test_epsilon

> Being a logical course of action and being a dick measuring contest aren't mutually exclusive.

They are by definition.

It wasn't. The main purpose of the original space race was to develop capabilities to put satellites in orbit and to be able to deliver nuclear warheads on ballistic missiles, which both countries considered (rightly or wrongly) to be existential necessities.

I know how alternatives work, and they are not used to make packages with the same named binaries drop in replacements.

They are used to make packages with differently named binaries able to implement standard shell commands.

There is no need to match binary names. It doesn't really help with anything.

Oh my stars are you actually saying viral story telling is not "real" work? I'm outraged!

But seriously (and I can't see linkedin), it sounds like the qualification is most relevant in response to the comment the OP made.

The same acronym is underhanded.

And it's entirely possible to use different software names for projects that implement a compatible API or service, the claim that it's for compatibility is pretty bogus. It's not "standard", especially not for an adversarial fork. And that's not why the alternatives system exists, the alternatives system exists so differently named packages can implement a particular service (i.e., exactly the opposite, for the equivalent in shell commands). So that's underhanded.

It is one sided, by definition.

However creating a fork with the same acronym and name for the daemon or binaries or whatever seems pretty under-handed.

Was a release announcement for the original software moderated, on a list where release announcements had been posted without moderation before the fork? Was the author banned from lists?

What is the problem if they could be translated to a working chip? A C program contains no instructions the machine can use and yet you can compile an open source program with a closed source compiler.

Would be kind of clever if it was actually intended to waste time and frustrate people.

> Very few European countries are innocent when it comes to taking land that wasn’t theirs.

Very few any countries are.

That wasn't the important part of the response to your post though, the important part is that it wasn't stolen or conquered.

Aren't all aircraft a specific class of aircraft?

Corporations are absolutely involved in oppressing people at the behest of government or other ruling class, yes. If you were deluded into thinking otherwise.

You're okay if the government privatizes certain "problematic" services it provides and allows the now private organization to violate peoples' rights?