Linus Not The Father Of Linux, According to Report

MrIrwin writes "According to this article on Yahoo, Linus is not the real father of Linux and Open source software is really just code nicked from other sources. " Groklaw has done a dissection of the press release. It's a press release by the Alexis de Toqueville Institution, who gets funding from MSFT, as well as believes that US IT troubles are because of free software. Oh, and terrorism works better because of open source, and the "Star Wars" program was a good idea.

Comments

Please cut the political bullcrap

[Anonymous Coward]

Esp about Star Wars. It's well known that SDI wasn't a serious program, but a big straw man program that scared the Soviets into building up their own program, resulting in the bankruptcy of the Eastern Block. SDI was the decisive event in winning the Cold War.

Re:Please cut the political bullcrap

[FreeUser]

Esp about Star Wars. It's well known that SDI wasn't a serious program, but a big straw man program that scared the Soviets into building up their own program

Uh huh.

So then, why did Baby Bush feel compelled to withdraw formally from the ABM treaty and resurrect this "strawman" after his appointment to the white house?

To scare the terrorists into persuing a matching program, driving Osama bin Laden and the other extremists to bankrupcy?

Star wars wasn't a strawman or a joke ... though it should have been.

Well of Course He's Not

[dbretton]

Al Gore is!

Re:This is old news

[sucresemoule123]

Sorry but everybody knows that Al Gore is the real father of open source.

HAHAHAHAH I love this troll

[3.5 stripes]

he had used a modified apt-get to "install packages of anti-Perens propaganda on the Debian mailing list server", and quoting "the superior ability of apt-get to deal with flamebait and troll dependencies over our own RPM tool".

Great stuff guy.

Re:Seeing as they like history......

[Impotent_Emperor]

That's not funny, that's true. In many states, once the paternity is established, there is no way to revoke it (for instance, California gives you two years to dispute, after that you are screwed -- assuming you are even aware that someone has named you as a father). It doesn't matter at all if you really aren't the father. The States don't care and, apparently, feminists don't either.

Re:Seeing as they like history......

[DaHat]

And the most unfortunate aspect is that to be named as the father of a baby, in most cases, all the mother has to do is say that so and so is the father. I am forced to wonder if a named father could file fraud charges against the mother for naming him when he was not in fact the father... might not get you removed, but could teach an effective lesson.

Why would the feminists care? Feminists complain about the possibility of a father 'hijacking' a woman's body for 9 months if the father wants the mother to carry a baby to term rather then aborting it... and yet they have no problem with 'hijacking' a man's wallet and life for 18+ years should she want to keep it and he not.

Father's right is a very poorly understood area of law, and an even less fought for one.