| 1 |
On Sun, 2012-11-18 at 17:19 +0000, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Diego Elio Pettenò posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:47:22 -0800 as excerpted: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > On 18/11/2012 07:43, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: |
| 5 |
> >> And, by the way, I doubt, that people "laugh" about eudev (previously |
| 6 |
> >> named udev-ng) creation. Mostly they just can't understand why gentoo |
| 7 |
> >> devs created third udev's fork, where it was already done (and |
| 8 |
> >> maintained) fork for LFS (somewhere on bitbucket) |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > People _are_ laughing at it. On G+, on Twitter, I suppose identi.ca and |
| 11 |
> > IRC as well. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> There's worse things than being laughed it. In fact, what's the oft-used- |
| 14 |
> in-MS/Linux-context quote (Gandi if I'm not mistaken), something along |
| 15 |
> the lines of... |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then |
| 18 |
> you win! |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> If they're laughing, they're beyond the ignore stage. And we see |
| 21 |
> evidence of the fight stage now too. If the idea behind that quote is |
| 22 |
> correct... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
People keep repeating that quote implying that whenever somebody laughs |
| 25 |
at an idea it's because the idea is worth something, but that's |
| 26 |
illogical and in fact false: just because B(worthy idea) was preceded by |
| 27 |
A(laughter) doesn't mean that whenever there's A(laughter) then B(worthy |
| 28 |
idea) ensues |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
http://xkcd.com/386/ |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix |
| 34 |
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. |
| 35 |
http://common-lisp.net/project/iolib |
Archives