Slashdot Mirror


Eben Moglen on the Global Software Industry Post-GPL3

Dan Shearer writes "Three days before GPLv3 was released, Eben Moglen delivered the annual lecture of The Scottish Society of Computers and Law in Edinburgh, Scotland giving his thoughts on 'The Global Software Industry in Transformation: After GPLv3.' The text transcription, audio and 384kbit video are up at archive.org. Eben looks back at the 'legislative action' achieved by the GPLv3 community over the last 18 months, and also from the 22nd century. A riveting presentation for all present."

55 comments

  1. 22nd Century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    wait... the GPLv3 is from the future? o.O

    1. Re:22nd Century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eben Moglen is an anagram of Buck Rogers

  2. is this guy a Time Lord?? by RobertLTux · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    or is he maybe talking about the work done creating V3??

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    1. Re:is this guy a Time Lord?? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Most people don't know this, but the Gallifreyans have been interfering, or should I say, intervening, in Earth history for centuries. Usually, it's when we're about to screw up bigtime, or the Master does something he shouldn't be doing and screws us up bigtime. They've never bothered to maintain an ongoing presence here, so far as I'm aware, so I don't think Moglen is an actual Time Lord.

      On the the other hand, they may have given him a few hints.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  3. Why Streaming by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    Is it that hard to find a link to the actual file? I've just spent all morning visiting interesting-looking media links only to find that the site doesn't like my version of javascript or flash or both.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Why Streaming by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1

      Look harder, the links are on the left sidebar. No flash or javascript required to get either the transcript or the audio.

    2. Re:Why Streaming by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

      I know; I'm just encouraging story submitters to use those links when available. Helps some of us out

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  4. Here are the video files by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Here are the video files by twitter · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the 365 MB MPEG 1 version, which is the only patent unencumbered file other than text. Sad how the formats that save 2/3 of the bandwith are owned.

      --

      Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    2. Re:Here are the video files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sad how the formats that save 2/3 of the bandwith are owned.

      You misspelled "superior". HTH!

  5. Predicting the future by benhocking · · Score: 4, Interesting
    In case you were wondering:

    "Seen backward through the end of the 21st Century, our achievements will seem very primitive. They thought that it was something that they got a few tens of thousands of otherwise hierarchically disorganised people around the world to cooperate on a single act of limited purpose legislation, regulating the share of software," the 22nd Century will say. "How quaint." But it was the beginning of a joining-together of communities of affect in the global organisation of power, the beginning of affiliation rather than territorial location or political domination, as the source of legitimacy for legislation. It was the beginning of the idea that cooperative private agreement can substantially oust public law institutions without challenging the legitimacy of the Governments that participated in making the public law. And it provides an escape from the moral dilemma presented by the myth of endlessly acquisitive homo economicus, the little homunculus of economic dream, the independent entity with the exogenously derived preference schedule, competing with sharp elbows in the market against every other homunculus economicus seeking only the same narrow benefit off the same asocial schedule of what I need today.
    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
    1. Re:Predicting the future by value_added · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But it was the beginning of a joining-together of communities of affect in the global organisation of power, the beginning of affiliation rather than territorial location or political domination, as the source of legitimacy for legislation.

      Nice words to read, but this could be entitled The Triumph of Optimism over Experience. My gut tells me that despite the underlying Star Trekish optimism in the evolution of our species, and despite our inherent ability to aspire to greater things, nationalism and petty self-interest will prevail as they always have.

      That's not to say we can't find new ways of looking at things. Or establish new institutions.

    2. Re:Predicting the future by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      It takes time to build new institutions but I am optimistic that ever improving communications infrastructure will be what gets us there.

    3. Re:Predicting the future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Am I misreading, or did this little Moglen twerp just call me an economic homo???

    4. Re:Predicting the future by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Are you implying there's something wrong with nationalism and petty self-interest?

    5. Re:Predicting the future by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Really? Tall that to the negroes, and women without the vote. There are places both still happen, but it's gotten radically better for them in the last 200 years. Even in the last 50.

      It takes time. It takes resources. And it's not universal. But change does occur.

  6. He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You see here on slashdot people frequently go on tirades about how somebody _was_ wrong. Or about how something _is_ a bad idea and is flawed. It's a common misconception that people have about themselves that this sort of behavior somehow means that they are smart.

    You see... Pointing out bad things that intellegent people do does not make you yourself intellegent. Very stupid people can find flaws in other things very easily.

    However what intellegent people can do is make predictions. That is take what they know, and what history has shown, combined with their own cognitive abilities to make interesting and insightfull comments about the FUTURE.

    You see.. You don't need to be a Time Lord to know what is going to happen. You just have to be very smart.

    This is how you know your ideas, beleifs, and assumptions are right and other people who disagree with you are wrong. If you can accurately predict the future then you are right.

    And by being right and knowing what is going to happen next allows you to be _constructive_. If you can plan ahead and leverage what you know is going to happen. This allows to you change things for the better, or at least what is better for your own self interest. You can be successfull in business; Like Bill Gates did with Microsoft, for example. Or you can create fundamental changes on how society operates; Like how Richard Stallman did when he created the GPL, which created the legal framework that helped make Linux and the open source movement successfull.

    This is in contrast to stupid people which generally just going around finding flaws in other people and other things, tearing things down. Then acting all scared at change and mystified about how things are not remaining the same.

    You can go back to 1990's and such when things like GCC and Linux were just started.

    It was very common for people to say stuff like:
    "Nobody in their right minds would ever work on a FREE compiler. Sure it's a interesting toy, but GCC will never be able to replace "

    "Ha! Linux in the enterprise? Sure it's a cheap OS for cheap hardware. But nobody in their right mind will ever use it. When people need to get REAL work done they will never give up their "

    So what Eben Moglen is talking about is what is going to happen POST GPLv3 release. He is a very smart guy and is probably going to be mostly right.

    The lesson to take home here is:
    "One does not need to be from the future to know what is going to happen tomorrow with reasonable accuracy"

    1. Re:He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by Riddler+Sensei · · Score: 1

      This is how you know your ideas, beleifs, and assumptions are right.. You spelled "beliefs" wrong.
    2. Re:He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is how you know your ideas, beleifs, and assumptions are right.. You spelled "beliefs" wrong. Well, you spelt "spelt" and "beleifs" wrong!
    3. Re:He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by tlapale · · Score: 1

      Or maybe there are so many predicting people that it is just random.

    4. Re:He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      However what intellegent people can do is make predictions. That is take what they know, and what history has shown, combined with their own cognitive abilities to make interesting and insightfull comments about the FUTURE.

      Actually we seem to measure the intelligence based on the outcome of the predictions. Thosed that have guessed correctly are seen as visionaries while those who didn't are not. "Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then."

      While meteorlogists, stock analyst, economists, and etc. are usually intelligent people, their predictions are not always correct.

      The real question is there any significant change in philosophy that makes GPL3 more revolutionary than GPL2? Mostly what I've seen has been evolutionary and we are seeing a trend toward acceptance based on the quality of some high profile software projects (in particular Linux) and a see the trend growing with companies like Sun licensing more of their products to GPL. The irony being that Linux was promoted for it's developer and end-user friendliness and GPL just benefitted by association. If there was a different license that mirrored Linus' thinking more accurately he would have picked a different license. Anyway... point being GPL acceptance is product driven and it doesn't take a genius to see the trend of the number of products based on GPL going up based on past performance.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    5. Re:He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe everyone is just making random predictions and by chance someone gets some right? Once he gets enough predictions right everyone starts acting as he predicts. There is value in beating the competition to a certain spot and the smart person seems to know where that spot is. Consequently the smart person gets smarter in everyone's minds and the cycle repeats until the smart person has reached genius level. The evidence would fit either theory.

    6. Re:He is PREDICTING. It's what smart people do. by syousef · · Score: 1

      This gets modded insightful????

      Take a look at the stupid things that smart successful people have predicted and you'll see "smart" people can be terrible at predicting the future. Why?

      1) There may be important things the person has overlooked or is unaware of. Technologies, politics etc. This is more likely if the "smart" person is commenting on something outside their own expertise.
      2) Rare events can and do happen, albeit by definition less frequently than common ones.
      3) "Smart" people are often surprised at how things turn out.

      Would you call Bill Gates stupid? Take a look at "The Road Ahead"
      Would you call Isaac Netwon stupid? Yet the laws of motion turn out to be an approximation as Einstein discovered. Would you call Einstein stupid? Yet most scientists today do accept that "God does play dice".

      Google for: Bad technology predictions
      or just: Bad predictions

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  7. Linus is right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am with Linus on this one.

    1. Re:Linus is right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Microsoft starts assimilating all main distros, Linus might move to GPLv3 to protect the little people.

    2. Re:Linus is right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the only way to protect yourself from evil is to become MORE evil?

    3. Re:Linus is right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't you watch The Chronicles of Riddick?

    4. Re:Linus is right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't you watch The Chronicles of Riddick? I know we're talking about evil, but there are limits!
    5. Re:Linus is right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My bawls itch!

  8. Finished, gosh by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 1

    If your comment appeared before this post, you didn't watch the entire video.

    --
    Beep beep.
  9. I have a very bad feeling about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After reading thru the huge flame war in linux kernel list on GPL3, I'm not sure if this is a positive step. (BTW, the 1000 msg thread can be seen at here.

    It looks like Linus and many top level contributers does not agree with the FSF view on this license. The FSF view that GPLv3 is in line with the spirit of GPLv2 has not accepted, and the view seems to be that GPLv3 is an unneceassary power grab.

    I wonder how this will end....

    1. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was involved in an off list (mostly because I didn't want to crowd a kernel dev list with the opinion of a non-kernel dev) discussion with the primary FSF disciple in that thread. The purpose of my discussion with him was to point out why the GPL3 was inferior to the GPL2 and instead, he just tried to turn it into another case of anyone who was trying to be pragmatic is wrong and we should all worship the prophet Stallman.

      The FSF deliberately made the GPL3 incompatible with the GPL2. Doing so creates a wedge between those of us who use the GPL to keep our source open so we can get changes other people made back and those who simply worship the dogma of the FSF. The FSF is trying to leverage its code base moving to GPL3 to force others to go GPL3 even if they don't use the GPL for any of the reasons why the FSF wants them too. My choices are to fork the GPL2 and maintain it myself or move my work to GPL3 if I want to use FSF code. I absolutely resent the FSF trying to usurp my rights as the author of code. Oh, and the FSF stuff being incompatible with the work of GPL2 only authors is entirely OUR fault and not the FSF's... why, if we would have just licensed our work under GPL2+, there wouldn't be any incompatibility. Nevermind that it would require me to absolutely trust someone else to determine the terms my work is licensed under and I have no say over those terms. I also likened the GPL3 to a submarine patent... wait 15 years for a community to grow up around the GPL2 only to come in and change the terms to force your view on the community just because you've got one of the biggest voices.

      The GPL3 is full of holes waiting to be exploited - the more verbiage you add to a legal document, the more ways you can twist the words. The GPL2 specifically states that the scope of the license is copying, distribution and modification. The more specific you get, the harder it is to go back and say that you really meant something else (ie, the FSF supporters now say that the GPL2 was meant to cover execution and replacement as well). Perhaps it could have if it didn't specific say it only covered copying, distribution and modification. Clauses about business use vs personal use and all other kinds of stuff is just waiting to be twisted and exploited.

      Ultimately, the GPL3 is going to divide the community deeper into an open source camp (we do it to keep our code open so we can get modifications back) vs a free software camp (where the code is always about the user even if the developer has to suffer). On top of that, the GPL3 makes it so some businesses absolutely cannot use GPL3 software, possibly even for stuff like election computers and definitely for stuff like medical equipment. Instead, we're going to see businesses go proprietary or BSD at best because it is cheaper to pay a license (and pass that cost on) than it may be to get sued and have who knows what opened up because you used some GPL3 software. However, that was somehw spun as a win for the users as well. Fact is, the FSF is so focused on its own propaganda that it can't see reality. Kinda reminds me of the "Smug Alert!" episode of South Park.

    2. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the GPL is moving away from a distributor and developer license and closer to an EULA. What's next, FSF DRM that forces all your code open?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    3. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      No, I predict a lot of flaming trolls will invent FUD wholesale, to try and obscure its usefulness and the history of how it has evolved.

      I'm sorry, but is irony somehow missing on Slashdot?

    4. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by Azuma+Hazuki · · Score: 1

      Oh, quit bitching. Unlike with certain other EULAs I can name (hint: distributor begins with an M and ends with an icrosoft), there's always an alternative. There have got to be BSD, MIT, etc. licensed versions of programs that do what you need, or programs that are close enough to work. Plus the GPLv2 is still valid, and I have a feeling a lot of programs are going to stick with it. Remember that the FOSS community is just that: a *community.* It's not a monolithic corporate entity that all follows one license, and there are plenty of GPLv3 haters in it from what I've seen. If v3 is really so bad, it will die over time; just wait.

      And I don't think it's possible to create DRM that "forces all your code open," as you put it...how would someone do that? You could, under the terms of the GPLv3, create a new DRM program that does absolutely nothing, or write a patch against it that disables it.

      --
      ~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...
    5. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by mgiuca · · Score: 1
      I shall bite.

      Your comment has missed the point of not only Eben Moglen's speech, but the GPL and the entire free software movement.

      Sounds like the GPL is moving away from a distributor and developer license and closer to an EULA. A point he made very early on - which I really liked by the way because I haven't heard it explained like this before - is that the GPL is *not* a EULA. EULAs add additional terms on top of normal copyright. The GPL takes copyright and subtracts terms from it. The GPL does not add any restrictions on top of what normal unlicensed copyright offers. If you violate or disagree to its terms, it defaults back to regular copyright.

      Secondly the GPL never was, and still isn't, an end user license. It still applies just to distributors and developers.

      What's next, FSF DRM that forces all your code open? I know that's a joke, but it's insulting to the ideals of the free software movement. Once again, the GPL is about giving users choice - additional rights on top of copyright.
    6. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by david_thornley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The purpose of my discussion with him was to point out why the GPL3 was inferior to the GPL2 and instead, he just tried to turn it into another case of anyone who was trying to be pragmatic is wrong and we should all worship the prophet Stallman.

      Sounds to me like we have a couple of dueling ideologues here. If you're trying to point out why GPLv3 is inferior to GPLv2, as opposed, say, to why you think that, no wonder there's problems.

      The FSF deliberately made the GPL3 incompatible with the GPL2.

      And how were they supposed to make it compatible? Adding any additional restrictions, such as those dealing with new ways to make end-runs around GPLv2, makes the new license incompatible. There's no way around it. Either GPLv2 is considered perfect until the end of time, or the FSF has to issue an incompatible GPLv3. There are no other possibilities.

      The FSF is trying to leverage its code base moving to GPL3 to force others to go GPL3 even if they don't use the GPL for any of the reasons why the FSF wants them too.

      Since, of course, nobody has been able to use any license other than GPLv2, since the Gnu software is under GPLv2. It doesn't really matter if the Gnu software is under GPLv2 or GPLv3 for compatibility purposes, since for practical purposes nobody links into it anyway. It won't bother you at all unless you want to Tivoize the software or acknowledge Microsoft patent supremacy or something.

      The GPL3 is full of holes waiting to be exploited - the more verbiage you add to a legal document, the more ways you can twist the words.

      It was drafted by highly competent lawyers, and exposed to months of intense public scrutiny. It won't be as exploitable as you think.

      It's also pretty readable for a complicated license, and it has the very desirable feature that you only need to learn what it says once. It's dense in spots, but no worse than a lot of C++ code I've worked on. If you can't figure it out, maybe you should only hack in COBOL.

      Clauses about business use vs personal use and all other kinds of stuff is just waiting to be twisted and exploited.

      And, now, please point out more than one such clause (you did use the plural, after all). Are you referring to the approved methods of distributing source code? If not, I don't know where you're getting this. There is a distinction between a consumer device and a non-consumer device, as an exception to the anti-Tivoization clause, but that has nothing to do with business vs. personal use.

      On top of that, the GPL3 makes it so some businesses absolutely cannot use GPL3 software, possibly even for stuff like election computers and definitely for stuff like medical equipment.

      Blasting what you demonstrably don't understand is not going to get you anywhere. Go and read the anti-Tivoization section. It applies to consumer devices only. An electronic voting system is not a consumer device, and neither are most pieces of medical equipment.

      Instead, we're going to see businesses go proprietary or BSD at best because it is cheaper to pay a license (and pass that cost on) than it may be to get sued and have who knows what opened up because you used some GPL3 software.

      Nope; the FSF got plenty of comments from businesses who are interested in using GPLv3 and wanted to make sure it was suitable for them. That's why anti-Tivoization applies only to consumer devices, and why the patent clauses were modified.

      For almost all purposes, the GPLv3 is equivalent to the GPLv2. Anyone who likes the GPLv2 shouldn't hate the GPLv3 (Linus, for example, considers the GPLv3 to be a reasonable license, although he likes GPLv2 better). Anybody who distributes inaccurate FUD about GPLv3 is probably no friend of the F/OSS community anyway.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    7. Re:I have a very bad feeling about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linus, for example, considers the GPLv3 to be a reasonable license, although he likes GPLv2 better.


      Linus doesn't think GPLv3 is reasonable. See the recent LKML discussion.
  10. MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL by PatrickThomson · · Score: 1

    I regret not having the points, this is by far the most insightful post I've seen on slashdot. So many uuid's here only seem to post belittling smarter people than themselves.

    --
    I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
    1. Re:MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      The post surely is correct and good and deserves to be modded 'insightful', but it is an 'Anonymous Coward' post. I never waste mod points on those.

    2. Re:MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because well written comments are a waste? Because you want your mod points to give someone karma?

      I don't understand your attitude. Most ACs are pointless (much like this comment, frankly) but there are gems. What you think you're demonstrating with this childish attitude isn't clear, but I'll tell you I'd rather be an AC too lazy to log in, than to be you.

      [and no, I'm not the AC he was referring to]

  11. Well said. I'd only add one more thing by btarval · · Score: 1
    The lesson to take home here is: "One does not need to be from the future to know what is going to happen tomorrow with reasonable accuracy"

    Your entire post was very well said. Thank you for those insightful and well spoken words. A pity you are anonymous, as you deserve credit for them. But that does show the power of allowing people to choose anonymity when they so want it. Thank you Slashdot, for allowing anonymous postings.

    I'd only add my favorite quote, from the well known Peter Drucker, which has been in my sig for ages.

    --
    The best way to predict the future is to create it. - Peter Drucker.
  12. good quote :) by howlingmadhowie · · Score: 2, Funny

    (38:30) about bribery and corruption often present in legal decisions:

    "i don't think anyone actually thought there was any point in offering stallman money"

  13. Shocking! He is 'The architect' in the matrix by 7-Vodka · · Score: 2
    Did anyone actually watch the video? Can someone describe to me what 'style' of speaking this guy uses?

    He is honest to god harder to understand than 'The architect' character in the matrix.

    It's not that he's trying to be precise, he is a lot more formal than precise. Why is it so hard to follow?

    I'm completely familiar with the words he uses, however the way he throws them together into a monotone slush is almost like purpose obfuscation at times.

    --

    Liberty.

    1. Re:Shocking! He is 'The architect' in the matrix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a term for people like this, it's called "Lawyer".

    2. Re:Shocking! He is 'The architect' in the matrix by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I had no problem understanding him at all. He does construct some complex sentences, but it's probably worth you while to learn to understand that style of speaking - it's reasonably common when talking about non-trivial topics.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    3. Re:Shocking! He is 'The architect' in the matrix by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1
      To be perfectly honest, he became a bit less monotone and easier to understand later in the talk.

      He also handed M$ their arse, which is a good thing.

      --

      Liberty.

  14. honeycombing copyright law by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    ...or rather Copyleft. All rights Reversed.

    "..the tendancy of the market, if left free to itself, to extirpate ignorance and cultural deprivation."

    "like all other monopolies, they obeyed the laws of the free market, they produced lousy goods at very high prices and they stifled innovation"

    - Eben Moglen

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
  15. I find him quite eloquent by Geof · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, I find him wonderfully eloquent and inspiring. Lawrence Lessig calls him "the truly inspired rhetorician of our age". Here's one passage that struck me:

    The monopoly isn't in any intellectual sense interesting, it isn't in any ethical sense tolerable, it isn't in any economic sense necessary, it's simply a thing that happened to happen, and that we will soon be finished making no longer there.

    What a put-down. The slight complexity of the last two phrases ("happened to happen" and "we will soon be finished making no longer there") is deliberate. It makes you pay attention and drives the point home. Language like this draws you in: it makes you think, and because you have to work a little it makes you a participant. Frankly, you need to think and you need to participate because there is so much depth behind his words. There are so many ideas, so many necessarily unanswered questions, that I would even say - and I mean this as high praise - that at some point or at some level you need to disagree.

    1. Re: I find him quite eloquent by stebbo · · Score: 1

      I agree with the "eloquent and inspiring" finding. I've sent links to three friends, listened to it three times and watched some of the video.

      He doesn't seem to be reading from a script or even prompt cards. To talk through a subject so comprehensively without going off track and having to stumble and back track is excellent. No presentation either, which so many people rely on.

      Very cool.

      --
      Ashes to ashes and dust to dust, if the women don't get you the whiskey must
  16. Listening to Eben Moglen by mgiuca · · Score: 1

    This man has such an excitingly eloquent and passionate way of speaking. He is devoted to his cause and he makes you think about things in a whole new light. Truly a great man. I hope that more people will hear what he has to say.

    Funny how sure he is that MS (or "The Monopoly") will be beaten by this community. I believe him .. but I'm not sure "we win" yet!

  17. Nope, he called you a "homunculus" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or demon.

    Look, if you're going to look for offense in someone's statement, you'll get offended.

    According to biologists, you're a homo sapines sapiens. Hey, they're calling you a homo AND a sap! Twice!!!

  18. Is Bill Gates stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, to use the words of the "great man" himself (under penalty of perjury): it depends what you mean by "is".

    Hey, if the retarded fuckwit aspi (I'm an asperger too, but I don't fuck people over because 30 billion isn't enough: I've got to WIN too) can't understand simple words like that, I'd figure them somewhere down in the pre-erectus stage of learning.