Thread: Calibre on FreeBSD
View Single Post
Old 06-25-2011, 05:25 AM   #11
KevinBurke
Enthusiast
KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.KevinBurke writes the songs that make the whole world sing.
 
KevinBurke's Avatar
 
Posts: 40
Karma: 40000
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: State of New York
Device: Kobo Aura HD
Cool the GPL is for moronic losers like Kovid Goyal
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovidgoyal View Post
Wow, what a moron.
The only moron I see here is you :

"Riehle's research plays off the excellent analysis of The 451 Group's Matt Aslett on the rise of permissive licensing in open-source communities. As Aslett points out, GPL licensing has been in relative decline compared to Apache- and MIT-licensed projects.

http://blogs.the451group.com/opensou...ive-licensing/

The reason, as Riehle writes, is clear: "Projects that don't choose a permissive license are at a Darwinian disadvantage over those that do because the later can receive contributions from a broader set of enterprises than the former." Not so surprisingly, this holds true even for source code repositories: GitHub has been beating SourceForge, Google Code, and other source code repositories by being even more open.

Openness matters. Even in the land of open-source software, where openness is the default."

http://eaves.ca/2011/06/14/how-github-saved-opensource/ "


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06...nness_problem/

Do I even have to state outright that the Apache and MIT licenses are more closely related or in the same class of licenses as the BSD licenses and the ISC license ? Obviously anyone who chooses the GPL license is a moron so you are the moron here not me.

Anyway I do use Calibre on windows. Calibre might be able to function 100% on FreeBSD by fiddling with dbus and hald permissions or whatnot. I know I tried but it proved to be too much of a pain in the ass. So I now use Microsoft windows and FreeBSD together. My setup is that I use Microsoft windows with Xming and putty to connect to my FreeBSD box and xforwarding is turned on so my FreeBSD applications which are GUI based run on my windows box transparently as well as being able to use the console shell and related console programs. So I use windows for applications such as calibre. I get the best of both worlds. Obviously the GPL and Linux are a failure. The GPL is in decline compared to the MIT and Apache licenses due to the fact that it is at a Darwinian disadvantage and people have been proclaiming the 'year of the linux desktop' for about a decade now but that never came to fruition as Microsoft Windows and MacOSX have a much bigger market share on the desktop market. The desktop market has rejected Linux. Do I even have to mention that the core of MacOSX is significantly based off of FreeBSD ? So BSD is more successfull than Linux on the desktop and the *BSDs are technically superior on the server market as well. Linux may rule supreme in the supercomputer world but that is deprecated due to cheaper cluster solutions where both the BSDs and Linux are used. So Linux is for losers :

http://www.forbes.com/2005/06/16/lin..._0616theo.html


Linux and the GPL licenses are for loser morons. So the facts of reality show that Kovid Goyal is a moron and that Kevin Burke is not a moron. Face the facts that us BSD people are elite and you GPL linux loving people are losers.
Last edited by KevinBurke; 06-25-2011 at 06:07 AM.
KevinBurke is offline