[SGVLUG] Hans Reiser's twisted story

[Emerson, Tom (*IC)]

> -----Original Message----- Of Dustin Laurence
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 06:05:51PM -0700, matti wrote:
> > 
> > CSI, L&O.. funny to think we've meet
> > Hans .. odd to think about this whole
> > sordid aspects of this.
> 
> Yeah.  I guess I won't send him that email about reiser 
> realtime latency that I promised him at SCALE after all.

Why not?  For that matter, I think we should even request that he
perpare a presentation on Reiser4 for us for an upcoming meeting (and,
umm, send a copy of the request to the warden...)  Personally, I'd
rather believe him to be innocent UNTIL proven guilty...

This does, in a way, set up one of those "moral delima" scenarios you
probably had back in high school (are they still doing them?)  you know,
ones like "there's a fallout shelter that can safely hold 6 people, but
10 people want in -- some are highly qualified folks [a doctor, for
instance], others not-so-qualified [a famous painter], and others we're
not sure of [a pregnant woman with no skills to speak of, but at least
you know she's fertile...]

So, "moral delima 2.0":  the "one guy in the world" with the vision to
produce an /extremely/ beneficial product for the world stands accused
of a heinious (sp?) crime -- if found guilty, the sentence is death.
Presume he is found guilty -- would you oppose or uphold the death
penalty, knowing that with his demise so goes this contribution to the
world/community?

[like the fallout shelter delima, there is no right-or-wrong answer
here; likewise, I'm not saying that someone who produces something of
great value "to the world" should have carte blanche to go around
knocking people off...]

Tom

P.s.: moral delima 2.1: the "one guy in the world" who actually produces
something that is universally regarded as both an "extremely beneficial
product" and as an "extremely hated product" stands accused of said
crime -- again, penalty is death -- but in this case the business he
started is now running independantly of him and his influence and will
therefore persist after his demise; presume found guilty, does your
position change from the above decision, and if so, why?

[and no, answers of "because he IS Bill Gates" are not valid ;) ]