Linus and his Merry Men (aka H4) 63
jra wrote int to send
us a link to another ESR composition, this one humorously
titled
'Halloween 4'.
It's actually a funny little extrapolation on the recent
comments from MS's Ed Muth referring to the Open Source
Community as Robin Hood and the Band of Merry Men.
It's New Years, It's Funny. Enjoy it.
Guns vs. encryption (Score:1)
---
Flawed. Read first. (Score:1)
People here in this thread are not going into some very important issues about guns. Reading this, it's like if guns were the product of some domestically grown plant or whatever. The truth is, guns are built by big companies for a profit. For a profit means they are willing to sell to almost anyone. For example, to third world dictatorial goverments that use them to arm death squads against peasants. In fact, the US government has been this whole century heavily involved in that (think El Salvador, Guatemala, Indonesia and others, armed by the US).
I think most USians have never seen armed official repression first hand. I for one, have luckily only had a really slight taste of it, which involved no shooting, just sharpshooters aiming rifles from helicopters at unarmed students for no good reason; just to make a show of force, film the whole thing, edit it, and make some propaganda about "students attacking our democratic ideals". Political persecution, that's it. (The pro-statehood party in Puerto Rico has a long history of political persecution against independentists. Kidnapping, murder, infilitration, and public massacres in my university included).
The point being, it's easy to defend the right of USians (and conveniently ignoring the rest of the world) to bear arms (and therefore defending the arms industry) while sitting comfortable in front of a computer, reading /., getting flown around first-class to give conferences, and, in general, close to the top of the food chain, claiming that you need to defend yourself from those in the bottom of said chain.
Just thinking about the immediate issue of 'self-defense' is failing to grasp the big picture, where a few privileged few who enjoy huge power, which the people did not appoint to, benefit from all this misery. Think Indonesia and Guatemala again: governmental death squads, armed by the US, massacre people to defend the interests of huge corporations.
I figure I'm just ranting by now. So I'll come to a close. The best reasons for opposing arms are, IMHO, antimilitarism and pacifism in general. This does not mean opposing the right to defend oneself against criminal aggression in the USA; it means opposing the purported right of a select, non-elected few to profit from widespread misery, all over the world.
---
Misc. reply (Score:1)
I use Fetchmail everyday and am greatful to ESR for his excellent software as well as how he has promoted OpenSource, but I also share some skepticism about all the different licenses that are coming out. I agree with the poster that said it makes things confusing for the average programmer.
I'm curious as to why some posters had to bring up ESR's politics in their comments. What that has to do with this piece of writing is baffling.
However, since gun control was brought up i'd like you to consider the following:
Look at all those gun freaks always ranting and raving about their Freedoms. Only criminals need guns anyway, right? Besides, we have a trained professional military and police force with better resources than some scruffy gun freak to protect us.
Sound anything like:
Look at all those open source freaks always ranting and raving about their Freedoms. The only people who need encryption are criminals, right? Those folks are a bunch of ragged hackers, why do they need to build an OS when we have professional programmers with better resources to build us one?
I'm truly curious what people think about this. I am all for Geeks with Guns. Its in the American Bill of Rights for a purpose. Think Free Speech not Free Beer:)
Happy New Year!
Encryption is defensive, not offensive (Score:1)
The analogy is flawed. Be careful.
Score one, because it's funny (Score:1)
I was ready to cringe when I saw this -- some already consider ESR a bit too daffy [tuxedo.org] for the spokesperson role.
However, the story turned out to be hilarious, well written & has a nice plot twist at the end (cliché, but hey, it's a fairy tale!). I hope this gets passed around by email.
Why be boring? The world doesn't need more 'Nightline'-friendly talking heads, it needs millenial pranksters [the-revolution.org] with a serious message.
Friar Eric seems to get all the best lines for some reason, though. :)
Flawed Horse Hockey (Score:1)
This absurd interpretation of the Second Amendment isn't shared by serious legal scholars -- or indeed by anyone who has studied the Amendment's history.
You may want to check out some or all of these:
Palladium of Liberty? [2ndlawlib.org] (Oklahoma City U Law Review, 1996)
The Second Amendment: Toward an Afro-Americanist Reconsideration [2ndlawlib.org] (Georgetown Law Journal, 1991)
The Embarrassing Second Amendment [2ndlawlib.org] (Yale Law Journal, 1989)
These are just a few of the more than 40 articles published in the last two decades on the subject. Of these articles, only two (both, incidentally, by lawyers known more as political hacks than scholars) agree with your assertion.
Craig
Hmm.. (Score:1)
What a great way... (Score:1)
Down with MS-FUD in '99!
-Falcor
Vinod cringes elaborately. (Score:1)
--
Dat rules. (Score:1)
Lord of the Rings? (Score:1)
Hehe. Loved it. I kept thinking of the Robin Hood cartoon all the way through. I liked the Vinod character the best.
How about Lord of the Rings next? Bill could be Sauron, Ed Muth plays Saruman, Vinod plays Wormtongue (hehe). Hmmm, except I don't quite see Linus as Frodo. More of a Gandalf really. Oh well ...
What a hoot! (Score:1)
Nathless, I got a kick out of it.
I found it funny (Score:1)
You know, the only selfserving things I could find that ESR says are in major press publications (on line or on dead wood.) And we all know they NEVER take statements out of context, right? Hell, half the things I've seen that they've quoted from Linus make him sound like an egotistical jerk. I've just seen enough outside the press that I know this is exactly opposite of truth. I don't think it would matter who the press (or the community) chose to be "spokesman." Until we get more writers like Nick and Jon, we are going to have to deal with the press not understanding, and in turn misleading the public.
ESR has a dry sense of humor, it seems. Alot of hidden sarcasm (which I find funny, because I see it even in some misleading mainstream articles.) Maybe less of that, with monotone, humorless statements is what you'd like? Maybe that would create a better image... but personally, I like it. It forces intelligent reading, not just letting the words go in and stick. People should THINK, man. Of course, too few do these days (else FUD would not exist at all.)
This isn't a marketing machine, after all. And thank God for that.
Flawed. Read first. (Score:1)
What is this "well-regulated militia..." thing, if it isn't intended as a restriction/qualification? The writers of the Constitution are otherwise so exquisitely economical with words. If the 2nd Amendment is intended to just give individuals the right to bear arms whenever and wherever they please -- why not just say so? Just wondering, I am no law man.
And why is it, that in quotes of the 2nd Amendment by NRA folks, this preamble commonly is forgotten? What do their lawyers know that I don't?
I don't mind people keeping Kalashnikovs for hunting rifles, or hand guns for target practice. It's OK with me, Eric, you're safely on the other side of the ocean
Back to topic, your newest piece was good for a smile. But I didn't like the name. I think the "Hallowe'en theme" has been milked enough by now.
And I still like fetchmail more.
Flawed. Read first. (Score:1)
It would be more accurate to compare Microsoft with, e.g., Mussolini (yes, he did make the trains run on time).
And about the Constitution, please read it first (Art. II of the Bill of Rights):
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
This simply gives the states of the US the right to keep up their own militia. That's all. No right to arm bears!
Time for another tea party, I guess.
Bashing (it could be worse..could be cshing) (Score:1)
People..get a clue. I don't *know* ESR, but I have met him. He is warm, witty and passionate about Linux, open software and other geeky things. I don't happen to share his love of firearms, but then again I don't have any right to judge him about it either.
It's his choice to write these pieces, and your choice to read it or not. It is his right to be able to express himself as he so desires as long as he harms no one. On the other hand, you have NO right to expect him to make you happy or agree with you.
Happy New Year to all of you, including the MSCEs out there. It's going to be a wild year for us geeks so put on your seat belt...
ESR, thanks for you sharing your gift of words and IMHO funny sense of humor!
--Rick [peachnet.edu]
Not funny (Score:1)
"It's New Years, It's Funny," It's ... (Score:1)
Can you say "self-indulgent", boys and girls? I knew you could.
When I saw "Friar Eric", I got a bad taste in my mouth. "Hey, gang, my very funny story, starring ME!" Umm, I think not. If someone other than ESR had written it and assigned a role to "Friar Eric", perhaps I would not have hit my back button so fast. So sue me.
With all due respect to ESR for "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", IMHO his apparent grandstanding is counterproductive to Linux and free software/open source at times.
Hm.. Borland and Citrix (Score:1)
Heres a typical Scenarios... MS comes in, checks out your software, announces they could do the same thing with a couple of programmers, offers you an insuliting low price to purchase. When you refuse, they hire a couple of programmers, steal your ideas, make it different enough to avoid being sued, put you out of business.
Borland (now Inprise) caught MS using Borlands' own technology against them. They had to modify their license agreement, so that you have to get permission to distribute more than 10,000 copies of your software. (Don't worry, if you're not making something that is competing with them, you will get approval, and still royalty free).
So, in the end, MS realy does believe in open source, that is, everybody elses open source so they can benefit. Can you say "hypocrosy"?
Bleah. (Score:1)
Yessss! (Score:1)
--
Defensive use of offensive tech... (Score:1)
Is a gun specifically made to put holes in people? Well... That appears to be the function that the designers had in mind, yeah.
But still, a gun (or your car) CAN be used offensively, but so far I haven't seen any casualties from the use of encryption. Which was the original point, if you remember.
Still flawed (Score:1)
It doesn't matter if you can use a gun defensively, it's still designed to be a pretty offensive thing. I don't see how you can use encryption in an offensive way.
And how about ICBM's with nuclear warheads then? They are used defensively most of the time too. Yet you have to admit that they can be pretty damn offensive once you actually use them.
Hm. (Score:1)
I happen to know a guy who likes Linux (in fact, he was the one who introduced me to it) and is a MSCE at the same time. He must earn money to survive somehow. Go figure! But I guess all who are in any way associated with Microsoft is tainted and evil?
"A few MCSEs try to lay hands on them. Tove side-kicks the luckless minions. They fall down."
Haha. Violence. Fun.
I'm also sick of Eric's "nerds with guns" propaganda which has occasionally appeared in Slashdot.
"If you're politically correct you'd better skip this -- it might put you in danger of learning something." Right.
Silmarillion... (Score:1)
BillG = Melkor
SBallmer = Sauron
Ed Muth = That spider thing (predecessor of Shelob)
Vinod = Just another Balrog
Saruman & Wormtongue = traitors (yet to be determined)
Free software bashers = Orcs
RMS = Iluvatar, maybe? (Father of all, including the gods, humans, elves, earth, and whatever else)
Linus = Ea
Other high-profile PROGRAMMERS = other gods (sort out yourself)
Mithrandir (Gandalf) and his peers = loud voices we all know (insert names here), that try to steer our future course. Who is who is yet unknown. (Remember, possible traitors can be in this catagory as well:)
Elves = All the hackers, programmers, and others that have been contributing for a long time.
Humans = the general public
Heroes = those that GET IT, understand, and try to help. Some on a par with some of the elves.
Just some ramblings. Corrections/improvements welcome.
No I'm not a big "Hero Worship" guy. I just find much amusement in analogies.
Smurfs? (Score:1)
Smurfs? (Score:1)
overkill? (Score:1)
ESR is an embarrassment (Score:1)
he's not as cloyingly cutesy as larry wall, but that's not saying much. humor requires a lighter touch and a greater sense of the absurd than ESR has (or for that matter larry wall, who makes piers anthony look subtle). ESR is not a fool, and he has contributed infinitely more to OSS than i have, but he's making an ass of himself trying to play a role that doesn't fit.
he also seems to be trying to bootstrap a halloween memo industry here. he's milking it for all it's worth. "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" is great stuff, and important to boot, but all he's doing now is advertising himself. i read his annotated version of halloween II, and the comments were mostly obvious, pointless, and cocky. i was embarrassed for him.
point taken. (Score:1)
point taken.
Are you saying there's only The One True Way to humour?
eek! i'm not denying that there may be many roads to humor; i'm simply saying that ESR isn't on any of them. he's writing schlock.
And you have a patent on it? Geeezz, if you don't like it, write your own!
oh, lord, i can't write humor worth a damn. it's hard to write humor, and i'm not much of a writer to begin with. i guess my excuse (for what it's worth) is that i can't write operating systems either, but i can still judge for myself whether or not win95 is a crock.
i think, anyhow, that there's plenty of room to respect ESR and value his many contributions, while still thinking that the robin hood play is terrible. and if i "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" hadn't impressed me so much, i wouldn't give a damn about ESR one way or the other. i am not saying "ESR sucks!", because he doesn't suck. though i haven't met him, i think he's cool. what sucks is lame cash-in sequels, and unfortunately an apparently cool guy just went and did one.
arrogance? propaganda? (Score:1)
as long as he doesn't complain about microsoft being arrogant and propagandistic, i don't mind. heh.
the problem here IMHO is that we have an Open Source Spokesmodel who is not actually speaking for the whole OSS community. he undoubtedly speaks for a large portion of it; there are a lot of very favorable comments here. but, uh, i don't necessarily want this guy to speak for me, thank you.
but how do you appoint spokesmodels for a completely decentralized movement? how, indeed! you let them float to the top, just like ESR did (and for good reason at the time), and stallman, and the rest. when they slide back down, though, it becomes divisive. the Open Source Trademark Battle thing is really depressing. this internal bickering makes OSS look like a bunch of squabbling kids. it doesn't help either that a lot of talk out of the OSS camp makes it look like a bunch of random people united by their dislike for bill gates, rather than a stable and remarkably productive technical culture dating back to the 1950's, which is what it is (and ESR if anybody must know that, because i learned it from the jargon file!). microsoft is our retarded younger brother. be firm with him, but don't be mean.
slashdot wouldn't be slashdot without microsoft-bashing, but our spokesmodels should know better. how long has the linux advocacy FAQ been around?
if he were just speaking for himself it would be an entirely different matter. i, for example, am just a random nut. nothing i say will ever be public enough to affect public perceptions of OSS.
Where is RMS? (Score:1)
Not bad (Score:1)
It's only funny when it's true. (Score:1)
Hey dumbass! (Score:1)
Yes there is. Unix expertise is harder to fake than Windows. Any idiot can fake their way through an interview for a Windows NT administrator position. The same can not be said about a Unix administrator position. This is simply due to the fact that the minimal skills required to be a competant Unix administrator are much greater than the minimal skills to be a competant WindowsNT administrator. There are more options and greater flexability in Unix systems, so the knowledge base must be larger than that for WindowsNT.
Point being, if you prove yourself as a competant Unix administrator it usually means you actually know something. If you prove yourself as a competant WindowsNT administrator you may actually know something, but it is not a given and certainly not the usual case.
ON AVERAGE expert Unix administrators have more knowledge and skill than expert WindowsNT administrators. This is not to say that no WindowsNT administrators have more knowledge or skill than Unix adminstrators, some do.
Sorry I had to explain this to you. You may have more knowledge of TCP/IP and "all the related technologies" than I, but I sincerely doubt it.
Talk About Flawed! (Score:1)
Even if it is not true, it makes for a good "offensive" use of encryption. Especially if you held the encryption keys in "ransom" until the company paid up - supposedly to some untraceable electronic fund.
Do you not find kidnapping an "offense?"
You login is flawed, mostly because you don't have the imagination to see how encryption can be used as an offensive weapon.
Hmm.. (Score:1)
BTW: I've been using Linux since 0.96. I believe before
aww yeah! (Score:1)