Linux-Advocacy Digest #372, Volume #25 Thu, 24 Feb 00 07:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Giving up on NT (Donn Miller)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Fergus Henderson)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K (Matt Chiglinsky)
Re: Windows 2000: flat sales (5X3)
Re: /a(r)?s(s)?(e)?hole/ of the month (5X3)
Re: Info on SCSI Standards and Scuzzy Spammers (was: Differential Signal
Transmission in SCSI (5X3)
Re: Info on SCSI Standards and Scuzzy Spammers (was: Differential Signal
Transmission in SCSI (5X3)
Re: Info on SCSI Standards and Scuzzy Spammers (was: Differential Signal
Transmission in SCSI (5X3)
Re: Linux Demo Day a letdown (Terry Porter)
Re: Giving up on NT (Donn Miller)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 06:18:31 -0500
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000, Paul 'Z' Ewande=A9 wrote:
> But I have no such problems with the Windows Media Player. It isn't
> multimedia ? I can play witha huge Photoshop file in the background and
> still do other computer intensive things, can you on the Mac without
> bringing Photoshop almost to a grinding halt ?
You mean in the background, as on the root window (wallpaper)? Well, if
you mean photoshop running IN the background, it's because Photoshop is
sitting there idle, so it stops consuming resources. If you have memory
being consumed by the image read into memory by Photoshop, Windows' LRU
(least recently used) algorithm will swap out the Photoshop
image. Meaning - it moves the Photoshop file's data segment
into swap. So, really, Photoshop isn't consuming _physical_ memory -- it
has been moved into swap.
I learned all this from reading Petzold's book. Damn good book -- he
really knows his shit. Oh, and Peter Norton is one smart dude.
- Donn
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fergus Henderson)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:25:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
>Fergus Henderson wrote:
>>One reason why the squatting is not justified is that the bums
>>might damage the property while they're using it.
>
>Yes, but they are still committing an offence if they don't damage
>it.
>
>>And presumably business-people or morally upstanding citizens
>>would be less likely to damage the property than bums, so that
>>seems to reduce the magnitude of the offence.
>
>Damage to property is a seperate offence entirely. That someone
>"might" damage property is not an offence. You can not be charged
>or assumed guilty for something that you might do.
Well, firstly I should point out that I was mostly talking
about whether it was morally justified or not, not whether
it was legal.
But even when it comes to the law, you can certainly be charged
for doing something that might cause damage even if no damage
was actually done. If you do something that recklessly endangers life,
in the absence of extenuating circumstances that is certainly a crime,
even if no-one is actually hurt.
Endangering property can be an offense, in some cases, even if the property
was not actually damaged by your act, but was merely at risk of being damaged.
Have you heard of the crime of "Arson endangering property"?
Starting fires is not in itself a crime.
But starting fires that might damage property is.
Here's a couple of references I pulled off the web.
>From the South Australian Crimes Act:
| COUNTRY FIRES ACT 1989 - SECT 52
|
| Endangering life or property
|
| (1) A person who, during the fire danger season, without lawful excuse, lights
| a fire in circumstances where the fire endangers, or is likely to endanger,
| the life or property of another, is guilty of an offence.
>From the Pennsylvania crimes code:
| (d) Reckless burning or exploding - A person commits a
| felony of the third degree if he intentionally starts a
| fire or causes an explosion, or if he aids, counsels, pays
| or agrees to pay another to cause a fire or explosion,
| whether on his own property or on that of another, and
| thereby recklessly:
| (1) places an uninhabited building or unoccupied
| structure of another in danger of damage or destruction; or
| (2) places any personal property of another having a
| value of $5,000 or more in danger of damage or destruction.
The potential risk for damage to the property being tresspassed apon
may be one of the reasons behind the law against tresspassing.
Of course, the potential for damage to the property is certainly not the
_only_ justification for the law against tresspassing.
>>Another reason is that they might invade the owner's privacy.
>
>Once you start invoking "rights to privacy", you tread on shaky ground.
>Such rights are at least as arbitrary as intellectual property rights,
>and are certainly not well protected by the laws in most countries.
I was not really talking about the legal issues there, more
about the moral ones. I think the invasion of privacy issue
is a one part of why most people see squatting as a severe moral wrong,
which in turn is why why have laws against it.
>>>(a) If the bum was willing and able to clear out without the owner
>>> noticing
>>>
>>>(b) If the owner was not actually planning on using the house during the
>>> time the bum was squatting.
>>
>>I don't agree. I think most people would agree that these factors
>>at least affect the gravity of the offence.
>
>Yes, but they don't make it "not an offence".
No, but that's partly because with physical property there is always
_some_ risk of damage to the property, invasion of privacy,
and/or invasion of personal space.
If you could imagine a scenario where there was genuinely _no_ risk
of any such damage, then I think most people would not see it as
morally wrong and would therefore think it should not be legally wrong
either. But your analogy with physical property can't produce such a
scenario. It's just a flawed analogy.
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Chiglinsky)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:25:28 GMT
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 05:26:27 GMT, mr_rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K. Coming soon.
>
>Bawhahahahahahahahaahahahah....................
>
>"They want us to buy this crap, and they won't even migrate to
>it!"
>
>The biggest, richest, and most powerful OS manufacturer in the
>world just released a final version of their new OS and they
>refuse to migrate their busiest website (Hotmail) to their new
>fangled OS.
>
>If Bill Gates and his money can't switch Hotmail to NT or Windows
>2000, how the fuck is the little guy supposed to migrate to
>Windows 2000?
Why migrate unless it gives them some advantage they didn't have
before? If I remember right they're using BSD, but its worked fine up
to now, right? Why waste the effort?
The question of course is why weren't they running NT in the first
place...but I'm sure this has already been beaten into the ground so
your point is moot. :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (5X3)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: flat sales
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:39:21 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You say you can prove that the stack wasn't modified? that solaris wasn't
> modified for hotmail? That's your claim.
That isnt my claim, liar. You are not comprehending what im typing.
> You claim you can prove this.
No, I never claimed that either, liar.
> Go
> ahead, prove it. We're waiting.
YOU'RE waiting, liar.
> Can you also prove your W2K ultimate ping
> attack while you are at it?
Wheres your little C webserver, liar?
> You might even figure out how to run more than 7
> devices on a single "chain" - when you get to 16, I'll just point down
> kilometers of cable at 127 devices and say: ok, child, what comes after
> fibre?
You know nothing about SCSI, liar, and you refuse to answer questions about
it, liar.
> Of course, YOU don't know anyone involved in the project and that much I
> know factually.
You know nothing, liar.
> When you figure out just how I got that gem,
You pulled it out of your ass, liar.
> you'll suddenly
> have the suprise you've been flirting around but just keep missing. I would
> pay to see your face when (if) you find out.
Theres nothing to find out, liar.
> hotmail.com -> w2K: Y2K - bet on it.
I'm not doubting it, liar.
p0ok
--
1 divided by 0 = 0
--drestin black
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (5X3)
Subject: Re: /a(r)?s(s)?(e)?hole/ of the month
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:42:39 GMT
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "5X3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:89207s$v98$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > I dig the caps on V and S. Just find it ... amusing. "Dresden" would be
>> > remotely amusing if it had ANY significance whatsoever to topics at
> hand,
>> > was slightly annoying and/or wasn't originally penned by a child
> pretendin'
>> > to be all grow'd up. Is 100s of thousands worth insignificant? My cover
> is
>> > intact!
>>
>> Dont you know why I call you dresden, dresden? You dont know your history
>> very well...
> yea... figures a little neo-nazi would latch onto that...
I'm not a neo-nazi, dresden. And you need to start being *very* careful about
what you type.
> But I know my
> history VERY well
Uh huh. Just like your math, eh?
> and i think you've missed something in your choice... but
> why would I want to change a thing ...
I dont think you have the brain for it.
p0ok
--
1 divided by 0 = 0
--drestin black
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (5X3)
Subject: Re: Info on SCSI Standards and Scuzzy Spammers (was: Differential Signal
Transmission in SCSI
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:50:01 GMT
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "5X3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:891vth$v98$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <snip crap>
> Hey 5x3 - tell me - what does the "v" in this seagate model number stands
> for? (and why)
> st318451LWV
> It's the new drive I'm getting
> (http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/marketing/detail/0,1121,245,0
> 0.shtml).
> Hows it different from the LC model?
> Think you could name ANY IDE drive faster than this one, consuming less
> power, generating less heat with less noise?
> And, if you were going to use, say, a quick dozen of these in a
> mirrored/stripped set - which ones would you pick and why? And if you think
> the word differential plays anything meaningful in this act... well... go
> ahead...
Dresden, I dont know what the V in that seagate model means---and im not
going to search the web to look it up just to pretend that I do, because
I dont do that kind of thing. I shall not go to the URL you posted, because
I dont care about ANYTHING that you're getting. I therefore do not know
how it is different from the LC model. I shall not attempt to name any
IDE drive faster than the one that youre buying because I did not go look
at the URL. Mirrored/stripped set? You mean STRIPED? I dont know that
I would use ANY of them in a "quick dozen", again, because I have not
gone to check the URL.
Now then dresden, I find it very interesting that even unto avoiding the
issue at hand, which is that you lied when you said you never refused to
answer any questions, you STILL refuse to answer any questions.
Liar.
p0ok
--
1 divided by 0 = 0
--drestin black
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (5X3)
Subject: Re: Info on SCSI Standards and Scuzzy Spammers (was: Differential Signal
Transmission in SCSI
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:51:58 GMT
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, I went on to return your insults. You were confused that I didn't take
> what you thought was the bait.
No, it was actually a real question, engineered to be answered. It was
answered by someone who actually knows what theyre talking about, and I
appreciated it.
I did suspect that you didnt (and dont) know the answer and that that was
the root cause of your refusal, true. But honestly I cared about the answer
more than I cared about you looking foolish; you tend to be able to take
care of that all on your own.
p0ok
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (5X3)
Subject: Re: Info on SCSI Standards and Scuzzy Spammers (was: Differential Signal
Transmission in SCSI
Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:54:15 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm not outing anyone.
Backpedal. Yep, pedal harder!
> I've never done anything like this before and don't eve intend to do it
> again.
Somehow I dont believe that.
> I'm just giving him a bit of his own medicine but I'm stopping it right
> here because quite frankly the stench that has been released just
> scratching the surface has made me ill.
MOOOMMM!!! He hit me first!!!! WWWAAAAAAAA
> I'm outta here for good............................
Thank the gods.
> Good bye Mr. Bilk.
> May God have mercy on your soul.
Ahhh...a fundie. Arent fundies and computers supposed to be more than
100 yards apart at all times?
p0ok
--
1 divided by 0 = 0
--drestin black
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux Demo Day a letdown
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 24 Feb 2000 19:59:30 +0800
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 05:00:03 -0500, Stephen Voss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Why did I have **no** trouble getting RH4.2 installed in 4 hrs in 1997 ?
>> Why did Linux find my net card then, when Windows couldnt ?
>> Why did my second machine network almost straight away after I also
>> installed Linux on it in 1997, via NFS, from the first machine ?
>
>Because your a linux geek thats why!
Your point ... ?
Actually I'm a embedded systems designer, electronics is my strong suit. I'm
very below average as a programmer, and make a poor geek.
Before 1997 I knew little about Linux, and was a dos/windows user only, apart
from programming assembly for various embedded micros.
>
>> Hang on, why did Yggdrassil install *no* problems for me in 1993 ?
>> Found the soundblaster pro etc,
>
>I still have problems with my AWE 64
Then *fix* them, or pay someone to do it for you, or wait till a programmer
hardware/video guru does it for himself/herself and releases it under the GPL ?
>
>> No I think it may be you ?
>
>Perfect Microsoft style...its never our fault its always the users fault.
He's the one complaining, its *his* problem.
>
>> Coyotebert, Linux IS NOT Windows, we dont care what Microsoft does, Microsoft
>> has NO impact on us. Maybe it does on Redhat or Suse, who are both commercial
>> companies, however Linux enthuisasts such as myself, will continue to use it
>> continue to learn about it, and continue to write software, tech manuals
>> design equipment, and work the net with it, regardless of Microsoft.
>
>You dont think commercial distrubitions have an effect on the quality and
>quantity
>of software available???
What software? Free software. or commercial software ?
>
>> Linux is a comunity, perhaps the first real community since socialism
>> that's probably why ?
>
>Do you remember what happened to the socialists? Frankly I dont want linux to be
>on that
>team.
I have learnt about the conditions that caused socialism to exist, and it was a
community, while it lasted, I happen to think that was a good thing.
>
>> >God save Linux if we have more "demonstrations" such as this one.
>> Linux doesnt need Gods help, Coyotebert, it's doing fine as it is.
>
>...and if we stick our heads far enough up our ass we wont be able to smell the
>stink
Sure be my guest. In 1993 Linux was tiny, unheard of, look at it now. Did you
cause this, did I ?
Nope, its bigger than you and I, your ass metaphor is funny but not really
relevant ihmo .
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 4 days 9 hours 46 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 06:18:31 -0500
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
======_=_NextPart_000_01BF7EBB.9C64D060
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
This message uses a character set that is not supported by the Internet
Service. To view the original message content, open the attached
message. If the text doesn't display correctly, save the attachment to
disk, and then open it using a viewer that can display the original
character set. <<message.txt>>
======_=_NextPart_000_01BF7EBB.9C64D060
Content-Type: text/plain;
name="message.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="message.txt"
Path: =
col.hp.com!cello.hpl.hp.com!nntp.hpl.hp.com!hplabs.hpl.hp.com!unix.sri.c=
om!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu=
!remarQ-easT!remarQ.com!supernews.com!portc05.blue.aol.com!uunet!ffx.uu.=
net!ffx2nh3!lcm208.cvzoom.net!dmmiller
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: =
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocac=
y,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 06:18:31 -0500
Organization: UUNET
Lines: 21
Message-ID: =
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <88ukrs$b4n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<890fuc$30d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <890qdl$rep$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<891p0j$gov$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
<8932p3$i1s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lcm208.cvzoom.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=3DX-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
X-Trace: ffx2nh3.news.uu.net 951391137 18676 208.230.69.208 (24 Feb =
2000 11:18:57 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Feb 2000 11:18:57 GMT
In-Reply-To: <8932p3$i1s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Xref: col.hp.com comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:172628 =
comp.os.os2.advocacy:456863 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:685616 =
comp.os.linux.advocacy:380724
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000, Paul 'Z' Ewande=3DA9 wrote:
> But I have no such problems with the Windows Media Player. It isn't
> multimedia ? I can play witha huge Photoshop file in the background =
and
> still do other computer intensive things, can you on the Mac without
> bringing Photoshop almost to a grinding halt ?
You mean in the background, as on the root window (wallpaper)? Well, =
if
you mean photoshop running IN the background, it's because Photoshop is
sitting there idle, so it stops consuming resources. If you have =
memory
being consumed by the image read into memory by Photoshop, Windows' LRU
(least recently used) algorithm will swap out the Photoshop
image. Meaning - it moves the Photoshop file's data segment
into swap. So, really, Photoshop isn't consuming _physical_ memory -- =
it
has been moved into swap.
I learned all this from reading Petzold's book. Damn good book -- he
really knows his shit. Oh, and Peter Norton is one smart dude.
- Donn
======_=_NextPart_000_01BF7EBB.9C64D060==
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
