[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL



On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 09:26:46PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 06:23:31PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >> What's silly or unrealistic about it? The totalitarian state in
> >> question is the People's Republic of China. The original name of this
> >> test is the "Chinese Dissident" test.
> >
> >I find it gross that it was suddenly renamed, losing much of its meaning
> >for false "political correctness".  It'd be nice if the FAQ would correct
> >this.
> 
> Why is the state in question significant? There's no shortage of places
> where writing subversive software may result in bad things happening.

China is mildly notorious for having a rather, uhh, "broad" definition
of "subversive". Basically, if you're in China, your only defence is
anonymity.

Also it's a huge, modern nation with strong political, economic, and
military power, and it seems likely to stay that way. Certainly the
most extreme example, and probably by a wide margin. It's not like one
of the tinpot dictatorships.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: