Your posting is missing something. A sense of humor, perhaps?
After reading all of the current thread, I agree with those that called your "humor" tasteless and inappropriate. Your "success" in a improv group, and in being moderated up, etc. are not relevant to whether this posting was humorous. Death threats never really are and I didn't see anyone else (so far) call your posting funny.
The only remaining question is whether your response is going to be "Fuck you, asshole" or "Hmmm. Maybe jokes about death threats are really not funny."
I checked out xMach.org and did not find any justification for yet another port of BSD.
Why xMach? Why splinter? Why not apply all that energy to making an existing Unix better? Is it hubris? self-promotion? ignorance? NIH?
If I were Microsoft, I would pay people to create yet another port of Unix, and I would sow FUD by saying that version thus-and-so was so lame it couldn't be fixed.
I'm not a JWZ fan, but you can't lay your first point on him.
JWZ forked the Emacs code because Stallman was impossible to work with. I was there. I was involved with the telephone and email discussions between the XEmacs team (JWZ, Chuck Thompson, Ben Wing and others) and Stallman. I tried to find a compromise that was acceptable, but I was not successful.
It's my opinion that the XEmacs team was less rigid and more willing to change than Stallman was.
As I recall, Linux was based on AT&T's System V Release 3 as described in Maurice Bach's "The Design of the UNIX Operating System". Early versions of Linux ran under Minix.
Years ago (1970's) I heard a computer play Rimsky-Korsakov's "The Flight of the Bumblebee" at a museum of science in Paris. The audio device was a cheap AM transitor radio held close to a mainframe.
This computer normally emitted radio waves during operation, and the "program" that was running during the demonstration was written especially to emit radio waves that played "The Flight of the Bumblebee".
Here is an article on the subject. The conclusion: Yes, they do.
Do portable electronics endanger flight? The evidence mounts - Perry, T.S.; Geppert, L. This paper appears in: IEEE Spectrum On page(s): 26 - 33 Sept. 1996 Volume: 33 Issue: 9 ISSN: 0018-9235 References Cited: 2
Abstract:
According to a new study, the risk that RF emissions from carry-on electronic devices will affect avionics, although not high, is still high enough to warrant tougher government regulations. The authors discuss a study by RTCA on the problems of interference caused by portable electronic devices (PEDs). The electromagnetic emissions from PEDs and their effects on avionic systems, particularly radionavigation and communications, are discussed. Some of the PEDs and the types of problems that they can cause are then discussed. The regulations covering this issue are outlined.
I remember Andrew Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl) making a comment something to the effect that even though his window system for Amoeba(?) was smaller and faster than X, he couldn't prevail against the MIT juggernaut. I checked Tanenbaum's home page, but I didn't find any references. Perhaps someone could email him a question. [Amoeba is a distributed operating system that is available free-of-charge from ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/amoeba/amoeba5.3/.)
Slashdot Mirror
Your posting is missing something. A sense of humor, perhaps?
After reading all of the current thread, I agree with those that called your "humor" tasteless and inappropriate. Your "success" in a improv group, and in being moderated up, etc. are not relevant to whether this posting was humorous. Death threats never really are and I didn't see anyone else (so far) call your posting funny.
The only remaining question is whether your response is going to be "Fuck you, asshole" or "Hmmm. Maybe jokes about death threats are really not funny."
I checked out xMach.org and did not find any justification for yet another port of BSD.
Why xMach? Why splinter? Why not apply all that energy to making an existing Unix better? Is it hubris? self-promotion? ignorance? NIH?
If I were Microsoft, I would pay people to create yet another port of Unix, and I would sow FUD by saying that version thus-and-so was so lame it couldn't be fixed.
I'm not a JWZ fan, but you can't lay your first point on him.
JWZ forked the Emacs code because Stallman was impossible to work with. I was there. I was involved with the telephone and email discussions between the XEmacs team (JWZ, Chuck Thompson, Ben Wing and others) and Stallman. I tried to find a compromise that was acceptable, but I was not successful.
It's my opinion that the XEmacs team was less rigid and more willing to change than Stallman was.
This email address should also work.
As I recall, Linux was based on AT&T's System V Release 3 as described in Maurice Bach's "The Design of the UNIX Operating System". Early versions of Linux ran under Minix.
Years ago (1970's) I heard a computer play Rimsky-Korsakov's "The Flight of the Bumblebee" at a museum of science in Paris. The audio device was a cheap AM transitor radio held close to a mainframe.
This computer normally emitted radio waves during operation, and the "program" that was running during the demonstration was written especially to emit radio waves that played "The Flight of the Bumblebee".
I remember Andrew Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl) making a comment something to the effect that even though his window system for Amoeba(?) was smaller and faster than X, he couldn't prevail against the MIT juggernaut. I checked Tanenbaum's home page, but I didn't find any references. Perhaps someone could email him a question. [Amoeba is a distributed operating system that is available free-of-charge from ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/amoeba/amoeba5.3/.)