You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
someday maybe theyll fix this forum.
in about two seconds, someones going to tell you that "there is no problem."
theyre right, of course. no problem, at all. ive seen the list-- and ill take it over this. AGAIN.
its about my "hate," of course.
thats what they told me last time. funny, thats what torvalds said, too. look it up, its pretty classic.
monopolies are able to change free software so it better serves their freedom than ours.
why is that so difficult to prove to many free software advocates, and what is it that stops them from caring?
Offline
someday maybe theyll fix this forum.
in about two seconds, someones going to tell you that "there is no problem."
theyre right, of course. no problem, at all. ive seen the list-- and ill take it over this. AGAIN.
its about my "hate," of course.
thats what they told me last time. funny, thats what torvalds said, too. look it up, its pretty classic.
Simmer down, man! It's not all about you, y'know. I think you are overreacting just a tad. I agree with most of what you've been saying, but you seem to be seeing enemies where they're not.
Offline
Simmer down, man! It's not all about you, y'know. I think you are overreacting just a tad. I agree with most of what you've been saying, but you seem to be seeing enemies where they're not.
Well said. Impatience, impulsiveness and drama will derail the best-intentioned efforts.
Offline
at any rate, it take hours or more for my emails to end up "lurker" and im not sure theyre all going through at all. i sent one reply that seems to be missing, while other replies to the same thread have shown up, so ill just post it here:
> Let me just kindly ask you to restrict the habit of numbering
things starting from 0 to programming in C (and derived languages). In
these languages it is a trick to map array indexes to address
arithmetic; out of this scope it makes no sense.the scope it makes sense in is that the first four were already numbered 0 to 3 before i had any say in them. the fifth, if numbered consecutively, will have to be freedom 4. if i number it freedom 5, and put it up to the rest of the list, people will say "what happened to freedom 4?" i dont think thats better.
likewise, if i take the great liberty of renumbering all the freedoms, when people hear of "freedom 0" they will ask whatever happened to freedom 0? i thing the best course of action by far is to follow the numbering convention already in place and retain compatibility.
monopolies are able to change free software so it better serves their freedom than ours.
why is that so difficult to prove to many free software advocates, and what is it that stops them from caring?
Offline
at any rate, it take hours or more for my emails to end up "lurker" and im not sure theyre all going through at all. i sent one reply that seems to be missing, while other replies to the same thread have shown up
That is a moderated list. I just let you in.
Offline
That is a moderated list. I just let you in.
thanks.
monopolies are able to change free software so it better serves their freedom than ours.
why is that so difficult to prove to many free software advocates, and what is it that stops them from caring?
Offline
Pages: 1