In the bottom-right corner of the above mentioned website, I noticed what might be a very recent addition:
Disclaimer: In case you are either 1) a complete idiot; or 2) a lawyer; or 3) both, please be aware that this site is not affiliated with or approved by Canonical Limited. This site criticizes Canonical for certain privacy-invading features of Ubuntu and teaches users how to fix them. So, obviously, the site is not approved by Canonical. And our use of the trademarked term Ubuntu is plainly descriptive - it helps the public find this site and understand its message.
There's always been a kind of "change is bad/one system forever!" monoculture in the IT sectors in Korea (and, in lots of other area in Korea too, but let's keep to the topic.)
Other pet peeves:
1. Making whole pages textual information just (titled up) jpeg images of... text, because they're too set in the ways (read: "lazy") to learn how to use HTML to position text and make it do what they want. (That, and having a fast local network, too; some older pages still have a 10MB flash based "welcome" graphic.... just because.) I've actually sat in on a class at a Korean computer institute and they were just concentrating on 1.) designing in Photoshop, 2.) exporting the whole canvas as a "page", and 3) doing very basic editing in the HTML editor to define some click hotspots. That's it.
2. Just trying to buy a pre-built computer system off the shelf that isn't Windows/Intel CPU/nVidia GPU. You'll have a hard time finding them in (South) Korea. You see, the hardware cartel of Intel/nVidia were established early in the PCbangs (LAN cafes)â"where most people encountered their first PC, so that's what everybody now looks for when they go shopping for a home PC. AMD parts can now be found on Gmaket or down in Yongsan, but they're not often bufled together.
This troper...
There's a trope for that.
One question he was asked was whether a government agency had ever asked about inserting a back-door into Linux. Torvalds responded 'no' while shaking his head 'yes,'
That's actually quite a cunning answer: possibly, regardless of his answer to the back-door request (I hope the answer was something like "No, fuck you"), like others in comparable situations have hinted at, maybe he's being held accountable to some kind of on-going government "Non-disclosure clause" concerning such a request/conversation.
But can body language and gestures be held up to the same legal gagging? I'm sure no legal precedent been held for that yet, and Linus probably is aware of that.
A cunning, cunning way of answering the question.
Successful and fortunate crime is called virtue. - Seneca