At our company, we use a heterogeneous setting: Windows XP and Linux (Kubuntu that is).
The XP machines we set up for development purposes (Eclipse, PHP, XAMP) are now, not quite 7 months after their first installment, at the bottom of usability, so to say. Everything on these machines takes longer and longer, with nothing having been installed in-between except the required updates for the development platform.
On the linux machines it is different, quite a few update to the installed development software, upgrades to the system and installation of a few gadgets and still everything works fine and most of all responsive.
And, what is more, yesterdays I received a notification by XP (professional taht is, based on the proven NT platform), saying that the MSDOS driver would not function properly after inserting a certain CDROM... remember that this is a off-the-shelf installation of the system.
To my account, Linux is more desktop ready than any other platform, except perhaps the also Unix based Mac OS X environment.
a third party stable VM for their own VM, and, in case that does not work out with current marketing strategies, even faster boot times.
Red Screen of Death, haha, we had the good ol' fashioned GURU MEDITATION once, if anyone can remember... and that beast did boot up very fast afterwards...
Besides that, it was also a sloth menace in virus prevention, in fact, it did spread viruses like hell in the good old days they were...
And, if you hide the defines very well beneath a pile of mud, then nobody will ever know that you actually are using gotos. However, they will know that you use multiple exit points and that is bad design unless you are doing low level kernel and device driver hacking...
The part about auto-boxing is generally not true, especially when it comes to low-level generic interface method invocation.
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/1200/dotn et/ for a short instruction on how primitive types directly map to objects in the language, the very same concepts of auto-boxing and unboxing take place as they are implemented in the Java language.
less stress, semi-freedom of choice, higher availability, less crashes, higher productivity, increased to the max usability, what more *your suggestions*?
Yet, they have not recognized yet that they are no longer in that position.
There is plenty of innovation going on, most of which is bought by the so-called market leaders the sooner that they realize that it would eat into their profits and by that would cost them a lot of market share.
Remember when Intel licensed stuff from AMD that essentially made things easier with 64bit computing and all?
Intel tries to remain in the position that they have not excelled in by the day that they realized their very first processor "architecture", something I would term as being the least of the least things that I would think of implementing in anything that I would someday then or future-wise would have devised.
However, they have strong marketing, and that is what sells, nowadays and then way after.
I remember the time when I, in my first essential project, had to build up a computer from scratch, based on some x86 cpu, eventually soldering all connections required by my self. Later then I had to program that god dam thing as well, not exactly the self-soldered single board computer, however, I learned that the Intel architecture is all about keeping the past alive and well and by that also the company alive and well, by no means ever going into different directions, that might have been more benefiting to the overall customership (see the original writer).
Instead, they bought out the xscale architecture from arm, which, actually, by far expelled the Intel based architecture by far, however, I do not see any desktop products produced today that use the very same architecture, instead, we strive with the very same old architecture that we had back then in the 1970s...
emoticons, so to say. Those are not supported by the current M invented emoticon driving technology and never will be. Sad, should I sue them because they do not care about my own emoticons?
Or do they provide a way for inclusion of self-defined emoticons? If so, they are really at it and top of the notch, so to say. Remembers me somehow of M research where they do whatever shit has done before, calling it innovation.
Who actually cares about them anyhow, the American patenting system is already down the drain and will go down further with M recognizing it. Somehow this remembers me on the way they dealt with technology, look at it now!
first there was violence stuff in tha head, woe, which we made to proceed to become virtually physical violence that then always destroyed the becoming of the people and the land - then we created the virtual video game console bearing virtual video game violence.
so what? first, there was the virtual stuff, then there was the virtual physical stuff, next then to it we put into their mouth and *shooot* stuff.
who cares, only dem hypocrites do.
dem who shoot everyday, spray the word and make you pay. dem who teach you the wrong way. dem tell you now that to stop upon virtual violence killing would be a good way? while dem keep you at killing you virtually physically every day? dem only afraid that we move upon them.
no way.
rebellion, fight dem hypocrates
kill dem virtual targets, kill dem physically offending targets in US i say.
Just imagine them peops being teached how to
- throw chairs across the room
- shout out "I will kill 'em all, I have done it before, I will do it again"
Steve Ballmeresque management lectures being told, a society gone to waste.
SCNR
And by that, licensing the technology to whatever firm is interested in it?
I have been experiencing the same RSI as said person. With proper workout and different
patterns of movement I have been able to resolve the problem in fewer than 3 months.
However, as work continues, I will not be able to actually apply different movement patterns
anymore, therefore I require new technology.
Who is in for open source development of such technology with proper licensing so that we
still get our share, apart from the recognition, from it?
Regards,
Carsten
PS: If you like to contact me, feel free to mail me at carstenklein (at) yahoo (dot) de
Time's not so bad out here, once you've been freezed to death and
nearly dismembered whilst gettin' on with what is yours, seeing
it all being stolen by those that made you run...
Steve: Ok, guys, I love this company...repeat...I looove this company (throws chair around).
Bill: And remember, if it compiles, it ships...
Dev-Team: But we're already special casing here...
Steve: (looking angry)
Bill: If it compiles, it is good enough for shipping, let the active user basis sort it out...
Dev-Team: Well, look this special case here, where it says that all of Microsoft is GOOD and everything else is BAD, it might cause systems to go awry...
Bill: It's awry in the first place, so don't care on fixing this until it is required to be fixed, we definetly can introduce more special casing if required...does it compile already?
Dev-Team: Well, er, yes, a few errors and a few warnings, but no black box testing was done yet...
Bill: Testing?
Steve: (whispering into Bill's ear) you know that sort of thing that would prevent us from shipping early...
Bill: Ah, erm, yes, ok. It compiles. Comment out the lines that produce the errors and re-compile. Ignore the warnings...and ship that damn patch. We have this initiative running, you know, security it was called, I believe. Ah, I love this company.
Steve: (remember Dim from the Clockwork Orange?) Ah, I love this company...
Dev-Team: Bill, you are genius, after commenting out the faulty lines and setting the compiler flag to ignore all warnings, it compiles just fine. Thanks for your great insight...a pleasure to be working for you! Ah, we love this company (even more so like Dim).
SCNR.
Carsten
first, it is free. second, it therefore cannot suck, never.
And, as to the non-integrated email / calendaring application, I for my part am using the Mozilla Suite, soon to be replaced by the SeaMonkey Suite. Both, Mozilla and OOo perfectly fit together and furthermore, security holes in OOo (not really holes as OOo is actually not made fit for distributed computing, but it will be in the near future) do not interfere with my Email correspondence and vice versa. And, we all know what kind of steep curve learning process Microsoft has had when bundling email/internet and their Office Suite. And we all paid for that and this sucks.
Quality takes time, I heard once someone saying, and it is true. Whilst MS Office gets less and less comfortable and suitable for more than the average Joe's daily email-writing/ letter writing task, OOo becomes more and more suitable for replacing everything with more stable and better implementations, implementations that are highly reusable and therefore create a wealth of its own. I do not see that in the MS Office Suite. Prediction: as soon as the rich client facilities of the OOo are made stable and a suitable profile or multiple suitable profiles for the individiual solutions based on those rich clients have been found out and defined, MS Office will lack as it had 10 years ago. Perhaps then, MS Office will be enabled to stable manage documents that include more than the average Joe's 10 pages at max, with lots of embedded documents and other objects etc.
Recently I checked on my webserver logs and found out that, although my site is actually "out-of-order" due to my very own lazyness, the msnbot checks at least once sometimes multiple times per day my site, although there is actually no information to be found except an open letter to the world right now.
Now, as I am paying for excessive traffic on this virtual server, it would actually be a kind of self-defense in order to reduce expected cost by exceeding the traffic limit, in that I would lead the msnbot into a honeypot from where it may never come out unless it terminates the connection.
That said, how about showing them fudders who is really providing original content and who is really able to at least provide a decent search engine.
I call upon you to program honeypots that will lead the msnbot and all the other bots from Microsoft into a neverending loop from where they will only escape if they themselves close the connection, with no information whatsoever being transmitted to Microsoft at all.
This would, in case MS has approx. 10 bot servers running, lead to a stall in their information and content harvesting, for whatever purposes they have in mind. In my opinion they also use it for finding out about new developments on which they had never thought about in the first place.
next, protecting your paid traffic and therefore your site from exceeding limits and by that forcedly going offline by this badly programmed bot which is not capable of deciding whether or not to look at a site, even if there have been no changes to the site in-between multiple visits of the bot. Personally I do not think that just excluding the msnbot from reading beyond robots.txt is the proper way to go, we have to shut them out and cause their bot to stall in exchange, by not finding any more available ports on their machine for outside world connections.
What is your opinion to that? Are you in?
there is no free market.
Market is always defined by restrain, necessity and lastly also pressure.
Restrain by local to global laws, neccessity to always outdo the competition and pressure
that either is created by the competition on your business or by the market itself (customers)
that won't pull off, ie your products won't sell or won't reach your expected numbers of sales
so that you eventually have to react and redefine your portfolio of products.
Lastly, there is also no free market in that all participants of the market are dependent on
each other, so that there is always an active force that enforces some restrain, necessity or
pressure on your business and on the market.
Free as in speech it of course mostly is, not for all products though, considering legal prosecution of
export of for example strong encryption methods etc.
But then again, what is freedom of speech worth if there is actually no freedom?
And what is more, global markets are divided by the global players, whether they be the biggest players
out there or the so-called smaller businesses. And, by dividing the market and of course the market shares,
everyone is interested to keep that share or increase the amount of market share. With that in mind,
and the introduction of b2b, we find that free market is actually a lie in that the market it a planned market and lastly also a planned economy. Of course, the actors in that economy mostly act on their behalf, being restricted by said restrains, necessities and pressure. They act semi-free in that they decide on their behalf and not on behalf of some third party that actually defines what to produce and when. Taking necessity into account and existing business relations (b2b), you will actually find that the only freedom one does have in the so-called free market is whether or not to actually be a part of that so-called free market.
And, if that is what freedom leaves us as a choice in respect to market, then freedom is void in respect to the market, it is either be in it or leave it. And, considering that when you start complaining about something, it is always: you better leave as others who seek out to keep the system as it is, will eventually drive you out of it.
Just my two cents,
Carsten
I think that knowledge is required for intelligence, which is effectfully the application of that knowledge in context.
As such, even the meakest and weakest cells of our body gather knowledge and thus generate intelligence from that knowledge. As such, intelligence is not to be measured as it can also be the intelligence of something like for example stone or rock or whatever it is that is requiring both knowledge and intelligence to form out the form of being it has chosen to be or was driven to be by internal and external forces.
As such, intelligence can only be build up by a) gathering knowledge and b) applying that knowledge in whatever real or artificial world the being exists in.
Women in general are coined for the three K's at least it is called this way in germany for a very long time (Kitchen, Church and Children that is). As such, all their assorted knowledge never came to utilization as they have ever been occupied by looking after the household including children etc. So their intelligence is in fact most often very limited and by that their assorted knowledge is reduced, essentially making them kind of moronic if you take my word not to personally.
Men, on the other hand, most often have been workers and / or thinkers and tinkers that had every chance of applying their knowledge to generate more intelligence from and by that to also increase their knowledge in their field of specialization.
However, some men are not intelligent, some women are intelligent; and, whoever creates the context and measures the intelligence in that context will gather and experience different results by the intelligence tests they apply to the people, be it either women (woe to men;-) or men.
At least, this is my personal reasoning of the fact.
The idea that is attributed to Linus is not essentially his idea. Many more people had this idea, even I. And the I thinks that there is no library of patents as patents themselves are opposite to free market. They monopolize. The database of patents should rather be a database of vital thread to public and private development in opposite to a database of virtually benefitial patents held by some individuals based in either the open source or of liberated patents.
A database of thread to public and open development would be more specific and in this by itself would be more true than building up a database of open-sourced patents or patents that are held by any of the open-source developers just in order to show that also the OSS development and activists that both grow and grew out of OSS development are capable of also issuing patent registrations etc.
And, yes, I personally recognize patents as a thread and a tendency to monopolize where there actually can not be any monopoly, ie free economy and free market, free decision, free as in beer not as in..., just because there is no speech anymore, not free of course.
While we speak about monopolism we also speak about public economies, ie states, that fight against monopolism, yet the duality is fulfilled and they grant monopolism by introducing patents, and also, as we have here in Germany, and perhaps in other states in the world, so-called petty patents, we also grant people who have developed something petty to also be granted full future-extension-and-copy-control and by thus monopolism to its full extend. Haven't we learnt anything from the past industrial phase of (de-)humanization? Have we only listened to the economic mind? If so, we have listened and interpreted the call on a wrong basis. The call is, actually, to make everything free, as it not only provides for all of us living, but also for the structural beings that are yet to come, and believe me, mankind is only the beginning, and the end of itself - as it strives not only for intellectual property but also for mind control.
Just my two or more worth of cents...
Carsten
Slashdot Mirror
At our company, we use a heterogeneous setting: Windows XP and Linux (Kubuntu that is).
The XP machines we set up for development purposes (Eclipse, PHP, XAMP) are now, not quite
7 months after their first installment, at the bottom of usability, so to say. Everything
on these machines takes longer and longer, with nothing having been installed in-between
except the required updates for the development platform.
On the linux machines it is different, quite a few update to the installed development
software, upgrades to the system and installation of a few gadgets and still everything
works fine and most of all responsive.
And, what is more, yesterdays I received a notification by XP (professional taht is, based
on the proven NT platform), saying that the MSDOS driver would not function properly
after inserting a certain CDROM... remember that this is a off-the-shelf installation of
the system.
To my account, Linux is more desktop ready than any other platform, except perhaps the also
Unix based Mac OS X environment.
Just my 2
Regards.
a third party stable VM for their own VM, and, in case that does not work out with current marketing strategies, even faster boot times.
Red Screen of Death, haha, we had the good ol' fashioned GURU MEDITATION once, if anyone can remember... and that beast did boot up very fast afterwards...
Besides that, it was also a sloth menace in virus prevention, in fact, it did spread viruses like hell in the good old days they were...
SCNR
And, if you hide the defines very well beneath a pile of mud, then nobody will ever know that you actually are using gotos.
However, they will know that you use multiple exit points and that is bad design unless you are doing low level kernel and
device driver hacking...
--------
#define try
#define catch(X) X:
#define throw(X) goto X;
void doweirdstuff()
{
try
a = malloc(100);
if ( !a )
{
throw(ABC);
}
b = malloc(100);
if ( !a )
{
throw(DEF);
}
free( b );
free( a );
return XYZ;
catch(ABC)
return XYZ;
catch(DEF)
free( a );
return XYZ;
}
The part about auto-boxing is generally not true, especially when it comes to low-level generic interface method invocation.
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/1200/dot
objects in the language, the very same concepts of auto-boxing and unboxing take place as they are implemented in the Java
language.
to this:
less stress, semi-freedom of choice, higher availability, less crashes, higher productivity, increased to the max usability, what more *your suggestions*?
but first of all: it is non M.
it is not _expelled_ (note to my self: remember) but excelled
*g
And, additionally, it is M paragraph sign and not just M. Why does slashdot still not support the new synonym given to M$?
I mean, they are more into legal issues than ever before, with all their trivial patenting (off topic now) stuff going on,
the same with Intel...
Yet, they have not recognized yet that they are no longer in that position.
There is plenty of innovation going on, most of which is bought by the so-called market leaders
the sooner that they realize that it would eat into their profits and by that would cost them a lot
of market share.
Remember when Intel licensed stuff from AMD that essentially made things easier with 64bit computing and all?
Intel tries to remain in the position that they have not excelled in by the day that they realized their very
first processor "architecture", something I would term as being the least of the least things that I would think
of implementing in anything that I would someday then or future-wise would have devised.
However, they have strong marketing, and that is what sells, nowadays and then way after.
I remember the time when I, in my first essential project, had to build up a computer from scratch, based on some
x86 cpu, eventually soldering all connections required by my self. Later then I had to program that god dam thing
as well, not exactly the self-soldered single board computer, however, I learned that the Intel architecture is all
about keeping the past alive and well and by that also the company alive and well, by no means ever going into different
directions, that might have been more benefiting to the overall customership (see the original writer).
Instead, they bought out the xscale architecture from arm, which, actually, by far expelled the Intel based architecture
by far, however, I do not see any desktop products produced today that use the very same architecture, instead, we
strive with the very same old architecture that we had back then in the 1970s...
Somehow, this reminds me of M.
Regards
Carsten
at the beginning there was vista (from where did they get that name?)
SCNR
Carsten
shit, why does slashdot not support the paragraph sign? replace all occurrences of M with M paragraph sign please.
emoticons, so to say. Those are not supported by the current M invented emoticon driving technology and never will be. Sad, should I sue them because they do not care about my own emoticons?
Or do they provide a way for inclusion of self-defined emoticons? If so, they are really at it and top of the notch, so to say. Remembers me somehow of M research where they do whatever shit has done before, calling it innovation.
Who actually cares about them anyhow, the American patenting system is already down the drain and will go down further with M recognizing it. Somehow this remembers me on the way they dealt with technology, look at it now!
Cheers for a brighter M deprived future
Carsten
violence stuff in tha head.
first there was violence stuff in tha head, woe, which we made to proceed to become virtually physical violence that then always destroyed the becoming of the people and the land - then we created the virtual video game console bearing virtual video game violence.
so what? first, there was the virtual stuff, then there was the virtual physical stuff, next then to it we put into their mouth and *shooot* stuff.
who cares, only dem hypocrites do.
dem who shoot everyday, spray the word and make you pay. dem who teach you the wrong way. dem tell you now that to stop upon virtual violence killing would be a good way? while dem keep you at killing you virtually physically every day? dem only afraid that we move upon them.
no way.
rebellion, fight dem hypocrates
kill dem virtual targets, kill dem physically offending targets in US i say.
Just imagine them peops being teached how to - throw chairs across the room - shout out "I will kill 'em all, I have done it before, I will do it again" Steve Ballmeresque management lectures being told, a society gone to waste. SCNR
And by that, licensing the technology to whatever firm is interested in it? I have been experiencing the same RSI as said person. With proper workout and different patterns of movement I have been able to resolve the problem in fewer than 3 months. However, as work continues, I will not be able to actually apply different movement patterns anymore, therefore I require new technology. Who is in for open source development of such technology with proper licensing so that we still get our share, apart from the recognition, from it? Regards, Carsten PS: If you like to contact me, feel free to mail me at carstenklein (at) yahoo (dot) de
NT
Administrators have done this ever since.
You pay as you go get a new cup of coffee while waiting for the system to restart.
SCNR
shit on me...it's frozen to death, repeat: frozen...
Time's not so bad out here, once you've been freezed to death and nearly dismembered whilst gettin' on with what is yours, seeing it all being stolen by those that made you run...
Steve: Ok, guys, I love this company...repeat...I looove this company (throws chair around). Bill: And remember, if it compiles, it ships... Dev-Team: But we're already special casing here... Steve: (looking angry) Bill: If it compiles, it is good enough for shipping, let the active user basis sort it out... Dev-Team: Well, look this special case here, where it says that all of Microsoft is GOOD and everything else is BAD, it might cause systems to go awry... Bill: It's awry in the first place, so don't care on fixing this until it is required to be fixed, we definetly can introduce more special casing if required...does it compile already? Dev-Team: Well, er, yes, a few errors and a few warnings, but no black box testing was done yet... Bill: Testing? Steve: (whispering into Bill's ear) you know that sort of thing that would prevent us from shipping early... Bill: Ah, erm, yes, ok. It compiles. Comment out the lines that produce the errors and re-compile. Ignore the warnings...and ship that damn patch. We have this initiative running, you know, security it was called, I believe. Ah, I love this company. Steve: (remember Dim from the Clockwork Orange?) Ah, I love this company... Dev-Team: Bill, you are genius, after commenting out the faulty lines and setting the compiler flag to ignore all warnings, it compiles just fine. Thanks for your great insight...a pleasure to be working for you! Ah, we love this company (even more so like Dim). SCNR. Carsten
however, applying it to the boot drive is somewhat non-trivial. Right click on your boot drive and select Format Disk... SCNR...
first, it is free. second, it therefore cannot suck, never.
And, as to the non-integrated email / calendaring application, I for my part am using
the Mozilla Suite, soon to be replaced by the SeaMonkey Suite. Both, Mozilla and OOo
perfectly fit together and furthermore, security holes in OOo (not really holes as OOo
is actually not made fit for distributed computing, but it will be in the near future)
do not interfere with my Email correspondence and vice versa. And, we all know what
kind of steep curve learning process Microsoft has had when bundling email/internet and
their Office Suite. And we all paid for that and this sucks.
Quality takes time, I heard once someone saying, and it is true. Whilst MS Office gets
less and less comfortable and suitable for more than the average Joe's daily email-writing/
letter writing task, OOo becomes more and more suitable for replacing everything with more
stable and better implementations, implementations that are highly reusable and therefore
create a wealth of its own. I do not see that in the MS Office Suite.
Prediction: as soon as the rich client facilities of the OOo are made stable and a suitable
profile or multiple suitable profiles for the individiual solutions based on those rich clients
have been found out and defined, MS Office will lack as it had 10 years ago.
Perhaps then, MS Office will be enabled to stable manage documents that include more than the
average Joe's 10 pages at max, with lots of embedded documents and other objects etc.
Best wishes to you, MS, who lacked all the time.
Cheers
Carsten
Recently I checked on my webserver logs and found out that, although my site is actually "out-of-order" due to my very own lazyness, the msnbot checks at least once sometimes multiple times per day my site, although there is actually no information to be found except an open letter to the world right now. Now, as I am paying for excessive traffic on this virtual server, it would actually be a kind of self-defense in order to reduce expected cost by exceeding the traffic limit, in that I would lead the msnbot into a honeypot from where it may never come out unless it terminates the connection. That said, how about showing them fudders who is really providing original content and who is really able to at least provide a decent search engine. I call upon you to program honeypots that will lead the msnbot and all the other bots from Microsoft into a neverending loop from where they will only escape if they themselves close the connection, with no information whatsoever being transmitted to Microsoft at all. This would, in case MS has approx. 10 bot servers running, lead to a stall in their information and content harvesting, for whatever purposes they have in mind. In my opinion they also use it for finding out about new developments on which they had never thought about in the first place. next, protecting your paid traffic and therefore your site from exceeding limits and by that forcedly going offline by this badly programmed bot which is not capable of deciding whether or not to look at a site, even if there have been no changes to the site in-between multiple visits of the bot. Personally I do not think that just excluding the msnbot from reading beyond robots.txt is the proper way to go, we have to shut them out and cause their bot to stall in exchange, by not finding any more available ports on their machine for outside world connections. What is your opinion to that? Are you in?
there is no free market. Market is always defined by restrain, necessity and lastly also pressure. Restrain by local to global laws, neccessity to always outdo the competition and pressure that either is created by the competition on your business or by the market itself (customers) that won't pull off, ie your products won't sell or won't reach your expected numbers of sales so that you eventually have to react and redefine your portfolio of products. Lastly, there is also no free market in that all participants of the market are dependent on each other, so that there is always an active force that enforces some restrain, necessity or pressure on your business and on the market. Free as in speech it of course mostly is, not for all products though, considering legal prosecution of export of for example strong encryption methods etc. But then again, what is freedom of speech worth if there is actually no freedom? And what is more, global markets are divided by the global players, whether they be the biggest players out there or the so-called smaller businesses. And, by dividing the market and of course the market shares, everyone is interested to keep that share or increase the amount of market share. With that in mind, and the introduction of b2b, we find that free market is actually a lie in that the market it a planned market and lastly also a planned economy. Of course, the actors in that economy mostly act on their behalf, being restricted by said restrains, necessities and pressure. They act semi-free in that they decide on their behalf and not on behalf of some third party that actually defines what to produce and when. Taking necessity into account and existing business relations (b2b), you will actually find that the only freedom one does have in the so-called free market is whether or not to actually be a part of that so-called free market. And, if that is what freedom leaves us as a choice in respect to market, then freedom is void in respect to the market, it is either be in it or leave it. And, considering that when you start complaining about something, it is always: you better leave as others who seek out to keep the system as it is, will eventually drive you out of it. Just my two cents, Carsten
more intelligent, more responsible, more free in my decision, more of everything...
I think that knowledge is required for intelligence, which is effectfully the application of that knowledge in context. As such, even the meakest and weakest cells of our body gather knowledge and thus generate intelligence from that knowledge. As such, intelligence is not to be measured as it can also be the intelligence of something like for example stone or rock or whatever it is that is requiring both knowledge and intelligence to form out the form of being it has chosen to be or was driven to be by internal and external forces. As such, intelligence can only be build up by a) gathering knowledge and b) applying that knowledge in whatever real or artificial world the being exists in. Women in general are coined for the three K's at least it is called this way in germany for a very long time (Kitchen, Church and Children that is). As such, all their assorted knowledge never came to utilization as they have ever been occupied by looking after the household including children etc. So their intelligence is in fact most often very limited and by that their assorted knowledge is reduced, essentially making them kind of moronic if you take my word not to personally. Men, on the other hand, most often have been workers and / or thinkers and tinkers that had every chance of applying their knowledge to generate more intelligence from and by that to also increase their knowledge in their field of specialization. However, some men are not intelligent, some women are intelligent; and, whoever creates the context and measures the intelligence in that context will gather and experience different results by the intelligence tests they apply to the people, be it either women (woe to men ;-) or men.
At least, this is my personal reasoning of the fact.
The idea that is attributed to Linus is not essentially his idea. Many more people had this idea, even I. And the I thinks that there is no library of patents as patents themselves are opposite to free market. They monopolize. The database of patents should rather be a database of vital thread to public and private development in opposite to a database of virtually benefitial patents held by some individuals based in either the open source or of liberated patents. A database of thread to public and open development would be more specific and in this by itself would be more true than building up a database of open-sourced patents or patents that are held by any of the open-source developers just in order to show that also the OSS development and activists that both grow and grew out of OSS development are capable of also issuing patent registrations etc. And, yes, I personally recognize patents as a thread and a tendency to monopolize where there actually can not be any monopoly, ie free economy and free market, free decision, free as in beer not as in ..., just because there is no speech anymore, not free of course.
While we speak about monopolism we also speak about public economies, ie states, that fight against monopolism, yet the duality is fulfilled and they grant monopolism by introducing patents, and also, as we have here in Germany, and perhaps in other states in the world, so-called petty patents, we also grant people who have developed something petty to also be granted full future-extension-and-copy-control and by thus monopolism to its full extend. Haven't we learnt anything from the past industrial phase of (de-)humanization? Have we only listened to the economic mind? If so, we have listened and interpreted the call on a wrong basis. The call is, actually, to make everything free, as it not only provides for all of us living, but also for the structural beings that are yet to come, and believe me, mankind is only the beginning, and the end of itself - as it strives not only for intellectual property but also for mind control.
Just my two or more worth of cents...
Carsten