SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Open Source Initiative bans co-founder, Eric S Raymond:
Last week, Eric S Raymond (often known as ESR, author of The Cathedral and the Bazaar, and co-founder of the Open Source Intiative) was banned from the Open Source Intiative[sic] (the "OSI").
Specifically, Raymond was banned from the mailing lists used to organize and communicate with the OSI.
For an organization to ban their founder from communicating with the group (such as via a mailing list) is a noteworthy move.
At a time when we have seen other founders (of multiple Free and Open Source related initiatives) pushed out of the organizations they founded (such as with Richard Stallman being compelled to resign from the Free Software Foundation, or the attempts to remove Linus Torvalds from the Linux Kernel – both of which happened within the last year) it seems worth taking a deeper look at what, specifically, is happening with the Open Source Initiative.
I don't wish to tell any of you what you should think about this significant move. As such I will simply provide as much of the relevant information as I can, show the timeline of events, and reach out to all involved parties for their points of view and comments.
The author provides links to — and quotations from — entries on the mailing list supporting this. There is also a conversation the author had with ESR. The full responses he received to his queries are posted, as well.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @12:13AM (88 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @12:18AM
Guns, scare of Mooslims since 9-11, pedophilia, Patreon fraud, and just being an asshole. Used to be, families would keep old farts like this out of the public sphere, for their own protection. Like Trump, or Guliani, or Bannon, or Tweety (Chris Matthews).
(Score: 5, Informative) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:01AM (86 children)
A bit of research ....
From the linked article (such as it is):
From the OSD clauses 5 and 6 [opensource.org]
Seems to me that a case can be made for restricting software from certain uses because it's simply not fit. Sun restricted the use of Java such that it couldn't be used in critical control systems such as nuclear reactors or flight controls because it wasn't real-time.
The license doesn't allow restrictions for safety, so it's not fit and should be scrapped. On this basis alone, ESR can go disappear for another 20 years, and take the OSI with him. They certainly deserve each other at this point.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:21AM (11 children)
Yeah, um, no. His beefs were with those particular points but not even slightly the way you're framing them. But if you told the truth, I'm assuming you know the truth here in the first place, it would mean you had to say he was right in his free speech and meritocracy views, which are directly opposed to your personal agenda of censorship and victimocracy.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:56AM (9 children)
All I know is what I found from the linked article and the OSI site. If ESR wanted to say what he originally posted, he should have repeated it instead of going all coy.
Or did you not actually read the linked article and see that he refused to repeat his posts?
Since the mailing list no longer has the posts, and nobody bothers following that shit anyway, why don't you enlighten us about what it was about? I had assumed it was some Code of Conduct stupidity, but seems it was actually about the sections 5 and 6 of the license.
Contrary to the linked article's assertion, there are no links to the various emails from ESR. Either that, of the crappy colour scheme makes them almost invisible, but the blog itself says the emails have been deleted
Looking at the source, there are improperly constructed links to ESRs site.They work in source view, but not on the blog page. And they just go to an obsolete entry about ab HD-DVD decryption key. Which goes to another entry about an HD-DVD encryption keys. Stuff that nobody gives a shit about.
If that's the hill he wants to die, on, so be it.
But both the article and everything ensuing is full of shit.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 11 2020, @06:22AM (6 children)
What words did you read that expressed *refusal* to so do? I read the linked article, and the linked to blog post, and therein ESR *explicitly* stated that he didn't even know which posts had been considered objectionable. Which bit of
Lunduke: Any idea what statement/email you sent that specifically caused the banning?
Eric S Raymond: “They never told me specifically which message was the cause.
failed to get that across? How is he supposed to tell us what he's not even been told?
The OSI professional victims have refused to say, as they've been explicitly asked to justify their actions, and have given no such justification. They just got in an inane flap and started ranting about CoC abuse without identifying any evidence.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:28AM (5 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:23PM (1 child)
Kind of like how you're refusing to copy and paste your source links...? ;)
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday March 12 2020, @01:59AM
I gave the exact search phrase "Woman wins $10,000 from Microsoft" that will bring up the relevant links as the first 10 results, and more on the following results pages.
Unlike the blog, which has no visible links to ESR's posts because the html is screwed up, bad css, poor colour scheme, etc ... take your pick.
A really bad blog post that shouldn't have made the front page because it's pretty much zero content. I'll sum it up/
1. ESR abandons project (so what else is new? Seriously, this is his modus operandi);
2. 20 years later all butt-hurt that changes seem to be in the making. Expresses phony outrage;
3. Anonymous submission referring to badly written blog.
Conclusion: The submission was blog spam.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 11 2020, @09:50PM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:21AM
Good catch. Except that he contradicts himself ...
After all, if he's arguing that nothing should be restricted, that includes not attempting to restrict the potential "persona non gratia" clause. That's the problem with absolutes - nothing is absolute, not even zero, no matter how close we get to it.
But ESR dares to post "whatever moral authority I still have here,"? He abandoned the project two decades ago by his own admission. He quotes Thomas Paine. I'll just say "use it or lose it" - and he abandoned it of his own free will and by his own admission, so he has no moral authority whatsoever on the question, and he has some nerve to try to impose his will as an outsider after 20 years.
If someone who I haven't seen in 20 years suddenly popped up and started telling me what to do, you can guess what I'd tell them. I suspect most people would be the same.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @04:40AM
I'm sure that did ruffle a few horsefeathers.
But I believe what he actually got banned for is the one quoted here [opensource.org]; the original seems to have been moderated, but it appears to be quoted in full there.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:13PM (1 child)
Buzztard read sourced info? Pleeeaaasse. The dude only ever reacts with his manly man libertarian bullshit martyrdom and any valid criticisms of someone like ESR is just pissy rants by people who can't handle reality.
He should be ignored in most conversations as he can't handle the nuance of reality.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2020, @03:00AM
Since it's what I've been working my butt off doing lately, answer me a question: Is any of this remotely as important as having a pressure tested plumbing system and a working shitter at the church so I don't have to drive home to shoot a roost? Yeah, it's just not. Deal with not being important enough for me to bother educating.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:38AM
You've seen her shit. I'm not even sure if she can help it, it's like some kind of tourettes thing. The extremely personal issues she has with free software, free speech, and so many other things require intense psychotherapy, and probably stronger meds.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:39AM (31 children)
Seems to me that a case can be made for restricting software from certain uses because it's simply not fit. Sun restricted the use of Java such that it couldn't be used in critical control systems such as nuclear reactors or flight controls because it wasn't real-time.
I completely disagree. I don't see how this is a license issue at all, at least if we're talking about Free or open source software. It's not the job of a license to keep someone from using software in a place where it's a really bad idea; that's the job of the legal system ultimately, because doing so is negligence (possibly even criminal negligence).
Corporations will write licenses or restrict sales of proprietary software for things it's unfit for, but that's simply to avoid liability. Sun didn't want some morons using Java for a nuclear reactor control system and then somehow being liable if it caused a literal meltdown. But OSS doesn't really have this problem; it's free of charge and open for anyone to download and use for anything (or modify for whatever they want, though for copyleft ones they need to make their changes available downstream), and the license does explicitly declare there's no warranty at all, so that should cover the "unfit for particular use" issue.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:06AM (29 children)
Free of charge doesn't mean free of liability. You might help someone build a fence for free, but if you harm them in doing so, you'll have your ass sued.
Disclaimers of liability don't hold up in court. Ask Microsoft. They disclaim all liability for the harm done by the update to Windows 10, but one woman took them to court and got $10,090.00. (Don't be a lazy asshole and ask for a link - just search for "woman wins $10,000 against Microsoft. I don't do link requests any more for lazy people).
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:34AM (28 children)
Let's look at that more closely. We have stuff [seattletimes.com] like this:
That's not a legally valid contract. I can't tell whether the woman who won the $10,000 from Microsoft was indeed victim of a similar scheme, but this isn't software being operated for a risky purpose for which it wasn't intended. And for someone who doesn't even know what Windows 10 is, much less how to revert it to an older version, how are they going to know what of their other critical software is going to break when they, whether intentionally or not, upgrade to Windows 10?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:36AM
They aren't, that's the point.
Microsoft hates you actually having control of any computer, even those you technically own. Big Tech does not want you to have computers, to control computers, or to have any way to stop them from deciding what you may and may not do with any computer you come into contact with, including accessing information, making content, or running software that they disapprove of.
Big Tech wants to own your data, your use of a computer, your computer period, and through these, you. Never, ever forget that.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:59AM (26 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by janrinok on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:37AM (13 children)
So khallow went and found a link to an article in the Seattle Times, and provided quotes from it. You discovered that his quote didn't support your argument. And so you replied with this:
If you want to prove your argument - PROVIDE THE LINKS THAT SUPPORT IT! Don't blame others for finding links that contradict your point of view. khallow did as you told him to do. but he found a different slant to the story than the one you want to portray. That is your problem, not his. Then calling someone names:
... is simply wrong, because it was you who was too lazy to back up your own statements and claims. It is not the readers' responsibility - it is yours.
(Score: 0, Troll) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:39PM (11 children)
Shallow khallow did no such thing. I made reference to a specific judgment, where a woman went to use her computer and found that, without any interaction from her, it had attempted an upgrade to Windows 10 and failed. Shallow khallow was too lazy to actually do what I said - search for "woman wins $10,000 judgment against Microsoft", and instead replaced it with a bunch of suppositions of how it MIGHT have happened.
Shallow khallow is a troll. And he trolled you but good. Read what I wrote, do the search I suggested, and you'll see the story. Not some bullshit in the Seattle Times that had NOTHING to do with the scenario that actually happened.
Shallow Khallow is the same as "pee ina cup" fusty - posts bullshit all the time, but never anything with any sort of personal background, because it's a troll account.
Shallow khallow did NOT present anything that contradicted my post about the woman getting $10,000 - instead he tried to do the whole "victim blaming" thing. You might fall for it - I don't. Don't be angry at me - be angry at yourself for being another of shallow khallow's suckers.
As for "not backing up my post" - look at what happened to you. Instead of actually doing your own research, or even just searching for "woman wins $10,000.00 judgment against Microsoft" you fell for Shallow khallow's link, which had nothing to do with what I posted, and did not reflect the actual events of the case. Do your own research - how hard is it anyway? How hard is it for you to search for "woman wins $10,000.00 judgment against Microsoft" anyway?
Sheesh!
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:33PM (7 children)
I know exactly who or what khallow is - I've been on this site a while.
But nevertheless, he should not have to prove your claims.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday March 12 2020, @01:47AM (4 children)
And yet he trolled you but good, didn't he?
And that's a nice deflection from my point - I provided the easiest way for INDEPENDENT confirmation - you doing the search yourself with the search term "Woman wins $10,000.00 from Microsoft." That allows anyone to do their own verification, without any possibility of me being selective or bias in choosing what comes up.
That search term proves what I wrote. The first 10 results all do. I'm not saying take my word for it or take whatever link I post as the authoritative source - unlike Shallow khallow. He played you.
It is not up to me to prove anything - when I'm in the real world, people are free to grab their phone and verify anything I say. That's what I expect of people, that they use initiative to verify things that they don't believe.
I'll even give sufficient information (you know, clues and stuff) so that others can, if they're at all clued in, do their own research and come to an independent conclusion. Same as I would expect an independent review in business. Same as I would expect in school. Same as I would expect normal people to do in any common-life scenario.
So what makes the Internet different? In reality, nothing. However, people have this stupid idea that"netiquete" obliges you to connect all the dots for everyone, educate them, provide them with links, and then get into stupid arguments about whether the links you selected were biased. I don't play that shitty game any more, because the trolls like shalkow khallow like to use misdirection, misrepresentation, etc., to "make their case".
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:35AM (1 child)
Claims require evidence. Full stop.
You made a claim and didn't provide evidence.
Janrinok is correct and you're (as usual) talking out of your ass.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:56PM
Wrong. The internet has warped people's behaviour. When someone tells you what traffic is like, do you demand proof? When someone says that bananas are on sale do you demand proof? When someone tells you that they got a raise, do you demand to see their old and new paycheques? When someone tells you who they voted for, do you demand proof?
And yet the internet is somehow different. Screw that. Don't believe me, no skin off my nose. I . OWE . YOU . NOTHING .
Same as everyone else on the internet.
It's amazing that demanding the same level of discourse online as offline is seen as so radical.
Explain to me and everyone else how there's some sort of requirement for anyone to prove anything they post on the internet. And then explain how you are violating that rule by refusing to post using your real identity, but that's somehow okay, because internet.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday March 12 2020, @07:06AM (1 child)
And people are free to consider you to be making inaccurate and unsubstantiated claims. Not only in this thread, but in every comment you make in the future. As I have already said, this is not Twitter...
No. I have not said that I agree with what khallow claims either. But you left yourself wide open and then complained when you found the response was not what you wanted.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:33PM
In normal human interaction, when someone makes a statement, if the other person chooses not to believe it, it's not up to the person making it to prove anything. That's my stance online as well now, because there are too many bunfights over "you said it - now prove it" and "your citation is biased" and other stupidity.
If I tell someone that all cruise ships with 500 or more passengers are banned from all ports in the country, and they choose not to believe it, how is that my problem? Hint: it's not. If someone is heading to an NHL game and I tell them the season has been suspended so don't bother going, it's not up to me to "prove" it. They're free not to believe me.
IOW, my stance is the same as people in the real world. I am not responsible either for your beliefs or your education or your inability to find things. That things are, for some stupid reason. different on the Internet is an example of how dysfunctional the Internet makes people, same as smartphones and social media turn people into zombies.
People with think what they want to think. Look at all the Trumpsters who continue to believe the idiot-in-chief. "There are only 15 cases of the virus, and they will soon be gone. Anyone who wants can get tested. It's a conspiracy by the Democrats." You will never convince them otherwise, and it's not your problem to do so.
I'm not all that invested in the online world - it's more for relieving boredom than anything else. It will never change my life. I take it for what it is. I think it would be nice if people could put the Internet in what I consider a more rational perspective, but you're free to do what you want.
Just that you cannot find any error in my proposition, that it's not my job to find shit of other people, and they're free to believe what they want to as a (very minor, even minuscule) consequence.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:31AM (1 child)
Just so you know, I did take her advice and search for the term she wanted (here is the results of said search [urlscan.io]). The top 10 articles all reference the same Teri Goldstein case as khallow was talking about. You know the one where Microsoft lost because there was no legally-valid contract because she never agreed to one because closing the pop up did not count as a manifestation of consent to be bound.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:37PM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @01:08AM (2 children)
I checked the link khallow posted, and the first 6 paragraphs are exactly about the specific judgement you allude too.
It's pretty clear by now the biggest troll on this site is YOU.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:03AM
If only people started moderating her as such, instead of supporting her because their politics mostly align.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by barbara hudson on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:24AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:19AM
Oh, janrinok, if only you could perceive the depths of hell you open up with this statement. Normal people are not required to cite common knowledge to right-wing nut-job potential-mass-shooter trolls on the internets, let alone on SoylentNews. So, you are simply wrong, janrinok. Simply double down do it wrong. Not the first time.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday March 11 2020, @12:17PM (2 children)
Please don't swear.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:36AM
Fuck that noise!
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:45AM
Profanity is the crutch of the inarticulate motherfucker.
(Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:21PM (6 children)
Well, consider yourself called out and being held to the standards you claim to have. I get that you don't have infinite time to follow every link nor did I describe what was at my link, further selecting a quote that would reasonably lead to the impression the link wasn't about the lawsuit, but my linked story was indeed about the lawsuit.
Even if it weren't, it's still a pretty sloppy assumption to make that I didn't read about the lawsuit.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:42PM (3 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:01PM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:21AM (1 child)
The preferred nomenclature is: "my dear and fluffy khallow". Or at least it is with me. I will always treasure that time in Cody. . .
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 13 2020, @04:11AM
(Score: 0, Redundant) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:10PM (1 child)
You're a troll. Everyone knows it. Get over it. Take your place beside pee in a cup fusty, shallow khallow.
You obviously don't know my standards. They include total disrespect for trolls like you. Your account has all the earmarks of a troll account, same as fusty's did.
Expect to be called out once in a while when you piss me off.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:43PM
And if anyone doesn't know it, you're being very proactive in telling them.
I count four posts under this article so far?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:29PM (1 child)
Please stop using abusive language.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @03:21AM
She won't do that because the "abusive language" is all you've got when you operate in a fact free zone.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:38AM
Indeed, if you make it the business of the license... then you may open yourself up to the same sort of legal liability.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by driverless on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:00AM (1 child)
Oh, that one's obvious. By co-founding the OSI, which promotes free, open-source software, ESR was discriminating against commercial closed-source software. He was therefore violating the 6th Commandment of the Sacred Scriptures. He was lucky he wasn't crucified, which is the usual punishment for heretics.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:08PM
Not quite. You can use a GPL compiler to write proprietary software.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:13AM (32 children)
It's certainly not, and has never been, up to the person licensing software to decide where and how it is used. This is laughable.
The engineers designing FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEMS don't need Java dipshits telling them what's up.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:23AM (29 children)
Obviously the people doing MCAS could have used a bit of extra input. Same as the idiots at Uber who tried to build a self-driving car using Javascript for a hard real-time control system because javascript coders are cheap.
There's a reason why there are hard-real-time systems and everything else.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:41AM (18 children)
> Uber who tried to build a self-driving car using Javascript
Have you seen this somewhere reliable? First I've heard this detail, couldn't find a reference online.
(Score: 0, Troll) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:02AM (17 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by janrinok on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:40AM (10 children)
There you go again - making statements and claims that you are unwilling, or unable, to back up with facts.
You are making the claims - it is your responsibility to prove them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @03:01PM (9 children)
reading this from the outside world and loosely skimming along, it seems that she shouldn't have to back up the claim to not do other people's research with research.
anyway you guys are ganging up on her for a technicality and she seems irritated and replied in such a manner.
were professionals right? so let it slide and put (not necessarily yours--i am addressing everyone) biases aside for the moment. even if she was incorrect it shouldn't devolve into windows 10 refunds and the reasons as to why, even if she started it as a defense.
eventually the horse can't be beat effectively anymore to get it to go faster if it dies from the beating.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:01PM
The whole thing was discussed on the old green site. Everyone had a good laugh when it was pointed out that they were trying to develop a real-time self-driving car system using Jaqvascript because (1) javascript monkeys are cheap, and (2) Uber hasn't got a clue.
I keep telling people to do their own research because why should anyone trust me over their own research? I might do like shallow khallow just did, post a link to something only peripherally related and claim that it settles the question, that he built up a lot of suppositions of how the woman's computer might have been "accidentally" upgraded, rather than the actual case, where the woman did nothing and her computer attempted to upgrade overnight - it's whjy she got $10,000 (plus $90 small claims costs) from Microsoft.
Instead, he posted a bullshit story from the Seattle Times about how people are tricked into upgrading - not something that applies to the case - and claimed I'm full of shit.
Shallow khallow is a troll account, same as "go pee in a cup" fusty. They both have long posting histories, but no backstories. And all they do is sow discontent and discord, because they masturbate just thinking about how they're trolling people.
I'm the one saying "don't take my word - or anyone else's word - for it. Do your own research." How that is a bad thing is beyond me. We;ve seen over and over how people post links that don't actually address the question, and then claim some sort of victory. In Shallow khallow's case, I even gave the search terms "woman wins $10,000 from Microsoft". Every one of the first 10 search results gives the same story, with details. It must have taken work to find a story that didn't actually respond to the content of my post, but when you're a troll, you don't give a shit about accuracy.
When I come to my computer and I can't read half the crap because it's referencing websites that are almost impossible for anyone who is visually handicapped, I'm not going to bother "doing the research" for someone else. I have enough problems. Let them do their homework, same as in school or at work.
We had a guy at one of my work places who just cut-n-pasted Windows code he found on the internet into svn for a server that was to run on FreeBSD. He would also check out someone else's code, add or remove an ENTER, and check it back in - and that was his work for the whole day.
After I audited everything, the boss still refused to believe it, until I pulled up the Microsoft.com site where he had grabbed the code. Another coder was so disgusted he quit to work elsewhere. Refused to work with the asshole, and didn't want to wait a month while I engineered his firing. Apparently his plagerist predecessor had been doing the same thing - it took me months to remove all the Windowisms (and no wonder it wasn't working, duh!).
Trust but verify. Because many coders are full of crap cut-n-paste monkeys who are just trying to serve their time while looking for their next job, never actually delivering anything.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:28PM
First of all, I am not 'you guys' - I am a indivdual. So do you believe everything people say without checking the facts? Barbara Hudson is no better or worse than everyone else on this site. The onus is upon her to prove her claims.
If she had provided the evidence with her first claim it would never have happened. But she invited everyone to search for their own references and khallow just took advantage of it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:30PM (5 children)
it's not a "her".
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @06:06PM (3 children)
Are you worried that this will be some sort of moving target? Last I checked, Barbara has gone by "she" for many years. That plus her name make it pretty easy to keep track of gender pronouns.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @07:21PM
I think you misunderstand the point of bigotry, but nice response anyway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2020, @04:46PM (1 child)
A he/she generally implies that person grew up as part of that group and thus often has views different from the other group. It was nice to know that soylent had an outspoken female who could provide us with a female viewpoint on many issues. Apparently that's not the case and now I feel a little duped and betrayed. My trust in all posters who claim to be female, through either directly stating it or by using female related words, has gone down.
Yes, it does matter how people present themselves because of all the expectations and assumptions underlying those words. Not being honest about your background hurts everyone.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:31PM
That's the common sense talking. Sounds like you owe Barbara a thank you.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday March 12 2020, @10:34AM
I know, but if she wants to be known as Barbara I'm happy to respect that as her choice. And her choice of sexuality or pronoun is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:53PM
The problem happens when the burden of research is thrust on other people. Circumstances can justify some leeway. For example, I'm presently posting from a cellphone - so even minor HTML code is a living nightmare and my usual habit of dropping links for support will just have to wait. I understand there are similar circumstances which prevent Barbara from posting well-linked articles without expending a great deal of effort.
But googling support for your argument is not the reader's research, it's your research. And claims that have no basis in fact will never be otherwise, no matter how much research is done.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday March 12 2020, @10:44AM (5 children)
So I've searched for Uber and Java, and Uber and Javascript but I can find nothing that supports your claim.
Java was used for the language in which a version of the Uber Ride Hailing app was written (https://developer.uber.com/docs/riders/ride-requests/tutorials/api/java [uber.com] and https://github.com/uber/rides-java-sdk [github.com]) but I haven't found anything relating to the software for a car.
Javascript is also extensively used by Uber - but again I can find nothing that supports your claim that it was used for a self-driving car (https://github.com/uber?language=javascript) [github.com]
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:11PM (4 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday March 16 2020, @09:10AM (3 children)
Most of us left the green site in 2016 - I'm not using my /. account ever again. As an editor it is also advised that I do not do so - I can honestly say that I do not view the site and therefore cannot be accused of copying their stories. Presumably, the discussion on /. was based on a media report. otherwise it has no valid source whatsoever. If that media source cannot now be found then you have failed to convince me that any of that actually happened. Your claim - your proof is required.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday March 17 2020, @10:59PM (2 children)
Not my problem. I told you where to look, and you refused. So tell me, why should I care? It is NOT MY PROBLEM. And it never was.
Just like Uber when Uber laid of the second tranche of 1/3 of their engineers. Not my problem. Personally, I hope that exploitative platforms like that DIAF.
But if it's that important to you, if you're so invested in it, why not write them and ask? Go to the source, janrinok. Go to the source.
Or get away from the keyboard and see how people would react to you in real life if you demanded citations for everything they said. They would tell you to fuck off.
Real-world person: "Bananas are on sale!"
janranok: "Really? Prove it!"
Real-world person: "Seriously? Not my problem if you don't believe me."
janranok: "Your claim - your proof is required."
Real-world person: "Fuck you!"
That's how the real world works. You're wayyy to invested in online unreality if you can't see/have forgotten it.
Because, like in the real world, I call bullshit. I told you where to look, you don't want to for your own stupid reasons, that is not my problem, it's yours. Or as Mick Jagger once said, "You Can't Always Get What You Want." Not even by bullying tactics such as you're using.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday March 18 2020, @07:33AM (1 child)
I'm not bullying anyone - you made a claim that Uber had used javascript when writing the software for a driverless car. You provided nothing to support your claim. Google and DDG both failed to find any sources to support your claim. You believe that a 'claim' made on /. - probably also unsupported by any factual evidence - is sufficient to support your claim.
I claim that you are bullshitting me - and I have much of your comments in this thread to support my assertion.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 18 2020, @11:16AM
I don't buy that as an excuse. And I can't help but notice that you make further unsupported assumptions about what you would find if you actually did look it up, without any proof on your part, as a lame attempt to justify not looking there.
Bit of hypocrisy on your part - you can make all sorts of arguments without proof against going where I found it, and I am supposed to accept them as valid? Why? Because you said so? Prove it, don't just assume it. Hold yourself to the same standard you're holding me to.
I at least told you where to look. Not my problem you can't find it via a search engine. They don't index everything, or were you assuming they did? Because you're now using the failure to find something via a search engine as "proof " that I'm wrong.
Again, I don't care if you believe it or not, because it's not my problem. But looking at your arguments, I've got to say your logic is provably flawed.
Which brings me to the real question - why do you (and others) think you have any right whatsoever to demand that others do the grunt work for something you obviously think is important but that I don't? It's no skin off my nose what you believe, as I have pointed out several times. I have zero skin in the game. What is wrong with you to be so anal-retentive?
It's like all the people who ridiculed my statement that you could catch coronavirus from packaging, now again proven, with the evening news even warning people. I let it drop after a short discussion because it's not that important whether someone on the internet believes me or not, and now I get to say I told you so. I could have gone digging up studies of previous coronavirus infectious agent lifetimes, and the lifetimes of other pathogens, but it's not my job and frankly , I don't give that much of a damn. I'm willing to let time prove me right, whether it's a few weeks or a few decades. It's just the internet , not real life. In real life, we've been acting on the assumption that packaging and boxes can not be returned by clients because they can be contaminated by COVID19 because it has real-world consequences. Whereas whether you go to slashdot or not is irrelevant to pretty much the whole world.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:02AM (4 children)
The guys who wrote the software for MCAS did a fine job. It performed exactly to spec.
The problem was with the management who installed a single point of failure sensor and who covered up the extent of the changes to the plane in order to avoid expensive re-training of pilots.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Wednesday March 11 2020, @06:31AM (2 children)
I thought the software was missing sanity checking on the extent of its action. i.e. It should only ever deflect the control enough to counter the movement of the center of thrust the new engines caused, which should never be enough to overcome the control stick input. (that's what I got from some airline pilots going over the investigation so far anyhow - in addition to the single point of failure and Boeing making safety features expensive upsell items)
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:49PM (1 child)
That doesn't match with my understanding.
The relocation of the engines meant that the plane could become unstable, and/or stall, if flown at a high angle of attack. MCAS would periodically trim downward if its sensor (singular!) indicated this, and bring the plane back "level". If the sensor input was faulty, well...
The intended procedure for overriding MCAS' input was the same as any issue with the electronic trim system: disable it, and revert to the manual trim wheels. (There wasn't any specific guidance on MCAS, as its existence wasn't explicitly referred to in the training material.)
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:16PM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:07AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2020, @02:50AM (4 children)
Obviously the people doing MCAS could have used a bit of extra input.
Please educate yourself before making absolutely incorrect posts like this. There was nothing demonstrably wrong with the MCAS software: according to all evidence we have, the MCAS software worked exactly as it was supposed to. It took input from a single sensor, and make excessively-large adjustments to the elevators, fighting against the pilots, and flew the planes into the ground, just as it was programmed to. The software worked perfectly.
The problem with MCAS wasn't the software; it was the systems engineers (probably taking orders from managers) who thought it'd be a great idea to take input from a single sensor that frequently ices up, and to perform excessively-large adjustments (a later change they made from the initial design of the MCAS), and then the managers who thought it'd be a great idea to not mention MCAS in the manual and not bother training pilots on it because that might require them to get a new type rating for the aircraft which would be very expensive and eliminate the 737MAX's advantage. The software engineers simply took the specification they were given and wrote software that did exactly what the spec said.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2020, @12:50AM (1 child)
The engineers who developed the system *DID* develop it with a 3 sensor system (not even 2!!!!) intending it to have failover if any one sensor was giving erroneous readings. The system as implemented and written off for the aircraft had 2 sensors, the system itself documented to be switched off by an MCAS switch that had been on the older 737 models (the -NG?) and would have allowed the powered trim adjustments to work as expected if there had been runaway trim adjustments from the MCAS unit before it was shutdown. However, between the engineers signing off on the MCAS and its implementation in the 737MAX, someone had it handed over to a different team for 'revisions' these included making the 2nd MCAS sensor optional as part of a much more expensive 'addons' package, and of removing the MCAS switch from the control clusters in order to make room for some other change they did (maybe digital displays?)
This was all discussed on one of the flight forums linked from this very website when the whole 737MAX debate was going on months ago. The key point being: the engineers did everything they were supposed to. Some management, possibly one or two 'complacent' signoff engineers, and a low budget indian staff made revisions after the fact to allow them to cost cut and 'feature price' necessary safety features, which is what lead to the cascade of design failures that caused two planes to crash and hundreds of lives to be lost. The upper management as well as the people who signed off on it need to tried, convicted, and executed in a very flashy and public show trial. The actual engineers who did their jobs, signed off correctly and weren't responsible for these later alterations should be thanked for their service and ideally helped to find jobs at another company. Boeing itself, needs to die.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2020, @12:56AM
The system was SIGNED OFF with either the 2 or 3 sensor variant. The changes to the 1 sensor system happened AFTER the FAA inspection and testing of the system but before it was installed into the planes. Somehow the FAA didn't manage to catch this change and the planes were able to ship with the 1 sensor, 2nd optional system without requiring a comprehensive (and expensive!) review of the changes. One of the reasons systems were so slow to change in the past was that ANY modification to the system no matter how small would require the retesting of the entire module/system as well as cascading those tests to any larger systems it was involved in. Testing that would prove both time consuming on the order of years, and expensive to implement. The 'streamlining' that happened with the FAA helped eliminate much of this re-testing and oversight and directly lead to the situations that allowed this homicidal negligence to happen.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:49PM (1 child)
You're building flight-critical software and you notice that there's only ONE sensor and it doesn't raise alarms? What's your failure mode? What if the sensor ices up or is defective? Or a bird strike takes it out?
Even cars have multiple headlights and taillights. Redundancy. Dual hydraulic braking circuits. Brakes on every wheel.
Heck, even humans have guilt-in redundant sensors. Two eyes, two ears. Even the brain is divided into two hemispheres, and the failure of part of one can sometimes be compensated for by the other (especially if you're left-handed or ambidextrous).
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday March 17 2020, @01:41AM
You're building flight-critical software and you notice that there's only ONE sensor and it doesn't raise alarms? What's your failure mode? What if the sensor ices up or is defective? Or a bird strike takes it out?
You obviously haven't worked on flight-critical software. It doesn't work that way.
First off, the original story was that the MCAS was not really flight-critical, and would only make very small adjustments within a small range, and that justified the single sensor.
But more importantly, software like this is requirements-based. The requirements are written by systems engineers, and then translated into DOORS. This auto-generates a lot of the code, which is then filled in by software engineers to satisfy the requirements. It's totally a waterfall process. If the code doesn't satisfy the requirements, it fails; it doesn't matter if the requirements are wrong. The things you're asking ("what if...") are questions for the systems engineers, not the software engineers.
Yes, you're right about redundancy of course, but again this isn't the job of a software engineer in aerospace, that's the job of the systems engineer. Those are the people who really failed, and they did so most likely because they were required to make the requirements this way by managers (under direction of executives) who wanted to avoid the 737MAX having a different type certification.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:40AM (1 child)
Someone has to tell Boeing which way is up.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @05:04AM
According to this second-hand Boeing sensor, it is about 45 degrees down from horizontal.
(Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Wednesday March 11 2020, @06:42AM (2 children)
Actually, Sun DISCLAIMED use in critical control systems such as nuclear reactors or flight controls because it wasn't real-time. Stating clearly that X is not suitable for Y nor is it intended to be is not the same as restricting the license. Many products and services include such statements even when they have no associated license at all. For example, rope you buy in the hardware store will often warn that it isn't suitable for use as a safety rope. Silica gel famously warns you not to eat it.
It's basically a way of saying if you DO use our product against the warning and someone gets hurt, don't come crying to us.
In cases where "borrowing" code is permitted, there's no reason someone can't grab a few useful functions and use them in such a safety critical application as long as they do the needed analysis and take responsibility for the decision.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @08:34AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @02:11PM
Then why do they make it soooo tasty?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2020, @01:02PM (1 child)
I don't know why you are so confused on this, it is clearly about the creation of social justice licenses (like the one that denies a license to ICE or such).
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday March 11 2020, @04:07PM
I'm not "confused" - I just don't see the relevance of either ESR or the OSI. ESR abandons the OSI for two decades, then comes back all pissed off because he doesn't like how things are being done. Seriously - after 20 years?
He has no moral claim to the OSI or how it's run at this point. Tempest in a teapot. Mountain out of molehill. Whatever, it's no longer relevant. I mean, really, if you created some software and a license to go with it, are you going to submit it to the OSI for approval? That gang of idiots?
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by Lester on Thursday March 12 2020, @08:32AM (1 child)
The restriction of Java for critical control systems, although they may use the word restriction, it is a warning, not a restriction.
The spirit of restriction of Java for critical control systems is more
"You've been told that it is not safe. You are using it at your own risk, don't sue me"
than
"I am going to sue you"
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday March 15 2020, @04:19PM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.