Hans Reiser, the prominent Bay Area Linux programmer charged with murdering his wife, says he's seeking to sell off his open-source file system company, Namesys, to help pay mounting legal costs. In the first interview since his arrest, Reiser spoke this week about the future of his company and his legal travails from within the walls of Santa Rita Jail, where he is being held without bail.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-24
Perhaps I was not clear enough. What part of:
"""
"Innocent until proven guilty" is an excellent policy for the law and for the courts
"""
is so hard to understand?
My opinion doesn't mean diddly squat to the court. And I would not want it to.
Finchwizard posted this good link earlier in the thread:
http://tinyurl.com/yhqqge
Hans' strangeness is irrelevant.
Now, could we possibly talk about how this affects Reiser4?
Edited 2006-12-22 14:26
Member since:2005-07-07
Now, could we possibly talk about how this affects Reiser4?
Agreed:)
Nothing really, usual OSS policy. Either people will pick up where Namesys left or not. Reiser4 was GPL licensed.
What Reiser wants to sell is company resources and customer relations, not filesystem. One buying off his company would also get his customers and that is what Reiser hopes to sell.
Member since:2005-07-24
Perhaps I was not clear enough. What part of:
"""
"Innocent until proven guilty" is an excellent policy for the law and for the courts
"""
is so hard to understand?
Actually, it's the statement "Somehow, I just don't see the injustice." that doesn't parse well for your argument.
The injustice is easy to see, if he turns out not to have been guilty after all. You've already judged him and sentenced him based on your opinion.
Yeah, he looks guilty to me as well, but until the court actually proves that to be the case, I'm not going to blithely judge that his current incarceration is justice. I know first-hand what it's like to be jailed on false, trumped-up charges, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
Unseen injustice is just as unjust as that which you do see.
Member since:
2005-07-07
"Innocent until proven guilty" is an excellent policy for the law and for the courts. Holding individuals' opinions to it is just silly. Circumstantial evidence is perfectly good evidence, especially when there is a *lot* of it. However, in a legal conviction, there really should be no doubt.
First, I'm not judging if Reiser did it or not. Couldn't care less. That's for others to decide.
Your logic sounds great until you're on the other side of the fence. A lot of circumstantial evidence can be gathered on any topic. And in Hanses case? He was living in that house (who doesn't argue at least few times, and especially if divorce is in question?). He was driving that car (hell, I seriously cut my self few times in my car, meaning if I disappear there will be dna evidence in it) He was never what you would call "people person", more like "dissociative arguing eccentric", so he's bound to look strange when his personality is taken to question. Another example, I bought few books about perfect murder too, not because I would be interested how should I do it, but rather because I was more intrigued by puzzle of algorithm which would cover all the facts.
I seem to fit your profile, but am I guilty?
It is like SCO case, except that for difference from SCO case where they say "We know you did it, now tell us how" here "He seems strange and this is why we suspect..." drives the court case.
It is hard to go against circumstantial evidence. Facts you can fight, global descriptions? much harder
Edited 2006-12-22 14:12