I wonder if this will be the wake up call to those investing in SCO because of it's great IP in Linux (so they say) - this news definitely trims away the FUD and leaves very little meat on the bones.
You've got to be able to differentiate between the fairy stories and real ones, it's a part of becoming an adult.
While I'm sure I don't represent the typical Slashdotter, I am an adult, and I believe in this "fairy story" as an actual historical account from a book that is a great historical and archaeological resource. In fact, there are a great number of adults in the world who believe. Most of us are not the uneducated, backwards, poor and dirty brainwashed souls that the "adult atheist" might make us out to be. I for one have spent a great deal of time investigating what I believe from historical, archaeological, and yes, even scientific viewpoints. It is surprising how easily science lines up with the "fairy tales" of the Bible when you don't approach it from a pre-conceived, Darwinian "this is the way it had to be" mindset.
I'm in no way qualified to debate the science of the Genesis flood with the ultra-educated population that resides on Slashdot, but I will say this - I've done the research myself, and I can say I am more than satisfied with the scientific explanations of professional geologists, biologists, archaeologists, etc. that happen to believe in a creator being (and thus are unfortunately labeled "creation scientists", as if they are any less qualified due to their faith). If you really want an answer to your question, that answer is readily available from people much more qualified than me. Why don't you ask a geologist or earth scientist who is both qualified and has no problem in correlating the scientific data with the historical account of the Genesis flood.
However, if a person is dead-set against believing in a supreme creator being (aka: God), then I suppose we could fly you to the Ark itself, let you walk through its decks, and you still would not believe....
The fact that Baystar wants to "bet" so much money on a case that is not just up in the air, but leaning strongly in favor of IBM and Linux users, makes me think Baystar would be just as far ahead to take their 20M to Vegas and roll the dice.
Now that they've placed their bet, they should lose it. Nobody places a bet on a horse and then asks for their money back halfway through the race just because the horse is lame and the jockey is, well, Daryl McBride:-)
-EK
Disclaimer - I don't gamble, nor do I promote gambling
Which doesn't seem too bright on Baystar's part, considering recent events in the SCO vs IBM case. Maybe somebody should send an email to Baystar asking them to invest in a legitimate Linux-based business (Novell, Redhat, etc.)
I found it interesting that Baystar wants SCO to give up on UNIX to pursue the "intellectual property process." In other words, Baystar wants SCO to give up the only service it offers and pursue legal action against Linux (and Linux users) even more than it is now! In fact, if they do this (and a few other things), then Baystar might change their mind about recalling their stocks..
I wonder who would benefit most from this (cough Microsoft cough cough....)
ps - I do like the idea of no more Daryl McBride, except for the fact that he probably will help the Linux community more in the end with all his irrational rantings and ravings!
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if this will be the wake up call to those investing in SCO because of it's great IP in Linux (so they say) - this news definitely trims away the FUD and leaves very little meat on the bones.
Time to throw this fish back.
While I'm sure I don't represent the typical Slashdotter, I am an adult, and I believe in this "fairy story" as an actual historical account from a book that is a great historical and archaeological resource. In fact, there are a great number of adults in the world who believe. Most of us are not the uneducated, backwards, poor and dirty brainwashed souls that the "adult atheist" might make us out to be. I for one have spent a great deal of time investigating what I believe from historical, archaeological, and yes, even scientific viewpoints. It is surprising how easily science lines up with the "fairy tales" of the Bible when you don't approach it from a pre-conceived, Darwinian "this is the way it had to be" mindset.
I'm in no way qualified to debate the science of the Genesis flood with the ultra-educated population that resides on Slashdot, but I will say this - I've done the research myself, and I can say I am more than satisfied with the scientific explanations of professional geologists, biologists, archaeologists, etc. that happen to believe in a creator being (and thus are unfortunately labeled "creation scientists", as if they are any less qualified due to their faith). If you really want an answer to your question, that answer is readily available from people much more qualified than me. Why don't you ask a geologist or earth scientist who is both qualified and has no problem in correlating the scientific data with the historical account of the Genesis flood.
However, if a person is dead-set against believing in a supreme creator being (aka: God), then I suppose we could fly you to the Ark itself, let you walk through its decks, and you still would not believe....
The fact that Baystar wants to "bet" so much money on a case that is not just up in the air, but leaning strongly in favor of IBM and Linux users, makes me think Baystar would be just as far ahead to take their 20M to Vegas and roll the dice.
:-)
Now that they've placed their bet, they should lose it. Nobody places a bet on a horse and then asks for their money back halfway through the race just because the horse is lame and the jockey is, well, Daryl McBride
-EK
Disclaimer - I don't gamble, nor do I promote gambling
Which doesn't seem too bright on Baystar's part, considering recent events in the SCO vs IBM case. Maybe somebody should send an email to Baystar asking them to invest in a legitimate Linux-based business (Novell, Redhat, etc.)
I found it interesting that Baystar wants SCO to give up on UNIX to pursue the "intellectual property process." In other words, Baystar wants SCO to give up the only service it offers and pursue legal action against Linux (and Linux users) even more than it is now! In fact, if they do this (and a few other things), then Baystar might change their mind about recalling their stocks..
I wonder who would benefit most from this (cough Microsoft cough cough....)
ps - I do like the idea of no more Daryl McBride, except for the fact that he probably will help the Linux community more in the end with all his irrational rantings and ravings!