use strict;
use LWP::Simple;
my $content = get("http://freshmeat.net/news/2000/09/19/969383787.html
+");
if ($content =~ m/[Pp]erl/) {
print "Found valid Perl content. ++ the node.\n"
}
else {
print "Where's the beef? -- that sucker.\n"
}
| [reply] [d/l] |
Two comments, then I'll stop...
Number one, not everyone here is an Open Source believer. There are, in fact, people here who can think for themselves, and make their own decisions about whether or not they believe in Open Source or Free Software or Santa Claus. If you want to snicker at what you perceive to be "Micro$oft's" evil activities and "Billy's" stupidity, try SlashDot.
Number two, it's ironic that you say GATES defied logic in the referenced article, since a first-year logic student could tear the Commentary to shreds on logical grounds. If you want to argue about it, I'll be glad to show you - via email, please, not in posts.
- email Ozymandias
For those interested in a balanced viewpoint (I know, I know, but what the heck, it's worth a shot) Gates's comments are here.
Update: Just a note; this is an example of sarcasm. Look it up. | [reply] |
This, that and the other thing but BG's says:
"It's simply false that open source has any great benefit in terms of reliability or
security."
"The idea that people's altruistic contribution will somehow evolve into the best product
is wrong."
which would seem to validate the argument that he doesn't know what he's talking
about, or, more likely, is whistling past the graveyard. His win2k
and USD4 billion have hardly produced anything comparable to the value
of
perl, apache and even linux. Some small amount of GUI smoothness,
but have you ever tired to fix a winxx box? Sure, enough (heck
most) people don't (they just buy a new one - he's not stupid, nobody
should be saying that) to keep him in the largest house in upper
WA state but doesn't make him right.
a
| [reply] |