Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:58:33 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard), hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation Message-ID: <199701201958.MAA15627@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199701201752.KAA15603@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <17107.853740593@time.cdrom.com> <199701201752.KAA15603@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert writes:
> I admit that following pattern-flow logic requires the ability to
> follow patern-flow logic. If you've got it, you've got it; if you
> haven't, it's "tediously unreadable". Like Clifford Algebras or
> Chebyenchev Polynomials.
Translation:
Terry: I'm a stud, you're not.
> > > OBSERVATION: Other OS's have achieved these tasks.
> >
> > "OBSERVATION: NO OS has acheived these tasks without paying a
> > full-time staff, and none of the free OS camps has enough clued-in
> > bodies to do even half the things they'd like (and possibly even need)
> > to do. Terry is peering into alternate universe again due to local
> > field effect of as-yet undetermined nature."
>
> 1) Linux has ELF.
> 2) FreeBSD does not.
> 3) ELF is desirable
> 4) Linux is doing something right that FreeBSD isn't.
Item 4 is *NOT* the inevitable result of 1, 2, and 3. You've forgotten
that ELF was *necessary* in Linux in order for it to get beyond a
certain stage, and it's not (yet) necessary in FreeBSD.
Plus, the entire move to ELF was *NOT* done with the users best interest
in mind.
> 1) Linux has a large number of willing bodies
> 2) FreeBSD complains of a dearth of bodies.
> 3) Allocation of bodies to the projects is based on the
> interaction of the social organism with the larger society.
> 4) Linux is doing something right that FreeBSD isn't.
- Microsoft has a large number of willing bodies willing to test it's
software for free.
...
- Microsoft's model must be superior...
Hmm, somewhere there is a logic fallacy.
> > > QUESTION: Why is is that the adoption of ELF is categorized
> > > as premature, when it works?
> >
> > Defense lawyer: "Objection!"
> >
> > Judge: "Yes, Mr. Selachii?"
> >
> > Selachii: "The actual statement was ``a premature move to elf'', the
> > context of which makes it quite clear that any assumption of
> > maturity, or lack thereof, refers entirely to the action of
> > movement, or in this case the merging of code, rests entirely
> > with the speed or pace at which this action is carried out
> > and does not, in fact, make any assumptions or claims
> > concerning the actual maturity level of the ELF software
> > itself."
> >
> > Judge: "What!?"
>
> Judge: Overruled, Mr. Selachii. During discovery, you agreed
> with Prosecution's posit that "ELF was a good thing".
> You did not attach conditions then, and I will not
> allow you to attach conditions now.
Right!
You want to play stupid word games:
1) Bill Gates has a couple billion dollars
2) Terry does not
3) Having a couple billion dollars is a good thing since Terry
wants to invest in nano-technology
4) Terry is doing something wrong.
Terry: But, but having a billion dollars isn't as important to me as
finding good solution to problems, rather than re-using existing
technology.
Judge: Over-ruled, not external stipulations are allowed, you agreed
that having a couple billion dollars was a good thing and *NOTHING* can
stand in the way of you making it your only priority in life.
So Terry, I want to see you start quitting time posting to the mailing
lists and instead I want to see your name with the likes of Marc A.,
Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates in the next year.
Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701201958.MAA15627>