Without Dennis Ritchie, there would be no Jobs

Joshua Judson Rosen rozzin at geekspace.com
Wed Oct 26 00:49:52 EDT 2011


Randy Edwards <redwards at golgotha.net> writes:
>
> > After rms's statement on Jobs[1] (which I basically agreed with), I was
> > a little surprised there wasn't one for Ritchie.
> 
>    Good point. I thought rms gave enough of the appropriate disclaimers about 
> Jobs' death to make his point with the appropriate amount of taste. That ZDNet 
> article obviously felt otherwise because they couldn't resist a slam on 
> Stallman.
> 
>    Perhaps with Ritchie's passing rms felt he'd caught enough heat about 
> commenting about people when they die?

I just figured it's that rms' "Political Notes and News items"
page is a `political blog'--if the title didn't give it away,
most (all?) of the notices there seem to be attempts at motivating
people to action on some issue. Maybe dmr just wasn't of much
*political* significance near the end of his life? I'm not
expecting to see a post there about McCarthy, either--
even though there would be no Emacs or Guile without him....

As for why rms *did* comment on Jobs' death: I found this
NY Times piece, `Against Nostalgia':

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/opinion/jobs-looked-to-the-future.html

... via esr's blog:

    http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3790


I thought those helped explain it, if rms was too laconic.


-- 
"Don't be afraid to ask (λf.((λx.xx) (λr.f(rr))))."



More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list