Well... Linus did not create an operating system. He created the kernel.
That's your opinion. There are some, like me, that consider the kernel to be the operating system; Everything else runs in user space.
Because of this ambiguity in what is actually part of an operating system, I can accept the arguments for both GNU/Linux and Linux. It's my opinion that the people that put together the distributions of the system can call it whatever they want.
This comment reminded me of something that happened in my college physics class. A student made a similar comment about 'just a theory' which was shot down by the professor. Anyway, here some text I yanked from a website that gives the basic idea..
A scientific law is a description of an observed phenomenon. Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion are a good example. Those laws describe the motions of planets. But they do not explain why they are that way. If all scientists ever did was to formulate scientific laws, then the universe would be very well-described, but still unexplained and very mysterious.
A theory is a scientific explanation of an observed phenomenon. Unlike laws, theories actually explain why things are the way they are. Theories are what science is for. If, then, a theory is a scientific explanation of a natural phenomena, ask yourself this: "What part of that definition excludes a theory from being a fact?" The answer is nothing! There is no reason a theory cannot be an actual fact as well.
I believe it's because if one were to steal a CD from a store, the local police would handle this. In contrast, if a CD is downloaded from the internet, that would be the responsiblity of the FBI to investigate.
Slashdot Mirror
That's your opinion. There are some, like me, that consider the kernel to be the operating system; Everything else runs in user space.
Because of this ambiguity in what is actually part of an operating system, I can accept the arguments for both GNU/Linux and Linux. It's my opinion that the people that put together the distributions of the system can call it whatever they want.
a bionic penis might be dangerous for slashdot readers... too many broken hands testing it out
lasik surgery won't repair your retina..
were capable of slashdotting google now??
You're obviously not an EE.
maybe you should get into the habit of initializing pointers to NULL instead.
A scientific law is a description of an observed phenomenon. Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion are a good example. Those laws describe the motions of planets. But they do not explain why they are that way. If all scientists ever did was to formulate scientific laws, then the universe would be very well-described, but still unexplained and very mysterious.
A theory is a scientific explanation of an observed phenomenon. Unlike laws, theories actually explain why things are the way they are. Theories are what science is for. If, then, a theory is a scientific explanation of a natural phenomena, ask yourself this: "What part of that definition excludes a theory from being a fact?" The answer is nothing! There is no reason a theory cannot be an actual fact as well.
I believe it's because if one were to steal a CD from a store, the local police would handle this. In contrast, if a CD is downloaded from the internet, that would be the responsiblity of the FBI to investigate.
You were lucky to post this anonymously; no one will ever know that you forgot what you were taught in your high school physics class. ;)
P.S. you were right about one thing- the acceleration is not constant in circular motion.
Right on! Classic sucks balls. I just received my free copy of Office X from school so I'll never have to use that piece of shit environment again.
A real man wouldn't feel embarrassed using the iMac or driving a VW.