Slashdot Mirror
What Really Happened To Ubuntu's Edgy Artwork?
angrykeyboarder writes, "Many Ubuntu users expressed surprise, dismay, and disappointment when Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl) nixed the popular community-developed artwork during the beta phase of Ubuntu 6.10 ('The Edgy Eft'). Some Ubuntu community members were downright shocked, and many were ultimately dissatisfied with the final product. What exactly happened? Short answer: the Art Team was less disturbed than some other community members were. Linux.com has the scoop." Slashdot and Linux.com are both part of OSTG.
So lacking of red tape, they don't even care about their seniors' opinions!
They should issue an official statement of chastisement against themselves!
Ninjas and pirates. How piquant.
Is anyone surprised?
What a society - where killing untold thousands of people in far off lands is fine, but showing pictures of the human body is taboo.
this really pisses me off. Would it be so fucking hard to just fucking link to an example of "edgy art" Jesus. They have links that go to text, and links on the text pages go to more text. Hello? Don't waste my time with this. Just show me the art which is the subject of the article.
...or something? Call me shallow but I'd like to look at some pictures.
Found some... with some digging. Peace, Tropic and Blubuntu.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Here are some links to screenshots of the artwork in question:
P lan/Polish/Incoming/ P lan/Polish/Directions/
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Specs/EdgyArtwork
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Specs/EdgyArtwork
What on earth are you talking about?
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
"...you're new here, right?"
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
That stuff looks really amatuerish
This artwork
455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
Maybe it's a dirty protest?
"Edgy Eft" is the "nick-name" of the release of Ubuntu. Like "Woody" was a Debian release and "Zod" was a Fedora release.
"Edgy art" does not refer to "provocative art", but "art for the 'Edge Eft' release".
All Ubuntu releases are named with an adjective and an animal, and they have to alliterate. I have no idea why.
Sheesh.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
sorry, this is a part of OSS culture I entirely fail to understand. Like, when there is a new version of distro X and some OS News sites have nothing better to report than a 15 pages of hires screenshots of the default desktop etc.
You mean you install a new distro and then judge its worth by the look of the default theme? You don't change the theme first thing? You don't know how to install a custom theme if you don't like the preconfigured choices?
But then again, my boxen run headless 98% of the time, so why should I care...
605413? Yes, it's a prime.
I don't know what direction was required for the art, but the samples have that "ooohhh shiny" web 2.0 feel to them so they just must be better :p
Meeehhh, it will all change again anyway when everyone jumps on the Web 3.0 graphic design bandwagon or whatever the next hot trend will be.
You must be new here... that's not the way it is.
Wow, it's actually a real site.
Why should this happen? Why should "some community members" be shocked if Ubuntu is being developed as "an Open Source OS?" And I guess they were following Ubuntu's development pretty closely.
I need this question answered: Is Mark Shuttleworth a benevolent dictator in Ubuntu's Development?
The reason is quite simple. It takes more money to raise a child than to bury a person.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
the current release of Ubuntu is named "Edgy Eft."
The submitter was attempting to make a horrible pun.
If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
N/T
Chief artist head honcho summed it up: "We set out to start from scratch and to top Dapper, while Dapper was arguably very close to what Mark had in mind."
Hmm...sort of reminds me of the Slashdot CSS Redesign Contest. Need the Slashdot "Shade of Green" and Coliseo font. Basically it has to be very similar to the old one, but better. Sometimes it fades into the background once the hubbub dies down...as people realize that visual continuity and product branding do count for something...
This sig donated to Pater. Long live
The icons were professionally designed:
:-)
:-)
http://iconfactory.com/design/detail/ubuntu
By one guy. Working directly with Mark.
My suggestion for the art team would be to establish someone as an art director. Someone that Mark trusts to implement his vision. And then have that art director give specific tasks to the designers that report to him.
It sounds like they're heading in that direction by giving Frank Stroep the title of "Artist in Chief". His task now is to tell people what he wants. And if you think it's easy being a hard ass when it comes to design & the people who do it, let me assure you IT IS NOT.
If this doesn't happen, they'll end up taking the "design by committee" approach. The result of this kind of process is something that no one loves -- a lowest common denominator. Sort of like when software is designed by a committee
For what it's worth, I'm a principal in the company that did the Ubuntu work -- so I speak from experience about this stuff
-ch
Having installed Edgy on a couple of computer these last few days, and upgraded a few Dapper machines, I find its artwork pretty relaxing. I didn't like the brown colors at first, but you get used to it very quickly.
Efty's new boot up logo looks much better than the old one, and I am happy that they got rid of all the boot up messages on start-up, which was just distracting crud.
Nice one -- on the computers I installed it on, it just worked and the upgrades went smootly. Your milage may vary of course.
This is not porn. Every image of the nude human form is not porn.
Nothing sounds better to me than -current and -stable.
What about -useful? It boggles the mind that OpenBSD doesn't support IrDA or IPX!
How can you live with an OS that lacks these fundamental and necessary technologies in today's world? I mean, what about reading IR codes from VCR remotes? What if you want to play StarCraft with a person that is at an early patch level? These are important questions that need to be addressed!
Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
Same here, except I use NetBSD.
The BSDs have had their fair share of bickering over the years, and there has been fallout. But usually the fallout is a great benefit to the entire community. The disagreement between Theo and some of the other NetBSD members lead to the formation of OpenBSD. OpenBSD lead directly to the development of OpenSSH, which is used far beyond OpenBSD.
We witnessed the same thing with the disagreement between Matt Dillon and some of the other FreeBSD developers. The end result was the formation of the DragonFly BSD project, which I have great hopes for. Matt correctly saw the need for a highly-scalable BSD, which becomes very relevent with low-end PCs soon offering 8 or more cores. DragonFly BSD is already years ahead of the other BSDs when it comes to its multithreading.
Frankly, I think it's stupid that there's been such strife over some fucking art work. Whenever I have to use Ubuntu, I end up replacing the default theme with one that's far more usable. I often even get rid of GNOME, replacing it with a stock KDE installation. At least they manage to pick default icons, colours and themes that don't start a civil war within its user community.
That depends who you ask....
455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
well, speaking as a guy that really appreciates his porn, i'm finding this a little hard to masturbate to. a little "edgier", please.
>> Ubuntu doesn't work under any version of Virtual PC.
Neither did Windows run under DR-DOS, it gave same horrible made up error to stop you from using non-microsoft OS software.
Why should it be any different this time around?
On the bright side, Ubuntu runs fine under VMWare, and even Windows XP runs nicely under VMware under Ubuntu.
who flippin cares??!!! just install vista! :P
While we're on the subject of how Ubuntu works, someone should come up with a new logo for the system. It probably means something to someone but I don't think it's being effectively conveyed. Furthermore, it doesn't translate well to small sizes which is a big problem considering that's how it's going to appear often in the OS. It looks like an indistinguishable ring of colors.
The Ubuntu name also fights with the graphic. It looks like each element was designed by two different people and forced together. In fact, the Ubuntu font face is unique enough on it's own that it doesn't even need the graphic. All it might need is a more compelling graphical treatment sort of like what Apple has done with the OS X mark; I'm not saying that the glass look should be copied, mind you.
Regarding this theme, I don't see what makes this newsworthy. The theme itself is bad, but it certainly isn't anything out of this world. In fact, in my opinion, it still lacks the polish of OS X , XP or Vista. It's got some interesting features but nothing compelling or particularly unique.
The problem with these systems is that they don't have a series of rules defining how look and feel. In the end it always comes down to some guy doing something because it looks pretty and not really considering the overall experience. It's kind of like contemporary Japanese cars where designers have gotten overly fixated on these elaborate tail light designs that don't quite fit the rest of the car.
I'm all for an innovative interface, but it should be functional. This Edgy theme to me looks like someone took Vista's graphical elements and applied them to a OS X type interface.
As for the complaining, I'm a bit perplexed: That sounds like a legitimate enough problem. Unfinished artwork and effects can make a distro look amateurish.
Besides, I thought the point of OSS is the flexibility that comes with it? Are these Ubuntu users going to be forced to use it.
Quack, quack.
If quirky names and art issues make you feel vindicated in your choice of Operating Systems, you certainly are a picky one, my friend. Thankfully, I'm quite happy with my feisty Linux as it is.
By the way, interesting link to the OpenBSD lyrics thing. I'm not big on the rap part, but I liked the electronica part of the first song. All the songs are very geeky. I like it.
Don't you remember when Ubuntu hit the big times (I think it was version 4.10) and they put out that desktop wallpaper of the group of interacial people where they were all topless (even though the bottom edge of the screen covered everything up)? There was a bunch of controversy over that making the OS "family-unfriendly".
How the hell did this crap get modded insightful?
1) Shuttleworth is the CREATOR of Ubuntu. Head honcho. What he did was to roll back the artwork to a Dapper variant, CHANGING the DEFAULT theme that was to be in Edgy.
2) Blubuntu is in the repositories. If you want to use it, then install it and use it. Like you said, Linux is about choice. But at least know what you are bitching about.
Please, my computer desktop should take me to that fantasy land where everything is blue and green and aqua forever. It shouldn't make me think about global warming.
Also, there's the problem that orange, yellow, red, and brown are fast food colors. Don't we computer nerds eat enough already?
I think you'd agree the art in the Zune installer is pretty edgy!
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
I can't speak for Edgy, but I ran Dapper just fine in Virtual PC.
Bluntu? Really? I looked at it and said, "Jesus Christ. It's a fucking mac."
It's not that I have a problem with the images per se, or anything against macs. I'm own a mac, and I'm using it right now. I like my mac, but come on! EVERY DAMN RELEASE of an oss interface is a copy of something else. This isn't art. It's a damn ripoff. How come apple and even microsoft come up with original art, and it's impossible for the oss comunity to do so? Obviously there are talented artists, the images speak to that. Well, let me take that back. There's obviously technically talented artists. The lack of originality is damning indictment of their creativity. I mean what look at the "home" icon. It's identical to the mac home icon, except that the chimney is smoother and the door is tapered at the bottom. Anyone that seriously argues that they're different, probably also believes that the music to Vanilla Ice's "Ice Ice Baby" is distinct from the Queen's "Under Pressure." (Damn you Robert Van Winkle. Damn you to hell.) Also don't give me that crap about how it's more user friendly. That's specious. That's an argument that hinges on the reasoning that by dressing something up to look like one thing, but actually behaves differently from it is "intuitive." No. That's counter productive. ("How come I can't do X? I can do it on a mac. What do you mean this isn't a mac? It must be. It looks just like a mac! This mac is just broken.")
Wrong, those are shots of what was released. I should know, I'm typing this on an Ubuntu Edgy installation right now.
At the risk of starting a Gnome vs KDE war, For everyone complaining about how ugly the default Ubuntu theme is in Edgy, why not look at the Kubuntu eyecandy?
c reenshots/index.php?linux_distribution=Kubuntu%206 .10
http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/s
What a achievement, new backgrounds and splash screens! I thought 'Edgy Eft' was meant to try out some new kinds of technology or some new kind of user interactions. I even hoped there might be some provocative design decisions which allows to bring the Linux desktop a footprint forward. Yet backgrounds and splash screens don't improve my working system by a single inch. So what's so edgy on 'Edgy Eft'?
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
Start
I noticed that those textures on the front page are annoyingly vivid stuff that I would never want on a desktop.
But searching through the maze of submissions I found a few that I thought were cooler that what's was in there.
But really, there was a lot of annoying artwork, all better packaged as optional than as default.
As far as I can tell Ubuntu installation disks are currently limited to CD size, not DVD size, so there probably isn't a lot of extra space for alternate art. Given that fact, I think artwork really belongs in a separate package.
I'd rather see features than artwork given the choice. If it were up to me, it would come with a firewall control gui, Wine, Eclipse and Sun Java etc. Though it's not as bad as Linspire in requiring an internet connection to get any features.
I wonder why there isn't a DVD install version for people who won't have access to the internet after install. That would be awfully useful in packaging for countries where fast internet access isn't a given.
I suppose that the licensing is the reason there's no Sun Java, but since Java was just GPL released this week, I hope future versions will have it.
it was far from pr0n though...no more sexual than the Sistine Chapel ceiling
look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
I think that the live cd install used in edgy has problems with VPC. In all likelyhood the text based alternate install CD would be fine.
If you like the screenshots (links posted earlier) for Peace, Tropic, and Blubuntu, then install them through your favorite package manager - they are in the Ubuntu repos.
I don't believe anyone was talking about violent emulations, thought that's happened more than enough to prove you wrong. The above specifically addresses desensitization and emotional conditioning. I find it quite disturbing that seeing someone brutally murdered has become so commonplace as to produce little to no emotional response, particularly among the young. Any number of studies back this up.
To extend your (flawed) scenario: Are you seriously suggesting that you have no problem with little Johnny being incrementally conditioned to view killing as less a horror and more of an entertaining thrill, simply because he lacks the immediate means to re-enact a particular act out of tens of thousands viewed in his short life? There is not (nor have any peer-reviewed studies suggested) a long-term one-to-one correspondence between specific imagery and perpetrated criminally violent activities with any regularity (though isolated copy-cats have certainly been documented.) It's a cumulative effect that leads a subject to an emotional state that can quite casually entertain the thought of violence.
What this gets at in lay terms is that after decades of exposure to realistic violent imagery, a person is orders of magnitude more likely to be psychologically capable of perpetrating a violent act on another human being. This is mainstream modern psychology, here, not my personal opinion. See Grossman, Davis, Rothesburg etc etc etc. (Or read up on the psychology of advertising, which uses similar techniques and they actually WANT you to emulate what they are showing (i.e. use of their product or service)! The proof is in the pudding. Beyond the psychology, why do ad firms make billions a year if they can't influence your behavior? Yet when was the last time you lapsed into a zombie state after seeing a single ad and did exactly what they told you? The effect is cumulative, and very very real.)
The best examples of this are the training methods and technologies employed by modern military forces (specifically during and subsequent to Viet-Nam.) Non-firing rates of soldiers (percentages of soldiers not aiming at or firing on a human enemy with intent to kill - i.e. not shooting or intentionally missing) during large scale military engagements around the world since the US's Revolutionary War historically were between 50-95%. Killing another human is simply contrary to most people's innate behavior patterns. Most people just can't do it naturally. Starting in the 1960s, training techniques began to include use of film to illustrate techniques used in actual combat footage, using human silhouettes as targets instead of bullseyes, snipers schools using mannequins filled with cabbage and ketchup so the student isn't shocked in the field after a shot (the most vulnerable time for a sniper), and on and on. Non-firing rates have dropped DRAMATICALLY - down to 5-10% in some studies. The last 15 years has seen much of the virtual reality and computer driven training technology used in "kill houses" and mock urban-warfare environments applied directly to video games and special effect technology in films.
I have personally been through the "House of Horrors" at Bragg (about 5 years ago) and can tell you that there are a number of FPSs that get eerily close to that experience. Scan, shoot, move, "pie" around the corner, watch out for "death funnels" - even a ten year old understand the basics of clearing a room and target discrimination - and has been told its just a game! No reason to feel bad! No, feeling bad comes later when you must deal with the emotional fallout of what you've done without conscious thought because of conditioning. To wit, the catastrophic rise in psychological problems among vets returning from Vietnam, Panama, Iraq 1, Iraq 2 when compared to WWII and Korea. Coincidence? Not a chance, according to the military's own psychologists and academicians who have studied this for decades.
Sorry to ambush you here and go off, but I am a combat vet with a bachelors in psycholo
I'll tell you what happened; That damn duck ate it and pretty soon it'll be a smear on your windshield. Stupid drake, always having to steal the spotlight. He should be more careful around hunting season.
If all my base are belong to you and I attempt to retrieve my base, does that mean I'm freebasing?
Wow, this is a level of cynicism that I can only aspire to.
I salute you, sir!
"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
Megalomania is not. However, it doesn't take either to flex your brain and cast a doubt that maybe we aren't living in a brilliant new modern world after all. Maybe we are still in dark middle ages, punishing "witches", freethinkers, oddballs. Believing in magic and bad karma, labeling hard-to-deal-with matters as taboos.
Not always. But take a guess how many have been beaten or killed because their peers think it is so?
Preserve old classics: copy your collection onto all hard drives.
.. and it should come as no surprise than anyone would turn it down.
What IS disappointing about Edgy Eft is that the release was at first intended to be edgy and risky, because they had the Long Term Support release, Dapper Drake, to suggest to anyone wanting something conservative and stable.
In the end the only thing edgy in the release was the new event based startup system which isn't yet that visible for the end-user. People can say what they want about 'Edgy Eft' just being a name, but it was fairly clear from Shuttleworth's early emails that the name wasn't just chosen at random.
Edgy is thus the most (and possibly the only) disappointing Ubuntu release so far. It is not bad, it is just nothing like what was intended.
Ubuntu DVD on Amazon.
About your second point, currently it is only available in the US though.
Gaybuntu? Is that for Mac users?
"The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
End The FED. -
How did this conversation go from Ubuntu art to murder and sex? Very interesting comments though.
Open Source and Computer-aided Design (http://ossandcad.blogspot.com)
Here is some more links:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/EdgyPropo sals/Summary_18JULY2006
o sals/WallpaperProposal
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/EdgyProp
plus everything under https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/EdgyPropo sals/
Before I go on this rant, there was a lot of talk on the mailing lists and the forums about what went wrong. This is just my subjective voice.
I've been following the mailing list since May, and saw as things started falling apart by mid-August. IMO there were many great contributions: niklas weidal did some absolutely gobstopping images. Who did some excellent GDM proposals, and many others contributed with original ideas later in August. However, the process was stifled somewhat to a rigid plan set out at the Paris Conference, and many contributors got very little further than submitting their first few efforts, before being rejected by "The Powers that Be".
There was a Proposal stage, with some great ideas thrown in (a summary of those ideas is in the link above). At the end of the Proposal stage Mark dropped into the mailing list to point at one picture as a basis for all of edgy artwork (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/EdgyProp osals/Summary_18JULY2006?action=AttachFile&do=get& target=lsplash.png). All further proposals were rejected by this point due to the Paris Plan, and the Council spent a great deal of time pondering on what to accept, and finally around mid-August decided to scrap all artwork unrelated to this image. Above all, it fell down to 3 member's contributions, which had encapsulated the "gloss" aspect that everyone was raving on about, but no one could figure out. Unfortunately, many users didn't like the selected outcome, as cogently put by one user on the mailing list: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/2006- September/003107.html (BTW this is not my opinion -- I thought the image question was very appetizing)
Not surprisingly, the existing contributors stopped helping out, presumably thinking their work was unappreciated rather than fixing the selected images, and when the final Polish stage arrived at the end of August, all the work was lumped onto 3 people. Around the same time there were a great deal of new contributors, yet they were all snubbed because they were not working on the existing artwork. Mark decided to revert to Dapper and try and brainstorm something with the 3 long-standing contributors. Whether that turned out well, I don't know, as I've long since stopped using Ubuntu as my distro de jour.
So, in the end the whole process became massively inflexible due to a one cycle pre-engineered artwork submission process, and a lack of direction from Mark when it mattered, because although plenty of people wanted to contribute, they couldn't. Yes, the story is much longer: there weren't the appropriate tools / the Wiki was a mess, but when I look at the Fedora Artwork process, they thrive on exactly the same toolset, so I don't think that can be used as an argument.
[/rant]But the drooling about screen dumps is a regular feature of sites allegedly geared towards technically savy people.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/2006
This sig can be distributed under the LGPL license
The login music is disappointing too, sounds like something lifted from the Lion King soundtrack. At least we're not stuck with only Blue, Olive Green or Silver for theme choices.
I wonder if that's the reason Ubuntu has such a brown look to it...
"The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
End The FED. -
This is similar to seti@home asking for millions of contributors to donate their resources, yet allow from them absolutely no input into the experiment itself. Quite a few people bailed on the project because of a perceived ivory tower attitude. Look, don't touch!
People asking for volunteers should heed Henry V: "But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make"
The sad thing is that most people who read this will now side with the tone set in the summary (that Shuttlesworth is wrong and/or a bad person).
Sometimes I think the folks who edit slashdot get a story and roll the dice to see if they are going to give it a positive or negitave slant, and then monitor their success rate of getting the larger part of the community to agree with them.
I guess Ubuntu's success upset ./ so it is time we turn on them too in keeping with our underdog mentality, but last I checked OSTG no garage based effort either. Maybe it is time for ./ to turn on itself?
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
I'm just as happy that the Edgy release came out as it did. It does boot faster -- and it looks OK. I took a good look at the three candidates and found the other two good enough, but Blubuntu is obnoxious! That horrible blob suggests something that spilled on the floor, and the blue is much too bright. (Blue is a good color for a background effect, but not that blue.) The Ubuntu warm colors, much darkened, are fine, and small changes in the Human colors are not a big deal.
Then I looked at the comments around these efforts, and apparently there is a big lobbying effort by the creators of Blubuntu. That really put me off!
It's true that very non-technical people are always making changes to their appearances, including (on Windows) themes with neon pink and chartreuse, pictures of their babies, slide shows, etc.; all of these drive me nuts when I have to fix something on their PCs (why is this thing so slow???). As they are not busy all the time, and the PC is just a glorified typewriter to them, the way it looks is very important to them. They are locked down, more or less, by central IT, so this is the only power they have.
What I really like about Edgy Eft is that all I had to do was change all the Synaptic Package Manager Repositories from Dapper to Edgy, then run sudo apt-get dist-upgrade, then keep an eye out for questions. I'm not an expert by any means, but I love the reasonable upgrade path.
I for one welcome our boring brown colored ubuntu distro overlords...again.
And it is even cheaper to educate people about sex in the first place.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
like this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6149464.stm
Yes, David Berkowitz was quite the freethinker, too bad we punished the poor guy.
Depending on how I look at your question, the answer is either "too many" or "not enough".
This is absolutely true. The look of the OS establishes its identity. Ubuntu needs distinct identity- this could be why the artwork was not accepted.
Damn, I forgot about the lack of a -useful branch. Although I don't know why IPX is marked as a big fat no: IPX on OpenBSD.
The meme police, They live inside of my head
No, but I understand that he was a Debian developer long before he was an Ubuntu developer. Which makes him a creator of part of Debian. And he still contributes back to the Debian codebase with Ubuntu. Regardless, it was his vision, and his capital that founded Ubuntu as an entity. I am not a Debian user, I am an Ubuntu user. I would say the same thing if I was using an Ubuntu derivative.
It's not that I am disagreeing with you. I would take issue with someone who was saying that Shuttleworth was the origin of everything Ubuntu as well. But that wasn't what I was trying to say. I was trying to say that Shuttleworth is the leader of the Ubuntu project. The benevolent dictator.
This is news in Linux now? Good lord.
Who gives a shit about Ubuntu's artwork other than the people making it? The Bored Billionaire. That's who. What contrived bullshit.
If you're making it, your peers find it usable, and some billionaire overlord doesn't like it, you can simply stop working on things for this idiot and make them for any other distro out there -- they'll be glad to have you.
In Ubuntu, Mark's payin' the bills. What he says goes. Draw nice stuff for someone else, they'll probably appreciate it more. Let Mark go pay someone to make his artwork to his standards.
+++OK ATH
> I was trying to say that Shuttleworth is the leader of the Ubuntu project
No problem with that. He may be the leader, but not "the creator". There are many creators, including the main folks -- kernel developers and the GNU folks.
I managed to dodge that trap. You see, I didn't write that I consider _my_ mind to be more agile. Heh, missed by *that* much.
But let me have a minute and review his point once more...
Ok, time for a point-and-laugh, once more: Look, he's worried that sex "can lead to unwanted and unconsidered consequences", never mind violence but god help us if it's sex that does it!
And, what might those unwanted consequences of sex be that are even more horrible than violence? Look, he says "probably going to give him ideas next time he's alone with little Sally". Behold the unwanted and unconsidered consequences of sex! It's going to give him ideas! Hahaha!
Preserve old classics: copy your collection onto all hard drives.
No, you didn't really dodge the trap, it was obvious that you consider your mind more agile since you hold that viewpoint. You didn't even give any reference to which minds, and their agility, you just gave your point of view and said that more agile minds are the ones that hold it.
He was pointing out that the vast majority of people meet the physical requirements for performing sexual acts (well it depends on what your requirements are, really), but not everyone has guns and bazookas (not metaphorical ones), though I guess in America a lot of people have guns.
Anyway, even though kids may not be capable of having kids themselves, they could still be messed up later in life once they realise what they've done. The same could be said for shooting each other, of course *shrug*
which is totally what she said