Posted on 10/10/2006 4:56:51 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
Linux or open source seems to thrive wherever Left governments rule. And as Kerala schools log Microsoft out and boot open source systems, Linux world is buzzing with excitement over possibilities in the communist-ruled states. Though West Bengal and Tripura have to go whole hog to adopt a free software model, ideological closeness is more than evident. Kerala, most insiders’ feel, is turning out to be Richard Stallman's happiest hunting ground. His personal vibes with Velikakathu Sankaran Achuthanandan, even from VS's pre-chief minister era, are in play. It’s a picture watching the duo cozying together in a similar attire — Stallman in a crumbled white T-shirt and VS in homely sleeveless white banian. Secretly, people do wonder what Class VII drop-out Marxist patriarch chitchats with whiz-kid of the Red Hat business-model. However, those who attended a Stallman seminar on FOSS, could clearly see that Linux and Left are on the same wavelength.
(Excerpt) Read more at financialexpress.com ...
You're right here defending him on this very thread, just like always. How about you show me where you've ever condemned him as a leftist, instead.
And we told you to look up the definition of "fungible." Here's a quick explanation: "BillG just gave us a bunch of cash, but we can't use it for abortions. So we'll pump more funding into abortions, de-fund our other programs by the same amount, and use Gates' money to make up the shortfall. Then we can use his money for counseling, where we encourage women to get abortions."
Bill Gates' dad was head of Planned Parenthood, and Jr. admired him for that. Yet you like to bring up that Linus Torvalds' dad was a commie, although Linus was ashamed of it. I leave you with a BillG quote:
I always knew there was something about really educating people and giving them choices in terms of family size. (ref)
SGI was trying to diversify, and were even putting chips in game consoles like the PS/2, but nothing destroyed their core business like Linux did, as directly evidenced in Linux now being their primary product, but of course not leading to any financial stability.
I simply provided the link that showed none of the contributions were used directly for abortions, as had been claimed. Gates is still not a Green Party leftist like Stallman, the obviuos fact you're trying to divert from.
Nice weasel attempt. Not convincing.
Yes we all know his dad was an influencial communist who studied in Moscow, but you've never posted anything proving he was ashamed of it. If anything I would equate them as similar to Putin, who also claims to be a "former communist" only, but whose actions indicate otherwise.
article that claimed none of Gates contributions were used for abortions,
Which just goes to prove that there are a lot of people who don't understand what the phrase, "money is fungible" means.
Yup. you're still a wanker.
However, I haven't used the word "Stallman" in any post of mine on this thread other than when quoting you.
Wanker.
My definition of "wanker" would be someone who endlessly supports free givaways to communists, not someone who is drawing attention to it in an attempt to have it blocked.
They made several strategic mistakes, which resulted in reduced confidence in their commitment to their core products, MIPS workstations, servers and supercomputers. At the same time, other hardware (both CPU and GPU) became as fast as, or faster than, their MIPS lines.
Without MIPS hardware selling, IRIX became a white elephant for SGI. In the end, Linux helped save SGI by providing them with a low-cost, extensible OS.
but nothing destroyed their core business like Linux did, as directly evidenced in Linux now being their primary product,
How did Linux destroy them if they themselves leveraged Linux for profit? You are not making sense.
They didn't declare bankruptcy but until after Linux was their core product. Your attempts to claim Linux somehow saved them are absurd, their only hope now is for someone to buy them, but since Stallman's license makes them give their technology away for free now no one is nor will they be interested.
His dad later actually rejected it, chalking his communism up to his young naiveté growing from 60s radicalism. But as far as Linus is concerned, "Other kids teased Linus about his father's politics. 'Growing up, I was terribly embarrassed by him,' Torvalds says."
This is as opposed to Gates, who admired his dad for his work at Planned Parenthood.
As with all the other crap you spew on this forum, your "definition" would be wrong. You're a wanker and a troll. Admit it.
They were already on a steep slope from their own failures when they adopted Linux.
but since Stallman's license makes them give their technology away for free now no one is nor will they be interested.
They are. SGI currently has 12 systems in the Top 500, one at #4. SGI always was, and still is, mainly a hardware company. As far as OS goes, they can get the same performance from Linux as IRIX, but they aren't stuck with the entire development costs of the OS, and they can still charge for support like they did with IRIX.
And how did they pay for this advantage? As you say, by releasing some of their code under the GPL. This was their choice as the copyright holders. Other options would have been to hang on to IRIX until they sank (with the extra expense of an Itanium port), or spend a fortune in cash paying for licenses for someone else's UNIX. And what would most likely be HP, their direct competition.
Torvalds constantly refers to himself as a "dictator"' being obvious proof he has no regrets for his communist roots.
www.google.com/gwt/n?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessweek.com%2Fprint%2Ftechnology%2Fcontent%2Faug2004%2Ftc20040818_1593.htm%3Ftc&hl=en&mrestrict=xhtml&q=torvalds+%22dictator+for+life%22&output=xhtml&site=search&source=m
"I am a dictator, but it's the right kind of dictatorship."
There's going to be a big conceptual problem for you if I try to explain this. You see, Linus Torvalds has a sense of humor, and you don't.
Besides, any project (or company) without a "dictator" is doomed to failure. Otherwise, you get the old joke, "A camel is a horse designed by committee."
Damn, you did it again, blew right by my posting proof of my assertion, into another tangent.
Trying to glorify communist terms isn't helping your argument LOL. Torvalds refers to himself as "dictator for life", being obviously much more akin to something like Cuba and Castro than an American President or company.
"Dictator" is not a communist term.
Torvalds refers to himself as "dictator for life", being obviously much more akin to something like Cuba and Castro
Actually, it's akin to a privately-held corporation or the rights granted under trademark, and to a lesser extent copyright, to Linus Torvalds. Torvalds didn't subjugate masses by force to obtain his dictatorship -- he wrote software and acquired a trademark. Your comparison is rediculous at best.
You're still side-stepping though. Bill Gates is proud of his dad's work at Planned Parenthood, and Linus Torvalds was embarrassed by his dad's communism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.