On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 07:22:56PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> It sounds like your goal is to subvert the GPL, in which case you are
> not our friend.
Speak for yourself. Speak for the FSF too, perhaps. But not for me.
> If your goal is to try and figure out ways that bad
> people might subvert the GPL, so that the FSF can fix them, then you
> should bring such issues up in private with the FSF.
The Bugtraq vs CERT debate (should security problems be discussed in
private so they can't be subverted, or in public so that people understand
the risks and can avoid them in other ways) has been done before.
BTW, just killfile Galt, you don't miss anything worthwhile and you do
miss a whole bunch of mindless nonsense. Even better, if he ever gets
the sense to start using a real name, he won't stay killfiled. It's win,
win, win, I say.
(*Now* you can probably legitimately claim we're getting off topic...)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgpK5H_3S0Fyv.pgp
Description: PGP signature