Someone pointed out that I was wrong about the origin of that post - the original was actually written 2 years ago (Feb 2003) by Shaun Jurrens, a FreeBSD user (here's what he says about the troll I previously linked).
I apologize, but I googled before talking, and the oldest result I found was the troll I linked in parent (Jan 2004).
Still, I don't think that the text of a 2-year-old rant, copied and pasted by a troll, is objectively worth any modding up. And FWIW, what I think of the ones who do it doesn't change very much.
At the risk of burning my karma, I don't think this is acceptable.
The parent (modded at +4 right now!) made its first appearance on the FreeBSD mailing lists, with the false signature "Maxim Hermion", in order to imitate the name (and the email address) of the FreeBSD committer Maxime Henrion. Here's what Maxime Henrion (the real FreeBSD committer) writes about it, in a reply to this troll message.
This being said, one can suppose that nobody who is intellectually honest would call this anything other than a defaming piece of crap, authored by a worthless troll.
Still, on this forum, a piece of crap like this has mysteriously managed to reach the +4 level, by doing nothing else than gratuitously defaming FreeBSD.
To the people that modded this up: nice job indeed... Maybe, according to your agenda, it really *is* a nice job.:-/
-- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
I just want to inform whoever modded this crap up (at +3!) that this is an old troll. It first appeared on the FreeBSD mailing lists in january 2004 with the false signature "Maxim Hermion", in order to imitate the name (and the email address) of the FreeBSD committer Maxime Henrion.
These are the latest data I could find about FreeBSD market share - and they say it's gaining it. Nearly 2 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (July 2003)
"[FreeBSD] is the only other operating system [the other ones are windows and linux] that is gaining, rather than losing share of the active sites found by the Web Server Survey."
I think it's true that market share has little importance for the BSDs, but before taking for granted what a troll says, it's always good to check it out.;)
One more thing: I don't think that guy simply "wants to troll" as you put it. Since his/her/its FUD-spreading activity has been going on for *years*, that would probably qualify as something else.
(Of course I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a mental issue:)
-- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
[This is my last reply (not anonymous and karma-free) to this name-calling AC]
That one by Oppermann was a mailing list post, in which he was implicitly referring to a Xeon. Not surprisingly, the submitter of the/. story understood that. In fact he says: "Andre claims that FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
Notice the "on a 2.8GHz Xeon" part... *Both* the numbers (1 Mpps and "not much more than 100kpps") are referred to one particular architecture.
And, I repeat, there's *nothing* in the post you linked that either disproves that, or justifies your previous claims. The 1.3 Mpps figure is *not* referred to the same architecture. About the Xeon, the post you linked just says "Our numbers on Xeons are less than 1Mpps".
I think that's enough to acknowledge that if there is a troll, that would definitely be you.
One more thing about the "can't do much more than 100kpps" part: even if it were an underestimate, and the actual figure turned out to be 300, 400 or even 500 kpps, it's still hardly relevant compared to FreeBSD's 1 Mpps.
Not to say that FreeBSD is without weak points, of course (just like every OS, and the devs are surely working on those), but it routes much better than Linux. And underlining this fact, in the one place (/.) where trolls have been spreading the "BSD is dying" FUD for *years*, is more than appropriate.:) -- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Ok, from now on AgainstFUD won't reply with a +1 message to trolls that are below that threshold.
Until now it hasn't been like that: I apologize, I'm still experimenting. Let's say, this whole anti-FUD process is still in its beta (or alpha?..) stage.;) -- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Our troll says: >The actual facts cannot be obscured by trolls
Sadly, this isn't true. If it were true, FUD wouldn't work. But to a certain extent it does.:( -- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Give me a break.
But to tell the truth, I had always seen thesetwo versions (they're screenshots), and to me they look *much* better than the original.
And besides that, my fav is still the daemonette by Bellamy. But to say "it's awful"... Come on.
ok.. enough with soft-porn.;)
-- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Thanks for the info, and Kudos to the DragonFly developers!
DragonFly's a promising OS that often goes unnoticed because it's still in its infancy, but BSD users surely have great expectations about it - and when you're an OS that people don't know yet, a nice piece of software like this installer is surely a *very* good way of introducing yourself.:) -- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
..that when someone doesn't bother to reply to an AC, it's not always because the AC's right.
You know.. there might be other more plausible explanations.;)
(I know, I know, don't feed the troll and stuff, but on this one I couldn't resist) -- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
WTF..
I *love* FreeBSD and I'd choose it over Linux any time.
But obviously, Linux *is not* garbage.
Since you're proving to be such a dickhead, would you please stop using any of the marvelous BSD systems? Please?..
Thanks.
-- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Re:Errata 2 - the Rob Enderle links I posted...
on
NetBSD 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Thanks, setagllib, very nicely put indeed - but as you can see, some people aren't even worth paying attention to..;) -- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Errata 2 - the Rob Enderle links I posted...
on
NetBSD 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
I read some more articles by this guy (Rob Enderle) and I also read again the articles I linked. Even if he definitely has a point about certain things, this guy spreads quite a lot of Microsoft FUD. So, if you happen to read them, beware..
For example, in one of those 2 articles he says: "The Pros are platform agnostic. They just want to get the job done, [...]" True. But then he tries to manipulate the reader by saying: "The Pros generally see things like the SCO legal action as someone else's problem and have done their best to distance themselves from any related issues."
False. How on earth can a Pro consider the SCO issue as someone else's problem, when 1) SCO's threatening to sue his customers whenever he should choose to deploy a particular OS and 2) SCO's trying to hinder the use of that OS, that is one of the tools he can choose to get the job done?
And then: why shouldn't a Pro be interested in the end of Microsoft's monopoly? He would benefit from the end of the monopoly *more* than anybody else, because to a Pro, the more tools are available, the better.
Finally, when he's suggesting that Pros should do "their best to distance themselves from any related issues".. he's actually suggesting to drop Linux completely (surprise, surprise). While that would be more than fine most times - since there's BSD:) - a Pro really wants as much choice as possible. So, the SCO lawsuit to a Pro is somehow a pain in the ass no matter what.
No, after reading the articles a second time, those 2 links definitely weren't worth posting: I apologize for that. Besides some well-founded concerns, they contain too much dishonest Microsoft propaganda for my taste.
But, let's make it clear, this takes nothing away from the lack of ethics of the GNU/Linux advocates. The proof is all the FUD spread on this very board.
-- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Ok. This post, albeit arrogant and stupid, sheds some light over the FUD-spreading activity that has been going on here on this board - for *years*. That's why, since the BSD systems are the ones I prefer, I feel like replying to this BS point by point.
This is going to be somewhat unpopular, I know, especially with all you flaming BSD zealots out there, but I feel it has to be said.
Uh.. I really don't see "flaming BSD zealots", I just see FUD-spreading GNU/trolls.
But.. whatever. Shoot.
The simple truth that nobody here will seem to accept is that BSD simply can not possibly move to the forefront of the Free Software / Open Source movement.
Care to explain why?
Moreover: if BSD did, the academical and technical aspect of Open Source software would finally prevail over the political anti-proprietary crusade. That would be a Good Thing, IMHO.
At present, Linux is favoured because many corporations (IBM, Novell, etc) are using it to fight the Microsoft monopoly.
But as soon as the monopoly ends (as soon as possible, I hope) the market wouldn't benefit any more from a communistic anti-proprietary crusade.
The second it is, Microsoft (or IBM or Sun or whoever the Evil Empire of the Day is) will simply rip it off and create their own, which will sell to the PHB crowd like hotcakes. If (when?) this happens, all of everyone's hard work will be undone.
1) Nobody can "rip off" any BSD code. You can *use* it, but you can't claim it's your own, and you *must* give proper credits to the author.
The only ones having trouble to grasp this simple concept (or, I should say, the only ones actually *stealing* code) seem to be some GPL programmers. 2) Microsoft won't certainly be the only one to *use* BSD code. Its competitors do it as well, and the smaller they are, the more benefit they can draw out of it. Apple uses BSD code extensively. Linux can use it too, of course - again, as long as proper credits are given. BSD, if anything, is *contributing* to the end of the Microsoft monopoly. 3) "All of everyone's hard work" will be *acknowledged*, not "undone".
Some people seem to have trouble to understand that not every Open Source programmer is out on a crusade against proprietary software...
But, entirely separately, if we want to reach an OSS-dominant situation at any point,
...and who the h**l gives a f**k? Seriously. As far as I can understand, BSD are devoted to technical excellence, not to communistic politics.
it is imperative that we stop duplicating our efforts and immediately focus on one project.
1) People can focus on the same project only if they have the same objectives, I don't think this is the case.
2) If you really wanna avoid duplicated efforts, start by looking at the myriads of gnu/linux distributions out there...
We cannot afford to have BSD bleeding developers and code away from Linux (which has far more momentum behind it), likewise for KDE and GNOME, and so on.
Ehm... BSD is older than Linux. So, Linux would be the one sucking away developers and code... but I don't think this is the case - again: *different objectives*.. BSD has an academical spirit, Linux is loaded with politics.
Moves like this strike me as attempts to split up and hamstring the Open Source effort, and I don't like the smell of this one bit.
Wow, that's really gross.. Do you like the smell of the FUD that you GNU people are spreading over BSD??
Oh, I forgot: basically, what you say is "Yeah, it's a disgusting thing to do, but it's for a good cause".
This calls for a mandatory question: where would you GNU people draw the line between what is legitimate to do in the name of your "cause" and wha
It's about time we make a single comment including references to all of those articles AND those that include benches, technical reports, and other useful things. Someone people manage to consider those articles 'not good enough'.
Well, in fact they are good enough to disprove the worst FUD spread by the GNU people - that is, that BSD's {dead|dying|declining} - and that was my major point, since sadly this disgusting campaign has been going on for many years. Sure, such campaigns aren't effective in conditioning the choices of competent people, but these are always a minority: the majority is heavily influenced by mainstream choices and word-of-mouth. Moreover, the FUD campaign probably has driven some potential developers away from BSD ("I heard on slashdot it's dying?"). Sadly, to an extent, FUD works - unless you quickly dispel it.
Anyway, on the technical front: of course a collection of benchmarks and technical articles would be a great thing for a lot of reasons. Besides stimulating the competition among the projects, it would help us users to know the strengths and weaknesses of the OSs we're using and to choose the right tool for the job.
-- Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Damn my English.. This twisted sentence "From time to time, it happens to say things in a way that offends some touchy people"
should have been like this "From time to time, things are said in a way that offends some touchy people" I should stick to shorter posts. Easier to proofread;)
Slashdot Mirror
Someone pointed out that I was wrong about the origin of that post - the original was actually written 2 years ago (Feb 2003) by Shaun Jurrens, a FreeBSD user (here's what he says about the troll I previously linked).
I apologize, but I googled before talking, and the oldest result I found was the troll I linked in parent (Jan 2004).
Still, I don't think that the text of a 2-year-old rant, copied and pasted by a troll, is objectively worth any modding up. And FWIW, what I think of the ones who do it doesn't change very much.
At the risk of burning my karma, I don't think this is acceptable.
:-/
The parent (modded at +4 right now!) made its first appearance on the FreeBSD mailing lists, with the false signature "Maxim Hermion", in order to imitate the name (and the email address) of the FreeBSD committer Maxime Henrion.
Here's what Maxime Henrion (the real FreeBSD committer) writes about it, in a reply to this troll message.
This being said, one can suppose that nobody who is intellectually honest would call this anything other than a defaming piece of crap, authored by a worthless troll.
Still, on this forum, a piece of crap like this has mysteriously managed to reach the +4 level, by doing nothing else than gratuitously defaming FreeBSD.
To the people that modded this up: nice job indeed... Maybe, according to your agenda, it really *is* a nice job.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
I just want to inform whoever modded this crap up (at +3!) that this is an old troll. It first appeared on the FreeBSD mailing lists in january 2004 with the false signature "Maxim Hermion", in order to imitate the name (and the email address) of the FreeBSD committer Maxime Henrion.
This is what the real Maxime Henrion says about it, in a reply to that troll message.
Please check the sources before modding things up...
Nearly 2 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (July 2003)
"[FreeBSD] is the only other operating system [the other ones are windows and linux] that is gaining, rather than losing share of the active sites found by the Web Server Survey."
I think it's true that market share has little importance for the BSDs, but before taking for granted what a troll says, it's always good to check it out. ;)
One more thing: I don't think that guy simply "wants to troll" as you put it. Since his/her/its FUD-spreading activity has been going on for *years*, that would probably qualify as something else. :)
(Of course I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of a mental issue
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
[This is my last reply (not anonymous and karma-free) to this name-calling AC]
/. story understood that. In fact he says:
:)
That one by Oppermann was a mailing list post, in which he was implicitly referring to a Xeon. Not surprisingly, the submitter of the
"Andre claims that FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
Notice the "on a 2.8GHz Xeon" part... *Both* the numbers (1 Mpps and "not much more than 100kpps") are referred to one particular architecture.
And, I repeat, there's *nothing* in the post you linked that either disproves that, or justifies your previous claims. The 1.3 Mpps figure is *not* referred to the same architecture. About the Xeon, the post you linked just says "Our numbers on Xeons are less than 1Mpps".
I think that's enough to acknowledge that if there is a troll, that would definitely be you.
One more thing about the "can't do much more than 100kpps" part: even if it were an underestimate, and the actual figure turned out to be 300, 400 or even 500 kpps, it's still hardly relevant compared to FreeBSD's 1 Mpps.
Not to say that FreeBSD is without weak points, of course (just like every OS, and the devs are surely working on those), but it routes much better than Linux.
And underlining this fact, in the one place (/.) where trolls have been spreading the "BSD is dying" FUD for *years*, is more than appropriate.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
FreeBSD:
FreeBSD, Stealth-Growth Open Source Project (Jun 2004)
"FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (Jun 2004)
"[FreeBSD] has secured a strong foothold with the hosting community and continues to grow, gaining over a million hostnames and half a million active sites since July 2003."
What's New in the FreeBSD Network Stack (Sep 2004)
"FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
NetBSD:
NetBSD sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (May 2004)
NetBSD again sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (30 Sep 2004)
OpenBSD:
OpenBSD Widens Its Scope (Nov 2004)
Review: OpenBSD 3.6 shows steady improvement (Nov 2004)
*BSD in general:
..and last but not least, we have the cutest mascot as well - undisputedly. ;)
Deep study: The world's safest computing environment (Nov 2004)
"The world's safest and most secure 24/7 online computing environment - operating system plus applications - is proving to be the Open Source platform of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) and the Mac OS X based on Darwin."
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
And, there is a better way.
FWIW: I'm unplugging for (approx) 15 days, Happy Holidays to all the BSDers around the world! :)
(..and Requiem for the FUD, of course)
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Ok, from now on AgainstFUD won't reply with a +1 message to trolls that are below that threshold. ;)
Until now it hasn't been like that: I apologize, I'm still experimenting. Let's say, this whole anti-FUD process is still in its beta (or alpha?..) stage.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
>The actual facts cannot be obscured by trolls
Sadly, this isn't true. :(
If it were true, FUD wouldn't work. But to a certain extent it does.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Give me a break.
But to tell the truth, I had always seen these two versions (they're screenshots), and to me they look *much* better than the original.
And besides that, my fav is still the daemonette by Bellamy.
But to say "it's awful"... Come on.
ok.. enough with soft-porn.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
DragonFly's a promising OS that often goes unnoticed because it's still in its infancy, but BSD users surely have great expectations about it - and when you're an OS that people don't know yet, a nice piece of software like this installer is surely a *very* good way of introducing yourself. :)
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
You know.. there might be other more plausible explanations. ;)
(I know, I know, don't feed the troll and stuff, but on this one I couldn't resist)
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
I *love* FreeBSD and I'd choose it over Linux any time.
But obviously, Linux *is not* garbage.
Since you're proving to be such a dickhead, would you please stop using any of the marvelous BSD systems? Please?.. Thanks.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Thanks, setagllib, very nicely put indeed - but as you can see, some people aren't even worth paying attention to.. ;)
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
For example, in one of those 2 articles he says: :) - a Pro really wants as much choice as possible. So, the SCO lawsuit to a Pro is somehow a pain in the ass no matter what.
"The Pros are platform agnostic. They just want to get the job done, [...]"
True.
But then he tries to manipulate the reader by saying:
"The Pros generally see things like the SCO legal action as someone else's problem and have done their best to distance themselves from any related issues."
False.
How on earth can a Pro consider the SCO issue as someone else's problem, when 1) SCO's threatening to sue his customers whenever he should choose to deploy a particular OS and 2) SCO's trying to hinder the use of that OS, that is one of the tools he can choose to get the job done?
And then: why shouldn't a Pro be interested in the end of Microsoft's monopoly? He would benefit from the end of the monopoly *more* than anybody else, because to a Pro, the more tools are available, the better.
Finally, when he's suggesting that Pros should do "their best to distance themselves from any related issues".. he's actually suggesting to drop Linux completely (surprise, surprise). While that would be more than fine most times - since there's BSD
No, after reading the articles a second time, those 2 links definitely weren't worth posting: I apologize for that. Besides some well-founded concerns, they contain too much dishonest Microsoft propaganda for my taste.
But, let's make it clear, this takes nothing away from the lack of ethics of the GNU/Linux advocates.
The proof is all the FUD spread on this very board.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
The second link was actually this:
The MyDoom Effect: Crossing the Line into Terrorism
(I fell into the long-post temptation again..)
Uh.. I really don't see "flaming BSD zealots", I just see FUD-spreading GNU/trolls. But.. whatever. Shoot.
Care to explain why?
Moreover: if BSD did, the academical and technical aspect of Open Source software would finally prevail over the political anti-proprietary crusade. That would be a Good Thing, IMHO.
At present, Linux is favoured because many corporations (IBM, Novell, etc) are using it to fight the Microsoft monopoly. But as soon as the monopoly ends (as soon as possible, I hope) the market wouldn't benefit any more from a communistic anti-proprietary crusade.
1) Nobody can "rip off" any BSD code. You can *use* it, but you can't claim it's your own, and you *must* give proper credits to the author. The only ones having trouble to grasp this simple concept (or, I should say, the only ones actually *stealing* code) seem to be some GPL programmers.
2) Microsoft won't certainly be the only one to *use* BSD code. Its competitors do it as well, and the smaller they are, the more benefit they can draw out of it. Apple uses BSD code extensively. Linux can use it too, of course - again, as long as proper credits are given.
BSD, if anything, is *contributing* to the end of the Microsoft monopoly.
3) "All of everyone's hard work" will be *acknowledged*, not "undone".
Some people seem to have trouble to understand that not every Open Source programmer is out on a crusade against proprietary software...
1) People can focus on the same project only if they have the same objectives, I don't think this is the case.
2) If you really wanna avoid duplicated efforts, start by looking at the myriads of gnu/linux distributions out there...
Ehm... BSD is older than Linux. So, Linux would be the one sucking away developers and code... but I don't think this is the case - again: *different objectives*.. BSD has an academical spirit, Linux is loaded with politics.
Wow, that's really gross..
Do you like the smell of the FUD that you GNU people are spreading over BSD??
Oh, I forgot: basically, what you say is "Yeah, it's a disgusting thing to do, but it's for a good cause".
This calls for a mandatory question: where would you GNU people draw the line between what is legitimate to do in the name of your "cause" and wha
Well, in fact they are good enough to disprove the worst FUD spread by the GNU people - that is, that BSD's {dead|dying|declining} - and that was my major point, since sadly this disgusting campaign has been going on for many years. Sure, such campaigns aren't effective in conditioning the choices of competent people, but these are always a minority: the majority is heavily influenced by mainstream choices and word-of-mouth. Moreover, the FUD campaign probably has driven some potential developers away from BSD ("I heard on slashdot it's dying?").
Sadly, to an extent, FUD works - unless you quickly dispel it.
Anyway, on the technical front: of course a collection of benchmarks and technical articles would be a great thing for a lot of reasons. Besides stimulating the competition among the projects, it would help us users to know the strengths and weaknesses of the OSs we're using and to choose the right tool for the job.
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
(only, slashdot automatically puts a blank space into the link and the copy-and-paste doesn't work)
After Christmas I'll have some spare time, hopefully I'll be able to use it to optimize the troll-thwarting process. ;)
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131228&cid =10982290
http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131228&cid =10982290
http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131228&cid =10982290
http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131228&cid =10982290
FreeBSD:
FreeBSD, Stealth-Growth Open Source Project (Jun 2004)
"FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (Jun 2004)
"[FreeBSD] has a secured a strong foothold with the hosting community and continues to grow, gaining over a million hostnames and half a million active sites since July 2003."
What's New in the FreeBSD Network Stack (Sep 2004)
"FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
NetBSD:
NetBSD sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (May 2004)
NetBSD again sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (30 Sep 2004)
OpenBSD:
OpenBSD Widens Its Scope (Nov 2004)
Review: OpenBSD 3.6 shows steady improvement (Nov 2004)
*BSD in general:
..and last but not least, we have the cutest mascot as well - undisputedly. ;)
Deep study: The world's safest computing environment
"The world's safest and most secure 24/7 online computing environment - operating system plus applications - is proving to be the Open Source platform of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) and the Mac OS X based on Darwin."
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Damn my English.. This twisted sentence ;)
"From time to time, it happens to say things in a way that offends some touchy people"
should have been like this
"From time to time, things are said in a way that offends some touchy people"
I should stick to shorter posts. Easier to proofread