Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Talk at Microsoft

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 248 posts

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#221

Post by [deleted] »

danShumway wrote: post #187
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Javascript in the browser is practically compiled binary software at this point. You can't realistically inspect or edit 99% of what you're running since it's fully minified and obfuscated. And that's even more the case with WASM.

I'm going to push back on this, at least a bit. Maybe I'm atypical because I work with Javascript a lot, but I don't think it's that hard to read minified JS. Modern browsers have a lot of tools to help with that -- you can set breakpoints on DOM manipulations, you can autoformat the code so it's not just a jumble of text -- you can even pause execution and add custom code to functions that can do additional logging…

[deleted]

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#222

Post by marmaduke »

vezycash wrote: post #184
jacquesm wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ballmer is an opportunist, pure and simple. When it suited him Linux was a cancer, and when it no longer suited him he 'loved Linux'. If the wind should ever change Linux will for sure be a cancer again.

> Ballmer is an opportunist, pure and simple. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Ballmer is not a Devil. Open source was costing him billions in lost Windows revenue from Google, Amazon and many other companies. Right now, with hindsight bias, we feel that the path to capitalizing on open source was OBVIOUS - it wasn't. Cloud computing wasn't a…

> Apple will join the fray once the financial guys can prove that they'll make more money selling

Could it be (I'm not an apple fanboi though I like my 2015 MBP) that Apple's financial predictions suggested that a lone company not selling customer data might be able to flip that to their advantage in the marketing or minds of its users? Apple privacy is a recurrent même so it seems they succeeded intentionally or otherwise

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#223

Post by hollerith »

simion314 wrote: post #180
CJefferson wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Readline is distributed only under GPLv3 nowadays. I worked on some software licensed only under GPLv2, where some authors are no longer available. GPLv2 and GPLv3 aren't compatible.

Thanks for you response but I am not understanding, you wanted to copy paste some code from a GPL2 project into a GPL3 one ?

He probably wanted to link the Readline library into his GPL2 program, which according to the owner of the library (the FSF) is not permitted and might have led to his employer's getting sued by the FSF for copyright infringement or at least to his employer's lawyers getting scared, then badmouthing him to management.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#224

Post by _ph_ »

extra88 wrote: post #150
_ph_ wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we all know the pros and cons about running Javascript on web pages. But it becomes more and more obvious, that while Javascript gets abused for a lot of bad things, a modern web completely without scripting in web pages isn't feasible either. Consequently, I consider this as something the GNU project failed to address. Why isn't there an official GNU webbrowser with a reasonable Javascript implementation? On…

That wouldn't address Stallman's objection; regardless of which browser is used, the JavaScript delivered by website operators would still be executed in the user's browser.

I am aware of his objections. I agree that dealing with Javascript is a challenge. But the consequence of that there is no GNU webbrowser and Javascript implementation is, that all users have no real choice but use other browsers which might not even try to protect the user.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#225

Post by cameronbrown »

freeone3000 wrote: post #104
cameronbrown wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can understand their perspective, especially if they're non technical. Much of the time they see open source as some ragtag community project that has no real support so they believe in terms of risk, it can seem lower to build or buy.

Are they that wrong? What real support does an npm module have?

Exactly. Given the absolute shitshow maintaining anything in the JavaScript ecosystem I can't blame them.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#226

Post by sandov »

WorldMaker wrote: post #194
fortran77 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a new type of yoga where you jump up and down while repeating your mantra. (His is "Developers".)

Most everyone makes fun of that mantra moment, but Ballmer was right, Microsoft has always historically done its best work when it put Developers first. Ballmer wasn't always great at executing a developer-first vision (particularly compared to the modern open source era of Azure/WSL/VS Code/…) [ETA: partly because Ballmer was not himself a developer and needed the reminders], but it's weird to criticize him for shou…

No one disagrees with him on his thesis. It's just that the way he presented it was extremely funny.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#227

Post by [deleted] »

marmaduke wrote: post #222
vezycash wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ballmer is an opportunist, pure and simple. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Ballmer is not a Devil. Open source was costing him billions in lost Windows revenue from Google, Amazon and many other companies. Right now, with hindsight bias, we feel that the path to capitalizing on open source was OBVIOUS - it wasn't. Cloud computing wasn't a…

> Apple will join the fray once the financial guys can prove that they'll make more money selling Could it be (I'm not an apple fanboi though I like my 2015 MBP) that Apple's financial predictions suggested that a lone company not selling customer data might be able to flip that to their advantage in the marketing or minds of its users? Apple privacy is a recurrent même so it seems they succeeded intentionally or oth…

[deleted]

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#228

Post by jacquesm »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #158
jacquesm wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To a coarse approximation, yes. But very few people would go to the lengths that Ballmer was prepared to go to. In a more just society these guys would be behind bars rather than pretending to be philanthropists.

> But very few people would go to the lengths that Ballmer was prepared to go to. Larry Ellison? Scott McNealy? I'm sure I could think of others if I had the time. Ballmer was merely the most visible because MS was at the top of the food chain at the time.

Good point about Ellison and McNealy, Jobs figures in there somewhere as well given how he treated his business partner.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#229

Post by jacquesm »

vezycash wrote: post #184
jacquesm wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ballmer is an opportunist, pure and simple. When it suited him Linux was a cancer, and when it no longer suited him he 'loved Linux'. If the wind should ever change Linux will for sure be a cancer again.

> Ballmer is an opportunist, pure and simple. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Ballmer is not a Devil. Open source was costing him billions in lost Windows revenue from Google, Amazon and many other companies. Right now, with hindsight bias, we feel that the path to capitalizing on open source was OBVIOUS - it wasn't. Cloud computing wasn't a…

I very much do not think Nadella is a saint, for one thing he was there when Ballmer did his stuff, if he was a man of principle he'd have left MS long before he made it to the top so I'm going on the assumption that he was A-Ok with those strategies as long as it benefited him.

Re: My Talk at Microsoft

#230

Post by fgonzag »

5trokerac3 wrote: post #61
dash2 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

That phrase could be used to describe how every genocidal maniac in history viewed themselves. Most of the steady progress that has been made in this world has been due to the efforts of diplomatic individuals who cast a wide, friendly net for their supposed adversaries.

Rather than progress, I'd state that change, both good and bad,is driven by unreasonable men.
Post reply on HN