Haven't seen (pseudo)minimalism threads, excessive Unix/C/Bell Labs fagging or Suckless/cat-v/Bitkreig shills recently

Haven't seen (pseudo)minimalism threads, excessive Unix/C/Bell Labs fagging or Suckless/cat-v/Bitkreig shills recently.
Has Jow Forums finally healed itself from the degenerate and ultimately destructive "bloatware is proprietary" mindset?

Attached: 9frontisadeathcult.jpg (1898x381, 76K)

I have nothing against features, but I don't like closed source spyware.

Most software is actually closed source because:
1. People would like to get paid for their work.
2. People are sometimes embarrassed by messy, yet working code.
3. Simply keeping the source unavailable allows one to ignore a lot of legal and political drama.
4. Despite memes, security through obscurity is a completely valid tactic.

Always assuming bad intentions is a horrible way to go through life, Anonymous.

>Most software is actually closed source because:
>1. People would like to get paid for their work.
You can get paid to work on foss and you can foss, but yeah it's easier with closed source
>2. People are sometimes embarrassed by messy, yet working code.
Valid
>3. Simply keeping the source unavailable allows one to ignore a lot of legal and political drama.
Depends on what exactly you mean by legal and political drama.
>4. Despite memes, security through obscurity is a completely valid tactic.
Only if done correctly and still isn't fool proof. Although on the other hand the guy that was gonna exploit your closed source software would also not not submit a bug report for your foss. Your software would have to be pretty famous for a random person to find/look for a security issue with it and report it.

>Always assuming bad intentions is a horrible way to go through life, Anonymous.
True but always assuming good intentions isn't good either not to mention most closed source software has tracking features simply because it can.

1. This is a cope
2. Get over it
3. Yes, we have known for decades that closed source developers steal open source code. Doesn't mean it's okay
4. Even if you believe that it has nothing to do with whether your code is foss or not, your program can still be "obscure" despite the code being out there

>Has Jow Forums finally
yes, Jow Forums has finally become /v/

Most software is terrible. Find a way to use lisp.

I like C too.
You can run it as a script with tcc -run too.

Never heard of tcc. That sounds quite cool.

I'm not some cat-v faggot suckless cuck, but fuck off nonfree shill. I'd rather have faggot suckless, muh poosix retards than nonfree shills.

I'd like to believe a good portion got jobs and Luke Smith is hanging from a tree innawoods.

I just haven't been posting as much. I'm back to remind you all that everything besides suckless and plan 9 is still bloated shit.

Seconded.

It's end of third quartal. We are exhausted from work.

I enable the non-free repository on debain

I use Windows 10

redpilled

C is horrible for scripting, why would you do that?

Plan 9 is worse than snake oil. Plan 9 was created to make distributed computing look like snake oil. Like UNIX compared to Multics, it arrived years after working distributed computing protocols and is still worse. AT&T's "research" is inferior to what was already on the market and will always be, no matter how much time and money is put into it. It's "research" that results in an inferior OS, increases costs on every single level, decreases productivity, replaces simple solutions with complex problems (sometimes so complex that nobody believes they can be solved), makes things worse for users, and prevents real researchers from doing what works because of "compatibility" with horrible interfaces. UNIX and Plan 9 are anti-research that shit on 60 years of computer science. That's why UNIX technology like Plan 9, BSD, and Linux in 2019 is worse than what Multics did in the 60s. Plan 9 uses "tar" to copy directory hierarchies not for any "philosophical" reasons, but because the version of UNIX it was based on didn't have "cp -r" and they were not capable of adding it. It doesn't have dynamic linking because they weren't smart enough to copy Multics or another mainframe system that does it properly. It still has the same bc calculator and all that other UNIX bullshit. What sucks is when Plan 9 weenies point to something that UNIX does wrong and blame the entire thing itself instead of the broken UNIX implementation.

>Most software is terrible.
>Find a way to use the most terrible of them all.

Ok, now go back to your Unix circlejerk.

Ok where’s your Multics desktop? Post screenshots

I wonder why, lets see, maybe 'cause it's not a scripting language genius?

Pretty sure most software minimalists grew out of it once they turned 16 years old

Did you reply to the wrong post?
Also, what is a "scripting langiage", anyway?

What a strange way of spelling Rust.
Do you formally verify all your code as well?

Does anyone actually do that and does this actually prevent errors? Ive had ocaml code shit on my due to the retarded hackers working on it causing a regression, major software too.

why use something that the true intentions are unknown instead of something that the true intentions are known?

features are bloat

>You can run it as a script with tcc -run too.
this is seriously based

>1. People would like to get paid for their work.
open source is more charitable then
>2. People are sometimes embarrassed by messy, yet working code.
open source is higher quality then
>3. Simply keeping the source unavailable allows one to ignore a lot of legal and political drama.
open source is more accountable then
>4. Despite memes, security through obscurity is a completely valid tactic.
windows

based

based

Attached: satania.webm (720x404, 2.97M)

Nice pasta