Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linux For Supervillains

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the nothing-else-happening-today dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 256

computernut writes "Supervillains seem to like Linux. Take a peek at a cool Shockwave Animation on why they use it." Cute little animation. I think we might have shown it here before, but hey it's Sunday, and August which means this is the closest thing to news we might have all day.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FP! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315938)

FP!

Mystery Revealed (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315939)

It appears the Slashdot editor inadvertantly revealed why they have dupes. If only we had known...

OLD! (-1, Redundant)

wdd1040 (640641) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315945)

I remember looking at this at least 3 years ago...

Re:OLD! (3, Insightful)

lightyear4 (852813) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315984)

who cares?? it entertained me - thats more than you can say for most /. posts

Re:OLD! (1)

PsychicX (866028) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316022)

I feel better in the morning knowing I can always count on Slashdot to post something dated from at least a year ago.

Are you kidding me? (5, Informative)

falloutboy (150069) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315946)

This story is a great reason not to get a subscription to slashdot.

Anyway, the video -- which is funny -- is several years old and comes from http://www.ubergeek.tv/ [ubergeek.tv]

Re:Are you kidding me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316042)

If I had mod points I'd give them to you.

Re:Are you kidding me? (3, Insightful)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316088)

Not even for non-suscribers. It has been more than a year since I saw this - how can people think this is "new(s)"?

Re:Are you kidding me? (2, Insightful)

JPriest (547211) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316167)

It is for the people who couldn't figure out how to link flash from mozilla back then.

Re:Are you kidding me? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316100)


Seriously, do the smell of farts give you a hard on? I've always wondered if you gays found farts erotic - you know, if you sniff the ass scent from a hot guy do you think, "yeah, I'd like to stuff my pecker into some more of THAT."

Re:Are you kidding me? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316303)

Seriously, you have no need to be worried. While you do stink atrociously, you are not hot nor even remotely attractive. Therefore no person, male or female, will want to have sexual intercourse with you. Ever.

Re:Are you kidding me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316139)

Re:Are you kidding me? (1)

Uber Banker (655221) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316254)

It's a Sunday, it's August. So if we're browsing comments on a non-story I guess we're bored. There is a load of more cool Shockwave animation here [4chan.org] .

Re:Are you kidding me? (1)

slavemowgli (585321) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316269)

Not to mention here [newgrounds.com] .

t3h 3v1l (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315947)

No! I refuse to believe it!! M$ 1s t3h 3vil, not Linux!!!!111111one!111

Not flash!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315950)

Flash is what will kill the web.

Flesh is what's gonna save it.

Of course (5, Funny)

PakProtector (115173) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315952)

Linux is for Supervillians. The Good Guys use NetBSD.

Re:Of course (1)

aurb (674003) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316195)

Netcraft confirms you know what.

News for Nerds? (5, Interesting)

Ubi_NL (313657) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315954)

My $DEITY
This thing is nearly 3 years old
It's mentioned on other websites [milkandcookies.com] with a date of january 2003!

Re:News for Nerds? (1)

Ubi_NL (313657) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315981)

The original version seems to come from here [ubergeek.tv] with a date of january 16 2003

everyone hates on Taco.. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315955)

..but at least he's honest about it. Doesn't fucking bother capitalizing August or Sunday, doesn't care to look up if it's a dupe.

*gasp* He's just another lazy computer geek! Everyone, get the pitchforks and torches! We're supposed to all be pissed off cuz he's getting paid to be a lazy geek! We're supposed to gripe about having subscriptions and.. o, wait, I'm an AC.

Yes, anyway, Taco is still my man.

Or... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316172)

He could've just not posted any new articles, keeping the ones that are there on the main page so we can discuss them more.

Why we used to love /.: In the good ol' days, Taco and Hemos posted an article when there was something to post, maybe once an hour, maybe once a day. Articles stayed on the front page for days, and we managed to have meaningful discussions about them.

Why we don't love it anymore: There's now a quota of one article per hour (or one per 2 hours during USA-side nights and weekends). This results in lots of lame articles and dupes, and makes the older articles disappear from the front page quickly. Unless you're glued to your computer, there's no way to carry on a meaningful discussion, and there's a rush by everybody to post a comment within the first few hours, flooding the articles with irrelevant stuff.

Basically, slashdot's gone from quality to quantity. Great for ad revenue, not so great for readers.

More Microsoft FUD (5, Funny)

Stephen Samuel (106962) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315957)

Great... More fodder for the Microsoft FUD machine..

First, "they hate copyright", now "they want to destroy the world". What next? "They're trying to put an entire industry (anti-virus) out of business!"?

Well... (4, Funny)

MustardMan (52102) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315960)

Since we're duping movies we've seen before, I might as well point out the funniest Switch parody I've ever seen... http://www.roosterteeth.com/archive/download.php?i d=499 [roosterteeth.com]

Re:Well... (1)

pwnage (856708) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316260)

Which world is this funny on?

AKA "Slashdot for Suckers" (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315971)

If you've ever submitted a story and had it rejected, now you know why. The editors have finally come clean and admitted THEY DON'T CARE. Yes, it's just a paycheck, and like many minimum wage workers they're simply doing enough to not get fired.

So next time you think to yourself "Should I take my time to submit this to Slashdot?" remember Taco's "it's sunday blah blah blah" commentary. He doesn't care, and neither should you.

Re:AKA "Slashdot for Suckers" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315986)

How could they get fired? They own the shop.

Uh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316007)

They sold out a long time ago. Who do you think OSTG is?

michael was fired a while back... and I'm beginning to think maybe they fired Zonk. He's never got this long without a story.

Re:AKA "Slashdot for Suckers" (1)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315987)

Naw.

Next time I submit a story, I'll just make sure it's Sunday in August.

Besides, the video did make me laugh, and on a day I could use it, so I'm happy.

D

Finally Linux will own the desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315972)

At least all EVIL desktops when the east coast is seized.

Uh huh. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13315974)

Yeah, a three year old flash animation. That sure makes up for the dupes, incomplete postings, and meta-moderation of anyone who has a complaint about how fucking shitty this site's gotten over the years.

I don't know why I bother coming here any more.

Re:Uh huh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316107)

I wish you wouldn't.

Re:Uh huh. (1)

Penguin (4919) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316108)

.. and yet you do. And even posting comments.

Re:Uh huh. (5, Funny)

prider (174309) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316147)

If you don't like this site, why do you post so much? I did a quick search for posts by you "Anonymous Coward" and it looks like you're the biggest user of this site!

It may be old.... (5, Funny)

davecrusoe (861547) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315980)

... but it's still funny! And besides, some of us don't remember /. stories three years old => So, I for one welcome our three-year-old Linux supervillian overlords. But only when used appropriately.

Re:It may be old.... (0, Redundant)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316116)

If the Slashdot editors are going to dupe stories on purpose, then can we at least get a 'Dupe' category so people who want to can filter them out?

Um, how come (5, Interesting)

TheEvilOverlord (684773) | more than 9 years ago | (#13315982)

When I post something relevant it gets rejected, but when someone posts an admittedly funny, but million year old flash animation, it gets front paged?

Re:Um, how come (2, Insightful)

TheLetterPsy (792255) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316010)

This is /. and the guy said Linux, ergo . . . relevant.

Cause no one likes you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316011)

Don't you get it yet? Are you that thick?

Re:Um, how come (1)

MrShaggy (683273) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316146)

Yes I posted a story when Peter Jennings died. Nothing. Couldnt figgure it out, here was a guy that everyone knew. A quiet influence for news people. Maybe cause he was a Canadian?

Re:Um, how come (0, Troll)

belg4mit (152620) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316228)

How is the death of a newsman relevant? Unless of
course it's Ruper Murdoch. It's not. Heck, I was
watching TV when it was announced and was rather put-off by the damn documentary they launch into. It seemed rather self-serving and disingenious to have something "already ready already".

Re:Um, how come (1)

Albino Wolfman (822132) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316234)

OK, but why come to /. to get articles that you can easily get from CNN or MSNBC? Peter Jennings was a very talented and reputable journalist. His death is quite unfortunate, but I wouldn't consider it to be "news for nerds".

Re:Um, how come (1)

killercoder (874746) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316315)

It would be news for nerds if he'd died in the sack with a spokes model for RedHat.........or been assassinated by Bill Gates for software Piracy...........or if he'd managed to Run OSX on his PSP. He didn't - so it didn't get posted.

Confused? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316001)

Take a peek at a cool Shockwave Animation on why they use it.

That is a Flash animation, not Shockwave.

Re:Confused? (-1, Redundant)

dolphinling (720774) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316030)

And rather ironic, isn't it, seeing as Shockwave doesn't even run on Linux.

Re:Confused? (0, Troll)

jnelson4765 (845296) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316064)

Uh, what cave have you been living in? Or are you using three-year-old linux to view it?

I watched it in FC4 with no problems...

Farking troll...

Re:Confused? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316131)

Maybe he's running it on 64-bit Linux (x86_64 FC4, for instance).

Re:Confused? (1)

Orgazmus (761208) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316141)

Yeah, because flash runs ine on linux, but he is talking about shockwave.
Get a clue, then open mouth

Re:Confused? (2, Informative)

Novus (182265) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316142)

Huh? Works fine in Mozilla for me. RPM version data follows:

> rpm --qf "%{NAME} - %{SUMMARY}: %{VERSION}\n%{VENDOR}\n" -q flash-player mozilla
flash-player - Macromedia Flash plugin: 7.0.25.0
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany
mozilla - The Open Source successor of the Netscape browser: 1.7.5
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany


Hope this helps.

Re:Confused? (1)

Novus (182265) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316168)

Sorry, I thought dolphinling was confused about Shockwave and Flash, but it turns out I was. Anyway, whether Shockwave works or not on Linux is mostly irrelevant; I can't say I've ever needed it. Flash is annoying enough, thank you.

Re:Confused? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316038)

The name you're looking for is Shockwave Flash.

Re:Confused? (1)

dhasenan (758719) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316288)

I saw that the article said "Shockwave" and thought it ironic--as everyone knows, Shockwave doesn't run on Linux (except via Wine).

i'm dumber! (4, Funny)

illtron (722358) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316004)

Yet again, something absolutely useless on Slashdot has made me dumber. This time it was unfunny too. Thanks Slashdot! Two or three more like this and I'll be too retarded to type.

Re:i'm dumber! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316016)

In four or five, you'll be ready to serve as an editor.

Re:i'm dumber! (1)

PakProtector (115173) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316067)

Yet again, something absolutely useless on Slashdot has made me dumber. This time it was unfunny too. Thanks Slashdot! Two or three more like this and I'll be too retarded to type.

Oi! That be dumberber.

Re:i'm dumber! (1)

Exatron (124633) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316337)

Quick! Somebody post some more things like that!

Re:i'm dumber! (4, Funny)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316341)

Two or three more like this and I'll be too retarded to type.

Try browsing at -1, you'll find many posters who seem to have overcome that particular disability...

Hey, I happen to like this... (1)

martinultima (832468) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316009)

Just because it's old doesn't mean it's not funny. I happen to like this thing, gives me something funny I can use to promote my favorite operating system. :-)

Re:Hey, I happen to like this... (2, Insightful)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316056)

I don't think it promotes linux... I think they're actually making fun of it where they say "you have to compile it, patch the kernel, etc". (I'm not being a troll).

Re:Hey, I happen to like this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316328)

Yea, ok Darl McBride.

supervillains (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316020)

lol!

So old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316035)

It's like Karl Marx chasing down Jesus and the Dell Dude while astride a dinosaur.

Shockwave? (0, Offtopic)

bartjan (197895) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316041)

Isn't it ironic that there is no such thing as a shockwave player for Linux?

Re:Shockwave? (1)

cosmol (143886) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316092)

Although you might be happier just not installing it, there is an official flash player for linux.

Re:Shockwave? (1)

Grant_Watson (312705) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316247)

As people have said before, Shockwave Flash != Shockwave, though this is really Flash and not Shockwave.

Re:Shockwave? (1)

kevcol (3467) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316098)

It's a good thing then we are all reading and posting from our PowerBooks.

Re:Shockwave? (1)

verbatim_verbose (411803) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316114)

It would be, except it's not a shockwave animation - it's flash.

As long as we're posting three year old flash clips, you don't expect an accurate description too, do you? ;)

Re:Shockwave? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316211)

I have flash installed, and whenever I click on the link Firefox just says it wants to save some file with ".swf" extension. Is this some sort of virus? I know flash works because I can see homestar runner.

Re:Shockwave? (1)

dhasenan (758719) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316295)

.swf is Flash. Firefox sometimes flakes out when you try to run a non-embedded Flash animation with it.

Linux versus Windows (1, Flamebait)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316049)

"We were negotiating with the Pentagon. We had a Blue Screen of Death..."
I have found Linux to be far less stable than Windows. I have used both on a lot of different systems, at work and at home. Linux is unlikely to completely crash (although it will—bad drivers or hardware are often the culprit). But KDE and Gnome go down all the time. It's not really fair to talk about applications. But Linux is the big loser there too.

Windows XP, fully updated, rarely goes down. Like in Linux, the base system can often save the rest. You just need to restart explorer.exe. Real BSODs, in my experience, tend to be driver and hardware related. The hardware culprits for me have been: An ATI Radeon card, a motherboard (a revision of K7s5a fails memtest out of the box), and bad RAM, of coore than a year.

None of my current Linux systems go for more than a month without X-Windows manager troubles. In one case, I know this to be a video card driver issue. The others, I have no idea about.

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316061)

A garbled line of text there, sorry: "and bad RAM, of course. My Windows XP box has not gone down for more than a year."

Re:Linux versus Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316091)

You must be new here. Whenever someone posts a relevant criticism of Linux on /., they get modded down as troll or offtopic, because we all know that Linux is superior to anything else, and any criticism of it is done purely out of evil intent, right?

Re:Linux versus Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316160)

The thing is. If GUI crashes on Windows. There is nothing you can do for it. But if X crashes on Linux, you can try another one, or third, or 4th, or... You get the point?

And hey, you can always fix the bug that is causing the crash or pay someone to do it for you. That is freedom which is not an option with Windows where you can only report the bug to Microsoft and hope that they will fix it.

And who uses X anyway, you can read slashdot with Lynx also.

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316166)

You can end the explorer.exe process with Task Manager and start a new instance of it.

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

electronerdz (838825) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316225)

If you don't need your task tray icons.

Re:Linux versus Windows (4, Interesting)

Otter (3800) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316178)

But KDE and Gnome go down all the time. It's not really fair to talk about applications....Like in Linux, the base system can often save the rest.

For most desktop use, though, an X crash (which is probably what you mean by "KDE and Gnome go down all the time") wipes out all your unsaved work and demands a reboot, just as a full-blown operating system crash does. The hair-splitting about "completely crash" doesn't change that.

The bitching about BSODs goes back to when Linux use involved running vi in an xterm in FVWM on barebones video cards. In those days, the GUI really was rock-solid (and Windows was really as flimsy as people made out).

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

SilverspurG (844751) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316280)

an X crash ... wipes out all your unsaved work and demands a reboot,
Perhaps you could enlighten me as to why an X crash demands a reboot or even wipes out all your work. My work? I use emacs inside a screen. Even if X dies a horrible death (which I've managed to pull off twice in the last six months by purposely attempting to use drivers labelled as experimental or not quite for my card) it's no different than if your ftpd choked. Restart and move on.

While it can happen... it's VERY rare that choking X will damage the console environment. One reliable method to make this happen is to attempt to manually set the timings for the Svideo TV-out on a Radeon 7500. X loses its timings and the timing for the console display gets mutilated.

I digress...

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316310)

unless of course your "console environment" is xterms, which is kind of the point of a GUI, windowed applications you can move, resize, overlap, etc...

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

dhasenan (758719) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316312)

Sometimes X refuses input, and even pressing Ctrl-Alt-F doesn't switch back to the console.

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

Solra Bizna (716281) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316180)

> ...KDE and Gnome go down all the time.

You know... I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Windows machine for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my POS Pentium 133 running Gentoo, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this P4, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In all seriousness, though, I've installed and used Linux on nearly a dozen boxes now. Lots of them weren't even x86. I have NEVER had anything short of hardware failure or my stupidity cause crashes. (Anyone else ever delete libc.so?)

I also note that the parent post is being modded down for not preaching the joys of Linux...I would gladly have spent a mod point on "underrated" it if I hadn't spent all mine in the "Google + iTunes" story.

-:sigma.SB

Re:Linux versus Windows (1)

electronerdz (838825) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316204)

_Linux_ itself does not go down. XWindows might have a problem, but the system is still running and does not need to be restarted. And if X is the problem, don't run it. I have several systems here at home without X that run for months without a restart, and the only reason they go down is for me to blow the dust out of them. I have set up several servers for people that run for years without a restart, and the only reason they go down is because of power failure. I have an old ProLiant with a P166 or something that runs all the time without problems. Windows can't do that... you HAVE to restart. Either for updates, or because Explorer screwed up and needs to be restarted to clean it up. Don't knock Linux just because YOUR hardware was bad.

Re:Linux versus Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316216)

Hey! Reality check: The flash animation is supposed to be funny, as in not necessarily 100% factually accurate.

Oh and by the way, argumenting against the general quality of something based on your own experience is treading on thin ice. Shall I give you a demonstration?

I have run gnome and linux for a long time, and neither of them has crashed, ever. See? I just sent your entire base for argumenting through the window!

Better luck next time!

Re:Linux versus Windows (4, Funny)

stwrtpj (518864) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316321)

I have found Linux to be far less stable than Windows.

Wow, not only is the topic three years old, but so are the comments.

Re:Linux versus Windows (3, Informative)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316348)

But KDE and Gnome go down all the time.

You do realise that there's other desktop environments and window managers than KDE/Gnome, right? I find that those two DEs go down fairly frequently as well. Since switching to XFCE, however, I have never had a crash. Ever. It's absolutely rock-solid, and as long as it's development is focused on speed and stability over, say, bells&whistles, it's going to continue to be rock-solid.

And if you don't like XFCE, there's nothing to stop you from using *box, fvwm, or hell, even tab-window-manager. Maybe your problems with X have less to do with X or Linux themselves, and more to do with your choice of using Desktop Environments with known memory leaks (KDE) and stability problems when dealing with unexpected library versions (Gnome).

And in the event of an X crash, I wouldn't lose my documents, either. At most, I'd lose 5 minutes' work, because that's the interval at which AbiWord is set to autosave my work. Hell, my music wouldn't even stop playing, thanks to me using MPD.

This thing is called Flash for 5 years already! (2, Informative)

tereshchenko (715289) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316057)

This thing is called Flash for 5 years already! And previously it wasn't simply Shockwave, but Shockwave Flash. Shockwave is the name of Macromedia Director's internet format and entirely different technology.

And actually (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316073)

Macromedia has renamed SWF to "Small Web Format" I'm serious. I sat through a presentation and that's what they called it.

Re:And actually (1)

tereshchenko (715289) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316155)

Huh? I need to see this to believe this ;-)

Slashdot... I thought we were smart?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316071)

It a FLASH animation, not a shockwave animation. Get it right the first time!

'several' years old? try 5 (1)

Cally (10873) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316090)

I had a vivid and specific memory of Slashdot last posting this, and I can date it 'cos I remember showing it to the goddam beret-wearing Mac freaks (us Linux/Slowaris/mod_perl folks had a friendly rivalry going with the shapemakers.) At the time I was working at a dotcom that went tits-up in July 2001. I only started there in October 2000, so that makes the Flash four to five years old.

See how much has changed since then, as the Linux revolution in ease of use and consistency has swept the world's desktops.

Yes Veronica, that was intended as sarcasm, not irony.

Supervillains (5, Funny)

burtdub (903121) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316095)

Perhaps we can get other enemies to jump on the Linux bandwagon:

  • Osama Bin Linux
  • Saddam GNU-ssein
  • Kim Jong Moz-Il-la

Re:Supervillains (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316156)

GPL Sharon
Yasser RedHat
Kernel Saunders

Re:Supervillains (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316219)

Midnight Taco

Re:Supervillains (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13316311)

Kernel Saunders? Isn't that the chicken guy? I think I'd hardly call him a supervillain.

Wow. (5, Interesting)

hungrygrue (872970) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316125)

I wouldn't be surprised to see a /. story on, say, hampster dance in a few years. Not only has that video been around for years, but Darl Mcbride even referred to it in his "open letter" not long ago:

  A popular animation
                on the Internet features a guy named Steve, the Linux Super Villain.
                During the course of the 60 second animation, he describes his work
                with Linux stating, "First you have to config it, then write some
                shell scripts, update your RPMs, partition your drives, patch your
                kernel, compile your binaries and check your version dependencies..."

http://ca.us.biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050808/lam060.ht ml?.v=19 [yahoo.com]

http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/08/ 1717257&from=rss [slashdot.org]

surprise! (1)

akhomerun (893103) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316150)

I think we might have shown it here before

At least this article admits openly that it is a dupe.

As for the flash animation, I found it mildly entertaining but somehow I feel like I've seen it before many years ago.

Sounds Like Nat Friedman (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 9 years ago | (#13316229)

Really. It does. If you've ever heard an interview with him or seen a presentation - that's him!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?