News • Science & Tech
The very first interview about Linux with Linus Torvalds - Oct 28, 1992
A 22 year old Linus talks about his creation... before he knew it would change the world.
May 17, 2024
post photo preview

On October 28th, 1992, the first interview about Linux — with Linus Torvalds — was published in a small E-Mail newsletter.

That newsletter, the aptly named “Linux News”, was written by Lars Wirzenius — a friend, colleague, and fellow student of Linus Torvalds’ at the University of Helsinki.

This newsletter was significant for two big reasons:

  1. It was the first such newsletter to be written specifically for Linux. (The first large format Linux magazine would appear 2 years later, as The Linux Journal.)

  2. Issue #3 of this newsletter contains the first interview ever, with Linus Torvalds, about Linux.

What follows is that entire interview, completely unedited. It appears here exactly as it did in 1992… when Linux was only a bit over 1 year old (and not yet at version 1.0). At this point in time, Linus — then just 22 years old — had no idea of the massive impact and longevity of Linux.

There are some fun little bits of Linux history in here -- including the role DOS and Prince of Persia play in the story of Linux (not to mention the Commodore Vic-20).

A huge thanks to Lars Wirzenius (and to Linus Torvalds) for making this back in 1992 (and making it available to all of us now).

Why is Linux News better than BYTE, CACM, the National Inquirer, and sliced bread? We interview Linus! In this first-ever, breathtaking, revealing interview, the Grand Wizard Linus tells it all! Well, almost...

LN: Tell us a bit of yourself and your background. Age, education, occupation, family, pets, hobbies, computing history, etc.

Linus: Hmm. I'm 22 (as some avid kernel source readers have already found out: there is a hidden clue in there somewhere...), and am (slowly) working my way towards a fil.kand (MSc? whatever) in computer science at the University of Helsinki. I'm currently in my fourth year (hmm.. fifth, but one was spent in the army) of studies, and I expect to sit here studying for a long time to come.

I still live at home (which is why I can afford to work on Linux and study at the same time without working too) with my (100% white) cat (Mithrandir, but it's called everything from "randi" to "klomppen" depending on my mood) and my sister and mother. The fun never ends.

I started with computers (a VIC-20) when I was about 11, first with BASIC, then learning 6502 machine code (assemblers are for wimps). I looked on with envy while my friends got their C-64's (I didn't have any more money then than I have now), but was eventually able to get a Sinclair QL and get some real programming done under a multitasking (albeit somewhat weird) system.

On the sinclair QL I continued to program in assembly (The QL BASIC (SuperBasic) was ok, but I wasn't interested), and I wrote various more-or-less useless programs (ranging from a FORTH compiler and an editor-assembler system of my own to pac-man to a msdos compatible floppy disk driver). The QL was a fun machine, but there weren't very many of them in Finland, and although I was generally happy to write my own programs (still am), it did teach me to buy hardware that actually is supported.

LN: When and why did you start writing Linux?

Linus: I took this course on UNIX and C at the university in the fall of 1990, and I got hooked. I had naturally seen some of the PC-contemptibles running msdos, and I was relatively happy with my QL, although some of the 386's were a lot faster. But one of the books we read during the course was "Operating Systems, Design and Implementation" by Tanenbaum, and that way I learnt about Minix. I wanted my home machine to have a similar setup to the suns at the university, and Minix seemed like a good candidate.

So when I had scrounged up enough money, I bought myself an AT-386 compatible machine (well.. I didn't have enough money, so I'm still paying on it, but it seems I'll get enough money for Linux to finally pay off the last rates). I had long since decided that anything less than a 386 wasn't worth it, and with Minix on it, I thought I'd have a nice enough system.

As it turned out, Minix wasn't available in Finland (at least I wasn't able to find it easily), so while I got my machine on January 5th 1991 (easy date to remember due to the monthly payments :-), I was forced to run DOS on it for a couple of months while waiting for the Minix disks. So Jan-Feb was spent about 70-30 playing "Prince of Persia" and getting aquainted with the machine.

When Minix finally arrived, I had solved "PoP", and knew a smattering of 386 machine code (enough to be able to get the machine into protected mode and sit there looping). So I installed Minix (leaving some room for "PoP" on a DOS partition), and started hacking.

Getting Minix wasn't altogether a pleasant experience: the keyboard bindings were wrong, and it didn't exactly act like the suns I was used to (ugghh. I *hate* the bourne shell for interactive work). The keyboard was easy to correct (although I didn't like the Minix keyboard driver code), and applying Bruce Evans' 386-patches made the system a bit more "real".

So somewhere around March-91, I had a 386 system running Minix-386, and I was able to install awb's gcc-1.37.1 port. After that, I was able to port bash to the resulting mess, and things looked a bit better. I also spent my time generally fooling around (porting gcc-1.40 and various other programs), and kept on learning about the 386 while doing so (writing small boot-disks that would set up a protected mode environment and print out various inane messages).

I had noticed by that time that Minix wasn't enough even with the 386 patches (various troublesome problems: no job control, ugly memory management, no fpu support etc). So I slowly started to try to make something out of my protected mode trials, and the result is Linux.

LN: Please give a short summary of the history of Linux.

Linus: Difficult. "Linux" didn't really exist until about August-91 - before that what I had was essentially just a very basic protected mode system that had evolved from a glorified "Hello world" program into a even more glorified terminal emulator. Linux stopped for quite a while at the terminal emulator stage: I played around with Minix, and used my protected mode program to read news from the univerity machine. No down/upload, but it did a fair vt100 emulation, and did it by using two tasks which communicated from keybodard->modem and modem->screen.

By mid-summer -91, "Linux" was able to read the disk (joyful moment), and eventually had a small and stupid disk driver and a simple buffer cache. So I started out trying to make a filesystem, and used the Minix fs for simple practical reasons: that way I already had a file layout I could test things on. After some more programming (talk about glossing things over), I had a very simple UNIX that had some of the basic functionalities of the real thing: I could run small test-programs under it.

By that time I looked around for some standards texts - I decided early on that I didn't want to write the user-level programs, and that in order to easily port things I'd either have to make the new system compatible with Minix (ugghh) or follow some other kind of standard. What I wanted was a POSIX guide, not so much to be 100% posix, but in order not to do anything really stupid I'd regret later.

My quest for the posix standards failed, as the posix standard committee sells the standard to feed itself as I found out, but I did get a good pointer to the (then very alpha and unsupported) GNU libc.a, which had an early manual accompanying it. The manual was of some help, but the biggest help was actually the contact to the person who pointed it out to me: [email protected]. He was/is the organizer of the pub/OS subdirectory at, and was interested in giving Linux a home at nic.

Back then, I was only idly thinking about making my system available (and I had no real time-table), but arl happily created a pub/OS/Linux subdirectory at nic, and thus also gave the system it's name. I wasn't really ready for a release yet, so the directory contained just a README for about a month ("this directory is for the freely distributable Minix clone" or something like that). Arl probably thought the project wouldn't come to anything.

Anyway, around the end of August-91 or so, I had a system that actually worked somewhat: I was able to run the Minix shell (recompiled with new libraries) under it, and some other things also worked. I released Linux-0.01 in September, telling about it by mail to those who had shown interest in it when I asked around on the minix newsgroup. 0.01 was a source-only release, and I don't think anybody actually compiled it, but it was a statement of intent, and people could look at the sources if they wished. I don't think more than about 5-10 people ever looked at it - I wasn't yet too happy about it, so I didn't announce it publically anywhere.

A few weeks later (October 5th by the minix news-archives), I had gotten my act together sufficiently to release 0.02, along with a couple of binaries you could run under Linux (bash, gcc, update and sync, I believe). It still needed minix-386 to compile the kernel, as the harddisk parameters were hardcoded into the hd driver, but I know some people had it up and running: arl even sent me some ftp-statistics about it (which I've sadly deleted by now). Gcc wasn't reliable under linux yet: it couldn't compile big files due to various buffer-cache problems, but you could get small programs going even under 0.02.

Not much later, I released 0.03, which actually worked pretty well - the buffer cache mostly worked, as did most other things. Heady with my unexpected success, I called the next version 0.10, and by that time I already got comments from early beta-testers, as well as actual patches. The linux community wasn't much: maybe 10-20 minix users who enjoyed hacking a new kernel.

After 0.10 came 0.11, and things were pretty much plain sailing. The system was stable enough to be used for further developement, and it was "just" a matter of correcting bugs and extending the system. I added swapping to the system in three days just before X-mas 91, and was finally able to say that I was no longer playing catch-up with Minix. The swapping code was ugly and not very well tested: it actually had bad bugs in it until I needed it myself when X11 came around, but it was something of a milestone. The next version (0.12) came out exactly (?) one year after I bought my computer (Jan 5th -92), and it was the version that finally got popular: by that time it was a very much valid alternative to Minix, and people started getting interested.

Later versions (0.95 etc) have had a lot of new features, and quite a few bug-fixes. There have also been major re-writes (first the fs was slowly changed to have a vfs layer, then the kernel sleep/wakeup primitives got rewritten, and then the mm got restructured). In spite of that, I think 0.12 was what might have been called 1.0 - it had the basic features, and worked.

LN: Have you enjoyed the past year and a half? Have you liked some things especially, have there been things you haven't liked?

Linus: It's definitely been fun. Things have changed pretty radically: the early couple of months were solitary hacking runs with 5-10 reboots a day to check out bugfixes/features - seeing the system evolve noticeably in a relatively short time. Now, most of my Linux hacking time goes into design (new features do take some more thought now) and/or administrative things like keeping up with linux mails etc - it's seldom a question of 40+ hours a week of pure hacking.

Getting mail (within limits) is fun: especially if it's 99% positive, as it has been. And people have been generally enthusiastic, sending patches, ideas, requests for features, etc. There are downsides: before the newsgroup got founded, I often got more than 70 mails a day. Things have calmed down significantly: while I still get 20-40 mails per day, many of them are from the mailing-lists and not to me personally, so that I can essentially ignore them if they aren't interesting.

Negative things have been mostly due to driver problems: while people have been very nice about it, it's still not fun getting mail about "the system from hell that ate all their files". Especially if I haven't had a clue about what could be wrong. Other problems have included just lack of time and different priorities: some people have gotten impatient when I haven't included some special feature or other. I usually need some kick-starting if it's not something I'm especially interested in.

LN: Why is Linux copylefted? The copyright was different in the early versions. Why did it change? Do you support the GNU view of software in general? What are your feelings about freeware, shareware, and commercial software?

Linus: One of the basic principles has always been being that it should be freely distributable without any money-begging. I generally dislike shareware: I feel guilty about not paying, so I don't use it, but on the other hand it is irritating to know that it's there. Illogical, but that's how I feel.

Early versions of Linux had a very strict copyright: it disallowed any payments at all (not even copying costs etc), while otherwise being similar to the GNU copyleft (ie freely distributable assuming full source is made available). It was probably an over-reaction to the dislike I felt against the way Minix had been set up: I thought (and still do) that Minix would have been better off had it been freely available by ftp or similar.

The copyright got changed with version 0.12, as there were a couple of mails even back then asking about the possibility of a copying service or similar. After removing that clause from the copying conditions, I essentially had the GNU copyleft (without the legal verbiage), so I decided I might as well use the copyleft as-is. And as Linux depended (still does) heavily on copylefted programs, it's only natural that the kernel should be copylefted as well.

LN: When are you planning the 1.0 release, and what do you expect it to include?

Linus: I've planned the 1.0 release for a long time, and I've always waited just a bit longer. Right now my final deadline is "before X-mas", but I hope it would be ready before December. No major new features: I want some cleanups and to get rid of bugs, but it's nothing special I'm waiting for right now.

LN: How do you feel about Minix, 386BSD, and Hurd and their authors? Are they rivals, or or allies?

Linus: 386BSD and Hurd are most definitely allies - I'll be happy to help them any way I can (for 386BSD I was already able to help with the math-emulator, and I've been in contact with some others re: vm86 etc). If 386BSD had been available a year earlier, I would probably never have started on Linux, but as it is, I'm happy to say that 386BSD didn't automatically mean that Linux wasn't worth it. Both 386BSD and Linux have their points, and I naturally think Linux is more fun.

As to Hurd, I don't know when it will be ready nor what it will look like. But it will be different enough that I don't think there is any point in considering it a rival. I doubt Linux will be here to stay, and maybe Hurd is the wave of the future (and maybe not), but at the very least it's an interesting project.

Minix... Hmm. It's no longer a rival, unless ast does something really unexpected with it - the niches are simply too different. Linux won't work on many machines that Minix runs happily on (x86, x<3, amiga, mac etc), and even on a 386, Minix is still probably preferable as a teaching tool due to the book. But for anybody who used Minix to actually get a UNIX environment at home, I don't see any reason to stay with it, as both 386BSD and Linux are free and give much better features.

On the other hand, I have to admit to a very unbecoming (but understandable, I hope) feeling of glee when I saw that c.o.linux had finally more readers than c.o.minix. There was a heated discussion about Linux on the Minix newsgroup back when c.o.linux (actually, alt.os.linux at that time) had just begun, and ast tried to ridicule it (one of his comments on c.o.minix being that I wouldn't have passed his course in OS design with such a bad system..). Ast and I mailed about it, and it left a slightly bitter after-taste.

LN: The Jolitzes suggested a while ago a contest between 386BSD and Linux, what do you think about it?

Linus: I don't necessarily think it would be a good idea: I cannot imagine how it would be "judged" or whatever. The only contact Linux and 386BSD has had has been only positive (aside from occasional flame-wars, but it's a religious argument..), and I don't think there is any need to try to get any kind of rivalry going. The argument seems to have been that such a contest would make both systems better, but I frankly doubt that is the case: both 386BSD and Linux will evolve even without any special contest held between them, and a contest would just result in more rivalry and flame-wars.

Linux and 386BSD have totally different goals - 386BSD wants to be BSD, while Linux just is whatever we make of it. 386BSD was helpful in giving me some ideas (I read the Jolitz column in DDJ with interest), and while it's a bit scary to have a big and well known UNIX kernel that fills a similar niche as Linux, there is no reason to choose one over the other on a larger scale. People will prefer one or the other, and if either shows itself to be much better/popular, so be it.

LN: What about the future? Are you planning to support Linux, or do you intend to retire and let it survive by itself?

Linus: I'm most certainly going to continue to support it, until it either dies out or merges with something else. That doesn't necessarily mean I'll make weekly patches for the rest of my life, but hopefully they won't be needed as much when things stabilize.

LN: Are you going to write a book about Linux? Or a detailed history, > with all the gory details revelead?

Linus: I don't like writing documentation, and writing a book is certainly not planned. There is some pressure for me to write a history, hope this interview will server at least partly as one. And there certainly won't be any gory details: if there were, I've already forgotten them (or flushed them: I have sadly deleted my correspondence with ast along with all other old mail. I simply don't have room for it, and I'm too lazy to back it up.)

LN: Is Linux your dream operating system? Are there things that you dislike, or would like to do differently, if you would start over from scratch?

Linus: There are things I'd like to change - but then it wouldn't be UNIX any more. There are good points to a microkernelish design and distributed systems: I just haven't got the resources to do anything about it. I'd like to do a more exotic system, with better support for pending I/O, distribution of processes etc, but with just one 386 at home, I'm not likely to do anything about it in the next few years. And maybe I'll have found a new area of interest by then anyway..

But in general, I think Linux does what I was looking for pretty well. There are details I dislike in the kernel, but the basic ideas have worked well, and there are no major ugly warts in the Linux design. So in that way it is kind of a dream system - just enough problems to keep up the interest, and keep it evolving. No program is ever perfect, and operating systems are interesting programs: there are a lot of things you have to keep track of, and a lot of different ways you can solve the problems. Linux does it one way: 386BSD has many basic similarities in design, but some major differences in implementation. Then there are OS's like Hurd (well, Mach right now) and Amoeba which have a totally different design strategy, giving different problems and solutions. There may be one right way of doing things, but I doubt it: and Linux doesn't do too badly.

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
What else you may like…
Mozilla Caves to Criticism, Unblocks Firefox Extensions in Russia

Two days after blocking anti-Censorship, pro-Privacy Firefox Extensions in Russia, Mozilla has reversed course.

The full article:

Open Source A.I. Definition to include Closed, Secret Data

The Open Source Initiative -- backed by Microsoft, Amazon, Meta -- is pushing for a "Closed" definition of "Open Source Artificial Intelligence."

Mozilla's War on the Open Internet

The Mega Corp behind Firefox takes another step to stomp out free speech and an "Open Web".

Mozilla Firefox blocks anti-Censorship and pro-Privacy extensions in Russia:

November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044
Off to a fantastic start!

A huge high-five is in order for everyone who pitched in and grabbed a subscription (or otherwise donated) today!

I do believe we've put enough funds in the "This is For The Linux Distro" account to cover all of the obvious expenses (servers, hardware, domains, etc.) for at least the next half year or so. Most outstanding!

I'll be honest... I wasn't expecting this level of response!

I'll leave the sale running until midnight tonight if anyone else wants to jump in, but this is truly amazing. All of you rule.

Next up: Getting servers, domain, source repository, and forum set up.

9 hours ago

#Commodore #Wikipedia

Here's a demo of an in-development Wikipedia-specific online browser running on C64 OS, which is a commercial OS now available for Commodore 64s. Data speeds are hobbled a bit by a 2400 baud modem, but seems very functional with neat features like multiple-language support and flexible screen usage under user control. This offers a much richer experience compared to Minitel or early online services like GEnie back in the day.

A question for the group:

Does Microsoft 365 run under Wine? Back when MS Office was a stand alone product it installed and worked well in wine but does it still? The need/desire to use this product has stopped some people from moving away from Windows and to Linux.

post photo preview
Last week at The Lunduke Journal (June 9 - June 15, 2024)
Firefox! Russia! WWDC! Open Source A.I.!

My-oh-my.  Another wild week at The Lunduke Journal!  It all kicked off with a live video commentary of Apple's WWDC keynote (which was banned by YouTube, but still available at the links below), then quickly moves to Mozilla and Open Source AI.

The Videos

The Articles

Previous Few Weeks

Reminder: Check out The Lunduke Journal Link Central page for all the handy URLS.  Podcast RSS feeds, contact info, direct links to some of the big shows and articles and a bunch of other goodies.  And be sure to subscribe to The Lunduke Journal to help support the work... and make sure you don't miss out on anything.

Read full Article
post photo preview
The CIA, NSA, and Pokémon Go

Back in July of 2016, I wrote a short article for Network World entitled “The CIA, NSA, and Pokémon Go."

While the title was certainly viewed as a bit “over the top” and “conspiracy theorist-y”, it was really just a collection of (in my opinion, rather bizarre) facts that – even without any sinister connection – were worth documenting. I am republishing it here, with some additional (increasingly odd) details added at the end (including radio and TV appearances related to this article).

Some of the details relating to the exact permissions and capabilities of the Pokémon application have changed over the last few years… but everything else remains correct, factual, and up to date.



The CIA, NSA, and Pokémon Go

With Pokémon Go currently enjoying, what I would call, a wee-bit-o-success, now seems like a good time to talk about a few things people may not know about the world's favorite new smartphone game.

This is not an opinion piece. I am not going to tell you Pokémon Go is bad or that it invades your privacy. I’m merely presenting verifiable facts about the biggest, most talked about game out there.

Let’s start with a little history

Way back in 2001, Keyhole, Inc. was founded by John Hanke (who previously worked in a “foreign affairs” position within the U.S. government). The company was named after the old “eye-in-the-sky” military satellites. One of the key, early backers of Keyhole was a firm called In-Q-Tel.

In-Q-Tel is the venture capital firm of the CIA. Yes, the Central Intelligence Agency. Much of the funding purportedly came from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). The NGA handles combat support for the U.S. Department of Defense and provides intelligence to the NSA and CIA, among others.

Keyhole’s noteworthy public product was “Earth.” Renamed to “Google Earth” after Google acquired Keyhole in 2004.

In 2010, Niantic Labs was founded (inside Google) by Keyhole’s founder, John Hanke.

Over the next few years, Niantic created two location-based apps/games. The first was Field Trip, a smartphone application where users walk around and find things. The second was Ingress, a sci-fi-themed game where players walk around and between locations in the real world.

In 2015, Niantic was spun off from Google and became its own company. Then Pokémon Go was developed and launched by Niantic. It’s a game where you walk around in the real world (between locations suggested by the service) while holding your smartphone.

Data the game can access

Let’s move on to what information Pokémon Go has access to, bearing the history of the company in mind as we do.

When you install Pokémon Go on an Android phone, you grant it the following access (not including the ability to make in-app purchases):


  • Find accounts on the device


  • Find accounts on the device


  • Precise location (GPS and network-based)

  • Approximate location (network-based)


  • Modify or delete the contents of your USB storage

  • Read the contents of your USB storage


  • Modify or delete the contents of your USB storage

  • Read the contents of your USB storage


  • Take pictures and videos


  • Receive data from the internet

  • Control vibration

  • Pair with Bluetooth devices

  • Access Bluetooth settings

  • Full network access

  • Use accounts on the device

  • View network connections

  • Prevent the device from sleeping

Based on the access to your device (and your information), coupled with the design of Pokémon Go, the game should have no problem discerning and storing the following information (just for a start):

  • Where you are

  • Where you were

  • What route you took between those locations

  • When you were at each location

  • How long it took you to get between them

  • What you are looking at right now

  • What you were looking at in the past

  • What you look like

  • What files you have on your device and the entire contents of those files

I’m not going to tell people what they should think of all this.

I’m merely presenting the information. I recommend looking over the list of what data the game has access to, then going back to the beginning of this article and re-reading the history of the company.

Update: April 14th, 2020

In March of 2017, a little less than a year after this article was originally published, WikiLeaks released what they called “Vault 7." A series of documents that was purported to be a large leak of CIA related documents focused heavily on hacking and electronic surveillance.

Among those documents was a list of code names, descriptions, and various details around Android specific exploits.

Of the code names listed… almost a third of them were Pokémon names. Between that and the CIA investment (via In-Q-Tel) in Niantic (the company behind Pokémon Go)… I mean, that's just a heck of a lot more Pokémon than one would expect from the CIA.

One other little tidbit:

The original CEO of In-Q-Tel was a man named Gilman Louie. Louie received multiple awards for his work with In-Q-Tel - including CIA Agency Seal Medallions, Director's Award by the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Director of National Intelligence Medallion – which included investing in Keyhole.

Louie now sits on the board of directors of Niantic.

In 2019 alone, Pokémon Go earned $1.4 Billion (USD). As of February 2019, the game had been downloaded over One Billion times.

Update: June 15th, 2024

After this article was originally published, back in 2016, I made a few radio guest appearances to talk about it -- my favorites being for Coast to Coast AM and Fade to Black.  Both of which remain available online.

This was followed by an episode of a TV show, for The History Channel, called "Breaking Mysterious".  That show only received a limited run in the USA, but it remains available via streaming in many other countries in case you want to look it up.

Here's a few snapshots from that episode (Season 1, Episode 1 - "The Watchers") just for good measure.

The show was originally titled "The Unexplained".  But the name was changed to "Breaking Mysterious"... and, later, "The Unexplained" title was used for an entirely different show, hosted by William Shatner.


Yup.  The video editors for the History Channel spelled my name wrong.  (It's with a Y!  A Y, I say!)


Sitting in a park.  Dropping truth bombs about surveillance on the show host, Jimmy Church.


Giving the show's host "The Look".
Read full Article
post photo preview
Funny Programming Pictures Part XLIV
Father's Day Weekend Edition

I hit Ctrl-C 187,000 times while creating this article.


... or simply don't know what we did, but it works.  It's "the algorithm".


Remember when Windows Vista was the "Best Advertisement for Linux"?  Good times.


We're all doomed.


This is the correct answer for every topic for an experienced dev: I hate everything, for different reasons.




This is a tough conversation for any dad to have.


The other 1% is giving up and just using a Center tag inside of a Table.


The more times you hit Ctrl-C, the better it copies.




"Backend Developer"




Don't look behind you.  Copilot is catching up.
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals