Okay, fine: the interview was a little dry. Perhaps, 5 years from now, we'll have trouble remembering it.
What the hell do you expect from a kernel maintainer? Trust me, you don't want revved-up and passionate...because he'll make revved-up and passionate mistakes. Marcello wasn't hired because of his strong views on the future of technology...he probably just does his job really well. I wish I could say the same about many people I've worked with.
Not that I wish to put you in an uncomfortable situation, but would it be possible to get your reaction to Eric S. Raymond's comment about the state of kernel development:
"I've been examining the existing kernel configuration system, and I have about concluded that the best favor we could do everybody involved with it is to take it out behind the barn and shoot it through the head."
For someone as persuasive and influential as Raymond to make such a statement, it begs for a response, if not a rebuttal.
As an Ontarian (jeez that sounds interstellar, doesn't it?), living in Toronto, I don't have many kind words for Mike Harris. He has been proven to display an unparalleled contempt for anyone not directly supporting/supported by 'big business'.
Provided he does not run in the next election (which is more than a year away, not in a month) or loses, he will have left teachers, environmentalists, students, doctors/nurses, aboriginal Canadians, and the greater populations of Toronto and Hamilton bleeding in his wake.
He is a living example of the banality of maliciousness, and although his position on provincially-funded gene testing is initially applaudable (in my eyes at least), time has only proven that underneath this lies the churning gears of another, dark scheme.
I think - above all - your reply is the most revealing. I was just thinking the same thing.
It's amazing how quickly a bunch of basement-dwelling, four-eyed hackers can turn on a dime and start talking about photography as if it were just another Linux app.
I have to disagree about the perceived "EXACT representation" of photography. While this may be correct if we approach photography as biologists or from any imperial scientific perspective, artistically it's a lot more complicated.
Artistically, what photography lacks is context. A photograph of a woman on a bench in 1932 may to jCAT seem as an absolute representation, whereas it shows nothing other than that moment, and that moment alone. Her name, her culture, her mind, her thoughts, among many other things are still open to speculation - just as the Mona Lisa still is today.
Don't get me wrong...I LIKE this about photography (and film in general), but I think it's erroneous to assume that - because it wasn't created by a paintbrush or clay - that it is more "exact" or realistic.
I think we place too great an emphasis on seeing realism, when in fact it's totally subjective.
It's stories like this that push the argument for mandatory death penalties against greedy bastards. Think about it: one of the FOX lawyers is sitting in his office, getting ready for a lunch meeting...maybe thinking about what he's going to do this weekend, when someone from the government steps in with a syringe. "Sorry sir." is the last thing he hears.
For the record, and to give backing to the claim that FOX are blood sucking pigdogs - the production company that produces The Simpsons (Gracie Films) want as little to do with FOX as possible. Their wars are well-known in the industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Java is the WHAT?
Yeah, just what AbiWord needs: gushing memory leaks and hellish library conflicts.
Okay, fine: the interview was a little dry. Perhaps, 5 years from now, we'll have trouble remembering it.
What the hell do you expect from a kernel maintainer? Trust me, you don't want revved-up and passionate...because he'll make revved-up and passionate mistakes. Marcello wasn't hired because of his strong views on the future of technology...he probably just does his job really well. I wish I could say the same about many people I've worked with.
Not that I wish to put you in an uncomfortable situation, but would it be possible to get your reaction to Eric S. Raymond's comment about the state of kernel development:
"I've been examining the existing kernel configuration system, and I have about concluded that the best favor we could do everybody involved with it is to take it out behind the barn and shoot it through the head."
For someone as persuasive and influential as Raymond to make such a statement, it begs for a response, if not a rebuttal.
As an Ontarian (jeez that sounds interstellar, doesn't it?), living in Toronto, I don't have many kind words for Mike Harris. He has been proven to display an unparalleled contempt for anyone not directly supporting/supported by 'big business'.
Provided he does not run in the next election (which is more than a year away, not in a month) or loses, he will have left teachers, environmentalists, students, doctors/nurses, aboriginal Canadians, and the greater populations of Toronto and Hamilton bleeding in his wake.
He is a living example of the banality of maliciousness, and although his position on provincially-funded gene testing is initially applaudable (in my eyes at least), time has only proven that underneath this lies the churning gears of another, dark scheme.
Good golfer though.
Alright: who picked the question where someone actually used the term "linux boxen"?
Isn't that the point where the government steps-in and puts you to sleep?
Please don't forget that John was the walrus.
I think - above all - your reply is the most revealing. I was just thinking the same thing.
It's amazing how quickly a bunch of basement-dwelling, four-eyed hackers can turn on a dime and start talking about photography as if it were just another Linux app.
I have to disagree about the perceived "EXACT representation" of photography. While this may be correct if we approach photography as biologists or from any imperial scientific perspective, artistically it's a lot more complicated.
Artistically, what photography lacks is context. A photograph of a woman on a bench in 1932 may to jCAT seem as an absolute representation, whereas it shows nothing other than that moment, and that moment alone. Her name, her culture, her mind, her thoughts, among many other things are still open to speculation - just as the Mona Lisa still is today.
Don't get me wrong...I LIKE this about photography (and film in general), but I think it's erroneous to assume that - because it wasn't created by a paintbrush or clay - that it is more "exact" or realistic.
I think we place too great an emphasis on seeing realism, when in fact it's totally subjective.
It's stories like this that push the argument for mandatory death penalties against greedy bastards. Think about it: one of the FOX lawyers is sitting in his office, getting ready for a lunch meeting...maybe thinking about what he's going to do this weekend, when someone from the government steps in with a syringe. "Sorry sir." is the last thing he hears.
For the record, and to give backing to the claim that FOX are blood sucking pigdogs - the production company that produces The Simpsons (Gracie Films) want as little to do with FOX as possible. Their wars are well-known in the industry.