On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 01:21:13 -0600 "Theo de Raadt" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Different design, different philosophy, and different goals [1] but the > > > > same BSD heritage. > > > > > > There is no philosophy involved. > > > > > > England and the US and Canada are not differences in philosophy. > > > > > > They are just different. philosophy has little to do with it. > > > > > > Stop using that word incorrectly, please. > > > > > > Try: > > > > > > Different texture, different pantone. > > > > > > See, it fails to reuse words which are out of scope, and is just as > > > accurate. > > > > actually, philosophy was used accurately here. > > > > the relevant definition from wordnet: > > any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation > > and the equivalent from merriam-webster.com: > > a set of ideas about how to do something or how to live > > > > it's only because you have a different philosophy that you use only /etc > > instead of /usr/local/etc. that's how you deal with the situation of where > > to > > put configuration files. > > > > people/groups have different ideas of "how to deal with a situation" or "how > > to do something", which means they have different philosophies. > > there is no philosophy. > > there was no belief. > > maybe there was a touch of idealism, but nothing as refined as you > suggest.
i made no such suggestion. a 'philosophy' doesn't have to be a doctrine. > > it was simply a decision made for a handful of things which got reused > for the rest of them. > > back decades ago. > > your philosphy is that you can copy things from a dictionary and > that we should live according to that as a rule? i never said you "should live according to that as a rule". and where the FUCK did you get that, eh? all i did was to point out that you were wrong about the use of the word philosophy. i have heard it used innumerable times in my life in exactly the manner it was originally used in this thread. and yes, when dealing with definitions of words, my philosophy is to go to the dictionary. > you weren't there. were you even born? perhaps your philosophy is > that you can speak authoritatively upon things you didn't experience > directly? > > oh wait, that's religion.... and what the FUCK does this have to do with anything? this is completely irrelevant anyway. you said the word philosophy was used wrong, and i *cited* authoritative sources. i could have said that i have always heard philosophy used in that manner all of my life, as i have, but instead i *cited* recognized authorities on the meanings of words.
