So you admit you are incompetent. If you were really competent you would be able to read the blinking lights and alter running programs via the swwitches.
By the way, there is a difference between reading and writing. But then, you seem to actually be THAT incompetent. > -----Original Message----- > From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:48 AM > To: Tony Abernethy > Cc: misc@openbsd.org > Subject: Re: The Atheros story in much fewer words > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 07:25:29AM -0500, Tony Abernethy wrote: > > Damien Miller wrote: > > > To: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra > > > Cc: J.C. Roberts; misc@openbsd.org > > > Subject: Re: The Atheros story in much fewer words > > > > > > On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > > > > > > > You seem uneducated about how powerless someone is without > > > the freedom > > > > to change a program because he has no access to the source code. > > > > > > You seem to be entirely missing the irony of making this > statement > > > in the context of an argument about software _reverse engineered > > > from a binary blob_. > > > > > > > Obviously he's never read machine code ;) > > I've written it, and swore never again to do so unless life > depends on it. You have to be extremely skilled and with an > excessive ammount of free time to make an argument based on > that defense. > > Whilst the first case is a compliment, the second not really > (but not an insult either). > > > Has the state of the art gone down that badly in the last > forty-odd years? > > Even I know better, > > and there's people on this list that actually know something. > > Yeah sure, like OpenBSD is 100% written in machine code *giggle* > > Rui > > -- > Grudnuk demand sustenance! > Today is Pungenday, the 39th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173 > + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown > Whatever you > + do will be insignificant, > | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi > + So let's do it...?
