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!"

Comments

wow

[cooley]

It's cool, but I'd never, ever have that kind of patience.

Then all you need to do is chmod 666

[fm6]

And you can sleep with the devil!

Just in time!

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

As NetBSD has changed its logo, and FreeBSD announced a contest to change theirs. Are there mow separate "Logos" and "Mascots"? Can a portrait of Kirk McKusick be put on a flag?

Of course there is also a Blowfish and a Firefly.

Will your mom?

[bluGill]

That guy (gal? I can't tell from the photos) didn't either, he had his mom do it.

Re:Will your mom?

[HitScan]

Except cut his hair!

Re:Will your mom?

[tuxnduke]

I'd just print it.. http://homokaasu.org/rasterbator/

Very nice!

[Otter]

Well now there's a page describing how to make a BSD Daemon wall flag without using fabric printing!

Unfortunately, her advice is "Have your mom spend months hand-stitching it!", which may not work for everyone.

loyalty

[mabu]

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?

Re:loyalty

[EnronHaliburton2004]

Over time, I dare say that most windows users will waste 250+ hours rebooting Windows and dealing with spyware.

Not quite an homage, but quite a sacrifice!

Boxers with HIM on them?

[Anonymous Coward]

I want my boxers to have HER on them.

--
No, not printed.

Couldn't you have brought a poster?

[Alpha27]

Would have probably costed you less than the materials, and you would have had in like a few days.

Re:Couldn't you have brought a poster?

[BossMC]

Yes, let's fucking buy everything instead of being creative.

Cross Stitch

[Sparr0]

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.

I Never Though I'd See The Day...

[DLWormwood]

...when cross-stitching warrant's a /. article.

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...

Re:I Never Though I'd See The Day...

[R.Caley]

...when cross-stitching warrant's a /. article.

Clearly they need another /. section for `Ask Mum' (or perhaps `Mom' for you wierdoes over there).

I mean, take some of the the current front page headlines:

Gates Blackmails Danes ``I blame the parents letting them play with that rough Gates boy'' Night Vision Scope ``You should be in bed anyway'' Annodex ``Shouldn't you be out in the fresh air?'' Wave Energy ``Wave goodbye to grandma'' Data Stolen ``I told you to look after it!'' Linux Cat Feeder ``I knew you'd get bored and I'd end up having to feed and clean up after it'' Phone with iTunes ``What do you want with that, you have a perfectly good phone, and if you'd have kept up with your piano lessons...''

Hmmm..

[biglig2]

There are T-shirts, bronze Daemons and even boxers with him on them.

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.

That poor guy's mom!!

[Drunken_Jackass]

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.

I can see people lining up now...

[feorlen]

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?

Auction that puppy!!!

[bergeron76]

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. ;)

Re:Auction that puppy!!!

[bergeron76]

You don't think it would sell for more than $2,000? There are some very wealthy BSD fanatics out there.

Now I'm very curious as to just how much it would sell for.

Re:Auction that puppy!!!

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

330 for just the beastie logo, the total flag took a bit more:
"so all in all it took her 720 hours of work to complete"

basically 1 persom month to sew, this was definitely a labor of love, or insanity... materials cost was inconsequential compared to labor, 31 euros, or about $38 at current exchange rates...

Re:Auction that puppy!!!

[WoodenRobot]

If you want it to go for a lot, put it on eBay after using a toaster to burn a picture of the Virgin Mary on it.

wow

[Mr.Coffee]

"she just opened the picture with gimp"

dude, your mom uses gimp? she sounds way hot.

Site slashdotted, here's a cache link

[kiore]

http://objective.jesussave.us.nyud.net:8090/propag anda.html

Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[ulib]

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

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[fm6]

If there's proof that this is a hoax on the site you linked to, you'll have to point me to it. All I see is a bare assertion, based on the name "Paley".

The fact that you can't find any mention of "Fellowship University" means nothing. It's probably an unaccredited school with a "campus" in somebody's church.

When this site was first mentioned on Slashdot, about 3 years ago, I spent some time googling the people mentioned on the site, and they all seemed to have a pretty big presence in the anti-evolution community, with lots of essays "proving" that evolution is bogus. All of it thoroughly ignorant, but much to detailed to be a hoax. It's lame, of course, but by the standards of crankdom, not that lame. There are a lot of self-taught "scientists" out there.

I don't feel like digging up this material again just to argue with you, but you can probably find it yourself if you look.

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[ulib]

I don't feel like digging up this material again just to argue with you

I definitely don't need you to do it..
As i posted in a correction, the link I attached to the word 'proof' was wrong. The actual proof is here.

To sum it up: this is the members page as it is now, and this is what it was (it's stored in a cache site). The faces of the members were obviously edited (compare the eyes, especially. Arguably, they did it in order not to use the face of some actual people). This pretty much proves that the whole website is a fake.

OTOH, I totally agree that the anti-evolution movement is a reality (sadly). It's enough to look at what happens in some schools, as the CEO of the AAAS (the association that publishes Science) is denouncing.

--
Requiem for the FUD

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[fm6]

The manipulations may be obvious to you. They're not to me. Perhaps if you pointed out specific pictures you thought had been manipulated.

The guy who wrote the museumofhoaxes page seems to think that the hoaxer is this this guy. If he spent 5 minutes reading the guy's web material, he'd realize that he's quite sincere, though not very bright.

Also, note that the OBJECTIVE web site was originally hosted by a Christian hosting company. Not a logical place to host a spoof!

Finally, notice how OBJECTIVE is distributing this banner demanding that the Landover site be shut down. I can't believe a spoofer would come up with the slogan "He didn't give His life to be mocked!", no matter how mock-serious he was trying to be.

It's pretty easy to "prove" that something on the web is bogus. You pick at little inconsistencies, and you ignore the contrary evidence. I've been accused of being a non-existant person more than once. The last time was on Slashdot, where I had a story accepted gushing about a new TV show I was enthusiastic about. Several people "proved" that I was a pseudo-person invented just to plug the show. Never mind that already had a couple thousand Slashdot posts in my history!

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[ulib]

The parts which were obviously manipulated (see before and after) are:

Dr. Andrew Miller - eyes
Peggy Miller - eyes
Timothy Allmon - eyes (if you can't see this one, the problem is in *your* eyes :)
Dr. Troy Franklin - hair
Jose Rosas - mouth
Fred "Skeet" Hoskins - eyes

This is a pretty exhaustive proof that the website is a fake.

--
Requiem for the FUD

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[fm6]

Look at the pictures side by side. The "after" pictures are not manipulated versions of the "before" pictures -- they're different pictures. These people are vain as hell (excuse me, heck) and probably get new head shots every week.

Even if you convinced me that for some strange reason (vanity?) somebody was manipulating these pictures, that's really not proof of anything. What settles the issue is the actual content of the site. Move away from the standard conspiracy "proofs" and look at the site as a whole. There's just too much long-winded, solemn nonsense that a satirist would never have to patience to generate. And even if they did, they'd try to make more of it funny.

This is just one of those lame stories that some conspiracy freak put out there, and that everybody passes on without checking the facts for themselves. It's up there with the sewer alligators and the dead bodies embedded in Hoover Dam.

Now excuse me, I'm late for my Illuminati meeting.

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[javaxman]

The parts which were obviously manipulated (see before and after) are:

As much as I actually did think the site was a fake ( wishful thinking ) after being told it was, I have to agree with fm6 that you've made a very weak argument here. Timothy Allmon's eyes? If that's an image manipulation, it's a bang-up job. I mean, they got the eyebrows looking very, very natural, even. It really looks like just a different head shot.

Most intriguing to me are the links http://www.biblecodedigest.com/ and banner adds on that site...

Anyway, I'd be happy to see other evidence that this is a fake site, it's just that religious nutballs are nutty enough, it's hard to tell if they're serious or not.

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[ulib]

As much as I actually did think the site was a fake ( wishful thinking ) after being told it was, I have to agree with fm6 that you've made a very weak argument here.

"A very weak argument".. Am I the only one *not* blind here?
For christ's sake, have a decent look at the two pictures before talking (one and two). The *only* difference between them is a manipulation of the eyes (which don't belong to the same person, it's quite evident) and of the colors. *Everything else* is exactly the same: look at the mouth, the nose, the hair, the tie. The pics are based on the same head shot.

I stopped answering to that other guy because I came to the conclusion that he was simply trolling. Now I don't know what to think.. is it a troll festival, or is there an epidemy of impaired eyesight?..

The manipulation *proves*, exhaustively, that the site's a fake. A brilliant satire, if you ask me - since sadly there are too many religious nuts asserting such things for real - but still a fake (luckily).

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[poopdeville]

Look at the pictures side by side. The "after" pictures are not manipulated versions of the "before" pictures -- they're different pictures.

You must be blind. They're obviously doctored. Do a google search for "Fisherman's Quandry" (sic) and "Fisherman's Quandary." There's no game theoretic problem in the literature with that name for "Diamond" Jack to solve. There are a ton of other glaring factual errors and inconsistencies.

They sell thongs in their online store, for shit's sake.

Re:Luckily, it *is* a fake. :)

[Fnkmaster]

Please see this thread. There's a fairly exhaustive list of reasons to believe this is a fake/hoax/whatever. Basically almost everything on the site turns up blanks - there are no churches, universities, math problems, high schools, etc. by the names cited therein.

If you can provide even a modest piece of evidence for their existance, please do so. There have been a few legitimate evangelical and anti-evolutionist types who have cited or discussed the essays, yes, but they don't seem to have any idea what the hell Fellowship University is or whether these guys are for real either. Thus the pretty obvious conclusion that it's a hoax.

Sorry, wrong link

[ulib]

The proof is here! Sorry.
It shows how the faces of the members were "edited".

bsd.ee

[ElDuderino44137]

The long hair may not make him a female ... but it certainly does make him an ugly male.

Cheers,
-- The Dude

this is a stupid troll thread

[frost22]

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.

Re:this is a stupid troll thread

[fm6]

Still works for me. Perhaps your browser has been hijacked.

Re:this is a stupid troll thread

[frost22]

Still works for me. Perhaps your browser has been hijacked.

Perhaps. That would have to be a truly ingenious hijack, though - since it only applied to this exact subthread, only on slashdot, and only to the links in the text, not those from ./ or even those from your .sig. Marvelous. And it's the first hijack I'm aware of that works with Mozilla 1.7.5..

Oh, and that subthread-on-slashdot-and-only-your-links hijack now right now doesnt go to a sex site any more but - after some redirects - to the front page of web1000.com, containing a stern warning about child porn reported to law enforcement.

But wait - that hijack is even more ingenious than you thought! It also has infected trusty old wget on my trusty old BSD box (boy, do I want to hire that hijack programmer)

me@myhost 3:21 [~/test] wget -nH -nd -vv http://objective.jesussave.us/propaganda.html
--0 3:21:52-- http://objective.jesussave.us/propaganda.html
=> `propaganda.html'
Connecting to objective.jesussave.us:80... connected!
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 302 Object Moved
Location: http://www.web1000.com [following]
--03:21:52-- http://www.web1000.com/
=> `index.html'
Connecting to www.web1000.com:80... connected!
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 21,204 [text/html]

0K -> .. [100%]

03:21:53 (24.71 KB/s) - `index.html' saved [21204/21204]

Unfortunately I failed to make this kind of precise records of the situation a few hours ago. So I can't demonstrate exactly what popped up those (German, btw - apparently IP address targeting works) sex sites on my screen.

OTOH, you seem to be one of the trolls. I probably HBT. So, yeah, have a nice day, too.

Re:this is a stupid troll thread

[ulib]

??
I also linked to randi.org and aaas.org. They're hardly porn sites...
I don't know why the "jesussave" website redirects you - apparently it also happened to another poster - but anyway that "web1000" thing doesn't look like a porn site either.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.

So that equates to:

[fallscrape]

£3240 that could have been earnt cleaning turkey corpses at the local Bernard Mathews plant in the UK.