×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Man Tries To Live an Open Source Life For a Year

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the living-free dept.

Open Source 332

jfruh writes "Sam Muirhead, a New Zealand filmmaker living Berlin, will, on the 1st of August, begin an experiment in living an open source life for a year. But this is going way beyond just trading in his Mac for a Linux machine and Final Cut Pro for Novacut. He's also going to live in a house based on an open source design, and he notes that trying to develop and use some form of open source toilet paper will be an "interesting and possibly painful process.""

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

332 comments

While you're at it... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635139)

...if you try, why not go a year without DRM [yearwithoutdrm.com]?

Re:While you're at it... (5, Funny)

hawguy (1600213) | about 2 years ago | (#40635393)

...if you try, why not go a year without DRM [yearwithoutdrm.com]?

If you think that's hard, try to go a year without DRAM [wikipedia.org]

Re:While you're at it... (4, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 2 years ago | (#40635665)

I, uh, think you linked to the wrong article.

Or else you already tried living without dynamic random-access memory, and your computer randomly linked to the wiki article on poverty as a result.

But... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635157)

But... but... hasn't Stallman been doing this for years already?

Re:But... (2, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | about 2 years ago | (#40635193)

LOL Stallman would turn over in his grave if he heard you suggest he's living the open source lifestyle!

Re:But... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635285)

Did I miss something? RMS is not dead...

Re:But... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635329)

Did I miss something? RMS is not dead...

Whoosh!

Don't worry, it "whooshed" me too.

I have no idea what the fuck grandparent post is talking about...

Re:But... (4, Informative)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40635509)

The turning in his grave part was moronic, but the implication was that RMS would hate anything he does being described as Open Source. He strongly opposes being thought of as a part of it, and insists that his movement is about liberated software. That's what the GP was alluding to, but spoilt it w/ the grave statement. Whenever he does any public event, he insists that he not be described as an Open Source advocate, and he refuses to be a part of Open Source campaigns that are described as such.

Re:But... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635703)

You forget. He is dead already, but came back to life to liberate all the softwares! He's the modern day messiah of computer software! He will return to his grave specifically to roll over in it because of statements like him being open source.

Re:But... (4, Funny)

macraig (621737) | about 2 years ago | (#40635337)

RMS has been doing fine without razors and toothbrushes and combs and toilet paper for decades. He's practicing open source hygiene.

Re:But... (1)

busyqth (2566075) | about 2 years ago | (#40635447)

RMS has been doing fine without ... toilet paper for decades. He's practicing open source hygiene.

Dude. What do you think your left hand is for?

Re:But... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635471)

RMS is a Muslim? (Either some hadith, or Umdat al Saliq states that 'The left hand is the hand of choice (for cleaning your butt) and allah approves)

Re:But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635479)

RMS has been doing fine without ... toilet paper for decades. He's practicing open source hygiene.

Dude. What do you think your left hand is for?

Is this what Geek culture and Burmese culture have in common?

Re:But... (4, Funny)

geekmux (1040042) | about 2 years ago | (#40635557)

RMS has been doing fine without razors and toothbrushes and combs and toilet paper for decades. He's practicing open source hygiene.

Under those conditions, I believe it would be called open sores hygiene.

Re:But... (1)

philip.paradis (2580427) | about 2 years ago | (#40635629)

Indeed, I heard RMS has been using TP composed of shredded Windows 3.1 install floppies and printouts of the leaked Windows NT source for years now. Furthermore, his meals are all organically grown and fertilized by sewage covertly diverted from One Microsoft Way. You've gotta respect a man on a mission.

Re:But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635631)

Where is this Open Source Stallman sex I have been missing?

food? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635159)

Will he be only eating foods that are non-GMO? (good luck with that, unless he can grow them himself. :/)

Re:food? (2)

i.r.id10t (595143) | about 2 years ago | (#40635179)

Even then, he's gonna starve in the short term.... takes a while to grow. Guess he could make his own bow and go hunting & gathering...

Re:food? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635211)

What a nettlesome individual you are!

Please pay your debts.

Re:food? (4, Interesting)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 years ago | (#40635245)

Honestly depending where he lives, he might not have an issue. Local farms are a source of meat, if you talk to the farmers you can find out what they feed their stock (most of them are more than glad to answer actually). Lots of foods can be foraged (I make trips once a week to forage as a hobby) and during the summer it can yield several pounds of berries at a time. These get canned, preserved, or jellied. I grow a huge garden and what I can't eat immediately gets either dehydrated or canned. Public water here has its contents documented, so we'll consider that open source. I grow my own hops, and brew my own beer with them. Honestly after a good growing season, I'd feel comfortable saying that I could live around 70% off of foraged and homegrown foods. I could easily up it to 90-100% but my fiance would kill me for taking over the yard. Not that my case is the norm (and foraging is a weird, albiet fun and fulfilling hobby to get into), but if he is dedicating himself to it and preparing in advance I don't think it would be that difficult.

Re:food? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635765)

where do you live??

Re:food? (4, Informative)

ChromeAeonium (1026952) | about 2 years ago | (#40635671)

It's a lot more than that; plenty of non-GE crops are patented. For example, say you go to buy a Fuji apple. What could be more open source than that right? Not if it is a Gale Gala [acnursery.com], a patented bud sport of Fuji, or if he picks up a peach, it might be one of the many patented Flamin' Fury peaches. [sierragoldtrees.com] If he eats a carrot, it might have the patented line S-D813B [google.com] as a parent, or if he eats a pepper, it might be the patented hybrid 9942815 [google.com]. Lots of plants, not just genetically engineered ones, are patented, so avoiding every patented fruit, vegetable, grain, nut, oil crop, ect. and any food produced with them would be quite the challenge.

I don't know how things are in Germany, but I'd have to imagine they grow their share of patented crops there, and even if they didn't he'd have to watch out for anything imported from countries where those varieties are grown. You'd pretty much have to eat exclusively whole fruits and vegetables that you know the variety, or things where the varieties are very likely to be not under patent like lychee or persimmon, and maybe things that haven't had much breeding work done on them like kiwanos and jícamas.

Re:food? (3, Insightful)

Gerzel (240421) | about 2 years ago | (#40635799)

No most crops are still non-gmo, well lab gmo. We've been modifying livestock and breeding plant species far beyond anything natural for centuries and playing with genes before we knew what genes where.

GMO is generally scary because it is done in a lab with white coats. The white coats apparently add the danger.

Er, wait, what? (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40635163)

I really don't want to know is how one programs in toilet paper. Worse, visions of managers telling me I have to eat more taco bell because my... production... is too low. Oh, the puns, the humanity. -_-

More seriously, it would be more accurate to say that he is trying to live a lifestyle in which only products that are part of the public domain or the mechanisms by which it operates must be made available for inspection, and any changes documented and also similarly made available, without cost. Considering how I have even found 'patent pending' stamped on spoons and forks (really, I mean... really?)... I don't imagine he'll be able to survive the year. At least not without a lot of rationalizing and hair pulling.

But while the experiment will probably ultimately fail, it will at least show beyond any doubt how deeply corporations have penetrated into every faucet of daily living. It is simply not possible to live in modern society without giving the devil his due.

Re:Er, wait, what? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635319)

I personally prefer the Heineken faucet, however the Ferrari faucet is quite awesome as well. All the hipsters are drinking kool-aid from the Apple faucet, and everyone hates the poison from the Rambus faucet.

Re:Er, wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635347)

just because something is patented and/or under copyright doesn't mean that it isn't open source... there are potentially infinite ways to do all things (the most basic of things expired 65000+ years ago with fire and spears...and spoons)

I'm more than willing to bet it is possible... however, I don't imagine it to be a 'good' life.. modern ideas come with a price (for better or worse)

Re:Er, wait, what? (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40635531)

Can't he just use a bidet, and after that, just wipe his butt w/ 'open-sourced' cloth, whatever that is? Or do they not have bidets in NZ?

Re:Er, wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635639)

They might, but how many bidets do you know of that are open source?

Re:Er, wait, what? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635659)

Of course it's virtually impossible to do this perfectly, it's like trying to live Biblically. Sure he's using a Linux computer, but that's only software. Are all the components open source? I doubt it. Similarly he's using a camcorder that tries to use as much open source as possible, but realistically it's not really kosher.

Why use toilet paper at all? Just wash yourself with soap and water. It's what a lot of folks in Asia do and it's just as hygienic (probably more so) than paper. The toilet would need to be open source too, which points to a composting toilet unless you fancy firing your own porcelain.

Where do we draw the line? A lot of things aren't exactly secret knowledge, but require a big company with money to manufacture. For instance, common steel nails have an ISO (or similar) standard size. If you wanted to you could make your own, the exact dimensions are publicly available, but it would take a hell of a long time. Power generation is another one, unless you build your own turbine, grid power is definitely closed source. Even then, batteries? Nuh-uh. But then, a lead acid battery isn't exactly complicated, so arguably one could draw up a schematic, it's just a matter of finding the chemicals.

I would be very interested in a repository of open source designs for home living, I'm not sure one exists. There are projects like Open Source Ecology that are trying to make a civilisation starter kit, but that's a bit low level. I want to be able to go to a database look for a design for, say, a four poster bed or a spoon.

Re:Er, wait, what? (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | about 2 years ago | (#40635689)

it will at least show beyond any doubt how deeply corporations have penetrated into every faucet of daily living.

I though they were in everything but the kitchen sink!

Truly, these are dark times.

no woman (1)

deodiaus2 (980169) | about 2 years ago | (#40635167)

No woman for this guy. I guess they want the finer things in life!

Re:no woman (4, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40635281)

No woman for this guy. I guess they want the finer things in life!

You need to get out of the basement more. Women don't want the finer things in life. They want the finer people in life. Most women I know who married a rich guy feel they married beneath them. They went through relationship after relationship, meeting asshole after asshole, and finally they decided that if they couldn't have someone who was intelligent, kind, humorous, and compassionate, they'd settle for getting knocked up by some rich guy... at least their kids will be provided for, and there's some chance of being loved in return then.

This guy is willing to take a year out of his life to experiment with art, to answer a question about existance and meaning. This is a guy who is confident enough in who he is and has a solid grasp of what he wants out of life. Unless he's a 4 bagger, odds are good someone will take him home... idealists tend to be compassionate and considerate, and will likely treat his woman with respect and kindness. Now all he needs is a job, a car that doesn't have the death rattle, and some living space... he'll have trouble keeping the girls away.

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635361)

odds are good someone will take him home...

But that isn't what men want!
Men want someone to take to their open source* home.

*it's open source so they can add all the weird sex swings and hidden dungeons they want!

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635443)

"he'll have trouble keeping the girls away."

And when the girls do come a running Open source condoms therefore are going to be a much more "interesting and possibly painful process." I suspect.

Re:no woman (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635897)

"he'll have trouble keeping the girls away."

And when the girls do come a running Open source condoms therefore are going to be a much more "interesting and possibly painful process." I suspect.

I think in this case, I'd choose closed source condoms lest i get open sores.

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635563)

This is not true. I know many women who have opted to marry rich guys even when there were perfectly good men who were interested in them but didn't have the kind of money these women were looking for. A lot of research has been done on this subject:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/relationships/8239530/Do-women-really-want-to-marry-for-money.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/08/marriage-and-class-study

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635595)

>> at least their kids will be provided for, and there's some chance of being loved in return then.

you mean her kids will love her?

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635619)

Show your tits

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635761)

"she" is actually a man

so no

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635835)

So the women you know say they want a nice guy. But what they do is the rich guy.

Good job refuting the stereotype, Hoss.

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635903)

Explain that to my exwife?

If we had money we wouldn't have got a divorce. Money can buy love too if you are an ok guy. But you can be the best man in the world and if she is misserable because she lost her former life because you can';t make as much as the ex who provided her a house iwth a pool then out you go.

Re:no woman (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635907)

No woman for this guy. I guess they want the finer things in life!

You need to get out of the basement more. Women don't want the finer things in life. They want the finer people in life. Most women I know who married a rich guy feel they married beneath them. They went through relationship after relationship, meeting asshole after asshole, and finally they decided that if they couldn't have someone who was intelligent, kind, humorous, and compassionate, they'd settle for getting knocked up by some rich guy... at least their kids will be provided for, and there's some chance of being loved in return then.

So, your evidence that women want finer guys and not rich ones is that the women you know who married rich guys claim that although they were totally selling out and marrying for money it is OK because all men are assholes anyway? Of course they feel they married beneath them. They chose to marry someone for economic reasons rather than the quality of the person. Or maybe you meant to say "Women want the finer people... but when it comes down to it, they would rather settle for the finer things and rationalize that it is OK since all men are assholes anyway."

Re:no woman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40636025)

You're either a lying bitch or a nasty lesbian. I'm not sure which.

Doubtful (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40636087)

Nice guy never get the women, good looking (actually, more like showing fertility signs , big breast 8 figure for women, V figure big upper body muscle for men) ,rich, and so forth are the criteria which all sociological study shows make it really easy to find a mate on both side. Nice guy/women, or confident, humour, do not even enter the equation in the top criteria.

Open source... (1)

stanlyb (1839382) | about 2 years ago | (#40635175)

You do realize that "Open Source Women" are the one with the pretty old professional skill set??? What about open source babies(whatever that means)?

Re:Open source... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635221)

If it means your free to modify them to suit your needs provided you contribute all such modifications upstream if they ever leave the house, I might actually change my decision not to spawn.

Re:Open source... (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40635541)

No, that is 'Free women' or 'Free babies'. With Open Source women of babies, you needn't contribute anything upstream or downstream - you just need to make their sources available whenever you set them loose. (Somehow, I just don't see how that would work for spouses)

Re:Open source... (1)

mug funky (910186) | about 2 years ago | (#40635885)

if he's anything like me, my son will have no qualms about making his... er... "source" as available as possible.

now, whether anyone's willing to download, compile and install it is another matter.

Re:Open source... (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#40635933)

If it means your free to modify them to suit your needs provided you contribute all such modifications upstream if they ever leave the house, I might actually change my decision not to fork.

FTFY

Re:Open source... (5, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40635235)

You do realize that "Open Source Women" are the one with the pretty old professional skill set???

Perhaps, but men are the retards that keep paying for a free product.

Re:Open source... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635345)

Why retards? Party A wants something from party B, who in turn wants something from A. They decide to trade and both get what they want (i.e. win-win). It isn't like either could get what they want in an easier/faster/cheaper way, otherwise they would.

Re:Open source... (2)

million_monkeys (2480792) | about 2 years ago | (#40635989)

What about open source babies(whatever that means)?

Well... I assume in most cases it means someone had an idea of how a baby should behave, but he couldn't make changes to existing babies, so thought it'd be a good idea to create his own baby, possibly much like many other babies out there, although different because he could make it behave the way he wanted it to. He had all kinds of grand ideas and greatly enjoyed the process of making the baby. But after it was made, he realized that it actually takes a lot of work to keep it running. The baby relies on volunteers to get it going and fix problems - sometimes that happens, other times it doesn't. Lots of people want to do the easy and fun things (like play peek-a-boo), but no one wants to do the hard work (like changing the poopy diaper). Few, if any, are willing to donate money to offset the costs of developing the baby. But they will definitely tell him how to manage his baby. Many are rude in doing so. The whole thing becomes a big hassle and he starts to lose interest in his baby. Eventually the baby ends up abandoned waiting for someone else to take interest in it and keep it alive.

A life without Coke? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635215)

It's not worth doing, not for a year. Or the Colonel's Secret spices. Or the Special Sauce. Or whatever they put in Taco Bell's food.

Sure, my life will be short, but it'll be good while I live it.

Re:A life without Coke? (2)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 years ago | (#40635255)

...you consider that good?

Re:A life without Coke? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635901)

The pleasure centers of my body do, and who am I to argue with them? They're the product of millions of years of evolution, whereas I've only been around for a few decades.

Re:A life without Coke? (5, Interesting)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | about 2 years ago | (#40635291)

I once spent 2 hours walking around with RMS looking for a restaurant that he liked AND served pepsi. This was in Recoleta, Buenos Aires, where most good restaurants have an exclusive deal with Coca Cola. In each place we entered, he asked if they served coke, and in a few places he insisted on speaking with the manager and when he got his way, he explained to him in gruesome details all the atrocities the Coca Cola company did in Colombia to workers.

I firmly believe in Free Software, and I admire RMS for everything he has done for the world. I try to uphold my principles, but this semi-religious thing of taking it to the extreme and avoiding anything even remotely related to something you disagree with, as if it was permanently tainted by immorality, is just plain stupid.

My company tries to free under the GPL as many products as possible, but if we freed certain things, we would be out of business. If I refused to use privative software at all, I couldn't even use a phone (even if the soft is free, the GSM firmware won't be).

What this guy is doing is just a publicity stunt, and a fairly stupid one at that. He thinks he's sending a message, but it's not the one he's thinking about.

Re:A life without Coke? (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about 2 years ago | (#40635429)

I have to ask, did he do the same or did he ever do the same about Chiquita Banana's? There are far worse companies than Coca Cola, and at the top is Chiquita. Hell, the term Banana Republic comes from them and what they did taking over government in South America.

Re:A life without Coke? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635589)

This is why I refer to him as Richard M. Stalin. The guy is a loon. He takes his zealotry to a truly absurd extreme. I enjoy free software and all myself, but that guy really turns me off.

Re:A life without Coke? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635743)

but this semi-religious thing of taking it to the extreme and avoiding anything even remotely related to something you disagree with, as if it was permanently tainted by immorality, is just plain stupid.

It's stupid for the individual because it's a pain and people will hate you for it. For the group, it's good. And the Free Software needs someone like rms. You don't see Apple saying "oh, but for some tasks Windows is just better". Like it or not, it'd weaken the message.

There are many cases were stupid extremists succeeded (take Gandhi, for instance: instead of taking the easy path, the idiot acted on his dangerous extremist ideas of the great English Empire not ruling India), but for some reason people only use the label extremist for people they disagree with.

What this guy is doing is just a publicity stunt, and a fairly stupid one at that.

Agreed, but I fear he isn't that stupid. He's asking for donations.

Re:A life without Coke? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 2 years ago | (#40636029)

When I had a similar problem in China, the waiter went across the street to buy soda for us (in Beijing a lot of restaurants only serve soup, not something to drink). I don't know if a similar solution would have worked in your situation.

What about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635287)

condoms? Oh wait its moot....

taking it too far (1)

YukariHirai (2674609) | about 2 years ago | (#40635299)

and he notes that trying to develop and use some form of open source toilet paper will be an "interesting and possibly painful process."

I'm completely in favour of free/open source software and related concepts wherever possible, but there is such a thing as taking it too far. Wherever the line is, demanding open source toilet paper is way over it.

Re:taking it too far (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about 2 years ago | (#40635351)

I'm pretty sure this guy doesn't know what "open source" means. I'm pretty sure that the process to make TP is widely known (open source). However, the toilet probably has a couple patented items in it, so he will have to dispose of his own shit by himself. I'm pretty sure that there are laws that prevent that in most cities.

Re:taking it too far (1)

green1 (322787) | about 2 years ago | (#40635513)

Toilets have been around long enough that you should by now be able to get one that is entirely public domain technology. I don't see this as an issue.

However I think he will have trouble with almost any technology. say goodbye to mobile phones, computers (I don't think there is any such thing as a fully open source hardware computer), probably stuck without many other things I haven't even thought of...

Re:taking it too far (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about 2 years ago | (#40636075)

Probably not. All the new laws in place for "low flow" flushing. Do not underestimate the need for new innovations to improve upon government regulations.

Re:taking it too far (1)

mug funky (910186) | about 2 years ago | (#40635939)

maybe it's more a matter of any improvements he makes to the standard toilet paper design should be committed upstream?

Re:taking it too far (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#40635951)

and he notes that trying to develop and use some form of open source toilet paper will be an "interesting and possibly painful process."

I'm completely in favour of free/open source software and related concepts wherever possible, but there is such a thing as taking it too far. Wherever the line is, demanding open source toilet paper is way over it.

Why? If he likes all the previous contributions to be passed to him, who are you to argue against his tastes?

Is a free life system good enough? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635353)

I don't touch proprietary software and am in the computer industry. I contract with manufacturers to product freedom friendly products to developing tid bids of software.

It can be done. It's not that hard actually.

Re:Is a free life system good enough? (1)

green1 (322787) | about 2 years ago | (#40635517)

It's easy enough to use completely open source software, but good luck using only open source hardware and firmware... I honestly don't think that's possible.

In other news (2, Insightful)

papasui (567265) | about 2 years ago | (#40635381)

I took a dump today.. Seriously this is just attention seeking, link bait. If I didn't know better I'd think it was a paid /. add.

Re:In other news (4, Funny)

million_monkeys (2480792) | about 2 years ago | (#40636037)

I took a dump today.. Seriously this is just attention seeking, link bait. If I didn't know better I'd think it was a paid /. add.

Was it an open source dump? If not, we don't want to hear about your proprietary shit.

The withdrawl symptoms can be bad (1)

Grayhand (2610049) | about 2 years ago | (#40635433)

He should try weaning himself off with shareware before going pure open source.

Re:The withdrawl symptoms can be bad (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40635713)

But open source has little to do w/ cost, and more to do w/ knowing how everything is made, and being able to make everything from common stuff that he can get freely, like sand, water, leaves, grass, et al. In short, his end product should be something that he'd have been capable of making himself from easily available parts, and not manufactured items, where automatically, a sense of 'closedness' would creep in. It may cost him a ton of cash to build, but it would be stuff that he built himself, as opposed to buying readymade off-the-shelf parts..

Re:The withdrawl symptoms can be bad (1)

Johann Lau (1040920) | about 2 years ago | (#40635827)

There isn't anything you cannot do with sufficient amounts of sand, water, leaves and grass. Why, you even could just declare leaves money, to hang out on the beach all day and just enjoy being rich (because when you're *that* filthy rich, you don't really have to pay for anything anyway, ever again; everybody will give you everything for free, in hopes of getting on your good side).

So... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635435)

Was the house open source? Was his food open source? His water?

Oh right, that's hardware. That's different.

Fuck you motherfuckers.

Physics (1)

Intropy (2009018) | about 2 years ago | (#40635437)

While public domain, a complete listing of the laws of physics has not been made available to the public. He's going to have to find an alternate universe for his scheme.

Re:Physics (1)

mug funky (910186) | about 2 years ago | (#40635947)

he could always send a terse email demanding a release of source to... um.

shit. haven't heard form that guy in a looong time.

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635441)

http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm [cryptome.org]
http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5 [pastebin.com]

Sections Overview:

1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Open Source Doorknobs, bro! (1)

moniker127 (1290002) | about 2 years ago | (#40635635)

Please excuse me if this is a stupid question, but since when has toilet paper had source code? I love open source software, and I've been a long time supporter of the movement, but I feel it weakens the open source software movement when you generalize it's meaning in such a way, because in order to change someone's mind, you need to have a clear and concise point! But whatever I'll get back to selling jewelry made out of found items and shopping at whole foods.

Dumb and Dumber (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635669)

Why has this made its way to the main page ? Slow news, or people fishing for news ? This is just dumb and dumber!

Undyed Crepe Paper (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635783)

Open source toilet paper is no problem although it may not be easy to find other than special order from a paper mill. Just use undyed crepe paper. Crepe paper has been patent free for around a hundred years now. I'm not sure whether the paper mill dyes the crepe paper or whether it is dyed by a craft supplies company. If the latter, then it should be possible to buy some of the undyed crepe paper from the craft company, but again, it may be special order only.

This is the common toilet paper that was used in the Soviet Union and you can still find it on sale in every town in the former Soviet Union in their central markets. Of course nowadays it competes with more westernised toilet paper but many still prefer the cheap undyed stuff. It is also a greener product since it is not bleached.

If somebody would start a fad, then undyed crepe paper could once again become a common thing to buy. For instance, what if people made their own dyes from household ingredients like beetroot, onion skins, blueberries, and then used that to print decorative patterns on undyed crepe paper as a GREEN alternative to party decorations. Suddenly their would be a new market and the open source toilet paper users could discretely buy their supply from any craft supplies store.

Re:Undyed Crepe Paper (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40636045)

Or corn cobs.

Toilet paper? Really? (3, Interesting)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#40635833)

What is objectionable about existing toilet paper from an "open source" point of view? Plain toilet paper isn't a creative work (specialty paper with artwork on it might be), so it can't be copyrighted. And patents only last about 20 years while toilet paper has been manufactured for much longer than that, so any patents on the manufacturing process or the paper itself would have expired some time ago. Shouldn't he be OK if he just buys a generic store brand without any fancy new features or copyrighted art on the package?

Of course any toilet paper brand name is likely to be covered by a trademark, but if that is enough to make it not "open source", then Firefox is not open source software either.

Money isn't open source (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40635841)

Debit and credit cards are proprietary. Cash is closed source in order to deter counterfeits (like DRM). Bit coin is not suitable for every day use and mining depends on closed source graphics cards.

OSS the saviour (4, Insightful)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 years ago | (#40635863)

What I cringe about "open source" that it is used as some kind of synonym for something that makes everything automatically good. I bet that by large the biggest benefit of open source software is that it's usually free in cost.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...