From: muta...@gmail.com   
      
   On Wednesday, March 22, 2023 at 6:19:51 AM UTC+8, Dan Cross wrote:   
      
   > >> I'm not advocating, either. Like I've said multiple times, if    
   > >> you want to release your little toy into the public domain, have    
   > >> fun. I could honestly not care less.    
   > >    
   > >You advocated, and continue to advocate, that GPL is    
   > >just fine, PD doesn't add any value.   
      
   > Nope. All I'm saying is that it doesn't add the value that you    
   > claim that it does. That doesn't mean that it is without value.   
      
   You claimed that it was perfectly fine and tested in court, as   
   if there was a definitive worldwide court.   
      
   If you are now changing your story, that's fine.   
      
   > >I'd rather be immature than a commie slimebag peddling    
   > >the GPL.   
      
   > Whatever. At least I'm not ripping off copyrighted material and    
   > passing it off as being in the "public domain."   
      
   I'm certainly not doing that.   
      
   So far you've made a claim, without proof (especially not   
   a court ruling anywhere at all), that a trivial amount of code,   
   contributed by Alica, is allegedly ripped off.   
      
   And again, the fact that cretins like you cast aspersions like   
   that on the most minor amount of code, and claim that that   
   discredits the entire project, is exactly sand.   
      
   You're convincing me that as well as the new API I created,   
   I also need to create a new executable format.   
      
   But you can keep going and say that the C standard is   
   copyrighted too, so all C programs are ripoffs.   
      
   There needs to be some sanity brought to bear.   
      
   I have created (with help) an OS from scratch, but even   
   that is not fundamental enough apparently. Maybe I even   
   need a new language.   
      
   It's grim.   
      
   And it's not just PDOS - it's any OS that supports the ELF   
   format. I assume these names are pretty standard if they   
   are the documented names.   
      
   > >> Are you a lawyer? Because you seem awfully sure of yourself    
   > >> when it comes to    
   > >    
   > >No. Are you every judge in the world? Because you seem    
   > >awfully sure you can predict what every single one of them    
   > >is going to rule regarding GPL that there is no value in    
   > >public domain.   
      
   > You seem to think all of them are going to agree with your    
   > interpretations vis things that are in the "public domain."    
      
   No, you seem to have made up more bullshit.   
      
   I have no idea what every judge in the world is going to say.   
      
   What I do say is that at least with an explicit public domain   
   notice, at least there isn't an undisputed copyright holder.   
      
   > >[quote more drivel]   
   > >> Nah. You already started from an inferior technical base. Not    
   > >> worth it.    
   > >    
   > >My point is that if you are restricted to public domain    
   > >for some reason, you can develop your "super technical    
   > >base", using PDOS.   
      
   > Why on earth would someone bother? What you don't seem to get    
   > is that there's _nothing useful there_: it's just junk. One    
   > would be better off starting from scratch and doing things    
   > properly.   
      
   You CAN do that.   
      
   Again - if you are restricted to using a public domain OS, PDOS   
   will allow you to start from scratch, without having to write   
   machine code.   
      
   > >> What does that have to do with not "needing to write in machine    
   > >> code"?    
   > >    
   > >If you are given a S360/67 (which has switches to zap memory),    
   > >plus whatever public domain code you can find, what's your plan    
   > >to develop everything you need?   
      
   > What fantasy world do you live in where that's a realistic    
   > scenario?   
      
   It's an example. E.g. nuclear war, or sanctions. Or a drop   
   dead date embedded in every Intel and AMD processor.   
      
   I don't know what the future might bring.   
      
   You're the one with the alleged infallible cyrstal ball.   
      
   > >Repeat for 80386, although I'm not sure what input tools    
   > >are available for that. You might need to go back to an    
   > >earlier machine that supports paper tape.   
      
   > This is pure delusion. You have obviously never bootstrapped a    
   > machine.    
   >    
   > Paper tape, indeed.   
      
   What do you mean by "bootstrapped a machine"?   
      
   I have created an IPL deck of cards for z/PDOS.   
      
   I haven't personally punched them and loaded them onto   
   a card reader. So?   
      
   > >You will want to move to a higher level language as    
   > >soon as possible.    
   > >    
   > >The S360/67 has a card reader too.   
      
   > Are you high?   
      
   Nope.   
      
   > >> And if that's what you're concerned about, what about that    
   > >> copyright BIOS or UEFI you want to do the heavy lifting for you    
   > >> so you don't have to think about it? How about the copyright    
   > >> firmware? Are you doing your own DRAM training?    
   > >    
   > >I want to be able to debug my applications by putting debug    
   > >code into the OS as required. And fixing bugs in the OS as    
   > >required. For whatever reason I've never had an OS bug that    
   > >I needed to debug at the BIOS level.   
      
   > Yes, because you're just a hobbyist. That's fine, but you are    
   > clearly not a domain expert.   
      
   Probably most application programmers aren't either.   
      
   But they can now debug at least at the OS level.   
      
   > >But yes, I have bought    
   > >Chromebooks and given some thought about replacing    
   > >Seabios. It just hasn't been priority.   
      
   > See what you just wrote above about bootstrapping doesn't even    
   > make sense with this ... whatever this is. You're obviously ok    
   > using a BIOS to bootstrap the machine, or for that matter,    
   > cross-compiling. So why do you feel like you need a machine    
   > with a paper tape reader? What does your weird little program    
   > loader have to do with machine code?   
      
   If someone wants to write a fantastic OS, from scratch,   
   and all they have is a machine with wiped disks, what do   
   you suggest they do?   
      
   Then ... what do you suggest they do if they are allowed to   
   use any public domain software they can find.   
      
   Perhaps some sort of clean-room OS by Fujitsu.   
      
   They don't want slimy assholes like you claiming that   
   software was stolen.   
      
   So there is no source code.   
      
   > >> >> >That's a very good foundation.    
   > >> >    
   > >> >> Nope. I looked at the code; it's really not very good.    
   > >> >    
   > >> >You don't need to read the code. You can write something    
   > >> >better using it, if you believe you have the skills.    
   > >    
   > >> That's irrelevant. You're the one claiming that your "PDOS" is    
   > >> a suitable "foundation" for building real systems. It's    
   > >> demonstrably not.    
   > >    
   > >It demonstrably is. You can use it to compile C code    
   > >and develop a replacement OS that you think is better.   
      
   > I can do that on almost any extant system today. I can even put    
   > the result into the public domain.    
   >    
   > Why would I bother with your little toy?   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)