BootOS: Monolithic operating system in 512 bytes of x86 machine code

Re:BootOS: Monolithic operating system in 512 bytes of x86 m... by kragen on Wednesday July 31, 2019 @01:46AM (#20571960)

But where does the misunderstanding come from? Where are they getting the fraudster definition from? Do they see threads like this and think “I should be like that guy who has all those people yelling at him that he's wrong,” or is there some reservoir of memetic infection out there where this kind of thing goes unchallenged?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:BootOS: Monolithic operating system in 512 bytes of x86 m... by smallnamespace on Wednesday July 31, 2019 @02:20AM (#20572087)

It's right there in the words of the term - it's not an unreasonable guess to think that 'open source' just means that the source code is 'open' in the sense of 'available', especially since proprietary software doesn't normally provide source code.

Compound this by the fact that many people are jumping into this field where English is not their first (or even second) language.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:BootOS: Monolithic operating system in 512 bytes of x86 m... by MrEldritch on Wednesday July 31, 2019 @03:46AM (#20572407)

When you open a container, you can see inside of it.

When you open source, you can see the source.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:BootOS: Monolithic operating system in 512 bytes of x86 m... by maxerickson on Wednesday July 31, 2019 @10:19AM (#20574606)

I'm sure some of the misunderstanding comes from the phrase itself, which has a sensible meaning even in a universe where OSI didn't trademark it.

[ Parent | on HN ]