The title of the article seems completely wrong to you? Naturally it would, when you daily read something like this. But I do state all this stuff is being a big mistake, if not worse. I am sure, that Linux is now close to extinction, and still is getting closer and closer to the point of no return.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-06-22
At the bottom of the article, the signature:
"Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is a Russian intellectual property and insurance lawyer, spending his free time on free software advocacy and UNIXes promotion. OpenBSD user, if you would like to know."
explains it all! There is a reason why I don't write analytical articles on law!
Member since:2005-07-08
I really wish I could mod you up Thom.
Like I said yesterday, Linux is about being open. We're about discourse. We're about talking. We're not about hiding our faults and problems.
If we're going to succeed we have to be able to freely speak our minds.
If we can't do that, if we can't talk about what's wrong or what we feel is wrong, then we become like Microsoft who cover's up their problems and hides them from customers. When we become like our "enemy" we've lost the war, and the war is useless.
Don't stifle or shut up critics. Let them talk. If what they say is true, take it to heart. If what they say is false, rebut them and show them what is true.
But don't push away those who might be in the middle--potential customers or users--by crying wolf all the time.
Member since:2005-07-10
Thom, there simply is no substance to refute.
The article is based on a false premise, acts as if this false premise was a fact and then acts as if the conclusion it draws follows logically from this false premise, though it fails to show how it does.
To add to this the article doesn't present one single fact to back up its assertions.
So no, this article is clear rubbish and there isn't anything more to say about it. That it is clear rubbish is obvious to anyone with half a brain and should be obvious to anyone who calls himself an editor, even if he's working for free.
Member since:2005-06-29
So no, this article is clear rubbish and there isn't anything more to say about it. That it is clear rubbish is obvious to anyone with half a brain and should be obvious to anyone who calls himself an editor, even if he's working for free.
You don't seem to understand what the role of an editor is. It is my role to properly format the news, and filter out irrelevant stuff. It is NOT, I repeat, it is NOT my job to filter news and articles based on the opinions expressed. If I were to do that, I'd be biased. You think I agree with this article and it's contents? I won't reveal my opinion directly; read between the lines of this post and you'll know.
If I were to filter news based on the merits of its opinions, you'd all get your panties in a twist even more. Attacking an editor JUST because he did not dispose of an article with debatable opinions in it, is just as bad as writing that article.
In other words, comment with arguments, write rebuttal, or ignore. It's that simple.
Member since:
2005-06-29
If you can't, then why is osnews publishing such obvious FUD?
There are three things you can do when you enounter an article you find rubbish or disagree with.
1) Write a comment why the article sucks, using arguments.
2) Write a rebuttal article which OSNews will be pleased to publish.
3) Ignore the article.
Take your pick. Empty claims like "this is fud" or "it is all nonsense" without any form or arguments is not really what we want to see.