Re: [GNUnet-developers] MySQL/Service/three structure/gnunet.conf

[Krista Bennett]

Jan Marco Alkema hath spoken thusly on Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 08:39:33AM -0800:
> >On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Igor Stojanovski wrote:
> 
> >> Folkert,
> >>
> >> The current Windows client has a scheduler that you can use to set
> >> your client to crawl whenever you want it to.  The time increments
> >> for controling the crawl time is 15 minutes.  Therefore, you could
> >> set the client to crawl no more than 15 minutes.
> >> I hope this was helpful.
> 
> Reading above I assume that focus on Java first will be better, because it
> is more platform independent.

Reading above I assume nothing; this doesn't say anything about anything 
that has any relevance to anything here, as far as I can tell. In fact, it 
doesn't say anything about Java, portability, or anything else.

Please read the discussion we had on Java last year. I'm getting tired of 
repeating myself.

> There are two ways to 'use' source from others:

AAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! How many times do we have to go 
through this????????????????

<broken_record>

There's proprietary source, and there's open source. If you take
proprietary source and, even through a series of transformations, claim it
as your own, that's theft of intellectual property. I may not agree in
principle with closed source, but this isn't about my personal beliefs and
I don't steal other people's work without permission regardless.

You miss the point. And I'm going to stop trying to make it with you. 

> N.B. In x years all executable code can be decompiled to source and visa
> versa like Java.

Yeah, Jan Marco. I've studied CS for a long time; I'm not a complete
idiot. Just because you can deconstruct something and transform it into a
different representation, or reverse engineer it, doesn't mean you're not
stealing it. I don't want to get into an ethical discussion with you about
this.

I can translate any book on the best-seller list into some representation
of its grammar, syntax, and semantics, and then into, say, Dutch, but that
doesn't mean I wrote the damned book or have the right to try to make it 
look like the original author didn't without his permission.

If you want to do that on your own time and discuss it on your own 
bandwidth, good for you; I'm not making a judgement on anyone else's 
ethics, but this is NOT the place to do it. Can I be any clearer???

> >Please do not expect assistance, discussion, or distribution of this code
> on our part.
> 
> Richard and Bastiaan have more than enough knowledge to make the Java
> client.

I'm sure they're fine programmers; this has nothing to do with Richard and 
Bastiaan.

What some guys can or cannot do has nothing to do with what I was trying
to tell you and have been trying to tell you for the better part of a year
now.

If you want to talk about GNUnet here, fine, great, good, and well. 

If you want to use GNUnet for some system you're developing, excellent.

If you want to discuss how to merge our code with some general
application, ok.  

If you want to discuss bugs, theoretical issues, ideas for GNUnet 
development, this is the place.

If you want to discuss issues with other anonymity systems that might be 
of interest to developers, fantastic.

We have no interest, however, in having anything to do with some
application you've ripped off from someone else, and we're certainly not
going to distribute some Java client (or whatever else) which was obtained
illicitly. I'm sure you can do that on your own; that isn't the point. 
Why, oh why, do you keep bringing it up here in a forum that has *nothing 
to do with it*????????

If you want to develop some project based on illicitly obtained code, and
you plan to integrate GNUnet into it, you do it at your own risk. This
list is *really* not the place for such discussions. Setting up a bulletin
board on your own site for such discussions, as you suggest below, is a
good idea.

> If I have some time I install a foonsearch bulletin board on
> www.foonsearch.com for discussion on the Java client.

Whatever you want to do is your issue. I cannot make our position any 
clearer. I'm starting to feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.

Enough already. I'm sorry I'm angry, but while I'm perfectly happy to
repeat myself again and again to people who implicitly warrant a high
level of patience (5-year-olds, my elderly grandfather, tax collectors,
people who can't understand me when I speak too quickly, etc.), I'm tired
of wasting my (virtual) breath on explaining this to someone who is
clearly not in any of these states of the human condition.

I am *not* trying to discourage your participation on the list, Jan Marco.  
You've made a lot of useful bug reports, and I don't want to discourage
your involvement (or anyone else's, for that matter) in discussions. I
just don't understand why we keep having to repeat the above over and over
again. Could we not *please* move on to more productive territory???

</broken_record>

Regards,

Krista

-- 
***********************************************************************
Krista Bennett                               address@hidden
Graduate Student
Interdepartmental Program in Linguistics
Purdue University

         If at first you don't succeed, try again. Then quit.         
             There's no use being a damn fool about it.
                           -- W.C. Fields