Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   salty_apollyon (rlier23@bae.st)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:13:01 JST salty_apollyon
   my computer got extremely slow after the fucking windows updates that were shoved down my throat
   i fucking hate microsoft so much ?
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:12:57 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:
     • T man :sex: :puffgiga: :puffpowerroll:
     @Giganova8 @theorytoe >From there you can disable it permanently.
     I don't think it's permanent.
     
     Windows is now designed to reset certain settings at random time periods, so they can say that that provide the option to disable X, Y, Z, even though those options are only set temporary.
     
     @rlier23 Why do you still stand on the proprietary ground despite everything they do to you?
   • Embed this notice
     Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love: (giganova8@varishangout.net)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:12:58 JST Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:

     in reply to
     @rlier23
     Gimme a minute, gotta find how I did it again :jahy_pain:
   • Embed this notice
     Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love: (giganova8@varishangout.net)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:12:58 JST Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:

     in reply to

     • Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:
     @rlier23
     Alright, so go to settings and then go to "Edit Group Policy".
     
     From there, go to "Administrative Templates" under "Computer Configuration", then "Windows Components", then "Windows Update". From there you can disable it permanently. :thumbs_up:
   • Embed this notice
     Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love: (giganova8@varishangout.net)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:12:59 JST Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:

     in reply to
     @rlier23
     >not disabling windows update permanently
     :futaba_smug:
   • Embed this notice
     salty_apollyon (rlier23@bae.st)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:12:59 JST salty_apollyon

     in reply to

     • Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:
     @Giganova8 i disabled it on the services stuff is there another way to do it?
   • Embed this notice
     Awoo (awoo@bae.st)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:50:44 JST Awoo

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:
     • T man :sex: :puffgiga: :puffpowerroll:
     @rlier23
     That is no excuse. I am retarded and use Linux.
     @Suiseiseki @Giganova8 @theorytoe
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:50:44 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Awoo
     @Awoo https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-users-never-heard-of-gnu.html
   • Embed this notice
     salty_apollyon (rlier23@bae.st)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 16:50:45 JST salty_apollyon

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Giganova8 :sob2: :nacho_love:
     • T man :sex: :puffgiga: :puffpowerroll:
     @Suiseiseki @theorytoe @Giganova8 necause i am fuckin retarded
   • Embed this notice
     Awoo (awoo@bae.st)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 17:42:11 JST Awoo

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Reluctant Weeb
     @Reluctant_Weeb
     Thank you for that TED Talk.
     @Suiseiseki
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 17:42:11 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Awoo
     • Reluctant Weeb
     @Awoo @Reluctant_Weeb Why don't I respond to and refute the copypasta?
     
     >trying to stake claim over the entire linux ecosystem.
     I have no idea what "linux ecosystem" is meant to mean.
     There are 3 versions of the kernel, Linux with more than minor patches; Linux from kernel.org, GNU Linux-libre and the RT_PREEMPT patchset.
     
     rms has never claimed credit for Linux, but everyone loves to claim credit for what GNU does.
     
     >were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products
     There are many different versions of the GPL and Linux used to be licensed under the GPLv2-only (but not anymore).
     
     The GPLv2 was written to be a free software license and gcc was written to be a free software compiler and not mere "products".
     
     >The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so
     I checked this claim, and well: "Sadly, a kernel by itself gets you nowhere. To get a working system you need a shell, compilers, a library etc. These are separate parts and may be under a stricter (or even looser) copyright. Most of the tools used with linux are GNU software and are under the GNU copyleft." - Linus Torvalds - https://linuxreviews.org/Notes_for_linux_release_0.01
     
     Linus has only ever said that the name of his kernel is Linux, although more than happy to accept credit for things that GNU did and doesn't correct such mistakes.
     
     >Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?
     Appeal to authority fallacy? Nice.
     
     I'm not worried about being known as a nag by infidels in this holy war.
     
     
     >By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a compute
     Ding dong, that definition is wrong.
     For something to be an OPERATING system, it must OPERATE. Linux doesn't operate on its own (it panic() on boot if you try), so it's not an OS.
     
     Meanwhile, you can boot a computer, down to the bootloader with only GNU software.
     
     >Take your beef to Red Hat
     I'm not sure if it was Red Hat, but I remember one company admitted that they referred to GNU/Linux as "Linux" since they felt they could make more profit that way.
     
     >XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions.
     You don't need Xorg to use GNU to its full extent, you can fire up emacs on GNU without Xorg installed and it'll be just as usable (rms most of the time doesn't use Xorg, although he has it installed for certain graphical things).
     
     >I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric.
     Most of my clock cycles are dedicated to running GNU software.
     
     >GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed.
     I'm sorry, gcc is used to compile a absolutely massive amount of software and it also has been cross compiled to a huge number of OS's that have a kernel that's not Linux, so Linux is irrelevant when compared to gcc. Meanwhile certain parts of Linux can still only be compiled with gcc.
     
     >where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?
     Today you can fire up GNU/Hurd and boot right into emacs, so GNU/Linux's days are numbered.
     
     Those days grow shorter, as GNU/Hurd now has slow, but working SMP support.
     
     Once the few remaining issues are fixed, Hurd will blow such proprietary kernel out of the water.
     
     >grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame
     We did not set out to become "famous", we set out to be able to use computers in freedom again.
     I will not rest or be grateful until every last piece of proprietary software is eliminated.
     
     >You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux
     It's more like the other way round - Linux was largely a success mostly due to how most of the needed work was already done by GNU.
     
     Thanks for reading.
     
     
     In case you have any questions, please read as below before asking:
     https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html
     https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html
   • Embed this notice
     Reluctant Weeb (reluctant_weeb@bae.st)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Mar-2023 17:42:12 JST Reluctant Weeb

     in reply to

     • 翠星石
     • Awoo
     @Suiseiseki @Awoo
     That article is just Stallman once again trying to stake claim over the entire linux ecosystem. Don't let him get away with it.
     
     =====================================================================
     
     No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.
     Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.
     
     One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?
     
     (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.
     
     Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.
     
     You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.
     
     Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?
     
     If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:
     
     Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.
     
     Thanks for listening.