3 ms·

How about this as a better thought experiment/reality: Some Linux distro makers refuse to include closed source drivers because they don't pass their idealogic

by jsz0 17y ago

How about this as a better thought experiment/reality: Some Linux distro makers refuse to include closed source drivers because they don't pass their idealogical purity tests. It's no good for the end user in the short term because it makes setting up a fully functional Linux machine more difficult. Some people accept this because they believe ultimately open source drivers are better. A company like NVIDIA spends some money to develop these drivers yet they are denied inclusion into most distributions out of the box solely for idealogical reasons -- a choice made by a relatively small group of people who control how the distributions are packaged.

blhack 17y ago
Uhmm...except for I can still install the nvidia stuff if I want to. This sounds exactly like what everyone is advocating. Allow people to install rejected apps, just make it tiny bit more difficult.
- 0x44 17y ago
  Allow people to install rejected apps, just make it tiny bit more difficult. I'd argue they already have. Jailbreaking the iPhone is trivial enough that anyone can do so if they desire rejected or non-AppStore applications.
  - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
    Didn't Apple argue this was illegal under the DMCA? http://www.macnn.com/articles/09/02/13/apple.jailbreaking.stance/ http://www.macnn.com/articles/09/02/13/apple.jailbreaking.st... I'm not sure breaking the law fits my definition of 'trivial'.
    - 0x44 17y ago
      Not exactly, they argued that the arguments the EFF put forth for carving out an exception for jail-breaking did not meet the legal requirements for carving out such an exception.
r0s 17y ago
The nature of that ideology makes it possible for you(or anyone) to make a distribution with closed drivers and even sell it, if the driver developers allow that. No one is protecting the keys to the Linux kingdom, you could be one of those merciless tyrants if you really want to.

by jsz0 17y ago

blhack 17y ago

Uhmm...except for I can still install the nvidia stuff if I want to. This sounds exactly like what everyone is advocating. Allow people to install rejected apps, just make it tiny bit more difficult.

0x44 17y ago
Allow people to install rejected apps, just make it tiny bit more difficult. I'd argue they already have. Jailbreaking the iPhone is trivial enough that anyone can do so if they desire rejected or non-AppStore applications.
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  Didn't Apple argue this was illegal under the DMCA? http://www.macnn.com/articles/09/02/13/apple.jailbreaking.stance/ http://www.macnn.com/articles/09/02/13/apple.jailbreaking.st... I'm not sure breaking the law fits my definition of 'trivial'.
  - 0x44 17y ago
    Not exactly, they argued that the arguments the EFF put forth for carving out an exception for jail-breaking did not meet the legal requirements for carving out such an exception.

r0s 17y ago

The nature of that ideology makes it possible for you(or anyone) to make a distribution with closed drivers and even sell it, if the driver developers allow that. No one is protecting the keys to the Linux kingdom, you could be one of those merciless tyrants if you really want to.