Apparently the software running the websites of the Occupy Wall Street movement is using Django and Debian behind the scenes (all FOSS, mind you).
Proof positive that LinuxIsCommunism™ I guess. DigitalAthiest will have a field day with this.
your point being? ...
If it runs on Linux, it most definitely will not be televised.
Professional TV studios don’t deal with broken arbitrary standards and tear-prone video.
(This is actually how I originally read the FUD — is it really FUD? — until I found out who the author was.)
Keep jammin’ that foot into your mouth, kid.
I believe this is Adam’s first, tentative step towards fooling us all by pretending he’s one of us: thus the LinuxIsCommunism™ crap.
There’s no evidence here of anyone being misled by idiotic fanboy horsecrap, so what the hell are we supposed to find objectionable about this?
“your point being? ...”
LINUX IS COMMUNIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or should I say, “Loonix”.
Upvoted. Because Adam hates being upvoted.
Also, it breaks TMR’s let-votes-decide-what-survives-here design, and that’s double the fun.
“ Or should I say, “Loonix”. “
Wouldn’t that be “Gnoo/Loonix” ?
“ LINUX IS COMMUNIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! “
I thought it was an OS?
“I thought it was an OS?”
No, it a movement. This is why you should call it GNU/Linux
“Our community’s strength rests on commitment to freedom and cooperation. Using the name GNU/Linux is a way for people to remind themselves and inform others of these goals.”
Oopzsch, yeah you’re right – I forgot.
I stand corrected
Voted up because it’s not need2bfree posting. Everybody else voted down because you’re all a bunch of jabbering vainglorious a$$holes.
Except for need2bfree, who will never be voted up and will always be voted down no matter what.
“Everybody else voted down [...]”
liar! I voted independent!
A little belated, but:
To quote Joe, “How is this relevant to this site?” (Also echoing Conzo’s first post.)
Admin: If you can ban the sock-puppet for something mildly off-topic, then surely you can at least put Adam on probation?
And don’t tell me that mentioning “Django” makes it all right. Next thing you know he’ll be joining the Birthers with a “subtle” twist like “Obama also admits that Django Reinhardt is his favourite musician!”
It’s not like he’s knowledgeable enough to tell the difference between the two Djangos.
I think it’s a little unfair to communism to compare it with crap software like Linux.
This trolling is getting close to Need2BFree levels of irrelevancy.
Also, Django runs on any platform that can host Python. Hell, I don’t do any actual development anywhere near a Linux machine; just virtual hosting (what it’s good at). All the development is done in Windows, or OSX on the road.
Of course it’s unfair to compare communism with Linux.
Communism is based on sound theoretical foundations. Communism at one point had a 33% market share. Communism built genuinely innovative products, like sending the first man into space.
Linux falls miserably short by comparison. There are only cases where I think it can rightly claim to have reached parity with communism:
(1) It is splintered into dozens of incompatible internecine factions(2) It appeals to thousands of whiny little middle-class kids in basements with massive chips on their shoulders.
Oh, and communism arguably got rid of Hitler. Linux can’t even get rid of Microsoft.
Communism ran on practically everything: the state, the army, the judicial system, even the church.
Linux runs on toasters and maybe the odd supercomputer here and there.
Communism sold things that people actually wanted. Hell, there were queues outside communist stores in the USSR for everyday necessities like potatoes.
Have you ever seen a queue outside a Linux store?
Have you ever seen a Linux store?
And communism even had its own colour: red. A strong, manly red. A corpuscular red. Red, the blood of martyrs.
What does Linux have? It can’t even decide on that. First some sort of sihtty brown, then a crepuscular purple. Finally a vile lime green.
Communism,as was right, appropriated the colour of its enemies, whether the British Red of Imperialism or the American Red of Republicanism.
Linux appears to have chosen its colours via a lucky dip in the cess-pool.
Why, the Soviet Union alone managed nine Olympics, 395 gold medals, 319 silver medals and 296 bronze medals.
Linux can’t hold a candle to that. And I’m sorry, Adam, but your framed certificate for the 25 yard snorkel doesn’t count.
The nearest Gnu/Linux has to an athletic hero is Richard Stallman: second from last in the sack race.
And songs? Communism has a truck-load of rousing songs. The Red Flag, the Internationale … Worker’s Unity, which incidentally demonstrates a sense of humour entirely lacking in the Linux song-book … they even managed to get the degenerate capitalist Beatles to write a hit for them (“Back in the USSR”).
What does Gnu/Linux have, in comparison? A single song in an intentionally obscure rhythm that hymns the virtuous nature of cold sores. I think it was cold sores. I’m not about to go back and listen to the damn thing again.
And at least communism had admirable goals, even if it failed miserably at accomplishing them. What’s Linuxes goal? To make the world a better place for lazy white nerds?
It’s not the laziness we object to.
It’s the objectionable hysterical inaccurate evangelism.
Heck, I’m lazy.
Linux goal is to have a common, free operating system where the entire world can innovate off of without reinventing the operating system kernel every time.
“... without reinventing the operating system kernel every time”
bhahahahahahahaahhaahahah, all unixes and their derivatives are laughing at you.
Yeah the world would be a better place if WebOS, Android, Red Hat, and any number of other things had to write their own kernel from scratch every time.
Better for properitary kernel vendors like Mafia$oft *
... because the linux kernel is not a clone and is the only open source kernel in the existence.
Right. It’s just the most developed (commerically). It could easily be FreeBSD as well, but I don’t think many companies like giving away code under the BSD license so it’s not doing as well.
Well, Theo De Rhaadt would beg to differ, but what can you expect from a guy, whose name is God.
OpenBSD had some fancy DARPA funding but lost it when Theo talked crap about the DoD. I’m glad you like it so much though, but I think GNU/Linux is just better (funded, and just plain better).
Dr Tanenbaum would beg to differ too (about the better part). :) But he is just an old senile professor, right?Anyways, for better or worse Linux has a better adoption.
Adam, how would you comment on this:http://omgcheesecake.net/index.php?/topic/1270-linus-torvalds-win-megathread/
This is the opinion of Torvalds about the GNU part.
“Yeah the world would be a better place if WebOS, Android, Red Hat, and any number of other things had to write their own kernel from scratch every time.”
iOS did it with a Unix kernel. Why reinvent the wheel and make Linux when you could have just used a Unix.
Mac OS X / iOS uses the CMU Mach kernel with large potions of additional kernel and low-level userspace code taken from FreeBSD. The resulting Darwin/XNU kernel was big engineering effort.
Sure Linux has competition in the “open source kernel” market. But keep in mind in 1998-1999 or so when Apple started work on XNU, Linux did not have the level of commericial support and development it did now. If they started over in 2011 they’d probably use Linux, I don’t know.
Linux COPIED the Unix kernel. They reinvented the wheel!
“If they started over in 2011 they’d probably use Linux, I don’t know.”
What sort of an argument is that?
And no, Adam, you don’t. Patently™.
If I were the CEO of this fabulous company that pays you mega-bucks to boot-strap your ignorance by basement-learning via a wonky online course from Berkeley, I’d be asking for my money back right about now.
Then again, since the company doesn’t exist, your qualifications don’t exist, and this magical perfect kernel whereof you speak doesn’t exist, it’s all a bit moot, isn’t it?
“The resulting Darwin/XNU kernel was big engineering effort.”
Gawrsh, Goofy, ya think so?
Let’s see. As a bunch of professional engineers aiming to take a 5% (or more) slice of the lucrative desktop market, and I’m incredibly fortunate in that I have a loyal following (brand problem solved!) and a potential lock-in for the hardware (audio and video and WiFi and every single other driver solved!), I get to choose …
Which is free, free, I tell you, and it’s perfect, well it’s FREE!
Or on the other hand I can “waste” a huge engineering effort, costing many tens of millions of dollars, completely ignoring some toy operating system and building a proper one from the bits that Torvalds ignored.
Hmmm. Yup, you’re right. Apple made a catastrophic choice right there.
Incidentally, this hugely respected yet benevolently free corp that you work for: do they have a Mission Statement to piss money down the drain?
Otherwise, I can’t quite see how your skill-set fits in.
Nope, I just checked the list of employees at Canonical.
No Adam King there.
“Linux COPIED the Unix kernel. They reinvented the wheel!”
The originally Unix kernel was never open source. And Linux is not a perfect replica of SysV Unix, it takes ideas from many different operating system designs (you can Plan9 and not Unix for /proc).
Reinventing history again, I see. The only reason that the original Unix kernel was not “open source” is that “open source” as a religion, oops, sorry, concept was not around at the time.
Since the only way to figure out why the stupid thing had just shafted you was to read the kernel code, which was helpfully provided to you by Dennis Ritchie on a reel-to-reel tape, I think it’s fairly clear that the original Unix kernel was, indeed, open source.
What a weird argument for a freetard. “Unix wasn’t open source, but we decided to copy it anyway.”
It may not be a perfect copy, Adam, any more than your genes are a perfect copy of your parents’. But it’s very definitely and intentionally a rip-off.
You must be signed in to leave comments.