XPost: comp.mobile.android, alt.comp.microsoft.windows, misc.pho
e.mobile.iphone
From: nospam@nospam.net
sms wrote:
>> Wouldn't it just be easier to use regular adb on a computer?
>
> Or spend the $2.99 to purchase LADB on the Play Store and support the
> developer.
My credibility is the most important asset I own, which is based on not
only my intelligence, but the fact I don't state a fact unless it's fact.
In assessing facts, I'm often trying to supply useful answers for others
to do the things I am able to do, much as Paul & Stan & Herbert kindly do.
When I write a post, I often take hours, and even days or weeks (elapsed
time) to compile and assess all the facts - and to test & screenshot them.
I do this as a free service, out of the goodness of my kind heart & soul.
Hence, my assessments of fact, whether or not you agree with them, at least
are NOT based on ignorance, which, I assert, Steve's assessment above is.
As I said, there probably isn't an ladb article on the net I haven't read.
If you read the back story, the developer is accused of stealing the code.
Specifically, one can easily argue ladb is "stolen code" (see details):
"I can't believe you're charging folks, lol you didn't even do the
leg work. Dude you realize your entire app depends on my work right?
Donate the money to covid relief or something, don't take others
work for your benefit, you did nothing, you literally coded a java
ui, I've done this a bunch for substratum and andromeda with aapt
and adb, lol you think you deserve 3 dollars for this? And that I
deserve nothing? You literally need NEED my code for your crap
to work, and you're going to charge these folks? I gave it away
for free. What the hell is wrong with you?
Steve would have no idea of this because Steve filters out all ladb facts.
etc.
As a former mayor of Cupertino (yes, that Cupertino), Steve is a political
animal who skews all his posts toward the _message_ he's fomenting.
Steve has been consistently admonishing us to _pay_ for ladb, which is his
right, but someone needs to ask Steve if he's aware ladb is stolen code?
From "tytydraco" (the person who gets the money for ladb, to "Surge1223"
"Yes, I am using your compiled binaries."
Stealing is a harsh term, so let's just say he "borrowed" some of the code
without attributing that borrowing to the original developer, "Surge1223".
My problem with Steve is mostly that he actively _tries_ to be ignorant,
and not so much that Steve (as a result), _is_ ignorant of all the facts.
From "Surge1223" to "tytydraco" (the "ladb" developer asking for money):
"Tyler, is it fair to say that your app depends on the coding I did?
Coding which you yourself haven't been able to replicate?
No shame, it's hard to make adb play nice, it took me quite a while,
I didn't charge 3 dollars or make a drama story about how broke I was
though. I felt as if people should have this, for free without charge,
I know I utilized a lot of others' work in making the free adb binary."
And, from "Surge1223" to "tytydraco":
"Given you use the adb binaries I compiled, which is fine, I'd prefer
if you made the app free for all folks. Thanks."
Notice that I'm not against anyone charging for the code, nor am I against
anyone who says that you should pay for the code - but - always notice I'm
against ignorance - and - particularly - willful ignorant - on purpose.
It's fine that Steve admonishes us to pay for what could be called stolen
code, but what's not fine is for Steve to chastise us out of his ignorance.
As others said in that thread:
"You used Surge's binary without even asking and started charging for it.
Sorry but that's scummy."
And, as "Surge1223" himself said about the audacity to charge for ladb:
"The reason I don't want you to charge, is because without the binaries
I compiled, the app doesn't work. You might say that your Java code
for making a shell and user interface is worth it, if it is, if
that's what you think the hardest part is, go for it and compile
your own binaries.
I realize they're open source, I didn't charge anyone or ask for
any donations for my effort, and I expect the same from anyone
using my work.
Sadly you didn't even have the audacity to thank those who's
shoulders you stepped on to make this app, nor did you even
think to provide credit.
As a dev for substratum and andromeda, both of which make a
ui around a binary, I know first hand how hard it is.
If you want to go the GPL route, I just ask you compile your
binaries on your own, after all, you have no idea what changes
I've made to adb, are you comfortable with selling that to folks?"
Adults make assessments based on facts.
Steve makes assessments based on purposefully willfully filtering them out.
That's fine.
But then you have to assess Steve's credibility, as a direct result.
And mine too.
Where I strive to maintain a credibility on facts never being wrong.
Adults never disagree on facts (facts are funny that way).
Only a fool disagrees with facts (that's _why_ they're fools after all).
However, once the facts are agreed upon, it's quite natural for adults to
disagree on _assessments_ of those facts (e.g., is the code stolen, and,
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
