Slashdot Mirror
Do it Yourself BSD Daemon Wall Flag
An anonymous reader writes "Everyone knows the BSD Beastie. There are T-shirts, bronze Daemons and even boxers with him on them. Well now there's a page describing how to make a BSD Daemon wall flag without using fabric printing!"
It's cool, but I'd never, ever have that kind of patience.
Just then the floating disembodied head of Colonel Sanders started yelling Everything You Know Is Wrong!-Weird Al
And you can sleep with the devil!
Of course there is also a Blowfish and a Firefly.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
That guy (gal? I can't tell from the photos) didn't either, he had his mom do it.
Unfortunately, her advice is "Have your mom spend months hand-stitching it!", which may not work for everyone.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
You know you have a good product when someone spends 250+ hours to create an homage to it. I wonder if anyone ever has done something like that for Microsoft?
I want my boxers to have HER on them.
--
No, not printed.
Would have probably costed you less than the materials, and you would have had in like a few days.
This method is known as cross stitching, and its pretty easy to find software to plan it out. If you plan to do it on a smaller scale you might want to consider techniques for producing stitches that look the same (no ugly lines) from both sides, which about quadruples the stitch planning complexity.
Not that I'm all that innocent myself. When I was about 10, I had a fixation with graphing paper, and frequently made video game and vector graphic inspired artwork and board games using it. My Mom was going through an "art-and-crafts" stage at the time, and suggested I make a computer themed cross-stitch pattern for her. So, I made a desk layout of an old style hobbist computer with about a dozen peripherals attached and she made it for me. I had it framed and it decorated my room until I went to college. I really ought to dig it out of my parent's attic, photograph it and post it online somewhere some time...
Those who complain about affect & effect on
And you can sleep with the devil!
:D
Mod parent up! That link is f*ckin' hilarious.. I didn't know about it, thank you so much for posting it
And the whole site is well worth a tour. If there's one thing I'm sorry for is that I'm too lazy to list here all the things that cracked me up
--
Requiem for the FUD
Heck, there's even a competion to replace him... oh.
Actually, if you know someone who's into this sort of art and crafts, you can probably commission them (with 50 free support incidents, perhaps) to make something nice for you. Tux or an apple logo, for example.
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
What We Can Learn From BSD
By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.
The last paragraph is priceless:
It took my mother about 330 hours of work sewing the Beastie
I hope he gets her something for Mother's Day.
There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.
Same old GNU/Linux FUD, that has been disproved countless times...
In short: the MIT research is *11 years old*, and that Rice study on the TCP/IP stack uses FreeBSD *2.2.6*
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
... facts are facts. ;)
FreeBSD:
FreeBSD, Stealth-Growth Open Source Project (Jun 2004)
"FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (Jun 2004)
"[FreeBSD] has secured a strong foothold with the hosting community and continues to grow, gaining over a million hostnames and half a million active sites since July 2003."
What's New in the FreeBSD Network Stack (Sep 2004)
"FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
NetBSD:
NetBSD sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (May 2004)
NetBSD again sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (30 Sep 2004)
OpenBSD:
OpenBSD Widens Its Scope (Nov 2004)
Review: OpenBSD 3.6 shows steady improvement (Nov 2004)
*BSD in general:
..and last but not least, we have the cutest mascot as well - undisputedly. ;)
Deep study: The world's safest computing environment (Nov 2004)
"The world's safest and most secure 24/7 online computing environment - operating system plus applications - is proving to be the Open Source platform of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) and the Mac OS X based on Darwin."
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Like this bunch has enough patience to stick out even one of those kiddie plastic canvas projects. 700+ hours of hand stitching over five months. And the guy didn't even do it himself, that I would be impressed about it. He got his Mom to do it.
I have to suppress the urge to throttle people when co-workers think they are being cute with "Nice hat you got there, would be swell to have a new sweater. By the way, I wear a size Large." They complain about paying $25 for something at Wart-Maul but think I'll be thrilled at the suggestion I take six months to spin and knit a one-of-a-kind custom garment for them?
I bet you would make a boatload of quid if you auctioned that thing on eBay (the USA one is probably the biggest market).
;)
And then make your mother make you a new one.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
"she just opened the picture with gimp"
dude, your mom uses gimp? she sounds way hot.
Cogito Eggo Sum, I think therefore I'm a waffle
Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personae?
The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. That hope is long gone, replaced by an inconsolable despair. A mournful, plaintive nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.
The lady deserves a moment enshrined in the spotlight, doing what mothers do best, sacrificing for their children, loving them.
Hats off to you mom! You rock! (That means you are great).
http://objective.jesussave.us.nyud.net:8090/propag anda.html
Typical BSD/Open Source person.
Let someone else slave away and do all the hard work for you, then take it without paying for it.
Evolutionism Propaganda Article by Dr. Richard Paley
The subject of Evolutionism's use of propaganda to spread its false doctrines is a broad one that would require many pages to deal with in full. That they resort to propaganda is just evidence that they have no honest arguments in favor of their position. The paucity of pro-Evolutionistic arguments has been widely documented and I won't go into it here.
What I would like to discuss are some prominent and current instances of Evolutionism propaganda: The PBS's series Evolution, the use of subliminal Evolutionism, and Evolutionism's place in the computing industry.
PBS's "Evolution":
PBS (supposedly the "Public Broadcasting System" although one has to wonder which public they serve with all the anti-Christian junk they put on) is currently airing a new series called simply Evolution. This series (running for eight nights, at two hours a night) is nothing but a commercial for Secular Humanistic pseudo-science.
Darwin questions God's existence from the bowels of the Beagle...
...while above deck, Capt. Fitzroy is mockingly portrayed reading the Bible aloud to the crew.
Thus far, the first episode (called "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" -- at least they are honest in the title) was a melodramatization of Charles Darwin's life. Darwin is portrayed as a sympathetic character who is attacked by ignorant Christians for his "revolutionary thought" which he is shown likening to "confessing a murder" (again, another slip of honesty). All those who historically questioned and pointed out flaws in Darwin's ideas are portrayed as villains: Richard Owen, Bishop Samuel Wilberforce, Captain Robert Fitzroy of the H.M.S. Beagle -- all are made into unrecognizable cartoons whose only purpose is to act as foils for the noble Darwin and his crusade against Christianity. Even God himself is turned into a villain; at one point in the episode they had the audacity to blame Him for killing Darwin's daughter!
Interspersed with the costume drama were talking heads explaining to us why Evolutionism is the One True Way. These included some doctors and biologists -- one of whom openly expressed the religious nature of his belief in Evolutionism -- whose names I can't remember as they were unnotable persons in the scientific community. Daniel Dennett, a philosopher who wrote a polemic also called Darwin's Dangerous Idea , was on hand to tell us in no uncertain terms that Darwin's ideas excluded the need for God. Needless to say Stephen Jay Gould made an appearance, although he did thankfully refrain from talking about baseball this time.
The episode also included "real life examples" of Evolutionism to try and convince us that it is a real science. One of these was -- and I am not making this up -- a primatologist who taught some chimpanzees to "count". Supposedly this proves that we are a monkey's uncle. Another example used was AIDS. They argued that AIDS is constantly evolving and if it weren't for Darwin we wouldn't understand why and thus would be helpless in treating the disease (they conveniently neglect to point out that Darwinistic propaganda equating us with animals might have helped to spread the disease in the first place). This is a common false argument made by Evolutionists; the random variations of AIDS is not the same as the transmutation of species that Darwin wrote about and that is the basis of Secular Humanism. All those little changes aside, AIDS is still AIDS. Show us AIDS evolving into a cat -- which is essentially the Evolutionistic position of common ancestry for all lifeforms -- and then you'll have something worth noting.
Remember, this was all in only the first episode! We still have seven more to go -- or fourteen more hours of this (PBS doesn't even allow us commercial breaks to help us regain our sanity!). One can only
Subject says it all.
I know it's goddamn off-topic, but this has to be said: :)
Luckily, it *is* a fake.
Yesterday I fell for it. Then today I googled for "Fellowship University" (where the anti-evolutionist wacko allegedly teaches) and found nothing. So, I found proof that it's a fake - albeit extremely well done!!
I don't feel so bad for falling for it, since the great James Randi fell for it as well! But he soon corrected himself (here and here)
Btw, The JREF website is totally cool. A great resource to debunk all the quackery of our time (from parapsychology to homeopathy).
--
Requiem for the FUD
The proof is here! Sorry.
It shows how the faces of the members were "edited".
The long hair may not make him a female ... but it certainly does make him an ugly male.
Cheers,
-- The Dude
Well someone will have to get back to sewing when the new logo is out. Definitely bad timing.
Oh well. All links (except those in the sigs of the perpetrators) in this subthread lead to porn sites (usually through a combination of redirects and javascript). even the waybackmaschine page has js embedded to this effect.
stupid trolls.
£3240 that could have been earnt cleaning turkey corpses at the local Bernard Mathews plant in the UK.
http://www.neobard.info - wacky world of me
From roughly halfway down the page:
This is me holding it up. I'm male, long hair does not mean I'm female!