Re: Fuzzy machine learning framework v1.2

[darkestkhan <darkestkhan@gmail.com>]

On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:46:45 PM UTC, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> "Zhu Qun-Ying" <zhu.qunying@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:35:04 -0700, Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >> It is stunning to see programmers who are used to formal,
> > >> rational thinking, becoming irrational. ;-) ;-)
> > >
> > > There's plenty of that going around!
> > >
> > >> The *combination* of someone else's work and yours is not your own
> > >> work!
> > >
> > > Right!
> > >
> > >> The resulting work is *not* the sole intellectual property
> > >> of either contributor.
> > >
> > > Right again! So, why does something think it's reasonable to suggest that
> > > you have to open your source because he opened his source? That's going  
> > > too
> > > far. All that's reasonable is to say "if you use this you have to also
> > > provide the source for it." The fact GPL infects anything that touches  
> > > it is
> > > wrong, and it's probably not legally enforceable.
> > >
> > 
> > Then don't use it.
> 
> I don't use it. Try reading the thread instead of adding to the noise level ;-)
> 
> > If your code deadly need other's code to function, then respect their
> > choice of license. 
> 
> I don't need anybody's code to function except the OS and on UNIX, libc (I
> usually use syscalls..)
> 
> > You are using your definition of freedom to overtake other's thought.
> 
> Let me see if I understand this. A guy from China is lecturing on the topic
> of freedom? It's well-understood where I come from. The Land of the FREE and
> the Home of the Brave. At least it was when I grew up...
> 

Funny...  I know some Chinese personally and talked with them and there is something interesting I learned - in Western World China is portrayed as country where you don't have any freedoms, mainly because it is `socialistic` [fyi Chinese government is technocratic] and people virtually can't speak,  while in the West we can speak virtually anything...
FYI: they can't speak but they can DO while we can speak but can't do that much.

> > I think RMS's GPL is more realistic to respect the author's will.  He is
> > not forcing you to use GPL for your code, he is not forcing you to use GPL
> > code neither.
> 
> You keep missing the point. The point is the GPL is not a free software
> license. It's a viral, forcible open source license.
> 

It does its jobs - it gives you all 4 freedoms of software freedom and effectively prohibits freeloading. It is good tool for this job, especially if you don't want to write code for freeloaders.

> > That is your definition of "free software", it is perfectly acceptable to  
> > lots of people, including me to call GPL software as free software.
> 
> But you're damn liars, and usually socialists and atheists, so you have no
> compunction about lying, propagandizing, expropriating private property,
> bullying, and killing people who get in your way, since you have no moral
> compass.
> 
> Have a nice day!

Yeah, I'm atheist. But I'm not socialist - I'm a technocrat, and IMHO GPL does its job very well - gives a lot of rights to people while effectively prohibiting freeloading. And I don't see how lack of faith in any God or gods makes me immoral - just looking in the Bible we see `almighty, merciful and good` God killing people because they don't pray to him, ordering conquest of Canaan and other atrocities that shouldn't be done by any good or moral God. Similar things can be found in other religious texts. As I would advice reading Confucius and Buddha's teachings [I don't see how Zen can be qualified as religion - for me it is philosophy of life].

Could you stop using argunentum ad hominem ? It doesn't give strength to your argument, to the contrary - it is serious logical fallacy.

Have a nice day!