Slashdot Mirror


Tanenbaum Rebuts Ken Brown

Stephan Schulz writes "Andrew Tanenbaum has rebutted Ken Brown's reply to his original comments on the (in)famous AdTI report on Linux's origin. It's quite entertaining, and leaves little doubt (well, even less than before) that Brown is conciously twisting the truth. Choice excerpt: 'I'm pretty animated all the time. But I only get tense when people try to put words in my mouth. After half an hour of repeatedly answering the question "Could Linus have written the Linux kernel by himself?" in the affirmative, I was getting a bit irritated. ... People who know me would probably confirm that I do not suffer fools gladly.' I'd add that being called 'the good Professor' repeatedly would have me exploding in no time..."

651 comments

  1. Haven't We... by RickHunter · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ... Seen this before?

    1. Re:Haven't We... by nizo · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      ... Seen this before?

      You are new here aren't you? After all if it was good enough for an article one time, it will be even better again later!!!

    2. Re:Haven't We... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No. That was the rebutal. This is the rebutal to the rebutal of the rebutal. Do try to keep up.

    3. Re:Haven't We... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Lol. What is the magical distinction between the slashdotted joke that gets modded funny and the one that gets modded offtopic? Is it really offtopic anyway?

    4. Re:Haven't We... by mrwonton · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      Not more than you need, just more than you want
    5. Re:Haven't We... by itwerx · · Score: 1

      Well here's a mirror

      Thanks!! :)

    6. Re:Haven't We... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  2. Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by the_rajah · · Score: 4, Funny

    So I guess this is the rebuttal to the rebuttal of the first rebuttal.. :-) Well done Andrew Tanenbaum!

    Why doesn't KB just cut his losses and slink away before he's made a greater fool of, if that's possible. I suspect that his check has cleared the bank by now.

    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

    --


    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by kunudo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So I guess this is the rebuttal to the rebuttal of the first rebuttal.. :-) Well done Andrew Tanenbaum!

      I believe that's what you call a discussion. This is just the type where they don't look each other in the eye and talk indirectly to each other.

    2. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by captain_craptacular · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why doesn't KB just cut his losses and slink away before he's made a greater fool of, if that's possible.

      Are you kidding? He's trying to sell a book, it's 100% in his best interest to stay in the spotlight as long as possible no matter what that takes. Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.

      --
      They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
    3. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by milgr · · Score: 4, Informative

      As long as KB keeps Tanenbaum responding, he is getting free publicity. Contraversy is frequently used to obtain free press, and boost sales.

      --
      Where law ends, tyranny begins -- William Pitt
    4. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by peeping_Thomist · · Score: 4, Informative

      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue

      It's being published through a vanity press, not a real publisher.

      --
      Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
    5. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why doesn't KB just cut his losses and slink away before he's made a greater fool of

      Because there is a world outside of slashdot. Yes, everyone here is going to snicker and roll their eyes about how this guy is obviously an idiot since he questions linus, the gpl, linux, etc., but there are people in the rest of the world who actually will consider what he has to say. Maybe he doesn't care if the crowd here thinks he's a fool? Maybe that's not who he is writing for?
      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    6. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by inode_buddha · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not true - as mentioned elswhere here and on Groklaw, it's being published by a "vanity" press, which means no huge advances, royalties, or anything. He'll be lucky to break even on the publishing costs.

      --
      C|N>K
    7. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by runlvl0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      everyone here is going to snicker and roll their eyes about how this guy is obviously an idiot since he questions linus, the gpl, linux, etc.

      That's not the point. Questioning is good: did Linus really write Linux is a perfectly acceptable question. Is the GPL good and (seperate question) enforcable is a good question. It only becomes foolish when, having gone to your sources and gotten your answers, you still cling to your asinine premise.

      --

      Carthago delenda est!
    8. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by kfg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He'll be lucky to break even on the publishing costs.

      Especially since he intends to distribute most of the copies for free for the purposes of political lobbying.

      KFG

    9. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by ron_ivi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't people think he was hired (i.e. paid) to do this political lobbying?

    10. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Maestro4k · · Score: 5, Insightful
      • Are you kidding? He's trying to sell a book, it's 100% in his best interest to stay in the spotlight as long as possible no matter what that takes. Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.
      Personally I think KB may turn out to be the bigger fool in the end. We can conspire about why he's so driven to his (repeatedly refuted) belief that Linus couldn't have written Linux without ripping someone else's code off all day, but the fact remains that KB's own consultants have contradicted him! Frankly I would suspect continuing to go to print with such a claim (even though it's his opinions, accusing someone of theft when your own research (e.g. consultants repots) have told you your opinion is wrong will probably not pass freedom of speech muster. KB may find himself on the wrong (and losing) end of a libel suit once his book is published. I doubt he'll have much left from his proceeds even after the legal battle's over, whomever wins.

      Yes I could be wrong, but there is so much out there already refuting, disproving, contradicting everything that we know KB's got in his book so far that I just can't see HOW it couldn't be considered anything but libel when it goes to print at this point. I also hope Linus follows up on it, I'm sure there are plenty of folks willing to help support a Linus vs. KB libel suit out there.

      If KB's really doing this because MS is paying him and/or his institute to do it, I sure hope he got a good price for completely and utterly destroying himself.

    11. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.
      Who's the greater fool, KB or the people he's claiming as sources saying that he doesn't know what he's talking about?
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    12. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Aren't most people who sit in the waiting room to talk to politicians?

      The only flaw here is that he's the president of a think tank that's being paid to say something. But maybe that's common knowledge, too. I just don't know.

    13. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To bad his consultant didn't demand a clause in their contract requiring his results to be included, unedited, in an appendix of KB's book.

    14. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He'll be lucky to break even on the publishing costs.

      Not true! You are totaling ignoring "consulting" fees from Microsoft!

    15. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.

      So, your hypothesis is that the ends justify the means - particularly when money is at stake? A grifter in a suit and tie is still a grifter - regardless of his social standing.

      The sad thing about all of this is that really brilliant people had to take the time to formulate rebuttals to the work of this second rate hack, who's only purpose in life is to serve as the mouthpiece of special interests.

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    16. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why doesn't KB just cut his losses and slink away...?

      Because his/AdTI's Microsoft funding would slink away also.

    17. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 0, Redundant
      So, your hypothesis is that the ends justify the means - particularly when money is at stake?

      Here we are, posting to a discussion about somebody who was annoyed at someone else putting words in his mouth ... and you're putting words in the parent poster's mouth. The OP didn't say a thing about "ends justify the means," and I rather doubt that he believes that in any case.
      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    18. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by quixoticsycophant · · Score: 1
      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day

      I believe the line is,

      "Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him."

      Thus we have:

      The fool = Ken Brown

      The fool who follows him = the Slashdot reader

      BTW this scene has the funniest blunder in the movie (other than the stormtrooper hitting his head). After saying this, Alec Guinness tries to get up, can't, then awkwardly nods "good scene" to the others. As in, "I'm going to pretend the scene ended before I got up, even though I clearly tried to get up but failed to do so."

    19. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Rei · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd love to see the book get reviewed by anyone who's ever programmed before. I love his shock at Linus's 10,000 lines in the first Linux, as if that were some huge number. I just grepped what I've coded, either for fun or school (most of it code for fun) in the past 6 years. This excludes everything that I've done for work, a fair amount of my school work, and what I've done in collaborative projects (I worked on a non-included branch of Celestia for a while, and did some code on the wd719x linux driver). I also ignored .h files and documentation. In the last 6 years, grep counted 43249 lines. However, during most of that time, my only coding was at work; I didn't feel like coding for fun.

      I have started a couple new projects at home recently, and in the past five-six months they total 5529 lines. *In my spare time*. And I'm no extraordinary programmer. I think Mr. Brown has no sense of the rate programmers produce lines of code.

      --
      "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
    20. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Because there is a world outside of slashdot.

      Really? When did this happen?

    21. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by csbruce · · Score: 1

      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day

      I don't think that Ken is going to make very money on his book. I'll bet that it's a net loss (the publishing part, not the shilling part). It's just for vanity purposes. In a few years, I'd bet that a framed share of SCO stock will have more zany-world-that-was collector's value that Brown's book.

    22. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 0

      " As long as KB keeps Tanenbaum responding, he is getting free publicity. "

      Tanenbaum isn't exactly being the most professional in his responses either. His colorful responses will keep the drama alive. I'm sick of both of them, really.

      "Excuse me? A Finnish student writes some software (in Finland) that a lot of people like and he is accused on sponging off U.S. corporations?"

      That one in particular really bothered me. The guy had a point and Tanenbaum narrowly focused the view on Linus. KB's point was real simple: Lots of copying going on in the OSS world. Linux is trying to look like a cross-breed of Windows and Unix. Gimp is trying to look like Photoshop. Etc. What KB might have been trying to say is that it's not a fun thought for a corp to make a new piece of software if the OSS community is going to work feverishly to try to make a free substitute. Whether I interpreted that correctly or not is questionable (I can only get one of the pages to load...), but it's pretty clear from Tanenbaum's rebuttal that he was using a cheapshot to 'win' that point.

      So yes, I agree, this is gaining publicity. Pity it's for the wrong reason.

    23. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by JayBat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Don't people think he was hired (i.e. paid) to do this political lobbying?

      Well, he's president of ADTI. It appears that he writes to please ADTI's contributors. No news here.

    24. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed... but all the previous posts seem to think publishing this book was some money-losing charity act.

    25. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "KB may find himself on the wrong (and losing) end of a libel suit once his book is published. I doubt he'll have much left from his proceeds even after the legal battle's over, whomever wins."

      Good! Let him publish it and let Linus and the entire open source community (coders & fans) behind him sue the guy into oblivion. If enough pressure is applied, he will squeal about receiving funding and "advice" from Microsoft in the settlement proceedings. Then that testimony can be used in a complaint against Microsoft for not living up to the Antitrust Settlement.

      Squeezing this imbletard (IMHO) would be much easier than relying upon squeezing SCO, the Canopy Group, and then finally Daryl and his brother Daryl into testifying or submitting statements about their little relationship with Redmond.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    26. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by 0racle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Prof. Tanenbaum did not narrow the view. This 'report' very specifically says Linus could not have written Linux on his own with out taking code he had no right to.

      Its very different then your examples of look-alikes. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as you wrote it entirely yourself, or with sources you have a legal right to. If KB were to use The GIMP as his example, he wouldn't be saying The GIMP looks lot like Photoshop, he'd be saying that the developers of The GIMP must have broken into Adobe's offices and stolen the Photoshop code, its the only way they could have a viable product.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    27. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      Maybe he doesn't care if the crowd here thinks he's a fool? Maybe that's not who he is writing for?

      Who else in the world GIVES A DAMN if the "Linix colonel" or whatever was written from scratch by one guy or not?

      We're all there is, quite frankly.

    28. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Asprin · · Score: 2, Interesting


      Are you kidding? He's trying to sell a book, it's 100% in his best interest to stay in the spotlight as long as possible no matter what that takes.

      I disagree. I think he's trying to PUBLISH a book, hence the vanity publisher others have pointed out above me. I expect that actually getting humans to go out and buy the book in a bookstore is not a part of the game plan -- In fact, I would even wager that whatever copies actually do make it off the printing presses will be snapped up by one customer - whoever paid Brown to write this hunk-a-hunk-a-burnin' trash.

      [I don't remember any details, but IIRC, there was a low-profile scandal about 15 or 20 years ago in the US when a political special interest lobbying group paid off a congressman by working a deal where he "wrote a book" that was then "published". Then, all of the "published copies" were purchased by one customer -- the org that set up the payoff -- and subsequently destroyed. Minus some printing and binding costs, it was basically a laundered political contribution. It's fuzzy, but I **think** the pages of the books were actually "printed" blank so they could save money on ink. I dunno - it sounds familiar - does anyone else remember any details about it or am I batty?]

      Either way, we can clearly agree that this is most likely a low-rent PR stunt aimed at FUDding up the Linux market. The only question is who's gonna end up with the books if they ever get published?

      --
      "Lawyers are for sucks."
      - Doug McKenzie
    29. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Tellarin · · Score: 1


      Speaking of fools who can not shut up, does it reminds anyone of SCO? They have been quite quiet lately.

    30. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Who else in the world GIVES A DAMN if the "Linix colonel" or whatever was written from scratch by one guy or not?

      Did you read the original Ken Brown article? The government may give a damn if they are running their servers on stolen intellectual property (I don't think they are, but I'm saying if they were, they would care). The government also cares if it is giving funding to a project that celebrates IP theft, when it could be funding another project that doesn't (he advocates government funding of BSD-style projects instead of gpl projects, but never actually explains why he thinks the BSD license makes a project less prone to having pilfered proprietary code checked into it than the GPL does). Corporations care if they are considering deploy linux. They don't want to be told "this is some code we found floating around the internet. We're going to deploy on 50,000 of our desktops." They want to know what is and where it came from, and whether it is safe to use from a legal point of view.
      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    31. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From the first paragraph:

      "Its purpose is to provide U.S. leadership with a researched presentation on attribution and intellectual property problems with the hybrid source code model, particularly Linux."

      I'd say legislation that benefits his anonymous backers will more than cover publishing costs.

    32. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Colazar · · Score: 2, Informative
      I think what you're remembering is the Jim Wright scandal in the late 80's. Given that he was the Speaker of the House at the time, and that he ended up resigning over it, I don't think you could really call it "low-profile" though.

      What you say matches up with my recollection, although I don't remember anything about the books being blank.

      --
      He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
    33. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by sparkz · · Score: 1

      Surely the better approach would be to use "wc" for this task ;-)

      --
      Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
    34. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      While the funding source is likely MS, it can't be confirmed. This article does state "A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution." so likely the institute at a minimum wants to keep its funding source happy (one doesn't bite the hand that feeds).

      The article does interestingly point out the institutes stance on funding as:

      "Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment on whether the company directly sponsored the debate paper. De Tocqueville Institute president Ken Brown and chairman Gregory Fossedal refused to comment on whether Microsoft sponsored the report.

      "It is not our policy to comment on supporters; I'm sure you can understand. From this you should not infer that information you have is correct or not correct; we just don't comment," Fossedal wrote in an e-mail. "


      Basically they use the "neither confirm or deny" tactic, but likely MS does influence their efforts.

    35. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by one4nine4two · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ken Brown should try reading a book, perhaps Just For Fun. A lot of the unanswered questions that Ken Brown thinks he's raising with Linux are answered in the book. From the best of my recollection...

      I see mentioned a few times that Linus wrote Linux from scratch with no programming experience, but from what I read he was basically raised a programmmer, sitting on his grandpa's lap at his computer as a young boy, watching him program. He started off programming in Assembly I believe, not C.

      Also, Linus claims in the book that Linux started off as a terminal program to read his university email. He began adding various other portions of code to suit his computing needs or rewriting code that he thought could use an improvement (like the disk drivers) and then later on decided to turn them into a complete operating system.

      As far as Linux being based off Minix, Linus had very fundamental disagreements with AST about how operating systems should function, even though Linus had learned a lot about how operating systems work from AST's famous book. Linus used a monolithic kernel architecture for Linux while Minix uses a microkernel architecture. It's already been proven that Linux doesn't contain code from Minix anyway, so no point in going on about it.

      So this is all Linus' side of the story, but it just seems unlikely that Linus crafted this whole facade some time ago in preparation for something like this. I also think it would probably be worthwhile to include the book in Brown's research on the history of Linux, since the book is about the history of Linux. Brown just seems to have completely ignored it and drawn his own conclusions.

      And to anyone who hasn't read Linus' book yet, I do recommend it. I found it fascinating and I don't even use Linux.

    36. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by csbruce · · Score: 5, Informative

      We can conspire about why he's so driven to his (repeatedly refuted) belief that Linus couldn't have written Linux without ripping someone else's code off all day, but the fact remains that KB's own consultants have contradicted him!

      I used to be a TA for CS452 Real-Time Programming course at the University of Waterloo. The assignments for that course came in two parts: (1) design and implement your own real-time multitasking kernel, and (2) use it to design and implement a real-time control system for either a robot arm or a model train.

      The students had about a month and a half to complete the first part, which was broken into four assignments. The kernels had a microkernel architecture, but I don't think that really alters the development time that much. (The message passing was highly synchronous, which helps to limit the mind-boggling complexity of debugging a distributed program, which Dr. Tanenbaum doesn't seem to discuss.)

      They worked in teams of two, but when I took the course, my lab partner conked out on me, so I ended writing the kernel myself, but that was okay since I had written multitasking kernels twice before, one in MACHINE LANGUAGE (no, not that wimpy symbolic-assembler stuff!) for a Commodore-128.

      So, it's quite do-able for a motivated student to write a relatively simple kernel in the amount of time that Linus took. Just ask the CS452 students--they had to build their kernels in just six weeks, plus they had other courses and limited resources in the lab.

    37. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by peeping_Thomist · · Score: 2, Informative

      there was a low-profile scandal about 15 or 20 years ago in the US when a political special interest lobbying group paid off a congressman by working a deal where he "wrote a book" that was then "published".

      In 1989, Speaker of the House Jim Wright was forced to resign over a shady book deal. I seem to recall that it was a real book, but that unions bought thousands upon thousands as a way to funnel illegal donations to him. If I recall correctly, after consulting Google, the book was his Reflections of Public Man, which had been published in 1984. He's continued to write since then and is a regular newspaper columnist.

      --
      Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
    38. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by julesh · · Score: 4, Informative

      From what I can see, it isn't a vanity press (who charge you up-front for the privelege of publishing your book), but they certainly don't seem to be reputable. They do say some things that aren't true in their marketing material, like:

      If I publish with BookSurge, can I still sell my book to a 'traditional publisher' or enter it into contests?

      You still control all the rights to your book. You may effortlessly transition into a traditional publishing deal. We will only need 30 days to remove your files from our system.


      One of the rights that a 'traditional publisher' is likely to be highly interested in is the right to be the first to publish your book. Which you'd no longer be able to give them...

      The Standard Bookseller Discount.
      40% discount. Pre-paid, non-returnable.


      uh-huh? Standard bookseller terms is, I believe 50%. 30 days credit. Sale-or-return.

    39. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Eccles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seems to me Linus has a pretty good libel case against him regardless, should he choose to sue. Malicious disregard for the truth about an individual can have consequences.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    40. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by b0r0din · · Score: 1

      People who know me would probably confirm that I do not suffer fools gladly.

      He must really suffer then.

    41. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 0, Redundant

      ...and you're putting words in the parent poster's mouth. The OP didn't say a thing about "ends justify the means," and I rather doubt that he believes that in any case...

      Parent poster's words en toto (read slowly if your comprehension level is too low):
      ~
      Why doesn't KB just cut his losses and slink away before he's made a greater fool of, if that's possible.

      Are you kidding? He's trying to sell a book, it's 100% in his best interest to stay in the spotlight as long as possible no matter what that takes. Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.
      ~

      Looking at his whole posting, not just the piece I chose to snip, you can see where I made the inference. My question is, why does the parent poster think it is "100% in his best interest to stay in the spotlight...no matter what it takes", versus doing the right thing. I would think his 'best' interest would be printing factual information, instead of FUD.

      This definitely implies, as I said, that the poster believes the 'ends justify the means'. I am not putting words in his mouth - I am restating what was said in a more direct manner that enlightens the subject matter. To paraphrase the orginal poster, "it is in his best interest to stay in the spotlight...to make money"; this certainly seems to say 'the ends' (making money), justify the means (doing whatever it takes to stay in the spotlight - by passing off FUD as valuable research).

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    42. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by k9-quaint · · Score: 3, Funny

      Linus didn't write the Linux kernel, he typed it.

    43. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Flower · · Score: 1
      The difference is borrowing ideas and utilizing standards is not the same as misappropriating code. Lots of copying goes on between closed source software just look at the various GUIs out there.

      The problem is Mr Brown (anybody else envision an evil twin to Paddington Bear when they hear that?) doesn't accept the axiom that software development leverages other works to build better software. Ugh. That wasn't well articulated and I can't figure out a how to phrase it better atm.

      Anyway, when I read his words I almost envision that what Ken wants out of linux is a bibliography noting that Unix and Minix was an inspiration and because there was obvious influence by the ideas behind the implementation of these OSes that Linus somehow should never have been allowed to use them without properly compensating AT&T or Prentice Hall (note that atm I don't see anything out of Ken's mouth about compensating Prof. Tanenbaum.)

      Personally I don't find Mr. Brown's line of reasoning very compelling.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    44. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The post in question claims that it may be in KB's best interest to stay in the spotlight. There is a major difference between, on one hand, making such a statement, and on the other, making a moral judgement of KB's behaviour, based on some general or for that matter personal ethics. What is in my best interest may not always be what is morally acceptable. If you don't understand this then you are an idiot.

    45. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There are banner ads on the rebuttals, actually. They both get publicity.

    46. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KB's point was real simple: Lots of copying going on in the OSS world.

      That wouldn't surprise anyone who's familiar with the software market, or pretty much any other market for that matter. Lots of copying (in the sense that you mean it) goes on all over.

      I doubt that Adobe find it any less of a fun thought to have to compete with Gimp than Wordstar did about competing with Wordperfect or Netscape did with Microsoft. So far Adobe seem to be in a pretty strong position but that may change, and the victor might be free software or it might be another proprietary company, I doubt that they'd any happier about losing to either.

    47. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I think what you're looking for is less "ends justify the means" and more "any publicity is good publicity." They're related, but not quite identical.

      And I'll admit that I've fallen for it in some cases. I'll check out a movie or buy a book if there's a big enough media presence to some aspect of it, just to see what the big deal is, even if I don't agree with the idea behind it. This is why I watched Ken Park -- to find out what the Australian censors were so up in arms over. I still don't see what their big problem was, and it wasn't a very good movie to begin with, but it made someone $1.25 here in rental fees.

      I have no intentions of buying this book -- I just don't have enough interest in it. But the phenomenon does work.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    48. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by DoctorPepper · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are you kidding? He's trying to sell a book

      Give it six months, it will be on the $1.99 rack at Barnes & Noble. I'll buy a couple of them then to use for emergency toilet paper.

      --

      No matter where you go... there you are.
    49. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by npsimons · · Score: 1

      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.

      Being rich does not preclude being a fool. There are many easy ways to get lots of money, most of which have nothing to do with intelligence.
    50. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      but when I took the course, my lab partner conked out on me, so I ended writing the kernel myself, but that was okay since I had written multitasking kernels twice before, one in MACHINE LANGUAGE (no, not that wimpy symbolic-assembler stuff!) for a Commodore-128

      Delicious!
      Beats 2 cards of EBCDIC machine language to bootstrap a hex loader written in hex.

      Single-tasking, tape-based. I had the source to IBM's 8k Assembler but quickly dropped it and wrote my own from scratch. It takes very little difference of opinion in how things should be put together to make the other stuff totally useless for copying stuff from.

      "Yes, I corrected myself. It was 6 man-years, not six real-time years. But in that time they wrote the complete operating system, a C compiler, and all the utilities. In his posting, Brown says the GNU C compiler is now 110,000 lines of code. Maybe the Coherent compiler was half that, or 60,000 lines of code. The MINIX utilities were about 30,000 lines of code and covered about the same ground as Coherent did. Add a 10,000 line kernel to this and it looks like the three Coherent programmers wrote 100,000 lines of code in 6 man-years. That is a productivity of 16,000 lines per man-year. In that light I don't see why it is plausible for Canadian students to produce 16,000 lines a year but not plausible for Finnish students to produce 10,000 lines a year. It is just as cold in Finland as in Canada so programmers are never tempted to go outside." [Emphasis added]
      16,000 lines a year (production grade)
      10,000 lines a year (hacker grade)
      Methinks the good professor (Sorry about that) severely understates the case.

    51. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Bilestoad · · Score: 5, Funny


      Has it not become obvious to you all yet?

      AdTI and Ken Brown are the creation of bored Slashdot trolls. Isn't it obvious? Where else do you find such a collection of glaringly faulty logic, complete ignorance and unwillingness to concede even a single fact mixed with such polished grammar and pomposity?

      Expect to see "YHBT. YHL. HAND." on their home page any day now.

    52. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by debian_cowboy · · Score: 0

      Hmm, I would wonder if he's is going to earn millions with this book. Maybe he had some more chances for revenue by looking for a new title. What about, The Well at the world's end, starting with: Once upon a time there was........ Assume that little children love to read stories like this.......

    53. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.
      Where the hell does "confident in their superiority" come from? The issue isn't who's a fool here, it's that KB a FUCKING LIAR. And I for one am not laughing at him, any more than I am at anyone who profits by knowingly and willfully manipulating the truth.
    54. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by boots@work · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Lots of copying going on in the OSS world.

      Specifically he says lots of copyright infringement happens, but he can't find even one single example of it. Can you? No, I didn't think so.

      What KB might have been trying to say is that it's not a fun thought for a corp to make a new piece of software if the OSS community is going to work feverishly to try to make a free substitute.

      Boo hoo hoo. If it wasn't open source hackers trying to beat it then it would be Microsoft or some other company. Any successful product attracts competitors. Do you see HP whining about Dell selling printers? Do you think it's fun for Sony that the XBox exists?

      If your company can't manage to make something better than what can be produced by hobbyists working on evenings and weekends then you don't deserve to survive.

    55. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by boots@work · · Score: 1

      A judge told them to stop making outrageous public statements (search Groklaw). Sadly, they complied. Darl in prison for Contempt of Court would have been a happy sight.

      I think Baystar told them to shut up too.

    56. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by bigman921 · · Score: 1

      Of corse it was a setup for the up comming news! Linus already admitted the tooth fairy and santa clause wrote linux!

      ps: Just for Fun is a great book, I think i ripped through it in a couple of days.

      --
      "So you call this your free contry, tell me why it costs so much to live?" - Three Doors Down
    57. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by OscarGunther · · Score: 1

      Ken Brown doesn't give a rat's ass about the money. He's already given us the real reason for publishing: he wants the book to influence policy makers in Washington to be more favorably disposed toward closed-source software companies. Having a change to the copyright laws passed that would gut the GPL would be worth more than a million dollars to him.

    58. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.

      He's not going to get any million dollars from the vanity press he's paying to publish his "book", but that's not the real problem. The problem is that all of Brown's discredited nonsense will still be easily available for citation by web search. And people will automatically believe that it's true because *it's on the computer*. His so-called paper will be used as *proof* against Linux by opponents for years. I'll bet that "Overly Critical Guy" troll starts using links to it within the week (remember, it was predicted here first).

    59. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Especially since he intends to distribute most of the copies for free for the purposes of political lobbying.

      You're forgetting the bulk orders from Microsoft, which will push it onto the best-seller list.

    60. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      That explains my lower middle class standard of living. Social engineering seems the surest way to make money/gain influence. Being the loaner at the end of the block with the overgrown Chevy in the front yard and tinfoil over the windows certainly isn't doing it. Uttering a low growl at anyone at work whp approaches me, who isn't in IT, doesn't help things either. Any my hockey mask is beginning to get a bit smelly. Maybe I should take it off?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    61. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by alien_blueprint · · Score: 1

      but there are people in the rest of the world who actually will consider what he has to say

      Everything he bases his "insights" on is the result of being incredibly ignorant and/or misinformed, as Tanenbaum's original rebuttal makes clear beyond a shadow of a doubt. Now, why should anyone listen to such a person again?

    62. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your company can't manage to make something better than what can be produced by hobbyists working on evenings and weekends then you don't deserve to survive.

      That's harsh. I agree that the company deserves to go out of buisness but killing someone just because they don't produce good enough software...?

    63. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Give me an example of doing something that is truly in someone's best interest that is not right. I can't think of anything that meets your criteria. You can not seperate your best interest from doing the right thing.

      We can only judge the actions of ourselves and others based on our own set of rules of right and wrong. Some of these ideas are universaly agreed upon, such as the idea that it is bad take the life of another person. However, taking the life of another person in the defense of your own life or that of others is right - if there is no other way to subdue them. In that case it is the right thing, based upon the circumstances.

      I can think of no circumstances where it is right to profit from lies and distortions of the truth - even more so where those lies cause unjustified injury to the reputations of others.

      This is why I find issue with someone advocating profit over truth as the best interests of anyone. Saying 'any publicity is good publicity' is the real issue is also incorrect. This is confusing side effects with the real problem. Publicity, in the case of the publication of a book, is designed to generate sales - and hence increase profits, thus my analysis stands: this is an issue of means justifying the ends.

      To put it simply, can the actions you do or promote pass the 'red face' test. Can you look yourself in the eye and say 'what I am doing is right; what I am doing does no harm'. Or, are you just kidding yourself?

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    64. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      • So, it's quite do-able for a motivated student to write a relatively simple kernel in the amount of time that Linus took. Just ask the CS452 students--they had to build their kernels in just six weeks, plus they had other courses and limited resources in the lab.
      My apologies that I didn't make it clear that I do indeed believe Linux wrote it all himself, I've never doubted it in fact. I was just trying to go along the lines of even if all that we say are just conspiracy theories, the fact is that Ken Brown's own consultant has basically proven that his allegations of code theft from Minix are false.

      I had a friend take an operating systems course while we were going through the CS degree, he (and all class members) basically wrote an OS using an emulator (emulated the machine hardware archetecture) in the one semester class. A semester's considerably less than a year too, so there's even further contradiction for KB's theories. :)

    65. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by zBoD · · Score: 0

      Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?

      --
      BoD
    66. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal.. by ccp · · Score: 1


      Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in book revenue or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.

      The only way KB is going to get 1M from book sales (not counting MSFT's check) is by posing like the goatse.cx guy in the cover.

      Cheers,

  3. This week by Mz6 · · Score: 5, Funny
    As I have said before... Welcome back to this weeks episode!

    Last week we found out that Ken Brown was pregnant with Linus' love child, but this week may hold new meaning to their relationship. Will the relationship last? Or will it crumble to nothing before the masses. And find out who Ken may have been caught cheating with!

    Tune in next week to find out!

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:This week by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1
      I thought the shocking twist to last week's episode, was that infact the father of the baby was bill gates, or steve B.

      In any case, in next week's episode we will find out that ken brown only takes it doggy style. So is he really pregnant or just fooling everyone....

      Stay tuned....<dun><dun><dun>

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
  4. Tennis anyone? by TimeElf1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anyone think we are watching a tennis match? Back and forth back and forth...

    --
    Cannot find REALITY.SYS. Universe halted.
    1. Re:Tennis anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure...KB just hasn't hit the ball yet. (Don't these things have a point limit?)

    2. Re:Tennis anyone? by daeley · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nah, it'd have to be Pong. Or Breakout. ;)

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    3. Re:Tennis anyone? by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 5, Funny

      But Pong is based on Tennis... surely noone could have written Pong without violating the intellectual property belonging to the makers of Tennis?

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    4. Re:Tennis anyone? by kfg · · Score: 4, Funny

      30-Love -- Tanenbaum.

      KFG

    5. Re:Tennis anyone? by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      you do know that the makers of tennis died long before IP were two letters that you could put together, in capitals, in a non-capitalised sentence?

    6. Re:Tennis anyone? by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 4, Funny

      Raise your right hand over your head and keep it there.
      Good.
      Now raise your left hand over your head and keep it there.

      Now, the next time I tell a joke that goes over your head, try and grab ahold of it....

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    7. Re:Tennis anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the corporation that holds those rights should be living on somewhere, right?

      (yes, that was sarcasm)

    8. Re:Tennis anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have conducted a series of interviews with people familiar with both systems and concluded that Pong could not have been written in a year without stealing code from the makers of Tennix. I've even found notes suggesting that Pong programmers may have had access to the rules of Tennix. Expect my book soon.

    9. Re:Tennis anyone? by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      ok - i wasn't reading the thread properly, i assumed you were being serious.

      i appollogise

      i also cant spell

    10. Re:Tennis anyone? by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      Apology accepted.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    11. Re:Tennis anyone? by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      I don't know why you got modded down, I thought it was a pretty funny follow up.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  5. Sue? by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At what point do Tanenbaum and Torvalds decide the Brown is slandering or libelling them and actually sue for damages. Reading through Ken Brown's response to Tanenbaum I get the feeling that he's getting close to breaking the law against these two people.

    John.

    1. Re:Sue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you got the names mixed up...

    2. Re:Sue? by torpor · · Score: 4, Insightful


      If you think what I think you mean, I sort of agree with you.

      Linus and Ken ought to be screening their public responses to this mess through their lawyers.

      I can bet you any money (and lots of it) that those funding this AdTI "research", have lots of money for their lawyers.

      This is such an obvious hatchet job, I have to wonder if it isn't a draw for something, more ... sinister ...

      Lets hope the plot doesn't thicken.

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    3. Re:Sue? by joib · · Score: 1

      Perhaps trolling for a lawsuit is the point of Browns actions? If Linus were to spend a significant part of his time during a couple of years in court instead of making the kernel better, MS and whoever else stands behind adti would benefit a lot more than they would lose. I'm pretty sure that MS considers Brown to be a pretty expendable asset. So what if Brown would ultimately lose the case? Even if Linus were to get millions in compensation, that's pocket money for MS.

    4. Re:Sue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At what point do Tanenbaum and Torvalds decide the Brown is slandering or libelling them and actually sue for damages. Reading through Ken Brown's response to Tanenbaum

      Well,

      I think that this is very much an American-centric way of handling the problem. (I don't mean to pass judgement -- whether you think that this is good or bad is your choice. I just want to point out that it sounds, to me, like the thought of suing him is an approach that is pretty specific to Americans.)

      My point is that, in my guess, Tanenbaum will probably do nothing and let it pass. This is just the way of many societies/cultures -- sometimes, the best thing you can do is not to make too much of a deal out of it and just let something foolish like this pass (without getting reactionary).

    5. Re:Sue? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Could you be specific? Libel is when you say something false to tarnish someone's reputation. Has either Linux or Tenenbaum been saying anything false?

      That's not to say that they shouldn't be careful. Ken Brown may just be shrewd enough and have enough backing that could make their lives difficult if they stepped over the line, all the while dancing on the line himself.

    6. Re:Sue? by jhobbs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      American courts tend to lean toward freedom of speech and the first amemenment right. I would say sueing for libel is a much more British thing to do. Thier libel laws are far more entertaining. Just ask Oscar Wilde.

      Also if Ken Brown continues to publicly assert that Torvalds stole ideas and/or code, and it can be proven that he did not. That is libel.

      li-bel
      n.

      1.
      1. A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.
      2. The act of presenting such material to the public.

    7. Re:Sue? by killjoe · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The problem is that these people are too nice. They should take a lesson from politicians.

      1) Realize that you are fighting a war. Don't pretend that we are all decent honest people who just want to get along. You have enemies and they seek to destroy you.

      2) Recognize no limits or you will lose. Your enemy has no morals, ethics or limits. If you set any kind of limits on yourself you will lose.

      3) Negative advertising works!. You must call your enemy names. You must smear your enemy with every kind of rhetorical device at your disposal. For example "liberals hate america", "Song swappers are terrorists", "linux is leprocy".

      4) Don't answer the question you are asked, simply make the speech you came to make no matter what your questioner asks.

      5) Stop reffering to ADTI and Ken Brown!. These people are mere proxies for Bill Gates and Microsoft so use those terms instead. Say "Microsoft called linux a leprocy" not "Ken Brown called ..". Force MS to deny that it's funding this and force MS to distance itself from this.

      6) Sue, Sue, Sue. We need to figure out how to pull a scientology on Microsoft, the US patent office, ADTI, and other nefarious organizations. Scientology filed so many lawsuits against the IRS the IRS cried uncle. We need to figure out how we can hundreds of thousands of lawsuits against MS and ADTI. We have to make it costly for them to attack open source.

      7) Get your message out to people that matter. No that's not slashdot. Businessweek, the economist, fortune and other pro-business, pro-corporation, anti-open source publications will endlessly hype any old shit MS writes for them. We need to shame these publications into either stopping their shilling for MS or writing a more balanced story. Your CIO does not read slashdot, he reads businessweek.

      In summary. It a war people. The fighting is just starting. MS is gearing up right now to file patent lawsuits. If we pretend all is well MS will kill all of us.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    8. Re:Sue? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Could you be specific?

      Could you be dyslexic?

      (Hint: Brown is attacking Linus's reputation)

      Libel is when you say something false

      No, saying it would be slander. Putting it in a book, as Brown is doing, would be libel. (Pay attention to spiderman...)

    9. Re:Sue? by An+Anonymous+Hero · · Score: 1
      1) Realize that you are fighting a war.

      2) If you set any kind of limits on yourself you will lose.

      3) smear your enemy with every kind of rhetorical device at your disposal. For example "liberals hate america"

      6) Sue, Sue, Sue.

      "+1 Interesting?" No, Rumsfeld tactics, literally.
    10. Re:Sue? by killjoe · · Score: 1

      I started off by saying that we should learn from politicians. These people know how to fight and win. Otherwise prepare to be roadkill.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    11. Re:Sue? by shadowbearer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is such an obvious hatchet job, I have to wonder if it isn't a draw for something, more ... sinister ...

      If it is, Brown is fucking up by the numbers. Speculation and innuendo don't go over well with judges, especially when the star material witness (Alexey Toptygin) has already effectively testified against Brown - in public.

      Linus, AST, etc, have shown remarkable restraint in what amounts to a public attack on their reputations. If they decided to sue for libel, I doubt that Brown would have any defense at all. If this is all part of a more sinister plan against Linus/AST/OSS/etc, all the defense would have to do in that case is trot out Brown's public Foot-In-Ass Syndrome (and his funding daddy :)

      Nah, Brown is just trying to justify his salary - but he's too ignorant of the reality of what he's talking about to really understand it. As far as I'm concerned, he can just go on making a fool of himself. After all, it's good publicity for (F)OSS too. If this becomes media mainstream, it's likely that there will be enough journalists who really dig into it that his foolishness makes mainstream IT publications, like SCO's has.

      Cheers,
      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    12. Re:Sue? by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      I started off by saying that we should learn from politicians. These people know how to fight and win. Otherwise prepare to be roadkill.

      Remember the old Nuclear War computer game? Where they showed the "winner" jumping up and down in the middle of a smoldering slag heap shouting "I win! I win!"? Ever heard of a "Pyrrhic victory"?

      Frankly, I'd rather live RMS' "Right to Read".

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    13. Re:Sue? by Delphinios · · Score: 1

      You obviously have never watched a single cartoon in your life.

      Homework: Go watch the entire Trigun series, followed by at least six hours of Ninja Turtles, and then finally finish up with a good honest helping of He-Man.

  6. This may be. by jwcorder · · Score: 0, Redundant
    This argument may be just as unsolvable as which came first?....the chicken or the egg. Or what does it take to win in NASCAR a good driver or a good car...or (GASP) which is a better OS...OS X or Windows XP!!!....

    I think I just started something on that one! :)

    --
    http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
    1. Re:This may be. by MrBlackBand · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      which came first?....the chicken or the egg

      That's easy. Reptiles were laying eggs long before chickens evolved. Therefore, the egg came before the chicken.

      --
      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
    2. Re:This may be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      A chicken and an egg are lying in bed. The chicken is leaning against the
      headboard smoking a cigarette, with a satisfied smile on its face.

      The egg, looking a bit p*ssed off, grabs the sheet, rolls over, and says,
      "Well, I guess we finally answered THAT question!"

    3. Re:This may be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or what does it take to win in NASCAR a good driver or a good car...or (GASP) which is a better OS...OS X or Windows XP

      OS X and a good car is a formidable combination. However Windows XP and a good driver is quite underrated.

      Tough one.

    4. Re:This may be. by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1, Redundant
      which came first?....the chicken or the egg.

      Neither. The ROOSTER came first. ;-)

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    5. Re:This may be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OS X is obviously a better user experience.

      The only things keeping it back are
      1) market penetration by windows is too huge
      2) locking yourself into mac hardware is both expensive and stupid
      3) os x has less apps than windows
      3(b) oh yeah, lots more hardware is compatible with windows.
      4) oh yeah, it's fucking expensive buy mac hardware.

    6. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      ... based on Judeo-Christian (and by extension Muslim) story of creation in Genesis.

      Don't confuse the Jews and Christians with the Muslims. It's fashionable nowadays to claim that all three groups worship the same God under different names, but that's simply untrue of the Muslims, by their own Quran.

      Yes, I know that Mohammed quoted the bible: he did so mostly in order to refute it. He claimed that the Jews had gotten their history wrong in the Pentateuch (he said that the Jews were descendents of Ishmael, rather than Isaac), and that Christ was not the Son of Allah. That last one shows us that whatever Allah might be, he's not the God described in the Christian bible. Please notice that I'm not telling you who's right; I'm telling you that it's one or the other (or neither, but definitely not both).

      The Jews and Christians are the ``unbelievers'' that Mohammed repeatedly exhorts Muslim faithful to kill.

    7. Re:This may be. by bofkentucky · · Score: 1

      I was merely referencing their common roots, both (all three) claim Abraham (Ibrahim) as their (great * x )-patriarch, and one of his sons. As I understand it though, the Genesis story is held by all three faiths prior to the sending away of one of Abraham's sons to father another great nation.

      --
      09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
    8. Re:This may be. by joib · · Score: 1
      Therefore, the egg came before the chicken.



      Actually, there's another study that supports this claim, even when talking about chicken eggs:


      W.N. Thurman, M.E. Fisher, "Chickens, Eggs, and Causality, or
      Which Came First?", American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
      237-237, 1988.

    9. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      I was merely referencing their common roots, both (all three) claim Abraham (Ibrahim) as their (great * x )-patriarch, and one of his sons

      Yes, they do have that in common, but that seems an awfully petty similarity in light of the fact that they quite literally worship different deities.

      Maybe the best way to contrast the two (i.e., Judeo/Christian versus Islam) is found in Matthew 22:36-40. Compare that summary of everything in the Old Testament to what Mohammed said in the Quran.

    10. Re:This may be. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      Yes, I know that Mohammed quoted the bible: he did so mostly in order to refute it. He claimed that the Jews had gotten their history wrong in the Pentateuch (he said that the Jews were descendents of Ishmael, rather than Isaac), and that Christ was not the Son of Allah. That last one shows us that whatever Allah might be, he's not the God described in the Christian bible. Please notice that I'm not telling you who's right; I'm telling you that it's one or the other (or neither, but definitely not both).

      Well, no. The Koran (or Quran, for purists) seems to agree that Christians and Jews are descended from Isaac, and that Muslims are descended from Ishmael.

      Some Muslims believe that Ishmael was the sacrificial lamb that Abraham offered to God. This is based on the fact that Ishmael was the elder son of Abraham (true), and thus the more valuable sacrifice. This latter point is debatable, however, and I don't want to debate it. Suffice it to say, different cultures place different values on the children of wives and the children of concubines. How Abraham would have chosen is likely entirely based on how his own people valued such things.

      Muslims do, in general, believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a prophet. They do not believe he was the Messiah. Since the Jews also disbelieve that Jesus (note that I do not use Christ, which is a title for the Messiah) of Nazareth was the Messiah, I do not see this as a reason for holding that Islam believes in a different God.

      And, no, the Jews and Christians are NOT the "unbelievers" - the pagans are. And the Zarathutrans. And the Hindus. Though the latter two are technically pagans, I include them as they represent a sizable chunk of the pagans early Mulsims would have encountered.

      Note that Islam considers all three (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) "Peoples of the Book". The Book in question is what Christians call the Old Testament.

      Much of the animosity between Islam and the other "Peoples of the Book" stems from historical incidents in Muhammed's lifetime. Muhammed didn't get too far with the leaders of either religion when he asked them to recognise the kinship of Judaism/Christianity and Islam....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    11. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      You might be right about the descent versus sacrifice bit. It's been a few years since I read the Quran, and that was never an important point to me, or the Muslims I was discussing it with.

      Muslims do, in general, believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a prophet. They do not believe he was the Messiah. Since the Jews also disbelieve that Jesus (note that I do not use Christ, which is a title for the Messiah) of Nazareth was the Messiah, I do not see this as a reason for holding that Islam believes in a different God.

      The Jews seem to be willing to accept the idea that the Messiah, whoever he may eventually be, could be the Son of God. There are many who have accepted that Jesus was the Messiah (starting with the apostles) and remained Jews. Therefore, I wouldn't say that the Jews worship another God than the Christians, especially since Jesus claimed to the the Son of their God.

      The Muslims, on the other hand, have explicitly rejected the notion that Allah ever had a son. The Quran addresses this point specifically: Jesus was a prophet, never the son of Allah, and saying otherwise is blasphemy. Jesus might have been wrong in his claim to be the Son of God, or Mohammed might have been wrong in saying that he was merely a prophet, but both cannot be right. Therefore, Allah cannot be the God described in the bible and torah.

      Definitely, we (Christians) and they (Muslims) worship different Gods: we worship the God of the Jews (or the Father of Christ, if Christ was wrong about them being the same), while the Muslims worship Allah.

      Note that Islam considers all three (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) "Peoples of the Book".

      Even people of the book can be unbelievers. If we hear and don't believe, we're unbelievers, and Muslims are instructed, many times over, to kill unbelievers.

    12. Re:This may be. by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      I lived in the Sultanate of Oman (eastern Arabian peninsula; east of Saudi Arabia) during the 80s. A number of Omanis told me that Christians and Jews (there were expatriate Jews in Oman, but no Israelis) were "people of the book", and should not be harmed.

      When I studied history (in Europe) I learnt that during the Crusades, Muslims wouldn't fight Christians so they had to employ mercenaries and slaves to defend themselves.

      The Muslim world was traditionally more tolerant of Jews that Inquisition-era Europe.

      Bringing this back on-topic, could I suggest that your research resembles Ken Brown's?

      (Disclaimer: not a Muslim, not an Arab, not an Israel-basher, not a terrorist)

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    13. Re:This may be. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      Jesus might have been wrong in his claim to be the Son of God, or Mohammed might have been wrong in saying that he was merely a prophet, but both cannot be right. Therefore, Allah cannot be the God described in the bible and torah.

      This one went right by me. Either Jesus is wrong, or Muhammed is wrong, therefore God is not Allah? That makes no sense whatsoever. Note that "merely" doesn't usually describe the prophets. They were, by definition, people whom God spoke to directly. They were also, by definition, people who told the truth about what God said to them. Neither of these is a "merely" sort of thing.

      I knew a muslim once who approached the "son of God" thing this way: "If God wanted a son, he would have one. That's what all-powerful is all about. We don't believe He needs a son, but who are we to tell God what he can and cannot do?" Course, this particular Muslim also said "There are things we are told not to do as Muslims. I don't do them. There are also things we are told to do as Muslims. I don't do them either," so you can take his opinions with a grain of salt....

      And, no, Peoples of the Book cannot be unbelievers. Unless you count the Peoples of the Book as having some genetic basis. A genetic basis for being considered a Jew is certainly valid, and the Muslims at least started that way, but it doesn't apply so well to the Christians. Doesn't even apply all that well to the Muslims anymore, since both Christianity and Islam are evangelical religions (unlike Judaism). The fact that your mother is Christian does NOT make you Christian. Same for your father. What makes you Christian is your beliefs! You either believe, or you don't. If you don't, you're not one of the "Peoples of the Book".

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    14. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      A number of Omanis told me that Christians and Jews (there were expatriate Jews in Oman, but no Israelis) were "people of the book", and should not be harmed.

      My Turkish friends told me something similar, but admitted there were some ``ifs'' and ``buts'' attached. The Turks used janissaries, but I don't think that was due to any proscriptions on killing people of the book. Certainly, I never heard that Saladin, or his soldiers weren't Muslim.

      The Muslim world was traditionally more tolerant of Jews that Inquisition-era Europe.

      I would say that Muslims in the modern-day Middle East have taken a lesson from Inquisition-era Europe on tolerance of Jews and other ``people of the book''. Certainly, events of the past 50 years have shown that today, Muslims are willing to slander and murder Jews and Christians, in the Middle East, Africa, and where ever they get a chance. Just as we shouldn't judge the modern West by the Spanish Inquisition, we shouldn't judge the modern Muslim world by the Bagdad Caliphate.

      Bringing this back on-topic, could I suggest that your research resembles Ken Brown's?

      Sure you could! I'll suggest right back that you're wrong. It sounds to me as if we have similar levels of expertise. I spent hours when I should have been working on my dissertation talking religon with my Muslim office-mates. They dealt with the awkward parts of the Quran (like ``kill the unbelievers'') the way nominal Christians deal with the awkward parts of the bible (like ``love your neighbor''): they ignored them.

    15. Re:This may be. by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      Sure you could! I'll suggest right back that you're wrong. It sounds to me as if we have similar levels of expertise.

      Yeah, the Ken Brown shot was cheap, and I apologise. I suspect we're less far apart in our views than I first assumed.

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    16. Re:This may be. by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

      Much of the animosity between Islam and the other "Peoples of the Book" stems from historical incidents in Muhammed's lifetime. Muhammed didn't get too far with the leaders of either religion when he asked them to recognise the kinship of Judaism/Christianity and Islam....

      Doesn't seem like Islamic fundamentalists are doing much in the way of playing "kinship" with others these days...

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    17. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      Either Jesus is wrong, or Muhammed is wrong, therefore God is not Allah?

      Perhaps I should have put that more clearly: ... therefore His (Jesus's) Father is not Allah. Jesus said that His father was the God of the Jews.

      Note that "merely" doesn't usually describe the prophets.

      Remember, Christ told us that He was the Son of God, and in a very real sense, was God. Mohammed said that was blasphemy. Compared to being the Son of God, and God incarnate, ``merely'' is a generous adjective for a prophet.

      If Mohammed was right, then Christianity is absolutely wrong. So, going only by this one, fundamental-to-Christianity point, it is either the case that Muslims and Jews believe in the same God (as Mohammed said), or that Christians and Jews believe in the same God (as Christ said), and impossible that all three believe in the same God. Christ told us that the only way to the Father (God) is through Him. If Christ was a liar, that was a stupid, evil, arrogant thing to say. If Christ was telling the truth, then ... it's not arrogant at all.

      And, no, Peoples of the Book cannot be unbelievers.

      I wonder if I have confused ``unbeliever'' with ``blasphemer''? Or were your not-too-strict Muslim friends telling you a mix of what they wanted to be true about Islam and what they hoped would make you comfortable with them? I have my notes on the Quran packed away (I hope I still have them!), but I'm quite sure I remember explicit instructions on when to kill Muslims, Christians and Jews. I think I remember that they were referred to as ``unbelievers'' (still people of the book), but perhaps there was another label. The important point is that the Quran directs Muslims to kill ``people of the book'' (definitely including some Muslims!) when they've gotten Mohammed sufficiently irritated. That I'm sure I remember correctly.

    18. Re:This may be. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Either Jesus is wrong, or Muhammed is wrong, therefore God is not Allah? Perhaps I should have put that more clearly: ... therefore His (Jesus's) Father is not Allah. Jesus said that His father was the God of the Jews.

      Ahh! What you really mean is that if they are both RIGHT, then Allah is not God! I'll concede that when you show me the verse of the Koran which asserts that Jesus was not the Son of God. It has been many years since I pulled my own copy out (English, so not considered a valid copy by purists), but I don't recall that part.

      I concede that Christians and Muslims fundamental incompatibility is the status of Jesus of Nazareth. I do not consider that fundamental disagreement to imply that they worship different Gods. Lutherans and Baptists have a fundamental disagreement about the nature of the Eucharist, but that doesn't mean they worship different Gods. And before you say that that latter difference is trivial, it was important enough to get burned at the stake at one time. And important enough to cause crusades (not all crusades were directed at the Muslims - some were against the French ;) )

      No. You might be confusing "unbeliever" with "heretic" though. Muslims traditionally have dim views of that sort of thing. As do Christians and Jews, though "heresy" has been reduced to "we agree to disagree" in recent centuries.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    19. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      What you really mean is that if they are both RIGHT, then Allah is not God!

      No, I meant what I said.

      One More Time:

      Christ said that He was the Son of the God of the Jews, and God incarnate. Mohammed said he wasn't. They can't both be right.

      If Mohammed were right about Christ's divinity, then Christ's father, whom the Christians worship, isn't Allah, the God of the Jews and Muslims. We wouldn't know who God is, but if Mohammed were right, we'd know who he isn't.

      If Mohammed is wrong about Christ's divinity, then this Allah whom the Muslims worship, and who Muhammed claimed inspired (i.e., dictated) the Quran is clearly not the God of the Jews and Christians. Again, we don't know who Allah is, but we know who he isn't.

      Either way, whoever's right, the two deities are different. Q.E.D.

      As for the difference between Lutherans and Baptists, yes it's trivial, and they'd be the first to tell you that. Both believe that Christ is the holy, living, died-and-resurrected Son of God, that He lived a perfect life, and died to pay for our sins, that His ressurection is a sign of our (Lutheran's and Baptist's and all other's who trust in Him) salvation. Quibbles over the Eucharist are trivial to those who believe that. They agree, for sound reasons, that they worship the same God.

      Muslims describe Allah very plainly as not being the Father of Jesus, while Jesus said quite plainly that the God of the Jews is His Father, and He is God. Different deities.

      As for where the Quran says that Jesus isn't Allah's son, there's a sura(? or book, or chapter, or something) which deals specifically with that Jesus guy, and brushes him off as a prophet. In that sura, it explicitly says that Allah has no son. I'd say that's equivalent to saying that Jesus isn't the son of Allah. Want a reference? Dig out your Quran and find it: mine's put away. If you're too lazy to do that, consider that if Christ were merely a prophet, he already wasn't the Son of God and God incarnate, as He claimed to be. Saying that Christ was merely a prophet is equivalent to saying that He wasn't the Son of God.

    20. Re:This may be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > we worship the God of the ...

      Specifically which god are you referring to? During the course of the old testament, there was a transformation of the religion, changing gods, mesiahs and changing from polytheism to monotheism. It's all brushed over by renaming everything God and Lord and assuming that it's all the same.

      The "Yahweh" mountain/volcano god, or the Elohim gods of the elements?

      Allah is probably closer to Yahweh, as it is singular.

    21. Re:This may be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sorry, AC, that's not right. The old testament gives God many names, but they're all different descriptions of the same God. In English, we'd probably call these adjectives rather than names.

      It was the custom to use titles as names, and names as descriptions. Abraham started out as Abrim (spelling?) and his wife Sarah as Sarai. Jacob was renamed Israel after wrestling with God, and so on.

      Anonymous reply for an anonymous coward.

    22. Re:This may be. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      As for the difference between Lutherans and Baptists, yes it's trivial, and they'd be the first to tell you that. Both believe that Christ is the holy, living, died-and-resurrected Son of God, that He lived a perfect life, and died to pay for our sins, that His ressurection is a sign of our (Lutheran's and Baptist's and all other's who trust in Him) salvation. Quibbles over the Eucharist are trivial to those who believe that. They agree, for sound reasons, that they worship the same God.

      My, you should read more history. The 30-Years War was fought over details as trivial as this (this ignoring the political reasons for that war, which reduce to the usual avarice on the part of rulers). Most of the Crusades were fought over details this trivial (note that "most crusades" were NOT against the Muslims).

      Also note that not all Christians believe(d) that Jesus of Nazareth lived a "perfect life". See Arian Heresy, as an example. I tend to lean in that direction myself, which would, no doubt, shock the pastor....

      The central mystery of Christianity is the Resurrection. "Without it, your faith is in vain". The rest of it is (relatively) trivial. Including the divinity of Christ. No doubt most theologians would argue that the "royal sacrifice" represented by the crucifiction could not be valid if Christ were less than divine. They are entitled to their own opinion on the subject, just as I am.

      Just curious aout something almost unrelated. How do you feel about Joan of Arc? At her trial, it was reported (by her) that her Angels addressed her as "Daughter of God"....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    23. Re:This may be. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      How do you feel about Joan of Arc? At her trial, it was reported (by her) that her Angels addressed her as "Daughter of God"....

      Jesus also referred to Himself as the ``son of Man''. Be careful about taking these things out of context. I don't recall that Joan claimed to be God. As I recall, she only claimed to be doing His work.

      As for ``how I feel about her'', remember she was a pre-reformation Catholic. That means that she probably wasn't quite a Christian in the sense we use that label today. Though most of what the church taught was sound, most of what the laiety learned was not. Church doctrine had a great deal in it to appeal to superstitous pagans, and by picking and choosing what they believed, many (obviously not all) people who were not considered heretics had some very non-biblical beliefs. That included a lot of the church hierarchy, which is why Martin Luther's little essay caused such a big stir. So, I have no idea exactly what she believed, or what might have been going through the minds of the men who burned her. I would suggest that she was politically inconvenient to a politicised church, and a heretic because she paraphrased what she chose to remember of what her priest had told her. The point here is that there have been some long periods of history when the Catholic church wasn't particularly closely connected to the Body of Christ (the people who, in God's opinion, are following Him). So, Joan of Arc, and the Church that burned her, are not necessarily relevant to a discussion of Christianity.

      No doubt most theologians would argue that the "royal sacrifice" represented by the crucifiction could not be valid if Christ were less than divine.

      ``Royal sacrifice''? I'd never heard that phrase before. I've always heard it referred to as a ``perfect sacrifice'', which is what God always expected, throughout the old testament. As for divinity, it wasn't Christ's divinity that made it a perfect sacrifice, it was His perfection. As I said, throughout the old testament God required that a sacrifice for sin be perfect, and unblemished. You couldn't sacrifice a sickly runt to appease God, you had to sacrifice a valuable critter. So, Jesus lived a sinless life, and was unblemished by sin. That, not His divine nature, is what made Him a perfect sacrifice, suitable to pay for all our sins. If He had been sinful like you or me, then His sacrifice would be of no more account than yours or mine. I certainly don't think that my death will save the world, no matter how painful or messy it might be.

      As for your ``... note that "most crusades" were NOT against the Muslims'', I'm not sure about ``most''. There were five official crusades, I think, plus the children's crusade, against the Muslims? I know that there were several offical crusades against heretics, but I thougt it was fewer than five. The only one that I can think of was against the Albignesians (spelling?) in France. I have never bothered to make a study of the history of Christian heresy, but as I recall they were gnostics, and believed that salvation came through learning the ``mysteries'', rather than through faith. That's not different deities, quite, but it's getting closer. Of course, in doing this, the Catholics ignored Jesus' commandment to love and forgive their (and His) enemies, and that's just as heretical (in my eyes) as were the heretics who ignored His teaching about salvation.

  7. Worse to come by peeping_Thomist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Others have made this point, but it's true: there's plenty worse than this to come. There are very powerful forces that are threatened by the development of Linux, and they will fight to the death. Hired character assassins are just the beginning.

    --
    Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
    1. Re:Worse to come by funkdid · · Score: 4, Funny
      Oooh I wonder if we'll get the standard intern that comes out to say she had an affair with Linus! Maybe we'll get a house guest that claims he bought Crystal Meth for Linus! Maybe some random people will come out and say that he's a communist cocaine using draft dodger.

      Oh wait, all those people are taken, it's a presidential election year here in the US.

      I wonder what OJ Simpson thinks about all this....

      --

      I boycott signatures

    2. Re:Worse to come by funkdid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are also powerful forces that stand to make some serious money from Linux. I for one am excited for the upcoming firefight, it should be interesting.

      --

      I boycott signatures

    3. Re:Worse to come by Tailhook · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are very powerful forces that are threatened by the development of Linux, and they will fight to the death. Hired character assassins are just the beginning.

      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

      - Mahatma Gandhi

      Bring it!

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    4. Re:Worse to come by ACNiel · · Score: 3, Funny

      There needs to be new moderation categories. Let's start with:

      Ignorant, Vague, Paranoid Fear Mongering

      and

      Legitimate, but ultimately unfounded, concern.

      And I think it is obvious what category "these sinister forces" belong in.

    5. Re:Worse to come by rsadelle · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wonder what OJ Simpson thinks about all this....

      Oh, I'm sure he's out there looking for the real author of the Linux kernal.

    6. Re:Worse to come by csbruce · · Score: 1

      There are very powerful forces that are threatened by the development of Linux, and they will fight to the death. Hired character assassins are just the beginning.

      Yes, but these hired assassins are more like the Saturday-Night-Live ninjas. If SCO's non-case and Ken Brown's bizarre nonsense are the best they can muster, then they don't have much hope. Their ridiculous opening attacks will tarnish any better-thought-out attacks that might follow. People will become accustomed to the pattern of some Microsoft shill ranting off about theft, communism, and ever-more-insane notions of derivative works and other legal theories followed by an implosion of the accusor when put-up-or-shut-up time finally comes. Microsoft would be better served by cutting off these idiots before Linux's legitimacy prevails in court or mass consciousness.

    7. Re:Worse to come by mrwonton · · Score: 1

      In my experience, we need a "Just Plain Wrong" mod.

      --
      Not more than you need, just more than you want
    8. Re:Worse to come by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      Others have made this point, but it's true: there's plenty worse than this to come. There are very powerful forces that are threatened by the development of Linux, and they will fight to the death. Hired character assassins are just the beginning.

      Are hired character assassins better than the unpaid free-software ones in terms of quality? Because I certainly see a lot of character assassination going on on this very website, aimed at a couple of people with the initials SB and WHG3.

      Or is character assassination only wrong when it's happening to one of your guys?

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    9. Re:Worse to come by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe we'll get a house guest that claims he bought Crystal Meth for Linus!

      That would explain some of the filesystem bugs.

      Just kidding, geez, don't flame me into the ground.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    10. Re:Worse to come by Draknor · · Score: 1

      Definitely appears that way... :-)

      Seriously though, I think the attempted character assassination going on against Linus is far more effective (or at least potentially effective), than the postings on /.

      And in the article, I thought KB did actually raise a few interesting questions, although he did nothing to address them (and Tanenbaum had some effective rebuttals in that regard) - issues such as IP rights & ownership. Of course, those could be applied just as effectively (probably moreso) to Microsoft than to Linux. And they are not limited to the open-source domain - open source just makes infringement easier to find.

    11. Re:Worse to come by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Well, his lawyers might be :)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    12. Re:Worse to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously he's a commie, he's finnish, for god's sake! Finland was part of Russia, therefore they're all commies! I believe the whole Finland breaking away from Russia thing was a covert operation to smuggle Linus to the US several decades later, so he could start to undermine Uncle Sam from the inside!

      This is so blatantly obvious that I'm not sure how no one saw it before. Really! You must all be commies too, and have been trying to cover up for them/him all this time!

      Bastards!

    13. Re:Worse to come by dubl-u · · Score: 1
      I wonder what OJ Simpson thinks about all this....
      Oh, I'm sure he's out there looking for the real author of the Linux kernal.

      Good luck finding the author of a kernel on a golf course. It's not like he was having much luck tracking down a murderer there, but kernel authors are, unfortunately rarer. And they spend much less time in the sun.
    14. Re:Worse to come by Delphinios · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's possible to Character Assainate Strong Bad, or Whugthree.

      Who's Whugthree?

  8. Soap by Kid+Zero · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...and people wonder why I don't watch soap operas anymore. Who needs them with stuff like this in real life!

    1. Re:Soap by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1
      WTF were you thinking when you were watching Soaps before ?

      Seriously do any of the /. crowd watch soaps or reality TV ? How can you stand that ? The only TV I watch is 11pm-12 adult swim.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    2. Re:Soap by Kenja · · Score: 1

      Just wait till the episode where we learn that Ken Brown is the love child of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Of, and Linus will have cancer and Andrew Tanenbaum will fall into a coma.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    3. Re:Soap by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      No, no, no! Ken Brown will be revealed as Linus' evil twin!

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
  9. Selective Comprehension by xerph · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After half an hour of repeatedly answering the question "Could Linus have written the Linux kernel by himself?" in the affirmative, I was getting a bit irritated.

    Its always been interesting that when somebody (or a group of people) don't want to hear a certain answer, it often goes in one ear and out the other just in time for another "listener" to ask the same basic question phrased slightly differently in hopes of obtaining a reply closer to the desired view. It seems that many times the media in general has this practice almost molded into an art.

    1. Re:Selective Comprehension by csbruce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its always been interesting that when somebody (or a group of people) don't want to hear a certain answer, it often goes in one ear and out the other just in time for another "listener" to ask the same basic question phrased slightly differently in hopes of obtaining a reply closer to the desired view.

      I really don't understand why he bothered to interview experts. If we assume for one second that Brown isn't a complete idiot, he should have realized that the experts would tell him the truth and then might get a bit uppity when he twisted their words to fit his own agenda. He might also have guessed that they would know how to use that 'inner-net thingy'.

      Really, he should have interviewed 'experts' like Rob Enderle or Laura Didio. He wouldn't have had to twist their words and they might have come up with even more creative insults than Brown himself. I guess this a proof by contradiction that Brown is a complete idiot.

    2. Re:Selective Comprehension by tsg · · Score: 1

      Its always been interesting that when somebody (or a group of people) don't want to hear a certain answer, it often goes in one ear and out the other just in time for another "listener" to ask the same basic question phrased slightly differently in hopes of obtaining a reply closer to the desired view. It seems that many times the media in general has this practice almost molded into an art.

      It's a common technique when questioning someone to try to catch them in a lie.

      Attorney: Are you aware the defendant was there?

      Witness: No.

      [some questions later]

      Attorney: When did you become aware he was there?

      Witness: He called me afterwards.

      I don't doubt that Brown thought he was doing the same thing. The scary thing is that the people putting out the FUD are starting to believe their own bullshit.

      --
      People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
    3. Re:Selective Comprehension by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      • Its always been interesting that when somebody (or a group of people) don't want to hear a certain answer, it often goes in one ear and out the other just in time for another "listener" to ask the same basic question phrased slightly differently in hopes of obtaining a reply closer to the desired view. It seems that many times the media in general has this practice almost molded into an art.
      Actually law enforcement in general, but the FBI in particular has honed this one to a fine art. They will ask you the same question a million different ways over and over and over and over and over hoping to trip you up to get the answer they want. That's why you should never talk to the FBI at least without a lawyer present, for any reason.
    4. Re:Selective Comprehension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very common practice. Consider:

      "Do you support the war in Iraq?" No.
      "Do you think the US should engage in combat with Iraqis?" No.
      "Do you feel that Iraq harbors terrorists?" Possibly.
      "Do you feel that terrorists might target the US?" Probably.
      "Do you feel that the US has a right to protect itself from terrorists?" Sure.
      "Would you say that a country harboring terrorists, possibly Iraq, planning to attack the US, should have military action taken against it?" I guess.

      There you have it, folks. The MediaWay(tm) of getting the answer you desire.

    5. Re:Selective Comprehension by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


      I really don't understand why he bothered to interview experts. If we assume for one second that Brown isn't a complete idiot, he should have realized that the experts would tell him the truth and then might get a bit uppity when he twisted their words to fit his own agenda. He might also have guessed that they would know how to use that 'inner-net thingy'.


      Brown explains the reason right at the beginning:

      AdTI did not publish Samizdat with the expectation that rabidly pro-Linux developers would embrace it. Its purpose is to provide U.S. leadership with a researched presentation on attribution and intellectual property problems with the hybrid source code model, particularly Linux. It is our hope that leadership would find this document helpful with public policy decisions regarding its future investment in Linux and other hybrid source products.

      If I may be so bold as offer a translation...

      I didn't write this for those of you who know about Unix, it's history, and the foundation and history of Open Source. I wrote this to convince U.S. Legislatures and Industry to either shun or actively hound Linux and the GPL license.

      Ken Brown isn't interested in truth. He's interested in crafting credability. If he manipulates the facts and his interviews properly, he can have it appear that he has wide-ranging support from definitive experts.

      The fact that these experts strongly discount Brown's claims isn't important. Ken's readership won't see these counter-claims. These readers don't know how to use the "inner-net thingy." Or, at the least, where to look.
    6. Re:Selective Comprehension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we assume for one second that Brown isn't a complete idiot...

      Sorry, but I have to stop reading your post at that point because you start your argument with a false premise.

    7. Re:Selective Comprehension by golgafrincham · · Score: 1

      Its always been interesting that when somebody (or a group of people) don't want to hear a certain answer, it often goes in one ear and out the other just in time for another "listener" to ask the same basic question phrased slightly differently in hopes of obtaining a reply closer to the desired view.

      while this is true, for me it's always been interesting that such an obvious fact still generates interest ;) this is one of the most popular patterns in human communication and maybe the cause of a lot of trouble.

      --
      beer as in "free beer"
    8. Re:Selective Comprehension by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      This is a common interrogation technique.

      When people are prepared to lie about something, like if they were out at the movies last night instead of at the office, where they told the wife they would be... asking them a direct question will get you a direct lie?

      "Were you at the movies last night?" "No"

      Asking them an indirect question, though, and they will most likely speak before realizing their mistake.

      "What did you think of the movie?" "It was good.. errr.. what movie?"

      or better

      "Did you see that accident on 5th street last night?" "What accident?"

    9. Re:Selective Comprehension by dheltzel · · Score: 1
      I've noticed that also. Strange how people with an agenda feel they can skip being unbiased, even if they are (like the media) assumed to be as some sort of code of ethics. I think their passions get them carried away and they often are so transparent about their agenda they really look like fools.

      I thought of another example of this, remember the Presiedential press conference when all the reporters were trying desperately to get a personal apology from the President of the "WMD issue". They so obviously wanted a "sound bite" to help his opponents politically, that they kept asking the same (thinly veiled) question over and over. It's like the reporters agreed ahead of time and were doing some sort of tag team to get what they wanted. In the end they didn't get it and wasted a lot of question time making themselves look like idiots.

    10. Re:Selective Comprehension by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You've obviously never been interrogated for a criminal or civil problem nor gone through a psychological evaluation. This is standard fare in such situations.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    11. Re:Selective Comprehension by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Brown went looking for dirt and bias. He heard about the rather public "flame war" between Tanenbaum and Torvalds - the microkernal vs monolithic kernal dispute. Brown was looking for an emotional and biased personal attack. He wanted someone who would twist or ignore facts to fit a personal smear campaign.

      Tanenbaum certainly took the opportunity to rant on Torvalds' choice of a monolithic kernal, but actually supported Torvalds everywhere else. Not exactly what Brown was expecting.

      Different personality types have different strengths and weaknesses, and one aspect of hacker/scientist types that tends to baffle most people is having a huge fight over X (especially where X is an intellectual dispute) and simultaneously be calm, rational, and even kind about everything else. In particular I recall my ex-girlfriend asking how I could possibly be so nice to her at the same time I was furious about X.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  10. And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by gsfprez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    http://www.adti.net/samizdat/open.contradictions.h tml references an ESR quote from Cathedral.

    Of course - i'm not sure they're aware that Minix isn't exactly Solaris-level UNIX that Linux is approaching rapidly...

    Where the idea that the go-cart of Linux 0.1 - which borrowed the ideas of 4 wheels, axles, steering wheel and brakes from Ford cars - is the same thing as stealing Fords from the lot remains to be still explained by AdTI.

    --
    guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
    1. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by Shimmer · · Score: 4, Informative
      Here's the damning part of the ESR quote:
      Linus Torvalds, for example, didn't actually try to write Linux from scratch. Instead, he started by reusing code and ideas from Minix, a tiny Unix-like operating system for PC clones. Eventually all the Minix code went away or was completely rewritten -- but while it was there, it provided scaffolding for the infant that would eventually become Linux.
      I think that ESR is simply wrong about this. The analysis of Linux v0.1 (commissioned by AdTI itself) found no code taken from Minix.
      --
      The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
    2. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      ESR is an arrogant, pompus, fuck.
      of course he'd say something like that; he's a pretentious ass. keep in mind that this is the guy who declared the "hacker logo" or whatever that idiotic thing is supposed to be.

    3. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by timeOday · · Score: 4, Interesting
      This whole argument over whether Linus could possibly have written Linux reminds me of a quote from Bill Joy
      If I had to rewrite Unix from scratch, I could do it in a summer, easily," says Joy. "And it would be much better. A much, much better job. The ideas are old."
      The article, by the way, is very interesting if you've forgotten or never read it. It's about BSDs legal coming of age, or path to freedom, or whatever you want to call it. By comparison Linux seems almost cleanroom.
    4. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by steveha · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hope ESR didn't mean to say that Linus lifted actual code from Minix. But it is absolutely true that Linus used Minux as a "scaffolding".

      Linux is now self-hosting: you can use a Linux system to edit Linux sources and compile them. Before Linux was self-hosting, Linus used a Minix host. I don't think the original 0.1 kernel was self-hosting yet.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    5. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by kfg · · Score: 1

      The analysis of Linux v0.1 (commissioned by AdTI itself) found no code taken from Minix.

      Eventually all the Minix code went away or was completely rewritten

      Q.E.D.

      KFG

    6. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So a building violates the scaffolding patents. Interesting...

    7. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      If he didn't mean it, he shouldn't have said it. For the supposed avatar of the Free Software ideology, he sure does do some serious damage.

      Here's a hint, if you want to be chief ideologue, don't shoot your allies in the foot...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by wyldeone · · Score: 1

      Yes, but in that case Minix was used as a tool. That does NOT mean that Linux is in infringement of Minix. I occasionally use VC++ 6 for compiling on Windows systems, but that doesn't mean that Microsoft somehow has some claim to my code. AdTI seems to have some trouble comprehending this idea. Could it be that nobody in that place has writen a line of code in their life?

      --
      In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and is widely considered as a bad move.
    9. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by Darby · · Score: 1

      This whole argument over whether Linus could possibly have written Linux reminds me of a quote from Bill Joy

      If I had to rewrite Unix from scratch, I could do it in a summer, easily," says Joy. "And it would be much better. A much, much better job. The ideas are old."


      No doubt, I wrote a complete *NIX kernel in 3 lines of perl. Granted, it isn't easy to read and I have to use a pentagram shaped xterm to view the code to keep demons from appearing but it works.

    10. Re:And AdTI uses ESR comments to shoot at Linus by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1

      Here's the damning part of the ESR quote:

      Linus Torvalds, for example, didn't actually try to write Linux from scratch. Instead, he started by reusing code and ideas from Minix, a tiny Unix-like operating system for PC clones. Eventually all the Minix code went away or was completely rewritten -- but while it was there, it provided scaffolding for the infant that would eventually become Linux.
      I think that ESR is simply wrong about this. The analysis of Linux v0.1 (commissioned by AdTI itself) found no code taken from Minix.

      Hmmm I think we should cut ESR some slack here, I know I for one have repeated muddled info on Linuxes genesis in the past, do to pure ignorance, and being miss informed. One of the really great things about this whole crapola (well the only one so far) is that now finally many of us (FOSS geeks) are getting all our facts straight. I must say I knew Linux was clean but I never realised how clean.

      Hope fully this will all blow up in Ken Browns face soon, and set the grounding for a clearly understood parentage and legitimacy for Linux

      --
      in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
      Francis Smit
  11. Critique of Ken Brown's response (Op-Ed) by anandpur · · Score: 5, Informative
  12. Get our own "institution" by YetAnotherName · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if the companies that have a stake in Linux like RedHat, IBM, and so forth would be willing to pony up the dough to create our own illustrious-sounding "institution" complete with a European-sounding name that could "create reports and advice to policymakers and government" that would instead be backed by the truth. Or at least the truth as we see it and not the way Micro$oft does.

    I like our truth more, admittedly.

    1. Re:Get our own "institution" by kfg · · Score: 1

      . . .pony up the dough to create our own illustrious-sounding "institution". . .

      It's called "printing up a letterhead." Seriously.

      KFG

    2. Re:Get our own "institution" by Bob9113 · · Score: 1

      "institution" complete with a European-sounding name that could "create reports and advice to policymakers and government" that would instead be backed by the truth.

      As others have pointed out, the OSDL already deals with the truth thing. What we need is some hardcore rhetoric, spin, and bullshit artists. We're facing an enemy armed with real guns and real bullets. Choosing to fight them with swords because swords are more gentlemanly is dangerous.

    3. Re:Get our own "institution" by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1

      "I wonder if the companies that have a stake in Linux like RedHat, IBM, and so forth would be willing to pony up the dough to create our own illustrious-sounding "institution" complete with a European-sounding name that could "create reports and advice to policymakers and government" that would instead be backed by the truth."

      Alex de Cokeville? Oh wait, that sounds a lot like that other institution.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    4. Re:Get our own "institution" by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

      I propose the Thomas Paine Institute in recognition of Common Sense.

      --
      No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
    5. Re:Get our own "institution" by SoSueMe · · Score: 1

      How about something like "Pensée de Collaboration éclairée"?

    6. Re:Get our own "institution" by Deusy · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the companies that have a stake in Linux like RedHat, IBM, and so forth would be willing to pony up the dough to create our own illustrious-sounding "institution" complete with a European-sounding name that could "create reports and advice to policymakers and government" that would instead be backed by the truth. Or at least the truth as we see it and not the way Micro$oft does.

      They're just not that stupid. Biased, false reports with dodgy backgrounds don't tend to do much for your business image, not matter how cleverly you try to disassociate yourself from them.

      People tend to believe in the old adage that "there's no smoke without fire." I do believe Microsoft is trying to play with fire and not get burnt, but will be spending some time in hospital over these kind of incidents in the future.

      --

      Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary

  13. For a good laugh... by KJACK98 · · Score: 5, Informative

    For an even funnier laugh, I recommend reading this one Is Brown Really the Father of Samizdat? - A Parody by Justin Moore to counter the Fake Research, hmm did I mention about their Fake Research?

    1. Re:For a good laugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK. What's with the Fake Research links? I mean? What is the point of putting multiple Fake Research links in a single message. I don't understand your Fake Research links.

      Fake Research Fake Research (drat you lameness filter!)

    2. Re:For a good laugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All we need now is for a bunch of other bloggers to link to Fake Research :)

    3. Re:For a good laugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the link: Fake Research

    4. Re:For a good laugh... by carlos_benj · · Score: 1

      The best quote from the parody: Brown isn't the only one to dispute the study; I myself have sided against myself.

      --

      --

      As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

    5. Re:For a good laugh... by MrHanky · · Score: 1

      If you're going for Google bombing against fake research, you might be interested to know that a search for Alexis de Tocqueville Institution also leads to a more informative article about AdTI.

    6. Re:For a good laugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original Comment: If you're going for Google bombing against fake research, you might be interested to know that a search for Alexis de Tocqueville Institution also leads to a more informative article about AdTI.

      Reply: Somebody Mod this guy up to +5 extremely valuable information provided...

    7. Re:For a good laugh... by leoboiko · · Score: 1

      About google bombing, does someone know if it works inside a style="display:none"'ed element? I'd like to add some links to the litigious bastards and Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's fake research, but I wouldn't like to have visible links and generate hits for them.

      --
      Prescriptive grammar:linguistics :: alchemy:chemistry. Stop being a nazi and learn some science.
    8. Re:For a good laugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he didn't forget the link to Fake Research. There it is right there, Fake Research. What, are you blind from all the Fake Research? Maybe you should cut back on the Fake Research. Fake Research makes the baby Jesus cry.

  14. Good professor? by SnappingTurtle · · Score: 4, Funny
    I'd add that being called 'the good Professor' repeatedly would have me exploding in no time...

    Why, are you a lousy professor?

    --
    I've found that my posts don't format quite right w/o a sig.
    1. Re:Good professor? by TheDredd · · Score: 1

      Why, are you a lousy professor?

      Of course not. "The Bad Professor" sounds better

    2. Re:Good professor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, it is condescending. Looking down his nose at the achievement of the professor and then taking his statements out of context.

    3. Re:Good professor? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Evil is better than lousy or bad.

      Anyhow, "the good professor" can be seen as condescending, depending on the tone. I'd say that it is possible if Ken Brown is using this, he is probably trying to incite Tanenbaum, Linus, ESR, Stallman, etc. into saying something stupid. Despite nearly every word of the "good president of ADTI" being rooted in stupidity, any stupid slip-up, aside frim the jokes I guess, on the part of anyone I named almost WILL be exploited.

    4. Re:Good professor? by spurious+cowherd · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Can I have 'Condescending' for $1000 please Alex"?

      --

      Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.

    5. Re:Good professor? by Tony-A · · Score: 2, Funny

      "They are honorable men."
      Keep repeating it and people start to wonder.

    6. Re:Good professor? by FattMattP · · Score: 3, Funny
      Why, are you a lousy professor?
      Obligatory Simon Travaglia (of BOFH fame) link: Academic Like Me
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  15. Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by claar · · Score: 4, Informative
    Rebuttal to Ken Brown

    Introduction

    For those of you just tuning into this soap opera, here is a brief summary of the plot so far. Ken Brown, president of a Washington think tank called the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution has written a book claiming open source using GPL is a bad idea and that Linus Torvalds stole Linux from MINIX, which I wrote. Linus, the alleged stealer, responded. As the alleged stealee I also felt the need to respond. Now Ken Brown has reacted to my responses. I very much doubt that when he came to visit me, he was expecting me to (1) defend Linus in our interview and then (2) do it fairly publicly later.

    I was planning to spend my Sunday afternoon doing something useful, but since Brown has directly challenged me in his posting cited above, I feel I should respond. I will do this in the form of commenting on his posting. His comments are set off typographically like this:

    "Samizdat is a series of excerpts from an upcoming book on open source and operating systems that will be published later this year. AdTI did not publish Samizdat with the expectation that rabidly pro-Linux developers would embrace it."

    I have to give credit where credit is due. Brown got that one completely right.

    "The United States is the home of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, an internationally respected agency which contributes to the worldwide effort to protect and govern intellectual property."

    ***EVERY*** country has a patent office. The United States is not unique in this respect. Furthermore, many people think that patenting software is a terrible idea. The subject of software patents is a very controversial issue in Europe right now.

    "The Samizdat report recommends that the U.S. government should invest $5 billion in research and development efforts that produce true open source products, such as BSD and MIT license-based open source. Government investment in open source development will accelerate innovation."

    I can live with this. Professors are always on the lookout for new sources of research funding.

    "The disturbing reality is that the hybrid source model depends heavily upon sponging talent from U.S. corporations and/or U.S. proprietary software. Much of this questionable borrowing is a) not in the best interest U.S. corporations ..."

    Excuse me? A Finnish student writes some software (in Finland) that a lot of people like and he is accused on sponging off U.S. corporations? And last time I checked, quite a few U.S. Corporations, such as IBM, seemed quite happy with Linux. And a very large number of U.S. corporations seem to be using the (open source) Apache web server. And even if open source weren't in the best interest of U.S. corporations, where is it written that all activities everywhere in the world must be done with the interests of U.S. corporations as their primary goal?

    "Linux is a leprosy; ..."

    This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct. Does he mean "Linus has Hansen's disease"? I hope not. But if he does, fortunately, it is highly treatable these days. If he means Linux is wasting away, the facts speak otherwise. If he means "Linux is very contagious" this is true, but a better wording could have been chosen.

    "... and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector. Software is also embedded in hardware, chips, printers and even consumer electronics

    --
    I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous...
    1. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by FerretFrottage · · Score: 1
      Well if he does have Hansen's Disease, he can always move to Hawaii Molokai

      BTW, if you ever do go to Hawaii, try to plan single day on that island...very interesting place. There is a guided mule ride down the seacliffs to the village where the "Lepers" were forced to live.

      --
      "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
    2. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by MrBlackBand · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      And even if open source weren't in the best interest of U.S. corporations, where is it written that all activities everywhere in the world must be done with the interests of U.S. corporations as their primary goal?

      It has been like this for most of the 20th centry and all of the 21st (so far). If you are a brutal dictator you're okay in the eyes of the U.S. government (you may have even been installed by the CIA) as long as you allow private corporations to do business in your country. If you are a socialist or even *gasp!* communist government you are evil, even if you are not a dictatorship.

      --
      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
    3. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by Ninwa · · Score: 0

      "I feel I should respond. I will do this in the form of commenting on his posting. His comments are set off typographically like this:" Where I'm from that's called "cutting up their post" or "snip and flame".

    4. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by starm_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "... and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector. Software is also embedded in hardware, chips, printers and even consumer electronics. Should embedded software become 'free' too, it would be natural to conclude the value of hardware will spiral downward as well."

      I'm afraid to said that Ken Brown is completely right here. I have been lobying for years to ban the use of light bulbs. Light bulb technology and any other electrical light producing devices have been reducing the value of candles for years now. Not just candles have been affected. Because of the low price of "electric" lighting other products are losing value because light bulbs are being used in their manufacturing plants.

      There are deleterious effects on the whole US economy. Products have a lot less value and are available at a very lower price. Costly power lines have been built wasting precious money from the tax payers.

      Please help me stop the light bulbs and all other kinds of electric lighting.

    5. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Bill Gates attened Lakeside high school. Lakeside got two small DEC computers on loan later in 1969 and Gates obtained a paper tape with an assembler and the source code for BASIC for a PDP-8. He used it to begin work on a BASIC interpreter.


      Prior to writing his own version of BASIC, Bill had access to a source version of Ditigal Basic. So did Bill Gates and Paul Allen really write the first version of Microsoft Basic?


      This might be the basis for a good book.

    6. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by radish · · Score: 1

      If you are a socialist or even *gasp!* communist government you are evil, even if you are not a dictatorship.


      Interesting. You realise that includes most of Europe don't you? Certainly Germany, Italy, France, UK (depending on who you ask). Should we expect the invasion/liberation soon?

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    7. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by Sick+Boy · · Score: 1

      Funny you should ask... yes. Yes, you should.

      --
      Does narcissism count as a hobby? --Shawn Latimer
    8. Re:Formatted Article Text (site getting slow) by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      s/light bulbs/automobile

      s/candles/horses

      --

      s/light bulbs/theaters

      s/candles/VHS

      --

      Indeed.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  16. Odd by Nimrangul · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd say being called, "the good Professor," would be preferrable to others, say for example, "the Nutty Professor."

    --
    I'm sick of following my dreams - I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later.
  17. Used to be exciting by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

    but ADTI and Ken Brown are just coming off as idiots so I don't even laugh anymore. Seriously, anyone of us could debunk their claims.

  18. OJ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OJ is thinking, "Kato is available. He hasn't implicated anyone in politics this year, so he's available for some character assasination."

  19. Favorite quote from article by SealTit · · Score: 5, Funny

    "'Linux is a leprosy; ...'

    This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct."

    Is it just me, or does Professor Tanenbaum really seem like the man lately?

    1. Re:Favorite quote from article by HeghmoH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With all respect to Dr. Tanenbaum, it's not hard to look good when responding to someone as stupid as Ken Brown.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    2. Re:Favorite quote from article by t1m0r4n · · Score: 1

      Is it just me, or does Professor Tanenbaum really seem like the man lately?

      Maybe because I read at mod 2 and above I haven't seen the comment, but I am convinced that Ken Brown is a creation of IBM in some clever artsy type ad campaign for Linux.

      The only sense I can make of this debate comes from Mark Twain's "of course reality is stranger than fiction, fiction has to make sense" type comment.

    3. Re:Favorite quote from article by chickenwing · · Score: 1

      From the fortune file:

      First law of debate:
      Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference.

    4. Re:Favorite quote from article by bain_online · · Score: 1
      This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct."

      I guess he can pass it out as an average slashdot comment :-))

      --
      BAIN http://www.devslashzero.com
  20. Expert witness by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    Maybe he is hoping to be called as an expert witness for SCO? Then he can charge $300/hour for talking about his book?

  21. A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by kollivier · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's about time everyone got together and created one polished and solid response to Ken Brown's lies and insinuations. We've heard from Andrew Tanenbaum, ESR, RMS, Linus, etc., but what I would like to see is a formal and official response to the AdTI book that is being published, tearing up its insinuations point-for-point, in a way that his own target audience (i.e. "decision makers") couldn't ignore. Particularly, I think it needs to be made clear that even his *own* research on how Minix influenced Linux code showed no code "theft".

    The people that KB is targetting just aren't going to "stay tuned" for the latest back and forth between KB and OSS advocate X. They need to have all the evidence presented to them clearly and concisely, and I think it needs to be from all the major players in the OSS community. I think this will *strongly* discourage people like KB from spouting lies and deception, as they know they will be called on it, at the expense of any journalistic integrity they may have had. And the more obvious it becomes that this is (likely solicited) FUD, the more the whole exercise will backfire on those that hoped to benefit from it.

    1. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by goon+america · · Score: 1
      I think it's about time everyone got together and created one polished and solid response to Ken Brown's lies and insinuations.

      Start on the wiki here

    2. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, we don't need a formal group response to this. Are you the one being accused of code theft? Is he putting words in your mouth? Are you being interviewed with false motives and then being quoted out of context with wrong interpretation? No? Neither am I.

      The people being slandered are responding, and I think the rest of us should stay out of it. When it gets into print, it will become libel, and then it will be more serious. Those involved can pursue it at that point if they wish, but until then, they might prefer to speak for themselves, rather than be defended by spokespeople they have no control of. We've already seen that Ken Brown made use of other people referring to Linus as an "inventor" and then implying Linus did something wrong by allowing that. Even if it's well meaning, let's not give him any more ammunition like that.

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    3. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by kollivier · · Score: 1
      No, we don't need a formal group response to this. Are you the one being accused of code theft? Is he putting words in your mouth? Are you being interviewed with false motives and then being quoted out of context with wrong interpretation? No? Neither am I.

      Maybe you didn't notice, but he was using Linus/Linux's imaginary "code theft" as an example of what he sees as the "hybrid source" community's attitude towards IP. In other words, he's saying that if you develop or promote GPL software, you probably think stealing IP from others is OK, and you're going to try and drain resources from the economy for your own benefit. (In other words: Look, Linus did it and he's revered by the community!) So yes, he is accusing not only Linus, but the entire free software commmunity of callous attitudes towards IP rights. This isn't about Linus - it's about GPL software, "hybrid source", and make no mistake, he's trying to kill adoption and funding of it by painting its promoters as immoral.

    4. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by wonkavader · · Score: 1

      Huge agreement.

      Gramattical or not "Linux is a leprosy" is gonna get bandied about. It's a great sound bite. The guy's good. No, wait, not 'good' -- 'talented', as he seems to have dropped his morals somewhere. He's very smart, a very convicing writer, and he knows what he's saying is a lie, and he's OK with that. The guy's a snake, and he's dangerous.

      A fragmented response isn't as convincing as his duplicitous prose. If someone who is a very good writer in the community could weave together the rebuttals, and someone with some cash flow (FSF or someone?) could make a packet with that and the original rebuttals, it would be a good idea to send that out to the movers and shakers who are gonna be handed this "study".

      It'll take both a well written, sound-bite-laden document and some distribution money to dampen this hissing noise.

    5. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      This isn't about Linus - it's about GPL software, "hybrid source", and make no mistake, he's trying to kill adoption and funding of it by painting its promoters as immoral.
      I'm fully aware that that is his intention. I'm not as naive as that; I just don't think it stands much of a chance of accomplishing anything in that regard. Right now, though, specific people are being accused, and I think they are doing a very competent job of speaking for themselves. I am pretty disappointed, though, that none of the rebuttals have addressed what I think is the worst issue. I understand his definition of "hybrid source", and it is an unsubstantiated falsehood for him to refer to Linux as such instead of open source. That needs to be contested and soon. He should not be allowed to continue that.
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    6. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Well, yes. But it *is* into 'print'. Or is internet news not considered 'print' yet? (and undoubtedly it's been 'printed' somewhere, but I can't afford to subscribe to all the industry mags anymore) - I guess I can't understand what you are defining as 'print'?

      Those involved can pursue it at that point if they wish, but until then, they might prefer to speak for themselves, rather than be defended by spokespeople they have no control of.

      Like Groklaw? Like Linus, AST, etc speaking for themselves? Isn't that essentially part of the 'formal group response' in that they are, in effect, our spokespeople? In that sense Groklaw has already joined in the debate against Brown.

      Remember, too, that if you don't fight them AT ALL; they win. Going down fighting, for the community, is much preferable to not fighting.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    7. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by FFFish · · Score: 1

      I think it's about time everyone got together and created one polished and solid response to Ken Brown's lies and insinuations.

      I could go out back, pick up a horse turd, and dip it a varnish glaze, if that'll help.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    8. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I guess it has made it into print. I was thinking of when his book gets published, but he's posted so many excerpts that it's in print already.

      I think Linus speaking for the Linux community is fine, as he is a somewhat recognized voice of Linux in general. Same for ESR about Gnu. What I was referring to is the other way around though. Linus personally is getting attacked, and I don't think it's the place of the Linux community to defend the individual.

      I know a lot of it is about Linux in general, such as that "hybrid source" nonsense. I think the innacuracies about the interviews may be best addressed by those involved.

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    9. Re:A Formal "Response" to Ken Brown? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      I think that most everything Ken said is nonsense. I suspect that he knows it, too.

      and I don't think it's the place of the Linux community to defend the individual.

      I do. I think that's what being part of the 'community' is about; that we support each other, and defend one another. I think Linus is perfectly capable of defending himself, but that doesn't lessen the anger I feel at assshats like Brown, because what he is attacking isn't just Linus, it's the whole community that has created one of the best software models out there.

      I'm not a programmer anymore; but I use and contribute my small part to the linux community; and like what's happening in this country vis-a-vis terrorism, if you attack some of us, you attack us all, and we damned will retaliate. To do any less is to stick our heads in the sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist. I don't think I need to explain that attitude to you, you understand it already.

      The major difference between the 'us' and the 'them' in this particular battle, is that we aren't using the same speculative innuendo and borderline libel attacks that they are. But have the right to, and the obligation to, respond to it.

      Some slashdotters go over the line, and a pox on them. I'm not above dispensing hyerbole myself - no human being is - but what Ken Brown is doing has completely, utterly, and intentionally crossed the line between debate and slander with intent. He's doing it because it fills his wallet. We defend what we have because we believe that it makes thing better - and we can prove our point from a logical standpoint. He can't.

      Fuck. Him.

      The 'hybrid source' comment by Ken was FUD nonsense. He, like too many others, has no conception of what the term 'community' means. He needs to go back to grade school, and relearn the concept of the golden rule. Civilization was not built on the principle of ekking the most dollars out of your neighbors, it was, is, and will continue to prosper, from sharing responsibilites, rights, and the results, among everyone.

      (To those out there who I know will call me a communist liberal - you don't have a fucking clue about what being a diehard conservative is about. Get one. Hint: It's an older concept than you can imagine.)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  22. One man can't build a house by kfg · · Score: 1

    And just because there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of qualified people who know they could easily do it themselves if called upon has nothing whatever to do with the issue.

    Or. . .something.

    I can't wait until Ken responds to this, I can't wait for more Tanenbaum re-rebutals.

    We can tell Ken isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, he doesn't know when to just shut the hell up.

    KFG

    1. Re:One man can't build a house by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Idiots often make Money; Money often makes Idiots.

      The fucked up part of all that is the times when no one calls them on it.

      What you said is right on, kfg.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  23. What's going to be funny by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

    is now that Linus is aware of Ken Brown trying to contact him, there may be a discussion between the two. Linus ought to make it pretty funny and humiliating for Ken Brown.

    1. Re:What's going to be funny by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

      Correction. It will be funny for us, humiliating for Ken Brown.

  24. Re:This is why MS always wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..all that matters is that it doesn't look fragmented, vindicitive and anarchical like the OSS movement.

    But the OSS community is fragmented, vindicitive and especially anarchical. If you don't like it, thats just tough. Go away.

  25. A quote from Brown: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    In his own words:

    "It would be skewed and bias to only quote people that are anti-Linux or anti-open source. I have done this for years..."

  26. Re:Dilemma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A bottle of sleeping pills and a pint of Jack Daniels should solve your problem.

  27. Obligatory Star Wars by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 2, Funny
    There are very powerful forces that are threatened by the development of Linux

    ABOUT TUX

    Ballmer: The Open Source is strong with this one

    Gates: The son of Linus must not become a Coder

    Ballmer: He will join us, or die, my master.

    1. Re:Obligatory Star Wars by CdnYoda · · Score: 1

      Linus...yes, is strong, the force, in this one...:-) Idiots like KB haven't even tried Amazon or Google in their 'research...'. "Write your own 32 bit operating system" (with a CDROM containing all the code, etc.) was published in March 1995, for example...sheesh... www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0672306557/ 104-7166624-9398326?v=glance

      --
      -- "May the Source be with you!"
  28. Better way to settle this by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Funny
    Lock Torvalds, Tanenbaum and Brown in a room with 3 bricks, and don't open the door until only one person is left standing.

    And yes, my money would be on Linus. He probably knows that Finnish kung-fu...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Better way to settle this by jbellis · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, I seem to remember that Linus's wife is some kind of Finnish martial arts champion. :)

    2. Re:Better way to settle this by Ann+Elk · · Score: 3, Funny

      Better yet -- just lock Brown in a room. Done.

    3. Re:Better way to settle this by rmohr02 · · Score: 1

      I don't think Torvalds and Tanenbaum have anything against one another.

    4. Re:Better way to settle this by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 0

      Finnish kung-fu?

      Thank god nobody here is a professional comedian. People would be gouging their eyes out to get away.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    5. Re:Better way to settle this by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Can't we lock ESR in there with him? Please?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Better way to settle this by marsu_k · · Score: 3, Informative
    7. Re:Better way to settle this by starling · · Score: 1

      No no no, lock them in a room with two forks and three plates of spaghetti and see who starves.

    8. Re:Better way to settle this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Presumably the two who aren't already dead from a pair of forks stuck in their chest...

    9. Re:Better way to settle this by shadowbearer · · Score: 1



      Holy shit, that's the funniest slam I've read here in a while.

      Have to get the 409 to clean the beer off the desk :)

      Kudos!!!! :)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    10. Re:Better way to settle this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brown wouldn't understand the metaphore, declare spaghetti a ripoff of bread and die fairly quickly.

      Tananbaum would get the first fork but then due to the mathmatical inability to successfully detect deadlocks, would sit at the table for ever and starve.

      Linus would re-write his single fork into an O(1) fork, which could simultaniously eat the spaghetti and dig an escape tunnel at the same time, without Linus noticing the performance loss or dirt. Linus would survive and escape.

  29. Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Every year at the University of Waterloo the Computer Engineering and Computer Science students personally build their own operating systems (including documentation) in less than four months. This is done without any prior knowledge of how OSes work and without being taught C.

    I'm sure many universities and colleges around the world do the same. Perhaps Ken Brown should investigate them as well.

    http://www.ece.uwaterloo.ca/~ece354/

    http://www.student.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~cs452/

    1. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by the+chao+goes+mu · · Score: 1
      I don't think I would attend that program.

      What did they study what they don't know how OSes work, and don't know any C?

      Are you sure these are computer science students?

      --
      Boys from the City. Not yet caught by the Whirlwind of Progress. Feed soda pop to the thirsty pigs.
    2. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by the+chao+goes+mu · · Score: 1
      s/study what they/study that they/

      Still not great grammar, but less unintelligible.

      --
      Boys from the City. Not yet caught by the Whirlwind of Progress. Feed soda pop to the thirsty pigs.
    3. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by dinog · · Score: 2, Funny
      But,
      But,
      <whine>But it has to be hard!</whine> They may need to write (as has been mentioned) 10,000 lines of code in a year. That would be, gasp !, almost 28 lines of code per day. What programmer could possibly write that much code ? </SARCASM>

      Personally, I've had programming exams that required me to write far more than 28 lines in an hour. And I do mean FAR.

      Dean G.

    4. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by sylvester · · Score: 1

      Well, CS at Waterloo starts with Java. Then you hit Scheme and Assembly and C++. Most people hit something else on their co-op jobs, like C# or C or ASP/JSP/Perl/Python/PHP. But there's no C in the core curriculum.

      And at least when I took it, the third year "baby OS" (CS354) course was still in the core. I think it's not now, as there's significant curriculum shuffling going on.

      -Rob

    5. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original parent was a little misleading. CS354 (operating systems) is a prereq to CS452 (real-time operating systems). In CS354, they start with a toy OS (NachOS), and add some more functionality. From what I heard from friends who took CS452, you have to start from scratch, but you are largely creating things you learned about in CS354.

      Strictly speaking, back in the day (7 years ago), Waterloo CS never really "taught" C or C++. You would start off by learning Pascal, then Modula-3, some assembler, and some scheme (at least that's the order I remember). Once you have a few languages under your belt, you should really be able to sit down and start programming in a new language. If you have to "learn" to program in a new language, you aren't a very good/experienced programmer yet. Granted, you might not be able to take advantage of all that the new language has to offer, but you should be able to implement some simple data types, and common algorithms.

    6. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by etymxris · · Score: 4, Informative

      LOC is a terrible measure of...anything. It depends on your application, the algorithms used for it, how good of a coder you are, etc. I've ported projects where I ended up with less lines than I started! I must be a terrible coder as I was writing -5 lines of code a day.

      OS software is hard. It's hard to write, it's hard to debug. Much harder than your typical RAD business app. So LOC in one means little to the other.

      Finally, in pretty much any application, how difficult LOC are to write depend on how big the application is. So, lines 10,000 to 10,100 are much more difficult (typically) than lines 0 to 100. Even this is dependent, of course. Are you changing something that affects many modules, or is it a fairly independent new addition?

      Anyway, just thought I'd try to clear this up a bit. 28 LOC a day may indeed be coding at "full steam", especially when you have subtle bugs that only pop up 0.0001% of the time and require reworking a function five times or so before they finally go away.

    7. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I think you missed a few things.

      1) It's not CS. It's electrical & computer engineering.

      2) As a former student in E&CE 354 (at Waterloo), I can rather authoritatively say that it's the *operating systems course*. i.e., It's the course where you learn about operating systems, and in the process, you're given the task (in groups of 4) to write your own. Obviously, people know about OSs before this course, but it's not part of the formal curriculum until this point.

      3) Regarding C -- the poster is correct. When I took the course many moons ago, all students had been taught and had been using C++ and assembly in previous years. (Now, I think it's primarily Java.) Students have to learn C and use their Motorola Coldfire assembly skillz to write the OS. C is not too hard if you've written C++ and/or Java.

    8. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am the author of the original post. You'll notice that I listed ECE 354 not CS 354.

      In ECE 354 we wrote C and Assembly for the Motorola Coldfire boards and built a simple OS with messaging and pre-emption from the ground up. There is no direct pre-requisite to ECE354, although we do take a course on computer architecture.

      To address a comment someone else made. UW doesn't explicitly teach programming languages. We (in Engineering) are expected to learn languages independently. It's a sharp learning curve, but it saves time spent in the classroom for learning concepts rather than syntax.

      For example:

      • ECE 150 is OO design (but uses C++)
      • ECE 222 is Computer Architecture (but uses Motorola Assembly)
      • ECE 250 is data structures and algorithms (but uses Java / C#)
      • ECE 251 is Computer Languages and Translators ( and uses Prolog, C++, Assembly, but mentions Lisp, Pascal, Modula-3)

      Very little teaching time is spent on language-specific details. In past years the average to be accepted into the program has been in the mid-90%. As such the students in the program are able to quickly and independently learn any language specific details they may need to know.

    9. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original parent wasn't misleading at all. It's E&CE 354, the Electrical and Computer Engineering's operatings course for computer ENGINEERING students.

      It's unfortunate that the numbers are similar (ECE354 vs. CS354) because I think that that might have misled you.

      - E&CE students are taught Java (among a few other languages -- used to be C++ and Prolog)
      - they learn C on their own (not hard after the previous ones)
      - we also learn assembly
      - we write our own OS in our "3A" academic term
      - we don't use NachOS -- we write our own, for the Motorola Coldfire processor (and actually run it on a real, legitimate Coldfire board)

    10. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by TheWizardOfCheese · · Score: 1

      What did they study what they don't know how OSes work, and don't know any C?

      The original post is a bit misleading. A student taking this course would know C, but UW does (did?) not teach it. The student would have taken courses in how OS's work, but not on the detailed internals of a kernel (that's what this course is for!) Nowadays, of course, many students may have had a look at OS kernels such as Linux.

      The version of the course that I took (nearly 20 years ago) had two parts 1) write a multi-tasking pre-emptive kernel and 2) write a real-time application on top of the kernel. The application controlled model trains & track switches, so we just called the course "trains." You had two people and about 13 weeks to do the job; most teams followed the OS/App split with the people. (For obvious reasons, you weren't supposed to take this course concurrently with certain other courses, such as Graphics and Compilers.) If I recall rightly, a small fraction of the system was written in assembler and the balance in a boutique language called WSL (Waterloo Systems Language), so C was of no direct use anyway.

      Are you sure these are computer science students?

      In fact, the CS/EE cross listing in the original post indicates that some students are engineers, not CS. But in my day it was all CS.

      --

      "The good reader is a rarer swan than the good writer."
    11. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apologies. I was actually writing with regards to your link to the CS452 home page. Off-hand, I know very little about the ECE curriculum (although I do remember the pre-Quest days, when they could still call it E&CE. I can't believe Quest can't handle ampersands.) My reference to CS354 was as a prereq to CS452, and had nothing to do with your link to ECE 354.

      Regardless, we seem to be in agreement on all relevant points, and risk simply repeating ourselves.

    12. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      When I was an undergrad I was taught (by a lecturer who was particularly keen on formal methods) that the average programmer can write 5 lines of bug free code per day. 28 probably means a lot of bugs are left in...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    13. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeezus what a course. I took it about 12 years ago. Along with the trains, there was a robotic arm. Surrounding the arm was a complex track -- you dropped a ball at the top of the track and had to catch it at the bottom (before it hit the floor) and drop it at the top again. You could flip gates etc to change direction and neat things like that.

      My masochistic partner decided we should set the course record for the most balls juggled. Hardly saw any of my roommates that term. Also started smoking. Believe they removed the robot soon after -- could have been the very unfortunate accident "Robbie" had with a sidewall during the final demo.

    14. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Every year at the University of Waterloo the Computer Engineering and Computer Science students personally build their own operating systems (including documentation) in less than four months. This is done without any prior knowledge of how OSes work and without being taught C.

      Which is what I've been saying since this crap came out. Ken Brown might be surprised to learn that many, many students have written compilers as class projects, too. (Having done both, frankly, the compiler was harder.)

      The really amazing thing is just how many free (both as in beer and as in speech) operating systems there are out there. Last time I checked, there were dozens and dozens in an operational state, some of which are a hell of a lot better than Linux 0.01 was, many of which are maintained by one or two people alone, and a few of which are actually written in hand-coded assembly language, which is a damn sight harder to do than cranking out C. More than a couple of them have been featured on Slashdot.

      Yes, writing a full-featured, mature UNIX-like operating system is hard. The reason Linux is one such OS is not because Linus Torvalds cranked out a buggy, minimalistic stub of an operating system all these years ago. Any halfway decent programmer with spare time and motivation can do that. It's because thousands and thousands of talented programmers took that buggy, minimalistic stub and have been cheerfully adding to it for a decade.

      You can grow a garden in horseshit, Mr. Brown, but that doesn't mean you pulled the garden straight out of the horse's ass. Your book, on the other hand...

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    15. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Jaywalk · · Score: 1
      Let's see:

      $ cat *.sh ../etc/*.awk ../sqr/*.sqr ../sql/*.sql | wc -l
      109807

      So my current client has had over 109,807 lines of shell, awk, SQR and P-SQL code written for this project so far. Of course, that's not counting the XML or stored procs. But, to be fair, there were two of us.

      Good grief. Granted, this stuff is not as esoteric as writing an OS, but is there a half-decent programmer out there who can't bang out 10,000 lines of code in a year?

      --
      ===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
    16. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Writing an OS is difficult, but not impossible, or even *too* uncommon. It's typically done in a CS student's 3rd or 4th year.

      Here are a few places that have courses were you write a simple, functional OS during the course of a semester, or term.

      CS 323 Summer 2004
      Operating Systems Design 1320 DCL
      http://www-courses.cs.uiuc.edu/~cs323/

      CS262a:
      Advanced Topics in Computer Systems
      http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~brewer/cs262/

      CS475 - Operating Systems Design
      http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/juell/c s475s04/ class/syl475-04.shtml

      CS-343 Operating Systems
      Fall 2003
      http://www.cs.northwestern.edu/~fabianb/clas ses/cs -343-f03.html

      You can find more with a search on Google.

    17. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by underworld · · Score: 1

      I agree with the sentiments about lines of code.

      And further, 1 line of C code != 1 line of ASM != 1 line of COBOL != 1 line of Java != 1 line of any language.

      I don't write much C code anymore- but back in the day I can remember producing up to 1500 lines in a single day sometimes. Of course, that wasn't everyday - but I know it can be done. Given that - I should have been able to physically code the original kernel in about a week. Of course, the hard part of writing any software is not the typing - it's the conceptualization, design, and debugging that seems to take time.

    18. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by p2sam · · Score: 1

      Not really, I don't recall them ever teaching me how to program. We were just expected to pick up languages left and right. Now the 4th year CS Programming Languages course is a different story ...

    19. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by sylvester · · Score: 1

      Then you weren't paying enough attention in CS130/131.

      Or maybe you skipped it, claiming that you already know how to program. Then that would be why they didn't teach you. 246 spent a fair bit of time on "how to program" C++, and 240 and 251 hit assembler, 240 also hit scheme. Sure, they didn't handhold, but they gave you what you needed to know.

      -Rob

    20. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by p2sam · · Score: 1

      That's true. After taking CS246 with Cowan, and CS342 with PK... I did claim to know OOP and C++, and put those keywords on my resume.

      But my point is that taking a couple of undergrad courses* does not make you a "real programmer". At least no more than getting an BMath make you a "real mathematician"

      * Well... taking realtime/compilers/graphics sure does give you some practice though :)

    21. Re:Writing an OS isn't hard. by sylvester · · Score: 1
      That's true. After taking CS246 with Cowan, and CS342 with PK... I did claim to know OOP and C++, and put those keywords on my resume.
      Are you 8-stream frosh '99 by any chance? 'cause those are the same two that taught me shit. And I think I might recognize your username. ;-)
      But my point is that taking a couple of undergrad courses* does not make you a "real programmer". At least no more than getting an BMath make you a "real mathematician"
      No, it makes you someone who jumped through the hoops necessary to get a B.Math in CS from UW, nothing more, nothing less.

      Coding lots (generally) makes you a good coder. Not much else will. And a CS degree shouldn't require you to code enough that you are a good coder. You don't need to be for most of CS.
  30. US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by GillBates0 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And even if open source weren't in the best interest of U.S. corporations, where is it written that all activities everywhere in the world must be done with the interests of U.S. corporations as their primary goal?

    Agree 100% with him there. For some reason US corporations take it for granted that all countries/entities everywhere exist merely to pander to their interests. To this end, they are fucking not only with the citizens of the US, but with people everywhere.

    The Patent on Basmati rice (a US corporation obtained a patent on Basmati Rice, which's been grown in India for thousands of years), and even the war on Iraq (the Halliburton/Cheney/Iraq_Reconstruction_contract connection) are just a couple of examples of what they're up to.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by haluness · · Score: 1

      Do you have any information on the current status of the patent? The article you linked to was from 2000 so I was wondering

    2. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by robochan · · Score: 1

      For some reason US corporations take it for granted that all countries/entities everywhere exist merely to pander to their interests.

      Perhaps that's because the US government seems to exist these days merely to pander to their interests.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    3. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Am I missing something here? Is the government supposed to be doing something other than what its citizens demand? Yes, corporations aren't citizens, but they are owned and controlled by citizens, and as such I see no reason the government should not be listening to them. Is there some reason that business owners and executives should not be heard by the government, or that the government should view them with greater distrust than others citizens?

      I know it's handy to hate rich people, but I don't think that will solve your problems. If you'd like to argue that corporations are doing anything other than the will of their owners then I'd like to suggest that business owners shouldn't be prosecuted for acts beyond their control -- you know -- all those evil things that corporations somehow do without being influenced by the natural people that run them.

      And just for the record, I am a business owner, and I am out to make money. I am also guided by my sense of justice and my understanding that an imbalanced economic system is unsustainable, and my business acts accordingly. Frelling liberal euro-hippie jobless toad.

    4. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's annoying when some voices are more easily heard than others.

      Seems like you have a global hatred of Europeans anyway. What's up, not enough tax cuts this year?

    5. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


      Agree 100% with him there. For some reason US corporations take it for granted that all countries/entities everywhere exist merely to pander to their interests.


      I think the venerable Tanenbaum may have veered a bit off-course here. The mentioning of U.S. interests is done in the context that the "book" is intended for U.S. Leaders. I agree that patriotism is a cheap ploy. But that's the game Brown is playing. And thus it's entirely appropriate.

      Now - what that has to do with crediting Linus or anyone else for Linux is beyond me.
    6. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by dheltzel · · Score: 0, Troll
      The Patent on Basmati rice (a US corporation obtained a patent on Basmati Rice, which's been grown in India for thousands of years), and even the war on Iraq

      They patented the war on Iraq! Shocking!
      I knew could could patent a business process, but a war? Does this mean the US Government will be able to extract royalties from all future conflicts.

      60 Minutes better get to the bottom of this fast!

    7. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have a global hatred of Europeans; I only hate frelling liberal euro-hippie jobless toads. And I respond defensively to people who talk-down "US Corporations."

      It *is* annoying when some voices are heard more easily than others. This doesn't mean that those voices shouldn't be heard. It doesn't mean that those voices are wrong, and it doesn't even mean that those voices shouldn't be heard as strongly.

      It's annoying. It's life. If you want to be heard more strongly you can make more noise. You however, can't tell me to speak more softly. That's like the blind demanding that we gouge out our eyes so that no one can see better than they -- we must rise to the meet life challanges and annoyances, rather than attempt to equalize the imbalances.

    8. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just for the record, I am a business owner, and I am out to make money. I am also guided by my sense of justice and my understanding that an imbalanced economic system is unsustainable, and my business acts accordingly.

      So you're incorporated? So you won't be taking personal responsibility if something happens with your business? I hope you're not in competition with a corp like walmart, or your business area will be re-zoned so they can put a superstore right down the steet. They'll "employ dozens" for minimum wage and drive you under,and the head of thezoning board will laugh at your cries from the deck of his new boat.

      Think it doesn't happen? Think again. Silly cheap-labor conservative.

    9. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by qtp · · Score: 1

      The mentioning of U.S. interests is done in the context that the "book" is intended for U.S. Leaders.

      Everything that AdTI produces is "intended for U.S. Leaders". They are a neoconservative lobbying group that pretends to champion "Liberal Causes" while pushing for neoconservative style privatization (putting our tax dollars directly into the hands of private corporations without any oversight while pushing for deregulation of those same industries).

      AdTIs board (google cache link due to AdTI removing this information from thier website) consist mainly of Washington based political party insiders. There is more at stake here than just Linux,

      They are not playing the public for Microsoft, rather they are tapping Microsoft (who will and does benefit from thier agenda) in order to attract funding for thier political platform.

      --
      Read, L
    10. Re:US Corporations get on *everybody's* nerves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I am incorporated, as of June 2002. And I'm happy to take responsibility for my business, because it acts on my behalf, as all businesses act on behalf of their owners. Beyond that point, I fail to see how the rest of your rant is related, but I'll do my best to reply anyway.

      I'm not in competition with Wal-Mart, but I fail to see why I should be angry at them for running a profitable, large, powerful business. That fact lets me buy things at a lower price, which works out fine for me.

      I also don't see anything wrong with working for minimum wage. Can you support 4 kids and a house working 30 hours/week at Wal-Mart* - probably not. Why should you be able to? If you are unwilling or unable to get a better job, you can't have 4 kids and a house. It's not fair, nor should it be; it's life.

      *It should be noted that Wal-Mart generally starts employees at 15%-20% above minimum wage, and has regular schedule for raises, as well as a premium for working on Sundays and holiday pay for anyone working more than 28 hours/week. For an entry-level job that requires no skills and no education that's not so shabby.

      I'm also not sure what you mean in terms of zoning. Wal-Mart has every right to ask for zoning changes. The zoning commission then has the right to approve or deny those changes. What part of this makes big business evil? Are you upset that zoning commissions sometimes choosea Wal-Mart and their dozens of low-wage jobs over you and your "less than dozens" of slightly higher paying jobs*? That sounds like a problem with your zoning commission, not with Wal-Mart.

      *Don't try to tell me that the jobs eliminated by Wal-Mart are worth any significant amount more than the those that Wal-Mart generates. People in competition with Wal-Mart aren't paying $40/hour -- that's not Wal-Mart's market.

  31. Re:This is why MS always wins by sloanster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    These petty squabbles with lines like "I do not suffer fools gladly" is why MS dominates. All the does is (accurately) portray the OSS camp as a bunch of squabbling, temperamental individuals.

    It's not clear at all what your point is here, if you have one... A CS Professor in the Netherlands quotes the old saw, saying that he "does not suffer fools gladly" - and this is connected to what you are saying, precisely how?

  32. An interesting point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can't find the cite, but an interesting point brought up on the discussion of this on K5 is that now Brown has started poking some of the original UNIX implementors like Dennis Ritchie asking them about whether they think Tanenbaum illegally stole from UNIX when he created Minix. It's beginning to look like Brown may be seeing, okay, well if Tanenbaum's not going to play along with my slander, maybe I'll slander him too.

  33. Uh, what? by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    I think the "institute" exists - it's juat a matter of them publishing the data on a "news" site, and maybe also on a blog site where the masses can be whipped into a Pro F/OSS frenzy.

    --
    Just pointing out the obvious that some readers may not have noticed.

    --
    Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
  34. Tanenbaum is a good writer by doombob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has anyone else noticed how eloquent and concise Tanenbaum's responses have been? I have many of the books he has written from when I was in school (and I enjoyed them all), but here he seems to take on an amazing writing persona. It's good to see him in top shape. Not to mention that he's so funny. There should be a book written about all of this.

    1. Re:Tanenbaum is a good writer by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      Tanenbaum also wrote several books, about operating systems, networks, and distributed systems, among others. They are accessible, informative, and used in CS courses around the world.

      The only real gripe I have is Andy's constant hammering of the microkernels are superior to monolithic kernels. While I agree with the point, I think it doesn't need repeating ad absurdum.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    2. Re:Tanenbaum is a good writer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Has anyone else noticed how eloquent and concise Tanenbaum's responses have been? I have many of the books he has written from when I was in school (and I enjoyed them all), but here he seems to take on an amazing writing persona. It's good to see him in top shape. Not to mention that he's so funny. There should be a book written about all of this.

      Hmm, Doombob... Maybe he didn't write these rebuttals... His persona has changed says you. Hmmm...

      - Ken Brown

    3. Re:Tanenbaum is a good writer by kunudo · · Score: 1

      Erzats Institution: How to win enemies and influence policy makers in 10 easy steps.

      Disclaimer: You might need some funding for the techniques described in this book to work.

    4. Re:Tanenbaum is a good writer by micromoog · · Score: 1

      I think it adds credibility . . . it shows that when he's talking about Linus and Linux, he's not some blind fanboy. He's speaking the truth.

    5. Re:Tanenbaum is a good writer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anyone else noticed how eloquent and concise Tanenbaum's responses have been? I have many of the books he has written from when I was in school (and I enjoyed them all), but here he seems to take on an amazing writing persona. It's good to see him in top shape. Not to mention that he's so funny...

      aawwwwww...doombob is in love!

    6. Re:Tanenbaum is a good writer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the Mozart reference at the end is priceless.

  35. Oh, it gets better! by cliveholloway · · Score: 5, Funny
    Go to the Alexis de Tocqueville home page, then click "Mission" link at top left, then click "Accomplishments".

    I couldn't have summed it up better myself :)

    Oh, I note on their home page that you can submit a study idea to them. How about a study into why Ken Brown is an incompetent researcher?

    cLive ;-)

    --
    -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
    1. Re:Oh, it gets better! by cardshark2001 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is just too funny. Any bets how long it takes them to fix it? I keep getting this picture in my mind of the Seinfeld with Kramer and his little person friend, wearing the same shirt, and the little person says "We'll look like idiots!"

      --
      WWJD? JWRTFA!
    2. Re:Oh, it gets better! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wold suggest someone to hack their site and post a very rude artice against a group, let's say african americans or jews...

      Then he'll get what he deserves....

    3. Re:Oh, it gets better! by forand · · Score: 1

      They took it down! Anyone have a mirror?

    4. Re:Oh, it gets better! by steveha · · Score: 1
      They will probably fix this someday, but right now you get this:

      Not Found

      The requested URL http:// was not found on this server.

      Their accomplishments are not found. Heh.

      steveha
      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    5. Re:Oh, it gets better! by cliveholloway · · Score: 1

      No one would have known if you hadn't posted that. I thought you were being funny on purpose LoL.

      cLive ;-)

      --
      -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
    6. Re:Oh, it gets better! by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Can somebody please summarize what was there for the benefit of those latecomers among us? The page has been taken down...

    7. Re:Oh, it gets better! by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      -1: Missed the joke.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    8. Re:Oh, it gets better! by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1
      Go to the Alexis de Tocqueville home page, then click "Mission" link at top left...

      ...which takes you to a page with

      1. Mission Statement 2. Accomplishments 3. Tocqueville Award 4. Staff & Associates

      So, let's see. It starts with "Mission Statement", follows that up with a <SPOILER>broken link</SPOILER>, and then has "Tocqueville Award".

      So does the Tocqueville Award involve any money? If so, then, you can replace the "Accomplishments" with "???" by virtue either of it being a broken link or of the accomplishments being nonexistent, and one might consider "Steal underpants" to be a mission statement, thereby giving....

    9. Re:Oh, it gets better! by newhoggy · · Score: 1
      Any bets how long it takes them to fix it?

      That might take some time, considering.

  36. No, MS loses most of the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "they are reassured by a single entity that goes about its business with self confidence"

    First, Linux isn't a single thing. The kernal is a single thing, but everything else is part of GNU and thus by definition cannot speak as a single thing.

    Second, Microsoft doesn't always win. In fact, they lose more than they win.

    Here are the wins:
    1) Desktop operating systems
    2) Wordprocessors/Spreadsheets
    3) Servers

    Interestingly, all of these were developed, or under development for more than 10 years. Since that time, Microsoft has not successfully (defined as profitable) opened any new market.

    So you're asking for the impossible and putting it against an enemy that doesn't exist.

    This article, and Brown's character assassinations prove to me that Linux is winning and the tide is starting to turn. Remember that Linux doesn't need 51% penetration to "win", as soon as it has a significant market share (defined as > 10%), the Microsoft monopoly falls apart as there are credible alternatives that will attract individuals and business alike.

  37. Dream On... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Why doesn't KB just cut his losses and slink away before he's made a greater fool of, if that's possible. I suspect that his check has cleared the bank by now.

    Because, unfortunately, the Suits in Redmond (and elsewhere) have been quite successful in implying/suggesting/insinuating that the likes of Andrew Tanenbaum are nothing more than dirty hippies (and RMS has not been much to help to dispel this view) who don't believe in IP, Ken Brown will keep on looking like an expert to be listened to, and the various PHBs will continue to buy his crap. So, keep on wishing, but the truth is, the more noise people make about Ken Brown, the more believable his bullshit become to Suits and PHBs.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Dream On... by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow. I assumed you must be trolling until I looked at your comment history and realized that you don't seem to be a troll. Just wow. How can anyone be so hypocritical as to get mad about people who try to scare people out of using linux/ unix by claiming that those who work on/ like it are "dirty hippies", and in the same sentence also claim that anyone who works on or likes windows is a "suit" or a "phb"?

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    2. Re:Dream On... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      You miss my point. Which is, we are playing into Ken Brown's hands.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    3. Re:Dream On... by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      No, I got that point; I just chose not to respond to it since I didn't have anything to add to that idea. But since you brought it up again: don't you think you play into the hands of those who characterize linux/ unix types as dirty hippies when you refer to people as "suits" and "phbs"?

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    4. Re:Dream On... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
      But since you brought it up again: don't you think you play into the hands of those who characterize linux/ unix types as dirty hippies when you refer to people as "suits" and "phbs"?

      Interesting point. Although it is a common characterization here at Slashdot. For the record, I sit in an office with a tie on, in the IT office of a certain large US Air Force Wing, so I guess I fall into the offended class.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    5. Re:Dream On... by Tony-A · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You miss my point. Which is, we are playing into Ken Brown's hands.

      I would disagree. Silence is often taken as implied assent.

      (That's probably why Dennis Ritchie's reply to Brown, from an extremely unlikely source for anything pro-Linux;)

  38. Re:This is why MS always wins by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I dunno....

    MS is having serious image problems at the moment.

    Their own customer surveys show 'Dislike of MS' to be a top negative factor.

    Somewhere in one of the latest halloween memos.

    Not a single entity that goes about business with self-confidence---

    Big, hairy dude, arrogant in the extreme, and unresponsive to complaints.

    On the contrary---the squabbling, temperamental, individuals often strike up passable relationships with entrepnurial minded business people....

    Even if there is a fair bit of petty squabling, there is a healthy, competitive open source community, and a GREAT deal more hands on/friendly service out there.

    MS sales people do not tend to be as well received as they used to.

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  39. Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The thing that's started to bother me, though: Is Ken Brown just a corrupt shill who is arguing a fallaceous premise in order to make a lot of money for his corporate backers (presumably Microsoft)? Or does he actually believe his own assertions?

    I mean, he sounds quite vehement in his reply to Mr. Tanenbaum. So, I wonder ... when somebody handed him a bunch of money to do his Linux report, what happened, exactly? Did he yawn, scratch his belly and say, "Oh goodie, that'll keep me in spare parts for my Rolls for a while"? Or did he seriously, actually, pop another Paxil, pound his fist on the table and say, "Linux?! Those bastards! By God and all the apostles of Jesus, this is a cause I can get behind!"

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by McDutchie · · Score: 1

      Those aren't mutually exclusive. My guess is both.

    2. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by dinog · · Score: 1
      No, Mr. Gates, I couldn't possibly say that. I'd look like an idiot, and I'm not willing to sacrafice my reputation on... Did you say one hundred million dollars ? Those BASTARDS !

      Dean G.

    3. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't write up a good troll (which is what KB is doing) without working yourself up a bit. Even if KB is nothing more than a hired gun creating PHB friendly slander he has to believe what he is writing, at least while he is writing it.

    4. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by Ken+Brown · · Score: 1

      I think the answer to your question is "Yes". I'll believe what I'm paid to believe. Money is my god, and Microsoft have lots of it.

      --

      --
      I wrote a book. All by myself. In less than six months.
    5. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by RPoet · · Score: 1

      Thugs like Brown are paid to believe what they say. It's doublethink in practice.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    6. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by MenTaLguY · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is Ken Brown just a corrupt shill who is arguing a fallaceous premise in order to make a lot of money for his corporate backers (presumably Microsoft)? Or does he actually believe his own assertions?

      Probably something of both. I suspect the project was probably pitched to him in terms of whatever principles he normally espoused. I doubt he was particularly knowledgable beforehand; while he may have had nagging doubts, it likely didn't seem too implausible.

      So he takes the money, does the interviews, and somewhere along the way begins to realize how evil a thing he's really been asked to do.

      At that point, he's already got the money, his reputation, and personal pride riding on this. Not to mention an aching conscience.

      Of cousre it would be presumptuous to claim to know what really went on in his head; this is a guess. Regardless, someone in that position can either:

      • 'fess up and recant (which is painful in the short term)
      • lie to themselves and keep going (putting off the inevitable just a little longer)

      Once someone starts down that second road, turning back only becomes more costly. One lie begets another, and the whole vicious cycle begins again, each revolution effecting a further disconnect from reality.

      It's like the moral equivalent of credit card debt.

      That's how we end up with suicidal cult leaders, the Iraqi Information Minister, and Darl McBride.

      Whatever you do, don't laugh, because in small or large ways it happens to all of us. Keep your conscience clean. If there's something you need to make right in your life, do it today, before the long-term costs catch up with you.

      --

      DNA just wants to be free...
    7. Re:Sure, sure, I think we get it by now by tawtao · · Score: 1

      "The thing that's started to bother me, though: Is Ken Brown just a corrupt shill who is arguing a fallaceous premise in order to make a lot of money for his corporate backers (presumably Microsoft)? Or does he actually believe his own assertions?"

      I don't think Ken actually believe his own assertions. If someone pay him enough money, he may say otherwise ... may be he might tell us who paid him to write the book.

      Just 2cents.

  40. Mozart the LIAR by ForsakenRegex · · Score: 3, Funny

    KB has already done the "could not have done it at that age" argument. His next book will instead argue that Mozart was simply small and diminutive, which allowed him to lie about his age to the King of England. He was really 35 at the time.

    --
    "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself."
    1. Re:Mozart the LIAR by dsheeks · · Score: 1

      Actually there is some controversy about whether Wolfgang Mozart wrote all of his early works or whether his father Leopold wrote them. I'm thinking KB is more likely to take up the argument that Columbus couldn't have sailed to the "New World" because the earth was flat.

  41. I HEART ANDY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is all.

  42. nazis by happyfrogcow · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is anyone else hoping that AdTI mentions Hitler or the Nazis so that this discussion can be officially over?

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

      Gna, why you did that. By the corrolarry to the well known Godwins law, a discussion where this
      is mentioned will take forever....

    2. Re:nazis by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      hey, you're the one who mentioned the name of the law. I just alluded to it ;)

    3. Re:nazis by twitter · · Score: 1
      He's coming close:

      AdTI did not publish Samizdat with the expectation that rabidly pro-Linux developers would embrace it.

      You have to wonder what the idiot expected. Every person interviewed seems to be coming out to say Ken is a liar.

      No, I'm afraid that Ken will keep going and going as long as Bill hands him money. What's he still got to lose after throwing his reputation away like this?

      Next cue is "Net Thug" FUD.

      --

      Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    4. Re:nazis by CaptainSuperBoy · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm a pro-Microsoft developer and I think Ken Brown is an idiot.

  43. ..but the Linux genie is already out of the bottle by Kurt+Gray · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ken Brown is being paid to put the FUD scare on Washington policy makers in the hope of slowing down Linux/Open Source.... nice try but too late. Every industrial nation and under developed country of the world is already putting Linux to work, cutting costs and getting more from less hardware. All one has to say to Washington is "You don't want to use Linux? Fine. Oh, by the way, the Chinese are building supercomputers that compete with ours, and they're not running Windows. What's that? You say we need more supercomputers for the NSA to fight terrorism? You don't have the budget for countless proprietary software licenses? hmmmm... what to do... what to do... too bad we can't use Linux. The Indians are using Linux everywhere and loving it. Boy we sure could use some Linux here..."

  44. Andrew, Andrew, Andrew.... by thewiz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Please, no need to be so polite. Tell us how you REALLY feel!

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
  45. OK...? by lvdrproject · · Score: 0

    I don't know, maybe i'm missing out on a key piece of the puzzle, here, but why do you guys care so much? Honestly, i don't understand why you're getting worked up by what this idiot has to say. :/

    1. Re:OK...? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Three Stooges syndrome - stupidity is fun to watch.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:OK...? by TEMM · · Score: 1

      Because its always the idiot that gets the podium and the spotlight, and the intelligent people are left in the dark. The worlds greatest minds can write the best pieces of writing and they get mediocre attention at best, but every idiotic piece of poorly researched and presented writing has a better chance of gaining public attention.

    3. Re:OK...? by Jerf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Schandenfreude.

    4. Re:OK...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I don't know, maybe i'm missing out on a key piece of the puzzle, here, but why do you guys care so much? Honestly, i don't understand why you're getting worked up by what this idiot has to say. :/


      Aside from being sad, this is actually quite important. The purpose of this Fake Research is to create a "research work" that can be handed to lawmakers by corporate lobyists as they are considereing policy.

      If this Fake Research isn't challenged in the strongest and most public way, it is going to get out there as research by a respected organization and will be used as cover for making horrible policy.

      It is extremely important that this Fake Research gets branded for what it is. (Fake Research)

    5. Re:OK...? by galonso · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why do we care?

      Probably because this has a lot to do with making useful software available without requiring abusive costs to use it. Or perhaps because a hatchet job should not go unpunished. Or perhaps because we don't like those who seem to be untruthful while those who don't 'know any better' take these so called 'facts' as truth.

      Win## is expensive to buy and maintain, partially because it is expensive to develop, and possibly due to corporate greed -- not good corporate stewardship, but greed. Good corporate stewardship means providing goods and services at a price that stimulates further goods and services while making respectable money for the corporation, and not getting more than fair value from the transaction. 'Fair value' is up for argument, but open source is a good 'buy' if you have the administrators to take care of it -- and please note that you need those administrators for closed source too!

      It's pretty clear that Mr. Browns arguments against Linus are refuted by Mr. Tanenbaum concisely and clearly. It's also pretty clear that Mr. Brown will continue his efforts. It should therefore be clear that those of us who disagree with Mr. Brown as well as others who also seem largely to be purveyors of FUD have a job to do, and hackles to smooth.

      --
      -[joke removed for your safety]-
    6. Re:OK...? by Wyzard · · Score: 1

      We know his claims are garbage, but the book's intended audience -- government policymakers, people who decide whether the government should support and invest in open-source software -- do not.

    7. Re:OK...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Schandenfreude

      This is funnier than most non-German-speakers realize: The term "Schaden" means "damage". So "Schadenfreude" is "joy of seeing someone damaged".

      "Schande", however, means "shame". So "Schandenfreude" is the "joy of seeing someone shamed".

      This post brought to you by the letter 'N'.

    8. Re:OK...? by Jerf · · Score: 1

      Crud. At least I lucked out.

      I'm learning Dvorak, and I was too lazy to look it up as it would have taken too long. :-)

  46. Rebuttal to the rebuttal of the rebuttal.. by Transient0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    that's what it is.

    and people might be interested in knowing that there is also a third party critique of the rebuttal to the rebuttal posted over at k5 with a pretty mature comment tree of its own.

    1. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal of the rebuttal.. by csbruce · · Score: 4, Funny

      From the k5 article (and Tanebaum's site):

      AST: Who funds it?
      KB: We have multiple funding sources
      AST: Is SCO one of them? Is this about the SCO lawsuit?
      KB: We have multiple funding sources
      AST: Is Microsoft one of them?
      KB: We have multiple funding sources


      If only Tanenbaum had been a little more clever, there could have been these two extra lines:

      AST: Is K-Mart one of them?
      KB: No.

    2. Re:Rebuttal to the rebuttal of the rebuttal.. by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      AST: Who funds it?
      KB: We have multiple funding sources
      AST: Is SCO one of them? Is this about the SCO lawsuit?
      KB: We have multiple funding sources
      AST: Is Microsoft one of them?
      KB: We have multiple funding sources
      AST: Is K-Mart one of them?
      KB: No.
      AST: Ahaaa !!!

  47. Brown is out of touch by MarkGriz · · Score: 5, Funny

    "The United States is the home of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, an internationally respected agency ..."

    Is the USPTO is even *nationally* respected any longer?

    --
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    1. Re:Brown is out of touch by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
      No, even the FTC is trying to figure out what the fuck is going on over there.

      --
      Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
    2. Re:Brown is out of touch by dheltzel · · Score: 1
      Is the USPTO is even *nationally* respected any longer?

      No, but it's still respected in Sosume, Iowa, because the USPTO allowed one of the locals to patent a process for swinging sideways pulling first on one chain, then the other. The mayor of Sosume, Ima Hankerin, was quoted as saying "This patent protects our youngin's right to their intellectual property, other communities have tried to copy this technique and claim it for themselves, now, if they try that they're gonna be in a world of hurt".

    3. Re:Brown is out of touch by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Internationally just means between nations. I'm sure someone on a ship in international waters somewhere respects it. And possibly someone out in africa or some such.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  48. Ph. D vs B.A. by redphive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am not fully aware of Brown's expertise in the subject of OS history and computer science in general, but do you think that Tanenbaum might have an edge in that department?

    From what I read Brown has a B.A in English Literature... WOW, this is so not impressive. Andrew has been a larger part of the CS community and probably has a better idea where the 'any key' is than Kenny does. I find the self-righteous B.A. types to be just that. You will never win an argument with them because they will never be able to ascertain when it is over. I think Andrew deserves a lot of credit for even writing a rebuttal to Ken's comments.

    Ken Brown is serving a personal agenda by writing for the right, and to bolster his own personal exposure with those who he wants to work with/for. Doing some research, Brown's first Open Source article came in June of 2002. 2 years vs a life time... I think the term is 'on crack' when someone thinks they are correct over someone with a lifetime of exposure on the subject.

    Andrew Tanenbaum has been there done that, and probably has more knowledge of what is going on than most people out there. I read a lot of ASTs textbooks, and still have them on my shelf. I think its pretty easy to side with him on this one.

    1. Re:Ph. D vs B.A. by sowellfan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a conservative/libertarian, there's nothing about Linux or Open Source that conflicts with any of my beliefs. I pretty much stand with ESR, I guess, in that respect.

      I do have a problem with the idea that Stallman seems to espouse, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to keep their source code to themselves, sell copies of the software, keep people from copying it, etc. People who do open source/free software are good and I am thankful for their efforts, but along with 'free as in beer' and 'free as in speech', I think there should also be 'free to be an asshole and not give my software away for $0.00'.

      AdTI seems to be working on the right wing, or at least working with some right wing orgs, but I think that's a sign of how people can be bought, not an indictment of the core beliefs of the right.

    2. Re:Ph. D vs B.A. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I find it interesting that Ken Brown is a black guy who directly benefited from affirmative action policies to obtain his education. Is it any wonder that he is not a fan of a free market meritocracy? And although he may have obtained a B.A., it is obvious that there were no maths or logic courses in his background.

      Even when one tries to interpret Ken Brown's arguments generously, it is still apparent that not only are his premises flawed, but his whole train of "reasoning" wouldn't garner him a passing grade in Logic 101.

    3. Re:Ph. D vs B.A. by eigerface · · Score: 1


      From what I read Brown has a B.A in English Literature... WOW, this is so not impressive.

      Agreed. The first thing I noticed is his use of the non-word "noone". Clearly he meant to use the phrase "no one", but may have been pressed for time.

      Obviously not the next Hemmingway!

    4. Re:Ph. D vs B.A. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do have a problem with the idea that Stallman seems to espouse, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to..sell copies of the software..

      Stallman has never ever said this. Shit, he used to sell copies of EMACS on tape for hundreds of dollars. Redhat, Novell and IBM seem to be doing pretty damn well for companies that are selling GPL software.

  49. You'd think that with the bank by jonasmit · · Score: 1

    that MS has they could fund a better opponent than Ken Brown. The guy can hardly type a sentence that sounds intelligent much less argue the history of an industry he clearly does not understand. Anyone can see his bias which makes the investment useless. This won't sway anyone who wasn't already in MS's back pocket. I'd say their SCO investment was much better than this.

  50. adti has a point. by peekitty · · Score: 1
    From the reply:
    Should embedded software become 'free' too, it would be natural to conclude the value of hardware will spiral downward as well.
    That certainly helps explain why my Zaurus SL-5500 is only worth about 50 bucks today.
    1. Re:adti has a point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that has to do with the advancement of technology. My old Compaq is worth about $2.00 (US) not because of some free software in the embedded hardware, but because of the better quality of hardware available now. Same reason for old cars deprecating in value. It it because they are disposable goods; things that will be replaced by better, cheaper technology.

    2. Re:adti has a point. by TEMM · · Score: 1

      The cost of hardware may go down, but the VALUE of the hardware does not... The value of the product, to the consumer, increases dramatically as the price of the hardware goes down. This is because you can now afford a better piece of hardware for less money.

  51. Measured Response by geomon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Many of the recent Slashdot comments regarding the ADTI President Ken Brown's defense of his controversial tome noted that his principle audience was not the Linux community, or even the IT industry. His target audience is the policy-makers in Washington D.C. How is that group informed about issues surrounding open source in general and the Linux kernel specifically? One 'trade' publication, FCW Media Group, "produces information resources that help government IT buyers... form an integrated information system to help them purchase, build and manage technology in government." They are 'our' target audience in defending the concept of software libre, in advancing open protocols and other standards, and in correcting FUD. The May 3rd online issue provides one such opportunity to advance Linux in government research.

    Nothing stops the flow of FUD like well-positioned information.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
  52. Cutting losses by Rei · · Score: 5, Funny

    No, I think it's time that *Linus* cuts his losses and slinks away. I mean, seriously, look at what Brown brought to the table this time: "In a recent ZDNet interview(6), he denies having the Lions notes. This is also unbelievable to AdTI."

    It's time that Linus fold. Brown clearly has him by the teeth and isn't going to let go until Linux admits what has been so clearly proven to us. Linus must reveal his theft of code from Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny immediately.

    I suggest that Brown establish a team in cooperation with the United Nations called UNOPUS (United Nations Office for the Prevention of Un-proprietary of Software), with the goal of getting Linus to turn over precisely where he stole his code from. Linus must immediately grant them access to his house at all times, as well as pay their salaries. He must provide an errorless full and complete accounting of his coding activities dating back to the 1980s; any contradictions found should be used as an excuse to sieze his property and jail him.

    His past activities show that we have no reason to trust that Linus's interests are legitimate. His failure to hand over where he stole his code from is further evidence of his guilt; if he would simply hand it over, the penalties would be much less severe. Linus is a threat to our way of life and must be stopped.

    Brown should then, if Linus refuses to state where he stole his code from, Brown should give him a 48 hours ultimatum to hand over the rights of Linux to SCO, or face retribution.

    --
    "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
  53. I wonder how much money... by Ninwa · · Score: 0

    KB will still make off of all of the people who buy his book just to see how stupid he is.

    1. Act like an ass
    2. ???
    3. Profit!

  54. DUPE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like another blunder by shitdots editors. This was already seen on newsforge here
    and also on redat for some reason right here

  55. I have an idea for a new soap opera! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Titled: As the World on which a pasty-faced M$ Funded Mouthpiece Shouting on a Soapbox Stand on Turns.

  56. ken brown? darl mcbride? by bark · · Score: 1

    Maybe Ken Brown and Darl McBride are the same person ... masqueraded by a company that specialises in smear campaignes.

    think about it, the next step is to have Rut, the illegitamate son that Linus fathered when he was 18 (those north europeans ... always have kids early...) speak up and say that Linus was running after hockey sticks, soiled t-shirts, and doggy poop when he was "supposed to have written the linux kernel" ... that would be a good next step

  57. I propose by Ninwa · · Score: 0

    I PROPOSE the question, "Can Ken Brown think?". No, since it's obviously impossible to answer this question, let's examine a question similar to this one. Let's question, does Ken Brown know what the fuck he's talking about in his papers? Obviously not, therefore, He cannot think.

  58. Re:Who are they ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who are they ? and why should i care if they are arguing amongst themselves ?
    If you don't know then you obviously shouldn't be commenting on this.

    seems more like a childish squabble fighting over sweets than a real debate between adults
    It has to do with something that is becoming a legitimate business force and those who would like to hurt it. Sounds pretty adult to me.

    Microsoft Windows(TM) - watching Linux get more un-professional every day since 1996
    Linux - watching Windows get more insecure every day since 1991 (the real year Linux was started). Do your research if you're going to post; don't be a Ken Brown!

  59. Re:This is why MS always wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    > These petty squabbles with lines like "I do not suffer fools gladly" is why MS dominates.

    MS dominates because they suffer fools gladly?

  60. Favorite part of article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kenneth Brown is president of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution and director of its technology research programs. He is the author of numerous research papers and popular articles on technology issues, including the 2002 report, "Opening the open-source debate," one of the first papers to raise serious questions about the security of open- and hybrid-source computer software, a point recently raised by the president of Symantec Corporation. He is reportedly "not the sharpest knife in the drawer," but nevertheless is able to converse with many intelligent people, and is accepted at fine restaurants and hotels around the world.

    There is no knife.

  61. 'No one' is two words by fijimf · · Score: 2, Funny

    That alone would keep me from reading his book.

  62. SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by AnimalCoward · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I read Browns response to Tanenbaum and he makes a good point. How will open source user's be assured that they won't be pulled into court because of some actual or alleged stolen code?

    I don't think for a second that he even came close to making the case that LINUX is stolen MINUX code. However, Brown's larger point is scary. Given SCO's suite this could be a big hairy monster hanging over opensource for quite some time.

    We in the Open Source community need to face up to the possibility that some of us may be cheating and contributing code that we don't have a legal right to contribute.

    Complain about how Microsoft gets away with stealing code. Complain about SCO having a business plan based on lawsuits. But, we need to think about this: We (the open source community) may be getting off light. There may be a time when someone contributes something that they did not have a right to, when it will be obvious, and when it will be all over the NYT.

    Opensource needs to get an answer to this fast!

    1. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by geomon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "How will open source user's be assured that they won't be pulled into court because of some actual or alleged stolen code?"

      How will closed source user's be assured that they won't be pulled into court because of some actual or alleged stolen code?

      Why should open source shoulder all of the doubt?

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    2. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I read Browns response to Tanenbaum and he makes a good point. How will open source user's be assured that they won't be pulled into court because of some actual or alleged stolen code?

      No one has ever shown me any sort of evidence, argument or reason, of any sort, why this would be any more of a fear to customers of open source software than propeitary software.

    3. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by AnimalCoward · · Score: 1
      No one has ever shown me any sort of evidence, argument or reason, of any sort, why this would be any more of a fear to customers of open source software

      Good question. Stolen proprietary code will be defended by big budget lawyers and marking departments that will negate the impact on the corporations bottom line. How will open source negate an actual violation?

    4. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by mcc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How will open source negate an actual violation?

      By promptly removing all traces of the violating code from their codebase, producing documentation showing that the code was presented to them as an original work, and then sending the lawyers after the person or persons who contributed the code in violation of its copyright to the open source project in the first place-- since, after all, they did consiously commit an illegal act.

      If you're asking how the open source project will deal with the fact that merely being accused of something in today's legal system is a significant cost, I believe the SCO case neatly demonstrates that this is not a real problem. The community seems more than happy to support those who are deserving of support, and the SCO case has resulted in the creation of at least one general open source legal defense fund.

    5. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by RoLi · · Score: 1
      Nonsense, opensource doesn't need any answer at all.

      If some IP-holder thinks his IP is stolen by some open source project he can take the publicly available sources and sue.

      End of story.

      This principle has been working in the open source area for decades and AFAIK there was only one single case in which open source software contained illegal IP: The 5 (or so) files in BSD which had to be changed after the big trial in the early 90's.

      Closed source vendors steal from OSS all the time, there is about a story/month on slashdot about it.

    6. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Closed source vendors steal from OSS all the time

      Probably a dozen times greater is how many times closed source vendors steal from other closed source. Companies stab each other in the back, ignore NDA's, actively engage in corporate espionage, and (perhaps by far the biggest) is programmers will steal from their previous employer, or steal from their wife or any relative or friend's employer, anything and everything they can.

      Open source is in fact the only way to stop this. Only with open source do the cheaters fear getting detected and stop doing this. Unfortunately the FUD is going to convice all the idiots who make policy that exactly the opposite is true.

    7. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by FFFish · · Score: 1

      Because you individual contributors could be held individually accountable. You want to shoulder a big-ass patent infringement lawsuit all on your lonesome? Better ensure there's a way to assure that your work isn't infringing.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    8. Re:SCO then Brown...we may need to exaimine OS by ignavus · · Score: 1

      For the same reason that the Mafia never need to pay insurance - they only make others pay.

      If FOSS users need insurance, but MS users don't, that is a sure sign that MS is behaving like the Mafia.

      And they are funding SCO. And AdTI. There is a pattern of anti-competitive behaviour here bordering on racketeering and gangsterism.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  63. Have you read Ken Brown's "rebuttal"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I just read Ken Brown's reply, and one thing struck me quite forcefully: Mr. Brown's grammar is terrible! His writing is full of comma splices ("it wasn't a solo effort, it was a team"), tense inconsistencies ("for years, Linus is credited with being an inventor"), non-words such as "noone," and other obvious grammatical errors such as in "what is anybody suppose to believe?" and "it would be skewed and bias to only quote people that are anti-Linux or anti-open source."

    I have a difficult time taking anything this man says seriously, quite apart from the actual content of his words, when they are delivered so poorly. This is especially troubling given that he is the president of the Alexis de Toqueville Institute! That such an uneducated man could rise to such a position in that organization does not speak well of the organization as a whole.

    Mike

  64. Your project for the class.. by utlemming · · Score: 2, Funny
    I can see it now, on the first day of class. "Okay Class, your whole grade for the semester is to write an operating system from scratch." Some how I see some Harvard or Yale or Berkley professor offering a class where the whole goal is to write an operating system kernel, just to prove AdTI wrong.

    But the article was funny. I can't wait to see the relationship between the bunny and the Minix.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    1. Re:Your project for the class.. by multriha · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's exactly what many US undergrad OS courses are.

    2. Re:Your project for the class.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like this? Posted anonymously so I don't get blamed for the departments servers going down.

      The professor (K.C. Wang) has been doing this for many many years. Its a great course. The idea is to create a system similar to minix (16bit multitasking OS) in a semester. The development is all done from minix, using the minix compiler, so the code must be written in ancient ANSI C syntax. One of first labs (available on the website) is to create a boot loader for your OS that must also be able to successfully boot linux. The lectures really do help you understand it better, and if you get to take the course the prof is very entertaining.

      The course is offered most semesters, and every CS student must take it to graduate. That means that every CS graduate from Washington State University for the last 10-20 years has written their own OS in less than a semester.

      Any slashdotters that want to try it should mirror the pages soon. The semester recently ended and he will soon take the pages down. They will go up again over the course of the fall semester as he covers the material...

      So much for Ken Brown's "Nobody could do that on their own" argument.

    3. Re:Your project for the class.. by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Such classes already exist at many universities!

    4. Re:Your project for the class.. by csbruce · · Score: 1

      I can see it now, on the first day of class. "Okay Class, your whole grade for the semester is to write an operating system from scratch."

      As is mentioned elsewhere, this is done in the CS452 course at the University of Waterloo, and that is the easy half of the course. The real-time-control half is significantly harder and more time-consuming.

      "All hope abandon ye who enter here."

  65. Re:This is why MS always wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    His point is a good one.

    Microsoft has the patience and communication skills to write in a style and medium that government policymakers listen to and respond to.

    The vast majority of open source advocates have no interest in this boring yet important work.

    IMHO, This sounds like something I'd like to see Perens' " Open Source Risk Management" take on.

  66. Re:This is why MS always wins by Tony-A · · Score: 1

    People aren't reassured by that - they are reassured by a single entity that goes about its business with self confidence.

    Yep, Microsoft would rather have worms than public squables.

  67. Dennis Ritchie didn't create C! by andrewagill · · Score: 2, Funny

    It should be clear to anyone and everyone that Dennis Ritchie did not create the C Programming language.

    Check out `man bc`. You will discover that there was a previous programming language that was written by a man named Brian Kernighan which bears striking similarities to what Mr. Ritchie would later call C.

    Mr. Ritchie obviously copied wholesale from this language, with the intent to destroy the American economy, and was obviously in collusion with al-Qaeda.

    Subsequent interactions between these two men were most likely based on the fact that Mr. Kernighan was ``conflicted and tense'' while in the presence of such a dangerous terrorist, and due to the fact that Mr. Kernighan was worried that his own language theft from B's predecessor, BCPL, and Martin Richards' language theft from CPL.

    (Note, if you mod this, please don't mod it funny.)

    1. Re:Dennis Ritchie didn't create C! by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Of course Kernigan was tense. It should be obvious that he stole the idea of using the '+' character to mean addition from Fortran! In fact there are literally thousands of ideas like that he stole from previous work!

      It is obvious that the only way to create an original computer science work is to be raised by wolves, and then design and develop all the electronics and computational theory from scratch.

  68. Record the converstion when being interviewed by Ixitar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the lessons from this is to record the interview yourself. It can put the interviewer on the defensive. If the interviewer turns out to be a schmuck and twists your words, then you pull out the recording and throw it back in his/her face.

    1. Re:Record the converstion when being interviewed by andrewagill · · Score: 1

      I think that this might be illegal unless you inform the party that the conversation is going to be recorded.

      On the other hand, if the other party informs you that s/he is taping already, it might be legal.

      I would consult your lawyer or friendly local slashdot paranoid type before taping conversations.

    2. Re:Record the converstion when being interviewed by Ixitar · · Score: 1

      I implied that the interviewer would know about the recording. It is much more powerful if he/she knows about the recording.

    3. Re:Record the converstion when being interviewed by andrewagill · · Score: 1

      Sigh. I knew this, and was going to mention it in my message bu-- Hey! Is that a squirrel?

    4. Re:Record the converstion when being interviewed by ralatalo · · Score: 1

      Didn't michael jackson do just this....

      Have his own camera crew follow the reporter's camera crew around....

  69. Funny name AdTI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somehow I always read the name of the institution as Alexis de 'Tortville' Institution whenever I come accross it.

    1. Re:Funny name AdTI by geomon · · Score: 1

      A name like the Alexis de 'Tokeville' Institute might explain some of the rather odd reasoning used by its principles.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
  70. Mike Vandeman and Ken Brown separated at birth? by talmage · · Score: 1

    The more I read by and about Ken Brown, the more he resembles Mike Vandeman, the legendary kook who used to harass mountain bikers in rec.bicycles.off-road. He used the same procedure:

    1. start with a conclusion
    2. collect facts
    3. ignore the facts that contradict the conclusion
    4. when no supporting facts remain, affirm the conclusion
    There is a FAQ about MV.
  71. The best part... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...is that his own consultant says he's full of it.

  72. In that case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I suppose what the grandparent post should have said was:

    Who's the greater fool, KB with his million dollars in "funding" from Microsoft or the people who laugh at him on /. all day, confident in their superiority.

  73. The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by grendelkhan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Hybrid source code" is a phrase coined by former Tocqueville Chairman Gregory Fossedal. The term refers to any product with a license that attempts to mix free and proprietary source code at the same time.

    Would this be like taking a free TCP/IP stack and mixing it into a proprietary OS?

    --
    Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
    1. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by Ann+Elk · · Score: 1

      No.

      "Hybrid Source" is a pejorative term coined by the Tacoville weenies in order to taint Open Source's image.

      The BSD license, on the other hand, explicitly enables incorporation of source code into proprietary products.

    2. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by grendelkhan · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I forgot the sarcasm tags.

      While it was perfectly legal and within the desires of the BSD developers, Brown derides the mixing of free and proprietary source, accusing the Linux Kernel developers of doing this, when, in actuality, Microsoft is "guilty" of using this type of development model. So was AT&T, hence the USL/BSD settlement.

      It just strikes me as ironic that this horrible act has not been done by the Kernel team, but by AdTI's funder.

      --
      Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
    3. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by sowellfan · · Score: 1

      I'm a little confused here. Ken Brown seems to be okay with BSD, but he doesn't like Linux. I understand that there are, in fact, licensing differences between the two, but I'm curious about his motivation.

      If MS is funding him, as I believe they are (and probably SCO, too), then why don't they also see BSD as a threat? It seems like, if they killed Linux, they'd still have BSD to worry about, because all the Linux folks would hop over there.

    4. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Would this be like taking a free TCP/IP stack and mixing it into a proprietary OS?

      When you have any proof that this was done other than running "strings" over FTP.EXE, let us know.

      A lie doesn't become the truth just because you repeat it over and over.

    5. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by justins · · Score: 1
      Would this be like taking a free TCP/IP stack [freebsd.org] and mixing it into a proprietary OS? [microsoft.com]

      Way to perpetuate a silly rumor that's completely false. There's no BSD code in the NT kernel.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    6. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by grendelkhan · · Score: 1

      Not in the NT kernel, but the TCP/IP stack was taken from BSD.

      --
      Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
    7. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      From what I understand the TCP stack was indeed used as the basis for Windows 2000 TCP/IP, but that since then some or all of it has been replaced with homegrown code - which probably looks a lot like the original code but with longer variable names and more bugs.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      "Hybrid Source" is a pejorative term coined by the Tacoville weenies in order to taint Open Source's image.

      "Hybrid Source" appears to be a term applied to code that is "open source", but only usable with significant restrictions applied. Basically, code licensed under the GPL or similar.

    9. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by demon · · Score: 1

      Because MIT- and BSD- licensed code can be harvested at will for any good ideas/code it might have by commercial developers. And you know, unrestricted commercial use is every business' right, and you licensing your "open source/free software" under a license that doesn't allow good American companies to use it as they will is just wrong, and.. and... un-American.. or something...

      </sarcasm>

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
    10. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proof please.

      The source is even floating around now, it shouldn't be too hard to prove.

      Oh, people have compared the trees and found the claim to be false? But you're still continuing this rumour? What a surprise.

      Several user-land apps were taken from BSD sources, notably ftp.exe, but if you think that encapsulates the entire TCP/IP stack you're not worth arguing with.

    11. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by Alsee · · Score: 1

      No, "hybrid source code" reffers to the GPL itself. He is saying that the GPL attempts to keep code "proprietary" in a sense that BSD does not. GPL code is "proprietary" to to the body of all GPL projects, and prohibited outside the body of GPL projects.

      Yes, it is twisted logic, a rotten abuse of the language, and about as clear as mud. The fact that it is about the most rational and truthful thing he's said is a testament to abysmal nature of his work in general.

      I think he was intentionally trying to create the impression that GPL code uses "stolen" code. It's a pretty lame argument. Any legitimate criticism of GPL code in this area is not only legitimate against closed code as well, it is a vastly bigger problem for closed code. Any GPL "theft" would be blatantly obvious and publicly visible and confirmable. It is difficult to nearly impossible to detect and confirm the use of "stolen" code in a closed project.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    12. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by grendelkhan · · Score: 1

      I know he's referring to the GPL, but his scenario also fits for describing taking BSD licensed code and putting into a proprietary product. It's perfectly legal and within the wishes of the developers of that code, but it fits his definition just as well as his mischaracterization of the Linux Kernel development process.

      --
      Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
    13. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I was about to reply explaining how putting "free" BSD code into a proprietary product did not fall under Brown's definition of "hybrid", but his logic is so bizzare and full of holes it gave me a headache. I quit :)

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    14. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by Deven · · Score: 1

      No, "hybrid source code" reffers to the GPL itself.

      I believe you're right about this. Ironically, he pushes the BSD license instead, which is more truly open to "hybrid" licensing since the open part can be mixed with closed code. Mostly, I think they just wanted a different term to use to describe the GPL so they could demonize "hybrid" licenses as bad. (At least Microsoft tried to demonize the GPL directly instead of masking it behind an invented term...)

      He is saying that the GPL attempts to keep code "proprietary" in a sense that BSD does not. GPL code is "proprietary" to to the body of all GPL projects, and prohibited outside the body of GPL projects.

      Yes, it is twisted logic, a rotten abuse of the language, and about as clear as mud. The fact that it is about the most rational and truthful thing he's said is a testament to abysmal nature of his work in general.


      Far be it from me to defend Ken Brown -- he's clearly a retard with a not-so-hidden agenda -- and I agree about the abysmal nature of his work in general.

      Nevertheless, there is a legitimate argument to be made that the GPL is proprietary to the GPL community. This isn't inherently a bad thing -- after all, the entire point of the GPL is to reserve its benefits for those who accept its rules. However, most GPL advocates would vehemently deny that the GPL is "proprietary" in any fashion, since RMS has been demonizing that word for 20 years now...

      I think he was intentionally trying to create the impression that GPL code uses "stolen" code. It's a pretty lame argument. Any legitimate criticism of GPL code in this area is not only legitimate against closed code as well, it is a vastly bigger problem for closed code. Any GPL "theft" would be blatantly obvious and publicly visible and confirmable. It is difficult to nearly impossible to detect and confirm the use of "stolen" code in a closed project.

      I agree that the FUD is all meant to imply that GPL code is particularly susceptible to "theft" of "intellectual property" (i.e. copyright infringement), but a simple reality check shows the reverse. Closed source is most likely to contain misappropriated code, because they're less likely to get caught! Open-source developers know their works are subject to public scrutiny, and are far more likely to be circumspect about such things, because they know they will get caught, sooner or later...

      --

      Deven

      "Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay

    15. Re:The Ken Brown-ism that Kills me by justins · · Score: 1

      ftp.exe is NOT part of the TCP/IP stack. Jesus.

      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
  74. Of course they don't believe it by madpoet_one · · Score: 1

    Ken Brown doesn't beleive Linus wrote the orginal Linux kernal... on his own... in six months...

    Of course he doesn't believe it. Neither would Microsoft. MS purchased their first OS and hired a real genius from DEC to write NT.

    It just isn't in their experience as software developers... and what do you want to bet that Ken Browns entire progamming experience is in VB?

    --
    Remain lost in hidden worlds where I reign. Head engine and caboose in my toy train...
    1. Re:Of course they don't believe it by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      "what do you want to bet that Ken Browns entire progamming experience is in VB?"

      He reportedly has a BA in English ... his actual computing experience probably comnsists of turning on his computer and starting up his word processor and web browser.

  75. I think you're wrong by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
    Do you know anything about book sales? You do know that most authors don't make much, if anything, from sales of their books. A book like this, with a very small potential market, is bound(bad pun, or coincidence?) to make very little money.

    That said, this asshat has probably already made his money, considering this whole fiasco was sponsored by other organizations.

    There is nothing to lose by responding to him. On the contrary, we have already gained because of the rebuttals, that gain being that it is quite clear to everyone who bothers to look that this guy hasn't the first fucking clue what he's talking about.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
    1. Re:I think you're wrong by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Funny
      Completely different meaning. An asshat is someone with craniorectal inversion.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:I think you're wrong by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I thought that was a butthead?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  76. lines of code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ken Brown says that it's hard to believe Linus could write ~10000 lines of code in a year at the age of 21.

    Hell, *I* wrote 40000 SLOCs, (source lines of code, as counted by a program line counter program, not just the number of newlines... which would be more) in ONE SUMMER -- less than three months -- when I was 18. My boss was astonished, and wrote me a great letter of recommendation. Part of what was going on was it was my first job, and I didn't really realize that it was OK if I wasn't coding 100% of the time... I worked like a demon, just non-stop, never taking a break, it was ridiculous. I have to laugh about that now.

    I sure as hell couldn't do that now -- don't hav the motivation.

    I would say that the age of 21 or thereabouts is about the ONLY age one could be expected to churn out that much code. That's just the age when smart programming people churn out code like crazy. Once you're older, the novelty of programming has worn off, and output is naturally going to drop, you just can't sustain that kind of energy and enthusiasm for the duration of your whole career.

    1. Re:lines of code by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

      Reality check: The project I'm working on is just over 80.000 lines of code. I have been working on it for just under 8 years. That is 10.000 lines of code per year netto growth. The brutto growth is higher, since I have deleted lots of code as well. And I'm in no way a fast coder, plus I have to write documentation, do support and even some teaching as well.

  77. Re:This is why MS always wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These petty squabbles with lines like "I do not suffer fools gladly" is why MS dominates. All the does is (accurately) portray the OSS camp as a bunch of squabbling, temperamental individuals.

    I see. And what, exactly, do you think that using lines like "Linux is a leprosy" does for paid Microsoft representatives such as Ken Brown?

    Are you saying that Microsoft dominates because the people who support them-- such as you-- are better at taking their opposition's quotes out of context?

  78. The best, most devasting line by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't see why it is plausible for Canadian students to produce 16,000 lines a year but not plausible for Finnish students to produce 10,000 lines a year. It is just as cold in Finland as in Canada so programmers are never tempted to go outside.

    1. Re:The best, most devasting line by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      Hey, it's nice to see Canuck contributions being noticed.

      Maybe all of us up here in Canader are actually the source of the, er, open-source problem.

      Between training our students to (gasp!) write operating sytems and computer languages from scratch (in one Canadian-style semester) and coming up with dangerous ideas like Java, it looks like Canada is turning into a dangerous, anti-Microsoft^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hinnovation entity. A well-known Canadian company even helped define the POSIX standard (not surprisingly, this company is linked to one of the creators of Coherent). Sounds like terrorist training camps for software zealots to me. Where do I sign up!

      Perhaps Finland and Canada are the ringleaders of the real Axis of Evil. You know, up here near the earth's axis. We even have agents working on the inside.

      If Brown doesn't do his job, he might be writing his idiotic screeds with a CNC editor compiled under Watcom C in a POSIX shell. We'll "allow" him to use an editor that supports en-CA localization. If he can hold his liquor and learns to follow a hockey game without asking stupid questions.

      Hey, maybe in the future the phrase "a vacation in Canada" might be a euphemism for "open-source re-education camp."

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    2. Re:The best, most devasting line by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Weapons of Microsoft's Destruction.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  79. 10K lines ... no big deal for a novelist. by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 3, Informative
    10,000 lines ... from the perspective of a writer, is about 400 standard manuscript pages, double spaced.

    I know novelists who can write a 400-pager - from plot idea to submission to their publisher - in under six months. That's with the pages edited, spell checked, and proofread. If you know the goal and have the tools, it's NOT A BIG DEAL!

    1. Re:10K lines ... no big deal for a novelist. by etymxris · · Score: 2, Informative

      Code is harder. Make a misspelling, or grammatical error in a novel? Oops, guess it'll be corrected for the next printing. But with code it's different. It's easy to slap down a bunch of code, but then to get it to compile, run, run correctly, run efficiently, etc. That takes more time. I'm not saying that writing novels is easy or trivial. It's not. Just that in my experience, writing philosophy, technical documentation, or whatever...has been much easier than actually writing programs. My writing probably wasn't the greatest, but then neither were my programs :)

    2. Re:10K lines ... no big deal for a novelist. by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      10,000 lines ... from the perspective of a writer, is about 400 standard manuscript pages, double spaced.

      Ten thousand lines...fifty weeks per year, that's two hundred lines per working week...

      ...forty lines per working day...

      ...five net lines per hour.

      Working full time, Linus could write one line of the kernel every twelve minutes.

      If each line is eighty characters, Linus had to be able to type 1.3 words per minute.

      If you assume he had to write the whole thing twice, and he was only able to work for six hours a day, and only on weekends...he's still only typing 8.5 words per minute. It's amazing what one can accomplish through slow, steady progress, isn't it?

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    3. Re:10K lines ... no big deal for a novelist. by ChefBork · · Score: 1
      Code is harder.

      My experience is of the opposite. Most programmers I know write horrible documentation - they're more fixated on process than description.

      Coding can be the easiest part of software development - especially if you've done your "homework" and created a design from which to work. The design can be as simple as complicated as you want or need. When I design for myself, I usually write it in pseudocode or simple rules that I can easily convert to code as I go. When I write a design or specification that others will need to follow, it must be much more complicated and complete.

      Some programmers can write well-formed and well-running code just as fast they can think about the process -- just as some writers can churn almost perfect prose out with little effort just as fast as they think of the "scenes" or arguments they're making.

      Other programmers must endlessly work on their code. Some because they have no idea where they're going, others because they start with a rough outline that they have to build upon and evolve to its final state. Just as some writers must spend an inordinate amount of time "polishing" their work before submitting it.

      I believe it has as much to do with experience as it does with talent and skill.

      It also depends greatly upon "subject matter". Pure calculative and processing programs are much easler to write than highly interactive GUIs. Just as technical help documentation or simple descriptive catalogs are much easier to write than screenplays or novels.

      Make a misspelling, or grammatical error in a novel? Oops, guess it'll be corrected for the next printing.

      Depending upon what language you're using, most mispellings will be caught by the compiler. Unless the misspelling happens to coincide with a simliar keyword, variable name, model/function/subroutine name, etc., you'll easily catch the former on a compile. The latter may require more work. The compiler, in this case, acts similar to spelling and grammar checkers.

      A similar procedure works for syntactical errors, if you'd like to compare them to grammatical errors. Logical errors (and similar word misspellings) require a little more time, if that's what you would compare them to grammatical errors. This is where a good test suite is like a good proof reader.

      Good software engineers, like good authors, use tools and processes to reduce the time spent finding and fixing problems before they are submitted to the tester (or editor). Good testers, like good editors or proof readers, use tools and processes to reduce the time spent finding and reporting problems to be fixed before distributing (or publishing) the final product.

    4. Re:10K lines ... no big deal for a novelist. by etymxris · · Score: 1

      Well, such judgments of difficulty must be subjective to a degree, as they are facts about the person doing the job. My experience has been that 'A'-level work on a programming assignment is much more difficult than 'A'-level work on a similarly sized writing assignment. I've done both fairly well as I'm told.

      I use school as reference since employers I've had since graduating don't really 'grade' me so concretely, and so serve as poor reference.

  80. The USPTO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is an agency which is internationally respected by everyone who is unfamiliar with it.

    Sure, they may be a corrupt, underfunded failure with a tendency in many tech areas to work more against their intended purpose (to promote growth in the useful arts and sciences) than toward it, but most people don't know that because the general media seems very unwilling to report on this.

    To most people "The United States Patent and Trademark Office" is nothing more or less than a very distinugished sounding name with several capital letters in it, which makes them automatically respected.

  81. What can be done? by wandazulu · · Score: 1

    I doubt that, even with this latest rebuttal, the book will change its "Linux is the devil" tone, and will go on to sell probably a *dozen* copies, unfortuantly all to people in the government.

    So how can we get the message out to them that this is all propaganda? Is there a similar organization that can put out a fair and balanced version and get it into the same hands of those who would read this book?

    Seriously, why is it that jerks like this can write stuff that suggests that using Linux causes cancer, and then nothing is done to prove otherwise? If the politicians are given only one side of the argument, that's the only side they'll know.

  82. USPTO Internationally Respected? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the ADTI link:

    ``The United States is the home of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, an internationally respected agency''

    Ugh! I nearly choked on that! Everyone I know laments the bad decissions taken by the USPTO (provided they have enough knowledge about it). It is not respected by many in the US, let alone internationally, with so many people opposed to US imperialism.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    1. Re:USPTO Internationally Respected? by ScottKin · · Score: 1

      Of course it's respected by many in the US. Try to infringe on an issued US Patent and see how much attention you'll get. THAT'S Respect!

      Maybe you're confusing the words "Respect" with "Love" or "Admiration". I can respect the business-end of a .357 Magnum. That doesn't mean that I want to send it flowers.

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
  83. It isn't whoring when you're anonymous (mirror) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The site seems to be struggling under Slashdot's load, so here is a mirror:

    Introduction

    For those of you just tuning into this soap opera, here is a brief summary of the plot so far. Ken Brown, president of a Washington think tank called the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution has written a book claiming open source using GPL is a bad idea and that Linus Torvalds stole Linux from MINIX, which I wrote. Linus, the alleged stealer, responded. As the alleged stealee I also felt the need to respond. Now Ken Brown has reacted to my responses. I very much doubt that when he came to visit me, he was expecting me to (1) defend Linus in our interview and then (2) do it fairly publicly later.

    I was planning to spend my Sunday afternoon doing something useful, but since Brown has directly challenged me in his posting cited above, I feel I should respond. I will do this in the form of commenting on his posting. His comments are set off typographically like this:
    "Samizdat is a series of excerpts from an upcoming book on open source and operating systems that will be published later this year. AdTI did not publish Samizdat with the expectation that rabidly pro-Linux developers would embrace it."

    I have to give credit where credit is due. Brown got that one completely right.
    "The United States is the home of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, an internationally respected agency which contributes to the worldwide effort to protect and govern intellectual property."

    ***EVERY*** country has a patent office. The United States is not unique in this respect. Furthermore, many people think that patenting software is a terrible idea. The subject of software patents is a very controversial issue in Europe right now.
    "The Samizdat report recommends that the U.S. government should invest $5 billion in research and development efforts that produce true open source products, such as BSD and MIT license-based open source. Government investment in open source development will accelerate innovation."

    I can live with this. Professors are always on the lookout for new sources of research funding.
    "The disturbing reality is that the hybrid source model depends heavily upon sponging talent from U.S. corporations and/or U.S. proprietary software. Much of this questionable borrowing is a) not in the best interest U.S. corporations ..."

    Excuse me? A Finnish student writes some software (in Finland) that a lot of people like and he is accused on sponging off U.S. corporations? And last time I checked, quite a few U.S. Corporations, such as IBM, seemed quite happy with Linux. And a very large number of U.S. corporations seem to be using the (open source) Apache web server. And even if open source weren't in the best interest of U.S. corporations, where is it written that all activities everywhere in the world must be done with the interests of U.S. corporations as their primary goal?
    "Linux is a leprosy; ..."

    This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct. Does he mean "Linus has Hansen's disease"? I hope not. But if he does, fortunately, it is highly treatable these days. If he means Linux is wasting away, the facts speak otherwise. If he means "Linux is very contagious" this is true, but a better wording could have been chosen.
    "... and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector. Software is also embedded in hardware, chips, printers and even consumer electronics. Should embedded software become 'free' too, it would be natural to conclude the value of hardware will spiral downward as well."

    If, say, HP puts free software in its printers, how does this reduce the ***value*** of their printers? It would reduce the cost a little, which in a competitive marketplace might encourage them to drop the price somewhat, but I don't see why having cheaper printers is such a bad thing.
    " ... Torvalds and

  84. Re:This is why MS always wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clippy certainly is/does.

  85. writers, credibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The ground rules when talking to reporters or writers seem to be...

    1. The story is already written in the writer's mind. They merely want you to supply some quotations to flesh out the "interesting" angle they have chosen .

    2. your comments can and will be bent to support the chosen angle.

    3. some interviewers are dependent on "pushing people's buttons" to generate provocative or "sexed up" copy. If you fall into this trap, your response will become the quotable "sound bite" and the rest of your fine ideas will be pretty much buried.

    The writer needs to characterize or "define" you in a word or two and if you can be induced to say something intemperate, there's the definition of yourself that you're going to see in print.

    4. rebuttals and protests to the editor don't matter. Reporters and editors support their version steadfastly and with total impunity.

    5. to avoid embarassment, interview with caution and be as bland and generous in your comments as you can.

  86. Standard stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Say you're writing an MP3 decoder. You don't start from scratch -- there's no reason to. You start by copying the source files from the open ISO reference implementation into your project. That's the "scaffolding" that ESR's referring to. You then go through the project and rewrite individual functions, and finally entire modules, to conform to your needs: smaller code, faster code, platform-specific optimizations, removal of legal encumbrances.

    That's a very common procedure in the coding business when starting a new project. It's very likely that Linus did start by copying the minix/src/*.c tree, and it's also very likely that his first public release didn't contain a single line of Minix code.

    1. Re:Standard stuff by RPoet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Very funny, Ken, you can stop astroturfing now. :)

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
    2. Re:Standard stuff by logan@bitsmart.com · · Score: 2, Informative

      Since I don't have mod points, I'll respond. GIVE THIS GUY SOME KARMA!

      Rather than having to come up with /everything/, from the bootloader to init, without being able to test much of any of it until all of the pieces were built and tested, Linus most likely /did/ use sections of code from minix to fill in the pieces he hadn't written yet. Once he got the piece he was working on to work, he moved on to replace the next piece in the chain until version 0.01 had no traces of minix in it, simply because everything in v0.01 was a full re-write.

    3. Re:Standard stuff by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      That is a big assumption, based on nothing.
      Minix is of a completely different design.

      That he used minix as a host, a development platform isn't even really relevant.... he could have used windows, or DOS or.... whatever had a compiler and the tools he wanted.

      Nobody has a shred of evidence that he copied anything, ever, from the minix source code.

  87. In the opinion of this American... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No.

  88. The quantity of responses compels me to say... by SnappingTurtle · · Score: 1

    ... I *did* know that Brown was being sarcastic. I was just, y'know, being a smart-alec.

    --
    I've found that my posts don't format quite right w/o a sig.
  89. wow by humankind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Torvalds story because the comparisons were too unbelievable. For us to accept Tanenbaum's argument, Linus Torvalds at 21, with one year of C programming, was Doug Comer, an accomplished computer scientist, or smarter than the Coherent team, and of course a better programmer than the good professor too."

    Huh? I learned more in high school from a single computer science teacher than I did in four years of college. Some of my college CSCI professors were the biggest idiots I ever encountered, and easily 5-10 years behind-the-times. I often corrected test questions.

    I am beginning to believe that most of these mean-spirited, burned-out baby boomers blew away a lot of their youth getting wasted or something, and resent anyone who pursued more productive ends. While it might not seem common, young people can be incredibly bright and productive. Linus' accomplishments at that age are actually not atypical IMO, among young people who have decent priorities and focus.

    I was programming for a Fortune 500 company when I was 13 years old. Before I got out of high school I wrote the billing system for a major public utility. Hell, I once got a contract to write a book on C programming for the web and at the time, I actually had about a month's worth of C programming, and none of it was web-related. I ended up taking a "crash course" in programming and writing that portion of the book within a few months and it still holds up today. When I was younger, I did a lot of computer consulting and I'd often accept teaching/consulting gigs on subjects I was unfamiliar with, but I'd bone up the night before and pull it off with nobody being the wiser. 10,000+ lines of code in a year? Try 10,000 lines of code in a few days.

    It really bothers me when people who don't have faith in their own abilities suggest others, such as Linus, are incapable of operating beyond the boundaries of their own mundane self-expectations.

    1. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Marry me!

  90. Adult Swim? by Psymunn · · Score: 2, Funny

    'That's old. We're into this string now!'

    --
    The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
  91. Andrew Tanenbaum, king of backhanded compliments by Progman3K · · Score: 2, Interesting

    >I'll bet [Ken Brown] dismisses the widely reported claim that Mozart wrote three symphonies and performed for the King of England when he was nine on the grounds that 9-year-olds don't normally do this sort of thing.

    So Linus is a prodigy like Mozart?

    Even MORE reasons to use Linux!

    Thank you, Mr Tanenbaum.

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  92. Review the book before he makes a million $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Post your reviews before the book comes out (if it will)

    http://www.booksurge.com/author.php3?accountID=A DT I00024

  93. KB gem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    My favorite KB quote (completely pulled out of context, but not reworded a bit):

    "It would be skewed and bias to only quote people that are anti-Linux or anti-open source. I have done this for years, and will continue to do so"

  94. There's no need for ad hominems by etymxris · · Score: 0

    The facts speak for themselves. We should be considering the facts of the case, not the facts about the people debating the case. Your comment smacks of elitism. Completely unnecessary elitism.

    1. Re:There's no need for ad hominems by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We should be considering the facts of the case, not the facts about the people debating the case.

      But the main "fact" supporting Brown's case is merely his personal opinion that Linux would've been too much work for Linus possibly to have done on his own.

      Since his argument is based only on intuition and not fact, the intelligence/education/experience of the parties are acceptable points of consideration.

      Pointing out that he's just an English BA and not a Computer Science PhD is a completely valid attack on his authority to judge if a computer program is within a certain person's capacity.

      Brown has no ability as a computer programmer- thus how can he claim to measure that skill in others?

    2. Re:There's no need for ad hominems by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      Completely unnecessary elitism.

      Match a Ferrari against a Yugo.
      No need for facts, elitism does nicely.
      (If you need facts and are willing to dig for them, they are there;)

    3. Re:There's no need for ad hominems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should be considering the facts of the case, not the facts about the people debating the case.

      Do you apply this principle only in relation to software development, or would you say that considering whether one of the people giving an opinion on a matter of law was a lawyer or not to be equally invalid? How about a medical opinion by a random slashdotter in comparison to one by a medical doctor?

    4. Re:There's no need for ad hominems by etymxris · · Score: 1
      Sure, if Brown's arguments depend on his ability to discern such matters as an expert, that's fine. And arguments from ignorance are certainly an example of that. For instance, "I can't possibly see how Linus could have written the kernel all by himself." Such a statement would be mute without an expert standing behind it. And I admit, Brown is probably not one.

      However, the original poster was using this as a foil to make the general point that PHD > MA, and strongly implied that we should side with Tanenbaum over Brown chiefly for this reason:
      From what I read Brown has a B.A in English Literature... WOW, this is so not impressive. I find the self-righteous B.A. types to be just that. You will never win an argument with them because they will never be able to ascertain when it is over. I think Andrew deserves a lot of credit for even writing a rebuttal to Ken's comments.
      If that isn't gratuitous elitism, I don't know what is. Even if there are valid points to be made about the relative credentials, that little section was completely unnecessary.
  95. Homework in my undergad compiler class by Get+Behind+the+Mule · · Score: 4, Informative

    My undergraduate compiler class had only one homework assignment: write a compiler by the end of the semester. That gave us four months time. We got the grammar for an Algol-like language to be compiled, which was relatively standard and simple (but it did have runtime allocation of arrays, IIRC). And the work was spaced out over the course of the semester -- first we did the lexer, then the parser, then the code generator. But that was basically it, you got four months, go write the compiler or flunk, chump. (We had to write it in C.)

    Not an easy assignment by any stretch, but we all got it done. I was an undergrad junior at the time, and there were juniors, seniors and grad students in the class as well. Don't ask me about the sleepless nights during the last week before the due date, I still remember it all too well.

    Writing an OS is even harder than writing a compiler by an order of magnitude, and getting that done within a year may very well be too much for your average undergrad. But it's not the kind of thing that a young programmer couldn't possibly do if he's talented, hard-working and has a little experience. Ken Brown's suggestion that it just can't possibly be, which is a weak argument in any case, has no force at all.

    1. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by cbr2702 · · Score: 2, Informative

      When Dennis wrote the C compiler, he had to design the language and write it in assembly, niether of which your class had to do. I think it might have even been harder than writing the OS, seeing as he at least then had C to write it in.

      --


      This post written under Gentoo-linux with an SCO IP license.
    2. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      Writing an OS is even harder than writing a compiler by an order of magnitude

      Personally, I'd guess it to be the other way around.
      Of course when you start adding essential utilities, ...

    3. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by radish · · Score: 1

      Hey - we had to write a compiler too. Ours was for a cut down version of Modula4 and had to output 68k asm. The lexer & parser got generated by the appropriate tools, we only had to do the code generator. We got 2 weeks to do it, and it wasn't actually that much of a stretch.

      Maybe mr Brown should take a CS course? ;)

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    4. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A working compiler is more difficult than the type of kernel Linus released in form of linux 0.01

      It is not that complicated to write a scheduler, a memory manager and a file system. I did something similar in 1993. Ok it was written in Pascal and it used real mode. But it had loadable drivers.

      Yes indeed it was complete crap, but it was not that difficult to write it, and it took me 2 month. Well the system used a cooperative scheduler.

      My point here is: Everyone who can write in a programming language can write a kernel.

    5. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      However if you were to attend a course in language design and definition, as presented in modern universities, you would (unless you slept through the lectures) be in a FAR better position to design a decent language; a lot has been learnt since those days.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    6. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My undergraduate compiler class had only one homework assignment: write a compiler by the end of the semester.

      I had to do one of these, too. Alas, I ran out of time before I got the code generator working, so I made it call random() to generate the opcodes, turned it in, and hoped for the best.

      I still passed, and I've made a good living at OS development for the last 15 years. I stay away from compilers, though.

    7. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by toby · · Score: 1
      first we did the lexer, then the parser, then the code generator. But that was basically it, you got four months, go write the compiler or flunk, chump. (We had to write it in C.)
      Were you allowed to use lex and/or yacc?

      --
      you had me at #!
    8. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by Get+Behind+the+Mule · · Score: 1
      Were you allowed to use lex and/or yacc?


      No, none of that sissy stuff. %^)

      All in straight-up C. We were required to implement a recursive-descent parser, so it couldn't have worked the way yacc does anyway.
    9. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by Kupek · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what my undergrad compiler class was like, except we were allowed to use C++. Great course.

    10. Re:Homework in my undergad compiler class by phliar · · Score: 1
      Writing an OS is even harder than writing a compiler by an order of magnitude, and getting that done within a year may very well be too much for your average undergrad.
      No. I used to be a CS professor. I'd expect my students to write a basic OS kernel in a semester, just as I did, and the others in school with me did. We also had to write a basic compiler in one semester. These things are not that hard once you get the basic concepts. The talented programmers had code that looked (was designed) better, was easier to understand, and had fewer bugs.

      The time-consuming thing is getting all the little details right so it's actually usable for real work. (No one here is claiming that Linux 0.01 was usable, I hope.)

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  96. AdTI logic by Ken+Brown · · Score: 5, Funny

    Linux 0.1 was totally different to Minix. Everyone I interviewed said Linus wrote Linux 0.1 himself. But Microsoft is paying me a lot of money to say otherwise. I love money, and don't care what I have to do to get it. Microsoft even gave me a copy of the same script Darl McBride is using. It's a literary masterpiece, and totally not derived from any other work ever. Look for the AdTI Review of Books, coming out soon. P.S. Anyone else notice how I didn't accuse Dennis Ritchie of remembering anything about Multics when he worked on Unix? That's because a friend of a friend of mine owns UNIX, and they would be upset if I slandered its provenance.

    --

    --
    I wrote a book. All by myself. In less than six months.
  97. As An Undergraduate at a Big10 University... by Black-Man · · Score: 1

    A group of 3 of us had to write a linker, loader, and compiler in 'C' on a primitive Unix (Solaris) box in like 3-4 weeks back in 1985.

    I'm no genius... and this wasn't a big challenge. Am I missing something here?

  98. 10,000 lines of code in a year by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was shocked to see that Linux 0.1 was only around 10,000 lines of code. Could one programmer write that! You bet they could. I have wrote a 14,000 line application in less than three months. Linux could have easily written the kernel in a year. So what if he was only 21? That just means that he is right out of or close to being out of school and hopfuly full of the latest and greatest ideas. I hate to say this because I hate RMS's GNU/LINUX rants but the truth is Linus wrote the kernel he did not have to write all the untilities or the compiler. Those came from the GNU project.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by rlowe69 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have wrote a 14,000 line application in less than three months.

      So what? :)

      I can write a Java program that can produce 14,000 lines of useless but valid C code in about 5 minutes.

      The quantity of code shouldn't be the question, which is Tanenbaum's point. What could the kernel do at 0.1? Well, not much.

      So is it belieable that Linux wrote it all by himself? Sure it is. The LOC argument is pretty stupid, isn't it?

      --
      ----- rL
    2. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Not really. If you told me that Linus wrote a million lines of code in a year then I would say no way. If you told me that he wrote a 100,000 lines of code I would doubt it a lot. 10,000 lines of code in a year is reasonable to say the least. Yea the kernel was pretty bare bones back then to say the least but at only 10k lines it is pretty clear that it was very possible for one 21 year old college student to write that.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by rlowe69 · · Score: 1

      f you told me that he wrote a 100,000 lines of code I would doubt it a lot. 10,000 lines of code in a year is reasonable to say the least.

      Why, do you doubt Linus' typing skills? Lines of code (LOC) is a terrible software metric. The only reason we use it is:

      1. It's easy to measure.
      2. It's easier to calculate than function points, which are more accurate.

      The problem with #1 is that everyone formats code differently, which effects LOC measurements. That makes comparisons pretty dubious at best.

      Of course a million lines of code is unreasonable. Not because a person can't write a million lines of proper C code in a year but because no one would write a million lines of ANYTHING in that time. It's useless hyperbole.

      The focus should be on *what* the kernel was able to do at that time, not the LOC count, in order to make the assertion that it was possible for Linus to create the *functionality* by himself in that amount of time. This is the only fair comparison.

      The kernel at that time could have been 20% useless cruft code brought on by a poor design (likely, as he was a student). This is not taken into account when one only considers the LOC count of 10,000.

      --
      ----- rL
    4. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... he did not have to write all the untilities or the compiler. Those came from the GNU project.

      umm, shouldn't that be GNUtilities?

    5. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Yes Lines of code are easy to count and are easy for a lay person to understand. Yes we use it because we pretty much expect people to write code in much the same way. I guess you could count ;'s as your metric to remove all comments and take into account puting more than one statment on a line.
      Of course you are right that counting funtions or objects and methods if you are doing c++ would be a better metric but that was not in the artical.
      As to the kernel being 20% useless cruft because it was written by a student. I would also bet that it was missing about 60% of the error checking it should have had as well :)

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by rlowe69 · · Score: 1

      Of course you are right that counting funtions or objects and methods if you are doing c++ would be a better metric but that was not in the artical.

      Actually I wasn't talking about counting functions or objects, I was talking about counting function points, which are a more accurate software metric used for estimations:

      If you're a software developer, you should check out function points even just to know they exist as a better alternative to LOC.

      --
      ----- rL
    7. Re:10,000 lines of code in a year by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      That was a new one on me. I think it is a new one on most people. Intersting.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  99. No further action required yet. by twitter · · Score: 1
    It would be a waste of time to collect everything before the book is published. First, no reputable publisher would go forward with the publication when every person "interviewed" has come forward to claim they have already been ignored and misrepresented. Second, Ken will just change what he says. Third, everyone has better things to do than worry about than refuting such a sleazebag.

    Sadly enough, the stupid thing will be published, people will waste their time writing explaining why none of it is true and some people will still be fooled by it. Oh well.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  100. Wrong names. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Funny

    SOFT WARS

    Darth McBride: The Source is strong with this one

    Emperor Bilgatine: The son of Linus must not become a Coder

    Darth McBride: He will join us, or die, my master.

    Ricstawaca the Wookie: ROOOOAAR!

  101. Funny you should say that by T-Kir · · Score: 1

    I think that when new snippets from the Houses of Parliament

    "Right honourable gentlemen..." and then proceed to politically rip into them.

    --
    Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
  102. I can't wait by mcc · · Score: 1

    For the VH1 special.

    [[Camera slowly zooming in on photo of Linus Tourvalds]]

    NARRATOR: BUT BEHIND THE SCENES, THINGS WERE STARTING TO FALL APART.

  103. Microsoft should fire de Tocqueville for this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    one quote from Ken Brown's page:

    We should support both invention and innovation. However, building a product that starts with the accomplishment of others and announcing it as completely your own work product, is not invention, nor is it innovation.

    Nothing could be more damning to Microsoft!

  104. The world outside of slashdot? by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have not idea how many hits a day slashdot gets but I think many people would be suprised how many people in the industry read it. What's even more likely is how many people that write for more mainstream news out lets read slashdot.
    I would bet good money this gets out to the rest of the world pretty quickly.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  105. One Student... by cgreuter · · Score: 2, Informative

    As it happens, there is another POSIX-ish kernel that was written by a student in about a year. That's the Thix operating system.

    (I played with it once and it wasn't very impressive, but from my casual examination, it seemed at least as advanced as Linux 0.01.)

  106. This should be the last word by autopr0n · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ken brown is a troll and should be ignored forthrightly.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  107. Please just remember... by soybean · · Score: 1

    if you buy his book, you give him money.

  108. Heh by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Did anyyone else notice the "ad" on tanenbaum's site, leading here? Damn furninrs telling us how to vote! :P

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  109. Written too popularly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's hard to point my finger to, but Brown seems to make a few pretty big leaps and generalizations in his arguments, and doesn't seem to back his arguments up with rigorous source code/design comparisons. This seems to be written like some kind of popular political/public figure book, not a detailed investigation of kernel programming. This rubs me the wrong way.

  110. the microsoft shills by soybean · · Score: 1

    are getting easier and easier to spot

    1. Re:the microsoft shills by ScottKin · · Score: 0, Troll

      ...just like the Linux shills:

      Slashdot
      OSDN
      Kuro5in
      Richard Stallman
      Tannenbaum

      etc, etc, etc.

      The door opens both ways, bucko!

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    2. Re:the microsoft shills by DylanQuixote · · Score: 1

      Tannenbaum is hardly a Linux shill.

  111. We did that in school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    In 1993, the Operating Systems class in the Computer Science department at the University of Arizona wrote a layered linux kernel in C, based on Minix and using Tannenbaum's textbook. The class was one semester, and the average team size was 3-4 people, and each team was assigned the same project, to write the layered kernel. I worked on the project alone and finished it in the semester, and I don't consider myself brilliant (only exceptional). So if a single computer science student at the UofA can do it in a semester, why not Linus in a year?

  112. You should be kissing Ken Brown by BelugaParty · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't understand all of the hatred for this guy. He is doing exactly what needs to be done to make linux a secure financial investment, he is: making a hypothesis that linus stole source code, and is working backwards and forwards. The police do this on a daily basis: listen to some chumps story and then investigate alternatives. This kind of legal investigation is a necessity, otherwise 10 years from now when linux is in everything someone can step up and start charging whatever they want (see SCO). He is the first of many to try to bring Linux out of it's buisness adolescence and turn it into an adult.

  113. As the kernel turns... by packet_wrangler · · Score: 1

    What a soap opera this has become... Next Week on 'As the Kernel Turns': Ken Brown is Melinda Gates and OJ Simpson's love child Seriously...all of AT's and ESR's are great reads for those of us who were to young to remember OS's without configuration wizards. All Ken Brown (ADTI) is trying to do is spread a little FUD about linux and the Open Source movement. In fact, I bet Ken Brown snuggles up with his diploma from Redmond University every night...

  114. word games by thomasa · · Score: 1

    QUOTE
    For years, Linus is credited with being an inventor. AdTI argued the claim was false. Coincidently in a recent interview, Linus decided he was not the inventor of Linux commenting in a ZDNet story, "I'd agree that 'inventor' is not necessarily the right word...(9)"
    UNQUOTE

    Ken Brown by that above comment is a flaming
    a*hole. This is a pure word game on Brown's
    part.

  115. Best Quote by saddino · · Score: 1

    I'll bet he [Brown] dismisses the widely reported claim that Mozart wrote three symphonies and performed for the King of England when he was nine on the grounds that 9-year-olds don't normally do this sort of thing.

    Game. Set. Match. But knowing Ken Brown, I'm sure a "KompozerImpozter" book is in the works.

  116. AdTI factual errors survey by infolib · · Score: 1

    The AdTI has a survey asking people to report factual inaccuracies in the "Samizdat". But don't send your data to the AdTI - you've seen how they twist facts. Instead someone should quickly set up a similar site with results posted publicly for the benefit of truth. We'd end up with a very thorough rebuttal of the entire aggregation of manure. Any takers?

    Here's the text of the survey:
    Report "Samizdat" inaccuracies
    A due-diligence review on behalf of the directors of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution. If you would like to report more than one inaccuracy, please submit one entry and then use a fresh form -- multiple entries are allowed.
    Have you located any inaccurate statements in Kenneth Brown's report, "Samizdat"?

    Yes
    No

    Please enter the page number of "Samizdat" on which the inaccuracy occurs:

    Please quote exactly the section of Samizdat that you wish to report is inaccurate:

    Please enter any information you wish to supply which demonstrates that the section of "Samizdat" you cite is incorrect.

    Please enter your email address below. Thank you for participting.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  117. Even the mainstream press by CaptainZapp · · Score: 5, Informative
    Even one of the two grand old ladies of the German speaking press (the other one can be found here stops just an inch short of labeling him a laughable fraud (in German) in their last Friday IT and Media section.

    The fishs translation (which is pretty hillarious in itself) can be found here.

    --
    ich bin der musikant

    mit taschenrechner in der hand

    kraftwerk

    1. Re:Even the mainstream press by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      You can tell its going to be a good Fish translation when it begins....

      "As a dwarf, then described themselves one of the sizes of the science, the English physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton."

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  118. Stupid Me by forand · · Score: 1

    Okay I am an idiot. So be it.

  119. Where have we heard this before? by Scott+Richter · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Agree 100% with him there. For some reason US corporations take it for granted that all countries/entities everywhere exist merely to pander to their interests. To this end, they are fucking not only with the citizens of the US, but with people everywhere.

    Ignoring the off-topic political overtones of the parent for a moment, do all US corporations expect the world to pander to them? Seems like a bit of a generality to me. In fact, I can only think of one instance where it was argued that the role of the various US "intellectual property" guardians (ie, copyright) is to enable large corporations.

    Yes, our old friends at SCO. Recall when they tried the whole "The GPL is illegal because US copyright laws protect the profit motivation" argument, and got laughed at? And now we have Ken Brown saying that OSS is bad because it will kill the software sector?

    *I don my tin-foil hat...*

    It's looking more and more likely that Microsoft could be behind this crap, pulling the puppet strings. The arguments are the same. Linux is legally insecure, no company vouches for linux, linux is bad for the software sector, linux is stolen from Unix, linux will rot your brane!. MS is definitely funding SCO, and the AdTI has been verrrry touchy about where their $$$ comes from. I would wager at least even money that MS is behind it.

    I know it sounds like the same slashdot ravings, but it's looking more and more like all this could be the voice of MS at work. So my ultimate point is don't assume that this point of view is anything but FUD until further notice.

  120. Is this guy for real? by rjdohnert · · Score: 1

    I personally think he is right, it takes a long tinme to write an OS even to be as functional as the first version of Linux. Linux got the inspiration from somewhere. The title of "inventor" is ridiculous. He didnt invent concepts and methods that were in use in UNIX before he was born.

    1. Re:Is this guy for real? by TheSunborn · · Score: 1

      But linux did NOT write an os. He wrote a kenrel which acording to the link is about 10.000 linies of code. The rest of the os and the compiler he got from other sources, mostly gnu. (There is a reason some people want to call it gnu/linux)

    2. Re:Is this guy for real? by hobbit125 · · Score: 0

      it is stupid. it's like calling eli whitney the inventor of the cotton gin.

      i mean...cotton was around years before he was born.

  121. There is always plenty of foolishness... by BlabberMouth · · Score: 1

    ...to go around, but Ken Brown will take home more than his fair share for this one. For a person in his position, credibility is necessary for him to continue to recieve grants from people like Microsoft. They may be willing to give money to a hack, but not a discredited, proven hack.

  122. Seriously, please STOP replying to AdTI by D4C5CE · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "AdTI did not publish Samizdat with the expectation that rabidly pro-Linux developers would embrace it."
    "I have to give credit where
    credit is due. Brown got that one completely right."

    These lines are just one of many examples why Professor Tanenbaum should not personally try and rebut Ken Brown's statements any longer. Rather, a visit to the next police station may be appropriate to make sure that (if there is such as thing in their statute books) the prosecution has their criminal defamation lawsuit -and hopefully handcuffs- ready next time Brown dares to visit the Netherlands (or Finland for that matter).
    Moreover, Professor Tanenbaum's and Torvalds' lawyers might see sufficient grounds to sue for compensation as well... and it's to them that the aggrieved should leave the talking:

    According to Professor Tanenbaum's own account, he immediately identified Brown as a clueless individual who had failed to do his homework, and that was within minutes after meeting him. So the idea of Professor Tanenbaum now spending many hours or even days writing rebuttals to Ken Brown as if both of them were holding opposite but equally defendable views e.g. like two researchers involved in a bona fide scientific debate... this only gives Brown undeserved credibility and an opportunity to brag even more about "the most important people talking to me all the time."

    To make things worse, replying to Brown misses the point, as from their latest piece of slander at least (even viciously insinuating, in an utterly patronizing tone, that "good" Tanenbaum was some kind of nutty professor, which reminded me of McBride's equally arrogant allegation that Eben Moglen rather than himself was the one who did not know copyright law), it is clear that the Institution does not engage in a discussion at all: As Professor Tanenbaum and others have sadly had to observe, AdTI just continue to uphold their claims even where they have been proven wrong. Rather, they are building a case for an entirely different audience in which their report will be the first and only thing ever read on this subject matter, and believed without hesitation, for among its targetted readers it commands nothing less than the sacrosanct authority of Alexis de Tocqueville (le pauvre tourne dans sa tombe...)!
    Pretending that a grown-up discussion with them was possible only gives Brown a chance to assert that every word not expressly rejected had been conceded by his interlocutors. Professor Tanenbaum had to experience this already, so it should come as no surprise if the next Brown communications will be somewhere along the lines "The good professor has immediately acknowledged most of our findings, in particular that pro-Linux developers are rabid zealots."

  123. Torvalds is a Composer by catdevnull · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Torvald's early kernels were very small and not extensive (and not too stable either). From the beginning, he's invited (publicly) the hacker community to contribute. The kernel grew and it became an open source project from the beginning. The organic growth of the kernel came from lots of people and was MANAGED by one person. Alot of the ground work had already been done by MINIX so, as a "novice programmer," Linus didn't have to re-invent the wheel-he used the structure of MINIX as a template and hacked it from there.

    It's like a composer using the sonata form--the notes are different but the form is the form.

    To extend the metaphor, the form has actually grown from simple tune to a full symphonic work as the motif began to grow and other musicians' contributed with different textures, sounds, and rhythms.

    Aaron Copland's "Apalachian Spring" features an old "Shaker" tune called "The Gift To Be Simple." Copland didn't write the tune, but he did adapt the work into a larger polyphonic structure with variations and formal development. (It was a ballet score for a small ensemble then a full symphonic suite).

    I suggest that Linus took Minix and did the same. Only Linus's symphony contains a bit of jazz improv by the use of extemporaneous solos from the contributing musicians in his orchestra under the baton of the conductor/composer.

    I fail to see why Ken Brown feels a need to call out Linus as some sort of phoney. Maybe he can write about how Copland ripped off all those poor backward hillbillies in the Apalachians.

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
    1. Re:Torvalds is a Composer by Newander · · Score: 1
      It's not even that close.

      MINIX==Micro Kernel
      Linux==Macro Kernel

      --

      Jesus saves and takes half damage.

    2. Re:Torvalds is a Composer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only was that compleely sickening to read, it was completely wrong too. Linux and Minux are about as different as you can get in kernel archetecture.

      Next time do a little research and leave the ill placed metaphores out of your posts. Thank you.

    3. Re:Torvalds is a Composer by catdevnull · · Score: 1

      If you consider that Linus saw Minix and said, "Hey, that's a good idea--Unix on regular hardware. How did he do that? Let me take a crack at that by studying what he did..." The metaphor isn't all that ill placed or misspelled.

      --

      I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
    4. Re:Torvalds is a Composer by catdevnull · · Score: 1

      ...and Viva la difference!

      However, the idea of taking the Unix kernel idea, building one for regular Intel hardware, and distributing for peer review/contribution isn't such a bad model to start with...I think that's probably the over-arching motif that Linus used more than actual code or programming design. I stand/sit/neal/bend corrected and I genuflect in the general direction of all those pasty little geeks who decided my metaphor was ill-placed. :-p

      The function of what it DOES was probably the seed that began the kernel that loads under the penguin.

      I may not be a snobby super geek who condescendingly retorts to slashdot posts with the pinache of a sysadmin ogre teaching intro to Unix, but I do know about the creative process and can recognize creative genius when I see it (and when I don't).

      I think Linus gets credit for his ideas, enthusiasm, and tenacity if he doesn't get all the credit for the code. The creative juice for the entire Linux project started with him--even if he took more credit for more than he wrote.

      If anything, that's the point I'm trying to illustrate while some are still mired in the myopic details and bashing "lesser" geeks.

      Maybe I just don't know WTF I'm talking about...but at least I'm not bitter.

      [no venom or bad karma on you, +Newander+]

      --

      I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
    5. Re:Torvalds is a Composer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please stop using the term "Macro Kernel", as there is no such thing. You mean "Monolithic".

    6. Re:Torvalds is a Composer by Newander · · Score: 1

      Oh, I didn't mean for it to sound that way. I think it's a good metaphor, I just think that it may not go far enough. Maybe, he used the theme from a sonata to write a march.

      --

      Jesus saves and takes half damage.

  124. Re:..but the Linux genie is already out of the bot by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
    Oh, by the way, the Chinese are building supercomputers that compete with ours, and they're not running Windows. What's that? You say we need more supercomputers for the NSA to fight terrorism?

    I don't think there are *ANY* Windows Super Computers, don't think it was an option.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  125. am i just silly or... by thepler · · Score: 1
    From the article:
    The reality is that, noone, including Linus Torvalds, can ever guarantee that code in the Linux kernel is free of counter ownership, or attribution claims.
    The following equally applies:
    The reality is that, noone, nobody anywhere, can ever guarantee that code in any piece of software ever written is free of counter ownership, or attribution claims.
    This is because anyone at any time can challenge the ownership or attribution of any software at any time in the future. All they need is a lawyer. Noone can ever "guarantee" that someone else in the future will not sue and gain ownership of "their" code.
  126. Just Kill the Whole Thread by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
    I think that Ken Brown has been pretty much proven to be some combination of an idio, a shill, deluded and/or a psychopath. I'd think that nothing that anybody says is going to change his mind, and anybody who looks at the currently existing rebuttal's is likely to take him seriously.


    Time now to go on to something that'll actually make a difference in this world... like getting the Free/Open Source comminity active in the many elections comming up this year.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    1. Re:Just Kill the Whole Thread by kollivier · · Score: 1
      I think that Ken Brown has been pretty much proven to be some combination of an idio, a shill, deluded and/or a psychopath. I'd think that nothing that anybody says is going to change his mind, and anybody who looks at the currently existing rebuttal's is likely to take him seriously.

      First, I'm not trying to make him change his mind. He made up his mind before he started, which means he's only interested in information which helps prove his (false) argument.

      Second, you're right that anyone in the free/open source community knows he's full of it, but you'd be surprised how people who are told only one side of a story are likely to agree with that side. Those people will see two things: he makes an argument (which they will assume he has proof of), and we are not (officially) responding. (These people don't read Slashdot.) Our "brushing it off" looks to them like we have something to hide, just as KB is suggesting.

      Sure, some people won't take the bait - but some will, and it may have a direct effect on government and military adoption of "free" source technologies. The best way to get elected officials to support your positions are to make your positions clear and refute opposing positions with solid information. With a few exceptions, most of the elected officials and incumbents really are not tuned into open/free source software.

    2. Re:Just Kill the Whole Thread by Boiled+Frog · · Score: 1

      Second, you're right that anyone in the free/open source community knows he's full of it, but you'd be surprised how people who are told only one side of a story are likely to agree with that side. Those people will see two things: he makes an argument (which they will assume he has proof of), and we are not (officially) responding. (These people don't read Slashdot.) Our "brushing it off" looks to them like we have something to hide, just as KB is suggesting.

      It is very unlikely that this is going to get much attention in the mainstream media. It is even less likely that people without a vested interest in this (one way or another) are going to care about this. Linux has only a vague presence in the mainstream mindset. People think it's a free operating system that competes with Microsoft. They don't know that much about it but they would probably think of it positively if asked about it.

  127. The brown book killed ADTI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft will have to look for another VoxBox now.
    I fail to see a connection between the Microsoft Mouthpiece ADTI and the original French political scientist Alexis de Tocqueville, convincing enough so that the name sharing would stand to reason.

  128. A number of fallacies by alex_tibbles · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1. Linux 0.1 == Linux 2.6
    2. Minix is a "Prentice Hall Product".
    3. "Hybrid Source".
    4. Software being cheaper is bad for the economy.
    5. Proprietary software is immune to the problem of software attribution.
    6. Rhetoric constitutes an argument.

    1. This fallacy is used in the inference that since Coherent took several man years, Linux must have been stolen.
    2. As even Brown admits, Prentice Hall released Minix under a libre license.
    3. Perhaps "Noone can ever truly accrue any value from owning hybrid source software", but so what? Everyone can accrue value from such software. It is a rank non-sequitur to claim that "The hybrid source model negatively impacts ... inevitably the entire IT economy". (See 4 too).

    "Tanenbaum vehemently insists that Torvalds wrote Linux from scratch, which means from a blank computer screen to most people. No books, no resources, no notes -- certainly not a line of source code to borrow from, or to be tempted to borrow from."
    This guy has never written a line of code in his life, and it's painfully obvious. I cannot think of a single program that I have written where I have never used a book. Linus just typed in every line of Linux version 0.1 himself. That's what "from scratch" means.

  129. Marketing 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> "How will open source user's be assured that they won't be pulled into court because of some actual or alleged stolen code?"

    > How will closed source user's be assured that they won't be pulled into court because of some actual or alleged stolen code?

    > Why should open source shoulder all of the doubt?

    Because of a very basic marketing fact:

    You take you biggest weakness and pretend it is your major strenght.

    Closed source knows that not beeing able to show source code to big customers may be their biggest weakness (in particular with recent security problems). Hence, they tell people that having the source code in the wild is a mistake, and that closed source is inherently better.

    Basic MS FUD.

    And they know it won't cut it. But even if they get one month of delay in linux adoption, it means 1 billion in cash.

    They will try *anything* to stop linux. Scox, Atdi is just the beginning. Stay tuned.

  130. Re:This is why MS always wins by Gleef · · Score: 2, Informative

    Anonymous Coward suggests:
    This sounds like something I'd like to see Perens' "Open Source Risk Management" take on.

    I'd rather see Daniel Egger's Open Source Risk Management take such issues on. If Perens had his own OSRM, that would confuse things. He'd potentially confuse himself, since he already accepted a position on the Board of Directors for Egger's OSRM. ;-)

    --

    ----
    Open mind, insert foot.
  131. Finally he's called by his real name... by sylencer · · Score: 1

    Has anyone else noticed that when this topic first spread, everybody was talking about "Andy Tanenbaum" as if they all were old buddies of his...

  132. little does he know ... by looie · · Score: 4, Funny
    just for laughs, i checked out the adti web site and lo ... it's hosted by geocities! which is owned/operated by yahoo! which runs on freebsd ... hmm, i wonder what web server they're using.

    c:\src\perl>geturl -h -d http://www.adti.net
    HTTP/1.1 302 Found
    Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:56:02 GMT
    Location: http://geocities.yahoo.com
    Connection: close
    Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

    what a hoot. a guy using a web hosting service from one of the biggest users of open source to distribute broadsides condemning open source.

    mp

    --
    "The secret to strong security: less reliance on secrets." -- Whitfield Diffie
  133. if I write a book claim M$ didn't write the DOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if I write a book claim M$ didn't write the DOS, will some one pay me some money? I guess no, because it is not a lie. How about a book like this, after Kevin Mitnick stole the source code of VMS, he sent the source code to someone named Bloodax3 at Netherland. And then a group of hackers at northern Europe wrote a kernel and they also found a stupid young kids named Linus to put it on the internet, and one administrator named the kernel "linux" by some kind of mistake. And they successfully introduced their work to the world. But actually there are many back doors in the "linux", for example, there is a default root user, "superman", and the password is "21241036". And several years later, this group of hackers did the same thing about DeCSS, but they were unlucky this time. So, that's it, will some body pay me some money for this fantastic SciFi book?

  134. Cached version here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have problem accessing the original. Here's the google cache version: http://www.google.fi/search?q=cache:M2evSXeG0NcJ:w ww.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/rebuttal/+&hl=fi

  135. I don't believe Ken Brown wrote that book by kasperd · · Score: 5, Funny

    One man couldn't possibly write so much crap in such a short time. I'm sure parts of it must be written by somebody else, and included in the Brown Book with or without permissions.

    --

    Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
    1. Re:I don't believe Ken Brown wrote that book by RPoet · · Score: 2, Funny

      this independant research report agrees with you -- there is no way Ken Brown could have written that book from scratch.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  136. what way are they thinking? by golgafrincham · · Score: 1

    "Another problem with Tanenbaum's logic is that he only presents examples of people that were Unix licensees, had Unix source code, or who were exceptionally familiar with software development. He cannot provide one example reasonably comparable to the Torvalds case."

    obviously, this is not from at, but from brown. but if brown does not understand how a cs student is able to write funky software without beeing a unix licensee, i think he does neither understand why it's cold inside the fridge but warm at it's backside.

    one good thing this soap opera has: it reveals some "history" that some people did not know, like how linux came to life and that.

    --
    beer as in "free beer"
  137. He needs a clue by confused+one · · Score: 1
    I wrote 40-50 thousand lines of code last year...

    And I was wasting a lot of time reading /. ,groklaw, and mainstream news.

  138. Copy editing by http · · Score: 1

    ...is cheap. Is AdTI not able to hire competent secretarial staff? Ken Brown's reply borders on illiterate.

    --
    If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
    3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
  139. I suspect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Ken Brown will be a future Darwin Award winner.

  140. Genius by orbitalia · · Score: 1

    I think the genius of Tanenbaum's response is the part he points out that Windows itself has a very shady past with regards ownership, and IP pollution. I hope Ken starts to get cold feet when he realises that the Open Source community can fight fire with fire and start asking difficult questions about where Windows really came from. I can only assume that he may be concious that Microsoft are probably behind this poor hatchet job.
    Thanks for the ideas Ken.

  141. Googlebomb ADTI campaign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Looks like this guy is running a campaign to google bomb adti with "Fake Research" and
    "Clueless idiots" keywords. Let's help out folks!!! After all, all ADTI does is publish Fake Research conducted by
    Clueless idiots

  142. Roger Red-hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Roger Red-hat framed Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny!

  143. Shhhh! Don't give Ken ideas by fleppir · · Score: 1

    It IS a good idea for him to shut up. I was hoping for another round :D

    --
    I am the Barber of Seville.
  144. Unless by Tony-A · · Score: 1

    you are a "heavyweight" like Andy Tanenbaum.

    Andy's first rebuttal included enough name-dropping and obscure significant facts about UNIX to establish himself as someone "in the know" and Brown as incompetent.

    It is important to note that Andy Tanenbaum has not switched from anti-Linux to pro-Linux. Andy has not shifted his position at all. Andy is not clobbering Brown for a hatchet job on Linux. Andy is clobbering Brown for an incompetent hatchet job on Linux.

    Personally I think Andy is making better copy.

  145. A disease named LInux by abertoll · · Score: 1

    "This statement is not grammatically, politically, or factually correct. Does he mean "Linus has Hansen's disease"? I hope not. But if he does, fortunately, it is highly treatable these days. If he means Linux is wasting away, the facts speak otherwise. If he means "Linux is very contagious" this is true, but a better wording could have been chosen."

    I think he means something like "Linux is a disease which feeds off of the healthy body of commercial software."

    --
    "he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
  146. Since Reagan died... by MasonMcD · · Score: 1

    I've been whipping out this de Tocqueville quote most every chance I get:

    It is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth.

    except at *this* point in Brown's case, that would be desperately clinging to a now complex lie rather than the simple truth.

  147. Yet Another Rebuttal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should embedded software become 'free' too, it would be natural to conclude the value of hardware will spiral downward as well.

    As far as I can see the Linksys WRT54G is selling for about $91.50. It would be natural to conclude that Linksys is saving time and money not reinventing the wheel.

    Meanwhile, we should also very plainly ask, "who[m] are we trusting?"

    Yes, whom are we trusting? Who is financing the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's study into this? Why did Mr. Brown refuse to disclose this information when asked?

    If Linux was based on Minix, doesn't it owe rights, attribution to Prentice Hall? Does it owe attribution or rights to anyone else?

    If Unix was based on Multics, doesn't it owe rights, attribution to MIT, and General Electric Company. Does it owe attribution or rights to anyone else?

  148. Stellar research at the AdTI by computational+super · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Doesn't the quote "the U.S. government is one of the largest patent holders in the world, owning the rights to 20-30,000 patents" (from Ken Brown's reply) pretty much underscore the commitment to top-notch research at the Alexis de Toqueville institute?

    "Hey, Bob! How many patents do you think the US government holds? 20,000 or so?"

    "Ummm, yeah.. maybe 30,000"

    "Ok, yeah, 20 - 30,000. That ought to cover us."

    --
    Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    1. Re:Stellar research at the AdTI by metacosm · · Score: 1

      It is worse than you think, the first NUMBERED patent was filed on July 13th, 1836 -- prior to that, patents were not numbered, yet, even before that (between 1790 and 1836) nearly 10,000 patents where filed.

      By 1870, we had over 100,000 numbered patents filed.

      By 1911, we had over 1,000,000 numbered patents filed.

      By 1935, 2,000,000.

      By 1961, 3,000,000.

      By 1975, 4,000,000.

      By 1991, 5,000,000.

      Currently, in 2004, we are nearly at the 7 million patent mark -- expected to be crossed before the end of the year.

      What a horrific research firm!

      -- By the way, my info comes from around 5 minutes of google research, I am in no way interested in patent history! --

  149. link dead, but bias obvious by MattW · · Score: 1

    To anyone familiar with the topic being discussed -- as opposed to a government bureaucrat that couldn't recognize a piece of code if it fell on their head -- it seems obvious that Ken Brown is being disingenuous.

    AdTI did not publish Samizdat with the expectation that rabidly pro-Linux developers would embrace it. Its purpose is to provide U.S. leadership with a researched presentation on attribution and intellectual property problems with the hybrid source code model, particularly Linux.

    Clearly not, because the pro-Linux developers are aware that the claims, as outlined in this document, are preposterous. "rabidly" is simply a thinly disguised ad hominem attack trying to lend some semblance of credence to claims which deserve none.

    The United States is the home of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, an internationally respected agency which contributes to the worldwide effort to protect and govern intellectual property. In addition, the U.S. government is one of the largest patent holders in the world, owning the rights to 20-30,000 patents.

    The USPTO cannot easily be said to be "internationally respected", when in fact huge organizations and a tidal wave of dissatisfcation have arisen, because the USPTO grants 95% of all patents filed, has no manpower to assess the validity of patents and has spawned an industry of patent litigation and manipulation. The government's portfolio is relatively unimpressive; IBM, a single US company, has 23,000 active patents and was granted 3415 in 2003 alone. (And, it should be noted, IBM is one of the largest corporate supported of Linux; funny how they are simultaneously the largest patent 'consumer', but also one of Linux's biggest supporters; that in itself seems to imply a disconnection in the documents conclusions)

    The disturbing reality is that the hybrid source model depends heavily upon sponging talent from U.S. corporations and/or U.S. proprietary software. Much of this questionable borrowing is a) not in the best interest U.S. corporations b) not in the best interest of IT workers in America c) at a serious expense to the investment community, an entity betting on the success of intellectual property in the marketplace.

    This is very cute, and the derogatory language immediately gives away the intent. "Sponging"? Linux inspires grateful contributions of improvements from developers excited to be a part of a phenomenon. That's not "sponging". And I'd like to see Ken Brown justify his argument of theft of proprietary software, which sounds slanderous to me. Note that OSRM now offers intellectual property insurance because their EXTENSIVE review of Linux concluded that it was legally unencumbered. I doubt Ken Brown was so thorough.

    Moreover, Brown's paragraphs conclusions about 'best interests' is fallacious. Because with respect to: (a) U.S. Corporations like IBM support Linux because it gives them access to powerful technology that they can build services and other revenue models on top of without forcing them to develop it themselves and Linux inspires more confidence than their proprietary products (such as AIX) ever did; (b) IT workers can benefit enormously from cheaper and more accessible software; expensive proprietary products simply allow soaking customers for IP, which does not benefit IT workers who do less work and see corporations charge more for it; moreover, OSS gives independant and small IT shops the ability to build powerful services on top of openly available tools; I make my living this way (and a good one), and (c) the investment community is irrelevent -- their "bet" on the IP marketplace is not one that government policy makers need to hedge for them; if someone betting on an "IP marketplace", if in fact such a bet has been made, th

  150. Why no rebuttle to the Lions notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it interesting that AT doesn't mention the Lions notes. Perhaps that is the link between linux, minux and unix.

  151. Many CS programs have OS-writing classes by Greg151 · · Score: 2, Informative

    University of Chicago, where I went for my CS degree, had a class where you wrote an Operating System as a project. In talking with my peers at work, many other colleges had a similar class, where students also wrote an OS. I am not sure what is so theoretically hard about doing this, especially when Linus turned this into a group project, and invited other interested people to assist. If college students can build a basic system in a quarter or semester of college, I suspect that the more dedicated types could whip out a really nice example in 6-12 months.

    Greg

  152. "Think Tank" hiring any moron who comes along... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey! I'm out of work!

  153. One person ... by zonix · · Score: 2, Funny

    More important! Is it likely that a student (a single person) with no Tennis experience, without any use of written Tennis rules, could build a functioning Pong game in six months? :-)

    z
    --
    What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
  154. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yeah... and the links are Fake Research and Clueless Idiots.

    Guess the original poster forgot a " after the address. ;)

  155. ken brown is confused of time ... by pikine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you read the arguments of Ken Brown, then read what Tanenbaum has to say, it's immediately clear to someone of average intelligence that Brown does have a consistent argument--with a condition, if you take the time away. In other words, he's trying hard to argue with anachronism.

    Unfortunately, most things in the world change in time, so you must be careful what you argue about. For example, according to Tanenbaum, it used to be legal to use Lions' book to teach Unix internals, until AT&T decided to forbid it. Brown would assert that Lions' notes have always been an illegal distribution, and therefore an infringement on Intellectual Property. In fact, he uses this argument to show how Tanenbaum is unaware of IP issues. But this is not true. If you can't tell how events unfold themselves in time, you'll buy his argument.

    Furthermore, even if there was Minix code at the beginning for testing purposes, it would be gone by now. It's meaningless trying to argue if there is a possibility that some reminiscent of Minix is still preset in Linux. The only way to find out if that is the case is by analyzing the code line by line. The person making the claim (Ken Brown) is supposed to do that. But he didn't.

    Ken Brown is free to say whatever he wants, but this just hurts his own credibility.

    --
    I once had a signature.
    1. Re:ken brown is confused of time ... by lendude · · Score: 2
      In fact, in the rebuttal article by AT, he specifically indicates that Brown did arrange such a comparison:

      Code comparison

      and that this comparison found no evidence for any Minix code in Linux, a fact which Brown simply ignored.

      --
      "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
  156. Remember to link farm Andy by nagora · · Score: 1
    Link to the rebuttal to make sure Google searches for this report bring up the rebuttal before the libel.

    TWW

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  157. I can't believe you all missed THIS line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brown: "The point of [my] paper is to magnify potential problems associated with this type of software development."

    One of the definitions of "magnify," from Merriam-Webster: "to increase in significance : INTENSIFY b : EXAGGERATE."

  158. The best statement in the whole article. by u-235-sentinel · · Score: 1

    Brown just ignores all the facts and persists in his belief. I'll bet he dismisses the widely reported claim that Mozart wrote three symphonies and performed for the King of England when he was nine on the grounds that 9-year-olds don't normally do this sort of thing.

    Andy is definitely amusing. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this re-rebuttal. I pity Brown. A person who needs to take his medication as ordered by his Doctor ;-)

    --
    Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
  159. Tocqueville by FenderGeek · · Score: 2, Funny

    Every time I see this name, I read it as "toqueville" (maybe because I'm from Michigan). I keep picturing some little town in the northern part of the US or Canada where the whole population walks around wearing wool hats.

    --
    One only needs two tools in life: WD-40 to make things go, and duck tape to make them stop. ~G.M. Weilacher
  160. Knowledge is disposable in Windows by agrino · · Score: 1
    Knowledge have a very short life span under Windows. Everything change with new versions. I'm not willing to spend months re-learning everything under Windows.

    Under Linux knowledge is accumulable: everything you learn today serves you tomorrow.

    With Linux I can spent my time learning new tricks. With Windows, I must spent my time re-learning the same basic tasks, time after time.

    (Yes, English is not my first language).

    1. Re:Knowledge is disposable in Windows by ScottKin · · Score: 1

      This is an absolutely STUPID comment.

      Switch shells in Linux and you MUST learn how to do things differently.

      Can you do the same things under KDE as you can in Gnome, in exactly the same way?

      It's hard to believe that Linux users are actually *this* naive - aren't Linux users supposed to be more intelligent because they use Linux?

      So much for that "Linux Myth"

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
  161. My guess... by The-Dalai-LLama · · Score: 1

    From the article (emphasis is mine):

    Its purpose is to provide U.S. leadership with a researched presentation on attribution and intellectual property problems with the hybrid source code model, particularly Linux. It is our hope that leadership would find this document helpful with public policy decisions regarding its future investment in Linux and other hybrid source products.

    Whether he had an agenda when he started or not, after conducting his research and interviews, of course he knows the difference. Influencing Public Policy = Money + Attention, however, and that's a pretty powerful incentive to convince yourself of a lot of things.

    The Dalai LLama
    ...I'm going to publish an article showing that Linux was actually a communist plot developed by Stalin...I'm just waiting for SCO and Microsoft to put me on retainer...

  162. define: good by chadjg · · Score: 1

    I don't know why we think KB isn't on our side, he just admitted that the Tannenbaum was morally good and excellent. Or perhaps he was saying that the professor has a higher social rank than the average pig farmer, but isn't quite noble.

    It is a quaint and annoying affectation. We aren't on the Orient Express anymore.

    --
    Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
  163. Late to the game, read if you can... by GPLDAN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One thing that sort of pisses me off about Slashdot is that if you take time to read everything, and form a response - it's so far down that it probably doesn't get read.

    I read - completely - Brown's webpage. Purple text gives you a headache. I then read Ta bu shi da yu's response on kuro5shin.

    Andrew tannenbaum sums it up when he comments on his webpage about Brown's visit. Here was a guy (Brown) who clearly didn't understand patents, or how to sumbit patent applications or release them into the public domain. He didn't understand tenets of intellectual property law. His paper is full of deliberate misuse of terms . tannenbaum says he wasn't very sharp, and he was being nice.

    The guy, Brown, comes to visit him and Tannenbaum asks him outright who funds this "thinktank". He dodges the question. Andrew asks - OUTRIGHT - is it Microsoft? Of course, he knows it is. The guy won't answer. Brown then starts down a series of questions that shows he hasn't done ANY research into the history of UNIX. None! He doesn't know about the AT&T vs. BSD lawsuit? To the lawyers out there, this is tantamount to going before the Supreme Court to argue a racial discrimination suit and not knowing what Brown vs. Board of Education was about. It's that stupid.

    It's clear that Andrew quickly sizes this guy up as a moron, and tries to educate him. Brown will have none of it, diverting the questioning into a series of leading questions.

    It's pretty sickening. Andrew Tannenbaum is a super bright man. His book, "Computer networks, Fourth Edition." is the BIBLE for network professionals. It is to networking what Kernigan and Richie's book is to C programming. Actually, that's not right. K&R is a primer, nothing more. AT's book is the definitive history of how we got to where we are.

    It genuinely sickens me when little turds like Brown get a few bucks from some Microsoft frontman, and then set off on a smear job like this. What it says, ultimately, is that Microsoft is afraid. I chalked that up to Slashdot hype and wishful thinking, but stuff like this makes me re-think that position. MySQL and PostgresSQL are beginning to really cut not into Oracle, but into SQLServer. Sun has been bought off, but IBM is coming hard with Linux and clustering. The Dell's and HPs out there are putting together bigger deals doing Linux. It's pissing Microsoft off, where before I honestly believed they didn't care. They ignored it.

    I guess we should all be happy that guys like Tannenbaum exist, and that they choose teaching and University as their vocation. They are the counter-balance to the mass of hysterical bullshit. They will live to document this era correctly for the next few generations. Sorry to be so melodramatic, but it's basically true. In 100 years, whatever happens, people need to know how it went down. It didn't matter when crooks like Jack Tramiel decide to bust out companies for their personal fortunes and change the face of personal computing (sorry, still bitter over the Amiga all these years later). But the stakes are 1000x larger now.

    1. Re:Late to the game, read if you can... by metacosm · · Score: 0

      If it makes you feel better, just for that reason, I tend to read postings "newest first" with a focus on people with good karma, seems to work out fairly well.

    2. Re:Late to the game, read if you can... by HenchmenResources · · Score: 1

      kind of makes one wonder what brown charged to write this rebuttle, or if this was just out of the goodness of his heart. {holds in laugh}

      --
      "Napalm is nature's toothpaste" - Chef Brian
  164. bedtime stories by dwave · · Score: 1

    From the article:
    "Ironically, the main character in these wonderful books by Sheila McCullagh was Roger Red-hat. Conspiracy theorists should go wild with this new information."

    Not quite, the picture shows a drawing with a white dog going by. Shouldn't it be a yellow dog?

  165. KB admits he's dumb by underworld · · Score: 2, Informative
    This is a literal quote from the bottom of the article at http://www.adti.net/samizdat/brown.reply.june.04.h tml:


    Kenneth Brown is president of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution and director of its technology research programs. He is the author of numerous research papers and popular articles on technology issues, including the 2002 report, "Opening the open-source debate," one of the first papers to raise serious questions about the security of open- and hybrid-source computer software, a point recently raised by the president of Symantec Corporation. He is reportedly "not the sharpest knife in the drawer," but nevertheless is able to converse with many intelligent people, and is accepted at fine restaurants and hotels around the world.


    (emphasis added)

    Well, you can say that again...
    1. Re:KB admits he's dumb by sakyamuni · · Score: 1
      This is a literal [sic] quote from Prof. Tanenbaum's article at http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/:
      As I soon learned, Brown is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I was already suspicious.

      (emphasis added)

      Sarcasm aside, Mr. Brown is not "admitting" anything. He is merely showing a sense of humor in response to Prof. Tanenbaum's insult.

  166. I am sick of ESR shooting off his mouth by hqm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He is a real liability to anyone he tries to "help". Remember him claiming it was "one of us" who DDOS'ed SCO. He is a mediocre programmer and a mid-level flamer who sadly was annointed by the press as some kind of spokeperson for the free software community.

    It's time he just shut up.

  167. Open Source Doomed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your post highlights my worst fear about the F/OSS community (at least, as represented on /.): Yet another comment that should have been modded "Insightful" is modded "Funny". Oh well, at least you were modded up... deservedly.

  168. Business uber alles by brodin · · Score: 1

    You can be Communist all you want as long as you have ONE BILLION CONSUMERS. Or should that be ONE BEEEELION CONSUMERS...

  169. I haven't RTFSC.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (the source code, that is).... but, did Linux-0.1 have ext filesystem support? I seem to recall that it relied on a minix filesystem of some sort, no?

  170. R-O-T-F-L-M-M-F-A-O by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thank you, sir.

  171. AdTI asking for $60,000 for media campaign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    AdTI here demanding $60,000 from lawyers of Philip Morris to start a media campaign.

    1. Re:AdTI asking for $60,000 for media campaign by thebatlab · · Score: 1

      So I'm trying to wrap my brain around why a letter from 1994 related to the Clinton excise tax which ask for help from Philipp Morris in funding a campaign aimed at promoting public awareness about it has anything to do with the Ken Brown issue. Other than the company name I mean.

      I haven't been able to do it yet. Maybe someone can help me out? Maybe one of the mods who modded it informative?

    2. Re:AdTI asking for $60,000 for media campaign by jjohnson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Had Philip Morris taken AdTI up on their offer, we'd have seen something similar back then to what we're seeing today: an apparently disinterested think tank raising a public policy issue for debate, while silently taking payoffs from a beneficiary of the debate.

      In other words, it's not a smoking gun, but it's a gun case and a couple of empty shells, to the effect that AdTI can be bought for astroturfing.

      What's really compelling, I think, is that a tobacco company apparently acted in a more moral fashion than Microsoft by refusing to use a fundamentally dishonest PR tactic.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    3. Re:AdTI asking for $60,000 for media campaign by x1048576 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Philip Morris did take up ADTI's offer. (Though they offered them less money). Details are here.

    4. Re:AdTI asking for $60,000 for media campaign by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      Okay, okay, it's a smoking gun. And tobacoo companies aren't more moral corporations than Microsoft.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  172. Re:Dilemma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better stick to the far better originals with Joel.

  173. EST's cooking book by LeftOfCentre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When Tanenbaum isn't writing books about how to create operating systems and computer networks, he's writing books about how to create food. (Yes, he really did write a book titled How To Prepare Your Input.)

  174. After some head-scratching, an honest inquiry by ScottKin · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I think people are missing some very important items here:

    1) There is a high degree of probability that Linus Torvalds *did* write the original Linux kernel on his own.

    2) Since so many people contributed to the Linux Kernel over the past years, it is *possible* that some code from proprietary sources made it into the Linux kernel.

    3) Whether any proprietay code is currently included in the present Linux kernel is still under speculation. SCO *did* show several snipets of code that *were* proprietary and *were* part of the 2.4 codebase; hence, it *is* possible that other proprietary code is still within the current 2.6.x codebase.

    What I'd like to know is this: what kind of code review goes into the process of submitting code to the Linux Kernel? Is there actually a group of people who check the code for possible violations of the inclusion of proprietary code into the kernel, thereby invalidating the GPL/LGPL or whatever Open Source licensing the Linux Kernel falls under? I'm aware that there are people who check the submitted code for other tendencies, but it would be interesting to see if there is anyone who watches for the inclusion of proprietary code into the Linux kernel before it actually gets included. In other words: does code checking include the legal requirements under the licensing model that Linux uses?

    --ScottKin

    --
    I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    1. Re:After some head-scratching, an honest inquiry by ScottKin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      So, I make an honest inquiry, and the Moderation-Nazis here turn my logical questions into flamebait?.

      More proof that /. is the most disingenuous forum on the Internet.

      Anyone care to really answer the questions?

      I doubt it.

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    2. Re:After some head-scratching, an honest inquiry by Doppleganger · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is there actually a group of people who check the code for possible violations of the inclusion of proprietary code into the kernel, thereby invalidating the GPL/LGPL or whatever Open Source licensing the Linux Kernel falls under?

      Perhaps you'd like to explain how anyone - whether from a big closed-source corporation or part of an open-source collection of coders - is supposed to check code to see if it came from another closed-source product? Whether you're Microsoft or Linus, all you have to go on is the word of the programmer who submitted the code. Linus and others obviously review any code that is submitted (as has been demonstrated recently with attempts to put in backdoors), but like any company, they can't check code against sources they don't have. And in either case, the punishment if such a thing were to happen would come down on the person who knowingly violated copyright.. the programmer who submitted the code.

      The only difference between Microsoft and Linus in this situation is that Linus allows anyone to see the code, and check for themselves whether their copyrights are being violated. How would anyone ever know for certain if their code was included into a Microsoft product? Microsoft has provably used code from outside sources before.. even open-source sources.

    3. Re:After some head-scratching, an honest inquiry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much everything you post is flamebait, fruity, whether you realize it or not. Because you pepper nearly everything you say with hackneyed cliches, ad hominem attacks, and passive-aggressive horseshit. You're about as disingenuous as they come, Mr. Pot, so let's just settle down there.

      Frankly, due to your dismal track record of saying anything worth reading, I'm surprised there isn't a script built in that mods you -1, Flamebait on general principles.

  175. Re:Apology accepted.... by AngstAndGuitar · · Score: 1

    "captain Needa.(sp?)"

    --
    Less look fast, more go fast.
  176. Definition of "Think Tank" by Tony · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I see the words "think tank," I replace them with "paid mouthpieces." This properly indicates the purpose of these groups.

    Near as I can tell, there are few real "think tanks" left in the US, unless you mean, "Stick these people in a tank until they think of a way to sell our bullshit as chocolate pudding."

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
    1. Re:Definition of "Think Tank" by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      I don't think "think tanks" are generally corrupt in the way you describe. They probably study a problem and return a finding. It's up to the people paying for the study to decide if it agrees with what they want to say.

      And if you don't get the answer you want, you go to another thinktank and pay for another study.

  177. The reason why Ken Brown is right: by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

    ah, yes... it comes down to this:

    "Being accepted at fine restaurants and hotels around the world is directly proportional to the intelligence one has." - Ken Brown

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
  178. An example of the danger of dumbness by oldstrat · · Score: 4, Informative


    A Reminder... (Score:1)
    by ScottKin (34718) on Tuesday June 08, @05:29PM (#9370763)
    (http://users.adelphia.net/~scottkin/)
    To remind everyone:

    Linus Torvalds is EMPLOYED by OSDN, who also happens to own Slashdot.

    Never trust everything you read. OSDN & Slashdot have a vested interest in "defending" Torvalds, as well as defending Linux - regardless of whether Torvalds *created* Linux on his own or he copied and/or transliterated code from other sources.

    The word that comes to my mind is "nepotism".

    --ScottKin


    You sure proved that poor thinking does not inhibit the abilty to type.
    Your Brown's kind of reader facts be damned.
    Linus works for OSDL - Open Source Development Labs
    Slashdot is a part of OSDN - Open Source Development Network

    No connection between the two, other than Linux enthusiasts have an interest in but, but no direct business connection.
    In your mind aparently the difference of one letter or one word makes no difference,
    well then I'm sure you'll understand this Tuck oft cupid".

    1. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by oldstrat · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm going to correct myself slightly VA Software (OSDN) is an OSDL member http://www.osdl.org/about_osdl/members/

      But then again so are Sun, NTT, Nokia, Intel, HP, Cisco, Computer Associates, IBM, Toshiba, Transmeta.


      Nothing to look at here though, as Slashdot is a user moderated community, not a service provider moderated community.
      If you see mods go pro Open Source, it's because the community as a whole is pro Open Source.

      It's not like this is some form of Fox News.

    2. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by ScottKin · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected, you cretin - but is there really a difference?

      What is the relationship between OSDL & OSDN?

      Don't you know?

      (heh)

      Obviously not.

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    3. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So tell me, how did you like working for Microsoft anyway?

      I guess they finally brought you back after all this years eh?

    4. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by oldstrat · · Score: 1


      Thought I made it CLEAR.

      Let me do so now for you.
      OSDN is a member (pays to support) the non-profit company OSDL.
      It's a one way street, OSDN makes no money back from OSDL.

      Clear enough? Or do you need it in Powerpoint?

    5. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by ScottKin · · Score: 1

      No, Mr. Anonymous Moron - I'm running my own consulting business at this time. The last time I worked at Microsoft was in 1995.

      And your point is....what?

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    6. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by ScottKin · · Score: 1

      I understood this perfectly - the question whas rhetorical. Maybe I should have used some indicator like (/rhetorical) in my statement so you could latch on to that.

      So: OSDN is related to OSDL. Slashdot is related to OSDN. Hence, Slashdot is related to OSDL.

      Therefore, Slashdot is nothing more than a propaganda avenue for Open Source projects. Why doesn't Mr. Malda change the cutesy tagline from "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" to "Open Source Propaganda Dissemination Tool for Nerds. News that is biased towards all Open Source Projects"?

      I mean, if we are wanting full disclosure (as has been said in other parts of this thread directed to me), why not be totally honest about the purpose of Slashdot?

      Don't get me wrong - Open Source is a wonderful idea. I use Open Source software all the time (Firefox, LiteStep, etc), so I hold nothing against it. What I do disagree with is the incessant bleathing on /. about how Open Source is so much superior than "proprietary" software. If this held true, everyone would be switching from Microsoft Office to OpenOffice in droves and everyone would be running some variant of *nix or Linux instead of a Microsoft Operating System. Each has it's place. I'm sure that one day, Linux or it's posterity will be on as many PCs as Microsoft's offerings - but I'm not holding my breath.

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    7. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by oldstrat · · Score: 1


      Therefore, Slashdot is nothing more than a propaganda avenue for Open Source projects.

      NOTHING MORE your so fripping stupid, I can't believe you can swallow without choking.

      Isn't it amazing that Microsoft does not provide a channel like slashdot where users do the moderation and non-microsofties don't get thier posts pulled.

      By the way, nice sidestep on the issue of Brown being full of excrement.

    8. Re:An example of the danger of dumbness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point being your a fool.

  179. within not to long a time by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

    we will call bogues reports which claim, insinuate, or are being portrayed as neutral scientific research, but in fact are FUD to the greater benefit of their corporate sponsors, 'Tocquevilles'.

    Also as a verb, like: "He (Linus) got Tocquevilled'

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
  180. Ken Brown is full of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Linux is a leprosy; and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector."

    But it's having a corresponding benefit on software consumers, who get a better quality product (both from the OS community and from the proprietary vendors). At the end of the day consumers spend more of their hard-earned money on doing interesting things with the software instead of paying for it, which probably translates to much more net innovation and job creation than if Microsoft ends up with all the money.

    "Software is also embedded in hardware, chips, printers and even consumer electronics. Should embedded software become 'free' too, it would be natural to conclude the value of hardware will spiral downward as well."

    No, it would be idiotic. A chip costs money to produce, money to assemble into hardware, money to package, ship etc. I'm unaware of any hardware company which has it's embedded software dept as a profit center; the software that runs on an embedded processor is sunk cost from the producers point of view. Not paying a license fee or development costs is pure profit for the hardware company.

  181. Re:This is why MS always wins by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 1

    BzzzzT!

    Wrong!

    This is a common misperception.

    Mind you, I'm not talking about Mr. Joe Blow.

    I'm talking about the people Mr. Joe Blow works for. There are plenty of linux consulting shops that will develop an end-to-end solution for you.

    Their service tends to be outstanding, but of course there are always exceptions.

    And, if you read my post, instead of just pounding reply, you would notice that I indicate there is survey evidence among IT professionals and business managers in an IT related field regarding the 'favorability' of MS versus OSS, and these surveys generally paint MS in a poor light.

    Not just among slashbots mind you.

    Yes, or course, the surveys were biased.

    Biased by whom? Microsoft, of course. I was refering to that leaked microsoft memo released as the halloween Document #7.

    Link here

    Microsoft is fighting neck and neck in the image war, and at this moment in time, they are loosing.

    That could change, of course, but don't count it on.

    CTO are pissed of about the new MS licensing, constant MS patching, and dealing with the hassel when their WHOLE FRIGGIN NETWORK goes down. Not that it was unavoidable...But its still happenning. Even if MS releases the patches in time, networks keep going down.

    And then there is the TCO battle.

    You are wrong about this being a slashdot only thing. Linux really is getting to be well known in the business world.

    Is everyone switching? No. But mindshare, and marketshare, are building.

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  182. Start a fegal und to sue Brown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's start a legal fund to sue Brown for libel.

  183. The Latest is the Greatist! by meanroy · · Score: 1

    An absolutely brilliant, thorough, and well deserved Fisking by the Good Professor!

    God I love that word!

  184. Moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You fucking moron.

    A "dupe" is when the same story is posted more than once on SLASHDOT.

    In case you didn't notice, SLASHDOT is neither NEWSFORGE nor REDHAT.

    Idiot.

  185. Oh yeah, BTW by meanroy · · Score: 1

    Best quote:

    "It is just as cold in Finland as in Canada so programmers are never tempted to go outside."

  186. Re:..but the Linux genie is already out of the bot by Draknor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of THOSE - you could generate blue screens at an INCREDIBLE rate!!

  187. Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sure hope this page:

    http://adti.net/ysurvey/survey.php?s_id=2

    isn't vullnerable to sql injection.

    Especially since it uses the mysql "hybrid source" database.

    That would be a pity...

  188. Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by Jonathan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Quite the contrary -- besides the whole feud with Linus, even earlier he quarreled with Stallman. It seems that Andrew, being at a Dutch institution called (in English) "Free University", had created a compiler kit called "The Free University Compiler Toolkit", and Stallman was intrigued and assumed that Tannenbaum was a kindred spirit and suggested a collaboration (this was in the 1980's, when the GNU project was first taking form). Tannenbaum in no uncertain terms told Stallman that "the university is free, but certainly not my software", and tried to dissuade Stallman from continuing his quixotic quest to create GNU.

    Anyway, the point isn't to criticize Andrew, but to show that his current support is all the more useful because he's *not* a traditional fan of free software.

    1. Re:Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by boots@work · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think it was "Free University Compiler Kit".

    2. Re:Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by leomekenkamp · · Score: 1

      Little fact (mostly off-topic): the 'Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam' aka 'de VU' is called 'vrij' (free) because it has no religious roots, unlike the 'Universiteit van Amsterdam' aka 'de UvA' which has catholic roots. Dutch society used to be divided into groups like catholics, protestants, socialists. Every group had its own schools, sport clubs etc. ('verzuiling').

      So the 'free' has basically nothing to do with 'gratis' or 'freedom'.

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    3. Re:Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by jit · · Score: 1

      Yup, but that's only the translastion of the original name: Vrije Universiteit Compiler Kit.
      It was a (the?) reason for changing the name to Amsterdam Compiler Kit.

    4. Re:Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      Ehm, I think you're wrong here,
      it's called free because it's free of church and government as it was around 1880. It was founded by and closely tied to the then new reformed protestant movement ('gereformeerd') who had separated from the official state protestant church ('hervormd'). It was founded by reverend 'Abraham Kuyper' the early leader of the reformed protestant church.
      This year officially the two protestant movements united again after 125 years into one church, althoug some new splinter groups have formed.
      "Free" here means free from the religious views of the mayority.
      The universities with catholic ties in the Netherlands are those of Maastricht, Tilburg and Nijmegen, esp. the later two.
      You are right thas Dutch society used to be very divided into separate groups, every group also had it's own political party, which has spawned our long tradition of coalitions ruling the country, never is one party alone in power (nobody has anything close to a mayority).

      Actually the 'University of Amsterdam' is called the 'municipal university' at the Free University as it is closely tied to the government and at least nowadays much more secular.
      The identification of Amsterdam with catholicism dates back much further, to the 80 years independance war, where Amsterdam sided on the side of the Spanish initially due to it's large catholic population at the time.
      In more recent history it has more been associated with jewism, the Amsterdam soccer club "AJAX" are still often refered to as "the jews" even though probably none of the players are jewish.

      http://www.vu.nl/organisatie/index.cfm

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    5. Re:Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by leomekenkamp · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected and humbly bow to this lesson in history. And I will beat up the friend who studied at the VU and told me what I thought was the truth. Should have known though, he did dutch and not history ;-)

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    6. Re:Tannenbaum? A Hippie? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      Don't beat him up, studying at the VU is cool, my sister does it too
      (reformed protestant theology actualy)

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
  189. then you laugh at them, by EdlinUser · · Score: 1

    SCO and AdTI are wonderful jokes.
    If this is the fight part then perhaps
    an updated version of the quote would read:
    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
    then they fight you, then you laugh at them,
    then you win.

  190. Bring it on! by trawg · · Score: 1

    Celebrity web deathmatch!

  191. US Corporations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "where is it written that all activities everywhere in the world must be done with the interests of U.S. corporations as their primary goal?"

    The US Constitution.
    Ammendment #47 section 1d.10-t:
    The United States shall be thought of as the 'Supreme Nation of the Earth'. All activities therein shall only be allowed if they benefit United States' Citizens^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Corporations. Any activities to the contrary shall be deemed unAmerican, and must be eliminated.

  192. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod parent up as "Informative", please.

  193. kenneth brown by SkunkPussy · · Score: 1

    Kenneth Brown is president of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution .... He is reportedly "not the sharpest knife in the drawer,"

    haha thats funny! even the article about him can't resist a sly dig!

    --
    SURELY NOT!!!!!
  194. What's the big deal by linuxhansl · · Score: 1

    Just ignore that guy (Brown).

    I can claim all of the following:

    "Nobody can run 100m in less than 10secs, because the human leg is not strong enough".
    "Albert Einstein could not possibly develope his theory of relativity in such a short amount of time".
    "Microsoft didn't develop the initial version of Windows, because they only knew how to write Basic code".
    "Iraq was involved in the events of 9/11 and has WMDs, because all dictators are terrorists".
    "The moon mission was a fake. The US did not have the technology and money to pull that off".
    "The Allies could never have won against Germany, because they didn't have enough troups. Hence we all live in a state of hynosis believing the Allies won".

    I can even write a book about all this. I can even come up with circumstantial "proof" backing my claim. That does not change facts.

    So instead of getting upset just ignore the guy. Nobody takes him seriously anyway.

    The only person who knows whether Linus wrote all of the first version of Linux is Linus. We can all claim whatever we want, it doesn't change a bit.

    And let me just say this: Everybody with some knowledge in OS theory could write the *first* version of Linux in six months (and this is not to discredit Linus). I remember we wrote a virtual memory management system and filesytem in our OS lecture in 1/2 semesters and that was only one of our projects.

    The fact the Brown needed to quote Tannenbaum out of context was enough for me to ignore him.

  195. Re:Andrew Tanenbaum, king of backhanded compliment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you ignored all the comments that said "Linux 0.1 wasn't that great."

  196. HP example was a good one by Curtman · · Score: 2, Insightful
    • If, say, HP puts free software in its printers, how does this reduce the ***value*** of their printers?


    HP does put free software out to operate its printers at least.
  197. Re:Dilemma by boots@work · · Score: 1

    Watch an awful show made by a liberal to restore cosmic balance.

  198. l-o-n-g-h-o-r-n by zlel · · Score: 1

    just because it takes what 4 years to write longhorn doesn't mean....

    1. Re:l-o-n-g-h-o-r-n by sidhartha · · Score: 1

      Indeed. How much of this is self justification?

  199. Re:Andrew Tanenbaum, king of backhanded compliment by Progman3K · · Score: 1

    Mozart's first few concertos weren't that great either.

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  200. Joe Lieberman? by mtrisk · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or does the name "Joseph Lieberman" stand out in the AdTI letter mentioned in this comment?

    Is it the Joseph Lieberman? The one who ran alongside Al Gore as VP? If so, how did he become "Honorary Co-Chairman" of AdTI? What a shame.

    --

    Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
  201. Ken Brown wacky weed? by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

    What ever this guy is smoking, it must be able to make Tommy Chong pause for a minute and wonder if it's a good idea to try it. Maybe it's that drain cleaner that that chick snorted in Up In Smoke?

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  202. Linus should sue Ken Brown for libel. by alizard · · Score: 1
    Disclaimer: IANAL. Linus Torvalds should consult legal counsel with respect to his available legal recourses against Ken Brown personally and the organization he runs.

    IMHO, Linus should sue Ken Brown for libel as soon as the book is published. Ken is calling Linus a liar with respect to Linus's writing of the original Linux kernel, which is arguably an attempt to damage Mr. Torvalds' public reputation and career. Every source Ken has named has publically contradicted Ken's version of what he said, which should make demonstrating the falsity of Brown's allegations a slam dunk.

    Perhaps IBM's legal staff would be willing to handle the lawsuit against ADTI on a pro bono basis. This is arguably just as much a threat to their Open Source-based products and development as the SCO lawsuit, and IMHO, for the same reason.

    It may well be that in the course of a lawsuit, any parties that might have paid ADTI to prepare this book and the press releases could be forced to disclose their interests, which would speak to the question of malicious intent and motivations for Brown to engage in what appears to be reckless falsehood directed against the Open Source community in general and Linus Torvalds in particular.

    Even if the book is not published, the press releases may well adequate grounds for legal action.

  203. Rejoinder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Morons abound... Response to a rebutal is a rejoinder... sheesh. Uneducated geeks.

  204. Will the real shill please stand up by oldstrat · · Score: 1

    Re:the microsoft shills (Score:1)
    by ScottKin (34718) on Tuesday June 08, @05:49PM
    (#9371020)
    (http://users.adelphia.net/~scottkin/)
    ...just like the Linux shills:

    Slashdot
    OSDN
    Kuro5in
    Richard Stallman
    Tannenbaum


    etc, etc, etc.

    The door opens both ways, bucko!

    --ScottKin



    And you wouldn't be a Microsoft shill now would you?

    Come on Scott, in the name of full disclosure fess up, your not that far south of Redmond and I'm sure Linux represents a potential hazard to you or your community in M$ terms.

    Slashdot & Kuro5in are communities not shills, good work insult an entire community and complain your unloved.
    Richard Stallman is an Open Source advocate that predates Linux by ages, if anybody is a shill it would be Linux to Stallman not the other way around.
    Tannenbaum, crap man your making me laugh - where's Tannenbaum's interest as a shill?
    Microsoft is more likely to give him grant money than any Linux entity.
    OSDN, well you could be right there they've got that wonderful SourceForge Enterprise Edition, that they give away an Open Source version of.

    Come on MickeySoft is a powerhouse in your neck of the woods and it's un-nerving to think anything could challenge it.

    1. Re:Will the real shill please stand up by ScottKin · · Score: 1

      I've got as much vested interest in Microsoft and their products as any intrenched Linux-dev or seasoned user has in Linux - anything wrong with that? My background is an open book, and my former relationship with Microsoft is well-known. What you and apparently most of the poser...oops...posters here forget is that I cut my teeth on the very first versions of BSD running on several of the PDP-11/70's I admin'ed at LBL (along with 2 CDC 6000's and a CDC 7600Z) in the late 70's/early 80's. I am *not* a Unix-o-phobe by any stretch of the imagination. I have Knoppix running on an old-disused Toshiba laptop, I'll be installing the latest OpenBSD build on an older IBM GL300 in my home lab this week. I'm even somewhat involved in an Open Source project that some of you might have heard of - it's this little MS SHELL32.DLL replacement called "LiteStep" (although I'm not as involved with LiteStep as I was before the whole thing forked into DarkStep, RetroStep and the OTS builds).

      If all of this makes me a Microsoft "shill", then so be it.

      Unlike others here, I am not a "karma-whore" and am not here to be "loved" - or didn't you get that in my previous posts?

      The Open Source community is just that - a communuty...and once someone starts pointing out some unsavory things about "The Community" the rest come out swinging. It's almost a gang-like mentality at times.

      Please explain to me how Linux = RMS shill - this should be entertaining.

      Why is it when someone tries to call a spade a spade everyone gets so freakin' uptight?

      Does the truth hurt *that* bad?

      I'll make you and the entire world a deal - make Linux as easy to install, as easy to use for the *average* user and provide the level of industry-wide support that Microsoft provides for their customers along with all of the driver support to make installation a breeze and I'll burn every MS pre-release Microsoft CDs that I have, including my prized posession - one of the ORIGINAL Windows 95 RTM "Gold" CDs - and worship at the altar of the Torvalds/RMS/OSS Triumvirate for ever.

      Game?

      --ScottKin

      --
      I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
    2. Re:Will the real shill please stand up by oldstrat · · Score: 1


      How did this get to be about ease of installation and drivers for Linux and Winblows?

      I use winblows and so does 90% of the rest of the world, that is part of the problem, the gene pool is too small.
      I also use Solaris, Linux, BSD, Xenix, CP/M, DRDOS, OS-X and Forth, 90% of the world does not.
      I see the relationships between these OS's daily and appreciate the FACT that much of the same code runs in each.

      I didn't say Linux = Stallman, nothing of the sort, what I said was Stallman/GPL preceed Linux and Linux is GPL'd due to Stallman's prognostic creation of the GPL which created an environment where Linux could go beyond just a toy kernel and become the core for an entire OS.

      The general topic here is "Is Brown correct when he calls Linux Stolen goods?"

      The answer is no, and if what you say is true about your attatchment to BSD, and you were more than an admin mechanic, then you know that at the core of everything is the processor instruction set and EVERYTHING else is on top of that.
      So everything is derivative of the 4004 instruction set, or which ever you choose.

      Files structures, batch processing, I/O etc.

      It is not good for the industry, or traditional within the indusrty for anyone to OWN these things.

  205. "I do not suffer fools gladly." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then again, what unix loser does?

  206. Ken Brown confuses terms by (Maly) · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Linux is a leprosy; and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector. Software is also embedded in hardware, chips, printers and even consumer electronics. Should embedded software become 'free' too, it would be natural to conclude the value of hardware will spiral downward as well.
    Ken Brown doesn't seem to know the difference between the terms "value" and "price."
    1. Re:Ken Brown confuses terms by mpmansell · · Score: 1

      Ken Brown doesn't seem to know the difference between his backside and his elbow ;)

  207. we will be the first to buy his book anyway. by quadrocerebra · · Score: 1

    we sure will be making fun of ken brown.. but i guess all of us will buy his book just out of curiosity and that exactly is his purpose.

    --
    this sig violates slashdot rules
  208. My favorite quote by dulles · · Score: 1

    This is perhaps more interesting in what it says about the author of the article...
    "Isn't fair to question their character, when the core of their business strategy is trust?"

  209. "Scratch" by pico303 · · Score: 1

    I love the idea that the only true way to write software is to sit down with a blank page and start typing away. How many developers out there don't share each others' code?

    I don't know many mathematicians who start from scratch on anything. I'm pretty sure ol' Einstein built on the work of others. He was just a little more creative than most.

  210. Oh yeah? by gulfan · · Score: 1

    In your face Tanenbaum! - Homer Simpson

  211. Re:"Think Tank" hiring any moron who comes along.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, it's the Think Tank that didn't!

  212. Impressive by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 1

    Go to the Alexis de Tocqueville home page, then click "Mission" link at top left, then click "Accomplishments".

    Amazing. They have 404 accomplishments. Pretty impressive, I must say.

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  213. Santa Claus? by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 1

    It's time that Linus fold. Brown clearly has him by the teeth and isn't going to let go until Linux admits what has been so clearly proven to us. Linus must reveal his theft of code from Santa Claus [...]

    You mean, the Santa Claus Operation?

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  214. Only if you read Kuro5hin! by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 0

    I wrote a piece on Kuro5hin a few days back. Is this what you're talking about?

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  215. Trivia Time by elpapacito · · Score: 1

    It's trivia time:

    What kind of person does the following ?

    1. Claims a single individual sponged talent (?) (he couldn't say stole) from U.S. Government and Corporations
    attempts to find proof of such an hideous horrible crime (in order to give his bold statement some foundation)
    only to be refuted by his own expert and apparently disregards expert opinion.

    2. Probably thinks even taking inspiration from works of others is an intellectual crime, let alone learning from others
    for the all-but-good purpose of writing the roots of a free-for-all operating system.

    3. Uses ad hominem rethorical attack, hidden behind the statement that operating system is a human disease (an orange=apple
    kind of equation) disregarding the fact Linux hasn't uprooted Windows et al yet and that this is necessarily an outcome as
    bad as that of leprosy.

    4. Uses the non sequitur : if a thing comes for free (price) then it lowers the value of something else, apparently forgetting (yeah sure) price and value are not always proportional and are two entirely different concepts to begin with.

    5. Claims that a single 21 year old can't do what a group of elder experienced people does in years, apparently forgetting that
    what wasn't coinceived or realized in the past may be conceivable and realizable in the future, regardless of the constrains
    experienced in the past , and using "age" as a factor that gives less likelyhood to a technical accomplishment ?