You know the history and reasons the internet has against top
> posting, especially on newgroups and mailing lists. You and everyone
> else top posting are just lazy culture at the expense/abuse of other
> people, in particular the brain power needed to decipher your
> messages in both direction and context. Stop wasting hundreds of
> other people's cycles and invest some of your own. Learn trimming
> and interleaving replies, google it, make your mail art, not dog shit.
>
> (: shitter a as but
> asses lazy your
> to cost no it's
> all After. off else
> everyone pissing on
> keep, want all you
> what that's if But.
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:25:18 +0200
From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>
To: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>
Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
Message-ID: <20150107112518.GB2512@sivokote.iziade.m$>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 01:57:25AM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> > Georgi write:
> > Dudes, you still using GPL GCC?
>
> Actually, no.
>
OK, this might have finally happened and I have been
trolling bsd fanatics about gcc since at least 4 years
(maybe more).
Not an expert on compilers, but gcc has some extensions like
__gnu*, some of which are widely used. Not sure how clang
currently deals with them.
Building just the kernel with clang is likely possibly, but
bare kernel is not a distro.
Till recently, I believe one couldn't build desktop
environment only with clang, might be wrong on this.
Unrelated: I am wondering why bigcorps like google/linksys
use linux, when they could have used *bsd like
apple/juniper.
> https://bitrig.org/10.html
> http://wiki.netbsd.org/tutorials/pkgsrc/clang/
> https://wiki.freebsd.org/BuildingFreeBSDWithClang
> http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/49906/why-is-freebsd-deprecating-gcc-in-favor-of-clang-llvm
> http://www.dragonflydigest.com/2014/10/22/14942.html
> http://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/developer/clang/
> http://www.thejemreport.com/more-on-openbsds-new-compiler/
> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20091228231142
> http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=137530560232232&w=2
>
> http://clang.debian.net/
> http://llvm.linuxfoundation.org/
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/bsd/fbsd/
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Lodewijk andré de la porte <l@odewijk.nl> wrote:
> > GPL when something is everyone's property,
>
> Unless you're not "in", then suddenly they get ugly like you
> broke their communal bong hit or something. They used to cry
> if you didn't pass the code around, now they sic their lawyers
> on you. That's not very free.
>
> > BSD when you ... just don't care.
>
> Exactly, everyone is in, do whatever you want. And it's almost
> as unlimited as you can get under today's mandatory law for
> those who say copyright is fiction. These days BSD says
> basically two things:
> 1) Do what you want.
> 2) Author disclaims liability.
>
> It's hard to be more free than that under current law, yet...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 11:33:37 +0000
From: Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>
To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
Message-ID: <54AD1991.1010706@cathalgarvey.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> You cannot extinguish BSD software. You may close your
> copy. However the original branch unaffected by that. Nor can
> you patent your copy of BSD code, the code itself exists as prior art.
Embrace/Extend/Extinguish works by taking a codebase that can be
improved (all codebases can be), making those improvements, and
patenting the *improvements*. You can often successfully patent the
original work, too, because the patent system is trash and open
developers rarely have the resources to fight you.
The original code remains open ("Yay!"), but now the open developers are
not technically entitled according to patent law to make the obvious
improvements they were probably planning to make, because they've been
patented by an extinguisher (whether MS, Apple, Yahoo, Google, FB, or
merely the competitor-next-door).
Don't tell me that the obviousness of the obvious-next-steps will
prevent patenting, because that's hogwash. This is the reality, it's
what happens out there in the world.
The GPL acknowledges this by forbidding suits within the scope of the
work (I think: GPL experts on-list?), preventing E3 from occurring.
Other licenses often take steps in this direction, but the ultra-short
"friendly and permissive" licenses usually don't, or do so in such a
terse and legally unenforceable way that they might as well not be.
> Don't mistake patent restrictions as freedom though.
Freedoms can be implicitly restricted merely by the act of withholding
essential things. Food, water can be restricted by "private ownership"
of a well to the degree that others in an area starve to death or
subjugate themselves to slavery: this is "freedom" to own something
exclusively becoming the instrument of enslaving others.
In a less dramatic but still important way, the "freedom" to proprietise
a code-base can starve others of their freedoms by withholding what they
need to exercise them, and potentially making them "slaves" to the code
that has all the obvious improvements while forbidding free alternatives
(patents).
So, patent restrictions are freedom; they prevent the limitation of
others' freedoms (being attacked with patents) by restricting the
freedom of the licensor/licensee (to create or enforce patents).
Preserving the rights of the few to patent and attack others opens the
door to the abrogation of others' rights. Where, in this case, "others"
can include the original developers whose work is co-opted,
patent-encumbered, and proprietised.
Freedom is not merely defined in law but in experience, and simply
removing explicit limitations on freedom (copyleft licenses) does not
mean that the total freedom in the world has increased.
On 07/01/15 11:04, grarpamp wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:48 AM, Cathal Garvey
> <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
>> Patents and profiting
>> from patents is an unrelated discussion to copyright-based licensing.
>
> Patents came about a bit before copyright. Today patents
> talk about licensing, and copyright talks about patent. They're
> not exactly inseparable.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
>
>> But there are plenty of people out there willing to Embrace Extend
>> Extinguish, which GPL protects against (patent clauses and copyleft) and BSD
>> does not.
>
> You cannot extinguish BSD software. You may close your
> copy. However the original branch unaffected by that. Nor can
> you patent your copy of BSD code, the code itself exists as prior art.
> Copyleft or not is of no concern to actual extinguishment.
> Patenting your subsequent mods to code may yes block
> others from moving in that same direction. That's really a
> question of patent reform, not license. Restricting patents
> in license like GPL is interesting and useful (presuming
> tested as enforceable) if you're worried about direction.
> Don't mistake patent restrictions as freedom though.
>
> As Juan may tell you, both patents and license are bullshit,
> at least to some people.
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 06:59:19 -0500
From: Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net>
To: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>
Subject: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...]
Message-ID: <ee4925d9607c7bb65f94fb01dee73127@cryptolab.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
"Cypherpunks write code, not flamewars."
~Jurre van Bergen
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 07:00:24 -0500
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
To: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>
Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>
Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
Message-ID:
<CAD2Ti28S1tihe3xJqmaBbwsfZme=13b4KBCPQ+9qXo+-eRSMbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
> Building just the kernel with clang is likely possibly, but
> bare kernel is not a distro.
>
> Till recently, I believe one couldn't build desktop
> environment only with clang, might be wrong on this.
As in the links, the entire FreeBSD kernel, base,
and most of it's ~25,000 ports build with clang. X,
browsers, whatever. The others are not as far along.
Not bad considering clang itself is a "till recently".
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 14:05:53 +0200
From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>
To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: What is offtopic and what should be avoided on this list?
Message-ID: <20150107120553.GC2512@sivokote.iziade.m$>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
What is offtopic and what should be avoided on this list?
I would like to know what is offtopic and what should be
avoided on this list.
Looking for an answer from authoritative source, not a
subscriber of doubtful quality.
Appears to me wide variety of topics are discussed.
Though the list is unmoderated, I suspect the dudes in
charge of the list might take action against flooding with
gross nonsense or commercial spam.
Just trying to avoid being banned from unmoderated list ;),
the way the heavily censored (in theory small moderated)
Fyodor's full disclosure blocked me at SMTP level.
Best of luck,
--
georgi
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:45:29 +0100
From: stef <s@ctrlc.hu>
To: Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>
Cc: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...]
Message-ID: <20150107124529.GB7530@ctrlc.hu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 10:21:42AM +0000, Cathal Garvey wrote:
> > You know the history and reasons the internet has against top
> > posting, especially on newgroups and mailing lists.
>
> I know the reasons but they don't apply to me, nor to a growing majority of
how embarrasing, how ignorant. gtfo pls.
--
otr fp: https://www.ctrlc.hu/~stef/otr.txt
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 14:47:14 +0200
From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>
To: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>
Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
Message-ID: <20150107124714.GD2512@sivokote.iziade.m$>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 07:00:24AM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
> > Building just the kernel with clang is likely possibly, but
> > bare kernel is not a distro.
> >
> > Till recently, I believe one couldn't build desktop
> > environment only with clang, might be wrong on this.
>
> As in the links, the entire FreeBSD kernel, base,
> and most of it's ~25,000 ports build with clang. X,
> browsers, whatever. The others are not as far along.
> Not bad considering clang itself is a "till recently".
Thanks, probably i should stop trolling bsd for gcc so far,
except for historical reasons that RMS & co gave them the
toolchain to get started and be alive.
I suppose _some_ of the ~25,000 ports _don't build_ with clang,
giving me a short opportunity of trolling -- you still need
gcc for _all_ ports?
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 15:25:25 +0200
From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>
To: Lodewijk andré de la porte <l@odewijk.nl>
Cc: "cypherpunks@cpunks.org" <cypherpunks@cpunks.org>
Subject: Re: Rant on BSD vs GPL was [Good ol' BSD vs. GPL]
Message-ID: <20150107132525.GE2512@sivokote.iziade.m$>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:45:16PM -0600, Lodewijk andré de la porte wrote:
> 2015-01-06 18:51 GMT+01:00 Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>:
>
> > Haskell language shit depending on GCC and claiming they "compile with
> > portable
> > assembler" don't make sense to me too, fuck Haskelli and its monads,
> > sorry.
> >
>
> Not really sure how this factors into it. There's more than one Haskell
> compiler, you know? Haskell and monads are languages, and do not depend
I suppose I trolled about GHC: https://www.haskell.org/ghc/license
Since I am in a trolling mood, let me give you the following
benchmark to check your favorite language for speed:
The fibonacci numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number
are defined by the linear recurrence:
F(0)=0,F(1)=1,F(n)=F(n-1)+F(n-2) [1].
Using numerology, you can compute F(n) in O(log(n)).
Compute F(n) via the slow recurrence [1].
Question: In haskell (or in your favourite language), how
long does it take to compute F(2^32) modulo 2^32?
Modulo 2^32 means working with C int's.
The haskell fanatic called this "micro-benchmark".
If you work in excel, you don't care if the popup shows in
0.1 or in 0.9 seconds.
If you work with loops to 2^34, you might care if you use C
or haskell IMHO.
Best,
--
Georgi
> upon compilation to have meaning. Monads are like, kinda inevitable. You
> have them in your code, you just don't know.
>
> As for the rest, GPL when something is everyone's property, BSD when you're
> actually just a company pushing a product or just don't care. There's not
> much between GPL and BSD. I'd like a structure where you have to pay to get
> in, but once you're in it's like GPL (but only with others who are "in"),
> instead of every closed source license out there.
>
> Meanwhile we must not depend upon the bullshit copyright system to provide
> us with compensation. Distribution is no longer a challenge and no profit
> can be extracted from it anymore. Stop it already. Please stop ruining
> reality to create artificial scarcity, I want it not.
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 10:32:08 -0500
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org
Subject: Re: Please stop top posting [was: TrueCrupt...]
Message-ID:
<CAD2Ti2939Q7WUqyZ+BAZ4eR1Ti31XZLOPo7K3=3r12iFWu9GRA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 5:21 AM, Cathal Garvey
<cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me> wrote:
> Despite this, I *do* use text-only mode
That's wise and perhaps even generous of you, thanks.
> scrolling [...] irksome
Someday they'll get tired of costly context "huh's", reading
backwards, and wasted mail space... and realize scrolling with
trim and interleave is a naturally elegant pairing.
> pre-configured
They might even get so irked as to raise a finger to configure that.
> cultural
I hear configuring a lamp and turning pages in books is irksome
these days too, what with swiping on backlit screens being so
superior. Sad this culture.
> I know the reasons
> [...]
> ..did you really call top-posting "abuse of other people"?
Yes, and I called them lazy too. My post stands.
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
cypherpunks mailing list
cypherpunks@cpunks.org
https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
------------------------------
End of cypherpunks Digest, Vol 19, Issue 9
******************************************