Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Linux Founder Disrespects Ancestors, Steals the Thunder

  • Subject: Re: [News] Linux Founder Disrespects Ancestors, Steals the Thunder
  • From: Homer <usenet@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:16:44 +0000
  • Cancel-lock: sha1:LmbxtV4+Akf4gZv7BwCQYrFRjCs=
  • In-reply-to: <4750404.mLDv0zQrD6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Openpgp: id=BF436EC9; url=http://slated.org/files/GPG-KEY-SLATED.asc
  • Organization: Slated.org
  • References: <4750404.mLDv0zQrD6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-GB; rv: Gecko/20080723 Fedora/ Thunderbird/ Mnenhy/
  • Xref: ellandroad.demon.co.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:706502

Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:

> Unjustifiable Criticism of Richard Stallman by Linus Torvalds

The reason has always been that I don't like single-issue people, nor do
I think that people who turn the world into black and white are very
nice or ultimately very useful.


I assume he's advocating apathy, rather than outright support for
gangsters like Microsoft. The problem, or rather one of many problems,
with Torvalds analysis, is it ignores the possibility that sometimes an
issue /is/ "black and white". If Torvalds stopped preening in the mirror
long enough to take a look around, he'd see the full scale of the threat
Microsoft poses, not just against Linux, but in a much wider context
too. The fact that Torvalds is disinterested in Microsoft's unethical
behaviour, particularly when it's directed towards the community of
which he is supposedly a central part, should not mean that others
aren't justified in being outraged about such behaviour.

For example, I wonder if Torvalds finds any ambiguity in Microsoft's
bribery of Nigerian education suppliers, to backtrack on a finalised
agreement to provide Mandriva to Nigerian schools (later overturned due
to public exposure and the subsequent backlash)?

Is there anything less than crystal-clear about Microsoft attempting to
bribe Swedish ISO delegates to vote for OOXML at the BRM for DIS29500?

What is not "black and white" about Ballmer making unfounded allegations
of "undisclosed balance sheet liabilities", and claiming that "Linux is
a cancer"?

Presumably Torvald's reaction to this thuggish behaviour is "Microsoft
ain't so bad".

Is he blind; delusional or just as maliciously motivated as the Redmond
gangsters who he thinks it's wrong to criticise?

I don't know about our Finnish friend, but if someone attacks me (or the
community I'm a part of), I tend to fight back, rather than bend over
and grab my ankles whilst condemning those who stand up for what's right.

Torvalds is rapidly shaping up to be the next Jörg Schilling, or a
slightly less productive version of him, anyway. Maybe it's time the
Free Software community redirected its efforts towards the Hurd, then
Torvalds can go play in the corner with "his" kernel, while the rest of
us do what's in the best interest of the /whole/ community - protecting
that community and its software from unambiguously vicious predators
like Microsoft.


| "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
|  the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
|  weeks after initial exposure to Lisp."   ~ Constantine Vetoshev

Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel
 21:16:27 up 14 days,  4:59,  3 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index