>BSD is usele-
medium.com
BSD is usele-
Leo Gonzalez
Other urls found in this thread:
arstechnica.com
fsf.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
duckduckgo.com
web.archive.org
twitter.com
Jason Brooks
Consoles been using it since forever.
Matthew Nguyen
i refuse to use it because the mascot is a devil
Gabriel Rodriguez
There is nothing more disgusting to me than all the "Linuxers" who whine and bitch about EME and net neutrality but still subscribe to Netflix services. It's like the kind of people who shit up a thread because A FUCKING DOG DIED YOU PEOPLE ARE SOCIOPATHS but then turns around and buys a hamburger at their favorite fast food restaurant.
Jaxson White
*a daemon
Zachary Ortiz
>be me
>Linuxer
>doesn't subscribed to netflix
Joshua Nelson
I don't even watch T.V., like ever. Fuck Netflix.
Kayden Richardson
Other 3D graphics focused companies use it as well. Lot of movie products with rendering farms. I've heard it may have something to do with the ease of writing drivers for the kernel, since drivers can be written easily they can use whatever kind of setup they need and implement a way to talk to the kernel however they need to, for things like custom hardware, filesystems, networking, etc.
Aaron Rivera
Eme is great, because it will be everyone on the same encryption platform, and when it gets cracked...
Kevin Jenkins
This is a big plus, but it's most likely the license they use that make companies choose it over for example linux.
Sebastian Carter
>2057
>Being a Linuxer
>Not using Linux Mint
arstechnica.com
Kevin Powell
FUCK YOU FAGGOT
Zachary Nelson
Why does the license matter if they're not distributing their software publicly?
Ryan Hughes
the only non-linuxer distros are alpine and gentoo
Justin Robinson
Ah yes, that's another appeal I often forget. I know Sony has used BSD in their products for a long time now, a more liberally licensed one is obviously a good choice in their perspective, must be the same for other companies as well.
Anthony Turner
I think "firmware built in the device" does count as distributing the software publicly.
Juan Powell
>if they're not distributing their software publicly
The license is what allows them to do so. More importantly it's simple enough to understand for engineers(who are not lawyers). If your programmers know the license themselves, you don't need to allocate as many resources from the legal department(very expensive).
Levi Hall
PS3/4 both are run inside FreeBSD, the Switch also contains a lot of BSD licensed code
Parker Murphy
netbsd seems to be insanely popular with japanese computer scientists for some reason
Elijah Hernandez
I'm legitimately surprised at Valve for not picking BSD for their "Steambox"/"SteamOS" project when everyone else in that industry is already using it, learning a whole new OS for a brand new gaming platform was obvious to doom them.
Very interesting. I wonder if it had something to do with language support, from what I have read, early non-English(Roman characters) support was a really rough problem for almost every OS.
Luis King
>learning a whole new OS for a brand new gaming platform was obvious to doom them.
Yeah, that and the fact that Steam is a fucking grotesque, proprietary abomination
Alexander King
driver support and wine dependencies i assume
Josiah Bailey
Unfortunately that's par for the course in the video game industry, the economics of it are brutal anymore for everyone except the top. I watch out for competition(like GoG, itch, etc.) but it feels like a hard business to change.
Parker Brooks
>driver support
This is interesting to me, people do say that Linux supports a lot of hardware and that's a good feature of it, BSD says it's easy to write drivers for them, does that mean these other companies are more willing to rewrite drivers efficiently than using a pre-existing but potentially inefficient driver? Maybe it just has to do with the cases where they are thinking ahead, if they have to write their own drivers eventually, they'd rather write them for BSDs api, I guess.
I'm interested to hear what a BSD developer has to say on making the decisions, they don't usually speak on this to much for commercial, closed products
Aiden Wright
It's not that companies are more willing to rewrite efficent drivers. it's just that the ideal use case for bsd platforms is 1. When no drivers exist for your hardware and 2. When you need a more proprietary tech friendly platform. So you see bsd being used when you need a closed sourced system running on custom hardware ala PS4, Mac, switch.
Brody Scott
I'm always really surprised when companies make their own complete system, designing your own OS seems like a big task in itself but then you have to make all the hardware and coordinate it all, seems like such a big task. I know it's split into teams and don't have to do it all themselves when hey use existing hardware and software components, but still amazing to me.
Hudson Diaz
...
Ryder Stewart
In this case what allows them to not, which is what makes BSD licensed software valuable to corporations. They have the (ready, freetards?) freedom to not release the software's source code.
Benjamin Evans
>OS X is BSD-based because muh drivers
That decision was made before Apple had anything to do with it, Jobs simply decided to purchase his new company through his old one and use the newer one's OS.
Samuel Butler
Do you ever think that the owners of that restaurant know what FreeBSD is? Like, do you think FreeBSD devs congregate there when there's a FreeBSDcon?
Christopher Miller
Free software is about preserving the four freedoms, not that people are entitled to your source code unless they themselves are executing the code. Interpretations of the four freedoms vary.
Isaac Ross
I bet they do but without saying why because it's funny to them.
Eli Foster
>the four freedoms
There you go redefining words again
Julian Morales
What? I don't mean to be inflammatory or anything, but I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
Also what? Literally no one in the free software world, BSD or otherwise, denies what the four freedoms are. Again, people's interpretations vary, but not the freedoms in themselves.
fsf.org
Nicholas Wood
>What?
Like an inside joke. After a convention someone says something like "lets go to the beastie bar" or some dumb shit like that, but since they're just normal guys going to the place, the owners still probably wouldn't know anything about FreeBSD despite a lot of developers eating there. Who knows.
Adam Ward
Connor Butler
Oh, oops, I thought you were responding to my other post. Yeah. I can't help but imagine somebody with a FreeBSD t-shirt walking in there, and the proprietors thinking something like, "Hey, those guys stole our logo! We should sue!"
Wyatt Hill
got an r5 430m garbage for graphics, xorg driver for radeon in freebsd doesnt support it.
is there support in openbsd or dragonfly?
Leo Green
Why BSD over GNU?
Lincoln Brown
It depends on the project. Don't lop all of the BSD's together like they're the same thing, because they're not. Not only do they have different kernels, userlands, they have radically different philosophies and directions, too, unlike GNU/Linux, which are all basically respins of the same operating system.
Caleb Lee
Is there a BSD for pentesting?
Anthony Morris
>Jobs simply decided to purchase his new company through his old one
This is factually false, lad.
Jackson Morales
Free software was the apropiation by a anti corporativist jew of a culture that existed naturally in universities.
Carson Anderson
Freedom is the right to act/speak freely, what are the other two "freedoms"
Logan Gonzalez
Jayden Jackson
That's a nice factual source you've got there.
>The_Free_Software_Definition
There you go redefining words again.
Carter Stewart
>There you go redefining words again.
What? I'm honestly just trying my best to understand what you're even trying to prove.
Ryder Morales
That freetards redefine words to fit their agenda
>Freetard definition
And you proved my point quite well
Gabriel Scott
What the hell is wrong with you? The freetard definition? As opposed to what? What alternative definition do you have?
William Garcia
Whose side are you even on? As it strikes me, you're the one trying to redefine established, universally accepted terminology.
Charles Scott
>en.wikipedia.org
Jobs left Apple and had nothing with them during the last half of 80's and the first half of 90's.
Charles Harris
Freedom consists of one thing, ability without consequence.
Then went back to Apple and as CEO purchased NeXT.
Juan Rodriguez
What the fuck are you even trying to prove? How does that even contradict the established meaning of free software?
Ethan Gonzalez
By pointing out that freetards redefine words.
Carter Bennett
All you've achieved is a pointless strawman. That doesn't even change my argument in the slightest. Why are you wasting my time arguing over pointless semantics when you know that doesn't prove anything?
Nolan Cook
Define "freetard".
Hunter Edwards
I don't need to change an argument to point out that it's dumb.
GPL zealot
Adrian Collins
Do the FreeBSD devs count as freetards? Because they sure seem to agree with me a lot.
duckduckgo.com
Daniel White
The term free software was coined nearly half a century ago to describe an established area of thought that had existed throughout the sixties among circles in MIT.
Anthony Fisher
No, they're remotely sane and therefore don't count.
Tyler Lee
That is a fucking stupid argument and you know it.
Jaxson Adams
That's a neat irrelevant fact.
Elijah Cruz
That a word has an etymological history? That it's ingrained into our culture and not some construed, "fabricated" bullshit, as you would claim.
Kayden Richardson
It's not a console and Valve is not Sony.
>everyone else in that industry
Seriously...
Jacob Hernandez
No it's not.
Robert Peterson
Free software doesn't and never was intended to apply exclusively to GPL software. You're argument is insulting to the BSD community, because you're implying that we don't consider our own software to be free software just because it doesn't fit into your pinhole-sized view of what free software qualifies as.
Luke Williams
Free software doesn't and never was intended to apply exclusively to GPL software. Your argument is insulting to the BSD community, because you're implying that we don't consider our own software to be free software just because it doesn't fit into your pinhole-sized view of what free software qualifies as.
Juan Bell
>Seriously
Yes, Sony uses it, Nintendo uses it, and even MS used it for Xbox Live before they made Azure, in terms of video games those are the big names.
Jonathan Ward
>Free software doesn't and never was intended to apply exclusively to GPL software
Where did I say otherwise?
>Your argument is insulting to the BSD community
As a member of the BSD community, I disagree.
Bentley Torres
>Where did I say otherwise?
>GPL zealot
>As a member of the BSD community, I disagree
Really? Because you seem more like a Microsoft shill, trying to disparage and stratify free software communities, than anything else.
Gavin Long
Remember that the only "freedom" that GPL zealots care about is the freedom to stop other people from using the software they control.
All software must be locked away in Stallman's hoard, and those who disagree must be banned from using it.
Cooper Gonzalez
>Then went back to Apple and as CEO purchased NeXT.
He became CEO years after NeXT was bought your moron.
Ian Nelson
Keep saying that, Microshill, and maybe it'll come true.
Jack Gomez
>>GPL zealot
That's what a freetard is. It's not a free software advocate, it's a fucking retard that sees the GPL and GPL licensed software as a be-all-end-all.
>trying to disparage and stratify free software communities
I'm not disparaging free software communities, just specifically freetards.
Charles Phillips
By dismissing the term "free software" in its entirety? Yeah, I doubt that. 10 rupees have been left in your designated shitting street, Prajeet. Microsoft appreciates your contribution.
Michael Cruz
I like the fact that people are treating this as news, when Netflix presented this at a NGINX conference in 2015.
Eli Bennett
That article's pretty old. I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge that Netflix's infrastructure is built on FreeBSD. I think OP was just putting it out there to garner some discussion. Well, he effectively pulled in one Microsoft shill.
Jackson Reed
The four freedoms that a bunch of people have arbitrarily decide to define as freedom despite it being less free than the dictionary definition of freedom?
Jack Harris
Article was published Septemer 29th of 2017. My point is that people think it's news, when it's been common knowledge in the circles you and I travel in, since 2015.
My theory is that it's because FreeBSD has never been as good at advocacy as the other side of the free software pond.
Lucas Gutierrez
AAAAAAA FUCK OFF ALREADY SHILL YOU GOT CALLED OUT
Jackson Hill
If you have any fucking idea what you were doing, you'd know that I'm not the user you were discussing with before.
What am I supposed to be a shill for, actual freedom? It doesn't have a bottom-line, and it can't afford shills.
Juan Perry
>Septemer 29th of 2017
Oh, that's weird. I could've sworn it said 2015. I must have had a stroke or something. Yeah, well, I think it's more like, FreeBSD's user base is very much an in-person thing. Like, the number of devs present is small enough that they can pretty effectively comingle at cons; thus, journalism to those people is kind of redundant.
Lincoln Campbell
>If you have any fucking idea what you were doing
If you had any fucking idea about the identity of a completely different person on an anonymous Chinese basketweaving forum, you would know that I'm not the user you were discussing this topic with before.
What are you trying to achieve by making this distinction? That free software's definition isn't as broad as freedom in itself? The same could be said for free real estate. Or free food. The point of an adjective (not that you would know, since you're clearly a third worlder) is to whittle down the meaning of a word into a more specific definition.
Nathan Rodriguez
Parker Barnes
What's the point of [word] if its definition is arbitrarily decided by the consensus of a bunch of people?
Oliver Cook
>2015
Article does mention the year 2015, which just goes to show that people don't even read the article they think of as news.
Exactly, they could've made up a new word - but they chose to redefine a word that doesn't fit the dictionary definition.
Levi Murphy
>web.archive.org
Yes, I saw the link, thank you. I made a mistake. Thank you for showing my the link again.
>Nice meltdown.
Thank you.
Grayson Gonzalez
Why do you think I linked that?
Luke Hernandez
It's been five hours since that article was posted. A lot of time has passed since anyone last read it.
>Exactly, they could've made up a new word - but they chose to redefine a word that doesn't fit the dictionary definition.
Did free software have another meaning prior to the present one? I still have no idea what your glitch is with the term free software. What would you prefer? Are you telling me that the four freedoms don't have qualities that preserve the freedom of the user to control the software that they're executing?
To date the article?
Cameron Cook
You keep on trying to change this into a BSD v. GPL thing, but, again, there's nothing about the four freedoms that doesn't work in accordance with the BSD projects' own philosophies. There's nothing inherently GPL/FSF about the four freedoms, so it really feels like you're attacking the term for no reason. You drive in a parkway and park in a drive way. Do you hear anyone complaining about the semantic inaccuracy of those two words? No. Because they convey what they do perfectly well. All you're doing is looking for a petty excuse to disparage a project because--well, because you can. And it's toxic, not to mention seriously ignorant.
Oliver Sullivan
The article is at least 12 hours, though. My point was to show that it's never been archived before yesterday.
That's fair. Also, fucking hell that's a great example - never heard it before.
Which project am I supposed to be disparaging, according to you? I'm curious.
Ethan Evans
>free software have another meaning prior to the present one?
They've got the fourth freedom wrong, which is:
>The freedom to close the source of the software and use it as you wish
Could someone with better English formulate this better? I'm going to make a site "4 freedoms" or something, and whenever someone links FSF or OSF or Stallman, I'm going to link mine.
Evan Perez
>The freedom to close the source of the software and use it as you wish
Which license lets you do this?
Isaiah Brooks
As I interpreted it, you were clinging onto free software as if it was FSF propaganda, when it's not. I found it incredibly condescending towards communities outside of the FSF.
Okay, Jesus. I think I almost understand what you're trying to say. So you DISAGREE with the current definition of free software, right? But you don't deny that, when I say free software, I'm referring to the four freedoms, which most people generally agree with, right? FUCK.
Apache. Also MIT, I think. Both free software licenses, by the way. And in no way do the four freedoms contradict them.
Nathan Hill
Unilicense, WTFPL, some others.
BSD and MIT are close and acceptable (distributing a text file together is not a big encumberance).
Could you formulate that better so BSD, MIT and the-likes would fit too?
I'm going to redefine free software, just like they redefined freedom, and thus you do not refer to free software, because that's not what it means.
Asher Hughes
>I'm going to redefine free software, just like they redefined freedom, and thus you do not refer to free software, because that's not what it means.
By which you of course mean, it's not what YOU think it should mean, despite that being the consensus, right?
Jaxon Thompson
>Apache. Also MIT, I think
No. You have to carry the license with both binary and source distributions. I said do whatever you want in that post.
Angel Anderson
ISC, BSD, MIT
Christian James
You do realize that all of the licenses you mentioned are defined on Wikipedia as free software licenses, right?
Anthony Barnes
>despite that being the consensus
Consensus of what? Stallman? Many people will agree with MY definition of free software.
Also, ask people what "freedom" means. They will say "do whatever you want", or "free of charge". They will not say "do whatever you want and enforce others to be able to do whatever they want too". So no, there's no public concensus.