Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Mar 2012 22:47 UTC
Linux "If you meet Linus Torvalds, he comes off as a mild-mannered, down-to-earth Finnish-American. He lives with his wife Tove, three kids, a cat, a dog, a snake, a goldfish, a bunny and a pet rat in a comfortable 6000 square foot home just north of Portland's tony Lake Oswego neighborhood. The house is yellow - his favorite color - and so's the Mercedes. But he's not really like any of his neighbors. He drives his Mercedes fast, slamming the car into gear and flooring it. There's no coaxing, no hesitation. Either the hammer is down, or the car is at rest. And he has an abnormal number of stuffed penguins on his mantle." Yup, sounds like the to-the-point Fin we all know and love.
Permalink for comment 511428
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I like Linus
by kwan_e on Wed 21st Mar 2012 15:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I like Linus"
Member since:

BSD apologists? Really? I don't even know what to say, other than perhaps OSS would make some more inroads into consumer computing if the different factions would just realize that the goal is the same, even if the license is not.

You sounds pretty religious yourself.

Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusions that people don't even have a good idea of what being "religious" means.

It's just become a name to call someone when you have no logical reasons to back up your point of view.

Go on, tell me what exactly I've said makes me sound "pretty religious".


"Religious" does not mean "having beliefs" and certainly not "having strong opinions".

"Religious" is probably being used where "fundamentalist" may be a better term. A part of being "religious" and "fundamentalist" involves strict ideology and some literalism.

"Religious" is not "fanatical" although it commonly does include fanatical elements. Having many different lines of argument is not fanatical. Fanatical often implies the brushing aside of logical arguments. Defense of a belief is not fanatical.


I have no problem with people choosing either BSD or GPL licences. It's a matter of choice. The FSF lists the BSD as GPL compatible, but I have only ever come across attacks on the GPL from people who like BSD style licences. They say unbelievable things, like "GPL steals your code". GPL can't steal your code if you don't use GPL code. You are not obligated to choose GPL projects. And yet you get this line of argument from BSD apologists all the time.

Reply Parent Score: 4