I seem to recall that forgiveness and redemption was in there somewhere too.
Actually, while you're right, Jesus also repealed Moses's Law and the 10 commandments. He replaced it with his forgiveness/guilt doctrine. So, the original poster was out of line (if he was a Christian) to post any of the commandments like they're supposed to be followed. Jesus patched those laws.
Disclaimer: fuck Jesus, fuck Moses, and fuck God. Just for the record. It does irritate me that nobody seems to notice that the old testament isn't supposed to apply anyway.
GPL, linux and open source is not more important than my family. A true father/mother and provider will do almost anything to keep food on the table and a roof overhead.
I'll add to that.:)
GPL, Linux, and Open Source is *for* my family. It exists to serve my kids and my wife (and myself, of course). Without the family, would I be so interested in Open Source? Probably not. I'd still be in to it, but not as much as I am now. I want to ensure that my kids will have freedom when they finally inherit the world from me, and I want to ensure that the tools they need will be readily available. In a world growing more and more dependent on computers, Open Source Software becomes more and more important.
But without the family, like if they were to die of hunger because I quit working for SCO (not that I work for them now, or anything) would defeat the purpose of my support of Linux, GPL, and Open Source.
There are other ways around the problem, though, because it wouldn't be right for me to work for SCO without opposing them somehow. Maybe I'd copyNpaste huge sections of the Declaration of Independence into SysV kernel source and try to set up McBride to sue Thomas Jefferson. Maybe I'd throw my cigarette butts in McBride's office. maybe I'd just look for another job. Who knows?
Admirable though this sentiment is, I can't help but wonder if it is being opined by someone who has never felt real hunger.
I agree with this.
Me? Given the choice between dying honest and living in guilt, I'd choose to live in guilt. There are very, very few things in this world worth dying for.
I agree with this, because you're talking about yourself.:) I, on the other hand, have quit jobs because I didn't like what the company was doing. Now, I didn't just walk out, granted. I first found another job and THEN quit. That's the right way to leave a job. It's entirely possible that there's a couple of programmers at SCO who are doing the same thing, but just haven't found a job yet.
I find the statement "All resumes submitted by SCO employees after May 2003" to be semantically equivalent to "If Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave the country within 48 hours." Both, in my opinion, are said by villains. I would also add that if any resumes are sent to my company after December, 2003, from employees of Damage Studios will be deleted.
Ok, that last bit was a joke.
Here's the short of it:
Yes, a person can and should leave an employer for moral reasons. If you don't like the way your eomployer treats its customers, employees, whatever. Yes, you should leave them.
No, you shouldn't make your family suffer for it. Yes, you should set a good example.
In this situation is an excellent opportunity to show your kids that you can quit a job without feeling any guilt or loyalty towards the employer you're leaving. You also get to show them "Look kids, if it were just me, I'd've left this job awhile back and just went hungry. But I can't do that. I have to make sacrifices for my family, so my family can live. So I'm looking for a job, and in the meantime ShortCOX is paying the bills". What better example could you set? You cover idealisticcally terminating your job, making sacrifices for the good of your family, and how to quit a job without fucking yourself over all in one go! What an opportunity!
Who are the member companies of RIAA and how do I stop supporting them?
The page was down, but this is Google's cache of the RIAA members page. I was surprised there were so many. I was further surprised that Sanctuary was one of them. Now I wish I hadn't have bought the new Anthrax CD. Gonna have to stop buying Anthrax, now.:(
Boycott RIAA is a website that talks about boycotting them. I haven't read through the website myself, I've just been doing my own independent thing.
RIAA Radar is a searchable database to see if an artist is on an RIAA label. They also have a javascript bookmarklet that will tell you when an artist is RIAA while you're on Amazon.
Nice try, but ALL systems need chopping and botching and reconfiguring to force the machine to act in accordance with your wishes. Linux/KDE is definitely no exception.
Let me point out that I was only talking about behavior. As far as look, I change my settings almost monthly, because I'm never happy with the way my desktop looks. Except on Windows, where changing the look actually breaks shit. But in KDE, I'm changing my look a LOT.
Also, as far as behavior goes, it is a fact that KDE's default behaviors are the ones I like best. I have experimented with them, and lately I've been going ahead and breaking windows by changing its behavior to more closely match KDEs. That doesn't mean it's true for everyone else, which is a disclaimer I intentionally left out of my original post.
The fact is, now KDE (and Gnome too) and Linux and the rest of the apps are being distributed in a fashion where out-of-the-box functionality, behavior, and look are extremely competitive. It seems that a lot of people are stuck on the mindset that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" and spend an awful lot of time looking for reasons its not. Well, it is. Now we have to focus on making it better, but we've already achieved the first bar set, which was merely "making it ready". Now we have to compete, which is a different game entirely.
Re:Let's make this a press release!
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 1
Is anyone or their linux-related company a member of any wire associations? Some anti-FUD articles really need to be filed as a press release, specifically mentioning SCOX.
User interface consistency between different DEs is not a huge concern of mine. Programming interface consistency is; with so many similar features, it should be far easier to make software *both* GNOME-enhanced and KDE-enhanced. Unfortunately, it's likely just as far-off a goal, due to the fact and ideological consequences of KDE being in C++ and GNOME in C.
I'd like to see wxWindows' wxGTK port become a wxGnome port, and a wxKDE port developed to coexist. The only real problem I can see is having a compiled program "just work" in whatever desktop it's loaded in. It shouldn't matter to the user what the binary was compiled for, it should just fucking work. If wxWindows starts adopting platform-specific features for the different nix desktops, then I think it will really stand up and take over the world. (I like it besides that, don't ge me wrong, it's my tool of choice right now)
The way you have worded your message, I'm inclined to think that you haven't used Gnome 2 at all. There is nothing wrong with having "more than one way to do it", but some of the assertions you make are, at the very least, disturbing.
I'm going to sum up my problem with Gnome. it's really very simple.
The Gnome team of developers (I assume they use it too) tells us how a desktop should be, and works very hard to make it so. I tell them how I want *my* desktop to be, and they work very hard to tell me why I'm wrong.
Microsoft tells us how a desktop should be, and works very hard to make it so. I tell Microsoft how I want *my* desktop to be, Microsoft works very hard to tell my why I'm wrong and can't have it.
KDE tells us how a desktop should be, and works very hard to make it so. I tell KDE how I want *my* desktop to be, and they tell me how to do it, or work out a way to add it (even providing pointers on where to look in the code).
Guess which of these 3 choices I use?
Any free software project that intends to get wide usage, such as GNU, has to run like a business in some respects. You have to market the project. You have to listen to your users. You have to service your users. It doesn't matter if you're doing it on your own volunteer time or not, if you want mass acceptance, you have to appeal to consumers in some fashion or other. When a project rejects something that *many* users are requesting, they're not listening to their users. In the end, it doesn't matter if the developers are right or the users are right. What matters is whether or not they achieved their goal of providing the free as in freedom alternative OS they were working towards, and whether or not people actually use it.
I don't give a shit if Gnome is easier to use out of the box than KDE. I use KDE because the Kdevelopers are very easy to approach, very friendly, and very accomodating. I find my desktop is a pleasure to use because it does what I want it to do, when I want it to do it. I don't care which developers make the best and most logical argument. I care more whether or not the developers argue, and how hard they argue in the face of hundreds/thousands of users that disagree. GUI is not a logical interface, and logic doesn't apply.
Then realise the horror of all the twits who insist their web page is best viewed at a width of 1024.
FOOLS. THe only way to make a website that works right is to have a liquid layout. If the layout doesn't ebb and flow with the window size, it's a worthless layout. I had a customer who had a hard width of 750 pixels. I have an employee who's somewhat visual impaired and runs her monitor at 800x600, or else she can't read it. Make her scroll right? Not when there's so many other competing websites that don't suffer from this problem.... Suffice it to say, that customer now has a liquid layout.
So download the free multiple desktop Powertoy for Windows, that has been out for some years now. Next.
Um, why should I have to download and install this when KDE does it out of the box? It takes me half an hour of configuring to get Windows to work the way I want it to, and that breaks it for some apps. On the other hand, KDE works the way I want it to out-of-the-box, and works for all apps. Who wants to spend hours configuring their machine to work for them? I sure in the hell don't.
Basically, the very thing everyone bitched endlessly about five years ago when Windows 98 came out.
Yes. Futhermore, I've found that you can't really uninstall Konqueror, and KDE doesn't play "nice" with other browsers. It tolerates them, don't get me wrong. But it doesn't necessarily work well with them when you click links in email, links on the desktop, etc.
I'd like to point out that motivation has a lot to do with whether it's "evil" or not. Microsoft had the motivation of crushing Netscape, which was a possible cross-platform competitor to Microsoft and as such endangered MS. There were loads of documentation that came out during the trials that showed this to be true. Gnome and KDE, on the other hand, do it for genuine usability reasons, and try to support other browsers as much as they can. There is a huge difference between the two.
But I have to admit that I enjoy trolling just like that every now and then.:) "Didn't MS integrate the browser already? This is OSS innovation?":)
I'd argue it isn't a republic unless the decision-makers are elected by the governed, and most shares aren't owned by employees.
That does depend on the size of the company, to an extent. It's a republic in the old sense, the Roman sense.:) The people who own the property (in Rome it was the people who owned the country, the landowners) choose who will make the decisions. The US has introduced a few differences, such as the right of anybody to vote (fairly recent, used to be you had to be male, 21+, landowner, some citizenship requirements, and possibly white, definitely not a slave). But in the old days, when only landowners could vote, it would certainly align with the definition I've provided.
What sort of govt. does Iraq have right now? It's run by the US, and the US is a republic, so is Iraq a republic? No, because the Iraqis have no vote (since the previous sham election of Hussein).
Iraq is currently an occupied territory of the US. Hopefully it won't become a permanent territory of the US and will be independent again. Soon! They seem to be really dragging their heels on this one. Anyway, they don't have a government right now, they are a conquered land. Perhaps that makes them a police state?;) So, no relative change in governmet for them...
Could you explain that one some more? I would think a corporation does the bidding of whoever owns it, which isn't necessarily the people who work there.
Shareholders elect the board of directores, who in turn elects the CEO. Usually. I think. Shareholders also elect the President. A corporation is a republic in the sense that the shareholders elect the people who run the corporation, thus representing the owner's interest. It is the job of the board of directors and the president and the CEO to increase the value of the stock, either through direct profit or otherwise (dividends, making the stock valuable on the stock market, etc). So, it's a republic.
Then again, the only time I've been there in recent memory is to look at the picture of the guy who's the most famous geek of all (sans his red hat).....
Most things that make sense are unpopular. For something to be accepted by the public, and therefore become popular, it must be thoroughly ambiguous to the point where it doesn't make sense.
This is why we elect people by popular consensus. It deadlocks the government and prevents it from gaining too much power. Or, at least, that's the reasoning.
Actually... now that I know that he's a Mormon I'll be happy to file a complaint with the church. Once the proof is there for all to see he'll be asking himself "was it worth it?"
Geez, you make it sound like getting kicked out of LDS is a bad thing. I'd LOVE it if those fuckers would just leave me alone.
The only thing it doesn't have are government sponsored tax exemptions and temples funded from shearing the faithful.
Well, as a matter of fact, the community is firmly divided by one group saying "It's a development model" and another group saying "It's all about freedom". In fact, about the only things the two groups can agree on are that the GPL is both an open source and a free software license, and that neither one of them are a religion. Um, that's the irony I was trying to approach.:)
As far as I'm concerned, "we" is the group that keeps the moral high ground. Anybody who breaks the law in the name of justice is "they".
This is very dangerous reasoning, I should point out.
You make the assumption that you will always take the moral high ground. While that may be your intention, can you guarantee that you will always act morally? Good intentions pave the road to hell...
This splits people into arbitrary groups of opposition without actually defining who goes where and why. To do this you have to define morality, otherwise you wind up going down the same path as our good governor Bush. I should also point out that it is exactly this ambiguity that RMS has avoided by clearly and distinctly defining what he is about, who is "Free SOftware" and who isn't, and has constantly reinforced with his writings and his speakings.
Oh for crying out loud. This is a false dichotomy. Instead of "black community" than use "christian" or "jewish" or "insert religious group here" community.
Is that better?
Um, no? Then people will start saying that Open Source is a religion after all.;)
Slashdot Mirror
I seem to recall that forgiveness and redemption was in there somewhere too.
Actually, while you're right, Jesus also repealed Moses's Law and the 10 commandments. He replaced it with his forgiveness/guilt doctrine. So, the original poster was out of line (if he was a Christian) to post any of the commandments like they're supposed to be followed. Jesus patched those laws.
Disclaimer: fuck Jesus, fuck Moses, and fuck God. Just for the record. It does irritate me that nobody seems to notice that the old testament isn't supposed to apply anyway.
GPL, linux and open source is not more important than my family. A true father/mother and provider will do almost anything to keep food on the table and a roof overhead.
I'll add to that. :)
GPL, Linux, and Open Source is *for* my family. It exists to serve my kids and my wife (and myself, of course). Without the family, would I be so interested in Open Source? Probably not. I'd still be in to it, but not as much as I am now. I want to ensure that my kids will have freedom when they finally inherit the world from me, and I want to ensure that the tools they need will be readily available. In a world growing more and more dependent on computers, Open Source Software becomes more and more important.
But without the family, like if they were to die of hunger because I quit working for SCO (not that I work for them now, or anything) would defeat the purpose of my support of Linux, GPL, and Open Source.
There are other ways around the problem, though, because it wouldn't be right for me to work for SCO without opposing them somehow. Maybe I'd copyNpaste huge sections of the Declaration of Independence into SysV kernel source and try to set up McBride to sue Thomas Jefferson. Maybe I'd throw my cigarette butts in McBride's office. maybe I'd just look for another job. Who knows?
Admirable though this sentiment is, I can't help but wonder if it is being opined by someone who has never felt real hunger.
I agree with this.
Me? Given the choice between dying honest and living in guilt, I'd choose to live in guilt. There are very, very few things in this world worth dying for.
I agree with this, because you're talking about yourself. :) I, on the other hand, have quit jobs because I didn't like what the company was doing. Now, I didn't just walk out, granted. I first found another job and THEN quit. That's the right way to leave a job. It's entirely possible that there's a couple of programmers at SCO who are doing the same thing, but just haven't found a job yet.
I find the statement "All resumes submitted by SCO employees after May 2003" to be semantically equivalent to "If Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave the country within 48 hours." Both, in my opinion, are said by villains. I would also add that if any resumes are sent to my company after December, 2003, from employees of Damage Studios will be deleted.
Ok, that last bit was a joke.
Here's the short of it:
Yes, a person can and should leave an employer for moral reasons. If you don't like the way your eomployer treats its customers, employees, whatever. Yes, you should leave them.
No, you shouldn't make your family suffer for it. Yes, you should set a good example.
In this situation is an excellent opportunity to show your kids that you can quit a job without feeling any guilt or loyalty towards the employer you're leaving. You also get to show them "Look kids, if it were just me, I'd've left this job awhile back and just went hungry. But I can't do that. I have to make sacrifices for my family, so my family can live. So I'm looking for a job, and in the meantime ShortCOX is paying the bills". What better example could you set? You cover idealisticcally terminating your job, making sacrifices for the good of your family, and how to quit a job without fucking yourself over all in one go! What an opportunity!
Poor W, if only he did better in school, he might have come up with a catchy slogan.
"He who rules with fear is a queer."
"If they hijack an airplane, we'll bomb everyone that's brown-stained."
"Blow Americans to bits so we can cut off your mommy's tits."
"If you terrorize the Brits, we'll blow your children to little bits."
"Crash an airplane into a tower and we'll send your ass to Allah."
I'm out, anybody else?
Who are the member companies of RIAA and how do I stop supporting them?
The page was down, but this is Google's cache of the RIAA members page. I was surprised there were so many. I was further surprised that Sanctuary was one of them. Now I wish I hadn't have bought the new Anthrax CD. Gonna have to stop buying Anthrax, now. :(
Boycott RIAA is a website that talks about boycotting them. I haven't read through the website myself, I've just been doing my own independent thing.
RIAA Radar is a searchable database to see if an artist is on an RIAA label. They also have a javascript bookmarklet that will tell you when an artist is RIAA while you're on Amazon.
Nice try, but ALL systems need chopping and botching and reconfiguring to force the machine to act in accordance with your wishes. Linux/KDE is definitely no exception.
Let me point out that I was only talking about behavior. As far as look, I change my settings almost monthly, because I'm never happy with the way my desktop looks. Except on Windows, where changing the look actually breaks shit. But in KDE, I'm changing my look a LOT.
Also, as far as behavior goes, it is a fact that KDE's default behaviors are the ones I like best. I have experimented with them, and lately I've been going ahead and breaking windows by changing its behavior to more closely match KDEs. That doesn't mean it's true for everyone else, which is a disclaimer I intentionally left out of my original post.
The fact is, now KDE (and Gnome too) and Linux and the rest of the apps are being distributed in a fashion where out-of-the-box functionality, behavior, and look are extremely competitive. It seems that a lot of people are stuck on the mindset that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" and spend an awful lot of time looking for reasons its not. Well, it is. Now we have to focus on making it better, but we've already achieved the first bar set, which was merely "making it ready". Now we have to compete, which is a different game entirely.
Is anyone or their linux-related company a member of any wire associations? Some anti-FUD articles really need to be filed as a press release, specifically mentioning SCOX.
PR Web is a good start. Knock yourself out. :)
User interface consistency between different DEs is not a huge concern of mine. Programming interface consistency is; with so many similar features, it should be far easier to make software *both* GNOME-enhanced and KDE-enhanced. Unfortunately, it's likely just as far-off a goal, due to the fact and ideological consequences of KDE being in C++ and GNOME in C.
I'd like to see wxWindows' wxGTK port become a wxGnome port, and a wxKDE port developed to coexist. The only real problem I can see is having a compiled program "just work" in whatever desktop it's loaded in. It shouldn't matter to the user what the binary was compiled for, it should just fucking work. If wxWindows starts adopting platform-specific features for the different nix desktops, then I think it will really stand up and take over the world. (I like it besides that, don't ge me wrong, it's my tool of choice right now)
Heh, I really enjoyed reading your post. Check this out:
With a filebrowser, however, I think that that is pretty rare. (opening multiple windows)
Yep, that's me. It's not as rare as you think.
If you're the kind of person that opens that many windows,
In fact, I am. I usually have 2-3 konqueror windows open to my filesystem, and I'm usually doing work within each that is self-contained. So Hah!
you probably prefer the command line anyway.
Mmmm, yeah. Fucker, you're right.
The way you have worded your message, I'm inclined to think that you haven't used Gnome 2 at all. There is nothing wrong with having "more than one way to do it", but some of the assertions you make are, at the very least, disturbing.
I'm going to sum up my problem with Gnome. it's really very simple.
The Gnome team of developers (I assume they use it too) tells us how a desktop should be, and works very hard to make it so. I tell them how I want *my* desktop to be, and they work very hard to tell me why I'm wrong.
Microsoft tells us how a desktop should be, and works very hard to make it so. I tell Microsoft how I want *my* desktop to be, Microsoft works very hard to tell my why I'm wrong and can't have it.
KDE tells us how a desktop should be, and works very hard to make it so. I tell KDE how I want *my* desktop to be, and they tell me how to do it, or work out a way to add it (even providing pointers on where to look in the code).
Guess which of these 3 choices I use?
Any free software project that intends to get wide usage, such as GNU, has to run like a business in some respects. You have to market the project. You have to listen to your users. You have to service your users. It doesn't matter if you're doing it on your own volunteer time or not, if you want mass acceptance, you have to appeal to consumers in some fashion or other. When a project rejects something that *many* users are requesting, they're not listening to their users. In the end, it doesn't matter if the developers are right or the users are right. What matters is whether or not they achieved their goal of providing the free as in freedom alternative OS they were working towards, and whether or not people actually use it.
I don't give a shit if Gnome is easier to use out of the box than KDE. I use KDE because the Kdevelopers are very easy to approach, very friendly, and very accomodating. I find my desktop is a pleasure to use because it does what I want it to do, when I want it to do it. I don't care which developers make the best and most logical argument. I care more whether or not the developers argue, and how hard they argue in the face of hundreds/thousands of users that disagree. GUI is not a logical interface, and logic doesn't apply.
What a maroon.
Say, what?
Then realise the horror of all the twits who insist their web page is best viewed at a width of 1024.
FOOLS. THe only way to make a website that works right is to have a liquid layout. If the layout doesn't ebb and flow with the window size, it's a worthless layout. I had a customer who had a hard width of 750 pixels. I have an employee who's somewhat visual impaired and runs her monitor at 800x600, or else she can't read it. Make her scroll right? Not when there's so many other competing websites that don't suffer from this problem.... Suffice it to say, that customer now has a liquid layout.
So download the free multiple desktop Powertoy for Windows, that has been out for some years now. Next.
Um, why should I have to download and install this when KDE does it out of the box? It takes me half an hour of configuring to get Windows to work the way I want it to, and that breaks it for some apps. On the other hand, KDE works the way I want it to out-of-the-box, and works for all apps. Who wants to spend hours configuring their machine to work for them? I sure in the hell don't.
Basically, the very thing everyone bitched endlessly about five years ago when Windows 98 came out.
Yes. Futhermore, I've found that you can't really uninstall Konqueror, and KDE doesn't play "nice" with other browsers. It tolerates them, don't get me wrong. But it doesn't necessarily work well with them when you click links in email, links on the desktop, etc.
I'd like to point out that motivation has a lot to do with whether it's "evil" or not. Microsoft had the motivation of crushing Netscape, which was a possible cross-platform competitor to Microsoft and as such endangered MS. There were loads of documentation that came out during the trials that showed this to be true. Gnome and KDE, on the other hand, do it for genuine usability reasons, and try to support other browsers as much as they can. There is a huge difference between the two.
But I have to admit that I enjoy trolling just like that every now and then. :) "Didn't MS integrate the browser already? This is OSS innovation?" :)
I'd argue it isn't a republic unless the decision-makers are elected by the governed, and most shares aren't owned by employees.
That does depend on the size of the company, to an extent. It's a republic in the old sense, the Roman sense. :) The people who own the property (in Rome it was the people who owned the country, the landowners) choose who will make the decisions. The US has introduced a few differences, such as the right of anybody to vote (fairly recent, used to be you had to be male, 21+, landowner, some citizenship requirements, and possibly white, definitely not a slave). But in the old days, when only landowners could vote, it would certainly align with the definition I've provided.
What sort of govt. does Iraq have right now? It's run by the US, and the US is a republic, so is Iraq a republic? No, because the Iraqis have no vote (since the previous sham election of Hussein).
Iraq is currently an occupied territory of the US. Hopefully it won't become a permanent territory of the US and will be independent again. Soon! They seem to be really dragging their heels on this one. Anyway, they don't have a government right now, they are a conquered land. Perhaps that makes them a police state? ;) So, no relative change in governmet for them...
Corporation: Republic
Could you explain that one some more? I would think a corporation does the bidding of whoever owns it, which isn't necessarily the people who work there.
Shareholders elect the board of directores, who in turn elects the CEO. Usually. I think. Shareholders also elect the President. A corporation is a republic in the sense that the shareholders elect the people who run the corporation, thus representing the owner's interest. It is the job of the board of directors and the president and the CEO to increase the value of the stock, either through direct profit or otherwise (dividends, making the stock valuable on the stock market, etc). So, it's a republic.
Dr Toomey said this was one reason why the code samples which the SCO Group had shown at its annual forum had turned out to be widely published cod
Was this sentence intentional? It was funny as hell...
Then again, the only time I've been there in recent memory is to look at the picture of the guy who's the most famous geek of all (sans his red hat).....
Are you talking about Rudolph?
No, companies are entirely different, because they are dictatorships.
Actually, a "company" is just a group of people. Here's my attempt to summarize some of the various commercial entities.
Corrections welcome. :)
Unpopular, but it does make sense.
Most things that make sense are unpopular. For something to be accepted by the public, and therefore become popular, it must be thoroughly ambiguous to the point where it doesn't make sense.
This is why we elect people by popular consensus. It deadlocks the government and prevents it from gaining too much power. Or, at least, that's the reasoning.
Actually... now that I know that he's a Mormon I'll be happy to file a complaint with the church. Once the proof is there for all to see he'll be asking himself "was it worth it?"
Geez, you make it sound like getting kicked out of LDS is a bad thing. I'd LOVE it if those fuckers would just leave me alone.
You mean it isn't?
The only thing it doesn't have are government sponsored tax exemptions and temples funded from shearing the faithful.
Well, as a matter of fact, the community is firmly divided by one group saying "It's a development model" and another group saying "It's all about freedom". In fact, about the only things the two groups can agree on are that the GPL is both an open source and a free software license, and that neither one of them are a religion. Um, that's the irony I was trying to approach. :)
You know, if I was him. I would tell Darl that I'll give the name of the person doing the DDoS if you give us the supposed lines of infringing code.
Too bad the irony would escape Our Darling Bride.
As far as I'm concerned, "we" is the group that keeps the moral high ground. Anybody who breaks the law in the name of justice is "they".
This is very dangerous reasoning, I should point out.
Just in case you were interested...
Oh for crying out loud. This is a false dichotomy. Instead of "black community" than use "christian" or "jewish" or "insert religious group here" community.
Is that better?
Um, no? Then people will start saying that Open Source is a religion after all. ;)