News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on An Open Letter to Intel. Parent comment

Re:An Open Letter to Intel by muninn_ on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @08:44AM (#15643267)
Speaking of ego:

"if you arent 25 years old proverbial "javascript developer" ;-)"

Why is this necessary?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by nscalf on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @08:59AM (#15643366)
We all need a massage from time to time.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by zymhan on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @09:11AM (#15643449)
Gotta stroke that grey beard
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by pferde on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @09:18AM (#15643504)
The same reason Vi versus Emacs internet arguments are necessary.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by Cthulhu_ on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @09:48AM (#15643755)
ed all the way!

[this comment was written in Lynx]

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by rhaps0dy on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @10:09AM (#15643911)
Ed! Ed! Ed is the standard text editor!

https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by jrs95 on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @09:32AM (#15643632)
Why is this necessary? It's just a little joke.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Letter to Intel by stronglikedan on Tuesday November 07, 2017 @09:43AM (#15643714)
I would think qualifying a claim of such scope as "widely known" would be very much necessary.
[ Parent | on HN ]