4 ms·
This was inevitable. Apple's shown they'll go after people who tell the truth about them if Apple doesn't want a paticular truth told. So it was just a matter
by SamAtt 17y ago
This was inevitable. Apple's shown they'll go after people who tell the truth about them if Apple doesn't want a paticular truth told. So it was just a matter of time before they smacked Stallman down for slandering their OS.
- nwjsmith 17y agoI haven't been able to find the part in the article or RMS's quote that states Apple went after him for this particular "truth". Do you have any evidence there is such a backdoor in Mac OS X?
- SamAtt 17y agoI specifically called it slander which means I don't think it's true. That's what slander is.
- tomjen2 17y agoYou think Stallman would get smacked down by Apple? They can't sue him, he doesn't own anything.
- zandorg 17y agoMacArthur grant?
- gaius 17y agoDon't forget the other million dollar grant, from the Takeda Foundation. All Stallman's economics make sense when you realize that he's quietly sitting on a huge pile of cash.
- calambrac 17y agoHe would probably love nothing more than to get sued by Apple, honestly.
- JeremyChase 17y agoHe would probably love nothing more than to get sued by Apple, for something he has a legal leg to stand on.
- SamAtt 17y agoHe has more than you think. To give one example, Apple could include the FSF in the suit meaning whatever assets the FSF has could be put into jeapordy. I'm not saying that's right or fair and I'm not saying they'd even win but they could inflict some damage (legal fees alone would be an issue) When someone's using the law as a weapon they're trying to take away what the other person values. Just because someone doesn't value money doesn't mean the law can't take away other things.
- JeremyChase 17y agoPlease read RMS's original letter here: http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/mac-osx-mistakes-and-malfeatures http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/mac-osx-mistakes-and-malfeature... and here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=849789 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=849789 I can't see a motivation for him to post a retraction for something he can't confirm in either regard, so I also assume that Apple has pursued some legal action. Apple does have complete control over the software on your system. Every time you do an update you give control to them, but this is no different than any other OS that is upgradable. The difference is that OSX users have no transparency into what they are doing, and no way to audit it. So why would they need a backdoor if you will sudo and hand them the keyboard?
- gjm11 17y agoI can't see a motivation for him to post a retraction for something he can't confirm in either regard: Honesty, perhaps?
- JeremyChase 17y agoSure, that is possible. Lets imagine that he simply stopped talking about the back door. Is this something he is asked about a lot? If so, he would have to recant eventually, why not now? You are correct, and I shouldn't have assumed anything. However, I still believe legal action to be the likely cause.
- rbanffy 17y ago"but this is no different than any other OS that is upgradable" Except for the fact that in free and open-source you can examine the code that conducts the update. For instance, my iPod-to-TV cable stopped working when I update my iPod touch (http://www.dieblinkenlights.com/blog_en/i-really-want-to-like-apple http://www.dieblinkenlights.com/blog_en/i-really-want-to-lik...). Could I examine the update, I could rather easily change the part that broke perfectly functional hardware and reverse the change in functionality Apple imposed upon me.
- TomOfTTB 17y agoThe mistake you made here was commenting on a topic that involves Apple fanboys and Open Source Zealots. It is a thread where the stupidest among us converge. You were just asking for down votes (and Yes, I'm probably going to get downvoted too but it was soooo worth it)