Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linus Torvalds Gives 'Thumbs Up' To Nvidia For Nouveau Contributions

Unknown Lamer posted about 8 months ago | from the romulans-approaching-the-neutral-zone dept.

Graphics 169

sfcrazy writes "Linus Torvalds has had some harsh words for Nvidia in the past. Their failure to work constructively with the Linux community is especially disappointing in light of the company's large presence in the Android market. That said, where there is life, there is change, and that is just what happened yesterday. Torvalds publicly gave a thumbs-up to Nvidia for contributing basic support for the recently released Nvidia K1 processor to Nouveau; something that was totally unexpected but received with open arms. 'Hey, this time I'm raising a thumb for nvidia. Good times,' said Linus."

cancel ×

169 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

nVidia binary blob drivers (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146085)

That caused me to never buy another nVidia product since.

Re:nVidia binary blob drivers (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146285)

I think moderators jumped the gun here. It is a fair point to make that the commenter voted with his wallet.

me too (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146443)

I also voted with my wallet. When I built my latest machine, I went for an ATI video card because I knew I would be installing Linux.

Re: me too (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147107)

You'be either never owned an nvidia product, or an ati.

I've owned two ati machines. For both of them, ati grew tired of supporting them long before I was done with the hardware. Now I have a laptop that works great except for its worthless ati video card. The open source driver is so slow it is worthless and the closed source one doesn't support a modern x11 server.

Nvidia may be closed source, but it works.

Re: me too (2)

NFN_NLN (633283) | about 8 months ago | (#46147331)

When I upgraded my PC I used the old parts to build an XBMC HTPC. The old MB was perfect because it had onboard video, audio, ethernet so it didn't require any cards (super low profile).

The onboard video was an ATI Radeon HD 4xxx and a pain in the butt. I couldn't just make a bootable thumbdrive as > Ubuntu 12.04 wouldn't support that card. And the XBMC version that was bundled with 12.04 had other issues.

Re: me too (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 8 months ago | (#46147825)

Your post does not have the ring of truth. I have been using open source Radeon drivers for years, without issue. Performance is good enough that the pain of switching back to binary never seems worth it.

Re: me too (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147901)

what pain ?

-- running XBMCbuntu on AT5IONT-I since forever

Re: me too (2)

OolimPhon (1120895) | about 8 months ago | (#46148591)

-- running XBMCbuntu on AT5IONT-I since forever

...which has an nvidia GPU. Your point?

Re: me too (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148195)

Perhaps you were lucky enough to have an ATI GPU that the open source "radeon" driver supported. I had the same experience as AC - fglrx just dropped support for RV370, and there was no 3D acceleration in the "radeon" driver. Meanwhile all the distros were upgrading to X.org 1.7, which the old version of fglrx didn't work with.

I, too, just got an nVidia instead. It's still working perfectly.

Re:nVidia binary blob drivers (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146807)

nVidia's drivers have been the reason I've consistently purchased their products. On any OS, ATi/AMD have been consistently buggy and useless.

Re:nVidia binary blob drivers (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147931)

Funny, it's been the other way around for me. We had half the company PCs stuffed with various Quadro generations (using the official driver for Linux and Windows), the other half with 25 bucks Radeons (driven with Catalyst in Linux and the opensource drivers in Linux).

The Radeons (and Intel IGPs, for that matter) never once had a problem. The Quadros spent two years corrupting video playback, crashing when trying to resume from standby and generally being a pain in the ass with each and every "certified" driver iteration.

They're now replaced with more $25 Radeons and/or Intel IGPs and people can actually work again.

Only Intel and AMD drivers are certified for 24/7 embedded use by us, Nvidia won't even be considered.

Re: nVidia binary blob drivers (1)

Foske (144771) | about 8 months ago | (#46147511)

So instead of a binary blob that was easy to install, stable and fast you went for Ati, with a crappy driver, crappy installer and we don't give a shit attitude ? Do you have any idea why the driver has been a binary blob for so long ?

Re: nVidia binary blob drivers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148057)

Do you have any idea why the driver has been a binary blob for so long ?

Please, enlighten us!

Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (-1)

guanxi (216397) | about 8 months ago | (#46146111)

Aren't there plenty of other, and Free, ways to publish? It's not the end of the world but when someone like Linus Torvalds does it I think it sends a message that undermines the value placed on FOSS systems. If end-user control isn't important for Torvalds' personal communication, when is it?

And yes, I'm aware I'm publishing this on Slashdot, but they say "Comments owned by the poster" and in this case, there's not a functional alternative for participating on this discussion.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (2, Interesting)

game kid (805301) | about 8 months ago | (#46146187)

Torvalds has said in the past something about that he doesn't want to associate with "free software" (or at least FSF) types because they're so "extreme" or such (can't find a link sorry). (Also that if a GNU kernel or 386BSD had existed that he probably wouldn't've wrote Linux [wikipedia.org] .)

That doesn't excuse G+ use (the first link actually caught me off guard...me and my stupid blind-clicking), but he doesn't see himself as so much of a strict FOSS advocate, so you probably see why he wouldn't give as much of a crap about whether the publishing channel is FOSS as, say, you or rms.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

dfghjk (711126) | about 8 months ago | (#46146517)

From the article you linked to...

"Although not released until 1992 due to legal complications, development of 386BSD, from which NetBSD, OpenBSD and FreeBSD descended, predated that of Linux. Linus Torvalds has said that if 386BSD had been available at the time, he probably would not have created Linux.[32]"

A 386 BSD *had* "existed" but it's future was cloudy due to lawsuit. Had the timing of those legal questions been more favorable, there would be no Linux today.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147437)

386BSD had bigger problems than the UCB lawsuit (which it was not involved with). The project had weak leadership and a huge amount of infighting, which is the real reason 3 different *BSDs forked out of it. Its quite possible Torvolds looked at the BSD mailinglists and said "forget them!"

Torvolds also wanted to make an OS designed around the x86 processor and PC AT architecture ... meanwhile old BSD was very obviously a port from bigger systems.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (4, Informative)

exomondo (1725132) | about 8 months ago | (#46146567)

Torvalds has said in the past something about that he doesn't want to associate with "free software" (or at least FSF) types because they're so "extreme" or such (can't find a link sorry).

This [lkml.org] probably isn't the link that you were referring to but in the discussion around GPLv3 he does mention that Linux has always been Open Source as opposed to Free Software and the FSF evangelizing Linux as a free software project is not something he advocates.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Tough Love (215404) | about 8 months ago | (#46147841)

Linus attacking the FSF all the time is hard to explain and tends to come across as petty rivalry. As good a demonstration as any that Linus isn't perfect.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147893)

Ancient history now, but RMS once demanded that Linux be put under FSF control (or else!), and that's probably the cause of Linus' dislike of them.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 8 months ago | (#46148317)

Ancient history now, but RMS once demanded that Linux be put under FSF control (or else!), and that's probably the cause of Linus' dislike of them.

[citation needed]

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148495)

The FSF are a political group by definition. The FSF are advocating for the ethical solution to the social problem of proprietary software. Torvalds says that he wants to be apolitical, he doesn't like proselytism of the FSF for morality in software distribution, and doesn't believe that proprietary software is a social problem. Stallman constantly advocates for the morally of free software and this annoys Torvalds who doesn't care for politics so Torvalds has criticized Stallman for his opinions about companies and technology that don't subscribe to Stallman's morality. This is why Torvalds responds to Stallman's rhetoric in a hostile manner because Stallman is arguing for ethics and morality while Torvalds only wants to see technically superior software.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

DrXym (126579) | about 8 months ago | (#46148129)

The issue with GPLv3 was that it would have rendered the Linux kernel toxic. It would have precluded its use in embedded devices, appliances, set top boxes etc., it would have prevented binary blob drivers and it would have been nigh on impossible to do anyway given all the contributions by individuals and companies. So they left it the way it was. I expect even if Linus had tried to impose it (and fortunately he is too pragmatic for that), the kernel would have instantly forked from the pre-GPLv3 version and the GPLv3 version would have been DOA.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 8 months ago | (#46148321)

The issue with GPLv3 was that it would have rendered the Linux kernel toxic. It would have precluded its use in embedded devices, appliances, set top boxes etc.

How?

it would have been nigh on impossible to do anyway given all the contributions by individuals and companies.

"Or any later version".

Re: GPLv3 on set-top boxes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148485)

I think it's pretty obvious "How?". GPLv3 tries to dictate how hardware running DRM stuff should work. So, your set-top box does not support the Netflix app because of a license incompatibility due to GPLv3? Then you're gonna use something else than Linux, or consumers won't buy your box.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 8 months ago | (#46148571)

it would have been nigh on impossible to do anyway given all the contributions by individuals and companies.

"Or any later version"

Only if the authors specifically used that license, the default for the kernel is GPLv2 only. And it's not a democracy, if authors refuse or can't be located or are dead with no heirs to manage the estate the only safe way would be to totally write out those patches. Some have suggested various "abandonware" or "implied by contributing" theories to give the project authority to relicense but it'd be a legal landmine field. For example USC 17506(d): "Fraudulent Removal of Copyright Notice. - Any person who, with fraudulent intent, removes or alters any notice of copyright appearing on a copy of a copyrighted work shall be fined not more than $2,500." That's a criminal copyright statute, not a civil one. Of course it hinges on the "fraudulent" part, but it would be pretty fraudulent to claim the author has given permission to use that code under the GPLv3. In short, even if you got most the core contributors and corporate sponsors on board it'd be a huge undertaking.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 8 months ago | (#46148255)

Well he's somewhere on the half way between BSD and FSF. BSD people care about usage (open, proprietary, doesn't matter), FSF people care about freedom (abiltiy to fix it yourself). Linus cares about the source code and the project. He doesn't care that Tivo locks down their machine as long as he gets any improvements they make so he can roll it into his own kernel and run it on his machine. Linus doesn't like the GPLv3, Linus doesn't like the BSD license, he likes the GPLv2 no more and no less. What he wants is to build the best kernel he can build, popularity and freedom are simply incidental to the process.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146685)

Torvalds has said in the past something about that he doesn't want to associate with "free software" (or at least FSF) types because they're so "extreme"

I can understand that. I wouldnt want to be associated with people like this [defectivebydesign.org] either! Maybe if those FSF types had spent more time innovating and creating a product people want then people might actually use Free Software, instead it's an attack on proprietary products as they scramble to build a poor immitation. Where is the FSF iPad? or the FSF iPhone? Or even the FSF PC? Always a late-to-the-game me-too product that fails to capture the end user because their *only* play is freedom and very often people would rather sacrifice the freedom to modify and install programs on their device than sacrifice the efficient operation and ease of use and that is their choice.

The FSF needs to prove that free products can compete with proprietary ones in addition to being freedom free and not continue on this misguided idea that the *only* thing that matters is freedom and that people will use whatever rubbish you give them so long as it is freedom free. The ideology *can* succeed but when the leader of it is using wget to pull the text of webpages and email it to himself to view locally that shows exactly what the problem with the Free Software ideology is and why it has failed in the mainstream.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147259)

I can understand that. I wouldnt want to be associated with people like this

So you think DRM is a good thing? You think it is good that companies take freedom and control away from users? You can be anti-DRM without fully supporting the FSF.

My take is that companies shouldn't get copyright protection if they use DRM. Your software has DRM? No copyright for you.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147375)

So you think DRM is a good thing?

Not necessarily but if it does not get in my way I have no problem with it and if it does get in my way I choose not to use the product.

You think it is good that companies take freedom and control away from users?

No that is wrong and is either a misguided or malicious attempt to sway people to your way of thinking: Companies do not take any freedom or control away from users, users make the decision to not have a very specific ability to do a thing in a very specific context of their own will and have the choice to do this or not. So tell me what exact specific freedom in a specific context you had that a company took away from you?

If you do not like DRM then do not use it and do not support the companies that use it in their products. You are *free* to make that choice.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148351)

Not necessarily but if it does not get in my way I have no problem with it and if it does get in my way I choose not to use the product.

Then you're unprincipled. Big surprise.

Companies do not take any freedom or control away from users

Of course they do. They take away the freedom to run the software and use its features as they please. Were the DRM removed, the users would be have more freedom with the software.

It also poses another problem; the existence of DRM on a piece of software usually means that it's neither free (as in freedom) or open source, and that brings with it privacy and security concerns.

If you do not like DRM then do not use it and do not support the companies that use it in their products. You are *free* to make that choice.

Yeah, thanks for stating the obvious. That's pretty much the entire point of the Defective By Design campaign: Don't use software that has DRM.

You're also free to not go in airports. Therefore, the TSA doesn't violate anyone's freedoms. Of course, that logic is nonsensical and should be ridiculed by anyone with a brain. The mere fact that something isn't absolutely necessary does not mean that you don't have less freedom when someone decides to take away some of your possible options.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147707)

You can be anti-DRM without fully supporting the FSF.

Of course I can. Enforcing GPL is a manual DRM. The question is, can I be anti-DRM while supporting FSF?

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148329)

If you don't understand the difference between crippling software such that the *user* cannot do certain things with it even if they want to, and software licenses, then you're a god damn idiot.

Re: Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147561)

You mean the FSF people who made GCC, GNU binutils, and a myriad of other tools you use daily as the core of your Linux-based OS?

Are you talking about THOSE FSF people?

Re: Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147715)

You mean the FSF people who made GCC, GNU binutils, and a myriad of other tools you use daily as the core of your Linux-based OS?

I don't use Linux or any of those other tools on a daily basis. I looked a bit at GCC but frankly it is a complete mess to port to other systems so I went for VBCC instead.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (3, Informative)

Tough Love (215404) | about 8 months ago | (#46147863)

Maybe if those FSF types had spent more time innovating and creating a product people want then people might actually use Free Software,

*cough* *cough* Gcc, Libc, etc etc *cough* *cough*

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147953)

LLVM/Clang are running circles around GCC nowadays.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Alioth (221270) | about 8 months ago | (#46148395)

Maybe so, but gcc was pretty much the only game in town for many years and gcc remains in development and very widely used.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (5, Interesting)

Jakeula (1427201) | about 8 months ago | (#46146207)

Google+, despite what a lot of people think, is very popular for companies to utilize for work projects. Hangouts is a great way to create conference calls, and since its tied into your other Google services like Drive, you can pretty much use it as a company intranet. I have been a contractor for companies that had employees across the states, and most of them have used G+ in the way I described. I would simply be added to a hangout for meetings with the team, they would place the files I needed access to on Drive and then there was little risk of me getting access to more critical business stuff. I was also part of a contracting team that just had a G+ page, and we would meet with clients in the exact same way. I personally didn't like this method, as I prefer to have more face time with clients, but it seemed to work well as a free platform to do business.

If we assume that the Linux team does something similar, its probably easy for Linus to get his ideas across on a social media platform where a decent portion of his development community lives. I have seen many ex-Google friends follow this same trend when they leave Google and create their start-ups. Chris Messina do it with NeonMob, as well as a few others that I met at Plus20. I cannot say this is necessarily the single best method, but it might be that they don't like FB, Twitter's limitations make it harder to utilize in this manner, so G+ is the next best place to put your ideas down for a large user base to view.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (2)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 8 months ago | (#46146369)

I'm on Google+, as my only Google product, and it does the job and seems to work. I'm not sure why people hate it, except for the Facebook fans who think everyone must be there or be nowhere.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#46146615)

I'm on Google+, as my only Google product, and it does the job and seems to work. I'm not sure why people hate it, except for the Facebook fans who think everyone must be there or be nowhere.

Its not the facebook fans that hate it.

Its the people who have seen the abuse that things like facebook have done to violate people's privacy.
To date we have only Google's word that the only thing they will do with your Plus data is serve you ads.

But intelligent people realize this is a hollow promise, one that can be violated by Google themselves, or any random
hacker that manages to penetrate Google's security, or any random NSA agent that wants to gen up a letter.

When one of these copycat services, provides public/private key encryption capabilities with the server side
not knowing your private key, let me know. But in the meantime, I trust regular old email (encrypted where necessary)
more than a central repository in the hands of a third party that can't make any money without selling something
to me
, or breaking their promise and selling me to someone else After all, once you agree to go
public with a Plus profile, you've essentially surrendered the last vestige of your privacy.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 8 months ago | (#46146719)

Oh I use email. I'm not putting up anything on G+ that I would want to hide from the entire world. Though it is problematic at time. Such as the android phone wanting to tie all its services to my G+ account if it can, that is I can't use a G+ app without it thinking that account should be used for everything. Targeted advertisements creep me out. I used to wonder if G+ was only for Doctor Who fans since that's half of all the public stuff I see, then realized that Google is filtering content based on what it thinks I like (the upside is that it figured out I don't want to see updates from gangsta rappers or boy bands).

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 8 months ago | (#46146739)

To date we have only Google's word that the only thing they will do with your Plus data is serve you ads.

But intelligent people realize this is a hollow promise, one that can be violated by Google themselves, or any random
hacker that manages to penetrate Google's security, or any random NSA agent that wants to gen up a letter.

And how is this different than any other company? It's not. If you're worried about these things, you shouldn't be using any online products/services from any corporation at all. In fact, if you're worried about random hackers, you either shouldn't be putting any of your data online at all, anywhere, or if you think you're so great at security, you should only be using systems that you've set up yourself and manage yourself.

But in the meantime, I trust regular old email (encrypted where necessary)

Regular old email can't be used to publish a blog to anyone in the world who cares to read it. You could use a blogging service, but then that could be hacked by some random hacker. Or, you could get an account with a hosting service and set up your own Wordpress site, but there again some random hacker could hack it, so that won't work for you either.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about 8 months ago | (#46146825)

Regular old email can't be used to publish a blog to anyone in the world who cares to read it. You could use a blogging service, but then that could be hacked by some random hacker. Or, you could get an account with a hosting service and set up your own Wordpress site, but there again some random hacker could hack it, so that won't work for you either.

He was talking about privacy violation, if everything you put on Google+ is stuff you don't mind being public then there's not going to be any violation of privacy.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about 8 months ago | (#46147035)

That's a very good point. If you're posting stuff for the world to read, then why would you care about "privacy violations"?

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about 8 months ago | (#46147149)

Is all the information you provide to and post on Google+ public? If so then you're right.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46147655)

Why would you post anything else?

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

chihowa (366380) | about 8 months ago | (#46147313)

Read the beginning of this very thread:

Google+, despite what a lot of people think, is very popular for companies to utilize for work projects. Hangouts is a great way to create conference calls, and since its tied into your other Google services like Drive, you can pretty much use it as a company intranet.

Letting Google, or any third party, be privy to all of your company's internal affairs is quite a precarious position to voluntarily put yourself in. This is the context in which this thread started.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147017)

I hate it because I have an online pseudonym for a reason. as "kits" I'm know to a few thousand people. As my real name, I'm known to a dozen or so. I do not want people who know "kits" to be able to find out who I am. I do not want my IRL identity tied to my most prevalent online identity. I don;t give a fuck if google knows; they most certainly do. What I do care about are the five or six really creepy fans I have showing up at my house or place of work.

So yeah, G+ can fuck off.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (3, Insightful)

evilviper (135110) | about 8 months ago | (#46147499)

I HATE Google+ for one simple reason... Google is trying very, very hard to push it down the throats of everyone using any google services.

I used-to write reviews for Android apps in the Play Store, no problem... Now I can't do so, nor even vote an app, or a review of an app as helpful, unhelpful, or flag it as spam, without a G+ account. Nag nag nag. Strange that everything worked fine before G+, but now G+ is strictly required.

Nearly the same is true for YouTube. There is no end to the nagging about linking a G+ account. And they make it a one-click process, so you click "OK" once by accident, and you've got a G+ account populated with your private information and address book from your gmail account, and all your information is now subjected to their insanely intrusive G+ (lack-of...) privacy policy.

Google+ is plain, old-fashioned, SPAM.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 8 months ago | (#46147535)

It goes the other way too. Ie, you can't use Google+ without also having a stupid youtube account. Clicked by accident now I have that youtube account I can't get rid of. If I upload pictures they are a part of picassa automatically. So why blame Google+ while not blaming Youtube also? Google wants a universal account which is the core problem, not Google+ itself.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147631)

Sounds similar to systemd in linux.

Re: Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147571)

People hate it because the experience is so lousy. A chat window which is what, 20x30 characters? Hello? Can't be resized? Hellooo?

I give a rats ass about Google+. Unfortunately some clients want me to use it. I registered with minimum real information, rest completely false, with a bogus profile picture to boot.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148455)

So, you are asking why people hate G+.. Want to rate the Android app you just paid and installed from Google Play? Not without G+ account. Want to use some more space in your Blogger-hosted blog? Not anymore, without G+. Want to leave a comment on Youtube? No you can not do that without G+. List goes on. Forcing people to use something is not usually the best way to get positive attitude against it.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148449)

When the alternative is Facebook, it makes complete sense.

On Facebook there is a limit on the number of "friends" a person can have, which breaks the system for popular personalities. Also, since friendship on FB is two-way, he would have to approve each any every "follow".
The solution is to create a page which people can "friend" (stupid as that may sound) in order to follow it and get updates. The problem is that FB nerfed that functionality about one year ago in order to boost their IPO: page owners now have to pay to have their posts visible on the user's feeds, otherwise, you only reach a small percentage of them.

Google+, for all it's evils does this very well. It has the same "follow" principles as Twitter, without the limitations.
Nowadays I go to FB to check on my friends and Google+ to check on the techies I follow. I think it works out pretty well.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

YukariHirai (2674609) | about 8 months ago | (#46146233)

Aren't there plenty of other, and Free, ways to publish?

I believe there are, but they're probably not widely enough used to be worthwhile for the desired purpose: to communicate.

It's not the end of the world but when someone like Linus Torvalds does it I think it sends a message that undermines the value placed on FOSS systems.

I don't think so. I do not believe that the value of Free systems is undermined by making any use of any non-Free systems or components. For example, most (if not all) banks use proprietary software for their ATMs. This does not mean that I expect every prominent figure in the Free and Open Source software world to boycott ATMs and go to a human teller when they need to get some money out.

I'm a big believer in Free Software, but I also believe in being pragmatic. If something needs to be done or needs to work but is not possible with entirely Free software, I think it's better that it be done with as little non-Free software as practical, rather than not done with entirely Free software. Torvalds takes the former approach, Stallman takes the latter.

Though if memory serves, didn't Torvalds and Stallman have an argument on Google+? If even Stallman thinks Google+ is acceptable enough, it can't be that undermining to the value of Free systems.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (2)

lagomorpha2 (1376475) | about 8 months ago | (#46146331)

"Though if memory serves, didn't Torvalds and Stallman have an argument on Google+? If even Stallman thinks Google+ is acceptable enough, it can't be that undermining to the value of Free systems."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

I kind of doubt Richard Stallman has a Google+ account tough there are probably multiple fake accounts of him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... [wikipedia.org]

"For personal reasons, he generally does not actively browse the web from his computer; rather, he uses wget and reads the fetched pages from his e-mail mailbox, claiming to limit direct access via browsers to a few sites such as his own or those related to his work with GNU and the FSF."

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

YukariHirai (2674609) | about 8 months ago | (#46146661)

I stand corrected then, though it was a very convincing fake. I still stand by the rest of the post, though.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146743)

I remember him saying that during a talk he gave at our university.
I think that is the point where everyone realized he is crazy.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (2)

allaunjsiIverfox2 (3506701) | about 8 months ago | (#46147275)

Actually, it sounds more like he has principles and wishes to stick to them. In a world of unprincipled people (such as people who sacrifice freedom for safety), I guess principled people would sound "crazy" to those people.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147543)

In a world of unprincipled people (such as people who sacrifice freedom for safety), I guess principled people would sound "crazy" to those people.

Freedom is not one thing, the intentionally vague use of it just hurts your argument. RMS gives up a certain amount of freedoms for safety too so your argument is invalid anyway.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

allaunjsiIverfox2 (3506701) | about 8 months ago | (#46147677)

Freedom is not one thing, the intentionally vague use of it just hurts your argument.

It hurts your brain, not my argument. If you've been alive even a few years, you'd probably know what I'm talking about.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147739)

Freedom and free-for-all are kind of different things, though.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Skinny Rav (181822) | about 8 months ago | (#46148465)

In a world of unprincipled people (such as people who sacrifice freedom for safety), I guess principled people would sound "crazy" to those people.

Freedom is not one thing, the intentionally vague use of it just hurts your argument. RMS gives up a certain amount of freedoms for safety too so your argument is invalid anyway.

RMS is a todays hermit. He thinks that conveniences of modern life are enslaving him, so he learned to live without them and sees it as liberation. What he does is not different than refusal to use money (seen as Mammon), or many rules by which Amish or orthodox Jews live.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (2)

Bengie (1121981) | about 8 months ago | (#46146821)

For personal reasons, he generally does not actively browse the web from his computer; rather, he uses wget and reads the fetched pages from his e-mail mailbox, claiming to limit direct access via browsers to a few sites such as his own or those related to his work with GNU and the FSF

He's an "Amish" programmer?

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (2)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 8 months ago | (#46146355)

Well, it's better than Facebook at least.
Are there FOSS alternatives to Facebook and Google+ that are actually used by a number of people?
Linus uses Google+ for more than just commenting on kernels and such, he sends photos what's happening on his vacations and so forth, like a typical social network person. However as a minor celebrity he can have people follow him without him accepting friend requests and such, split people into separate groups for posting purposes (though I heard facebook evolved to do this also).

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

lagomorpha2 (1376475) | about 8 months ago | (#46146411)

I hear status.net and friendica.com are useful but have not tried either personally.

"that are actually used by a number of people?"

Oh. Not that I'm aware of.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Eskarel (565631) | about 8 months ago | (#46146595)

Just because the ability for someone to run a FOSS environment is largely because of work done by Linus, doesn't mean he's actually a FOSS advocate. He's always used the best tool for the job be that open source or otherwise. Usually he'll eventually write some alternative that fits his needs better (see Git), but I doubt he plans on writing a social networking tool.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 8 months ago | (#46147877)

He has on occasion really pissed people off by going overboard with the "pragmatism" which degenerated into a huge mess with the Bitkeeper fiasco for example. Didn't believe the warnings he got. Eventually bailed his rep out out by coming up with Git, but that doesn't mean he wasn't just acting stupid at the time, in fact that is arguably where the Git name comes from.

Re:Why do Free/Open Source gurus use Google+? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146637)

Aren't there plenty of other, and Free, ways to publish? It's not the end of the world but when someone like Linus Torvalds does it I think it sends a message that undermines the value placed on FOSS systems. If end-user control isn't important for Torvalds' personal communication, when is it?

OMG LINUS is on GOOGLE+ the shame, how horrible. Doesn't he realize how dangerous attaching your name to the evil empire is? The world is coming to an end our GURU has been seduced by the dark side of the source! GET REAL it is free to use and is effective as a communication platform unlike places where anon cowards can slag away and heckle, intelligent debate can take place if you read some of the replies at least they are not slagging him for complimenting Nvidia on their decision.

I post this as anon coward for the irony factor. The numbers of posts that slag everything Google on slashdot is very telling, the Microsoft sponsored scroogle campaign still has legs and there as still a huge number of goofasses out there spreading fud. It has become almost laughable and is almost as funny to watch as the old tin foil hat crowd here on slashdot. At least Linus does not wear one. Who knows maybe tomorrow he will slag Google for creating Android or Samsung, Sony, LG or whoever for using his kernel for free on so many devices most likely including his living room TV without including all the source on some digital recording media like a cd or dvd or whatever included with the device. But I doubt it. LOL

wow, you really get a sense... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146137)

...for how communication gets skewed fast these days.

'Hey, this time I'm raising a thumb

The article says Thumb and so Linus is actually saying good job, BUT you have a long way still to go.

Re:wow, you really get a sense... (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 8 months ago | (#46146383)

...for how communication gets skewed fast these days.

'Hey, this time I'm raising a thumb

<pedantic mode="on">Speaking of skewed communication: isn't it weird to welcome a Tegra driver with open [opencores.org] ARMs [wikipedia.org] ?</pedantic>

Re:wow, you really get a sense... (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#46147087)

Since when does something like the Amber core not infringe the patents of ARM Ltd.? At the present time, open MIPS is more likely; see Loongson for an example.

Linus is an asswhole for the greater good (4, Insightful)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about 8 months ago | (#46146319)

Nothing wrong with being an ass, if the cause is just and the talent is used in moderation.

The results and tact that Linus uses this falls clearly in the acceptable category. He believes in high standards, but never goes out-of-bounds into silly land.

Something to admire, in my book.

Re:Linus is an asswhole for the greater good (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 8 months ago | (#46147881)

He believes in high standards, but never goes out-of-bounds into silly land.

Never?

Re:Linus is an asswhole for the greater good (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148069)

I agree.

But we should remember that most of us are not Linus Torvalds so, kids, don't try this at home. ... unless you are talented enough and have proved yourself by revolutionizing the technology world *two* times in a row, that is.

Re:Linus is an asswhole for the greater good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148605)

"The results and tact that Linus uses this falls clearly in the acceptable category"

"clearly"? Yes, "clearly" he can be ass, but the rest of your statement can be challenged.

So, the old saying "the ends justify the means" is okay?

This sounds like the policy of a big, money-making corporation to me...

Linus gets results (1, Troll)

scdeimos (632778) | about 8 months ago | (#46146385)

Not that I really want to continue with AMD under linux, but Linus should give them the middle finger too.

Re:Linus gets results (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147369)

Why, exactly?

- AMD's open driver is in *awesome* shape in latest 3.13, 3.12 brought the biggest improvements.
- AMD has been invested millions in open projects like Gallium3D, Mesa, etc to improve their drivers.
- AMD has been released specs for their hardware since 2006.

Re:Linus gets results (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147617)

What are you smoking? *ATI* released 900 pages of register specifications back in 2007 (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjA1Mw). AMD never releases complete register specifications for their hardware. (Yes, I'm familiar with http://developer.amd.com/resou... [amd.com] , which is just scratching the surface with the public registers.) I thank the few AMD employees (Michel Dänzer, Alex Deucher, Christian König, Marek Olák and Tom Stellard, sorry if I missed anyone) actually working on the open source drivers for AMD, I'm sure they're restricted in what they can do as are the rest of us, but the reality is that the drivers are slow and support neither brand new nor legacy hardware, just some mix of cards of middling age. AMD's binary drivers need to be uninstalled, recompiled and reinstalled with every kernel release. Quite the experience.

Re:Linus gets results (1)

someone1234 (830754) | about 8 months ago | (#46147873)

Yeah, it sucks that every kernel upgrade causes me to start linux in safe mode and recompile the driver. Hopefully, this will end some day.

Re:Linus gets results (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148185)

So use dkms or something similar?

Re:Linus gets results (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148319)

It ended in 2003 with DKMS.

If your distribution doesn't use it, then start complaining with them.

Re:Linus gets results (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148267)

You're not particularly up to date, are you? The open drivers *do* support the newest hardware just fine (both R9 290X discrete graphics and Kaveri APUs). And which legacy hardware is *not* supported by the open drivers?
Whether they're slow depends on your definition of "slow". Right now they have about 70% of the closed source drivers performance. Which is perfectly fine - even for the average gamer's needs. I get above 60fps with all the games I care about atm on high settings with a Radeon 7770.

Re:Linus gets results (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147651)

AMD's open driver is in *awesome* shape in latest 3.13, 3.12 brought the biggest improvements.

So I would have to go and buy another AMD card just in the hope that it actually supports half the features it exposes on windows? The every time AMD dropped closed source support for my graphics cards resulted in a catastrophic performance and feature loss with the next kernel update (two out of two).

 

AMD has been invested millions in open projects like Gallium3D, Mesa, etc to improve their drivers.

They invested peanuts.

AMD has been released specs for their hardware since 2006.

Why not release the sources to the closed source driver? Until I actually get to use an AMD card for more than a few years without insane performance drop they are not worth buying.

pundit insight wanted (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#46146431)

How wonderful is this actually?
Can Nouveau really compete with their blob?
I'm not particularly into gaming, but I understand recently Linux has been gaining
some traction as a gaming platform.
Is there a relation, in that Nvidia badly would need some goodwill to not miss that
bandwagon?

Nouveau has been fine, but I'm not a gamer. Now nv (1)

raymorris (2726007) | about 8 months ago | (#46146607)

The open source driver has been fine for me. I'm not a gamer, though. For games, I don't know. In any event, since Nvidia is now beginning to contribute rather than obstruct work on Nouveau, I don't see any reason that it shouldn't be similar to the proprietary driver very soon.

Re:pundit insight wanted (2)

davydagger (2566757) | about 8 months ago | (#46146689)

very important.

if you use linux, you understand that nouveau isn't about "competing" with the binary driver. It has many advanatages that come with open source such as unlimited redistribution rights, and it plays nice with other drivers, between the two making it the only option for LiveCDs and with that install CDs.

Noveau is almostly always installed by default with Xorg. It also works on a larger variety of hardware.

Nouvea is essential for getting a GUI on linux to "just work", even if the proprietary blob is better.

Re:pundit insight wanted (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148033)

Nouveau
Noveau
Nouvea

Novea is also great !

If its good enough for Linus (4, Funny)

John Allsup (987) | about 8 months ago | (#46146467)

Then its good enough for me too. So "Thumbs up!" Nvidia!

thumb != thumbs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146645)

nuff said

sp0n6e (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46146751)

as WidEOpen, [goat.cx]

In the wake of the Snowden revelations... (1, Interesting)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 8 months ago | (#46146827)

Another factor that might be pushing vendors to provide information to open source developers and/or publishing open source drivers is the fallout from the Snowden revelations.

People worldwide have awakened to the possibility that malware may be imbedded in closed drivers and firmware (including closed "binary blobs" embedded in open-source drivers). Indeed, it WAS imbedded in some - and sold as a feature. (Example: Intel's AMT, early versions of which lived in and ran from the Ethernet interface firmware, before it was moved to the Northbridge.)

Even if it isn't contaminated, a vendor can't SHOW that it's not contaminated as long as it's closed. So to convince jittery customers that the device is safe, the vendor needs to have open drivers and firmware available.

A vendor's own souce may include licensed code from others, making it hard for the vendor to open its own code (and perhaps contaminating its own developers). On the other hand, releasing the necessary information to the open souce community can lead to fully open support - at negligable cost (excluding perceived risk of exposing company secret-sauce recipes to the world - which won't matter if the customers stop buying the sauce-covered product, or demand falls enough for them to lose their competitive position).

So the Snowden revalations have created a strong incentive for vendors to enable open source developers.

Re:In the wake of the Snowden revelations... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147157)

the proprietary Linux NVIDIA drivers have a history of at least 2 remotely exploitable bugs patched.

Are you reading AMD/ATI? (1)

ikhider (2837593) | about 8 months ago | (#46147413)

I have an NVIDIA graphic card that goes back a few years, and NVIDIA still supports it and updates the drivers. I have an AMD/ATI graphics card that is significantly less old, and they do not support it, as the drivers are dated. I have called AMD a few times about this and wrote to them, but they brush it off. I want to see AMD/ATI pick up the slack and support their products. Then I will keep buying them.

Stop licking his nuts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147507)

Stop gargling toreballs' testicles.

Xen/Dom0 Support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46147887)

Any cooperation is better than nothing but it would be nice if using the blob driver in Xen's Dom0 was an option - I've found it to be pretty decent in the past for everything else but am looking at having to buy an ati card (or go with onboard video...ugh) given that I'm looking to mess with Xen at home.

Thumbs up, Xinerama still broken! (1)

Reverant (581129) | about 8 months ago | (#46147919)

I've been using nVidia cards on my Linux workstations for many years. Well, I recently found out the hard way that Xinerama is broken on any driver version after 319. Ouch. And has been for the last 9 months and with no response from nVdia. Double ouch. Thumbs down.

Collaboration strictly limited to Tegra K1+ (5, Informative)

mupuf (2617831) | about 8 months ago | (#46148125)

Hey, I'm a Nouveau developer and I had a chance to discuss with an nvidia engineer @ FOSDEM. This collaboration is strictly limited to Tegra and on the kernel side (at least for the moment).

There is some overlap with the desktop cards (mostly Kepler family) which will allow us to benefit of this collaboration in more than the SoC world. This is however very interesting and I'm really looking forward to seeing how it will pan out!

Thumbs up? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46148133)

Don't forget he's European. He probably meant "sit on this, Nvidia".

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?