Sudo rant

astyle said:
Do you seriously think that Che killed more Cubans than Uncle Sam? Well, I can always challenge you to do the research on numbers, to quote your sources, and then we can compare our analyses.
Click to expand...
Uncle Sam is not an individual. Ché Guevara single-handedly killed more Cubans than any gringo.
 
rbranco said:
Uncle Sam is not an individual. Ché Guevara single-handedly killed more Cubans than any gringo.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I do need more info than that. [Sarcasm]Next thing I know, you'll claim that Che personally conducted a mass shooting with over 1000 victims in an hour, and the M16 melted in his hands, and now the remnants of the specific gun are in a display in a museum in Caracas, while the guy himself died a decorated man specifically for that.[/Sarcasm]. And why is that not in Wikipedia?

BTW, I'm not questioning whether Che has blood on his hands, he most likely does, and that does need to be acknowledged and put out in the open as part of history preservation efforts.

What I'm questioning is, why emphasize that part of the picture so much, esp. when just about every country has more than one famous figure who's got blood on their hands?
 
astyle said:
Sorry, I do need more info than that. [Sarcasm]Next thing I know, you'll claim that Che personally conducted a mass shooting with over 1000 victims in an hour, and the M16 melted in his hands, and now the remnants of the specific gun are in a display in a museum in Caracas, while the guy himself died a decorated man specifically for that.[/Sarcasm]. And why is that not in Wikipedia?
Click to expand...
It's all documented. He himself documented his transition from an idealist to a murderous psychopath. And Wikipedia has a well known left-wing bias. It's useless for biographies and historical facts.

Here's a list of all the executions he did or signed:

 
What Che has done, isn't dependent on rbranco winning an argument. He's done what he's done, whether people here know it or not. If I had more interest in it, and not have worries, I'd pick up a book and read about Castro and Che. I don't put that responsibility on others, except maybe to point to the direction where this can be found.
 
rbranco said:
It's all documented. He himself documented his transition from an idealist to a murderous psychopath. And Wikipedia has a well known left-wing bias. It's useless for biographies and historical facts.

Here's a list of all the executions he did or signed:

Click to expand...
Even within that list, it's a couple dozen that he actually executed by his own hand, the rest were signed warrants. Just how many civilian deaths do you think were hushed up by CIA, who organized most of the armed incursions into Cuba in the first place? There's plenty of blame to go all around.

And I would not make a blanket conclusion that Wikipedia is useless for biographies and historical facts. If you feel there's an inaccuracy or omission, please feel free to edit the appropriate entry. Some entries are more controversial than others. Did you know that the entry that tries to define anime on Wikipedia is edited like, several times a day? People actually fight over what anime even is! Point being, Wikipedia is not useless.
 
I didn't know that. (That anime is constantly edited). As for Wikipedia, although one hears of many inaccuracies, it's still a major source of information for many things. If I were seriously trying to learn about, say, Che, I would probably start with the Wikipedia page and probably look for what the page recommended as sources and/or reference. If the page (or a page on anyone or anything else) seems really odd to me, then I'd probably just start at the library. If someone cleverly makes a page close to seeming accurate, while putting in subtle untruths---well, I'd probably be fooled, but if it's a subject that really interests me, I'd be checking other sources as well.
 
Windows has sudo; I used it for the first time a little bit ago with a Certbot renewal script and it worked perfectly (I do most stuff unelevated, but certbot insists on admin for some reason even when nginx doesn't :p)
 
Espionage724 said:
Windows has sudo; I used it for the first time a little bit ago with a Certbot renewal script and it worked perfectly (I do most stuff unelevated, but certbot insists on admin for some reason even when nginx doesn't :p)
Click to expand...
Ha! Brilliant, thanks🙏! I was already sick and tired on right clicking on Terminal and then looking for damn "Run as admin" option in that menu.
Just tested, sudo winget upgrade -u --all worked as a charm!

Still one dialog box to answer, but that's just ←↵.
 
rbranco said:
And Wikipedia has a well known left-wing bias.
Click to expand...
As a former Wikipedian, I would say that it instead just has abuse of admin power. There are many there from every side of the political spectrum that are united by bootstomping peons. The high-ranking editors basically own the articles they create, so you get far-left articles, far-right articles, and just general crap. Wikipedia can be useful for some stuff, but it has a rather toxic culture, and the system of managment is a pure oligarchical bureaucracy that feels like an experiment done by some researchers at a university. These are just my two cents as a former high-edit-count/privileged user that has A LOT of experience with the Wikipedia system of government, and the Wikimedia foundation.
 
RetroComputingCollector said:
Wikipedia can be useful for some stuff, but it has a rather toxic culture, and the system of managment is a pure oligarchical bureaucracy that feels like an experiment done by some researchers at a university.
Click to expand...
Some of the toxicity comes from sticking to your guns on certain battles that people at the bottom try to pick. Some things are just off the table, not negotiable - and consistency / sustainability gets mislabeled as toxicity.
 
Espionage724 said:
I'm wondering if there's more to it than that. The rotary user that post screenshot in the video thumbnail mentions was deleted (seems like if they were helpful to be noteworthy they'd keep the account around).

It sounds odd that Void themselves would be against Xlibre and I'd need to see a mailing list or announcement of that claim. At least in Fedora's case, someone brought the code to the table and it was rejected in a proposal all with visible public discussion.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering if there isn't a concerted effort to subvert the free software community. Not conspiracy theorying or anything, but the same week that it was reported that the Apache foundation changed their name and logo because of some indigenous commentary (even though the project was named such to honor the Apache people), it was also reported that a redhat employee was literally quoted as saying that "free software is the IT equivalent of white supremacy." Almost sounds like companies are trying to put the mark of evil on free software to enslave people into subscription services.

Saw both stories on vermaden's weekly news a couple of weeks ago.
 
VulcanRidr said:
I'm wondering if there isn't a concerted effort to subvert the free software community. Not conspiracy theorying or anything, but the same week that it was reported that the Apache foundation changed their name and logo because of some indigenous commentary (even though the project was named such to honor the Apache people), it was also reported that a redhat employee was literally quoted as saying that "free software is the IT equivalent of white supremacy." Almost sounds like companies are trying to put the mark of evil on free software to enslave people into subscription services.

Saw both stories on vermaden's weekly news a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...
This has been going on as long as OSS has been relevant. Microsoft and SCO were doing this crap in the 90s, and they still continue. They just now try to be more subversive and quiet instead of being big, loud, and in your face.
 
See, the stupid project of Xlibre keeps being brought up. It's a stupid project, so I don't blame Void for trying to hide it. This is exactly why. Void didn't attempt to sabotage the community, they wished to make some stupid project go away.

There may be intentional attempts to subvert opensource, however, it's not from Void. If anything, they tried to avoid Xlibre's unintentional effect of harming open source. Xlibre thinks they're doing a service to open source, but they're not. Xlibre did the stupidest shit, then, its fans act like Xlibre is victimized, when it caused a bad reaction to itself on its own. People keep peppering this thread with that nonsense, then, it keeps being discussed again. I don't blame Void Linux at all.

It keeps being brought up, and used to try to support a further idea that open source is being subverted. There well are attempts to subvert open source, but that's not an example of it to further add evidence.

Though, that Xlibre gets so much attention, is actually a symptom of the bad state that Xorg is in. Some think that FreeDesktop Foundation is trying to sabotage X for Wayland. While, this may be hard to prove, they have discouraged the use of X for Wayland. That something so stupid gets so much attention, is due to the lack of attention that X gets from its own upstream, and it seemingly trying to push it aside.

Open source isn't going anywhere. With the Document Foundation, Mozilla Foundation, Apache Foundation, BSD foundations, PostsreSQL, SQLite and other open source foundations, that's too much for bad actors to break down.

I believe that GPL harms opensource due to its viral nature. If there were something much simpler, and allowed it to use dynamic linking for dependencies this would be the perfect GPL alternative that some software makers are looking for. I understand, that people want others to give back their contributions, but forcing widely used dependencies, which are dynamically linked to combo license to be compatible, is plain wrong. GPL3 makes code closed off to reasonable open source, and even Linus doesn't use it. For instance, HyperbolaBSD may take a decade for a release, due to being convinced to make everything GPL3 compatible by Stallman. That's a lot of potential and effort wasted. Had HyperbolaBSD used a simpler license, as I've described above, they could continue to use all kinds of open source licenses as dependencies, and not have to rewrite everything to satisfy some overbearing flawed ideology. This may be the most successful subversion of other types of open source for one brand of open source. Now, I appreciate why Sun MicroSystems made CDDL1.0, which is the basis for other licenses.

Open source isn't anywhere where it should be.

One problem is, that the BSD, illumos, and Unix-like non Linux single user operating systems don't share technology as much as they could, due to lack of widespread cooperation, and by not following updates. They're free to get it, due to permissive licenses, but they don't see what they can get. illumOS is a BSD cousin, and they're not borrowing technology, for instance: drivers, LLVM/Clang. As nifty as illumOS derivatives are, I couldn't use them, because they're so far behind. illumOS even has parts to it which aren't open source, while they have permission to include those parts in their OS's, because they haven't had the ability to develop their own open source alternatives. They could simply borrow technology from BSD's to get past this. BSD's are also lacking in sharing technology between each other as well. NetBSD used to be far behind FreeBSD, and now they've surpassed it in some places in HID drivers and in some places on the graphics stack.
 
sidetone said:
See, the stupid project of Xlibre keeps being brought up. It's a stupid project, so I don't blame Void for trying to hide it. This is exactly why. Void didn't attempt to sabotage the community, they wished to make some stupid project go away.

There may be intentional attempts to subvert opensource, however, it's not from Void. If anything, they tried to avoid Xlibre's unintentional effect of harming open source. Xlibre thinks they're doing a service to open source, but they're not. Xlibre did the stupidest shit, then, its fans act like Xlibre is victimized, when it caused a bad reaction to itself on its own. People keep peppering this thread with that nonsense, then, it keeps being discussed again. I don't blame Void Linux at all.

It keeps being brought up, and used to try to support a further idea that open source is being subverted. There well are attempts to subvert open source, but that's not an example of it to further add evidence.

Though, that Xlibre gets so much attention, is actually a symptom of the bad state that Xorg is in. Some think that FreeDesktop Foundation is trying to sabotage X for Wayland. While, this may be hard to prove, they have discouraged the use of X for Wayland. That something so stupid gets so much attention, is due to the lack of attention that X gets from its own upstream, and it seemingly trying to push it aside.

Open source isn't going anywhere. With the Document Foundation, Mozilla Foundation, Apache Foundation, BSD foundations, PostsreSQL, SQLite and other open source foundations, that's too much for bad actors to break down.

I believe that GPL harms opensource due to its viral nature. If there were something much simpler, and allowed it to use dynamic linking for dependencies this would be the perfect GPL alternative that some software makers are looking for. I understand, that people want others to give back their contributions, but forcing widely used dependencies, which are dynamically linked to combo license to be compatible, is plain wrong. GPL3 makes code closed off to reasonable open source, and even Linus doesn't use it. For instance, HyperbolaBSD may take a decade for a release, due to being convinced to make everything GPL3 compatible by Stallman. That's a lot of potential and effort wasted. Had HyperbolaBSD used a simpler license, as I've described above, they could continue to use all kinds of open source licenses as dependencies, and not have to rewrite everything to satisfy some overbearing flawed ideology. This may be the most successful subversion of other types of open source for one brand of open source. Now, I appreciate why Sun MicroSystems made CDDL1.0, which is the basis for other licenses.

Open source isn't anywhere where it should be.

One problem is, that the BSD, illumos, and Unix-like non Linux single user operating systems don't share technology as much as they could, due to lack of widespread cooperation, and by not following updates. They're free to get it, due to permissive licenses, but they don't see what they can get. illumOS is a BSD cousin, and they're not borrowing technology, for instance: drivers, LLVM/Clang. As nifty as illumOS derivatives are, I couldn't use them, because they're so far behind. illumOS even has parts to it which aren't open source, while they have permission to include those parts in their OS's, because they haven't had the ability to develop their own open source alternatives. They could simply borrow technology from BSD's to get past this. BSD's are also lacking in sharing technology between each other as well. NetBSD used to be far behind FreeBSD, and now they've surpassed it in some places in HID drivers and in some places on the graphics stack.
Click to expand...
There is a Thread 98455 for talking about XLibre and rising complaints about its exitance. I admit that I'm guilty of straying away few times from the subject, but this one is supposed to be about sudo(8).
 
There are 21 posts mentioning Xlibre in this 123-post, 5-page thread. Five of those 21 are by you. Wayland is probably mentioned more, though I didn't bother to count those.

Edit: and one of the 21 is a post explicitly pointing people at the proper thread to discuss it.
 
sidetone said:
They keep bringing it up specifically on this thread. Why does this keep popping up?
Click to expand...
Because so many people on these forums have a political agenda that harms OSS for the sake of politicizing it. As you said, XLibre harms the open-source community. We can't be taken seriously if half of us are promoting a "conservative display server".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top