I am a teen that, without his parents really having absolutely any idea at all, has been all around the web. Yeah, that includes all those places kids shouldn't see. When we first got unlimited access, I just went around, clicking absolutely anything that piqued my curiosity, disregarding those stupid "adults only" warnings the way that south park kid did. The porn sites, the anarchist's cookbook and related mailing lists and sites, the warez kiddies, the hate sites, everything. I think I turned out ok.
You know what? I ended up here (meaning Slashdot). My "fragile little mind" just sort of lost interest in those places quickly because they weren't restricted and really didn't have anything interesting to say. I think I'm better off now, as a matter of fact. Having seen hate sites, I now have a pretty good idea of how bigots think, and in any situation I can "try on" their point of view (and debunk it of course). Funny how people think we need to be "protected". I would rather shape my own point of view - I think it came out pretty balanced.
I think I sorta left the impression from that last message that I am a die hard vegetarian. I'm not. Last night I ate shrimp and steak, and I just now finished a spaghetti dinner with meatballs. But I balance that out with a lotta greens. I am not under any dissolusionment that I am doing anything for my health eating meat, I just like it. And when I'm training for a sporting event, I adjust accordingly: little or no meat and right before the event, nothing but fruit and plenty of water.
That brings me to the other thing I forgot to say. There are groups of people that are justified in writing down numbers and crunching them for health reasons: Incredibly obese people (we're talking like 500 pounds and up, all fat) who need liquid diets and/or have some kind of disease/syndrome that got them there. The other is very competitive athletes who use training schedules and diets. Anywhere in between, there is simply no need.
And sorry everybody for the errors, I am just too lazy to proofread, or something.
I haven't found anything in the XFree86 literature that suggests that it runs on Be, and X11.org doesn't say anything about Be either (but then they were supposedly going to have their site overhauled a month ago but haven't updated their page since.)
And anyway, I don't really want a whole X server package for Be that controls the video hardware itself. Be has great hardware support already, for hardware that it supports anyway:-).
Ideally, I would want some kind of X server "emulator" that allows the user to run a GTK, Qt, or X app on the Linux server and have it display on the Be desktop with all the other windows.
I guess if there isn't such a thing, maybe I should try to write one, but I am not experienced enough and to me that seems like a big undertaking. Anyone know if there is something like that?
That was just what I was planning on doing pretty soon! I want to build a network with Be workstations and a linux server.
One question for those out there who can help: Is it easy to run X applications on a linux server using a Be box as an X server? Can I have my Be workstation double as an X terminal for any *nix GUI app I happen to want to run? I sure hope so.
I probably sound like an idiot bringing up neural nets here, just because of the hype that is associated with them, but I am wondering if someone out there with a good background on neural nets could answer some questions I have.
I know that the basic neural net works with three layers of neurons: an Input layer, with signals fed into it, a middle layer with a bunch of connections, and an output layer. To train it, you put input signals on one side, and "correct" output on the other, and let the middle layer weight the connections appropriately to "learn" the pattern it is being taught.
What I am wondering is: Are there other arrangements/learning methods for neural nets other than that one? Could a neural net be taught to play a game by "noticing" somehow which things it tries work and which don't? Instead of a bunch of one-shot examples, could it operate in a continuous manner, with signals constantly being fed in and out, and connections constantly changing? I suppose the basic way humans attach "right" or "wrong" to events is by signals of pleasure or pain, with the network always trying to get more pleasure signals and less pain. I see I've just gone way off on a tangent here. I'll post anyway because I would really like an explanation of how much people now know about neural nets from someone studying such things.
The quote you put in italics said better code. I was saying that opening source code review would at WORST give EQUAL results to closed source from a _TECHNICAL_ standpoint.
You just argued that it could be a bad idea from a business standpoint, which I conceeded could be argued either way.
If Wozniak and RMS would get along well. Both are brilliant, and both have made incredible contributions to the field of computer technology. Both dislike suits that are in it for greed. But Woz is like a more docile, fun loving version or RMS.
RMS: "ALL SOFTWARE MUST BE FREE FOR EVERYBODY OR I WILL BE (am) ONE VERY UNHAPPY CAMPER. IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US, YOU'RE AGAINST US!!!"
Woz: "Wow! This is cool! What would happen if i tried doing this? Neat! Heay, come check this out! What would be a cool practical joke I could pull off using this?..."
No question about it. Closed source software is still a gold mine. But you have to do it a certain way - don't sell small modular programs, sell big expensive "suites" and market them heavily as the "total, integrated solution to all of your ______ needs."
BUT, I wish somebody would explain to me how closed source development could POSSIBLY result in better code. All OSS means is that you make the source available to others so they can improve it. And you don't have to incorporate their improvements if you don't want to. At the very worst, it will give the same results as closed source.
And in business, open source definately has a place where making money is concerned: whenever your main product is not the software in question (like if you are selling hardware which needs the software to run, or a program which needs the operating system to run) make the software in question free. People won't want your device drivers anyway if they don't have your hardware. And they won't want your operating system if there is a commoditized product that does the job better for less.
If you are selling the same exact product that you have opened up, you are without a doubt taking a risk. Then, obviously your money is in service and support, but one could definately make an argument that closed source makes more money.
Bottom line: open source makes much more business sense if you are actually making money on a different but related product. If you are selling the same thing you are opening up, one could argue either way.
That's what I would really like to see. After all, BeOS is the _Media_ OS, made from the ground up with large files, multiprocessing and streaming media in mind. Video editing, rendering, and other visual effects applications using BeOS on an SGI Visual Workstation would be a hard to be combination, don't you think? Are there plans to port BeOS?
I mean, Linux is great and all, but the only thing I think it has on BeOS in terms of suitability for multimedia type stuff is more applications and better hardware support. (And that is the same one thing that Windows has on Linux for any use.)
I forgot the effects of reflected signals. With the kind of precise timing those things need, that would obviously be a problem.
Dammit, I wish there was some easy way to get good reception without making the unit huge. My friend has a 12 channel Garmin with a fairly large detachable antenna, and it constantly loses satelites.
My unattainable dream is to have only one unit i ever take anywhere. Something like a combo cellphone, pilot, gps. Ahhhhhhh.
Know where I would really like to see these? GPS receivers. Those could use all the reception technology they can get. Anyone know if there are any plans to include this in a handheld GPS receiver? If so, where do I sign?:-)
I can't figure out how to get it working with MySQL. I downloaded the latest version of the server and client from mqsql.com, but neither has the file libmysqlclient.so.4, which DigitalDJ says it needs. Is this file on an older version of mysql, or do I have the wrong package?
By simply not focusing so much on Microsoft. I say don't post MS related stories on slashdot unless they really are newsworthy. And don't post them on LinuxToday unless they are related in some way to Linux.
This would take away forums that seem to be used mainly to stir anti-ms feelings and (sometimes subtely) encourage flaming.
If we all just back away from talking about MS all the time, several good things will result:
1. We will continue to grow for the same reasons we always did: not worring about marketshare, deadlines, acceptance, etc. These things will come in time if you produce good software. These have always been touted as the linux community's greatest strengths. Let's keep it that way.
2. We will attract people that are interested in free software instead of people that want to feel cool or 3L1te or just hate microsoft. Without a place to read and post anti-ms stuff those people will lose interest and leave. I say good riddance.
Bottom line - it's not out of the control of the leaders in this meritocracy. An example can be set, and would be followed.
How about a shirt printed to look like a sword or big knife is slashing a huge, jagged tear in the shirt, and next to it a large bullethole or burned out area printed on. Naturally, they would form the design you are talking about.
If such a copyleft shirt is made (just the backward C in a circle, nothing else), I would definately get at least one. I'm for the GPL and all (duh, otherwise I wouldn't want the shirt) but there's something cool about just having that weird backwards copyright symbol on it.
People that don't know will look twice at it as they pass you on the street, and think it's cool in a weird sort of way. Others will recognize it and not need to see the GPL written out on the back. Put me down for one of those. I've actually checked back several times to see if such a shirt had been added.
I say that the AOL symbol should be the main part of the "evil three" logo, because, like you said, it almost fits the bill already. Also, Netscape is really just a part of aol now. And, of course, AOL is by far the most evil and MS-like of the three companies.
Start with the AOL logo, and color it black, with evil looking fire peeking around the edges. Inside, blend in a picture of a sinister mozilla, warped and twisted from it's previously good, pure form. In the monster's eye, or perhaps partly hidden behind the head, put a deep red, sinister looking sun.
I think a logo like that would be really cool, funny, and make a statement at the same time. Anyone out there really good with the Gimp? I'm not, but I'll try my best.
I would like a "music server" in my house. That is, connecting an old computer with no peripherals to a music system. I would control it by telnet or a web interface. Obviously, good sound quality is a high priority, and that might very well mean shielding.
Actually, though, what I would really like is an all-digital sound card, with any analog processing completely cut out of the loop. Ideally, it would output a digital signal that a good home audio system will decode, such as Dolby Digital, if that is possible. Or maybe the DAT format.
Anyone know how, with digital signals, shielding, or some combination of the two, you could make the best, cleanest audio signal possible? This wouldn't just be for MP3s, but also higher quality stuff. Any advice on this greatly appreciated.
Backwards compatibility should not even be an issue if it means breaking standards. Standards should reign supreme in the minds of developers, that way if it doesn't show up right it is because the viewer doesn't have a good browser and should get a good one.
With a mindset like that for webmasters and browser makers, the web will move toward universally supported standards and universal compatibility much faster.
I guess I'm just one of those people who will tear the whole thing down and build it from the beginning if there is something wrong with it, compatibility be damned. That's what I hate about windows9x - they don't seem to think that way at all.
There was a article a couple weeks ago about the Linux OS winning first prize in a contest for computer art. The justification given by the judges was that they believe computer code is a form of artistic expression. If you want to use the bill of rights to justify strong crypto export, use that. Artistic expression is free from export controls, right? Computer code is art. Therefore... O.E.D. !!!!!!!!
Subject says it all. They don't dispute your right to have it. But they don't want you to make it available to anyone overseas. That means it must be downloaded for a server that can tell the difference.
It can't go into general use if it can't be exported.
I "invented" an unbreakable encryption scheme and used it with friends when I was, like, 10. It's very simple: Add the key to plaintext to get cyphertext. It's called a one time pad. Works perfectly, as long as you never use that key again. Impractical, but quite unbreakable. Of course, I was by no means the first person to come up with this - not by a long shot.
Once you get into public key cryptography, I am convinced that there is always a shortcut to breaking it. It's just a matter of finding it.
Austin Powers is a clever spoof on Bondish movies that seem to come out every year. Austin Powers is funny. Austin Powers is lowbrow, slapstick, and sometimes, witty to the point of genius.
Austin Powers is not meant to have any kind of engaging plot. Austin Powers does not care that Austin Powers is not meant to have any kind of engaging plot, and the makers make no attempt to hide this fact. Some movies will go to great lengths to try to fill holes in the plot, at the expense of hokiness. Austin Powers basically tells the audience point blank that it doesn't care. At all. It's that scene when Austin is going back in time and gets confused by the paradoxes that arise. He - and the audience - are told, and I quote, "enjoy the ride".
If you laughed more in this than the first, great! I did. I can't imagine why else anyone would want to see it if not to laugh.
Junkbuster makes all it's block/don't block decisions from a file containing patterns to watch for. If you click on the junkbuster logo that pops up, you can see exactly which pattern it was that got caught, and remove/modify it if you like.
The notion of an open source OS (so it's easy to write apps for and tweak to your heart's content) and proprietary apps (so developers have food on the table and can make money with a good idea) works just great with me. There are a lot of proprietary apps that I really like and will continue to use. Obviously, given the choice between having something open sourced or closed, all other things being constant, I would pick the open one. But as we all know, it doesn't work that way, and I'm fine with that.
My point about ESR is that, while he may get under people's skin and say some off the wall things that many others don't agree with, he is still a very useful person to have around. He did, after all, play a big part in the oss mozilla in his present role, and before that (like many have already pointed out) wrote some very useful code.
I don't like to let outside issues (like, oh, say, gun control:-) get mixed in with arguements like this one, because they are irrelevant. Do outsiders really think we are all just like him; that he represents us all? Not unless they're stupid (hmmmm, maybe I better not go there).
I can see one useful goal for linux/oss advocacy. No, it isn't to put it on every countertop of every home. It is to get companies to accept oss as a viable alternative to css (can I make a new acronym?) in certain situations, like device drivers, if the thing you want to sell is the hardware. Or Linux/BSD on a server, if what you really want is to just shut the thing up in a closet and never have to worry about it again.
Bottom line: ESR has demonstrated an ability to push us closer to those goals. Who cares what kind of PR we get if those goals are met? That's what we really want, isn't it?
because of ESR, I for one will be grateful, and consider him worth having around. I, as a techie, would much rather not have windows on my desk at work, like I do now.
Slashdot Mirror
I am a teen that, without his parents really having absolutely any idea at all, has been all around the web. Yeah, that includes all those places kids shouldn't see. When we first got unlimited access, I just went around, clicking absolutely anything that piqued my curiosity, disregarding those stupid "adults only" warnings the way that south park kid did. The porn sites, the anarchist's cookbook and related mailing lists and sites, the warez kiddies, the hate sites, everything. I think I turned out ok.
You know what? I ended up here (meaning Slashdot). My "fragile little mind" just sort of lost interest in those places quickly because they weren't restricted and really didn't have anything interesting to say. I think I'm better off now, as a matter of fact. Having seen hate sites, I now have a pretty good idea of how bigots think, and in any situation I can "try on" their point of view (and debunk it of course). Funny how people think we need to be "protected". I would rather shape my own point of view - I think it came out pretty balanced.
I think I sorta left the impression from that last message that I am a die hard vegetarian. I'm not. Last night I ate shrimp and steak, and I just now finished a spaghetti dinner with meatballs. But I balance that out with a lotta greens. I am not under any dissolusionment that I am doing anything for my health eating meat, I just like it. And when I'm training for a sporting event, I adjust accordingly: little or no meat and right before the event, nothing but fruit and plenty of water.
That brings me to the other thing I forgot to say. There are groups of people that are justified in writing down numbers and crunching them for health reasons: Incredibly obese people (we're talking like 500 pounds and up, all fat) who need liquid diets and/or have some kind of disease/syndrome that got them there. The other is very competitive athletes who use training schedules and diets. Anywhere in between, there is simply no need.
And sorry everybody for the errors, I am just too lazy to proofread, or something.
I haven't found anything in the XFree86 literature that suggests that it runs on Be, and X11.org doesn't say anything about Be either (but then they were supposedly going to have their site overhauled a month ago but haven't updated their page since.)
:-).
And anyway, I don't really want a whole X server package for Be that controls the video hardware itself. Be has great hardware support already, for hardware that it supports anyway
Ideally, I would want some kind of X server "emulator" that allows the user to run a GTK, Qt, or X app on the Linux server and have it display on the Be desktop with all the other windows.
I guess if there isn't such a thing, maybe I should try to write one, but I am not experienced enough and to me that seems like a big undertaking. Anyone know if there is something like that?
That was just what I was planning on doing pretty soon! I want to build a network with Be workstations and a linux server.
One question for those out there who can help: Is it easy to run X applications on a linux server using a Be box as an X server? Can I have my Be workstation double as an X terminal for any *nix GUI app I happen to want to run? I sure hope so.
Anyone?
I probably sound like an idiot bringing up neural nets here, just because of the hype that is associated with them, but I am wondering if someone out there with a good background on neural nets could answer some questions I have.
I know that the basic neural net works with three layers of neurons: an Input layer, with signals fed into it, a middle layer with a bunch of connections, and an output layer. To train it, you put input signals on one side, and "correct" output on the other, and let the middle layer weight the connections appropriately to "learn" the pattern it is being taught.
What I am wondering is: Are there other arrangements/learning methods for neural nets other than that one? Could a neural net be taught to play a game by "noticing" somehow which things it tries work and which don't? Instead of a bunch of one-shot examples, could it operate in a continuous manner, with signals constantly being fed in and out, and connections constantly changing? I suppose the basic way humans attach "right" or "wrong" to events is by signals of pleasure or pain, with the network always trying to get more pleasure signals and less pain. I see I've just gone way off on a tangent here. I'll post anyway because I would really like an explanation of how much people now know about neural nets from someone studying such things.
Anyone?
The quote you put in italics said better code. I was saying that opening source code review would at WORST give EQUAL results to closed source from a _TECHNICAL_ standpoint.
You just argued that it could be a bad idea from a business standpoint, which I conceeded could be argued either way.
So I think we agree.
If Wozniak and RMS would get along well. Both are brilliant, and both have made incredible contributions to the field of computer technology. Both dislike suits that are in it for greed. But Woz is like a more docile, fun loving version or RMS.
RMS: "ALL SOFTWARE MUST BE FREE FOR EVERYBODY OR I WILL BE (am) ONE VERY UNHAPPY CAMPER. IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US, YOU'RE AGAINST US!!!"
Woz: "Wow! This is cool! What would happen if i tried doing this? Neat! Heay, come check this out! What would be a cool practical joke I could pull off using this?..."
No question about it. Closed source software is still a gold mine. But you have to do it a certain way - don't sell small modular programs, sell big expensive "suites" and market them heavily as the "total, integrated solution to all of your ______ needs."
BUT, I wish somebody would explain to me how closed source development could POSSIBLY result in better code. All OSS means is that you make the source available to others so they can improve it. And you don't have to incorporate their improvements if you don't want to. At the very worst, it will give the same results as closed source.
And in business, open source definately has a place where making money is concerned: whenever your main product is not the software in question (like if you are selling hardware which needs the software to run, or a program which needs the operating system to run) make the software in question free. People won't want your device drivers anyway if they don't have your hardware. And they won't want your operating system if there is a commoditized product that does the job better for less.
If you are selling the same exact product that you have opened up, you are without a doubt taking a risk. Then, obviously your money is in service and support, but one could definately make an argument that closed source makes more money.
Bottom line: open source makes much more business sense if you are actually making money on a different but related product. If you are selling the same thing you are opening up, one could argue either way.
That's what I would really like to see. After all, BeOS is the _Media_ OS, made from the ground up with large files, multiprocessing and streaming media in mind. Video editing, rendering, and other visual effects applications using BeOS on an SGI Visual Workstation would be a hard to be combination, don't you think? Are there plans to port BeOS?
I mean, Linux is great and all, but the only thing I think it has on BeOS in terms of suitability for multimedia type stuff is more applications and better hardware support. (And that is the same one thing that Windows has on Linux for any use.)
I forgot the effects of reflected signals. With the kind of precise timing those things need, that would obviously be a problem.
Dammit, I wish there was some easy way to get good reception without making the unit huge. My friend has a 12 channel Garmin with a fairly large detachable antenna, and it constantly loses satelites.
My unattainable dream is to have only one unit i ever take anywhere. Something like a combo cellphone, pilot, gps. Ahhhhhhh.
Know where I would really like to see these? GPS receivers. Those could use all the reception technology they can get. Anyone know if there are any plans to include this in a handheld GPS receiver? If so, where do I sign? :-)
I can't figure out how to get it working with MySQL. I downloaded the latest version of the server and client from mqsql.com, but neither has the file libmysqlclient.so.4, which DigitalDJ says it needs. Is this file on an older version of mysql, or do I have the wrong package?
Any help on this greatly appreciated.
By simply not focusing so much on Microsoft. I say don't post MS related stories on slashdot unless they really are newsworthy. And don't post them on LinuxToday unless they are related in some way to Linux.
This would take away forums that seem to be used mainly to stir anti-ms feelings and (sometimes subtely) encourage flaming.
If we all just back away from talking about MS all the time, several good things will result:
1. We will continue to grow for the same reasons we always did: not worring about marketshare, deadlines, acceptance, etc. These things will come in time if you produce good software. These have always been touted as the linux community's greatest strengths. Let's keep it that way.
2. We will attract people that are interested in free software instead of people that want to feel cool or 3L1te or just hate microsoft. Without a place to read and post anti-ms stuff those people will lose interest and leave. I say good riddance.
Bottom line - it's not out of the control of the leaders in this meritocracy. An example can be set, and would be followed.
How about a shirt printed to look like a sword or big knife is
slashing a huge, jagged tear in the shirt, and next to it a large
bullethole or burned out area printed on. Naturally, they would
form the design you are talking about.
If such a copyleft shirt is made (just the backward C in a circle,
nothing else), I would definately get at least one. I'm for the GPL
and all (duh, otherwise I wouldn't want the shirt) but there's
something cool about just having that weird backwards copyright
symbol on it.
People that don't know will look twice at it as they pass you on
the street, and think it's cool in a weird sort of way. Others will
recognize it and not need to see the GPL written out on the
back. Put me down for one of those. I've actually checked
back several times to see if such a shirt had been added.
I say that the AOL symbol should be the main part of the
"evil three" logo, because, like you said, it almost fits the bill
already. Also, Netscape is really just a part of aol now. And,
of course, AOL is by far the most evil and MS-like of the three
companies.
Start with the AOL logo, and color it black, with evil looking fire
peeking around the edges. Inside, blend in a picture of a sinister
mozilla, warped and twisted from it's previously good, pure
form. In the monster's eye, or perhaps partly hidden behind
the head, put a deep red, sinister looking sun.
I think a logo like that would be really cool, funny, and make
a statement at the same time. Anyone out there really good
with the Gimp? I'm not, but I'll try my best.
I would like a "music server" in my house. That is, connecting an old computer with no peripherals to a music system. I would control it by telnet or a web interface. Obviously, good sound quality is a high priority, and that might very well mean shielding.
Actually, though, what I would really like is an all-digital sound card, with any analog processing completely cut out of the loop. Ideally, it would output a digital signal that a good home audio system will decode, such as Dolby Digital, if that is possible. Or maybe the DAT format.
Anyone know how, with digital signals, shielding, or some combination of the two, you could make the best, cleanest audio signal possible? This wouldn't just be for MP3s, but also higher quality stuff. Any advice on this greatly appreciated.
Backwards compatibility should not even be an issue if it means breaking standards. Standards should reign supreme in the minds of developers, that way if it doesn't show up right it is because the viewer doesn't have a good browser and should get a good one.
With a mindset like that for webmasters and browser makers, the web will move toward universally supported standards and universal compatibility much faster.
I guess I'm just one of those people who will tear the whole thing down and build it from the beginning if there is something wrong with it, compatibility be damned. That's what I hate about windows9x - they don't seem to think that way at all.
There was a article a couple weeks ago about the Linux OS winning first prize in a contest for computer art. The justification given by the judges was that they believe computer code is a form of artistic expression. If you want to use the bill of rights to justify strong crypto export, use that. Artistic expression is free from export controls, right? Computer code is art. Therefore... O.E.D. !!!!!!!!
Subject says it all. They don't dispute your right to have it. But they don't want you to make it available to anyone overseas. That means it must be downloaded for a server that can tell the difference.
It can't go into general use if it can't be exported.
I "invented" an unbreakable encryption scheme and used it with friends when I was, like, 10. It's very simple: Add the key to plaintext to get cyphertext. It's called a one time pad. Works perfectly, as long as you never use that key again. Impractical, but quite unbreakable. Of course, I was by no means the first person to come up with this - not by a long shot.
Once you get into public key cryptography, I am convinced that there is always a shortcut to breaking it. It's just a matter of finding it.
Austin Powers is a clever spoof on Bondish movies that seem to come out every year. Austin Powers is funny. Austin Powers is lowbrow, slapstick, and sometimes, witty to the point of genius.
Austin Powers is not meant to have any kind of engaging plot. Austin Powers does not care that Austin Powers is not meant to have any kind of engaging plot, and the makers make no attempt to hide this fact. Some movies will go to great lengths to try to fill holes in the plot, at the expense of hokiness. Austin Powers basically tells the audience point blank that it doesn't care. At all. It's that scene when Austin is going back in time and gets confused by the paradoxes that arise. He - and the audience - are told, and I quote, "enjoy the ride".
If you laughed more in this than the first, great! I did. I can't imagine why else anyone would want to see it if not to laugh.
Just my $0.000000002
Junkbuster makes all it's block/don't block decisions from a file containing patterns to watch for. If you click on the junkbuster logo that pops up, you can see exactly which pattern it was that got caught, and remove/modify it if you like.
The notion of an open source OS (so it's easy to write apps for and tweak to your heart's content) and proprietary apps (so developers have food on the table and can make money with a good idea) works just great with me. There are a lot of proprietary apps that I really like and will continue to use. Obviously, given the choice between having something open sourced or closed, all other things being constant, I would pick the open one. But as we all know, it doesn't work that way, and I'm fine with that.
My point about ESR is that, while he may get under people's skin and say some off the wall things that many others don't agree with, he is still a very useful person to have around. He did, after all, play a big part in the oss mozilla in his present role, and before that (like many have already pointed out) wrote some very useful code.
I don't like to let outside issues (like, oh, say, gun control :-) get mixed in with arguements like this one, because they are irrelevant. Do outsiders really think we are all just like him; that he represents us all? Not unless they're stupid (hmmmm, maybe I better not go there).
I can see one useful goal for linux/oss advocacy. No, it isn't to put it on every countertop of every home. It is to get companies to accept oss as a viable alternative to css (can I make a new acronym?) in certain situations, like device drivers, if the thing you want to sell is the hardware. Or Linux/BSD on a server, if what you really want is to just shut the thing up in a closet and never have to worry about it again.
Bottom line: ESR has demonstrated an ability to push us closer to those goals. Who cares what kind of PR we get if those goals are met? That's what we really want, isn't it?
because of ESR, I for one will be grateful, and consider him worth having around. I, as a techie, would much rather not have windows on my desk at work, like I do now.