|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 10:29 PM EST |
Sorry to inject some ad hominem criticism here, but every time I see Darl I
can't keep myself from musing how much he looks like an overgrown version of the
stereotypical frat boy from all those silly 80's college exploitation B-movies.
What was the name of the jock frat in Revenge of the Nerds? ;-)
Er, does that make us Lambda Lambda Lambda/Omega Mu? ;-)
(No offense meant to fraternity members, my best friend was one.)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Brent on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 10:34 PM EST |
Now these are just a few 'stills' from the chat, but I'm curious - did he have a
habit of hiding one hand or the ther during the whole chat? Also, did he tend
to hover around behind the desk during the chat or did he come out toward the
audience at all?
Brent[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Harvard Pictures - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 10:57 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: JonnyRo on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 10:38 PM EST |
I heard references to a webcast. Is there an AVI format capture of this talk
anywhere that I can take a look at?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Harry Clayton on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 10:38 PM EST |
Darl MCBride wears a red tie - he's a communist...
---
Linux: There is no infringing code.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: James on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 11:04 PM EST |
| Is it just me, or is he doing a Bill Clinton impression in that first pic? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Tim Ransom on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 11:11 PM EST |
looks like he should be holding a giant pepper grinder - or a violin case, while
Sontag looks like a weak bladdered Niles Crane on casual Friday. Thanks for the
laffs!
Thanks again,[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- ! Darl - Authored by: PJ on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 11:22 PM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 11:29 PM EST
- Sorry, PJ - Authored by: Tim Ransom on Monday, February 02 2004 @ 11:50 PM EST
- Sorry, PJ - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 12:07 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 12:21 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 09:24 AM EST
- The Call Back... - Authored by: the_flatlander on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 11:33 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 05:35 PM EST
- Understanding - Authored by: Ed L. on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 07:27 PM EST
- Hey - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 04 2004 @ 01:18 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 01:50 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 03:10 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 09:39 AM EST
- Flamebaiting and Trolling - Authored by: rjamestaylor on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 03:55 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: bobn on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 09:01 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 10:40 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 11:30 AM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 04:33 PM EST
- ! Darl - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 08:48 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 12:39 AM EST |
| I think Darl was a member of I Eta Pi. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: atul on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 03:30 AM EST |
Sorry, Darl, baggy and misshapen suits are out this year. The big shoulder pads
aren't helping. Sorry.
P.S. The 70's called, they want their tie back.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: atul on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 03:38 AM EST |
I haven't heard anyone mention Darl's bodyguards. Surely the place was thick
with them, right?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 03:51 AM EST |
Hey! I'm sure that there are bits of the sleeve and collar of Darl's suit that
are identical to a very similar suit I currently have in my wardrobe at home!
He can either choose to stop wearing this suit or pay me $650 for the priveledge
of continuing to wear it. (Sorry Darl, but for legal reasons I can't let you
know what parts of the sleeve and collar are like mine...)
He'll be hearing from my lawyers. In the meantime - suit wearers of the world,
beware![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 05:27 AM EST |
Just needs to top it off with a black cowboy hat. Glad to see pictures, he is
human, he is real. I am not just having a bad dream.
Probably easier to demonize the man before seeing he is flesh and blood. Imagine
too, seven kids and a wife.
As misguided and off base as we might think this guy is, he really is more like
you and me than we might want to admit.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 06:15 AM EST |
Where is Darl's big red nose and 2 foot long floppy shoes? He's also missing
white makeup, red and/or multicolored frizzy hair. I was expecting at least an
oversized polka dot - *shirt* and some baggy pants. Darl is noting like I
expected..[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 06:22 AM EST |
| Don't cultivate hate, it only diminishes yourself. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: phrostie on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 07:11 AM EST |
he looks scared.
tired and scared.
---
=====
phrostie
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/cad-linux[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Harvard Pictures - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 05:02 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: gadget on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 08:35 AM EST |
Someone caught one last picture of the event before Mr McBride left
abruptly.
Last Picture of Darl [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 10:32 AM EST |
| He looks like a thug who was caught in the "act". [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: old joe on Tuesday, February 03 2004 @ 02:38 PM EST |
OK so SCOG's case (as I understand it) is that they are not Reopening the BSD
case they are Enforcing it.
Their case is that the settlement required BSD to put ATT copyright notices on
some files but gave BSD permission to publish those files so long as they
included that copyright notice. Anyone else publishing those files without
copyright notices can therefore be sued and the courts will order them also to
add copyright notices.
Flaws in this argument:
Flaw #1
Surely the most the court would do is instruct the parties to add the copyright
notices. Damages would only, I presume, apply if people still refused to put the
notices in AFTER such a court order.
How would the judge react when he hears SCO has never asked folks to add those
notices?
Flaw #2
From their statements in court UCB thought they could win the BSD case. They
stated that ATT had not put copyright notices on UNIX code when they first
published it nor had they registered the copyrights.
My guess is UCB went along with attaching copyright notices because it cost
nothing and got ATT/USL/Novell off their backs.
New defendants might fight.
Just my £0.02[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 04 2004 @ 02:59 AM EST |
| A guy from MIT reports. In case this wasn't yet linked here yet:
http://web.mit.edu/jonas/www/faim/
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
