One could argue that the extremists are those who insist on dragging paedoterrorists, er... I mean SJW into every sodding thread regardless of it's relevance.
Why bring up boogeymenpaedoterroristcriminals, uh, I mean "SJW" on an article about religious extremism and oppression?
It's like you are *determined* to validate my hyopthesis that non ironic use of "SJW" (and for the brain impaired, no, quoting other uses of it doesn't count either) is a 100% perfect indication that the bozo bit is well and truly flipped.
As for the SJWs, they're so full of it that the only people listening to them are other SJW wannabes.
Given that "SJW" is apparently the legion army of evil that anyone can join, what in seven hells is an "SJW wannabe"? And does that mean that SJWs who have received their commission[*] in the legion army of evil no longer listen to each other? Is that how you can tell an "SJW"? No TRUE SJW listens to another SJW? Does it matter if they're Scottish SJWS too?
[*] What about NCOs or mere privates?
All modern browsers except Firefox have decomposed their browser into multiple processes,
Mozilla is doing one better than that. Servo is being written to be provably memory correct and thread safe. Ultimately that's the better solution. Of course, firefox doesn't use servo yet.
All laws should have one.
Alternatively, the law should be limited to a maximum size. Any new law requires removing an old one that was passed during some time of moral panic and no one cares for any more, for example, in order to create space.
Right, because they haven't learned anything whatsoever in 30+ years of developing and maintaining a massive codebase of extremely widely used software.
Apparently not: they're blaming X (the protocol) not Xorg, their implementation of it. Bear in mind under their stewardship it's been largely rewritten. Some of the mistakes are theirs and they're blaming others.
That does not sound like a bunch of people who have learned lessons and will do it better next time.
Compare that to the slow and carful translation of GCC to C++ along with refactoring.
Why would anybody pay more then they were legally required?
Because most people have some degree of moral backbone and understand that the letter of the law is not the same as morals.
Most people don't take advantage of tax loopholes. Most people just have tax deducted from salary in the completely normal way and pay no more thought to it. Some people fill in a tax return and take advantage of a few rebates here and there if applicable[*]. Now, some people screw around with offshore shell corporations to reduce their taxes. That's an option open to many people but most simply don't bother.
So yeah, most people probably pay more tat than they're legally required because the combination of hassle and the skeezy feeling that you're being a bad person when you find some cheat to lower your taxes just is not worth it.
[*] Please don't try to insult my intelligence by claiming that rebates (which are intended by the government and there to promote certain kinds of behaviour) are equivalent to loopholes which are by definition unintended.
When X developers say that X is a pile of kludges and is a pain to maintain,
X is a protocol. Many of their complaints are about their implementation of the protocol that they wrote, not the underlying system. They're essentially blaming X for their own flaws in a number of cases.
If they wrote X as a big pile of kludges, they'll do exactly the same with Wayland.
The Wayland guys are saying that the way X is used these days is far removed from its origins, and it would be cleaner and better to start over.
They say many things. Some are true, some are not. It's just bizarre that they completely take X to task for having API updates over the years, for example. Every system over version 0.1 has API updates, Wayland included.
It shouldn't need as many extensions.
Extension is X11 speak for new API functions. Wayland will get new functions in it's API just like X as time goes on.
And I don't know why you even really care.
A major piece of Linux infrastructure being replaced by a bunch of people who are being dishonest about what they're replacing is just a bad smell to me.
You're a very strange gentleman, you know? You're pointing at the article which says the opposite of what you want as a source for what you want. There's no rebuttal of the article in the article showing it's wrong. That's your unsourced claim.
Not only did they do it wrong, half of the complaints about X are out and out FUD. See my post here:
I didn't say I oppose it, I said it marks you as an idiot, something you are utterly determined to prove me right on.
Knowing X well just allows them to be the kings of FUD as well. I've seen utterly shameless FUD from some of the X/Wayland folks. That they know X means they KNOW it's FUD and it cannot be ascribed to an honest mistake.
See my post here for examples of FUD and rebuttals.
It's not surprising. The people writing Wayland are the current stewards of X, and have been responsible for a number of really user-hostile things in X development too.
For example there used to be a keystroke for killing grabs. They removed it claiming it was "unnecessary" because you only need it if there's a bug in an application. So you should fix the buggy application, rather than just killing the grab (or application) and continuing with your day.
Looks like we're about to get another bozo marker.
So, OK, stop claiming and start proving. So you say the results are not statistically significant, show they are not. Otherwise, yours is just another unsourced opinion from the peanut gallery.
PS you completely ignored one of my points. I take it that you concede that one then.
I don't think the OP was talking about people who use their real names.
And that's the problem. Huge numbers of people use their real names on github.
Taking Slashdot as an example, I think that examples like girlintraining or Gaygirlie are what was being referred to,
But not JustAnotherOldGuy or King Neckbeard.
People who use their real names aren't doing so necessarily to point out their gender, they're just using their real name. People who use an anonymous username that reveals their gender apparently think that everyone should specifically be aware of their gender, as if that matters.
Or they've never thought about it because just about everyone is used to gendered names, so it might never have occurred to them that it matters.
Your code should be more efficient!