by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Thursday April 21, 2005 @03:23PM (#12305134)
The trouble is that you can't set ethics aside unless you're unethical.
I know this is not a fashionable position here on Slashdot, but what Tridgell did was downright slimy. It apparently was not illegal and according to some not a violation of any software license. But he was hired by OSDL with a certain understanding about the BitKeeper license, and due to exhaustive prior LKML discussion certainly aware of the terms of that license.
Nevertheless he chose to surreptitiously interact with (and thus "use") sofwtare provided on a complimentary basis under certain terms he knew he intended to violate. Not only that, he did not have the balls to TELL anyone what he was doing in advance, and that he did not agree with the license. Instead he blindsighted Linus Torvalds and everyone else at OSDL who entered an agreement with BK.
If Tridgell wanted to reverse engineer BitKeeper in an ethical fashion, he could have disclosed his plans to OSDL and connected to a PAID copy of the server. Instead he decided to act slimy, sneaking around to exploit specially comped software.
Now Slashdot wants to hold a discussion about the fruits of his slimy work, as though the MEANS through which this knowledge was acquired is totally irrelevant. Heads up guys, it is relevant.
The trouble is that you can't set ethics aside unless you're unethical.
Truer words were never spoken, and I thank you for posting them. Sad thing is the rest of your comment indicates you have set them aside already, or perhaps never had them.
There is absolutely nothing unethical in what Tridge did here, at least insofar as has been mentioned in any of the reporting on this in the past few days that we've both had access to. There is absolutely no ethical obligation to keep an agreement you were not a party to. The rest of your rant assumes facts not in evidence, without any source, and has the definate whiff of BS to me.
In fact, what Tridge has done here is the epitome of ethical behavior. Linus is stung now, understandably disoriented and angry because he's been proven wrong and, being human, his first response is to lash out at Tridge instead of thanking him. Give it a few years though... once his wounded pride settles down I'm sure he will, in fact, thank Tridge for this.
Locking your data into a proprietary single-vendor format for the sake of temporary convenience was never a good idea. Everyone told Linus this, but he was too smart to listen. Now exactly what he was warned about has happened. And it was inevitable all along - if Tridge hadn't done it someone or something else would have - McVoy was a ticking time bomb. The fact that the guy isn't very stable didn't help, but honestly - McVoy could have been a saint and the thing would have still been a ticking time bomb. If Tridges actions resulted in it going off a little sooner than otherwise, then he saved Linus and many others trouble in the long run. Replacing BK wasn't going to get any easier...
Ethics aside? (Score:-1, Flamebait)
I know this is not a fashionable position here on Slashdot, but what Tridgell did was downright slimy. It apparently was not illegal and according to some not a violation of any software license. But he was hired by OSDL with a certain understanding about the BitKeeper license, and due to exhaustive prior LKML discussion certainly aware of the terms of that license.
Nevertheless he chose to surreptitiously interact with (and thus "use") sofwtare provided on a complimentary basis under certain terms he knew he intended to violate. Not only that, he did not have the balls to TELL anyone what he was doing in advance, and that he did not agree with the license. Instead he blindsighted Linus Torvalds and everyone else at OSDL who entered an agreement with BK.
If Tridgell wanted to reverse engineer BitKeeper in an ethical fashion, he could have disclosed his plans to OSDL and connected to a PAID copy of the server. Instead he decided to act slimy, sneaking around to exploit specially comped software.
Now Slashdot wants to hold a discussion about the fruits of his slimy work, as though the MEANS through which this knowledge was acquired is totally irrelevant. Heads up guys, it is relevant.
What part of this don't you get? (Score:3, Funny)
Any questions?
Re:Ethics aside? (Score:5, Insightful)
Truer words were never spoken, and I thank you for posting them. Sad thing is the rest of your comment indicates you have set them aside already, or perhaps never had them.
There is absolutely nothing unethical in what Tridge did here, at least insofar as has been mentioned in any of the reporting on this in the past few days that we've both had access to. There is absolutely no ethical obligation to keep an agreement you were not a party to. The rest of your rant assumes facts not in evidence, without any source, and has the definate whiff of BS to me.
In fact, what Tridge has done here is the epitome of ethical behavior. Linus is stung now, understandably disoriented and angry because he's been proven wrong and, being human, his first response is to lash out at Tridge instead of thanking him. Give it a few years though... once his wounded pride settles down I'm sure he will, in fact, thank Tridge for this.
Locking your data into a proprietary single-vendor format for the sake of temporary convenience was never a good idea. Everyone told Linus this, but he was too smart to listen. Now exactly what he was warned about has happened. And it was inevitable all along - if Tridge hadn't done it someone or something else would have - McVoy was a ticking time bomb. The fact that the guy isn't very stable didn't help, but honestly - McVoy could have been a saint and the thing would have still been a ticking time bomb. If Tridges actions resulted in it going off a little sooner than otherwise, then he saved Linus and many others trouble in the long run. Replacing BK wasn't going to get any easier...