You don't even need the Ubuntu shell anymore. The latest update includes OpenSSH built natively for Windows. It includes ssh, sftp, and even an optional server. I'm not sure why you'd want to SSH into a Windows desktop but it's there.

The real usability boost may not be WSL itself, but the improvements to the console window they needed to make to support it. Those improvements benefit everything you do in a console window.

I'm not sure why I'd want to use Powershell to call ssh/scp/etc. rather than a bash session in a WSL layer, where I'm already familiar with the various tools in that environment.

I mean, yeah, I'm slowly starting to learn Powershell now, but there's a simplicity to bash that appeals to me.

Wow. I'm not sure how to feel about this. Stallman has been a tumor on the open source community for decades, definitely outlived his usefulness and has been a liability for a long time now ... but on the other hand, I never like seeing the outrage mob claiming another scalp.

I wonder if the mob realizes how much of an extreme anti-capitalist they took down this time.

My question has always been about why MIT continued to subsidize RMS's existence for decades after he stopped producing anything other than autistic tantrums.

I wonder if the mob realizes how much of an extreme anti-capitalist

they took down this time.

$ME has popcorn while a reddish person loses his job in a reddish organization because a reddish mob decided they hated him.

I suspect the FSF has hosted a good deal of cover SJWism with the aproval of Stallman, so I can't say I am sad. It is unfair? Totally. As I posted in the Thrashcan, I don't think a "I don't think this is what happened, I think this other thing is what happened" declaration should grant a resignation. However, the irony is just to great not to enjoy.

Here's the real problem.

"Good riddance. We managed to remove Brendan Eich, Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman. One white male homophobe, one white male tone deaf freak and sociopath and one white male misogynist. COC is our weapon. COC is how we cancel people who should have never be in any society in the first place."
-- "Lyberta" on freegamedev.net

I don't know who "Lyberta" is but I wish him/her/it the maximum amount of pain, suffering, and misery a person can bear without dying. Because dying would make the suffering stop. These are the people who are ruining everything.
These are the people who don't deserve to have open source software. They deserve to be beaten over the head with Steve Ballmer until they are a bloody stain on the pavement.

Yeah, that guy looks like an herald of moral despotism.

I have set a goal for myself not to contribute to projects that feature a Code of Conduct, because Codes of Conduct are not about managing the project, but about signaling that a project is a political platform.

The only good CoC I know is the one XD has, the Code of Cock.

This is getting way out of hand. Like the Tor project partaking in that climate change event. Whether you believe in man created climate change or you are skeptical, a software project is not the platform that should be used for such campaigns. It is like if I used my software foundation to campaign for horse welfare. You are diverting the funds and efforts of people into an event they didn't know you were going into.

You should join the Citadel project. Our CoC is "Ehmke will be shot on sight."

[ Responding to the Stallman/child rape thread over in the Relationships & Sex room ]

Yeah, there's so much of RMS to pick on that it seems to be spreading all over several rooms, but here in this room we stick with operating system stuff!
:) For example...

I'm still browsing all over RMS's web site ... I can't help it, the guy is such a train wreck. Today I discovered that he claims to have invented the name "POSIX" for the standard unix-like operating system.

"So I put the initials of "Portable Operating System" together with the same suffix "ix", and came up with "POSIX". It sounded good and I saw no reason not to use it, so I suggested it. Although it was just barely in time, the committee adopted it." [ https://stallman.org/articles/posix.html ].

At first glance, I have no reason *not* to believe this. But knowing RMS, one would think that a name of his suggestion would be far more "loaded" than something neutral like POSIX.

At first glance, I have no reason *not* to believe this. But knowing

RMS, one would think that a name of his suggestion would be far more

"loaded" than something neutral like POSIX.

In my opinion, that is all well rationalized paranoia.

https://www.opengroup.org/austin/papers/posix_faq.html

These papers support the Stallman version.

Relatedly, I was talking to a web developper about Stallman's downfall and he told me: "Well, they reds do what reds do and destroy each other. GPL is communistic anyway"

There is no doubt that GPL is communist. However, even as a hardcore paleoconservative, I believe communism *works* for software, because the cost of distribution is zero. If I have a loaf of bread and I give it to you, you have bread and I don't. But if I have software and I give you a copy, we both have it.

The analogy breaks down when you get to the point of forcing someone to build open source software and give it away. I don't believe in that. But if you think of open source as a commune, where everyone voluntarily works together for the good of the community, it's an apt analogy. (No pun intended, but I'll take credit for it anyway.)

Earlier this year the lead author shut the project down.  

I read the entire rant. It doesn't appear that the GPL was the deciding factor in shutting the project down. From what I can tell, this would have happened under any license. He poured too much of himself into the project, neglecting his family, got burned out, let the assholes on the forum get the best of him ... and then in the end he decided that he wanted $$$ for the software but couldn't do so because it was open source.

As much as I would like to continue picking on Train Wreck Stallman, this project's unfortunate end is the developer's own fault, and his own choice.

Is my view subjective? Decide for yourselves. I've been maintaining a "full blown complex application under the GPL" for 30+ years, and I continue to find it a source of joy. So what's the difference between me and Jedimark?
Is it just a matter of striking the right balance between working on the project and doing other things? When I get busy with my day job, or enjoying time with my family and friends, the project doesn't get worked on. Sometimes I get excited about the project and write a ton of code and get "The High" from it. Sometimes I go railfanning with the IGlet and no code gets written. Sometimes I have a deadline at work and no code gets written. Sometimes I'm Dead F***ing Tired and I just want to go to bed.

Are any of these delays the GPL's fault? Not at all. I have a day job that pays me handsomely for access to the same brain that is used on the open source project. I don't expect to ever be paid for my software (although I *have* on occasion been paid to add specific features and then release them as part of the mainline code).

Train Wreck Stallman may have made the world a worse place by writing Emacs, but he made it a better place by writing the GPL.

end rant.

"If Stallman asks you on a date, just tell him you're a vi user."

The POSIX thing, I'm pretty sure predated the existence of Linux and the whole GNU/Linux naming debate../t/troll/thing.

It was the 1980's and definitely predated Linux, but the GNU project existed, and was complete in Train Wreck Stallman's mind, even though all that was completed in actual code was maybe a compiler and some utilities. So he was certainly thinking about it, which is why I'm surprised he didn't come up with a more provocative name, as is his usual practice.

Today it doesn't matter. Linux *is* the gold-standard unix now.

New version of Virtualbox just released. Changelog says it fixes a guru meditation error, hope that's the same one that's been occasionally bothering me.

Just downgraded my virtualbox setup from xfce to "MATE", formerly known as Gnome 2. (I don't like the look-and-feel of KDE, and xfce's window manager regularly gets itself stuck in a state where it can't process mouse clicks.)

Gnome 3 just doesn't perform right without the best available 3D acceleration, and Virtualbox's API forwarding approach will never perform well, from what I'm reading. An entirely new architecture is needed to get it really blazing.

Sigh. The state of Linux on the desktop is just not what it used to be. :-(