Would you please just STFU about Google already, you little karma whore..
Below are the parents previous posts...
Why anyone is surprised that Apple (and Google) act like real companies is always a surprise to me.
Once Google became a publicly traded company their only obligation transitioned to making a profit for their shareholders.
Honestly why anyone is surprised at Google acting like a real company is a mystery. Since Google became a publicly traded company they only have one obligation.....
Do no evil? Hardly,... when Google became a publicly traded company their obligation became one thing..
and finally, from your own words...
Seriously is there anyone on/. that isn't a "me too, me too" Microsoft sucks, Linux is good person?
Why don't you eat them and STFU about Google in stories nothing to do with them.
wine does that exactly, if the code can not be understood then it is rejected and told to be made into smaller patches.
Inspection of source code when it's already in the database isn't the way to do it. However, it's very easy to review code coming into a repo.
Holding code up to a certain standard and rejecting the rest does work because it gets rid of a lot of time consuming errors that you will debug later and keeps the code base clean.
When you're working with someone who is a really crap programmer this works extremely well and there is no need to assign them to "documentation".
A ten year W.I.P isn't a good example of procedual content generation in games. Yes it's a game, but if no one gets to play it then it's kinda pointless.
It doesn't effect Linux because Linux makes up 1% of the market. If we pretended that Linux made up 90% of the market then I doubt it would matter because Linux has always had all it's apps like this from the beginning.
This is different from Windows that has allowed the parasite of AV vendors to exist, now it has grown into a cancer they can't operate on.
Nonsense, you've added the custom repos because you trust the person that maintains them and who has signed their debs. Such examples include winehq.org
Do you believe a wine deb would have contain malicious code? If it did Scott Ritchie who signs the debs (and works for ubuntu?) would be kicked out of ever contributing to wine and possibly ubuntu, unless it was an accident.
Sadly, the error has grown more and more common with time, such that even journalists, advertisers, and major mass media entities have fallen prey to "BTQ Abuse."
That's because languages written and spoken change from generation to generation. Fucking deal with it.
If you can't then perhaps you should realise we don't go around talking Shakespearian and that you're a douche bag.
Which projects do you contribute to because I've never seen that problem before. Maybe you are just being too sensitive about the issue because it's on your mind when you post the code?
Stallman worked on emacs and gcc while he was working at university.
He's done good things, but he is not an expert anymore.
I agree on his views however he has been more of a detriment in everything apart from doing the licenses. It would be better if he just stuck to the licensing and didn't comment about things like Firefox's freedom when he doesn't even use the program.
Also just because I use the GNU GPL, doesn't mean he can came my software is GNU/project. Sorry but I think I should get credit for my project not him. He enforces this GNU name because in history he wants to be remembered for setting up GNU which means all GNU GPL software would be credited to him. I'm not dumb, I see what he is trying to do.
You can claim otherwise, however I think you should go read the gnu.org history page..
Everything apart from Linux is called "GNU". There's no mention to the thousands of people who put their code under the GPL license, he makes it sound like they're responsible for all the projects.
However, the GNU Project is not limited to the core operating system. We aim to provide a whole spectrum of software, whatever many users want to have.
So there you go, they claim they invented "a whole spectrum of software" which is available on Linux.
Out of touch he believes that more people get paid to develop open source software then proprietary.
If you can't see the stupidity of your own quotes then please don't respond, I don't want to argue with someone who is like stallman, unable to see the truth and only able to see their ideals..
I'd hardly call someone that still uses lynx an expert. He probably barely knows what facebook is, obviously someone has told him.
He's a guy living in the past and in a bubble. He's never had to do one day of REAL work. He's only ever worked at a university and he now works for the FSF.
Not only this but he is such a boring shell of a man, his life exists for the sole purpose of promoting freedom, he never talks about anything else. That's dangerous when you've become so insane about a topic, how are you suppose to see another persons point of view?
If anything Mark Shuttleworth is more relevant then Stallman. Why? Let's look at Firefox and the trademark license agreement. Shuttleworth went in there and negotiated with Mozilla to drop the license agreement for all linux distributions.
What would Stallman have done in that situation? He would have bitched and moaned for years about it without ever contacting Mozilla.
No he isn't. He appears to support the idea of paid software development and paid services, but insists that the users of that developed software should have the right to copy, modify and redistribute it.
If you believe that then you have never heard him talk.
He believes that all software should be free software and if you can't make a living off free software then that's not his problem. He say's you should get a different job instead of being a paid programmer while still working on free software.
Ironic from a man who lives in a bubble, he's never had to have a real job his whole life.
I can't remember the podcast, he said this on, it was around 5 months ago I would say.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you please just STFU about Google already, you little karma whore..
Below are the parents previous posts...
and finally, from your own words...
Why don't you eat them and STFU about Google in stories nothing to do with them.
wine does that exactly, if the code can not be understood then it is rejected and told to be made into smaller patches.
Inspection of source code when it's already in the database isn't the way to do it. However, it's very easy to review code coming into a repo.
Holding code up to a certain standard and rejecting the rest does work because it gets rid of a lot of time consuming errors that you will debug later and keeps the code base clean.
When you're working with someone who is a really crap programmer this works extremely well and there is no need to assign them to "documentation".
You're missing a stage there where it is reviewed by someone else and accepted or rejected.
I don't understand why more companies don't employee someone to review everyone's patches/commits.
Writers have editors for a reason, so should programmers. Much easier finding the problems on the way in then debugging the problems on the way out.
A ten year W.I.P isn't a good example of procedual content generation in games. Yes it's a game, but if no one gets to play it then it's kinda pointless.
It doesn't effect Linux because Linux makes up 1% of the market. If we pretended that Linux made up 90% of the market then I doubt it would matter because Linux has always had all it's apps like this from the beginning.
This is different from Windows that has allowed the parasite of AV vendors to exist, now it has grown into a cancer they can't operate on.
Exactly, if you set yourself up to be Microsoft's bitch then you should expect to get fucked.
std::cout << "The parent can not code for shit." << std::endl;
Nonsense, you've added the custom repos because you trust the person that maintains them and who has signed their debs. Such examples include winehq.org
Do you believe a wine deb would have contain malicious code? If it did Scott Ritchie who signs the debs (and works for ubuntu?) would be kicked out of ever contributing to wine and possibly ubuntu, unless it was an accident.
It's called clam av.
Poor Linux analogy, most users get all their software from their distro.
Your question is a bit of a con because you're making the assumption that users don't need to install new applications or admin their own PC at work.
That's because languages written and spoken change from generation to generation. Fucking deal with it.
If you can't then perhaps you should realise we don't go around talking Shakespearian and that you're a douche bag.
Find someone in England who is willing to publish your code under their name and you have no problems with patent trolls.
Well, for the moment anyway..
Put both on your CV and rake in the cash woo hoo!
Doesn't really hold up in court..
"I'm the author!" ..Written by Anonymous.
"No, I am the author, he stole my account!"
Which projects do you contribute to because I've never seen that problem before. Maybe you are just being too sensitive about the issue because it's on your mind when you post the code?
mailing a 10 gig usb stick with 6000 pdfs on is though.
Stallman worked on emacs and gcc while he was working at university.
He's done good things, but he is not an expert anymore.
I agree on his views however he has been more of a detriment in everything apart from doing the licenses. It would be better if he just stuck to the licensing and didn't comment about things like Firefox's freedom when he doesn't even use the program.
Also just because I use the GNU GPL, doesn't mean he can came my software is GNU/project. Sorry but I think I should get credit for my project not him. He enforces this GNU name because in history he wants to be remembered for setting up GNU which means all GNU GPL software would be credited to him. I'm not dumb, I see what he is trying to do.
You can claim otherwise, however I think you should go read the gnu.org history page..
Everything apart from Linux is called "GNU". There's no mention to the thousands of people who put their code under the GPL license, he makes it sound like they're responsible for all the projects.
So there you go, they claim they invented "a whole spectrum of software" which is available on Linux.
You've mis-quoted me changing the meaning of my words. Why did you do that?
He was an expert at one point, however that time has come and passed.
You can't just reject all new technology for 10 years because it's not free and expect to still be in the know.
It's great what he has done, but it's too much to call him an expert when all he does is give talks and doesn't write as much code anymore.
You seem to have left out the rest of my comment, don't be a dick and misquote me.
Out of touch he believes that more people get paid to develop open source software then proprietary.
If you can't see the stupidity of your own quotes then please don't respond, I don't want to argue with someone who is like stallman, unable to see the truth and only able to see their ideals..
I never said submit contributions my good man, however I believe people would be able to spot bugs if given the chance.
I'd hardly call someone that still uses lynx an expert. He probably barely knows what facebook is, obviously someone has told him.
He's a guy living in the past and in a bubble. He's never had to do one day of REAL work. He's only ever worked at a university and he now works for the FSF.
Not only this but he is such a boring shell of a man, his life exists for the sole purpose of promoting freedom, he never talks about anything else. That's dangerous when you've become so insane about a topic, how are you suppose to see another persons point of view?
If anything Mark Shuttleworth is more relevant then Stallman. Why? Let's look at Firefox and the trademark license agreement. Shuttleworth went in there and negotiated with Mozilla to drop the license agreement for all linux distributions.
What would Stallman have done in that situation? He would have bitched and moaned for years about it without ever contacting Mozilla.
If you believe that then you have never heard him talk.
He believes that all software should be free software and if you can't make a living off free software then that's not his problem. He say's you should get a different job instead of being a paid programmer while still working on free software.
Ironic from a man who lives in a bubble, he's never had to have a real job his whole life.
I can't remember the podcast, he said this on, it was around 5 months ago I would say.