Comment Feed for "Troll" has lost its meaning? (Coffeehouse on Channel 9)

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rossj — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:18:13 GMT

Rory wrote:

Minh wrote:

Rory wrote:

My goggles?

(Goggles? Anybody?)

And, truly, the world does not appear to be revolving around them.

Well they are *quite* big.

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Kevin Daly — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 04:55:04 GMT

I think the fishing (and undoubtedly appropriate) use of the word "troll" has always confused me because here we would pronounce it "trawl" and probably spell it the same way (although I don't remember ever seeing it in print, even though the word "trawler" appears quite frequently).

'S just one of those things.

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 03:36:05 GMT

Minh wrote:

Rory wrote:

My goggles?

(Goggles? Anybody?)

Goggles :)

Indeed.

And, truly, the world does not appear to be revolving around them.

So he was right about one thing...

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Minh — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 03:21:09 GMT

Rory wrote:

My goggles?

(Goggles? Anybody?)

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

jsampsonPC — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 03:02:05 GMT

Rory wrote:

jsampsonPC wrote:Whoa! It worked....Rory, I twarted off the villian who's been gnawing on your a.s.s all day - you can pay me in rubles next time I'm in Redmond.

etisbew wrote: I have no problem with you. The world does not revolve around your goggles, ok? There is no sinister motive behind any of my statements. I just think you're kind of a poseur, that's all. I'm all discussioned out now.

Yeah. I owe you, dawgg

Me and my goggles (around which the world does not revolve).

Maybe by "Goggles" he meant your sweet new xbox360 cam? Or maybe he is refering to your shades in your avatar? I guess the common-folk call them 'goggles' :)

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:58:45 GMT

jsampsonPC wrote:
Whoa! It worked....Rory, I twarted off the villian who's been gnawing on your a.s.s all day - you can pay me in rubles next time I'm in Redmond.

etisbew wrote: I have no problem with you. The world does not revolve around your goggles, ok? There is no sinister motive behind any of my statements. I just think you're kind of a poseur, that's all. I'm all discussioned out now.

Yeah. I owe you, dawgg :)

Me and my goggles (around which the world does not revolve).

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:57:02 GMT

etisbew wrote:
I have no problem with you. The world does not revolve around your goggles, ok?

My goggles?

(Goggles? Anybody?)

etisbew wrote:
There is no sinister motive behind any of my statements. I just think you're kind of a poseur, that's all.

Yeah. Me and my goggles.

etisbew wrote:
I'm all discussioned out now.

I win!

Me and my goggles win!

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

raymond — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:53:42 GMT

We are all trolls.
[H]

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

jsampsonPC — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:36:27 GMT

Whoa! It worked....Rory, I twarted off the villian who's been gnawing on your a.s.s all day - you can pay me in rubles next time I'm in Redmond.

etisbew wrote:
I have no problem with you. The world does not revolve around your goggles, ok? There is no sinister motive behind any of my statements. I just think you're kind of a poseur, that's all. I'm all discussioned out now.

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

jsampsonPC — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:25:17 GMT

etisbew wrote:
...Then refering to Linux as the little cousin of Unix.

If you ask me...Linux is the little cousin of diarrhea. Which build of Diarrhea? I dunno, you decide. There, I have sufficiently defended Rory :)

Rory, does this discussion remind you of your dream? You know, the house of stupid people ;)

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:18:59 GMT

etisbew wrote:
We were talking about Linux. Then as to say you have X amount of experience with Linux you started name dropping OSX, which incidently has not been around very long, and Unix, never specifying which kind (solaris?). Then refering to Linux as the little cousin of Unix.

OS X has been around much longer than you think, but I'll leave you with all your knowledge to figure out just how long, in what forms, and what the various source technologies were that came together to form the system we now know as OS X.

And, there is enough similarity between Linux and various *nix implementations that discussing *nix, OS X, and Linux simultaneously makes perfectly good sense (unless you have a difficult time keeping them distinct in your own head).

Finally, to satisfy your curiosity, I worked with various Unix systems (just as I've worked with many different Linux distros). If you'd like a comprehensive list, then let me know and I'll forward my resume to you.

Perhaps then I'll finally have your blessing.

Another matter of curiosity: What exactly is your problem with me, and what are you trying to accomplish here?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

me — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:18:51 GMT

Minh wrote:

Rory wrote:

You're amazing. Really amazing.

I haven't "clumped all flavors of unix together as a common OS."

Why would I repeatedly refer to Unix, Linux, and OS X distinctly if I thought they were the same thing?

Are you even reading my responses?
I agree w/ etisbew. WE can read between the lines, Rory. etisbew, you gonna take that?

this just in... minh gets "mad" disease!

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Minh — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:16:10 GMT

Rory wrote:

You're amazing. Really amazing.

I haven't "clumped all flavors of unix together as a common OS."

Why would I repeatedly refer to Unix, Linux, and OS X distinctly if I thought they were the same thing?

Are you even reading my responses?

I agree w/ etisbew. WE can read between the lines, Rory. etisbew, you gonna take that?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Oberon — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:58:01 GMT

I don't see the point of picking nits over Rory's Linux experience. Do you have to be a kernel hacker to be qualified to comment on Linux?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:46:08 GMT

etisbew wrote:
You seem to clump all flavors of unix together as a common OS. I was specifically talking about Linux as were the trolls or whatever you call them here. You seem to pull in Unix and OSX into a pool with Linux. They really are very different. Yes they have the some of the same POSIX specs like the file system. Most people do not refer to those systems in that way, unless they are n00bs. I have nothing against you knowing Unix. Most people in computer science learn it at school.

You're amazing. Really amazing.

I haven't "clumped all flavors of unix together as a common OS."

Why would I repeatedly refer to Unix, Linux, and OS X distinctly if I thought they were the same thing?

Are you even reading my responses?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:44:20 GMT

jaylittle wrote:

Rory wrote: And it *did* hit a nerve. One of the things I dealt with when on the road and going up in front of customers was *constantly* being told things like, "Yeah, well, I switched to FIREFOX" - this, always followed by an intense glare as though I was being challenged.

Did it ever occur to any of you that there was a reason for that? Do you think after dumping Netscape for the garbage it was and rejecting Mozilla for the overrated bloated POS it was, that we were going to accept yet another inferior product? Because that's what IE6 is: An inferior product. One that Microsoft allowed to remain current for far far longer than it should have.

Yeah - the reason was one of angst and confrontation.

I'm guessing this because there was rarely any follow-up. It was just the "I switched to FIREFOX" comment followed by the stare. And when I failed to be horrified, since I'm really not concerned about what browser someone wants to use, it was over.

If I responded with, "And...?" then there was nothing.

If there was a deeper purpose to people telling me about the switch, then I failed to wrestle it from these people.

jaylittle wrote:

Rory wrote: I called Jamie's post a troll because it seemed to me that he was trolling.

Let's be frank: Your job was to evangelize Microsoft products. This doesn't exactly make you an unbaised source. Another point: Microsoft employees make it a point to avoid criticizing current products and restrict their criticisms to earlier non-current products. Surely Microsoft knew that products like Windows ME were total garbage, but they tried to pawn it off as the next big thing. Surely Microsoft knew that keeping DOS at the core of Windows 95/98 wasn't the best of ideas, but they pawned those off as the next big things.

You really don't know who you're talking to.

Yes, it was my job to evangelize MS products, but one of the reasons I got good scores for my talks, at least as far as the customer comments go, was that I was very open and honest about any shortcomings. By discussing things out in the open, I figured I could help devs get around technical issues.

I'm aware that I'm a biased source - I point it out myself from time to time just to make sure that people know I'm not trying to fool anyone - but my loyalty is first and foremost to the customer. When it was my job to spread the word on our tools and technologies, I understood "real" problems and tried to offer "real" solutions.

Like devs who came to me asking about how to use MySQL from a .NET app. That wasn't an uncommon question. My first response was typically, "Can you use SQL Express/MSDE?" simply because it's easier to use one of those from a .NET app. But, if the answer was "No," then I'd work through the problem with the customer, explaining what could be done.

To me, it was still a partial win - even if the customer wasn't using our DB, they were at least using our dev tools. That's better than nothing.

So, yeah - I'm biased, but if you ask anybody who really knows me, or who's been to one of my talks, then you'll learn that I'm very honest and that I won't walk away if you come to me for help concerning a competitive technology.

Also, I don't know where you're getting your information about what we can/can't talk about. At MS, the general rule is: Try to be smart about what you're doing. If it helps the customer, then it's probably smart. I never even got a slap on the wrist for talking about competitive technologies. I should also add that it helps build trust to be open about The Other Guys because it shows that I don't live in an MS-only land. I understand quite well that, like in my own home, the real world is very diverse when it comes to sources of technology. It would be pretty lame of me to turn people away simply based on the fact that they wanted help with someone else's DB.

jaylittle wrote:

As a software developer, I understand a Microsoft's employee's need to feel pride in their product, but it really seems to me that nowadays this has resulted in a form of RDF for MS employees. Sometimes you guys just can't see the forest through the trees.

How can you lump tens of thousands of individuals together as just "you guys"?

Yeah, there are some MS employees who live in an insular world and don't understand technologies beyond our own product lines, but, and this is important, many of us don't have that problem.

jaylittle wrote:

Rory wrote: Regarding the question of what is/isn't a troll, everybody needs to remember that troll does *not* refer to those mythological creatures who live under bridges and like to club people. Rather, it's the verb which refers to fishing by cruising around with your baited line dragging behind the boat.

Honestly maybe you should lookup the definition yourself. Jamie is not a troll.

Maybe you should read the post more closely.

I made it clear that "troll" is a verb. You cannot say that a person is "a troll" when "troll" is not a noun. It would be like saying "Jamie is a run" or "Jamie is a walk."

I was saying that it seemed to me that Jamie was trolling with his post, and I referred back to the definition of "trolling" as being the act of fishing by letting a baited line drag behind the boat. That's where "trolling" came from.

It isn't to say that Jamie is a "troll" or that he is someone who regularly trolls. On the contrary, I like the guy - I like his comics - I like his personality. He can be abrasive, but that's OK.

It doesn't change that he was trolling - arguing that Firefox is better by making a big deal of IE losing market share is clearly trolling.

jaylittle wrote:

Rory wrote: It did eventually come about that the people who regularly did this were referred to as "trolls," but the act of trolling itself is something distinct from the person - that's why it's possible to say that Jamie is *not* a troll, but that Jamie *was* trolling.

You only say that because Jamie's opinion doesn't coincide with yours. I use Firefox over IE as well, would you like to label me a troll as well?

Wow. Put some more words in my mouth, eh?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:17:58 GMT

etisbew wrote:
There really is a huge difference between coding up a java application on windows or OSX then simply using it on Linux or knowing a few bash commands, and knowing the platform well. I hope you know that.

Given that I have years of professional experience with *nix and other platforms, yes - I do know that. Quite aware of it.

And, I'm aware of the differences between coding up a Java app on Linux and on OS X. I'm aware of the differences in running those apps.

I'm aware of this...

I'm aware of that...

So... why is it you're so opposed to the idea that I know anything about *nix? This is a very curious thing. I'd love to know your motivations.

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

me — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:14:31 GMT

..and... the story has a happy ending.

I AM NOT MAD ANYMORE. ..well im "mad" mad - like "That blokes mad in the head!"

..but im over my ShellRevealed mad - mad.

so the end.

roll credits ;)

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:48:03 GMT

etisbew wrote:
"given the huge changes and advancements made since, I'm much more "qualified"", I doubt your newer experience with HAL an dbus are what you are talking about. What can you do on Linux now as far as the system that you couldn't in 1999 specifically? Xen? "Also, that was by no means my first encounter with *nix. I had my first Unix dial-up account in the early 90s" There's only so much you can do with a terminal user account. Let me guess, you built LFS by yourself too? The thing is, it's not your stated experience with *nix that bugs me. It's the fact that you are clearly a paid windows developer and have been for a long time, and you're trying to play both sides.

I like how, no matter what I say, you place arbitrary limits on my knowledge and experience based on asinine assumptions.

I don't care if it bothers you that I claim to have experience with *nix. I do. Both as a user and a developer. How that makes you feel has no impact whatsoever on reality.

While it's true that there are limits on what one can do with a dial-up account, you're leaving out experience that I've had professionally with *nix machines, as well as hobbyist activities that have included linux and OS X.

My introduction to Unix was through a dial-up account, but I had enough access to learn a bit about the shell (I don't remember which shell was used by the ISP) and also to do some development. But, after my introduction, I moved on.

You really don't want me to know about *nix, do you? That's so odd.

As for being "clearly a paid windows developer" and "for a long time," I can tell you the following:

1. I worked for myself until two years ago, and I did work on whatever platforms my clients needed me to work on - this included Windows, Linux, *nix, iSeries machines, and more. I used many different OSS and commercial software offerings to accomplish my tasks.

2. I am not a "paid windows developer," and I never have been. I've been paid to develop on Windows, but I was almost always simultaneously doing work for another platform.

3. It's entirely possible to "play both sides" - that's what kills me. I've never understood people who think that you have to choose one or the other, or that it's not possible to do both. It isn't just possible - it's actually very common. As anybody developing in the corporate world knows, it's actually pretty hard to find an all-MS or all-OSS business. Most mix and match technologies as needed, and that means either hiring different people to work on different platforms, or to do the efficient thing and hire people who can work competently on multiple platforms.

Anyway, again, you were saying...?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

me — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:39:06 GMT

...are you suggesting Rory swings both ways? ;)

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:24:10 GMT

jamie wrote:
*off topic - do you play around with vista at all rory? or use mainly xp/osx?

I don't actually have a machine on which it would be easy to install Vista :(

My main two Windows machines are:

1. A Toshiba m400 tablet - not very Vista friendly

2. A ThinkPad T60 - very Vista friendly, but I might be losing it in my move to the C9 team (it's an MS machine, and I think it belongs to the MSDN Events team - I still have to figure out how this works)

If I get to keep the T60, then I'll get Vista on it as soon as possible since I have a spare HDD.

But, if I don't... I don't know.

I wonder if I could ask Jeff for a MacBook Pro :) Once bootcamp is set up to run Vista, I imagine the experience could be pretty sweet...

Then I could have the best of both worlds - Vista/OS X.

Yeah. Nerd heaven.

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:11:20 GMT

etisbew wrote:
"Before coming over to the MS side of the fence, I was a linux/java geek. It wasn't until XP and .NET appeared that I really hopped on the MS side, and it was a technical rather than religious decision." I hate to break this to you but that hardly makes you an expert or even qualified on the topic of Linux. Java wasn't even available for Linux until 1.3 I believe, maybe 1.2, though I doubt it by memory. So that means that your experience couldn't even have begun until 2000 or later on that platform and you stated that you didn't use it for very long. It sounds like you used it as an edu platform and dumped it as soon as you could. I for one don't care if you are hip to Linux or not.

Did I claim to be an expert? No.

As for being qualified on the topic of linux - I don't even know what you mean.

Anyway, yes - I really started using linux in 2000, and I still use it now, although my preferred platforms are XP and OS X.

That means I've bee using linux for about six years. I've done "real" work on linux systems (that is, I was paid for my efforts). I know my way around.

And, if what I'm familiar with is relatively recent incarnations of linux (year 2000+), I'd argue that, given the huge changes and advancements made since, I'm much more "qualified on the topic of linux" than someone who started using it when it was first released, but stopped around 2000.

Also, that was by no means my first encounter with *nix. I had my first Unix dial-up account in the early 90s, and I learned about Unix the good old fashioned way: without a manual, exploring in the traditional fashion of the enthusiast.

So, yeah. I'm no expert, but I have nearly fifteen years of experience with *nix, and six years with its little cousin, linux.

Then there's all the time I've spent with OS X (I always have a few console windows open when I'm running a Mac), but we don't need to go there as I feel I've already adequately established myself as a seasoned user of *nix.

Anyway, you were saying...?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

me — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:11:14 GMT

*off topic - do you play around with vista at all rory? or use mainly xp/osx?

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

jsampsonPC — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 23:53:02 GMT

etisbew wrote:
"Before coming over to the MS side of the fence, I was a linux/java geek. It wasn't until XP and .NET appeared that I really hopped on the MS side, and it was a technical rather than religious decision." I hate to break this to you but that hardly makes you an expert or even qualified on the topic of Linux. Java wasn't even available for Linux until 1.3 I believe, maybe 1.2, though I doubt it by memory. So that means that your experience couldn't even have begun until 2000 or later on that platform and you stated that you didn't use it for very long. It sounds like you used it as an edu platform and dumped it as soon as you could. I for one don't care if you are hip to Linux or not.

Rory is soooooo hip, you don't even know. Rory is so hip that my grandpa fell down and broke him last week...

Re: "Troll" has lost its meaning?

Rory — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 23:19:26 GMT

Rossj wrote:

jsampsonPC wrote:
Not true. We have tons of very active linux-proponents here. Vincent comes to mind. He's a big linux guy, if I'm not mistaken. One among many. But to entertain your idea, I'll (again) put myself on the line.

I still don't understand what Trolls aim to achieve for Linux by coming on here and being insulting, other than putting people off Linux - or is it *solely* an attention thing?

Exactly.

That's the question that runs through my head, too.

The other day, in another thread, I compared such behavior to that of some protestors who woke me up from my nap the other day (I live in downtown Portland). They were screaming and yelling, blocking traffic, causing trouble, and generally pissing everybody off.

Now, I agreed with their political stance, but was so irritated by the way they chose to present the argument that I wanted them off the street just as much as those who opposed their ideals.

When people choose to be socially disruptive to push their causes, they risk turning people off to even examining the cause. It's a foolish, foolish approach to spreading the word.

Rossj wrote:
Not like I slam everything and start proclaiming OSX as the best thing since perforated bread. Sure I post OSX topics, and I occassionally bring it into conversation (at which point I normally get ignored anyway ), I'd be doing more damage than harm by acting like these guys.

Hey - I don't ignore you when it comes to OS X.

Frankly, I'm glad there's someone else here with whom I can talk about the finest desktop Unix experience in the universe :)