Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux 2.6 Kernel Pool Results

Posted by michael on from the lowered-expectations dept.

jafo writes "Steve Ratcliffe, Master Software Project Estimator, has most correctly estimated the release of the Linux version 2.6 kernel. On January 6, 2001 (within 4 hours of when the 2.6 kernel pool was opened), he entered a guess which was accurate within 15 hours. Check the results for some interesting statistics and submit your guess for the 2.8 pool." See the original story if you like.

142 comments

  1. Well... by i_am_syco · · Score: 1

    I put in a guess for Christmas eve. 2003.

    1. Re:Well... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Stefans law: Never release between thanksgiving and Jan1.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Well... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1

      I think v2.6.0 will be released December 18th, 2003 around 3am and v2.6.1 will be released January 5th, 2004. Did I win anything?

    3. Re:Well... by bubkus_jones · · Score: 1

      Well, 2.6.0 screwed that up

    4. Re:Well... by Celerian · · Score: 0

      It would be a swell Christmas after all! *anticipates the kernal*

    5. Re:Well... by Captain+Pedantic · · Score: 1

      Good one

      --

      None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
    6. Re:Well... by webtre · · Score: 0

      given the amount of time it took and the amount of time that it might take, I guessed Dec. 31, 2005 (around 5 pm)

      --
      litigious bastards
      suck it sco!
  2. Missing Pool Option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Duke Nukem: Forever release.

    1. Re:Missing Pool Option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe that maps to a time_t of 2147483647+1 implying that time travel of some sort is required.

  3. At least Linus didn't win ... by FelixCat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Since then we would have had proof the competition was fixed!

    1. Re:At least Linus didn't win ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess the guy in question is Darl, not Linus, how would Linus release the new kernel without getting some code off Darl's?

    2. Re:At least Linus didn't win ... by MadelineAlbright · · Score: 2, Funny
      Do you suppose Linus has 2.8.0 hidden away and will bring it out before the election?

      But really, I'm just joking!

    3. Re:At least Linus didn't win ... by Drantin · · Score: 1

      All he would had to do to do that would be to release it at the moment he said, without caring if it was ready or not...(or getting it ready way ahead of time and releasing it then...

      --
      Actio personalis moritur cum persona. (Dead men don't sue)
    4. Re:At least Linus didn't win ... by horza · · Score: 2, Funny

      Since then we would have had proof the competition was fixed!

      Even if you let the software engineer doing the designing enter the competition, the chances are that his guess will be the furthest off.

      Phillip.

      --
      Property for sale in Nice, France
  4. is Steve Ratcliffe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a senior linux kernel developer by any chance?

  5. Gambling on kernels - is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    After all, if the contributors(who can remain anonymous - it is open source, after all!) have a stake in the time the kernal is released, can't that cause some conflicts of interest vis a vis quality control, bug fixing, and overall process ownership?

    1. Re:Gambling on kernels - is it a good idea? by LearnToSpell · · Score: 1

      Maybe if first prize was a million bucks or something. I tend to doubt that a root access prize on some random box will really affect Linus's decision on when to release.

      --
      Haida Manga
    2. Re:Gambling on kernels - is it a good idea? by freakmn · · Score: 1

      If he really wanted that, he *could* put it in the kernel. Root access at the kernel level could be arranged by someone with his knowledge. Fortunately, the Open Source Model allows others to see the code, and that would be taken out...

      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
    3. Re:Gambling on kernels - is it a good idea? by fuzzix · · Score: 0

      What on earth are you talking about?
      Parent was not talking about kernel code, but the prize awarded in the pool...

  6. Well, made my guess... by heironymouscoward · · Score: 4, Funny

    But I'm not saying what it was. Otherwise everyone will want to vote for 29 September 2005!

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:Well, made my guess... by Dr.+Mojura · · Score: 1

      That's really weird.... I picked the exact same day, and I swear I didn't see your post

      --
      "Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion." - Democritus
  7. How are we supposed to do it? by Storm · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...With no LOTR releases slated for 2005...

    Quick, somebody call Peter Jackson. Get him working on a Silmarillion release for December 2005...

    --
    --Storm
    1. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by peragrin · · Score: 2, Informative
      Actually the rumors that run ramapt say that we may have a remake of the Hobbit.( the story of Bilbo Baggins) It is supposed to be around that time. After he gets done filming some new king kong flick

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 0, Redundant
      Quick, somebody call Peter Jackson. Get him working on a Silmarillion release for December 2005.

      Next would be The Hobbit, you insensitive clod.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by gustgr · · Score: 0

      Well, there's still the "Return of The King Extended Edition" on November I guess.

      I belive that the Silmarillion is not going to become a movie for a while, since Chris Tolkien have declared he will not sell the Silmarillion copyrights once he said it's his father's greatest work, a work of a life. It would be a really great movie and very complicate to produce as well.

      But we can expect a movie based on "The Hobbit" with a real enthusiasm.

    4. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 1

      Obviously you haven't read the Silmarillion or you'd be running in the other direction.

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    5. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Silmarillion was one of the two books I have been unable to finish. One of my friends said it took him forever to finish because people kept moving his bookmark and he didn't notice....

    6. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by Webmonger · · Score: 1

      I pity the fool who's read the whole thing.

    7. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by Theatetus · · Score: 1

      It would make an awful movie, IMO, until we get about ten more generations of CG graphics technology.

      It would be a great opera/symphony cycle any time, however...

      --
      All's true that is mistrusted
    8. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by ultranova · · Score: 1
      It would be a great opera/symphony cycle any time, however...

      Blind Guardian - Nightfall in Middle-Earth.

      Excellent music, and roughly follows the plot of Silmarillion (starts with War of Wrath, thought).

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re:How are we supposed to do it? by ultranova · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course you'd have to do heavy editing. However, I do believe that you could make a good movie out of Silmarillion.

      Start with the creation of Silmarils, with the backstory told in flashbacks by Morgoth as he watches and starts to lust for them. Follow the elf band that took the northern route to Middle-Earth (more dramatic). Once in Middle-Earth, cull most of the side plots. Luthien and Beren goes in, of course. Basically, keep Morgoth as the central character (as he is the only one who really stays constant in this whole mess.

      End with a massive, long battle scene from the War of Wrath.

      On second thought... Maybe this isn't such a good idea. Maybe it would work better as a tv series (one story per episode) ? Or maybe make a movie, and put the side stories into TV episodes ?

      Or maybe just make the whole thing into a computer game ? At least it wouldn't lack challenge (Mission: Kill all enemies. Your forces: 100 elves. Enemy forces: 100 000 orcs, 100 dragons, 1000 balrogs, 500 vampires, 1 Sauron, 1 Morgoth).

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  8. M$ by gustgr · · Score: 2, Funny

    What might had been microsoft guess ? Never ?

    1. Re:M$ by gustgr · · Score: 1, Funny

      Ohh no ... that was SCO's guess

    2. Re:M$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, SCO is claiming that there is no way that Steve Ratcliffe could have accurately predicted, in January, the December release without relying on proprietary SCO information. "Steve Ratcliffe was like a bicycle in January, while his successful prediction is like a luxury car. Oh, and SCO Unix was like, I dunno, the batmobile or something."

  9. 2.8.0? by alitaa · · Score: 1, Interesting

    what if they call it 3.0.0? :D

    1. Re:2.8.0? by unborn · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then the correct answer would be "Never".

    2. Re:2.8.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no!
      It'll be "Linux Server 2005"

  10. Guess in the past by Piggymon · · Score: 5, Funny

    First guess submitted on 2001-01-06
    Most optimistic guess: 2001-01-05 by Bill Segall
    Bill, you're a GENIUS!

    1. Re:Guess in the past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most optimistic guess: 2001-01-05 by Bill Segall

      Wouldn't call that optimistic. If it's put out a year "early" then that is just a year of updates/fixes you're missing out on.

    2. Re:Guess in the past by freakmn · · Score: 1

      I don't quite uderstand how that is ranked. That particular guess was ranked 2399 out of 2421. That means that 22 people did worse! Also, Perhaps that is a joke name? If it was in the "last name, first name" format, as names are printed many times, it would be SeGall, Bill (Seagull Bill). As in the beak of a seagull. It could also be a coincidence, as I have a friend who's recently born son was named Caine Novak, written as "Novak, Caine" (Novacaine). I think perhaps she was in pain when she named him? But by the time she realized that the name worked like that, she had already filled out the birth certificate and notified relatives.

      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
    3. Re:Guess in the past by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      There were some guesses that were out by 5 and 10 years..so I'd say it was ranked based purely on how close to the date it was and didn't take into account impossible guesses

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    4. Re:Guess in the past by fatgav · · Score: 1

      Could be a bug in his time calculator.

      I just tried to enter 1:30 on 13/May (won't say which year) and the confirmation page said I had entered around 11 on the 12/May. Perhaps he just did the same thing.

      Anybody else get this?

    5. Re:Guess in the past by Feztaa · · Score: 1

      First guess submitted on 2001-01-06
      Most optimistic guess: 2001-01-05 by Bill Segall
      Bill, you're a GENIUS!

      If you consider his goal to have been "get name known by all the slashdot trolls", he was remarkably successful.

  11. Re:splendid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're just jealous.

  12. Call George by ignipotentis · · Score: 3, Funny

    And find out when exactly episode 3 will be released.

    --
    Don't waste time... procrastinate now!
  13. He's a shill by grub · · Score: 1

    Obviously Steve Ratcliffe works for SCO and new in advance when they'd release the new kernel of their OS.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:He's a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KNEW in advance.. doh

    2. Re:He's a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're fired.

  14. Link for 2.8 guess is wrong by sparkes · · Score: 4, Informative

    This link adds a guess for the 2.6 release. Anyone getting this wrong after the event deserves to lose ;-)

    --
    blog and junk
    1. Re:Link for 2.8 guess is wrong by PieEye · · Score: 4, Informative

      It says that you're voting for 2.8, however the submission response page incorrectly states 2.6. You're voting for 2.8, and they'll correct the page eventually.

      --
      ... in bed.
    2. Re:Link for 2.8 guess is wrong by null-sRc · · Score: 1

      You can noun a verb, but don't EVER verb a noun

      i guess i shall stop monitoring your every move..

      haha me is funny

      --
      -judging another only defines yourself
  15. Conspiracy by clifgriffin · · Score: 1

    I bet they purposefully released it at that time to make them win!

    It's no different than my dad slowing down or speeding up so he'd win the time guesses in the old days.

    --
    clifgriffin > blog
  16. KRUD by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I still have my KRUD CDs from coming in within the top 20 for 2.4. I missed 2.6 by a month. Both guesses were made the day the pool went up.

    1. Re:KRUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what's your guess for 2.8?

  17. What? by eurleif · · Score: 1

    "You will be notified by e-mail of your final ranking when 2.6 is released."

    What?

  18. Re:splendid. by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome them!

  19. Interesting statistics... by cperciva · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you exclude the guesses which are obviously jokes (eg, 2038), then 96% of the guesses were optimistic. Obviously some elements of proprietary software development still hold true in OSS.

    Also amusing: The median guess was April 1, 2002.

    --
    Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
    1. Re:Interesting statistics... by Tim+C · · Score: 0, Troll

      Obviously some elements of proprietary software development still hold true in OSS.

      You mean shipping later, rather than sooner?

      I suggest you go take a look at soureforge; it's littered with projects that start, get a little way in, and are then dropped, never to be touched again (or in some cases, never even get off the ground). Seems to me that with the exception of a few notable and very large successes (Linux, apache, etc), OSS's record on delivering projects is nothing to be proud of.

      --
      It's official. Most of you are morons.
    2. Re:Interesting statistics... by cperciva · · Score: 2, Funny

      You mean shipping later, rather than sooner?

      No, I mean "on time, on budget, works properly. Pick none."

      --
      Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
    3. Re:Interesting statistics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah but what was the average guess? I bet that was a lot closer.

    4. Re:Interesting statistics... by StenD · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The same thing happens in proprietary software. Perhaps there's a lower rate of attrition in proptietary software once it's past the proposal stage, but I think that has a lot to do with the argument "We've already spent $bigbucks on the BlackHole project, do you want that to go to waste?", while with open source, if a project doesn't actually meet a need, the project is most likely going to wither away.

    5. Re:Interesting statistics... by jafo · · Score: 1

      You're only dropping obvious jokes on one end though. I'm not sure if people are just being silly, or aren't understanding the time_t entry, but there are a lot of super optimistic entries.

      For example, in the new pool there are a dozen or so entries within the next month. Do they think we're talking about 2.7?

      Sean

  20. damn by Vilim · · Score: 1

    I was guessing christmas day 2003 for the release of the 2.6 kernel. Oh well, I was wrong. For the 2.8 kernel I guessed December Fifth 2005 at 6:30 pm (the date and approxamate time when i will turn 20 years old)

    --
    History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it - Sir Winston Churchill
    1. Re:damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're about five years older than the average Slashdotter.

  21. Finally! by Guano_Jim · · Score: 5, Funny

    I, for, one, have been waiting for a swimming pool that can run Linux.

    --
    3D Printing Tips and Tricks at Zheng3.com
    1. Re:Finally! by foobsr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here you have it ... http://truetex.com/poolcontrol.htm

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    2. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Don't know about a swimming pool, but there could well be a cup of tea running Linux in the future. :)

    3. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      1. I, for, one, have been waiting for a swimming pool that can run Linux.

      Pah! I'm waiting for a shower that runs Linux!

    4. Re:Finally! by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

      Boy, that ain't ... Guano, eh... ;)

    5. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +2, mildly clever

  22. SCO will tell us by macdaddy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just ask McBride when he'll release the 2.8 kernel.

  23. Diebold Machines? by PincheGab · · Score: 4, Funny

    Lemme guess... The kernel pool thing was run on Diebold voting machines, right? Give himself a 15 hour discrepancy to not make it look suspicious yet still win... No paper trail... hmmmm...

  24. Lest ye not forget TEH SPOKE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to mention "TEH SPOKE", which is a pertinent metaphor for Linux and all of Open Sourcedom in today's fast paced society.

  25. optimistic or stupid? by gosand · · Score: 4, Funny
    Most optimistic guess: 2001-01-05 19:36:18-07 by Bill Segall

    Considering that the pool started on 2001-01-06,
    "(First guess submitted on 2001-01-06 08:43:00 UTC by Ian Davis)"
    could this really be considered optimistic, or just plain stupid?

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:optimistic or stupid? by Broodje · · Score: 1

      No it's considered unable to find the handy dandy time_t() doo-hickey to convert the date correctly.

  26. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can still vote, though. Literacy/intelligence requirements are illegal.

  27. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think linux is mostly for people who wish to refused that Windows is superior to it, always will be, and always will have. It's just another clone.

    Perhaps thinking is not for you :)

  28. Now this is an evil idea! by SharpFang · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine this, some hacker who takes part in kernel development submits a date, then sabotages the kernel, submits broken modules, introduces bugs, breaks stuff and keeps all the patches on his own harddisk. And finally, when kernel would be ready if not his own purposedly made bugs, he submits his patches one day before his "guessed date" and the kernel is released within next 24 hours, within 2h from his guess and four months later than it could've been released.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Now this is an evil idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      43 minutes later, Linux becomes self-aware...

    2. Re:Now this is an evil idea! by mhesseltine · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While this seems funny, I doubt it would work for one simple reason; if someone is submitting bad patches, breaking modules, etc., I would hope that Linus, Alan, Marcello, (insert maintainer here) would quit accepting this person's patches.

      After all, that's what the reputation game is all about. Those with talent are revered, those without are shunned until they can prove themselves worthy (probably through a stand-alone project).

      --
      Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
    3. Re:Now this is an evil idea! by yarbo · · Score: 1

      You know the kernel is ready when there are very few patches needed...

  29. mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Score:-1, Troll, Flamebait, Penis-envy)

    1. Re:mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Just to make sure I'm clear -- he's jealous of the sexual prowess of linux fans? Is that right?

      He can only be a nullo to be that far down the food chain.

  30. MOD PARENT DOWN - STUPID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude that is freaking stupid. It's not like first prize is a $20 million prize package.

  31. wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't 3.0 be the next stable release ?
    Remember all the fuss about making this relase 2.6 or 3.0 ?

    1. Re:wait by wastaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I might be quite off on this, but isn't changing the major number (like 1 to 2, or 2 to 3) supposed to signal breaking backwards compatability of some sort?

      Or am I totally out in the blue here? It wouldnt surprise me if I was..

    2. Re:wait by planetsphinx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is what I've always understood..

      the primary number (v1, v2, etc) is a MAJOR rewrite of the code..

      the secondary number (x.1, x.2, etc) is a substantial release, lots of changes and upgraded code...

      and the tertiary number (x.x1, x.x2, etc) are primarly big fixes.

      --
      -Mikey
    3. Re:wait by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      well.. i hate to break it to you but the version numberings don't have any rules that everyone would follow, if there's some unwritten rules people break them daily and marketing has the last say anyways.

      they're just numbers, and when the version number is printed big on the box it's just marketing material(and how some software start from 4.0 or so).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  32. Slashdot. Nerds. And Stuff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Some fool won a betting pool woo-hoo. buy him a cake or something.

  33. Re:I don't get it by fgb · · Score: 1, Troll

    I think Linux may be for people who are, at a minimum, capable of putting a sentence together. ;-)

  34. You mean... by va3atc · · Score: 1

    Enter your vote for the SCO kernel 2.8 :P

    --
    Candle burns its brightest in the dark
  35. What an interesting idea.... by ebbomega · · Score: 1

    What a fantastic movie that would make...

    "And then the elves went to war... again.... and they lost.... again...."

    --
    Karma: Non-Heinous
  36. I need a little time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to wake up wake up. another sunny afternoon. WHAT'S THE STORY MORNING GLORY?

  37. Huh? by Wrexen · · Score: 1

    I clicked on this article and got this ad. Please, someone say it's a joke.... please :(

    1. Re:Huh? by The+Jonas · · Score: 1

      It seems to be real. Probably due to all the responses from this old poll.

    2. Re:Huh? by pbur · · Score: 1

      Well, since it goes here: http://www.osdn.com/personals I would guess it's real.

    3. Re:Huh? by eclectro · · Score: 1


      That's just plain scary. If I were a girl I would want to get away from that pool of badly-groomed stalkers as fast as I could!

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    4. Re:Huh? by nathanroberts · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, as soon as I saw the ad I immediately recognized the chick. As in, I'd seen the ad before, not that I knew who she was. But I never even realized that it was an ad for personals.

      Just goes to show how much I pay attention to the ads...

    5. Re:Huh? by drowstar · · Score: 0
      Well, at least on that page they tell us how to:
      Overcome our shyness
      First emails: What to say
      I knew, OSDN would rescue all geeks!
  38. Is it me or is their time_t converter 14 hrs off? by porkrind · · Score: 2, Funny

    It says to enter the time in GMT, which I did. When I did that, the resulting date came out to be 14 hours earlier from what I entered. Wtf?

    It wouldn't be correct even if they're trying to guess my time zone and adjust for that - which would be dumb anyway, otherwise why bother requesting the date in GMT?

    --
    Hyperic Community Manager
  39. What about the GNU/HURD Poll? by miracle69 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anyone run a release poll on that?

    I wonder if Vegas has odds. If it does, I'd take the over.

    --
    Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
  40. Re:I PEED IN THE POOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just don't drink the water.

    Fucking troll.

  41. Unfair advantage by kbielefe · · Score: 5, Funny
    Proprietary software managers have an unfair advantage in this pool. After all, for a living they make release schedules before anyone knows what the new software is actually going to do.

    The schedule says we need to finish this in 6 months, but your estimates add up to a year so you'll have to do some stuff in parallel.
    Uh, sir, it will still take just as long unless you hire some more staff. Even then, it will take some extra time for training.
    But you said these modules were completely independent. You should be able to do two independent tasks in the same amount of time as one. Look how easy it is to schedule it that way in Microsoft Project.
    Well, then why don't we all just do 12 at once so it will be done in a month instead of a year?
    Don't be silly, it doesn't work that way. The schedule says six months. Boy, for how good you engineers are at algebra and calculus, you sure don't understand the basic mathematics of business.
    --
    This space intentionally left blank.
  42. Such as... by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Such as:

    RTFM!
    LOL!
    IANAL
    ROFLMAO
    YHBT
    FP!
    BRB

    Extra test for the lame lameness filter.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:Such as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, not like those at all. More like not calling strings of characters test like a demented spastic, but using the correct term text.

    2. Re:Such as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Extra test for the lame lameness filter.
      In that case, none of your posts would ever make it through.
    3. Re:Such as... by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      YHBT. Congratulations.

      Read my journal for more examples of my intentions to bait pedantic people like you with intentional typos.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    4. Re:Such as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In A.D. 2003
      War was beginning.
      Slashbot 1: What happen ?
      Slashbot 2: Somebody set up us the troll.
      Slashbot 3: We get signal.
      Slashbot 1: What !
      Slashbot 2: Main screen turn on.
      Slashbot 1: It's You !!
      Overly Critical Guy: How are you gentlemen !!
      Overly Critical Guy: All your base are belong to us.
      Overly Critical Guy: You are on the way to destruction.
      Slashbot 1: What you say !!
      Overly Critical Guy: You have no chance to survive make your time.
      Overly Critical Guy: HA HA HA HA ....
      Slashbot 1: Take off every 'sig' !!
      Slashbot 1: You know what you doing.
      Slashbot 1: Move 'sig'.
      Slashbot 1: For great justice.

  43. nice graph by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 1

    There is a nice graph of the guesses there. Looks like we will have to wait until later in 2005 for the 2.8 kernel.

    --


    TallGreen CMS hosting
  44. Resume title by unixformat · · Score: 1, Funny

    To have the title "Master Software Project Estimator" on a resume would have to blow away all the other applicants to a job.

  45. Graph by shoemakc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That may have been one of the worst graphs I've ever seen. Com'on guys...havn't we heard of intervals?

    -Chris

    --
    --an unbreakable toy is useful for breaking other toys--
  46. Re:Slashdot. Nerds. And Stuff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stuff that matters! Nuff said? Hello? Ding-dong?

  47. Predict 2.8? Why? by tellurian · · Score: 2, Funny

    2.6 ought to be enough for everybody

  48. Re:Is it me or is their time_t converter 14 hrs of by ColaMan · · Score: 1

    it's probably stored ok, but they're outputting it via some function that takes into account their local timezone.

    --

    You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
    There is a lot of hype here.
  49. Given enough guesser, all estimate will be shallow by xusch · · Score: 1

    This is how I see it...

  50. What??!! 2.6.0 Was Released??!! by Lord+of+the+Fries · · Score: 1

    Figures I'd find out from the results of someone's game show.

    --
    One man's pink plane is another man's blue plane.
  51. What, no OSS license for the winner this round? by DrFatal · · Score: 1

    Is it just me that think it's odd that 4Front didn't sponsor with a OSS license for the 2.6 betting pool?

  52. What a rip off ...the prize was a load of KRUD :-D by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1

    well it needed doing honest, ok the little blue men made me do it. :-D

    --
    in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
    Francis Smit
  53. Woe is me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I couldn't get the bloody thing to compile. Even using gcc 3.2 or 2.96.