[LUAU] Love of disagreements

[Jim Thompson]

On Dec 21, 2006, at 11:45 PM, Jimen Ching wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Jim Thompson wrote:
>> Eben Moglen has participated in a great many technical discussions.
>> Its part of his vocation (job) and avocation (the thing he loves).
>
> Do we have the same definition of technical?

Likely.

> I'm talking about technical software discussions.  I.e. design,  
> implementation, etc.  If Eben Moglen participates in these  
> discussions, then this is the first time I've heard of it.  Are  
> there any references?  I would be very interested to hear his  
> thoughts on OOP.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that all lawyers are non- 
technical.   I've dealt with lawyers (patent attorneys, mostly) who  
are sharp-as-tacks when it comes to both hardware and software.

And don't make the mistake that one has to have a CS degree to grok  
software either.

>
>> Scott didn't say "LUAU = HOSEF; HOSEF = LUAU;", I did.
>
> http://lists.hosef.org/pipermail/luau/2006-December/017515.html
> <qoute>
> Jim is correct that HOSEF=LUAU, and you are correct that LUAU is  
> not owned
> by HOSEF.
> </qoute>

Exactly my point.  Thanks for making it for me.  :-)

>> I never said that I (or anyone, including "HOSEF", the  
>> organization) "ows" LUAU.
>
> As you can see from Scotts qoute above; even he recognizes that I  
> know HOSEF doesn't own LUAU.  I don't know why you insist on  
> repeating something that I already know and agree with.

At this point, I'm wondering what your problem might be.

>> Finally, in order to steer this back to a topic we can all engage  
>> in, "Free Software" is expressly *NOT* about creation of source  
>> code and the sharing of this source code.
>> Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy,  
>> distribute, study, change and improve the software. More  
>> precisely, it refers to four kinds of freedom, for the users of  
>> the software:
>
> You know what amazes me.  Even when we basically agree, you have to  
> disagree with me.
>
> When I say "sharing of this source code", doesn't it connote "copy,  
> distribute, study, change and improve?"  I mean, these are the  
> exact activities that sharing source code will benefit.  I'm just  
> curious, what did you think I meant when I said 'sharing of this  
> source code?"

I knew you had an incomplete definition for Free Software.

> Looks like disagreeing with me has become your hobby...
>
> --jc
>
> P.S.  Just as an experiemt: 2 + 2 = 4.  And I mean it too!  :)

As the saying goes, "2 + 2 = 5, for sufficiently large values of 2"

Slashdot doesn't think so: http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topiced.gif

I'm buying you one of these: http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/generic/ 
60f5/
What size do you weear?

(Oh and its experiment).