Subject: Re: Amdahl's law and non-proliferation
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:19:06 -0700

There is a right way to agitate for reform. This isn't it, and it's rude
to us. Most of us agree with you and will join you when you find a more
constructive way to state this.

    Thanks

    Bruce

Thorsten Glaser wrote:

>Forrest J. Cavalier III dixit:
>
>  
>
>>4. I hold that the fraction of the 11% which is "easily influenced" is small
>>  because....most authors have some good reasons for choosing outside the
>>  "big 4".  "Good reasons" are not easily countered.
>>    
>>
>
>While I agree with this,
>
>  
>
>>   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law
>>    
>>
>
>linking to a webpage with a licence which even forbids me to
>see the content (since lynx creates a non-world-readable
>copy of the file, which is forbidden due to the "no DRM" clause
>of the GNU FDL) is not considered polite.
>
>Please read http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html
>and refrain from further linking to this unfree project "Wikipedia".
>
>bye,
>//mirabile
>
>  
>