Hey pencil-dick! It's my fucking server, and I'll run as fucking root when I fucking feel like it! I'll hack up my sudoers file, add your mother to wheel, and just generally break your dumbass procedural rules! And you'll goddamned well like it, because I pay attention to what the fuck I do as root, at least as much as you asspirates pay attention when you strap "sudo" on the frontend of every damn thing and act like it's somehow safer. So piss off!
Congrats all around. Even though I haven't been much of a Debian user, I am very pleased to see this. Making the June 6 projected release date sends a great message to the rest of the larger Linux community.
The point of the article is to demonize the Linux community by comparing it to the one social edifice most feared and despised by management types in organizations on the cusp of Linux acceptance - labor unions. The extent to which the comparison makes sense is that which the author believes will create maximum fear in the target audience.
I think this is representative of the FUD side of Microsoft having begun to realize that Linux is very much about passion. The argument is no longer going to be about technology and will begin to attack that passion directly.
It's actually a pretty brilliant change in strategy on their part.
And, invariably, the comparisons trivialized the horror of the Holocaust and the social pathology of the Nazis. It was a trivialization I found both illogical (Michael Dukakis as a Nazi? Please!)
The reason for comparing public policy issues, etc. to nazism is that nazism features two very important characteristics:
Nazism is a universally accepted example of a society gone wrong.
This was accomplished by degree - not overnight.
That Michael Dukakis, Bill Gates, George Bush, RMS, or (insert villianous character of choice here) isn't currently operating a death camp does not necessarily mean that their efforts don't threaten human dignity and freedom in much the same way as those of the nazis in the 1920s and 1930s. The terrifying reality of a historical study of the nazis is that we are all a hell of a lot closer to being nazis than we would like to think. The purpose of Godwin's law, therefore, has very little to do with logic and more to do with making us comfortable in dismissing those thoughts.
Logic compels us therefore to evaluate the people and policies for their own merits. Sadly as it may seem, and with all apologies and respect to Mr. Godwin, the presence of death camps is not the sole criterion for such consideration.
(Seperating the wheat from the chaff in my list of prospective villians I leave as an exercise in hilarity for the entire group.)
Haven't we reached the point where Godwin's law has become a self-defeating intellectual cliche in its own right? I find that I generally regard invoking Godwin in a debate to have the same effect as the situation the law intends to describe.
I notice that a lot of the complainants have posted their e-mail addresses in the blog to try to get together to organize action...
Dear concerned student:
I am a close friend writing to you about your recent experience with a phishing study in which deception was used. I have met with an attorney on this issue who is interested in pursuing a class action lawsuit on behalf of the victims of this study. To participate, please click the link below and provide the following personal information...
I think you are overanalyzing things. The essential truth behind the point you are making goes something like this:
In Western society, a male is not a valid human being. In Eastern ("sexist") societies, he is. Therefore, an Eastern technologist is less constrained by society to play by the rules in sexual relations (acting like a character from "Friends"), and has a better overall support structure and esteem within the society.
I've always heard a lot of bad things about CUPS, but have only had occaision to use it over the past year or so. Maybe I've just been lucky, or CUPS is a whole lot easier to mess with on Gentoo, but I've never had any problems with it.
Is there really an overriding need for a more stable Linux kernel? Maybe I've just been lucky, but I honestly can't think of anything in the IT world more stable than the Linux kernel.
Reading TFA, it appears that CA wants better OS virtualization features. What does that have to do with stability and/or a smaller kernel?
You've demonstrated that you know jack shit about SCMs, how Linus works and why BK was an extrmely valuable tool.
Linus does, and seems by all acounts to be horribly inconvenienced by the consequences of his choice to use BK. I submit that these consequences are part of the reality of this situation.
It's demonstrably true that BK was an excellent tool because of the productivity the LK team has shown over the last three years.
Shall we further proceed to ignore the giant fiasco this has turned into? I can promise you that SCO and Microsoft will most certainly not. If those are the results of using BK, then I am not sure I understand the benefit to which you are referring.
You can't sensibly argue it wasn't unless you are doing what the subject warns you about.
I am not the one whose vision seems to be selective in this situation.
And you wankers who want the latest and best but cannot see past the inconsequential metric of a release date of a "stable" set of packages, are selling your souls and that of the best distro of Linux to ensure it will happen.
If reasonably modern software were inconsequential, Ubuntu would not be a rising star. The message of Ubuntu should be that
People consider useable (read - modern) software to be more important than distro politics.
People will not submit to Debianistas making that value judgement on their behalf.
Debian's problem isn't Ubuntu. It is that Debian seems to be willing to win an argument about whether release dates matter at the expense of its own future.
The situation your having is that windows just doesn't have the drivers to support your hardware, in which case you can easilly integrate it with your setup cd using methods from...
Creating a customized installer? Are we in the same conversation? You can't possibly be serious, and if you were, you definately do not want to go there. A working Linux system is flat files. No licensing, no hidden crap to make it work, no bullshit. You can tarball the whole damn thing, explode it onto another computer, and have a duplicate system up and running with an automated script containing no more than about 4 lines. No fighting with SIDs, no nothing. Expanding the discussion to the topic of automated installation and system duplication severely points out further weaknesses in Windows system management and deployment, to which a great number of Windows admins can attest.
That statement is completely untrue. I don't understand why it seems to be accepted as canon.
Installing Windows is a NIGHTMARE. The vaunted "good default settings" on a modern machine consist of 640x480 graphics, no network or sound card drivers installed, and absolutely zero applications. Building a working Windows sytem from scratch is a tedious, time consuming process of calling Microsoft for permission to reinstall the operating system, installing chipset drivers in the right order, nearly a gig of patches, finding untold numbers of license codes and forgotten application CDs, and a week of getting everything settled down and working right.
Don't believe me? What do you do when your Grandmother's computer gets fatally spywared and has to be blasted and reinstalled? Do you tell her to insert her windows disc and follow the instructions? No, you go over there and spend DAYS getting everything working again. I spent 20 hours at my brother's house a few weekends ago installing all his software, drivers, and apps all over again, and it still didn't have everything back like it was before the crash. We still have to fix a naggnig problem with Outlook Express and the damn dialer prompt comes up every time he adjusts the chair in his office.
In 20 hours, I could have installed Gentoo and all supporting applications! I could have rolled out Debian, Red Hat, or Ubuntu to dozens of PCs, all with productivity apps in place and ready go to the moment the CD was ejected!
Just because we've come to take the difficulties of working with Windows for granted does NOT make installing Windows idiot proof.
To be considered a success, a distribution needed to install and all the laptop components needed to work without any software installs or changes to the kernel.
I don't know how reasonable that standard is. Although it may betray my Gentoo bigotry, I always thought that one of the most important things about Linux was that you could customize it to adapt to a specific purpose. I see the ability to adjust the kernel or install customized software as a benefit of Linux, not something to be excluded. It seems to me that if you restrict yourself to a platform that can do everything poorly right out of the box (assuming that you'll run windows without updating video or sound drivers), not only can Windows do a better job of that, there really is no reason at all to look at alternatives.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why I have no respect for copyright law.
Hey pencil-dick! It's my fucking server, and I'll run as fucking root when I fucking feel like it! I'll hack up my sudoers file, add your mother to wheel, and just generally break your dumbass procedural rules! And you'll goddamned well like it, because I pay attention to what the fuck I do as root, at least as much as you asspirates pay attention when you strap "sudo" on the frontend of every damn thing and act like it's somehow safer. So piss off!
/etc/motd
:wq
step 1: copy
step 2: vi
step 3: paste
Congrats all around. Even though I haven't been much of a Debian user, I am very pleased to see this. Making the June 6 projected release date sends a great message to the rest of the larger Linux community.
Remind me not to work someplace where they promote "Social lubrication".
Nor where they randomly hurl it out of windows.
1995 called. They want their (NT) inevitability argument back.
The point of the article is to demonize the Linux community by comparing it to the one social edifice most feared and despised by management types in organizations on the cusp of Linux acceptance - labor unions. The extent to which the comparison makes sense is that which the author believes will create maximum fear in the target audience.
I think this is representative of the FUD side of Microsoft having begun to realize that Linux is very much about passion. The argument is no longer going to be about technology and will begin to attack that passion directly.
It's actually a pretty brilliant change in strategy on their part.
I am pleased to see the same standards for "ready for the desktop" applied to Windows for a change.
It's either -59768 A.D. or it's 59768 B.C. Hey, bring that up with the marketing folk
Oh, I think this goes much farther than marketing. What would they call Windows 0 ? Windows Jesus Edition?
The reason for comparing public policy issues, etc. to nazism is that nazism features two very important characteristics:
- Nazism is a universally accepted example of a society gone wrong.
- This was accomplished by degree - not overnight.
That Michael Dukakis, Bill Gates, George Bush, RMS, or (insert villianous character of choice here) isn't currently operating a death camp does not necessarily mean that their efforts don't threaten human dignity and freedom in much the same way as those of the nazis in the 1920s and 1930s. The terrifying reality of a historical study of the nazis is that we are all a hell of a lot closer to being nazis than we would like to think. The purpose of Godwin's law, therefore, has very little to do with logic and more to do with making us comfortable in dismissing those thoughts.Logic compels us therefore to evaluate the people and policies for their own merits. Sadly as it may seem, and with all apologies and respect to Mr. Godwin, the presence of death camps is not the sole criterion for such consideration.
(Seperating the wheat from the chaff in my list of prospective villians I leave as an exercise in hilarity for the entire group.)
Haven't we reached the point where Godwin's law has become a self-defeating intellectual cliche in its own right? I find that I generally regard invoking Godwin in a debate to have the same effect as the situation the law intends to describe.
I notice that a lot of the complainants have posted their e-mail addresses in the blog to try to get together to organize action...
Dear concerned student:
I am a close friend writing to you about your recent experience with a phishing study in which deception was used. I have met with an attorney on this issue who is interested in pursuing a class action lawsuit on behalf of the victims of this study. To participate, please click the link below and provide the following personal information...
I think you are overanalyzing things. The essential truth behind the point you are making goes something like this:
In Western society, a male is not a valid human being. In Eastern ("sexist") societies, he is. Therefore, an Eastern technologist is less constrained by society to play by the rules in sexual relations (acting like a character from "Friends"), and has a better overall support structure and esteem within the society.
And started seeing credibility problems with the article. Is there a transcript of what he actually said anywhere?
I've always heard a lot of bad things about CUPS, but have only had occaision to use it over the past year or so. Maybe I've just been lucky, or CUPS is a whole lot easier to mess with on Gentoo, but I've never had any problems with it.
Is there really an overriding need for a more stable Linux kernel? Maybe I've just been lucky, but I honestly can't think of anything in the IT world more stable than the Linux kernel.
Reading TFA, it appears that CA wants better OS virtualization features. What does that have to do with stability and/or a smaller kernel?
You've demonstrated that you know jack shit about SCMs, how Linus works and why BK was an extrmely valuable tool.
Linus does, and seems by all acounts to be horribly inconvenienced by the consequences of his choice to use BK. I submit that these consequences are part of the reality of this situation.
It's demonstrably true that BK was an excellent tool because of the productivity the LK team has shown over the last three years.
Shall we further proceed to ignore the giant fiasco this has turned into? I can promise you that SCO and Microsoft will most certainly not. If those are the results of using BK, then I am not sure I understand the benefit to which you are referring.
You can't sensibly argue it wasn't unless you are doing what the subject warns you about.
I am not the one whose vision seems to be selective in this situation.
Very nicely done! Take that, Godwin!
pot? kettle?
Linus chose the best tool available to get the job done. It happened to be a closed source tool.
I think this whole fiasco demonstrated conclusively that the latter of your statements invalidates the former.
Without the contribution, Tridge would have never (needed) to even try to reverse engineer the (protocol).
Just a few edits on my part for factual accuracy- (in bold)
If reasonably modern software were inconsequential, Ubuntu would not be a rising star. The message of Ubuntu should be that
- People consider useable (read - modern) software to be more important than distro politics.
- People will not submit to Debianistas making that value judgement on their behalf.
Debian's problem isn't Ubuntu. It is that Debian seems to be willing to win an argument about whether release dates matter at the expense of its own future.Do you have them on the same network talking to each other? (hint - don't try it).
No, you can't.
The situation your having is that windows just doesn't have the drivers to support your hardware, in which case you can easilly integrate it with your setup cd using methods from...
Creating a customized installer? Are we in the same conversation? You can't possibly be serious, and if you were, you definately do not want to go there. A working Linux system is flat files. No licensing, no hidden crap to make it work, no bullshit. You can tarball the whole damn thing, explode it onto another computer, and have a duplicate system up and running with an automated script containing no more than about 4 lines. No fighting with SIDs, no nothing. Expanding the discussion to the topic of automated installation and system duplication severely points out further weaknesses in Windows system management and deployment, to which a great number of Windows admins can attest.
Windows is a truly idiot-proof setup.
That statement is completely untrue. I don't understand why it seems to be accepted as canon.
Installing Windows is a NIGHTMARE. The vaunted "good default settings" on a modern machine consist of 640x480 graphics, no network or sound card drivers installed, and absolutely zero applications. Building a working Windows sytem from scratch is a tedious, time consuming process of calling Microsoft for permission to reinstall the operating system, installing chipset drivers in the right order, nearly a gig of patches, finding untold numbers of license codes and forgotten application CDs, and a week of getting everything settled down and working right.
Don't believe me? What do you do when your Grandmother's computer gets fatally spywared and has to be blasted and reinstalled? Do you tell her to insert her windows disc and follow the instructions? No, you go over there and spend DAYS getting everything working again. I spent 20 hours at my brother's house a few weekends ago installing all his software, drivers, and apps all over again, and it still didn't have everything back like it was before the crash. We still have to fix a naggnig problem with Outlook Express and the damn dialer prompt comes up every time he adjusts the chair in his office.
In 20 hours, I could have installed Gentoo and all supporting applications! I could have rolled out Debian, Red Hat, or Ubuntu to dozens of PCs, all with productivity apps in place and ready go to the moment the CD was ejected!
Just because we've come to take the difficulties of working with Windows for granted does NOT make installing Windows idiot proof.
To be considered a success, a distribution needed to install and all the laptop components needed to work without any software installs or changes to the kernel.
I don't know how reasonable that standard is. Although it may betray my Gentoo bigotry, I always thought that one of the most important things about Linux was that you could customize it to adapt to a specific purpose. I see the ability to adjust the kernel or install customized software as a benefit of Linux, not something to be excluded. It seems to me that if you restrict yourself to a platform that can do everything poorly right out of the box (assuming that you'll run windows without updating video or sound drivers), not only can Windows do a better job of that, there really is no reason at all to look at alternatives.