News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation. Parent comment

Re:OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation by djsumdog on Friday July 01, 2016 @07:34PM (#12020459)
I did read that and I think it was posted here too, but a lot of the comments were on the line of "that's commendable, but the name is already tarnished."

Shame really.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation by int_19h on Friday July 01, 2016 @09:43PM (#12020997)
They did a pretty good job on Slashdot so far, and I think the community response has been rather positive. Hopefully they can turn SF around, as well. GitHub is great, but it's good to have competition to avoid monocultures.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation by Teever on Friday July 01, 2016 @10:21PM (#12021089)
It is my understanding that they haven't done much at slashdot as the issues with sourceforge were much more pressing.

As such I haven't seen any changes occur at slashdot since the take over. I've only seen the slow, steady decline of slashdot continue. Which is unfortunate because every once and a while you see the low UID people make some stellar comments and it reminds me why I stick around despite vastly superior alternatives like hackernews.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation by djsumdog on Saturday July 02, 2016 @09:30AM (#12022420)
Oh wait, they bought Slashdot too? I thought that was still owned by Dice.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation by int_19h on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @02:10AM (#12034682)
They bought the whole enchilada.

https://meta.slashdot.org/story/16/01/29/0247219/slashdot-an...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenLTE: An open source 3GPP LTE implementation by ocdtrekkie on Saturday July 02, 2016 @07:36PM (#12024191)
Why should the name matter? The owners, the intent behind a thing, how it is run. That is what matters.
[ Parent | on HN ]