Linux-Advocacy Digest #45, Volume #26 Sun, 9 Apr 00 14:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Re: InstallShield coming to Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: These OS debates are simply Hillarious! (Terry Porter)
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X (Rex Riley)
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty (Richard Corfield)
Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES (or
MDI for that matter) (Richard Corfield)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. (Majordomo)
RE: Binary Thinking ("Pedro Ballester")
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Date of modifications of files (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
(Damien)
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X (John Jensen)
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Bart Oldeman)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
(Damien)
Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do
you?) (Damien)
Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do
you?) (Damien)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: InstallShield coming to Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 9 Apr 2000 23:15:53 +0800
On Sun, 09 Apr 2000 10:04:10 -0400,
Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"InstallShield(TM) Software Corporation and IBM (NYSE: IBM) today
>announced an agreement to work together to simplify the installation of
>applications and software on IBM platforms, creating a consistent,
>easy-to-use install experience for customers".
Damn, I wish I had that "install_shield script" someone posted a few years ago,
It untarred and unzipped as we normally do manually, then added the Ms type
stuff,
"press Y to install"
"are you sure ? this might overwrite dlls on your system ...y/n"
" are you really sure ...... y/n "
" are you really really sure ..... y/n"
"please enter your 47 digit security code now ..." etc,
Hahahah it worked and was a hoot as well!
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 4 hours 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: These OS debates are simply Hillarious!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 9 Apr 2000 23:45:09 +0800
On Sat, 08 Apr 2000 04:05:55 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Isn't is just a riot! I can't believe peoples stupidity.
>
>People still debating which OS is superior Linux or Microsoft.
>
Great post Charlie, and I have to say it rings true for me, apart from the fact
my power fails here every 5 weeks or so, so my uptimes will never reach your
desktop uptimes.
As far as the debates are concerned, it's become a habit I guess. We learned to
repel these Wintrolls after they noticed Linux *was* a threat, and during
the Ms FUD campaigns we dug in and fought back to back, in hand to hand combat.
Now theyre on the run, their army in tatters, and we are still revved up.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 4 hours 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rex Riley)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2000 15:57:25 GMT
In <8co1oi$7l5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John Jensen wrote:
> Rex Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : In <8cnu0v$7l5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John Jensen wrote:
> : > Rex Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : > : This is a huge mindset change on John's part since wading
through
> : > : endless rants that the future revolves around Linux.
>
> : > I don't think so. Feel free to deja-news me.
>
> : > In fact, until you do I don't feel any need to respond to you
> : > further.
>
> : To wit:
>
> : Tue, 07 Mar 00
> : Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:
> : Darwin or Linux
>
> : > : John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : > : > It is a little frustrating therefore, to see Apple now make
the
> : > : > explicit choice to become irrelevant in a world increasingly
> : > : > centered around a Linux standard.
>
> Oh gawd, I said "It is a little frustrating".
>
> Man, I hadn't realized how far out of bounds my "rants" had become in
my
> Linux commentary. I'll have to consider carefully how to make amends
to
> you, the listening community.
>
>
I don't think we're communicating! Less than 30 days ago you broadcast
Apple "*irrelevent* in a world increasingly centered around a Linux
standard." (your words)
You either stand for a Linux centered world and Apple is irrelevent ?
or
You've changed your mind and value open competition in a unixverse?
You asserted:
>I don't think so. Feel free to deja-news me.
I answered your challenge to prove the evidence you demanded.
At least, you could have the common decency to respond to the question
you put in play after the hanging diatribe:
>In fact, until you do I don't feel any need to respond to you further.
-r
------------------------------
From: Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: 09 Apr 2000 15:54:58 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
> Once the tools are in place, and there is a good degree of devtool
> level compatibility, the problem of porting is much less difficult.
> This is why Unix applications have a great tendency to creep onto
> other Unix platforms.
Its a lot easier for programs to move from UNIX to UNIX if only
because the concepts of the underlying system are the same. A Windows
program on the other hand will probably make assumptions such as "One
machine, One User" or "One IP Address, One User". This and problems
such as a tendency to store user data in the program installation
directory may cause problems.
The GUI system under UNIX is a lot different too - cut and paste being
a minor niggle of mine when some of my programs use the UNIX way and
some use the Windows way.
- Richard.
--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_/ _/ _/ _/ Web Page, CV: http://www.littondale.freeserve.co.uk
_/_/ _/ _/ Dance (Ballroom, RnR), Hiking, SJA, Linux, ... [ENfP]
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ PGP2.6 Key ID:0x0FB084B1 GPG/PGP5 Key ID:0xFA139DA7
------------------------------
From: Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES
(or MDI for that matter)
Date: 09 Apr 2000 15:59:59 +0100
Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk> writes:
> I think Java's attempt to reimplement `make' is annoying; it gets in the
> way of tools like automake and brings no benefits that I can see; there
> is no way to determine what .class files will result from compiling a
> given .java file, and so on. Argh.
I tend to go for a
rm $(find . -name '*.class')
before compiling.
--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_/ _/ _/ _/ Web Page, CV: http://www.littondale.freeserve.co.uk
_/_/ _/ _/ Dance (Ballroom, RnR), Hiking, SJA, Linux, ... [ENfP]
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ PGP2.6 Key ID:0x0FB084B1 GPG/PGP5 Key ID:0xFA139DA7
------------------------------
From: Majordomo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2000 09:00:42 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You just don't like losing arguments jedi. You try and try to fog the
> issue. You throw rhetoric around. You change the subject when you are
> losing (which is quite often these days) and you resort to name
> calling when all else fails, and it usually does. You hope that when
> someone is on to your obvious ignorance that you can baffle them with
> double speak and they will disappear, but you see I won't go away.
>
> Let's see: in the last few weeks we have had you arguing:
> 1. How SBLive support under Linux is equal to Windows.
> 2. How Some Linux spreadsheet is the equal of Lotus or Excel.
> 3. Find under Windows is a kludge, despite being much faster than
> Linux.
> 4. And the rest of your convoluted word twisting rhetoric thrown in
> for good measure.
>
> Linux would be better off with you on the Windows side.
> You prove our point about linux every time.
>
> Steve
>
Just stay on the windows side steve, your stupidity, ignorance, and general lack of a
clue make you
the best thing there is for the linux community by being an Elmer FUD in the employ of
Bill "I can't
even code BASIC right" Gates
-NateGrey
"Shhhhhhhh... be vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting FUDs"
------------------------------
From: "Pedro Ballester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: RE: Binary Thinking
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2000 16:06:26 GMT
All right, even more, when we talk about OS, let's talk about it,
not about how many applications there are around. Then it comes
clear that Linux is better for everything :-))
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2000 16:21:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Sat, 08 Apr 2000 16:51:38 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Name calling and still no proof that I am incorrect.
>
>Looks to me like you are the shill.
One needs to use the right tool. "find -name '*.bak' " is a
sledgehammer used to pound in a 10-penny nail. :-)
Granted, it's not all that obvious to the casual user; one problem with
Linux -- a minor one -- is that the command names are less than intuitive.
I submit that that's an advantage! At least to us who do in fact
use multiple operating systems -- admittedly, that's less of a
problem now than in my college years; now there's only two: Unix or
Unix like, and Windows NT or Windows NT like.
(DOS is trying to hide. :-) )
Suppose one knew that a file copy command existed. If its name is
'cp', that's (1) easier on one's fingers, and (2) "weird" enough
to be memorable. If its name is "COPY", then, if one is using
multiple operating systems, it may be slightly problematical
as to what options are available in one's mind. It can get even
worse in some operating environment if there are multiple tokens
in the command -- does one do "FILE COPY" or "COPY FILE"? Is
there a "FROM" or "TO" in there somewhere?
(Side note: Apollo DOMAIN Aegis used the command 'cpf', which admittedly
generated *more* confusion because of its similarity to Unix --
already a "foreign language" -- and because the options were
different.)
Personally, I prefer:
cp /path/to/filea /path/to/fileb
to
[1] Doubleclick on My Computer.
[2] Keep doubleclicking on folders until you've found the source file.
[3] Doubleclick on My Computer again, after moving windows as required.
[4] Keep doubleclicking on folders until you've found the
destination file.
[5] Press and hold down SHIFT key, then position mouse cursor over
source file and press down the first mouse button, then move
the mouse pointer to the destination directory, and let
go of the mouse button (NOT the SHIFT key), then let go the
SHIFT key, and watch the silly animation.
(Note that the SHIFT key is important; otherwise one will move, copy,
or create a shortcut to the *source* file, depending on whether the
two drives are different and the file is a directory or not.
Peculiar behavior, from the standpoint of predictability.)
An alternative is to use Explorer, which has a similarly bad GUI. There
are also options to allow opening of a new window instead of displaying
the icons of the subdirectory in the same window, which may help
in certain cases -- if one can find the destination window.
But yes, I agree; "find / -name '*.bak'" kinda sucks; "find" isn't
"weird" enough, and, while the action is intuitive enough, it's too
general to be of much use for simple name lookups. But then
try "find / -name '*.bak' \( -empty -o -mtime +7 \)". Now that
sledgehammer is doing something *useful*. :-) Can Windows do that?
(One side note is that "find" -- or any tool that reads directories --
will eventually drag all of the contents of said directories into
cache memory; this means that subsequent "find"s will be a little
faster, on machines with sufficient memory. On my machine, however,
it didn't seem to make a lot of difference.)
>
>Steve
>
>No snipping done so all can see how the Linvocates act when cornered.
>
>
>On Sat, 08 Apr 2000 00:12:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher
>Browne) wrote:
>
>>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] would say:
>>>On 5 Apr 2000 23:18:56 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David
>>>Steinberg) wrote:
>>>
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>: Yea and you're FOS when you say it takes 2 seconds to find
>>>>: /etc/ppp/options scanning the entire drive.
>>>>
>>>>: Try this:
>>>>: cd /
>>>>: cd ..
>>>>
>>>>Why did you go up a directory after you went to the root directory? There
>>>>is no imaginary "My Computer" or "Desktop" sitting above the root....this
>>>>is a real operating system with a real file system, not some kludged POS.
>>>
>>>Because everytime I do a cd
>>>then find -name
>>>it never finds the file I am looking for.
>>>
>>>Bottom line is you are using my cli ineptness to cover the fact that
>>>find -name sux under linux.
>>
>>The fact that you don't know how do it means that you can't get useful
>>results.
>>
>>Your claims that it sucks because you are too inept to use it are
>>irrelevant.
>>
>>>>I know...you STILL don't understand the basics of file system
>>>>navigation; it's sad, isn't it?
>>>
>>>Nope, cause I don't have any desire to run LinSux.
>>
>>Then why are you bothering to discuss it? If you have no desire to
>>run it, then I think it *truly* stupid that you're wasting your time
>>reading and posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
>>
>>Surely you have better things to do with your time.
>>
>>>>Look, you've beaten this find issue to death, and the result of the
>>>>discussion has been:
>>>>1. You're wildly exagerating the time it takes to do a find in Linux
>>>Nope. YOU are the only one claiming that you can find the file
>>>SEARCHING THE ENTIRE HARD DRIVE in 2 seconds.
>>
>>You're a troll.
>>
>>The only way that Win32 can find a particular file in less than
>>"minutes" is if it has some formal indexing scheme similar to the one
>>commonly available on Linux called "locate."
>>
>>>>3. Even if there were no locate in Linux, you would still never have to
>>>> use find to brute-force search from root, since files on a Linux system
>>>> are logically organized: if you're searching for a system configuration
>>>> file it will be in /etc or a subdirectory thereof; if you're searching
>>>> for some data saved by a user, it will be in /home/<username> or a
>>>> subdirectory thereof.
>>>
>>>You are trying to narrow down the search. TRY THE ENTIRE DRIVE and see
>>>what happens..
>>
>>You're a troll.
>>
>>If you're going to waste your time talking about this, you need to be
>>more specific.
>>
>>UNIX doesn't have "entire drives." It has, just like Win32, drives,
>>partitions and filesystems. And it's *you* that look stupid when you
>>can't keep them straight.
>>
>>>>Everything that needs to be said, including regarding point 1, has been
>>>>said. There's no point in going back over it again.
>>>
>>>Of course not. You have been proved a liar and a LinoShill...
>>
>>The fact that you waste your time in this forum proves that you're a
>>"WinShrill."
>>
>>What alternative is there?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Date of modifications of files
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2000 16:43:46 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Sat, 08 Apr 2000 18:56:02 GMT <8cnvbs$9f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Hi everybody.
>
>I'm running Mandrake 7.02 in a DTK PIII 500Mz with 250MB.
>
>Recently, I have the next problem:
>
>Basically I'm getting differents dates in my system.
>
>Just see this. Look at the modification date of files..
>
>I have recently saved h2maxforw.c with emacs.
>
>[hlp@burns planner]$ ls -l h2*
>-rw-r--r-- 1 hlp ai 8332 Apr 8 02:40 h2maxforw.c
>-rw-r--r-- 1 hlp ai 8337 Apr 8 00:53 h2maxforw.c~
>-rw-r--r-- 1 hlp ai 24984 Apr 8 01:02 h2maxforw.o
>[hlp@burns planner]$ date
>sáb abr 8 14:36:51 VET 2000
>[hlp@burns planner]$ rm *.o
>[hlp@burns planner]$ gcc -c h2maxforw.c
>[hlp@burns planner]$ ls -l h2maxforw.*
>-rw-r--r-- 1 hlp ai 8332 Apr 8 02:40 h2maxforw.c
>-rw-r--r-- 1 hlp ai 8337 Apr 8 00:53 h2maxforw.c~
>-rw-r--r-- 1 hlp ai 9916 Apr 8 02:41 h2maxforw.o
>
>Well, when I use a Makefile to compile the file (h2maxforw.c)
>it always compile the file .c
>
>May be that I specified am and pm form of date.
>
>I SO tired about compile and recompile my files because
>make doesn't detect correctly the dates.
>
>Sometimes. I doesn't recognize the modifications.
>
>It problem start two weeks ago.
>
>Before that I didn't have any problems.
>
>Somebody could help me??
>
>
>Thanks a lot.
If you have a 'stat' command, try that on the .o file ("stat h2maxforw.o"),
to ensure that the time is correctly and consistently displayed. You may
have found a bug in the 'ls' command.
My 'ls' (RedHat 6) command seems to be working correctly. However,
I'm not familiar with the 'VET' time zone.
You can try this simple test:
touch -t 200004080220.00 AMfile
touch -t 200004081420.00 PMfile
ls AMfile PMfile
and see how confused things get. ("man touch" for more details
on the -t option.)
Note that 'make' should be using time_t values; time_t is the number
of seconds since the Epoch (Jan 1, 1970, midnight GMT) and is very
easy to compare (it's a signed 4-bit integer).
The source code for 'make' and 'ls' should also be available for
your perusal, should you wish to wade through it.
Good luck.
>
>Hector Palacios
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 09 Apr 2000 17:29:05 GMT
On Sat, 08 Apr 2000 19:01:16 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
fmc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[bigsnip]
| The real challenge is to RS. Will he defend the owner's decision to ship
| GPL'd programs w/o source code, based on his statement that he's "just
| sharing free programs with our customers"? That' equivalent to RS saying
| that piracy is "just sharing information with your neighbors", isn't it?.
No, RMS would probably have a hissy fit. However, that's not because
he feels the programmers have an innate right to control how their
wares are distributed. But because the law says they do. A law, even
one you don't agree with can still be used to your benefit, to achieve
things you want.
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
Date: 9 Apr 2000 17:31:24 GMT
Let's eliminate some of the ': > : > :' chaffe:
Rex Riley wrote:
: This is a huge mindset change on John's part since wading through
: endless rants that the future revolves around Linux.
When asked for a reference, Rex quotes my Mar 7 comment.
John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is a little frustrating therefore, to see Apple now make the
> explicit choice to become irrelevant in a world increasingly
> centered around a Linux standard.
And now, Rex writes:
: I don't think we're communicating! Less than 30 days ago you broadcast
: Apple "*irrelevent* in a world increasingly centered around a Linux
: standard." (your words)
: You either stand for a Linux centered world and Apple is irrelevent ?
: or You've changed your mind and value open competition in a unixverse?
: You asserted:
: >I don't think so. Feel free to deja-news me.
: I answered your challenge to prove the evidence you demanded.
: At least, you could have the common decency to respond to the question
: you put in play after the hanging diatribe:
: >In fact, until you do I don't feel any need to respond to you further.
I was offended that you accused me of "endless rants". Maybe we aren't
communicating. What do you think makes a rant? Is polite conversation,
ciritical of something you support, a rant?
I've had good things to say about Mac OS X, going way back. I've tried to
explain several times why I think a good technology can end up in niche.
It can become a boutique product. It might even become irrelevant. I'm
sure you can think of several good products that have already become
irrelevant.
Looking back over my our postings though, I see that you've attempted to
miss-represent my position in the past. Earlier, you claimed "John Jensen
castigated Apple for not developing new open standards". When I supplied
relevant quotes, you ducked out with "I can't chronologically piece the
thread back together but from what I've read ..."
It's kind of pathetic that you claim the moral high ground ("you could
have the common decency...") while attempting to warp and dismiss my
coments as "endless rants".
John
------------------------------
From: Bart Oldeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 17:26:51 GMT
On Sun, 9 Apr 2000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> Personally, I prefer:
>
> cp /path/to/filea /path/to/fileb
>
> to
>
> [1] Doubleclick on My Computer.
> [2] Keep doubleclicking on folders until you've found the source file.
> [3] Doubleclick on My Computer again, after moving windows as required.
> [4] Keep doubleclicking on folders until you've found the
> destination file.
> [5] Press and hold down SHIFT key, then position mouse cursor over
> source file and press down the first mouse button, then move
> the mouse pointer to the destination directory, and let
> go of the mouse button (NOT the SHIFT key), then let go the
> SHIFT key, and watch the silly animation.
I prefer mc (the midnight commander) for copying more than 1 file at a go:
(it's intuitive _and_ quick once you have mastered the shortcuts)
instead of
> cp /path1/to/filea /path2/to/fileb
M-c /path1/to Enter TAB M-c /path2/to Enter TAB C-S fi F5 End /fileb Enter
might seem difficult and slower but it is pretty clear if you're used to
mc. (M-Tab does filename completion, C-S searches in a directory panel)
I've assigned a key between "Ctrl" and "Alt" containing a certain logo to
"Meta" ;-)
Most CLI's in *nix are way better than cmd.exe in NT, but I still feel
like editing using "ed"/"edlin" instead of vi/pico/emacs/... if compared
to a _good_ file manager (and I don't particularly like Windows Explorer
for that matter).
Bart
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 09 Apr 2000 17:36:57 GMT
On Sun, 09 Apr 2000 09:53:55 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
fmc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| "Damien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
| > On Sat, 08 Apr 2000 08:43:24 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
| > fmc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snipped legal stuff, should have done that earlier]
| > I suppose I could have been more precise and suggested that none of
| > your physical property is involved. But then you would have made the
| > case that physical property and intellectual "property" are
| > analogous. So let's discuss that instead.
| >
| > You can't take, or have taken from you, intellectual "property". You
| > can make copies of it. But that in no way affects the original, nor
| > does it affect the owners of the original.
|
| I gather that you mean "harm" when you say "affect". A copy may not harm
| the original, (if it's software and not a fragile painting), but it
| certainly can harm the owner, and often does. Loss of revenue and market
| value is one way it can do harm. None of that matters though. The only
| thing that counts is the violation of the owner's rights with regard to his
| property. He needn't be harmed for there to have been an infringement.
| Someone who walks into another's unlocked house, then leaves without doing
| any harm has still violated the rights of the owner.
|
| > Some would say that people who create intellectual "property" have a
| > right to profit from it. True or not, this is irrelevant. I have
| > more of a right to do things that in no way affect them, then they
| > have a right to whatever sort of profit they think they deserve for
| > creating intellectual "property".
|
| How mean spirited that sounds! Unfortunately you can't play
| rock/paper/scissors with rights, matching mine against yours to see whose
| hands carries the trump. Your scale needs adjusting too, if you think your
| "right" to infringe outweighs their right to enjoy the benefits of their
| creative work.
Actually you can. I have the right to swing my fist. Should your
face be in the path of my fist, my right to swing it stops there.
Your right not to have bodily harm inflicted by others has just
trumped my right to swing my fist. So now I ask you, which right is
more important? My right to arrange my physical property an any way I
see fit, be it in the privacy of my own home, or a public gallery; or
your right to profit from a certain arrangement of physical stuff you
devised.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get
it, do you?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 09 Apr 2000 17:42:29 GMT
On Sun, 9 Apr 2000 07:25:43 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
doc rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Damien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
| > You can't own information.
|
| Well, ownership is just a concept, right? So it depends on how we look at
| the concept, whether we're talking about ownership of a stereo, a cat, or
| creative constructions.
Well I usually take it as rightful possesion and / or control.
Information exists in people's minds (and other physical belongings).
So in order to control information you need to keep it secrete or
control other peoples minds and belongings.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: We need a new subject was (Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get
it, do you?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 09 Apr 2000 17:48:37 GMT
On Sun, 9 Apr 2000 07:40:30 -0400, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
doc rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > > | > Since IP monolopy (and MS's use of it) is an artificial privilege
| > > | > created by government regulation,
|
| > > | Again, there is no real difference between "right" and "privilege"
|
| > > | > presumably for the public benefit,
|
| > > | I don't get the constant utilitarian assumption in this newsgroup.
|
| > > He's right. Copyright laws originated from utilitarian reasoning. At
| > > least in the US.
|
| > That could be. That doesn't mean that that has to have any bearing on
| > whether you disagree or agree with them, though.
|
| Another angle on this that you might be interested in is one from a
| different philosophical doctrine, pragmatism. It may result in a positive
| or negative utilitarian impact for you depending on how you look at this.
|
| That is that the people who create stuff will more readily create, and
| create more quantity-wise, if they make a living from it. That's certainly
| true from my own perspective.
|
| I don't care to spend a huge chunk of my time creating code, or music, or
| painting, etc. just to have (this is a negative utilitarian view) everyone
| use and benefit from the stuff I create while I have to continue working in
| a factory or something just to pay my rent and eat. I know lots of other
| programmers and artists who feel the same way.
|
| The positive utilitarian view of this pragmatic fact would be that, if these
| creations benefit anyone else in society, that benefit will be maximized by
| providing an incentive for the creators to do their thing.
Pragmatism is a very compelling argument for copyrights. But it falls
apart when you get to software due the nature of software.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
