Do you look up to anyone in tech?

myself

What's the catch? Gotta smoke on livestream fed directly into the FBI HQ? Dude blockchain lmao

Subhumans don't use desktop computers.

Ted Kaczynski

I chose him just to get a reaction but even if I think half of his pet projects are retarded, the fact that he dug into his own wealth to create and bring about what he thinks is the future is respectable. Outside of philanthropy, I can't think of too many others who've done something as cool with their gains.
If I had to name other tech peeps that I look up to it would have to be Jeff Bezo's, Jack Parsons, Ben Rich, Nick Szabo, and Vitalik Buterin.

Attached: E803EDA0-1B1B-49ED-BA5D-62F09EC15462.jpeg (640x480, 82.21K)

I admire rms greatly, and I wish that I could have his intelligence and drive.

I wish there was something I believed in as much as RMS believes in free software

>youtube.com/watch?v=nbsifBoI_0E
>youtube.com/watch?v=APb1tNxvGMY
>youtube.com/watch?v=ukQURxJ2QYc

We don't need a second Stallman. You don't need to have the drive he has, all you need to do is learn what it is he teaches and teach it to people who are willing to listen. I can recreate any of Stallman's speeches from my head because I know what he knows regarding the matters of freedom in computing, technology in general and copyright. I can teach people the three hour lecture or the ten second elevator pitch about the rationale of the technology I choose to keep. You can do this as well.

Steve wozniak was and is the greatest. hes a true hacker and doesnt care to take credit.
he cares so little that he spent his billions on music festivals for youngsters.
there's also ne0h who hacked the white house but i dont think they found him
there are so many people that will never be remembered.
wozniak is the greatest.

do you like him because he is a modern slave owner and gets away with it?

is this rms?

I dunno, mostly no.
But if I had to pick some, that would be a few simple men who know shit and do it right.
Like Raymond Hill, Kornel.Lesiński, Niklas Haas, …, in no particular order.

no

It's some cool dude who worked on the linux but I can't remember the name of

just remembered, alan cox

(((data mining)))

Michael Abrash. Knows graphics and assembler inside and out, software and hardware. Wrote games, including pioneering work on Quake. Key influence on Direct-X, then went on to make one of the finest 2D video codecs, and one of the best software D3D renderers, which he then parleyed into Intel's Larabee and Xeon Phi projects that are our last best hope to fully merge CPUs and GPUs.

On a similar note, Eric Traut, whose deep understanding of ISAs was used on Apple's crucial PPC-68k emulator, then the Virtual PC project that was the bellwether of wintel emulation on Macs, the legendary CVGS, easily the most successful commercial emulator, that managed to make Sony shake in their boots, and repurposing VPC to pioneering commodity hypervisor applications at M$.

On a more Zig Forums related note, Cameron Kaiser. Pretty much singlehandedly maintains a PPC/OSuX fork of Firefox (TenFourFox), in addition to a less active project maintaining a classic Mac system fork of Mozilla derived from the old Japanese WAMcom fork, another project to keep an active gophernet with clients for modern platforms, and numerous other projects. In order to support these retrocomputing projects, he has pretty much singlehandedly ported entire modern compiler and library toolchains to these old platforms, and hand-optimized assembler-level ground up rewrites of entire Javascript, CSS, WebM and other engines, all of which have also incidentally helped PPC ports of such projects on other OSs like Linux alive. On top of that, he's an avid hardware collector, with tons of oddball machines ancient and modern, many of which he uses for all sorts of things. He's pretty much Terry Davis if Terry wasn't fucking insane.

RoQ, or which one?
why do you think it is one of the finest?

I was thinking particularly of RAD's Bink and Smacker, which are pretty much always miles ahead of any of their real-world contemporaries in terms of encoding technology, playback performance, system requirements, and special features like alternate channels.

oh yeah, then that's true.

...

Aaron Swartz

Chris Sawyer.
He wrote some crazy good games in the 90s and early 2000s, all in assembler.

I don't think he's the most influential programmer ever or anything like that, but I really admire him. It's cool as shit to think that rollercoaster tycoon is written entirely (99%) in assembly, and it really showed too. The system requirements really are pretty sparce for a game that came out in 1999:
I only wish I was autistic enough to do something like that.

Bob Widler. What a legend.

Attached: 2018-03-06 21.21.12.jpg (3752x5376, 5.39M)

Attached: SJWs_btfo.jpg (523x395, 88.83K)

Typo, I meant Bob Widlar.

Elon Musk is a pretty impressive dude right now and I think deserves some mad respect

Also old Billy Gates because he was one the first person in history who realized he could treat operating systems like products seperate from hardware Before autists jump on me for this, reminder Microsoft BASIC was released nearly a decade before UNIX System V and was preceeded only by CP/M as far as an "OS as a product" business model is concerned. Mocrosoft won because they did see the potential in incorporating multimedia into their software at a time when most OS devs only cared about business.

von Braun, I consider the moon landing Humanity's greatest accomplishment. inb4 soundstage.

William Shockley also deserves a mention. Invented the transistor, and towards the end of his life became a full race realist. Shockley advocated the voluntary sterilization of sub 100 IQ brainlets.

Zig Forums is not gonna like this idea...

...

And now if you're a sub-80 IQ brainlet lowlife scrum you can live comfiliy from "social benefits", especially if rather than undergo sterilisation you bang out many more little brainlets.

Attached: Steve_Jobs_Headshot_2010-CROP2.jpg (747x560 183.7 KB, 257.03K)

I also admire him, but he spergs out sometimes for completely pointless reasons.

Anyone younger than Linus Torvalds and John Carmack who could be considered in their league competence- and/or significance-wise?

Elon Musk is younger than Carmack by 1 year and Carmack is younger than Linus Torvalds by 1 year

--Shockley

Keep that in mind any time some libtard wants you to believe that the "left" has a proprietary hold on tech.

Bill Gates

1 down, 2 to go.

Attached: fruit.png (600x300, 73.77K)

That's like saying that you look up to "Bill and Gates."

I mean, Shockley got cucked by Noyce, so I think I'll keep on believing as I already do

no because I am not a soyboy

People who live in poverty actually have more kids than people who are affluent and well-educated. Welfare is functionally a eugenics program to limit the number of niglets that get conceived. This is why you need to support the expansion of welfare and student aid programs: so black women will stop having kids because they're too busy with school.

I'm actually pretty far to the left, and think that racial supremacism is ridiculous superstition, but I've always favored the idea of offering cash bounties (in the range of hundreds or thousands of dollars per head to Americans) for voluntary implantation of IUDs or surgical sterilization.

I have always found it strange that Eugenics has been so vehemently opposed by both the American left and right.

Attached: Harald-Damsleth-Med-Nordmenn-for-Norge-Medium.jpg (1200x1709 1.56 MB, 595.78K)

*in recent years I should add. I know that it was not so controversial 100 years ago.

My main support of such policies is simply to accelerate existing trends toward depopulation to stable, sustainable levels. Tighter labor market, better for the environment, less unwanted children in broken families that will grow up as scum.

Eugenics (even voluntary eugenics beyond the most severe congenital defects) is a bad idea not because of whether it's effective, but because of whether the traits being selected for are actually desirable, as our understanding of most of them ("crystallized intelligence", for instance) is not even close to scientifically rigorous. Look at the heuristics typical consumers use to select computers, phones, software, websites, and other simple commodity goods, and apply that to genetics. Now look at the modern "furry/fat/tranny/sperg/fag/deaf/amputee/etc pride" movements (including "white" pride, which has expanded to encompass groups like the Germans, Slavs, English, Celts, etc. who were all attempting to genocide each other on the grounds of "racial inferiority" less than a couple centuries ago), maybe read some modern "transhumanist/post-singularity" utopian SF about genetic engineering.

Think about what the human race would look like after a few rounds of that.

Attached: seaweed_reference_sheet_by_fuzzymaro-dbcs27d.png (1500x1092, 1.92M)

no, it's not.

It's simply because it has connotation with Nazies if it wasn't connoted with it there would be a lot less people opposed to it.
This is what I hate with normies, because muh ebil nazies used some ideas of Eugenics (and I agree there was some inhuman ones) that it's mandatory evil, fortunately not everyone in the gov is a nigger about things like that otherwise we wouldn't have landed on the moon or developed metric tons of technology.

I think the same.
True but some of them are indeed more or less known for example we know nowadays via statistics that when one of your parent/ancestors had cancer or some mental illness that you have X probability do develop it or transmit it to your offspring of course it's a lot more complicated than that but it's feasible.
It seems that you consider eugenics like if all countries would go in the same direction, or am I wrong ?
A worldwide scale of unknown eugenics is suicide like a lot of worldwide experiment.
A small region size or city sized experiment would be less destructive (if it is destructive).

Do some research on the matter, there's more depth to it.

I do understand the problem of falsely selecting positive traits, yet we do have answers that nature has provided for us. Namely, that the sub-Saharan African races have not progressed anywhere near their northern counterparts. By pretending that this isn't so, we are likely practising dysgenics. Couple that with non-selective migration and the welfare support system they'll end up on, and you quickly exasperate the problem. Amusingly enough, it is actually the African nations I'm referring to which could benefit from an enforced eugenics program the most.

Looking forward, gene therapy and cognitive enhancements offer some hope of accelerating the progress of mankind.

Dead:
-Samuel Morse
-Louis Braille
-Augustus De Morgan
-George Boole
-Claude Shannon

Alive:

This

-RMS
Good sides:
Bad sides:
Has no skill to communicate with the average joe, obvious autism or extreme stress when talking.
Lost is computer skill wizardry with time.

-Torvalds Linus
Good sides:
Bad sides:

-EsR
Good sides:
Bad sides:
Opensource matters more than software freedom.

-Terry Davis
Good sides:
Build his own OS from scratch.
Bad sides:
Schizophrenic

-Theo de Raadt
Good sides:
Technical perfectionist.
Bad sides:
Compromised too much with proprietary software companies.
Permissive license promoter.

Andrew S. Tanenbaum
Good sides:
Good teacher.
Created minix the most widespread microkernel in the world on every platform.
Bad sides:
Licensed minix under a permissive license.
Legitimately used has a maintenance set of tools for sysadmins at hardware level, unofficially can be used has a backdoor by governments.

-Lennart Poettering
Good sides:
Made software that just works.
Bad sides:
Made incredibly bad software.
BIG BALL OF MUDS EVERYWHERE.

Bill gates:
Good sides:
Give money to Africa.
Bad sides:
Scammed the world.
Helps CIA niggers.

Steve jobs:
Good sides:
Bad sides:
Removed charity funding.
Scammed the world.
Helped CIA niggers.

Actually it's not complicated to do so even in binary, what's complicated and the most time consuming is to remember and take into account all the different exceptions and hardware standards and software standards that exists and it grows A LOT when you add security into it.

Stallman hasn't lost any of his computer skill at all. What he's lost is the use of his body. His physical practice of writing computer programs is no longer supported by his body so he is forced to give up the physical practice of programming.

Why does potter look like such a gayboi?

soyboy/10

...

Why would that be the case? If he can physically use Emacs for half of the day to answer emails, then why couldn't he be programming instead? How could someone who can physically use a computer just fine be physically prevented from using it for a specific purpose?

You haven't seen him when he wrote computer programs. He was a real typing demon.

That isn't true. Pro-eugenics has never really been an acceptable position.

Planned parenthood was literally started for that reason

Positive vs. negative eugenics.

Tim Pope.

Attached: who..png (685x648, 10.47K)

Au contraire. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

In certain Scandinavian countries, it was practised up until the '70s.

And then he became a greedy faggot and tried to rebrand Locomotion as a Transport Tycoon game for shitphones.

What's wrong with getting paid?

Elong Musk inspires me to just bullshit everyone with nonsense.
And you wouldnt believe how well it works.

Just Stallman really. His courage and dedication to his cause is really inspiring. I respect his ability to remain steadfast in spite of the immense pressures of social norms (even if part is it is likely due to autism spectrum disorder). There aren't too many people with the same kind of unwillingness to compromise on principles. He reminds me of Ralph Nader.

When was this?

So basically he gave up on programming because he couldn't type as fast as he used to because his fingers became fatter? Is that it?

So he should not have convessed they tried? Or what?

youtube.com/watch?v=7gRsgkdfYJ8

RMs has health problem.

Gary Kildall, John McAfee, Ed Roberts and Dennis Ritchie.

Attached: 47d75fdee5b1926e116dbe575fc1b085.jpg (200x232, 5.92K)

surely trying to hide it would have been worse

Gary Kildall was pretty legendary and I am surprised someone else knew him.

I am inspired by Terry Davis because he is an actual genius.

Also - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_B._Alexander is a person that I don't agree with but am impressed by what he did. He was the most powerful man in the world when people didn't understand what it meant to be him.

Namely the fact he is severely autistic

Call it autism but from what I get from the extremely rare moments that he talked about is personal life besides MIT labs moment, he was raised in a very dysfunctional family, I suppose that his father was a violent type either orally or physical, his behavior and body language seems to be one of a very stressed/anguished person when in public.
The thing that I admire with RMS is his tenacity he has never given up since he started the software freedom movement and god there's so much that has fallen on him since he began literally the whole computer industry was against the movement that he initialized.

If only he had been in office that day when the IBM emissaries came, he would have signed that damn NDA and would have been where Bill Gates ended up being.

No its most certainly autism, as in actual clinical autism. Watch that video again of him in Brazil where he spergs out because someone wanted him to speak Spanish

He sperged out because in the beginning he asked if people preferred him to speak spanish (which is close to portuguese) or english, the audience told him english, so he did the first half of the talk in english then they stop him and ask him to switch to spanish as most people have no idea what he's saying, and by then he has no time to do the full talk. Put yourself on his shoes, you travel to another country, ask the audience if they understand you, talk for an hour and then they let you know they were bluffing and don't really know what you're saying.

He sperged out because he had almost finished the talk, and then someone came and told him to do it all again because nobody in the audience spoke english

Dude do you know the context of that conference ?
See what said.

Popular misconception. They're somewhat similar but also much different. It's like saying English is close to German.

If some group of people choose to pretend their knowledge of English is way better than it actually is, then it should be their problem and not his.

Stallman simply likes his freedom and has made it his mission to teach people about the meaning of freedom in the technology we keep. Most of society do not think about these issues or even the matter of freedom in general. They get their education from companies who encourage their customers a life of "convenience" that doesn't necessarily support their freedom.

So basically all those tech geniuses/wizards/gurus mentioned in this thread are at least in their late 40 by now (Poettering isn't but then again including him in this kind of pantheon is highly questionable to begin with). What heirs and successors do they have? Or is it soyboys, pajeets, and "diversity hires" all the way down from now on? Did pic related get his way in the end? Is tech doomed in the long run?

Attached: 3T0Xj.jpg (600x267, 34.65K)

Literally why? Do you enjoy using one of the most obnoxiously intrusive anti-virus software out there?

Attached: bitcoin the new paradigm.jpeg (1080x1920, 99.64K)

Portuguese and Spanish are much closer than English and German (not surprisingly, since English gets words from any language it pleases, Latin, French, German, it doesn't give a fuck). For Portuguese/Spanish while the words aren't the same the root often is so if you can understand the word being said (the speaker slows it down) you can deduce its meaning (other romance languages also often share the same root, but aren't as close, so instead of getting say 70% of the words you can get maybe 20% if the speaker tries to be simple instead of flowery). There are words which are completely different, and also words which are very similar but with completely different meanings (die in german/english for example), but those are few so if you know one you can understand the other if the speaker doesn't try to fuck with you. One problem is you need to pay much more attention to get the other language, so while it works for say 20 minutes I can't do it for 1 hour.

Also try "gift" and "mist" :^)
(in German, "Gift" means "poison" and "Mist" means "dung", so not quite what one might expect).