An example of why Open Source just doesn't work

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by H.O.G, Jun 25, 2005.

  1. H.O.G

    H.O.G Guest

    Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    many others.

    A bitter old man, realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    to very little because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    not have a nest egg for his retirement.

    I find it interesting that yet another fierce advocate of Open Source
    talks about hoping that "someone with 6 figure$ to burn" would come
    and commercialise his product.

    A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    on the works of others, like this fellow).


    From http://linuxrouter.org/ :

    LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)
    With great pain, I must now state:

    The operating system that helped to create the embedded Linux
    marketplace, the Linux Router Project (LRP), is dead.

    As of January of this year I have finally accepted the fact I will
    likely never be able to develop LRP into the operating system it could
    have been. A full 6 months later I'm forcing myself to update this
    page to reflect this. It is not an easy thing to give up on your
    life's work.

    I am also now semi-retired as a computer engineer. Aside from my
    general disgust at the computing industry and what the Internet has
    become, scrambling around for scrapes of work and praying for the next
    good money project that eventually ends suddenly in a few months, just
    isn't keeping food on the table. I've looked quite a bit for some
    stable work, but plumbers make more hourly then Sys Admins in South
    Florida. Either I move to California (never!) or move on. I am now
    reserved to do the latter. With LRP remaining an unachievable goal I
    don't even feel much desire to work with computers anymore.

    My many contributions to the computing community has reaped very
    little personal benefit for myself. As I now struggle to pay the bills
    I can not help but feel quite pissed off at the state of affairs, for
    myself and the other authors who contributed massive amounts of time
    and quality work, only to have it whored by companies not willing to
    give back dime one to the people that actually created what it is they
    sell. Acknowledgement and referral would have at least been
    acceptable. Few companies do even that.

    Care to tell me what Embeddix (for one) is based off of? Ever offer me
    work Caldera? Even when I asked?

    Well actually I'm glad they didn't as I would hate to think I could
    have benefited those scumbags any further...but I think you, the
    reader, gets the point I'm making.

    Some companies did contribute directly to the project. However a few
    thousand dollars or a few computers does not let a programmer eat next
    month. As desperately as I have tried for the last 4 years I have been
    unable to get any type of sustainable funding for LRP development or
    steady work which would allow such. (It might have happened late in
    2001, but after many 100 hour weeks of coding....that contract was
    terminated and so were any hopes of dedicating future time to LRP
    development.)

    I actually have done more work on LRP 5.0 then anyone has seen. Yes
    LRP *5.0*. LRP 4.0 was brought to an alpha stage January 2001 and I
    was not happy with it. It was a gorgeous rehash of the same old Unix
    shit. Not acceptable to me. I began to explore some ideas I previously
    had but thought were not realistic to pursue. They instead turned out
    to be ideal.

    This operating system had a good deal of specifications outlined for
    it and some preliminary proof-of-concept coding done. To this day I am
    only beginning to see very minor bits of what I had expected to have
    in production the summer of 2001. You see, unlike the current pile of
    Linux distributions which are based on ~20 year old obsolete
    mechanisms, I was working on something that was from scratch. How
    different would it have been?

    * A new shell (no bash, no ash, no sh at all!)
    * A new shell scripting language
    * A new (universal) packaging scheme (would retrofit other OSes)
    * A true application management system
    * A new core process management system (No 'init' here...)

    That's just a short list from memory, for the sake of making people
    ill with longing. (YES, YES, Burn with desire! Muhahaha!) Even the
    syntax for the scripting language was designed. The full architecture
    for the packaging system was laid out. Oh yeah, and the base of this
    OS would have all fit in ~8MB of space. The name of this operating
    system and it's specifications, shall still remain UNRELEASED.

    Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Wish it could. I'd like to
    hope someone with 6 figure$ to burn wants this to happen, but I need
    to grow up and move on instead of continuing to wait on the tooth
    fairy to show up to help me persue my artistic dreams.

    Oh Well...

    My thanks go out to the few people that did help to make happen the
    LRP that was released. Untrue to the opensource dogma, actually
    finding people to contribute work to a project is a task in and of
    itself.

    My special thanks to Phil Hands and Paul Russell who helped make the
    early days possible. I would have never learned to hate Bourne shell
    at a guru's level without your help. :)

    Paul Wouters, modmaker did more to help LRP proliferate then
    anyone/thing else. I wish at the time I had realized it's true worth,
    and encouraged you more with it.

    Charles Wright, the only guy who ever really helped with any needed
    coding of the LRP base.

    Vesselin Atanasov, we made portslave into something quite nice.

    My eternal disregard also goes out to those that thought they had
    something to do with LRP but really did nothing for it but complain on
    the mailing list, and to those that did do something with LRP and
    never tried to collaborate with me to further the project.
    H.O.G, Jun 25, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 16:38:00 +1200, someone purporting to be H.O.G didst
    scrawl:

    >
    > Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    > free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    > many others.
    >

    *SNIP*

    OSS works just fine. However, if you're going to rely on being bought out
    to give you financial security it's definitely not something to count on.

    If OSS doesn't work, how is it that FreeBSD, and OSS OS that's been around
    longer than nearly any other, is currently used for processing
    transactions worth over a trillion (with a t) dollars a year? Or a
    utility company in NZ is using MySQL for recording meter readings into a
    database that currently has over a half-billion rows? That sure as hell
    meets my definition of working.

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
    Matthew Poole, Jun 25, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. H.O.G

    Bling-Bling Guest

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 16:38:00 +1200, H.O.G wrote:

    > You see, unlike the current pile of
    > Linux distributions which are based on ~20 year old obsolete
    > mechanisms, I was working on something that was from scratch. How
    > different would it have been?
    >
    > * A new shell (no bash, no ash, no sh at all!)
    > * A new shell scripting language
    > * A new (universal) packaging scheme (would retrofit other OSes)
    > * A true application management system
    > * A new core process management system (No 'init' here...)


    Ah!

    Someone trying to reinvent the wheel and then bitching about there being
    so many wheels already around him.


    Bling Bling

    --
    IBM: "Linux is not just another operating system. It represents a
    collaboration of the best programmers in the industry coming together to
    create an operating system that works on any hardware platform."
    Bling-Bling, Jun 25, 2005
    #3
  4. H.O.G

    Shane Guest

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 16:38:00 +1200, H.O.G wrote:

    >
    > Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    > free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    > many others.
    >
    > A bitter old man, realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    > to very little because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    > not have a nest egg for his retirement.
    >
    > I find it interesting that yet another fierce advocate of Open Source
    > talks about hoping that "someone with 6 figure$ to burn" would come
    > and commercialise his product.
    >
    > A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    > course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    > on the works of others, like this fellow).
    >
    >
    > From http://linuxrouter.org/ :
    >
    > LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)
    > With great pain, I must now state:
    >
    > The operating system that helped to create the embedded Linux
    > marketplace, the Linux Router Project (LRP), is dead.
    >
    > As of January of this year I have finally accepted the fact I will
    > likely never be able to develop LRP into the operating system it could
    > have been. A full 6 months later I'm forcing myself to update this
    > page to reflect this. It is not an easy thing to give up on your
    > life's work.
    >
    > I am also now semi-retired as a computer engineer. Aside from my
    > general disgust at the computing industry and what the Internet has
    > become, scrambling around for scrapes of work and praying for the next
    > good money project that eventually ends suddenly in a few months, just
    > isn't keeping food on the table. I've looked quite a bit for some
    > stable work, but plumbers make more hourly then Sys Admins in South
    > Florida. Either I move to California (never!) or move on. I am now
    > reserved to do the latter. With LRP remaining an unachievable goal I
    > don't even feel much desire to work with computers anymore.
    >
    > My many contributions to the computing community has reaped very
    > little personal benefit for myself. As I now struggle to pay the bills
    > I can not help but feel quite pissed off at the state of affairs, for
    > myself and the other authors who contributed massive amounts of time
    > and quality work, only to have it whored by companies not willing to
    > give back dime one to the people that actually created what it is they
    > sell. Acknowledgement and referral would have at least been
    > acceptable. Few companies do even that.
    >
    > Care to tell me what Embeddix (for one) is based off of? Ever offer me
    > work Caldera? Even when I asked?
    >
    > Well actually I'm glad they didn't as I would hate to think I could
    > have benefited those scumbags any further...but I think you, the
    > reader, gets the point I'm making.
    >
    > Some companies did contribute directly to the project. However a few
    > thousand dollars or a few computers does not let a programmer eat next
    > month. As desperately as I have tried for the last 4 years I have been
    > unable to get any type of sustainable funding for LRP development or
    > steady work which would allow such. (It might have happened late in
    > 2001, but after many 100 hour weeks of coding....that contract was
    > terminated and so were any hopes of dedicating future time to LRP
    > development.)
    >
    > I actually have done more work on LRP 5.0 then anyone has seen. Yes
    > LRP *5.0*. LRP 4.0 was brought to an alpha stage January 2001 and I
    > was not happy with it. It was a gorgeous rehash of the same old Unix
    > shit. Not acceptable to me. I began to explore some ideas I previously
    > had but thought were not realistic to pursue. They instead turned out
    > to be ideal.
    >
    > This operating system had a good deal of specifications outlined for
    > it and some preliminary proof-of-concept coding done. To this day I am
    > only beginning to see very minor bits of what I had expected to have
    > in production the summer of 2001. You see, unlike the current pile of
    > Linux distributions which are based on ~20 year old obsolete
    > mechanisms, I was working on something that was from scratch. How
    > different would it have been?
    >
    > * A new shell (no bash, no ash, no sh at all!)
    > * A new shell scripting language
    > * A new (universal) packaging scheme (would retrofit other OSes)
    > * A true application management system
    > * A new core process management system (No 'init' here...)
    >
    > That's just a short list from memory, for the sake of making people
    > ill with longing. (YES, YES, Burn with desire! Muhahaha!) Even the
    > syntax for the scripting language was designed. The full architecture
    > for the packaging system was laid out. Oh yeah, and the base of this
    > OS would have all fit in ~8MB of space. The name of this operating
    > system and it's specifications, shall still remain UNRELEASED.
    >
    > Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Wish it could. I'd like to
    > hope someone with 6 figure$ to burn wants this to happen, but I need
    > to grow up and move on instead of continuing to wait on the tooth
    > fairy to show up to help me persue my artistic dreams.
    >
    > Oh Well...
    >
    > My thanks go out to the few people that did help to make happen the
    > LRP that was released. Untrue to the opensource dogma, actually
    > finding people to contribute work to a project is a task in and of
    > itself.
    >
    > My special thanks to Phil Hands and Paul Russell who helped make the
    > early days possible. I would have never learned to hate Bourne shell
    > at a guru's level without your help. :)
    >
    > Paul Wouters, modmaker did more to help LRP proliferate then
    > anyone/thing else. I wish at the time I had realized it's true worth,
    > and encouraged you more with it.
    >
    > Charles Wright, the only guy who ever really helped with any needed
    > coding of the LRP base.
    >
    > Vesselin Atanasov, we made portslave into something quite nice.
    >
    > My eternal disregard also goes out to those that thought they had
    > something to do with LRP but really did nothing for it but complain on
    > the mailing list, and to those that did do something with LRP and
    > never tried to collaborate with me to further the project.


    nice three year old link
    his code _should_ have been protected by the GPL (I forget if thats what
    he released it under) and the companies that stole his code _should_ have
    been bound by the terms of that license
    (as it is a license is only any good if your lawyer is big enough)
    Ive used his stuff, its nice, and since the supposed *end* (last year as a
    matter of fact)
    troll rating: 4 out of ten
    nice.. youre going to get some bites (have already)
    but its 3 years old
    and the OSS community is/has getting thier shit together with respect to
    business models and protecting thier hard work from being swallowed up
    inside closed source products


    --
    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

    The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.
    Shane, Jun 25, 2005
    #4
  5. H.O.G

    Shane Guest

    I should learn to snip
    :\

    --
    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

    The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.
    Shane, Jun 25, 2005
    #5
  6. H.O.G

    shannon Guest

    Shane wrote:

    > On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 16:38:00 +1200, H.O.G wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    >>free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    >>many others.
    >>
    >>A bitter old man, realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    >>to very little because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    >>not have a nest egg for his retirement.
    >>
    >>I find it interesting that yet another fierce advocate of Open Source
    >>talks about hoping that "someone with 6 figure$ to burn" would come
    >>and commercialise his product.
    >>
    >>A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    >>course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    >>on the works of others, like this fellow).
    >>
    >>
    >>From http://linuxrouter.org/ :
    >>
    >>LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)
    >>With great pain, I must now state:
    >>
    >>The operating system that helped to create the embedded Linux
    >>marketplace, the Linux Router Project (LRP), is dead.
    >>
    >>As of January of this year I have finally accepted the fact I will
    >>likely never be able to develop LRP into the operating system it could
    >>have been. A full 6 months later I'm forcing myself to update this
    >>page to reflect this. It is not an easy thing to give up on your
    >>life's work.
    >>
    >>I am also now semi-retired as a computer engineer. Aside from my
    >>general disgust at the computing industry and what the Internet has
    >>become, scrambling around for scrapes of work and praying for the next
    >>good money project that eventually ends suddenly in a few months, just
    >>isn't keeping food on the table. I've looked quite a bit for some
    >>stable work, but plumbers make more hourly then Sys Admins in South
    >>Florida. Either I move to California (never!) or move on. I am now
    >>reserved to do the latter. With LRP remaining an unachievable goal I
    >>don't even feel much desire to work with computers anymore.
    >>
    >>My many contributions to the computing community has reaped very
    >>little personal benefit for myself. As I now struggle to pay the bills
    >>I can not help but feel quite pissed off at the state of affairs, for
    >>myself and the other authors who contributed massive amounts of time
    >>and quality work, only to have it whored by companies not willing to
    >>give back dime one to the people that actually created what it is they
    >>sell. Acknowledgement and referral would have at least been
    >>acceptable. Few companies do even that.
    >>
    >>Care to tell me what Embeddix (for one) is based off of? Ever offer me
    >>work Caldera? Even when I asked?
    >>
    >>Well actually I'm glad they didn't as I would hate to think I could
    >>have benefited those scumbags any further...but I think you, the
    >>reader, gets the point I'm making.
    >>
    >>Some companies did contribute directly to the project. However a few
    >>thousand dollars or a few computers does not let a programmer eat next
    >>month. As desperately as I have tried for the last 4 years I have been
    >>unable to get any type of sustainable funding for LRP development or
    >>steady work which would allow such. (It might have happened late in
    >>2001, but after many 100 hour weeks of coding....that contract was
    >>terminated and so were any hopes of dedicating future time to LRP
    >>development.)
    >>
    >>I actually have done more work on LRP 5.0 then anyone has seen. Yes
    >>LRP *5.0*. LRP 4.0 was brought to an alpha stage January 2001 and I
    >>was not happy with it. It was a gorgeous rehash of the same old Unix
    >>shit. Not acceptable to me. I began to explore some ideas I previously
    >>had but thought were not realistic to pursue. They instead turned out
    >>to be ideal.
    >>
    >>This operating system had a good deal of specifications outlined for
    >>it and some preliminary proof-of-concept coding done. To this day I am
    >>only beginning to see very minor bits of what I had expected to have
    >>in production the summer of 2001. You see, unlike the current pile of
    >>Linux distributions which are based on ~20 year old obsolete
    >>mechanisms, I was working on something that was from scratch. How
    >>different would it have been?
    >>
    >> * A new shell (no bash, no ash, no sh at all!)
    >> * A new shell scripting language
    >> * A new (universal) packaging scheme (would retrofit other OSes)
    >> * A true application management system
    >> * A new core process management system (No 'init' here...)
    >>
    >>That's just a short list from memory, for the sake of making people
    >>ill with longing. (YES, YES, Burn with desire! Muhahaha!) Even the
    >>syntax for the scripting language was designed. The full architecture
    >>for the packaging system was laid out. Oh yeah, and the base of this
    >>OS would have all fit in ~8MB of space. The name of this operating
    >>system and it's specifications, shall still remain UNRELEASED.
    >>
    >>Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Wish it could. I'd like to
    >>hope someone with 6 figure$ to burn wants this to happen, but I need
    >>to grow up and move on instead of continuing to wait on the tooth
    >>fairy to show up to help me persue my artistic dreams.
    >>
    >>Oh Well...
    >>
    >>My thanks go out to the few people that did help to make happen the
    >>LRP that was released. Untrue to the opensource dogma, actually
    >>finding people to contribute work to a project is a task in and of
    >>itself.
    >>
    >>My special thanks to Phil Hands and Paul Russell who helped make the
    >>early days possible. I would have never learned to hate Bourne shell
    >>at a guru's level without your help. :)
    >>
    >>Paul Wouters, modmaker did more to help LRP proliferate then
    >>anyone/thing else. I wish at the time I had realized it's true worth,
    >>and encouraged you more with it.
    >>
    >>Charles Wright, the only guy who ever really helped with any needed
    >>coding of the LRP base.
    >>
    >>Vesselin Atanasov, we made portslave into something quite nice.
    >>
    >>My eternal disregard also goes out to those that thought they had
    >>something to do with LRP but really did nothing for it but complain on
    >>the mailing list, and to those that did do something with LRP and
    >>never tried to collaborate with me to further the project.

    >
    >
    > nice three year old link
    > his code _should_ have been protected by the GPL (I forget if thats what
    > he released it under) and the companies that stole his code _should_ have
    > been bound by the terms of that license
    > (as it is a license is only any good if your lawyer is big enough)
    > Ive used his stuff, its nice, and since the supposed *end* (last year as a
    > matter of fact)
    > troll rating: 4 out of ten
    > nice.. youre going to get some bites (have already)
    > but its 3 years old
    > and the OSS community is/has getting thier shit together with respect to
    > business models and protecting thier hard work from being swallowed up
    > inside closed source products
    >
    >



    LOL
    LRP was a one floppy router derived from Debian binaries with kernel 2.0
    The rest of the developers said goodbye to this guy and got on with LEAF
    http://leaf.sourceforge.net/
    A good example of how open source code continues to be useful despite
    the departure of participants
    shannon, Jun 25, 2005
    #6
  7. H.O.G

    Judges1318 Guest

    H.O.G wrote:

    >
    > A bitter old man, realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    > to very little because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    > not have a nest egg for his retirement.
    >


    >
    > From http://linuxrouter.org/ :
    >
    > LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)
    > With great pain, I must now state:
    >
    > The operating system that helped to create the embedded Linux
    > marketplace, the Linux Router Project (LRP), is dead.
    >


    If he wanted it to be a commercial project, than he could
    have kept it proprietary, developed it, packaged it, advertised
    it, sold it and became a rich man.

    If he wanted it to be OS, he could have founded a community of
    developers (on the internet), and if he is fed up, someone
    from the community could have picked up the management, and the
    project lives on, and he goes onto something else (lucrative).

    Why is OSS to blame for someone's bad business/personal decisions?
    Judges1318, Jun 25, 2005
    #7
  8. H.O.G

    shannon Guest

    Re: An example of why Open Source projects survive Wintrolls attempts

    H.O.G wrote:

    <Wintroll bollocks snipped>


    >
    >
    > From http://linuxrouter.org/ :
    >
    > LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)
    > With great pain, I must now state:
    >
    > The operating system that helped to create the embedded Linux
    > marketplace, the Linux Router Project (LRP), is dead.
    >


    One branch that died, based on kernel 2.0

    The rest survived as Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall, and still going
    strong, with more modules than ever, incorporating shorewall and
    supporting 2.4 and later kernels

    http://leaf.sourceforge.net/
    shannon, Jun 25, 2005
    #8
  9. H.O.G

    Shane Guest


    >
    > LOL
    > LRP was a one floppy router derived from Debian binaries with kernel 2.0
    > The rest of the developers said goodbye to this guy and got on with LEAF
    > http://leaf.sourceforge.net/
    > A good example of how open source code continues to be useful despite
    > the departure of participants


    I never knew that
    I liked LRP as an alternative to coyote (two floppys) and freesco (which
    I didnt like purely because everyone else used it :)

    --
    Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

    The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.
    Shane, Jun 25, 2005
    #9
  10. H.O.G

    thing Guest

    H.O.G wrote:
    > Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    > free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    > many others.
    >
    > A bitter old man,


    Sounds like you woger

    realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    > to very little


    oh yet again woger strikes....

    > because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    > not have a nest egg for his retirement.
    >
    > I find it interesting that yet another fierce advocate of Open Source
    > talks about hoping that "someone with 6 figure$ to burn" would come
    > and commercialise his product.
    >
    > A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    > course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    > on the works of others, like this fellow).
    >


    Woger you are a prat as usual. Admit it you are too stupid to use OSS.

    1) Survival of the fittest, this is why OSS does work, there can be many
    branches and this one died. Commercial companies die, eg like Digital or
    Wang.....people will have lost jobs, savings and investors share value,
    thats life.

    2) I stand on the shoulders of others, and, in turn others will stand on
    my shoulders, over time they will be the tallest in the land. MS et al
    better get used to it.

    3) Your statement high lights why you just like many others will never
    understand OSS. This is why MS and the like cannot combat Linux and OSS
    and cannot win. They are fighting an imaginary war in their heads, OSS
    just does not care.

    4) Someone once said to Donald Becker why did you release your
    networking stuff for free, you could have charged for it? His reply was,
    he did some networking stuff and in return he got a complete high
    quality operating system, for no cost sounded like a fair trade to him.
    ie a contract is not always shown to have a direct money component but
    that does not necessarily mean there is no value.

    get a life

    Thing
    thing, Jun 25, 2005
    #10
  11. H.O.G

    H.O.G Guest

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 18:28:59 +1200, thing <> spoke
    these fine words:

    >> A bitter old man,

    >
    >Sounds like you woger
    >
    >realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    >> to very little

    >
    >oh yet again woger strikes....
    >
    >> A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    >> course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    >> on the works of others, like this fellow).
    >>

    >
    >Woger you are a prat as usual. Admit it you are too stupid to use OSS.


    I am not Woger. Note that I can actually string two sentences
    together, and know how to use punctuation .
    H.O.G, Jun 25, 2005
    #11
  12. H.O.G

    H.O.G Guest

    Re: An example of why Open Source projects survive Wintrolls attempts

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:49:47 +1200, shannon <> spoke
    these fine words:

    >H.O.G wrote:
    >
    ><Wintroll bollocks snipped>


    So expressing an opinion that differs from yours is trolling?

    I stand by my comments, and re-state that this was NOT a troll
    attempt.

    I have copied my original comments here again, and have added
    additional comments below. Care to discuss, or are you just going to
    name call?

    > Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    > free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    > many others.


    What part of this do you think is trolling? How can give something
    away put food on the table? Therefore, there are very few professional
    developers for Linux. All other developers are taken advantage of.
    Fact.

    > A bitter old man, realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    > to very little because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    > not have a nest egg for his retirement.


    Which part of this do you disagree with?

    > I find it interesting that yet another fierce advocate of Open Source
    > talks about hoping that "someone with 6 figure$ to burn" would come
    > and commercialise his product.


    This kind of comment has been made many times by many people.

    > A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    > course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    > on the works of others, like this fellow).


    I could see how this could be interpreted as a troll, but honestly,
    what percentage of Linux users actually really contribute code? I
    would guess about 0.0001 %, tops.
    H.O.G, Jun 25, 2005
    #12
  13. H.O.G

    ofn01 Guest

    H.O.G wrote:
    > Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    > free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    > many others.
    >
    > A bitter old man, realising too late that his life's work has amounted
    > to very little because he gave it away for free, and consequently does
    > not have a nest egg for his retirement.
    >
    > I find it interesting that yet another fierce advocate of Open Source
    > talks about hoping that "someone with 6 figure$ to burn" would come
    > and commercialise his product.
    >
    > A sad tale, that I'm sure others could learn from. (Although, of
    > course, most Linux users do not contribute, they just take a free ride
    > on the works of others, like this fellow).
    >
    >
    > From http://linuxrouter.org/ :
    >
    > LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)
    > With great pain, I must now state:
    >
    > The operating system that helped to create the embedded Linux
    > marketplace, the Linux Router Project (LRP), is dead.
    >
    > As of January of this year I have finally accepted the fact I will
    > likely never be able to develop LRP into the operating system it could
    > have been. A full 6 months later I'm forcing myself to update this
    > page to reflect this. It is not an easy thing to give up on your
    > life's work.
    >
    > I am also now semi-retired as a computer engineer. Aside from my
    > general disgust at the computing industry and what the Internet has
    > become, scrambling around for scrapes of work and praying for the next
    > good money project that eventually ends suddenly in a few months, just
    > isn't keeping food on the table. I've looked quite a bit for some
    > stable work, but plumbers make more hourly then Sys Admins in South
    > Florida. Either I move to California (never!) or move on. I am now
    > reserved to do the latter. With LRP remaining an unachievable goal I
    > don't even feel much desire to work with computers anymore.
    >
    > My many contributions to the computing community has reaped very
    > little personal benefit for myself. As I now struggle to pay the bills
    > I can not help but feel quite pissed off at the state of affairs, for
    > myself and the other authors who contributed massive amounts of time
    > and quality work, only to have it whored by companies not willing to
    > give back dime one to the people that actually created what it is they
    > sell. Acknowledgement and referral would have at least been
    > acceptable. Few companies do even that.
    >
    > Care to tell me what Embeddix (for one) is based off of? Ever offer me
    > work Caldera? Even when I asked?
    >
    > Well actually I'm glad they didn't as I would hate to think I could
    > have benefited those scumbags any further...but I think you, the
    > reader, gets the point I'm making.
    >
    > Some companies did contribute directly to the project. However a few
    > thousand dollars or a few computers does not let a programmer eat next
    > month. As desperately as I have tried for the last 4 years I have been
    > unable to get any type of sustainable funding for LRP development or
    > steady work which would allow such. (It might have happened late in
    > 2001, but after many 100 hour weeks of coding....that contract was
    > terminated and so were any hopes of dedicating future time to LRP
    > development.)
    >
    > I actually have done more work on LRP 5.0 then anyone has seen. Yes
    > LRP *5.0*. LRP 4.0 was brought to an alpha stage January 2001 and I
    > was not happy with it. It was a gorgeous rehash of the same old Unix
    > shit. Not acceptable to me. I began to explore some ideas I previously
    > had but thought were not realistic to pursue. They instead turned out
    > to be ideal.
    >
    > This operating system had a good deal of specifications outlined for
    > it and some preliminary proof-of-concept coding done. To this day I am
    > only beginning to see very minor bits of what I had expected to have
    > in production the summer of 2001. You see, unlike the current pile of
    > Linux distributions which are based on ~20 year old obsolete
    > mechanisms, I was working on something that was from scratch. How
    > different would it have been?
    >
    > * A new shell (no bash, no ash, no sh at all!)
    > * A new shell scripting language
    > * A new (universal) packaging scheme (would retrofit other OSes)
    > * A true application management system
    > * A new core process management system (No 'init' here...)
    >
    > That's just a short list from memory, for the sake of making people
    > ill with longing. (YES, YES, Burn with desire! Muhahaha!) Even the
    > syntax for the scripting language was designed. The full architecture
    > for the packaging system was laid out. Oh yeah, and the base of this
    > OS would have all fit in ~8MB of space. The name of this operating
    > system and it's specifications, shall still remain UNRELEASED.
    >
    > Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Wish it could. I'd like to
    > hope someone with 6 figure$ to burn wants this to happen, but I need
    > to grow up and move on instead of continuing to wait on the tooth
    > fairy to show up to help me persue my artistic dreams.
    >
    > Oh Well...
    >
    > My thanks go out to the few people that did help to make happen the
    > LRP that was released. Untrue to the opensource dogma, actually
    > finding people to contribute work to a project is a task in and of
    > itself.
    >
    > My special thanks to Phil Hands and Paul Russell who helped make the
    > early days possible. I would have never learned to hate Bourne shell
    > at a guru's level without your help. :)
    >
    > Paul Wouters, modmaker did more to help LRP proliferate then
    > anyone/thing else. I wish at the time I had realized it's true worth,
    > and encouraged you more with it.
    >
    > Charles Wright, the only guy who ever really helped with any needed
    > coding of the LRP base.
    >
    > Vesselin Atanasov, we made portslave into something quite nice.
    >
    > My eternal disregard also goes out to those that thought they had
    > something to do with LRP but really did nothing for it but complain on
    > the mailing list, and to those that did do something with LRP and
    > never tried to collaborate with me to further the project.
    >


    OSS makes my life easier at work, Windows makes my life easier at home
    (yes Ive run Linux as a desktop operating system at home before). I
    think one thing that is important to note about this link is that it is
    from 2002, which was quite a low point for I.T. (things are a bit better
    now but have never really returned to 2000 peak levels). Companies like
    Caldera that he mentioned may not have really been in a strong position
    to invest in extra resource (such as hiring him) and I certainly don't
    think many companies then would have been considering investing in this.
    ofn01, Jun 25, 2005
    #13
  14. H.O.G

    Dumbkiwi Guest

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 16:38:00 +1200, H.O.G wrote:

    >
    > Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    > free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    > many others.


    <snip>

    You have missed the fundamental point. Open source is a development
    model, and not a business model. Some people have managed to turn this
    development model into revenue by employing a successful business model -
    eg. IBM attributes billions of $ of its revenue to linux. Likewise, some
    people have failed to turn this development model into a
    successful business model. However, this says nothing about open source.
    Open source has never claimed to be a business model, and has never tried
    to be a business model. It is only people whose heads are firmly stuck in
    the "software must derive monopoly rents to be successful" mindset who
    can't get their heads round it. Open source as a development model is
    succeeding despite these people.

    Oh, and btw, I'm a coder, and someone who contributes to the community and
    makes money off open-source.

    Matt
    Dumbkiwi, Jun 25, 2005
    #14
  15. H.O.G

    Mercury Guest

    Re: An example of why Open Source projects survive Wintrolls attempts

    > I could see how this could be interpreted as a troll, but honestly,
    > what percentage of Linux users actually really contribute code? I
    > would guess about 0.0001 %, tops.


    And who makes the money? IBM and Red Hat while all the rest are along for a
    free ride.

    This is where the OSS movement risks coming unstuck.
    Mercury, Jun 25, 2005
    #15
  16. H.O.G

    Porky Guest

    Re: An example of why Open Source projects survive Wintrolls attempts

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:37:36 +1200, H.O.G wrote:

    > On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:49:47 +1200, shannon <> spoke
    > these fine words:
    >
    >>H.O.G wrote:
    >>
    >><Wintroll bollocks snipped>

    >
    > So expressing an opinion that differs from yours is trolling?
    >
    > snip
    >
    > What part of this do you think is trolling? How can give something
    > away put food on the table? Therefore, there are very few professional
    > developers for Linux. All other developers are taken advantage of.
    > Fact.
    >
    >


    They are fairly smart guys who advocate this linux , but they also have
    created this fantasy world.

    Where one successsful project which blinds them to the other 95% of stalled
    / abandoned projects that were doomed from the start ....

    Doomed due to $$$ needed for R & D / costs of creating documentation / god
    forbid actually pay the developers for their work.


    Its a tough world in the CSS sector ... and what got OSS to where it is
    today also strangles the crap out of it.

    Out ...
    Porky, Jun 25, 2005
    #16
  17. Re: An example of why Open Sauce just doesn't work

    In article <>,
    H.O.G <> wrote:

    >Just one example of someone coming to realise that producing stuff for
    >free doesn't put food on the table, and will be taken advantage of by
    >many others.
    >
    >From http://linuxrouter.org/ :
    >
    >News:
    >2003-06-22
    >LRP == R.I.P. (1997-2002)


    News travels fast on the Internet, doesn't it...
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jun 25, 2005
    #17
  18. Re: An example of why Open Source projects survive Wintrolls attempts

    In article <d9jabv$geg$>, "Mercury" <>
    wrote:

    >> I could see how this could be interpreted as a troll, but honestly,
    >> what percentage of Linux users actually really contribute code? I
    >> would guess about 0.0001 %, tops.

    >
    >And who makes the money? IBM and Red Hat while all the rest are along for a
    >free ride.


    Do you have any idea how many open-source projects there are out there?
    Thousands. Literally. Do you really think IBM and Red Hat are
    contributing to all, or even most of them?

    Not a chance. It's simply not possible for a handful of large companies
    to dominate the open-source world the way they can the closed-source
    world. In closed-source, you can raise the barriers to the entry of new
    competitors; in open-source, you can't.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 25, 2005
    #18
  19. H.O.G

    shannon Guest

    Re: An example of why Open Source projects survive Wintrolls attempts

    H.O.G wrote:
    > On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:49:47 +1200, shannon <> spoke
    > these fine words:
    >
    >
    >>H.O.G wrote:
    >>
    >><Wintroll bollocks snipped>

    >
    >
    > So expressing an opinion that differs from yours is trolling?
    >
    > I stand by my comments, and re-state that this was NOT a troll
    > attempt.
    >


    The whole lot is bollocks, and if you weren't trolling you could easily
    have ascertained the facts. You just cut and pasted a three year old
    piece of shoddy rhetoric. They weren't even your comments. Thats just lazy.

    The LRP router was built from the GPL licensed work of others, including
    the linux kernel, which the developer is entitled to do.
    That means he doesn't have an exclusive right to the results.
    This guy canned his version because the project had forked to more
    advanced versions.

    If you have a look at the Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall project, you
    will see what other branches of the project became.
    A great deal of the credit is due to a guy in Christchurch who built the
    Matterhorn branch, which in turn became Eiger then Dachstein, I have
    used several of them since LRP. The current Bering branch is excellent,
    and was used by Citylink in Wellington very successfully for their
    embedded routers distributing from their fiber. They run a version on
    Soekris, there are many versions that work with wifi etc, boot off usb,
    cf memory, etc, way beyond the original LRP 2.0 kernel floppy router.
    shannon, Jun 25, 2005
    #19
  20. H.O.G

    shannon Guest

    Shane wrote:
    >>LOL
    >>LRP was a one floppy router derived from Debian binaries with kernel 2.0
    >>The rest of the developers said goodbye to this guy and got on with LEAF
    >>http://leaf.sourceforge.net/
    >>A good example of how open source code continues to be useful despite
    >>the departure of participants

    >
    >
    > I never knew that
    > I liked LRP as an alternative to coyote (two floppys) and freesco (which
    > I didnt like purely because everyone else used it :)
    >


    LEAF is a great modular mini distribution, capable of all sorts of other
    useful tasks, besides firewalling and routing.
    shannon, Jun 25, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Rich
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    401
    John Turco
    Jan 27, 2007
  2. Lawrence D¹Oliveiro

    An example of why Closed Source just doesn't work

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 25, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    997
    Rob J
    Jul 16, 2005
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Open-Source Good, Closed-Source Bad

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 16, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    468
    Gordon
    Oct 16, 2005
  4. Peter
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    273
  5. umeshawasthi
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,363
    umeshawasthi
    Dec 13, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page