The post is a joke of some crappletard praising Crapintosh over Linux (referred to the whole operating system as Linux only, out of ignorance or laziness).
Actually, incase you may want to participate on the debate:
The corporations that hold copyright would see the IP belongs to Starlink and that company is sitting on US grounds, all they would do is send an email to the company so they cancel your service and you wouldn't be able to seed shit no matter where the server is.
> You often can just tell the ISP you're using your own router, or use bridging, or to use double NAT in the worst case (best avoided, but sometimes it's necessary to have routing freedom).
You can tell them but they won't care, from my own experience, ISPs do not like to disclose PPPoE credentials which are needed to replace the router. And you're already in a multi layer NAT by default with these dogshit providers, free software that relies on p2p doesn't work.
Hey did you hear that fuss about RedHat trying to restrict source code redistribution? How's that even legally possible if plenty of the stuff they use from Fedora is GPL?
> Also higher up in the thread someone said that the BSD's are proprietary and that just riled me up.
Because they are, get over it and accept it, it's the truth. Just like Linux upstream is also nonfree, so is *BSD. And if you think no licensing statement makes it public domain, I got bad news for you, the Berne convention disagrees, everything is all rights reserved by default unless stated otherwise almost everywhere.
@SuperSnekFriend@charlie_root@dcc@Nishi >The kernel includes a few minor firmwares which are FREELY PROVIDED by the vendors of that hardware, since those vendors chose to not put those firmware onto ROMS on their cards. Those firmwares are FREE. Please indicate a single vendor who wants MONEY for that firmware. They don't want money. >An "accomplished computer scientist" confusing "free" as in free beer and "free" as in freedom > I don't have much of a beef in this fight, but come on now!
Can you switch on your brain a moment?
Free software means that the software's users have freedom. (The issue is not about price.) We developed the GNU operating system so that users can have freedom in their computing.
Specifically, free software means users have the four essential freedoms: (0) to run the program, (1) to study and change the program in source code form, (2) to redistribute exact copies, and (3) to distribute modified versions.
Software differs from material objectsโsuch as chairs, sandwiches, and gasolineโin that it can be copied and changed much more easily. These facilities are why software is useful; we believe a program's users should be free to take advantage of them, not solely its developer.
Wrong, not only BSD systems include nonfree software from third parties, they have hundreds of nonfree source files making them nonfree. Hypberola is the only project santizing OpenBSD to make it a properly free operating system, because BSDtards don't give a fuck about free software.
> although rms play a part in asking some developers to consider releasing certain BSD's as free software.
Not a single BSD operating system is free as of today. HyperbolaBSD is still a work in progress, and they exposed the problem with BSD licensing is worse than we thought.
The problem comes when you need portability and massive storage.
I usually buy 3.5" CMR drives only as those have better performance, even as external, portable massive storage, but they're cumbersome and require auxiliary power supply. If you want proper portability you either:
1. Get 2.5" SMR HDDs with dogshit performance as manufacturers do not produce CMR 2.5" drives anymore.
2. Get an SSD which does have way better performance but is more expensive and wears much faster if you have to transfer large files (which is why i get HDDs).
@SuperDicq@Relected Nah, the bottom would be spending 8,000 bucks in a POWER9 motherboard with fully free and auditable firmware, and daily driving on a VM emulating a free implementation of amd64.