[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/22]
Peter da Silva wrote: > >> Where in that picture does the pile-on in Yossi's thread about >> filesystem semantics fit in? > > > Redirecting hate to legitimate targets. IMO, the semantics of the UNIX file I/O is a legitimate target. Moreover, the very fact that one must delve into a bigger shitload of semantical questions than your typical lawyer to understand why he's fucked by a system is a legitimate target. IMO, to make a target legitimate one doesn't have to: * mention an existing better solution (for instance, I think scons is better than make, but I don't bother to mention it when I hate make). That would lead to praising the better solution, which seems off-topic. More importantly, it is irrelevant, since if scons wouldn't exist, make would still suck. * prove understanding of the mechanism leading to the hateful behavior (for instance, I know about hard links and how unlink works and the like, but I don't bother to mention it when I hate Unix). If the engine blows up, you don't need to understand the chemistry behind this - the vehicle sucks. And if you know the chemistry, why bother proving it to people who like driving this kind of vehicle and proudly show off their scars? On the other hand, it is perfectly legitimate for people fond of certain software systems to protect them, just as it is legitimate for other people to hate those systems.
Generated at 22:02 on 27 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52