Huh? It was just some constructive criticism, I wasn't being racist like you made it look like. Am South Asian and my country has so much shit going on that I won't even bother to criticise it.
I just think that this violence crap should be censored instead of breasts or nudity. If you show that being a criminal is so cool and bad ass then don't expect anyone to not commit crimes. Many people would try to replicate what they see on TV.
I don't know if it has anything to do with how violent our media is (I'm not convinced that watching violence makes one violent) but the fact that we've basically been at war for the last 30 years or so has really desensitized us to it, I feel.
Sometimes titles are improved by moderator intervention--other times it's the opposite. Sometimes titles lose bias, but sometimes they become inaccurate or generic-to-the-point-of-madness.
I was expecting (incorrectly, I see now) that GP was referring to the other people in the thread -- why weren't they asking him why he was wasting his time on such a fucking stupid thing that no one ever needs?
For those unlucky souls who have yet to encounter the ingenious humor of Mitch Hedberg: this is a reference to the Mitch Hedberg quote that goes like this:
"I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to, too."
Other notables (pulled from his Wikipedia entry):
"I bought a $7 pen because I always lose pens and I got sick of not caring."
"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it."
"I haven't slept for ten days, because that would be too long."
fascinating to look at the beginning of something that has become so huge. millions of phones run on a linux kernel, as well as all those tablets, pcs, and other random devices. i wonder if that email will ever go into a historic museum one day.
I am guessing he was referring to the GNU OS, hurd. In retrospect this is quite funny considering hurd has yet to see a (production) release to this day. http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html
Well, he was probably referring to the Hurd, a kernel which was/is supposed to be the official kernel for GNU (not GNU OS btw). As Linux came with a GNU userland from the start and the discussion is specifically about the kernel it's hard to imagine he meant something else.
I must admit: I had to Google "Lawrence Page". Didn't strike me that Larry is the diminutive for Lawrence :-)
edit: proof that he was successful, indeed, is that "to google" is a verb that comes more naturally to me when speaking English than common name diminutives.
Your entire post history is defending the NSA, snarky comments that add nothing such as '[citation needed]', and general negativity/patronizing 'well actually...' or 'I can't believe anyone...' type statements.
You haven't looked hard enough. I think you've ignored my recent comments about YAGNI and security, the follow-ups to those '[Citation Needed]' where I actually find a citation or ask for one, the one where I politely ask for direction about the entertainment industry, and the general plethora of material from a technical perspective.
Your reply also implies there's something wrong with NSA apology, which there shouldn't be intrinsically, as I'm posting an alternative perspective. Similarly, I don't subscribe to the idea that short comments or snarky comments are necessarily bad if they contain facts or point out a lack thereof - it's outright rudeness, willful stupidity/ignorance (reddit style humor), and meanness that I object to. Everything you've pointed out is stylistic.
Needless to say, this is all irrelevant, because my post history has nothing to do with my comment - that being, it'd be nice if we can talk about the early days of Google without demonizing it for its (alleged) privacy violations.
But, by all means, ignore my original point and look through my comment history for things to nitpick and argue over. I'm not going to debate it further with you.
You surely know this, but for clarity: it's a Usenet group. Google inherited a huge Usenet archive when they acquired Deja News and used it as the core of what eventually became Google Groups. But it was never a corporate-maintained forum. Usenet was always distributed.
Ha! Hadn't ever seen that before. I wonder if they ended up working around it, ignored it until it was fixed, or threw their hands in the air and re-wrote the bot in C++.
Page ended up working with another grad student (Scott Hassan, who later ended up founding eGroups, which later became Yahoo!Groups), who rewrote the whole thing in Python. Google's crawler and webserver were in Python until the Netscape deal (summer 1999). When Urs was hired as Google's first VP, he started transitioning the system to C and C++ to solve Python's performance problems. Java was introduced when Google hired some very skilled Java programmers during the 2001-2003 recession.
So yes, Urs sorted out Google's Java problems by not using Java.
Steven Levy's "In the Plex" is probably the best one. A lot of the stuff in my comment is mentioned there, and the rest is cobbled together from various presentations, blog posts, and Quora answers on the net.
"In the plex" and "I'm feeling lucky" - both are very good and offer very different angles. As you can guess by the name first is more formal history whereas second are memoirs of a their marketing guy who has got a very good sense of humour :)
Another detail I've stumbled on is that Sam Rushing, a talented Python programmer, had something to do with Python in Google's early history: http://www.nightmare.com/~rushing/ .
He also worked at eGroups. He wrote "medusa" which became asyncore in the Python standard library (http://www.nightmare.com/medusa/). This was long before Java had async I/O. Interesting that Guido is working on the new async I/O interface "tulip" in the Python core after all these years!
And Larry Page's brother apparently also worked at eGroups.
One of the most enjoyable things about reading this that even in the first 3 usenet messages, Linus states engineering tradeoffs cleanly, simply and un-apologetically.
All qualities that Linus was to become famous (and infamous) for, before Linux was even fully formed.
Very much so. So many of my side projects get derailed due to thinking about scaling. I tend not to do web projects so "scaling" in my context is usually along the lines of "hmm, if I put this language feature in my compiler (that nobody knows about or uses and doesn't even work) I'm going to have to support it for years."
Lame.
The "do things that don't scale" article helped knock me out of this rut a bit. I suspect I'll knock myself out the rest of the way the more I remind myself that pre-mature worries like this are actually an advanced form of procrastination.
My memory of 1990s Linux development is hazy (I was a young kid at the time), but my recollection is ~5 years after this post they paid a huge cost in effort to get it to work on Alpha, and after that the required effort to port to other stuff went down. So maybe it's more like "simple initial implementation, massive rewrite later".
Edit: Also worth noting that the 386 was the first "modern" Intel CPU in terms of instruction set and interfaces provided to kernel developers, so requiring 32-bit CPU with an MMU excludes a lot of machines in 1991 but not so many machines in the years that followed. What he's saying is he won't port to 286 which is a very obvious decision but maybe not so much if your frame of reference was Minix.
(Later on I do seem to remember there used to be a port of Linux to MMU-less varieties of 68K in the late 90s, like some of the other replies are asking for. Not sure how well it ever worked.)
The problem with generalizations is that once you go looking for them, you find them everywhere. Not everything is an affirmation of yet another Paul Graham paradigm.
There is hardly anything more scalable than distributing a free software clone of a widely used OS over an open global network for cheap, incredibly popular, commodity hardware.
If anything, MINIX did not scale. They charged a fee, and free Unix clones took off leaving MINIX behind.
Go ask someone running Ubuntu to recompile their kernel. 5 bucks says they don't know how. Hence, it would be inconceivable to them that everyone did it back in the day.
Actually, IMVHO, people still should run custom kernels because otherwise they turn into sissies who waste hours switching distributions every time they hit a driver bug.
I think a strong case for "regular" Linux users being able to build there own kernels is that while most users don't need or want a "bleeding edge" userland, they often want a bleeding edge kernel. For example, I use Debian Stable because I hate having inconsequential stuff change out from under me every 6 months, but I need up-to-date kernels for my hardware to work.
That is a niche (a large one I think) that is unfilled by the popular distros as far as I can tell.
Seven months later, Debian 3.0 was released - with Python 2.1.
...time passes...
In November 2004, Python 2.4 is released. Debian stable is still using Python 2.1, and will continue with it up to June 2005.
June 2005, Debian stable finally upgrades off its 4+ year old Python version.
Needless to say, many 2.2+ scripts I ran in early 2005 broke on my Debian stable.
I understand that the late date of that particular Debian release was partially due to Ubuntu hiring away developers. I also understand that I could have always ran unstable. But it put me off of Debian stable.
Hmm, I can see that being a problem. Though I have a habit of avoiding distro-packaged interpreters/compilers anyway, even with Fedora, so that I'm always on the latest.
Yup, compiling and installing (in a distro-friendly manner that smoothly integrates with the rest of the system) your own kernel on Debian is almost trivial using "make-kpkg".
Most people don't have the need, of course, but if you do, it's not hard.
Linux.io is a social operating system with a beautiful minimalist interface that allows you and those closest to you to interact with the computers that matter
Ugh, I just groaned out loud thinking about that. Freemium, closed source, just get enough users in a proprietary social graph and then ???? and then profit!
> It is NOT protable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never will support anything other than AT-harddisks
I've always wondered about the humbleness in that post. Whenever I talk about something I've created, I try to be humble about it. That said, inside, I'm of course wishing that it becomes the biggest bestest piece of software that (insert favorite large tech company you want to see collapse here) never saw coming and eventually rules the world. I can't help but wonder if Linus was thinking that at the time.
Reminds me of Alan Kay's attitude[1] in naming "Smalltalk":
The name was also a reaction against the "IndoEuropean god theory" where systems were named Zeus, Odin, and Thor, and hardly did anything. I figured that "Smalltalk" was so innocuous a label that if it ever did anything nice people would be pleasantly surprised.
I'm not sure about that. Maybe Linus appreciated the encouragement. Depends on the person, but knowing that people like what you are doing can help motivate a hobby project.
For those that like reading about these sorts of things, I highly recommend Just For Fun. It's a short book, but one I enjoy going back to every now and then to read.
194 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 237 ms ] threadI double-dare you, motherfucker
I just think that this violence crap should be censored instead of breasts or nudity. If you show that being a criminal is so cool and bad ass then don't expect anyone to not commit crimes. Many people would try to replicate what they see on TV.
edit: The original title was "22 years 16 hours 48 minutes 25 seconds ago". It has now been improved (IMO).
""" 'improve' """
(with sarcasm quotes intact) is exactly the word many would use to describe moderation on HN.
"I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to, too."
Other notables (pulled from his Wikipedia entry):
"I bought a $7 pen because I always lose pens and I got sick of not caring."
"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it."
"I haven't slept for ten days, because that would be too long."
Happy Birthday :)
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.lang.java/aSPAJO0...
edit: proof that he was successful, indeed, is that "to google" is a verb that comes more naturally to me when speaking English than common name diminutives.
Can't we have one thread that doesn't get into this?
Your reply also implies there's something wrong with NSA apology, which there shouldn't be intrinsically, as I'm posting an alternative perspective. Similarly, I don't subscribe to the idea that short comments or snarky comments are necessarily bad if they contain facts or point out a lack thereof - it's outright rudeness, willful stupidity/ignorance (reddit style humor), and meanness that I object to. Everything you've pointed out is stylistic.
Needless to say, this is all irrelevant, because my post history has nothing to do with my comment - that being, it'd be nice if we can talk about the early days of Google without demonizing it for its (alleged) privacy violations.
But, by all means, ignore my original point and look through my comment history for things to nitpick and argue over. I'm not going to debate it further with you.
Holy carp.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urs_H%C3%B6lzle#cite_note-1
Page ended up working with another grad student (Scott Hassan, who later ended up founding eGroups, which later became Yahoo!Groups), who rewrote the whole thing in Python. Google's crawler and webserver were in Python until the Netscape deal (summer 1999). When Urs was hired as Google's first VP, he started transitioning the system to C and C++ to solve Python's performance problems. Java was introduced when Google hired some very skilled Java programmers during the 2001-2003 recession.
So yes, Urs sorted out Google's Java problems by not using Java.
He also worked at eGroups. He wrote "medusa" which became asyncore in the Python standard library (http://www.nightmare.com/medusa/). This was long before Java had async I/O. Interesting that Guido is working on the new async I/O interface "tulip" in the Python core after all these years!
And Larry Page's brother apparently also worked at eGroups.
(or, if you prefer, "Commentarii de bello Gallico")
All qualities that Linus was to become famous (and infamous) for, before Linux was even fully formed.
The beginning of his verbal abuse seemed so innocent.
Won't support non AT-Disks
Not portable, and needs an MMU
Lame :)
Lame.
The "do things that don't scale" article helped knock me out of this rut a bit. I suspect I'll knock myself out the rest of the way the more I remind myself that pre-mature worries like this are actually an advanced form of procrastination.
Edit: Also worth noting that the 386 was the first "modern" Intel CPU in terms of instruction set and interfaces provided to kernel developers, so requiring 32-bit CPU with an MMU excludes a lot of machines in 1991 but not so many machines in the years that followed. What he's saying is he won't port to 286 which is a very obvious decision but maybe not so much if your frame of reference was Minix.
(Later on I do seem to remember there used to be a port of Linux to MMU-less varieties of 68K in the late 90s, like some of the other replies are asking for. Not sure how well it ever worked.)
There is hardly anything more scalable than distributing a free software clone of a widely used OS over an open global network for cheap, incredibly popular, commodity hardware.
If anything, MINIX did not scale. They charged a fee, and free Unix clones took off leaving MINIX behind.
"just"
Inconceivable now, with out-of-the-box systems e.g. Ubuntu, but this was fairly common relatively recently.
If anything, I wonder if it didn't take longer to recompile back then. I'm lucky to have 8 very bored cores to throw at the job. He didn't.
That is a niche (a large one I think) that is unfilled by the popular distros as far as I can tell.
In December 2002, Python 2.2 was released.
Seven months later, Debian 3.0 was released - with Python 2.1.
...time passes...
In November 2004, Python 2.4 is released. Debian stable is still using Python 2.1, and will continue with it up to June 2005.
June 2005, Debian stable finally upgrades off its 4+ year old Python version.
Needless to say, many 2.2+ scripts I ran in early 2005 broke on my Debian stable.
I understand that the late date of that particular Debian release was partially due to Ubuntu hiring away developers. I also understand that I could have always ran unstable. But it put me off of Debian stable.
Most people don't have the need, of course, but if you do, it's not hard.
> It is NOT protable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never will support anything other than AT-harddisks
I've always wondered about the humbleness in that post. Whenever I talk about something I've created, I try to be humble about it. That said, inside, I'm of course wishing that it becomes the biggest bestest piece of software that (insert favorite large tech company you want to see collapse here) never saw coming and eventually rules the world. I can't help but wonder if Linus was thinking that at the time.
The name was also a reaction against the "IndoEuropean god theory" where systems were named Zeus, Odin, and Thor, and hardly did anything. I figured that "Smalltalk" was so innocuous a label that if it ever did anything nice people would be pleasantly surprised.
[1] http://www.smalltalk.org/smalltalk/TheEarlyHistoryOfSmalltal...
Like someone scribbling on a precious museum artifact.
Eh maybe I am being silly.
Although, I believe that if there was something interesting going on in the newer comments you might not feel so disturbed about it.
http://www.amazon.com/Just-Fun-Story-Accidental-Revolutionar...