Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 80

Thread: Ubuntu To Investigate Digital Rights Management

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    I find that today a bit sad, because arch linux packagemanagement tool is a joke, first you have to install with the normla packagemanager another packagemanager yaourt, then the interface from this packagemanager is worse than what I used in gentoo 10 years ago. It looks like a linux-from-scratch helper script or something like that. Also the packages in AUR having often bad quality.
    drunk or dumb?
    yaourt is not the arch packagemanger....
    pacman is.
    If you use yaourt to use AUR has nothing todo with how arch package management work. Its exist a shitload of different AUR-helpers, yaourt is one of them. Non of them is official and non is neded. AUR is a place you can distribute your own packagebuilds if you dont understand the difference between that and the packagemanager pacman you should probably not choose arch ither way.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    THANK YOU for admitting the FACT that DRM is part of Qt bu$ine$$ model. This DRM shit pulled from Qts ass is also partly to blame for KDEs reluctance to join a cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack. Being under control by the Puppet Master called Qt will get you down the alley of "compability" to several stacks(Including Qts first priority DRM-infested, patented shit). That is the most sad thing learned from DRM. It fucked free software not by it adoption, but by its existence. Qts DRM shit is like a 2006 fart that keeps smelling. And even today KDE is confused because Qt s a ongoing DRM disaster.


    NO! Go read your own link. KDE is provided with powers to put Qt Free under a more permissive license. Which is so permissive it wont be FOSS anymore.
    as always poor trolling

    1.) ok i quote your first fail "Should Nokia discontinue the development of the Qt Free Edition under these licenses, then the Foundation has the right to release Qt under a BSD-style license or under other open source licenses. The agreement stays valid in case of a buy-out, a merger or bankruptcy." from kde foundation

    2.) second fail, digia commercial Qt don't provide any DRM inside[as always trolling in fantasies] and you can prove it by downloading the demo for any OS and check the SDK or looking up the symbol table[very unlikely you have the skill to do it], Qt Commertial due to its license can access safely[from a legal POV] the in OS DRM plataform[windows media/itunes SDK/IOS SDK/VxWorks DRM native API] or write your own using Qt but is not inside Qt and Digia is can't be responsible of what you do with their SDK[like KDE foundation can't be blamed for killing kittens if i use Qt LGPL to program my kitten killing machine].

    3.) "cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack" <-- WTF, KDE won't do it cuz is insane not cuz digia LOL that is why they focus on FFMPEG/Gstreamer[Default since quite a while ago]/VLC in combo with pulseaudio/sdl which 3 are quite crossplataform and they work just fine with Gnome too. and if you are reffering to phonon, its not a cross DE stack but an internal KDE API to let you use multimedia setting in a KDE fashion regardless the backend AKA you code in phonon API instead of pulseaudio/alsa/OSS/VLC/Xine/ffmpeg/gstreamer/SDL/Cocoa/Win32PE WMP API/etc and phonon will detect/decide wich backend use to fullfil your requirement[pretty much like KDE solid do with lower level drivers or KIO] andwith this with 3 fails in a row, seriously troll your MMO forum, this one is still too much of a challenge for you

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,048

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Frett View Post
    We've established we hate DRM, OK. But the hard fact is, if we want Linux to advance; we need some form of DRM so companies can feel safe.
    Do we need Linux to advance?

    I use Linux everyday and has been doing so for years and it works great.
    I am very satisfied with Linux as it is.

    I don't need Linux to advance, it already works great for me and does what I want it to do.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    now that you open my eyes i just realized DRM is written in C++ too, OMG lets switch all GPL apps to VALA and get rid of that EVIL C++ too
    God dammit, I was just about to make the exact same comment. Screw you!

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    == GNU / LINUX QUESTION ==

    And I find it funny how strong marketing works when you look on the naming shemes that are official or are mainstream. Nobody even says Android/Linux, so because of his drm stuff, they at least see that its something different, ok with Android/Linux instead of only Android you could understand that, because Linux itself is not a name that stands for free software or something so if there is no GNU/Linux you know it is not at least 99.99999% opensource. But even thats a difficult Term, RMS dont think that a distri even like debian is fully free, so there are a few full free linux versions. basicly you should only call them GNU/Linux or am I wrong here, like tristian Linux or somethign like that.

    http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html

    So would RMS be happier to call a not 100% free linux GNU/Linux because it values his big contributions to the os that is not only the kernel, or would he be unhappy, because someone would use the word gnu meaning non-freesoftware basicly ^^.

    It sounded to me that rms wants to call each linux gnu/linux at least if gnu tools are used there. So I find it a bit funny because then they would give their name for stuff they dont want to happen.

    So calling ubuntu -> ubuntu/linux and fedora gnu/linux would be funny because even fedora is not really 100% free like rms defines it it also does not only have fully free software included, like the firmwares etc.


    But I think too, that ubuntu now defines a new category of linux, it would be easier if they fork also the kernel (more than distries do anyway) than it would be easier than it would be Ubuntu/ukernel or something ^^ than we could call each ubuntu mint its a ukernel System ^^ but thats also only because the term linux did get missused sadly. So now you cant call anything precisly, so android uses a linux kernel and therefor its linux, but its very different from a "normal" linux. it has nearly nothing except its usb-stack that is way better than at least windows 7 its usb stack, and some of its drivers, but others not...

    Strange... but yes its a bit hard to now call ubuntu GNU/Linux.
    I guess the only way to tell would be to ask FSF themselves. From what I was able to find after a brief look at the issue on Wikipedia, FSF said that Android and uClinux (which does not use glibc and very few GNU packages) should not be called GNU/Linux. But they don't object to Debian officially calling itself "Debian GNU/Linux" at all. The libre distributions (Trisquel et al) are just officially endorsed, I believe.

    An interesting interpretation that I have seen of whether to consider a system GNU/Linux or not is to compare the size of all the GNU packages installed by default with the side of the default kernel. If GNU ⪆ Linux, then it's GNU/Linux. If GNU ≪ Linux, then it's not GNU/Linux.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zanny View Post
    Why did a topic about Canonical being Apple 2.0 turn into a back and forth about DRM, qt, and piracy?
    The first and third come from the title of the thread. The second is just funkSTAR being his usual self.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    THANK YOU for admitting the FACT that DRM is part of Qt bu$ine$$ model. This DRM shit pulled from Qts ass is also partly to blame for KDEs reluctance to join a cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack. Being under control by the Puppet Master called Qt will get you down the alley of "compability" to several stacks(Including Qts first priority DRM-infested, patented shit). That is the most sad thing learned from DRM. It fucked free software not by it adoption, but by its existence. Qts DRM shit is like a 2006 fart that keeps smelling. And even today KDE is confused because Qt s a ongoing DRM disaster.
    No, DRM is not part of the Qt "bu$ine$$" model. DRM is just a negative side effect of what can happen.

    "cross-DE quest for a working multimedia stack": can't comment on that, you will have to elaborate…
    "Including Qts first priority DRM-infested, patented shit": I'd like you to pinpoint this in the Qt source code for me, where exactly this DRM, of which you speak, lies.

    Here's a question for you:
    What makes you think people can't implement DRM into their modified GTK, then use that in their proprietary programs?

    Guess what, they CAN.

    It's not like you can remove the DRM from the modified GTK, when the proprietary programs depend on it! Specifically, you will have to crack those programs, to bypass DRM.
    This all assumes, you want to use those proprietary programs that depend on that… otherwise you don't have to use those modified versions.

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    NO! Go read your own link. KDE is provided with powers to put Qt Free under a more permissive license. Which is so permissive it wont be FOSS anymore.
    You are indeed correct, I should have left the F out from the FOSS.
    Quote Originally Posted by j2723 View Post
    By the way, Qt will always be OSS thanks to the KDE foundation.
    http://www.kde.org/community/whatisk...foundation.php
    Fixed.
    Last edited by j2723; 03-07-2013 at 02:47 PM.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by j2723 View Post
    No, DRM is not part of the Qt "bu$ine$$" model.
    LoL. You are in denial.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akka View Post
    drunk or dumb?

    nothing of both, that proofs that you are a ashole and dumb, and to insult somebody without got insulted by this person or hurt in any different way also proofs that you are the dumb motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by Akka View Post
    yaourt is not the arch packagemanger....
    I never wrote such stuff
    so another proof of your dumbness!

    its only so taht in 99.99999999999999% of any tutoral or even on official wikis you get noted that you should do that next...



    Quote Originally Posted by Akka View Post
    If you use yaourt to use AUR has nothing todo with how arch package management work.
    packmans user-interface is even more stupid it looks like dpkg heck even the old debian non-recommend 2000 year old apt-get looks better and more comfortable at least you dont have to use combinations of 4 shortcut-keys to do stuff, everybody can learn easily apt-get update; apt-get upgrade, but who remebers packaman -Sy ( I had to look again ) -Syu its ok for console tools to have additionaly shurtcuts for people who want to use a command 100 times a day or so, but to not have --long-name option is just stupid. I stay to it, gentoos interface is way better and even debians bad console interface is better.

    But you can think here different, but because of that you dont have to insult me, ashole!

    Quote Originally Posted by Akka View Post
    Its exist a shitload of different AUR-helpers, yaourt is one of them. Non of them is official and non is neded. AUR is a place you can distribute your own packagebuilds if you dont understand the difference between that and the packagemanager pacman you should probably not choose arch ither way.
    look at the quality of the packages in ubuntu-ppas and then look at AUR, you will see a big big quality difference. even the gentoo files I found in bugtrackers or somewhere else years ago had better quality.

    And its not just the interface, yes I am able to use even such a bad interface, I just think that its a bad sign if that tools arent that good.

    Arch can maybe be a ok distri I would not have mentioned it, when I just think its totaly bad, but at least for testing new stuff even ubuntu is better, the support from the ppas to test as example very new mesa builds is better than what garbage often lies in AUR.

    Maybe my comparsion with gentoo is set to high, they had maybe there best days also behind them, back in the days I used it, latestly in a weak after something a bit bigger was released there were packages or build scripts at least in unstable, now they seem to work also more with 3rd party (and because of that often less quality) stuff.

    But just because gentoo is now also bad, makes the desktop linux question not better, I find it somewhat strange that there is no linux, not even the in 1 week coming beta version of the next ubuntu release have gnome-shell 3.7xx packages. and arch dont have it, and sadly even gentoo dont have it as option.

    Thats my problem with todays linuxes, yes not everybody wants to play around with new packages that are not ready for productive environments, but to have the option is not bad.

    The only one I just found out who can deliver me that option in a non-3rdparty way is fedora:

    https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/gnome-shell

    So if they get there release-dates back somewhat sync with the gnome-releases I could think to it that it would be the alternative to me.


    But then is the question if arch linux fails to deliver (if you exclude AUR) very new versions of even major software parts whats the point in rolling releases??? I dont really get that.
    Last edited by blackiwid; 03-07-2013 at 04:10 PM.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    Taking advice on security from antivirus companies is like taking advice from foxes on how to build your chicken coops.
    what do you suggest? believe every random guy who has an internet connection.
    it wasn't long ago when someone found an exploit on how to unlock the screen of an i-pad while it had password protection with 3 simple taps on the locked screen and I remember another case where the user's passwords were stored in plain text in the system.
    I'd say again, that Eugene guy must've been drunk. I believe all you random guys who have internet.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •