From: muta...@gmail.com   
      
   On Wednesday, March 22, 2023 at 4:19:28 AM UTC+8, Dan Cross wrote:   
      
   > >> >Communists are very good at the "to each according to    
   > >> >their need" (and they always "need" a lot), but when it    
   > >> >comes to "from each according to their ability", they all    
   > >> >suddenly have sore backs.    
   > >> >    
   > >> >Now that PDOS exists I can point them to it and say "ok,    
   > >> >you love communism - what can you contribute according    
   > >> >to your ability - documentation? testing?".    
   > >> >    
   > >> >Of course they're not going to contribute anything.    
   > >> >    
   > >> >I just want to show them up for being slimebag commies.    
   > >    
   > >> Have you considered that people may not want to contribute to    
   > >> your project because they don't want to work with you, or find    
   > >> it technically substandard, or aren't interested in spending    
   > >> time on an eighth-baked toy?    
   > >    
   > >It's just an example. They can write their own public    
   > >domain OS, or do something else to benefit the world.    
   > >They don't need a communist government to force    
   > >them to do that.   
      
   > Except your "example" doesn't follow; it's specious. Your    
   > statement amounted to suggesting that people who don't    
   > contribute to your hobby project should be "called out" because    
   > they're communists, while failing to consider that maybe they    
   > just don't want to work with you because you behave like a    
   > petulent child.   
      
   I made no such statement. That's just bullshit you made up.   
      
   > >> >And the commies can improve PDOS for free. Or rather,    
   > >> >be called out for not doing that.    
   > >    
   > >> So you're suggesting that anyone who's not interested in working    
   > >> on your little toy hobby project should be "called out"?    
   > >    
   > >No. Commies should be called out for insisting that they    
   > >need a communist government, because Marx's ideals    
   > >can't be satisfied under a capitalist system.   
      
   > No, what you said is that, "the commies can ... be called out    
   > for not doing that [improving PDOS]."   
      
   You misunderstood. When commies complain about   
   Microsoft etc and we need a communist government,   
   I will challenge them to show me what is preventing   
   them from following Marx within the capitalist system.   
      
   PDOS is something I can point them to AS AN EXAMPLE.   
      
   If they counter "oh - i never realized i could contribute   
   according to my ability - and i have the ability to cure   
   cancer - i'll develop it over the next 30 years for free",   
   that's perfectly fine. And another demonstration of   
   living up to Marx's fantasy world without needing to   
   impose communism on everyone.   
      
   > Well, I'm not a "commie"    
   > but I'm not going to work on your thing, because it's garbage    
   > and you're an asshole.   
      
   If you're not a commie, then I won't call you out for   
   failing to contribute anything to anything.   
      
   I'll just call you out for peddling virus licenses as just   
   as good as public domain.   
      
   Are you sure you're not a slimebag commie and just   
   pretending not to be?   
      
   > >So I point out one of Marx's ideals.    
   > >    
   > >And then I point them to PDOS and say "for example,    
   > >improve this, or write a better version".   
      
   > ...but you fail to recognize that maybe no one cares because you    
      
   No-one? Another world survey you pulled out of your ass?   
      
   > cannot understand that there's no actual (not your imagined)    
   > need to build such a thing.   
      
   That's your claim, as if you are omniscient.   
      
   > >> >Both things sound great to me.    
   > >> >    
   > >> >Being extorted by monopolies is not great. Monopolies    
   > >> >naturally arise in capitalism and are a known problem.    
   > >> >Normally the government steps in. But in the case of    
   > >> >IBM and Microsoft that is apparently too difficult.    
   > >> >    
   > >> >So - I made a reasonable attempt to challenge them    
   > >> >myself. Both of those major APIs have a PDOS flavor.    
   > >    
   > >> The delusion is strong with this one.    
   > >    
   > >The denial of PDOS's existence and API isn't going to fly.   
      
   > Oh, it exists, it's just that no one is going to take it    
      
   Yet another world poll pulled out of your ass?   
      
   BTW, Linas made a similar claim about Linux. That it   
   would never be as good as SCO.   
      
   He didn't know he was wrong at the time, but he was wrong.   
      
   You may or may not be wrong right now. I have no idea.   
   You're the one claiming to have an infallible crystal ball.   
      
   > seriously as any kind of "challenge" to, well, anything.    
   >    
   > Because it's not. Because it is a toy.   
      
   Again - what you are calling a "toy" is all the public actually   
   owns.   
      
   And that "toy" still allows you to develop a replacement   
   OS more to your liking in a high level language.   
      
   If that's a "toy" to you - fine, I don't really care what a   
   slimebag pseudo-commie like you thinks. Other than   
   I want to make sure your bullshit is countered in the   
   free marketplace of ideas.   
      
   BFN. Paul.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)