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.
Thread beginning with comment 511579
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: I like Linus
by kwan_e on Thu 22nd Mar 2012 23:05 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: I like Linus"
Member since:

Uh, no, Perhaps your understanding of what an apologist is wrong? I said in common usage, and in common usage, it is a derogatory term. You might be technically correct that it is not defined as a derogatory term, but it is used in a derogatory fashion all the time. Google the term, you'll see.

Well I wasn't using it in a derogatory sense. Maybe you shouldn't be such a sissy over a harmless description? I gave you my reasons for using the word. How can I be wrong if I'm using the word "apologist" in its intended definition? I don't care what you think it is in common usage.

I gave you my reasons and you still use it as evidence of me being derogatory - that's no longer my problem. That is a problem of you having a prejudiced opinion of me that no amount of reasoning will convince you out of.

"Someone who apologizes for BSD style licences is thus a BSD apologist. It does not put down anyone for choosing the BSD licence - it merely describes those who take the step of apologizing for BSD, mainly by attacking people who choose the GPL.

You mean to tell me that statement is attacking in itself? I don't think you can be reasoned with in this case, as you are the one doing the attacking. You brought up the differences in the licensing, and you continue to attack BSD supporters.

How have I attacked BSD supporters? I only explained the logical inconsistency with the argument that GPL "steals code" that comes from people who take the extra step of decrying the GPL after preferring the BSD licence. I also explained the difference in freedoms between BSD and GPL. The FACT of the matter is that BSD-style freedom is ideological, while GPL-style freedom is pragmatic. NEITHER freedoms are better than the other. Do I have to make myself clear or will you actually read this time?

Or is trying explaining why people are mistaken for calling the FSF "religious" an "attack"?

I can be reasoned with in this case. So far, I'm the only one trying to reason. You are taking the shortcut of calling me a religious fanatic and have not addressed any of my reasons for my opinion. The only argument coming out of you is "You're a fanatic! You're a fanatic! You sound like a fanatic! I don't know what apologisty means, so you must be a fanatic."

You seem like the perfect analog to a religious fanatic to me. Oh, and stop telling me that I haven't thought things through, or that I don't understand the terms. It's just another way to dismiss arguments you don't agree with.

Except I don't dismiss arguments - I explain quite in depth why they're wrong. Apparently, according to your twisted logic, that is "religious fanatic" is it?

Once again, stop putting people down for their choices. The GPL is just a license, different in some ways from the BSD license, but both are Free, and both have the same goal.

Stop lying. I have never said anything that put down people for their choices. I have never said BSD users were evil. I have never said GPL users were good.

All I have said is that the argument that FSF related people/licences are somehow religious are mistaken in terminology, reason, logic, and evidence. That is NOT putting people down.

If you think explaining why certain arguments about a particular topic is "putting people down for their choices", then YOU are the religious fanatic. Religious fanatics are the only ones who argue that people aren't allowed to point out THEIR mistakes in reasoning because it makes them feel bad, which makes them feel sad.

Reply Parent Score: 1