There are more than two ideologies out there, you closed-minded fuck. You sit here and talk about being immature and pig-headed, then you assume every person in the country falls into either the "liberal" or the "conservative" camp. Isn't it pretty immature to think everyone is either a part of your little club, or an enemy? And isn't it a little immature to generalize with flamebait horseshit trying to lump everyone into a group based on one person's statement?
Not only that, but when the fuck did this become a THREAT? A threat is intended to intimidate or harm the person its directed at. Saying "this place is a shithole so I'm thinking about getting my ass to somewhere better" is an opinion on the state of affairs somewhere, not a threat, you pig-headed conservative jackass.
Am I a liberal? No. Am I a conservative? No. Am I a sheep? No. I find the candidate from whom I believe I will get the most benefit out of my vote and vote for him/her. I voted for kerry because I was praying my inbred redneck state wouldn't go pro-bush (which they did, by a landslide), but the rest of my ballot was primarily libertarian candidates, mainly because I wanted to support any disruption to the two-party, two-mentality, two-ways-of-getting-fucked-in-the-ass system that we have today.
This day makes me embarassed to be an american, and I wouldn't mind trying out another country for a while at this point. However, my family resides in america, and it's difficult enough already having to visit them flying from state to state. I'd rather not add a visa and higher chances of cavity checks to the equation.
Scientists discovered a "hellmouth" in washington, DC today. The hellmouth, formerly thought to be a fictional idea, popularized by the Buffy The Vampire Slayer series, is a gateway to hell, which serves as a nexus of evil. Many consider the appearance of the hellmouth to be a symbol of the coming apocalypse.
If you do a name, location search on google, you can often get as your first result a phonebook entry listing their number, home address, etc. A few clicks away you can usually see a satellite picture of said address. It was pretty creepy to put in nothing but my father's name and town, and be a couple clicks away from a satellite image of his house.
i'm Canadian and i'd prefer Bush in office over Kerry
I wouldn't be so quick... aslaska is really close to Canada, and there's oil in alaska... let Dubya get the idea in his brain that Canada holds vast oil reserves and before you know it, you're harboring terrorists and on the wrong end of a Tomahawk cruise missle.
I wish I came up with the joke orignally, but sadly I stole it from an internet comic. I did, however, have the lack of class to give my loving companion a name based solely on something to make other geeks chuckle.
Wow. Off the deep end much? I said I wanted to discuss things rationally. Nowhere did I say I was forcing others to be rational. You are really getting desperate to try to paint me as... shit I don't even know what you're trying to paint me as, your points are completely out there. You are trying to use this big blasting of me as a zealot to make fun of me calling others zealots, when in fact my entire POINT was that the term zealot was overused, and the only time I even USED the example of an open source zealot was to give a counterexample to the microsoft zealot nonsense.
Your posts are getting more and more personal and less and less sensible, so I'm not bothering to reply to any more by you. Feel free to continue trying to twist my words, I think it will be quite clear to anyone reading this thread that you are thoroughly full of shit.
That's a mighty strange definition of zealotry. Even by your own twisted definition of zealotry there are lots of MS zealots on slashdot.
The majority of the people you claim to see on slashdot are in fact trolls, claiming to support MS to get a rise out of the clearly pro-linux crowd here. As far as my definition being strange, nowhere have you said HOW it's strange.
If you understood altruism then the thought might have occured to you.
So, because I omitted one term in a quickly typed reply to a slashdot troll, I automtatically don't understand it? If you look at this thread, I've replied to many posts here, in fact I've bitten into a couple of trolls knowingly, just to make sure my point is clearly understood. I omitted the term "altruism" specifically because my mindset was primarily on that which motivates people who advocate microsoft products, as this was the subject of my original post: i.e. money. Which brings me to your next point...
You have a kneejerk hatred of people who advocate open source software and automatically lable them zealot
Nowhere have I said an advocate automatically makes a zealot. In fact, this entire discussion I have been arguing that ms advocates are NOT zealots. I used the "open source zealot" term merely as an example of a type of zealot most people here are familiar with, to better illustrate my example. You continually try to put words into my mouth and claim I'm bashing open source when in fact I have said nothing against it.
As far as the religion thing, nowhere have I claimed open source is a religion, but it does have parallels with religion. The decisions of most religious people are driven by a sense of morality. In their case, that morality is defined by some code of the church. In the case of open source advocates, decisions are also driven by a code of morality, but in this case it is simply a desire to help others. While these are not the same thing, they clearly stand on the opposide side of a line from the microsoft driving force, which is personal gain and profit.
XM Has opie and anthony. I seriously considered signing up for the service just for those two. I know it's immature toilet humor, but I laughed my ass off at those guys before they got canned for broadcasting a couple having sex in a church.
In fact, O&A were the first big name act to go to satellite after making a name for themselves on traditional radio. Howard followed in their footsteps. Their first show on XM was basically a giant FU to Howard, who did his damnedest to interfere with their careers when they were on the air.
I never noticed any of these issues in the xbox version. I know there was a bug in the ps2 version, where if you completed certain quests to get items to appear at your savepoints, those items wouldn't appear at savepoints you bought after completing the quest. This bug was fixed on the xbox version also. Perhaps it's worth waiting the extra year for the xbox version to be released.
Note to people who are about to attack me for using an xbox: i software modded it to run linux and play mp3s illegally downloaded off the internet, so im not an MS fanboy. Get off my nuts.
It's funny how people in this thread are trying to attack me like I'm some evil proprietary software person out to destroy the world. Nowhere have I said open source is bad, that proprietary software is better, or even that I don't support open source. All I have done is argue that the term zealot does NOT apply to people who support microsoft products, because the most vocal supporters are those who stand to profit from it, and those who don't profit from it but support it, do so due to misinformation or generally being attached to one thing due to familiarity. That is NOT zealotry.
As far as your immature "people like you" attack, I write scientific simulation code. I'm paid peanuts out of an NSF grant. All code I write is GPLed. I've taken up the long and arduous path of a PhD student with the goal of eventually teaching at a university level, hence sharing my knowledge with others, when I could in fact be making an order of magnitude more money if I was working in industry. Don't assume that just because I'm not a mindless sheep who bashes anything proprietary on slashdot that I don't understand altruism.
I don't know why I'm bothering to reply, as you've said nothing to refute my original point, but I will do so anyways...
My original point is that there is NO SUCH THING AS A PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE ZEALOT. You can commit slander and fraud and extortion if you think you can get away with it and make a profit from it. That doesn't mean you think proprietary software is a greater good, it just means you are a greedy fuck who will stop at nothing to make yourself rich at the expense of others. In no way does a greedy fuck make a proprietary software zealot. As I said in the original post, the term zealot is being misused here, and is just as bad as when people "slander" the open source movement. Not that you can slander a movement, but I'm not even going to open the can of worms of attacking all the hyperbole strewn throughout your posts.
While it may be in your best interest to be honest to a customer, it apparantly isnt in Microsoft's best interest, as they have made a shitload of money being dishonest and manhandling their customers at every possible turn. Note that nowhere have I said I support this method of conducting a business, but it sure seems to be a damn effective one.
I never said open source was a bad thing. I never said "Love of truth and fellow man" was horrible. And here's another big shocker, I never said proprietary software was better. I did, however say the use of the term zealot was inappropriate. Because you can't refute that statement, you've attempted to lump me together with the "Big Bad Wolf" and put me in their camp to attack me that way, because you can say nothing against my original point.
What is my motive? My motive, as a member of the open source community, is to discuss things rationally and in a sane fashion, without resorting to immature nonsense like bashing people with overused terms like zealot, which don't even apply to the people you're bashing.
It's not clear from the context whether you're calling me an idiot, or referring to zealots as idiots, so I will take the high road and assume the latter.
However, I will say that the reason DOES matter. There's a big difference between a profit zealot and an ideology zealot. To be a zealot for profit just means you're greedy and want to make things better for yourself. To be a zealot for an ideology implies being willing to sacrifice something for yourself to promote your ideology.
As an example, an open source zealot would choose to run a (hypothetical) inferior open source clone of a proprietary piece of software, because it fits with his ideology. The only time you will see people choosing an inferior closed source product over an open source one, isn't going to be because they believe in the ideology of closed source. Instead, it's usually because they believe it's a better business decision, whether because of FUD about security issues, accountability, legal nonsense like the SCO case, etcetera. The point is, the decision is made by weighing percieved information, even if that information is false. No one is going to say "my company is using closed source software because its the Right Thing (morally) to do." Many will say that about OSS. I have re-iterated this many times in this thread, but I will say it again in bold for the sake of pounding the point home. People support proprietary software almost exclusively due to economoic concerns - whether their reasoning is fallible isn't the point, they think that closed source is a safer choice, monetarily. People, especially zealots, support open source because of an intangible feeling of doing something for a greater common good, not because of increased personal benefit.
Zealotry transcends personal gain, and this is why I stand firm in my original assertion that there's no such thing as a "proprietary software zealot."
so I guess, in addition to being closed source fanatics, they are close minded fools as well!
You've actually spelled out the jist of my whole argument. I don't think they are closed source fanatics at all, but they ARE closed minded fools. Using what you are familiar with because you are scared of change doesn't make you a zealot, it makes you timid. I don't think the hordes of people out there using MS, and even advocating its use, are doing so because they adore closed source software, it's because they don't understand the benefits of open source, and haven't been educated enough to change their closed minds, or even to make an informed decision about the choices and think for themselves. Instead, they are mostly doing what they've always done, because familiarity breeds comfort.
To use a religious analogy, and please don't jump down my throat thinking I'm attacking Christians. I'm not. A closed minded Christian might lobby to have evolution removed from a school curriculum. A zealot Christian might scream at you and call you a blasphemer for even bringing up the subject. Both are difficult to deal with, and even annoying, but a closed minded person has a small chance of having his mind changed if forced to face the facts. A zealot is more likely to lash out at you when cornered.
I'm getting a kick out of looking at the moderation happening to my post here. I rehash a tired slashdot joke like "Real Ultimate Power" and I almost always get +5, funny, but I post a real opinion on the way people think around here, and I get "overrated" (pussy mod afraid of metamod) and "flamebait". Flamebait? Smoke crack much?
I'm going to rehash an old joke, which, surprise surprise, I got +5'd on. This post is off topic, I'm bitching about the moderators, so I should get modded down. Because I've said I will get modded down, by reverse psychology I will be modded up. And now It's back down again. And up... and down...
I wonder if some mod has smoke coming out of his ears right now.
The scary thing is, I think I'm starting to look like a troll, because I karma whore with jokes once in a while, and then a lot of my other posts bitch about how stupid people around here act. I promise I'm really not trolling or trying to start flamewars, I really think the majority of intelligent people around here must share some of my opinions and be baffled at the way this community acts. It's a fascinating phenomenon. I think a line from Men in Black said it best... "A *person* is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
How many millions has Ballmer made from being "fanatic about his near-religious institution"? If I was snorting coke off a 20 thousand dollar hooker's ass with a rolled up hundred dollar bill, I might become a bit fanatical too. That still doesn't show a trend in "real people."
At the risk of getting myself a YHBT reply, I will put some of my thoughts in a reply to this post, as several others have said similar things.
Those people making all those ridiculous claims about free software being a cancer and unamerican... have a motive to do so, and it's not zealotry. Surprise, surprise, it's PROFIT. SCO doesn't badmouth linux because they are zealots, they badmouth it to make money. MS doesn't spread FUD because they believe their product is the path to shangri-la, they do it because it makes them a buck.
You said it yourself in your own post, when you referred to them as "greedy jerks." The only zealotry going on there is the worship of the Almighty Buck. As far as your "most vile garbage" link, that's clearly a troll, and in my experience many trolls post things not because they believe in them, but to get a rise out of people who actually buy into their crap. Is MS self righteous and fanatic? Only if they think it will make them more cash.
Here's the real nitty-gritty... if you are a strong supporter of open source, you are doing it for intangible reasons. Religion, faith, zealotry... those are all different behaviors which hold up the intangible. While stock prices might not exactly be tangible, the new Ferarri sitting in the garage sure as hell is. In the proprietary software world, it all comes down to the Benjamins.
I'm a member of a Macromedia User Group and some of the people in it are pretty keen on their stuff
There's a big difference between being a Macromedia zealot and being a proprietary software zealot. Lots of people Like linux because it's linux. Lots of people also like linux primarily because it's open source. I'm guessing not many people like Macromedia specifically because it's proprietary.
Proprietary software zealots? Huh? I've seen plenty of open source zealots, where zealot is defined (dictionary.com) as "A fanatically committed person." I've never seen anyone be fanatic about proprietary software. I've seen plenty of people say "I make money with proprietary software so that's why I do it," but never someone holding it up as a near-religious institution like the majority of OSS folks. Not that I'm saying it's bad to be an OSS zealot, but like so many things on slashdot, the person who submitted the article is mis-using a buzzword. How can a community that gets so pissed off about people putting i- and e- in front of things, be so accepting of cultivating our own pile of buzzwords and overusing them.
And before you bother with the standard joke, no, I'm not new here
obofficespace: MICHAEL Well, technically it did work.
PETER No it didn't!
SAMIR It did not work, Michael, ok?!
MICHAEL Ok! Ok!
SAMIR Ok?!
MICHAEL Ok! Ok! I must have, I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place or something. Shit. I always do that. I always mess up some mundane detail.
Re:Save yourself from RTA, the fix is:
on
Saving Huygens
·
· Score: 1
No, NEVER use the targetting systems... you have to trust your feelings
Slashdot Mirror
There are more than two ideologies out there, you closed-minded fuck. You sit here and talk about being immature and pig-headed, then you assume every person in the country falls into either the "liberal" or the "conservative" camp. Isn't it pretty immature to think everyone is either a part of your little club, or an enemy? And isn't it a little immature to generalize with flamebait horseshit trying to lump everyone into a group based on one person's statement?
Not only that, but when the fuck did this become a THREAT? A threat is intended to intimidate or harm the person its directed at. Saying "this place is a shithole so I'm thinking about getting my ass to somewhere better" is an opinion on the state of affairs somewhere, not a threat, you pig-headed conservative jackass.
Am I a liberal? No. Am I a conservative? No. Am I a sheep? No. I find the candidate from whom I believe I will get the most benefit out of my vote and vote for him/her. I voted for kerry because I was praying my inbred redneck state wouldn't go pro-bush (which they did, by a landslide), but the rest of my ballot was primarily libertarian candidates, mainly because I wanted to support any disruption to the two-party, two-mentality, two-ways-of-getting-fucked-in-the-ass system that we have today.
This day makes me embarassed to be an american, and I wouldn't mind trying out another country for a while at this point. However, my family resides in america, and it's difficult enough already having to visit them flying from state to state. I'd rather not add a visa and higher chances of cavity checks to the equation.
Scientists discovered a "hellmouth" in washington, DC today. The hellmouth, formerly thought to be a fictional idea, popularized by the Buffy The Vampire Slayer series, is a gateway to hell, which serves as a nexus of evil. Many consider the appearance of the hellmouth to be a symbol of the coming apocalypse.
If you do a name, location search on google, you can often get as your first result a phonebook entry listing their number, home address, etc. A few clicks away you can usually see a satellite picture of said address. It was pretty creepy to put in nothing but my father's name and town, and be a couple clicks away from a satellite image of his house.
i'm Canadian and i'd prefer Bush in office over Kerry
I wouldn't be so quick... aslaska is really close to Canada, and there's oil in alaska... let Dubya get the idea in his brain that Canada holds vast oil reserves and before you know it, you're harboring terrorists and on the wrong end of a Tomahawk cruise missle.
My cats love me... in the same way an abusive husband who beats his wife then buys her a flower loves her.
I like cats... I can just never eat a whole one.
Must... resist... pussy... eating... joke....
Ah, fuck it.
I bet you don't keep girlfriends for very long do you? *rimshot*
I thought most people were allergic to the dander, and not the hair.
My cat is named Five... seriously.
Cat Five.
Get it?
I wish I came up with the joke orignally, but sadly I stole it from an internet comic. I did, however, have the lack of class to give my loving companion a name based solely on something to make other geeks chuckle.
Wow. Off the deep end much? I said I wanted to discuss things rationally. Nowhere did I say I was forcing others to be rational. You are really getting desperate to try to paint me as... shit I don't even know what you're trying to paint me as, your points are completely out there. You are trying to use this big blasting of me as a zealot to make fun of me calling others zealots, when in fact my entire POINT was that the term zealot was overused, and the only time I even USED the example of an open source zealot was to give a counterexample to the microsoft zealot nonsense.
Your posts are getting more and more personal and less and less sensible, so I'm not bothering to reply to any more by you. Feel free to continue trying to twist my words, I think it will be quite clear to anyone reading this thread that you are thoroughly full of shit.
That's a mighty strange definition of zealotry. Even by your own twisted definition of zealotry there are lots of MS zealots on slashdot.
The majority of the people you claim to see on slashdot are in fact trolls, claiming to support MS to get a rise out of the clearly pro-linux crowd here. As far as my definition being strange, nowhere have you said HOW it's strange.
If you understood altruism then the thought might have occured to you.
So, because I omitted one term in a quickly typed reply to a slashdot troll, I automtatically don't understand it? If you look at this thread, I've replied to many posts here, in fact I've bitten into a couple of trolls knowingly, just to make sure my point is clearly understood. I omitted the term "altruism" specifically because my mindset was primarily on that which motivates people who advocate microsoft products, as this was the subject of my original post: i.e. money. Which brings me to your next point...
You have a kneejerk hatred of people who advocate open source software and automatically lable them zealot
Nowhere have I said an advocate automatically makes a zealot. In fact, this entire discussion I have been arguing that ms advocates are NOT zealots. I used the "open source zealot" term merely as an example of a type of zealot most people here are familiar with, to better illustrate my example. You continually try to put words into my mouth and claim I'm bashing open source when in fact I have said nothing against it.
As far as the religion thing, nowhere have I claimed open source is a religion, but it does have parallels with religion. The decisions of most religious people are driven by a sense of morality. In their case, that morality is defined by some code of the church. In the case of open source advocates, decisions are also driven by a code of morality, but in this case it is simply a desire to help others. While these are not the same thing, they clearly stand on the opposide side of a line from the microsoft driving force, which is personal gain and profit.
XM Has opie and anthony. I seriously considered signing up for the service just for those two. I know it's immature toilet humor, but I laughed my ass off at those guys before they got canned for broadcasting a couple having sex in a church.
In fact, O&A were the first big name act to go to satellite after making a name for themselves on traditional radio. Howard followed in their footsteps. Their first show on XM was basically a giant FU to Howard, who did his damnedest to interfere with their careers when they were on the air.
I never noticed any of these issues in the xbox version. I know there was a bug in the ps2 version, where if you completed certain quests to get items to appear at your savepoints, those items wouldn't appear at savepoints you bought after completing the quest. This bug was fixed on the xbox version also. Perhaps it's worth waiting the extra year for the xbox version to be released.
Note to people who are about to attack me for using an xbox: i software modded it to run linux and play mp3s illegally downloaded off the internet, so im not an MS fanboy. Get off my nuts.
It's funny how people in this thread are trying to attack me like I'm some evil proprietary software person out to destroy the world. Nowhere have I said open source is bad, that proprietary software is better, or even that I don't support open source. All I have done is argue that the term zealot does NOT apply to people who support microsoft products, because the most vocal supporters are those who stand to profit from it, and those who don't profit from it but support it, do so due to misinformation or generally being attached to one thing due to familiarity. That is NOT zealotry.
As far as your immature "people like you" attack, I write scientific simulation code. I'm paid peanuts out of an NSF grant. All code I write is GPLed. I've taken up the long and arduous path of a PhD student with the goal of eventually teaching at a university level, hence sharing my knowledge with others, when I could in fact be making an order of magnitude more money if I was working in industry. Don't assume that just because I'm not a mindless sheep who bashes anything proprietary on slashdot that I don't understand altruism.
I don't know why I'm bothering to reply, as you've said nothing to refute my original point, but I will do so anyways...
My original point is that there is NO SUCH THING AS A PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE ZEALOT. You can commit slander and fraud and extortion if you think you can get away with it and make a profit from it. That doesn't mean you think proprietary software is a greater good, it just means you are a greedy fuck who will stop at nothing to make yourself rich at the expense of others. In no way does a greedy fuck make a proprietary software zealot. As I said in the original post, the term zealot is being misused here, and is just as bad as when people "slander" the open source movement. Not that you can slander a movement, but I'm not even going to open the can of worms of attacking all the hyperbole strewn throughout your posts.
While it may be in your best interest to be honest to a customer, it apparantly isnt in Microsoft's best interest, as they have made a shitload of money being dishonest and manhandling their customers at every possible turn. Note that nowhere have I said I support this method of conducting a business, but it sure seems to be a damn effective one.
I never said open source was a bad thing. I never said "Love of truth and fellow man" was horrible. And here's another big shocker, I never said proprietary software was better. I did, however say the use of the term zealot was inappropriate. Because you can't refute that statement, you've attempted to lump me together with the "Big Bad Wolf" and put me in their camp to attack me that way, because you can say nothing against my original point.
What is my motive? My motive, as a member of the open source community, is to discuss things rationally and in a sane fashion, without resorting to immature nonsense like bashing people with overused terms like zealot, which don't even apply to the people you're bashing.
It's not clear from the context whether you're calling me an idiot, or referring to zealots as idiots, so I will take the high road and assume the latter.
However, I will say that the reason DOES matter. There's a big difference between a profit zealot and an ideology zealot. To be a zealot for profit just means you're greedy and want to make things better for yourself. To be a zealot for an ideology implies being willing to sacrifice something for yourself to promote your ideology.
As an example, an open source zealot would choose to run a (hypothetical) inferior open source clone of a proprietary piece of software, because it fits with his ideology. The only time you will see people choosing an inferior closed source product over an open source one, isn't going to be because they believe in the ideology of closed source. Instead, it's usually because they believe it's a better business decision, whether because of FUD about security issues, accountability, legal nonsense like the SCO case, etcetera. The point is, the decision is made by weighing percieved information, even if that information is false. No one is going to say "my company is using closed source software because its the Right Thing (morally) to do." Many will say that about OSS. I have re-iterated this many times in this thread, but I will say it again in bold for the sake of pounding the point home. People support proprietary software almost exclusively due to economoic concerns - whether their reasoning is fallible isn't the point, they think that closed source is a safer choice, monetarily. People, especially zealots, support open source because of an intangible feeling of doing something for a greater common good, not because of increased personal benefit.
Zealotry transcends personal gain, and this is why I stand firm in my original assertion that there's no such thing as a "proprietary software zealot."
so I guess, in addition to being closed source fanatics, they are close minded fools as well!
You've actually spelled out the jist of my whole argument. I don't think they are closed source fanatics at all, but they ARE closed minded fools. Using what you are familiar with because you are scared of change doesn't make you a zealot, it makes you timid. I don't think the hordes of people out there using MS, and even advocating its use, are doing so because they adore closed source software, it's because they don't understand the benefits of open source, and haven't been educated enough to change their closed minds, or even to make an informed decision about the choices and think for themselves. Instead, they are mostly doing what they've always done, because familiarity breeds comfort.
To use a religious analogy, and please don't jump down my throat thinking I'm attacking Christians. I'm not. A closed minded Christian might lobby to have evolution removed from a school curriculum. A zealot Christian might scream at you and call you a blasphemer for even bringing up the subject. Both are difficult to deal with, and even annoying, but a closed minded person has a small chance of having his mind changed if forced to face the facts. A zealot is more likely to lash out at you when cornered.
I'm getting a kick out of looking at the moderation happening to my post here. I rehash a tired slashdot joke like "Real Ultimate Power" and I almost always get +5, funny, but I post a real opinion on the way people think around here, and I get "overrated" (pussy mod afraid of metamod) and "flamebait". Flamebait? Smoke crack much?
I'm going to rehash an old joke, which, surprise surprise, I got +5'd on. This post is off topic, I'm bitching about the moderators, so I should get modded down. Because I've said I will get modded down, by reverse psychology I will be modded up. And now It's back down again. And up... and down...
I wonder if some mod has smoke coming out of his ears right now.
The scary thing is, I think I'm starting to look like a troll, because I karma whore with jokes once in a while, and then a lot of my other posts bitch about how stupid people around here act. I promise I'm really not trolling or trying to start flamewars, I really think the majority of intelligent people around here must share some of my opinions and be baffled at the way this community acts. It's a fascinating phenomenon. I think a line from Men in Black said it best... "A *person* is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
How many millions has Ballmer made from being "fanatic about his near-religious institution"? If I was snorting coke off a 20 thousand dollar hooker's ass with a rolled up hundred dollar bill, I might become a bit fanatical too. That still doesn't show a trend in "real people."
At the risk of getting myself a YHBT reply, I will put some of my thoughts in a reply to this post, as several others have said similar things.
Those people making all those ridiculous claims about free software being a cancer and unamerican... have a motive to do so, and it's not zealotry. Surprise, surprise, it's PROFIT. SCO doesn't badmouth linux because they are zealots, they badmouth it to make money. MS doesn't spread FUD because they believe their product is the path to shangri-la, they do it because it makes them a buck.
You said it yourself in your own post, when you referred to them as "greedy jerks." The only zealotry going on there is the worship of the Almighty Buck. As far as your "most vile garbage" link, that's clearly a troll, and in my experience many trolls post things not because they believe in them, but to get a rise out of people who actually buy into their crap. Is MS self righteous and fanatic? Only if they think it will make them more cash.
Here's the real nitty-gritty... if you are a strong supporter of open source, you are doing it for intangible reasons. Religion, faith, zealotry... those are all different behaviors which hold up the intangible. While stock prices might not exactly be tangible, the new Ferarri sitting in the garage sure as hell is. In the proprietary software world, it all comes down to the Benjamins.
I'm a member of a Macromedia User Group and some of the people in it are pretty keen on their stuff
There's a big difference between being a Macromedia zealot and being a proprietary software zealot. Lots of people Like linux because it's linux. Lots of people also like linux primarily because it's open source. I'm guessing not many people like Macromedia specifically because it's proprietary.
Proprietary software zealots? Huh? I've seen plenty of open source zealots, where zealot is defined (dictionary.com) as "A fanatically committed person." I've never seen anyone be fanatic about proprietary software. I've seen plenty of people say "I make money with proprietary software so that's why I do it," but never someone holding it up as a near-religious institution like the majority of OSS folks. Not that I'm saying it's bad to be an OSS zealot, but like so many things on slashdot, the person who submitted the article is mis-using a buzzword. How can a community that gets so pissed off about people putting i- and e- in front of things, be so accepting of cultivating our own pile of buzzwords and overusing them.
And before you bother with the standard joke, no, I'm not new here
FF girls, naked and petrified... covered in hot grits *drools*
You don't duck when something is COMING RIGHT FOR you, you shoot it. Duck and cover only works with lava. Duh.
obofficespace:
MICHAEL
Well, technically it did work.
PETER
No it didn't!
SAMIR
It did not work, Michael, ok?!
MICHAEL
Ok! Ok!
SAMIR
Ok?!
MICHAEL
Ok! Ok! I must have, I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place
or something. Shit. I always do that. I always mess up some mundane
detail.
No, NEVER use the targetting systems... you have to trust your feelings