Linux-Advocacy Digest #34, Volume #27 Mon, 12 Jun 00 01:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Eric Bennett)
Re: vote on MS split-up (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (tholenbot)
Re: Linux & Winmodem ("Rich C")
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: Time to prove it's not just words ("Keith T Williams")
Re: Time to prove it's not just words ("Keith T Williams")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:21:04 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I see that, having found it hot "out there", you have taken over the
> > tending of Chris Pott's balderdash garden. How predictable.
>
> What alleged "balderdash garden"?
The balderdash garden you admitted to having last summer when you wrote:
"Illogical, as I only grow Feldercarb in my balderdash garden."
-Chris Pott
--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: vote on MS split-up
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:07:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Smitty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Colin R. Day" wrote:
>
> > Gerald Willmann wrote:
> >
> > > CNN is conducting a poll whether MS should be split up and if yes
into how
> > > many parts. Please take a minute to vote for a good cause.
> > >
> > > -> http://cnnfn.com/poll/microsoft_breakup.html
> > >
> > > thanks, Gerald
> > >
> > > --
> >
> > Justice is not the product of opinion polls. Besides, I want
> > Microsoft destroyed by Linux, not the DOJ.
There's only one problem. Microsoft is playing with a loaded deck,
marked cards, cameras behind each of the players, and all of the
aces up their sleeves. And they've slipped mikkies in the drinks.
Moving away from the metaphores:
Microsoft has binding contracts with the top 20 OEMs that prevent
them from making any changes that would allow them to install Linux
on the same computer. Furthermore, Microsoft uses cliff tiered pricing
to force them to buy 120% of their capacity. Finally, Microsoft has
already threatened license audits for machines which did not have
Windows installed at shipment. This is what they did to IBM, and
they claimed that they were justified in doing it to protect themselves
from piracy.
Although the Judge has already judged these contracts to be illegal and
therefore null and void effective immediately, the industry is acting as
if they were valid for the next 90 days for fear that Microsoft will win
a stay of the entire verdict (meaning that the contracts could be
legally binding retroactively).
That's the loaded deck.
Second, Microsft has repeatedly exploited code developed under the BSD
license, the NCSA public license, and the other public license variants
that don't explicitly state that all enhancements must be submitted
back to the original author for possible inclusion into the standard
product. Keep in mind that Internet Explorer was based on NCSA Mosaic
which was sold to Microsoft by Spyglass under terms never formally
ratified by the developers.
That's the marked cards.
Because Linux is based on Open Source, specifically the GNU Public
License, and because it is based on published standards, there are
very few secrets. Microsoft knows what we are doing, how we are
doing it, how we operate, how we develop, and how we market.
This is the camera behind every player.
Microsoft has attempted to isolate the Linux community through a
series of nondisclosure agreements with all of the standards
committees which were a prerequisite of Microsoft's participation.
While the significance of these NDAs was minimized as a "standard
formality of no significance", Microsoft has shown it's true
intent in it's threat to sue Slash/Dot for not removing a posted
copy of the Kerberos 5 specification preceeded with a Microsoft
nondisclosure agreement. The same document was posted on Usenet.
The fact is that Microsoft has used their NDAs to exclude Linux
from PCI PnP, USB, DVDCSS, and has attempted to use it to exclude
Linux from MSCHAP logins to AOL, MCI, and Sprint dial-up connections.
They also attempted to use NDAs to protect NTFS, and are using it
to protect NTFS2. They have even been trying to protect LDAP
and CORBA!
That's the aces up the sleeves.
Microsoft has also been using their proprietary trade secret code
to commit various forms of electronic vandalism aimed at causing
unexpainable crashes of competitor products such as Netscape,
Lotus Notes, and WordPerfect. This wouldn't be the first time
(MS-DOS 6.0 and Stacker, NT 4.0 SP2 and Cyrix, NT 4.0 SP 4 and ???).
Microsoft's latest dirty tricks include "Medialess" Windows 2000
licenses guaranteed to force corporate users to avoid Linux at all
costs for fear of losing the ability to recover the hard drive
after a crash. This could be reasonable and customary if the media
is available for $10 to $15.
That's the Mikkies in the drinks.
Essentially, the "interim" remedies would be sufficent to level the
playing field a little. Only half the cards would be marked.
Only have the players would have cameras and we'd know which
ones, and only two of the aces would be left up the sleeve.
And the drinks will be too strong, but chemical free.
The interim remedies is more like Probation. If Microsoft could
play by the rules until the appeals are complete, they have a
very good chance of beating the structural remedy. On the other
hand, if they keep jerking around, acting as if the entire verdict
was a joke and that they are above the law, it will give the
prosecutors an overwhelming argument that proves that the structural
remedy is necessary.
> > Colin Day
> Hear! Hear! Crush them in the market place where they live!
But lets not bring knives to a gunfight.
> Smitty
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 90 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:21:45 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
TholenBotPro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ask Chris Pott, it's his balderdash garden.
>
> Typical incorrect illogic, laced with invective. How predictable,
> coming from you.
Liar.
"Illogical, as I only grow Feldercarb in my balderdash garden."
-Chris Pott
--
Why do you fail to understand how he can lift you in the air just by raising
his hand?
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:26:32 -0400
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8i1h23$ae9> > I know it is incompatible, but is it
> > still worthwhile running a dual Windows (for internet) and Linux
> > system - or does that kind of miss the point?
>
> I do this all the time. I run windows on either an NTFS partition
> or a Fat32 partition and Linux on an e2fs partition and create a large
> FAT partition that can be used to pass information from NT to 95 and
> Linux.
>
Why do you use an intermediate FAT partition for Win95/98? Linux supports a
"vfat" filesystem type that lets me pull files off my win98 Fat32 partitions
directly.
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:49:04 GMT
On 06/11/2000 at 06:35 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) said:
> In article <393e5525$3$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 06/06/2000 at 04:11 AM,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) said:
> >> CBS is a capitalist organization. Yes, *CAPITALIST*. So why hasn't CBS
> >> gone broke???
> >Were it just a TV network, it likely would be down the tubes by now.
> Is CBS receiving hundreds of millions of subsidy money to keep it
> going?
No, it sells far more than programming and is far more than just a
network. Of course, you are too stupid to realize that because you are
locked in the fantasy game world of Mac toys.
> >> However, the military and the police are financed in EXACTLY the same
> >> fashion, and who wants to abolish government military and police forces?
> >We do not have a national police force except on Federal property.
> However, local and state police forces are all government-run --
> by local and state governments, of course.
No, they are not. There are numerous gated communities in all parts of the US which
have their own private police forces which receive absolutely no tax money.
> > So that
> >analogy goes out the window. The military is an obligation of the
> >government, health care is not and should not be.
> Says who?
About 67% of Americans according to the latest polls. We don't want a government
bureaucracy taking over 1/7 of our economy.
> >> Furthermore, if one did not pay taxes for medicine, one would have to
> >> pay bills, so expecting automatic savings is folly.
> >It is a whole lot cheaper to pay for something yourself than to have the
> >government pay for it at an added cost of 80% or more for bureaucratic
> >overhead.
> And where did you get that number from?
The cost of running Medical in California according to several recent news reports.
California is paying nearly twice what the care they pay for costs in the private
sector. There are several investigations currently underway.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 04:49:06 GMT
On 06/11/2000 at 06:46 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) said:
> > > > I'll just refer you to 60 minutes, who showed it to *me*. > > Ah, the
> >National Enquirer of TV. If you watch that tripe, you believe > >
> >anything. CBS is a shill for all so-called liberal causes.
> However, CBS isn't going broke as a result. Think of that.
You obviously have no familiarity with what is happening to TV networks in
the US. They are all losing viewership, revenue, cutting back, etc. thanks
to the emergence of new competition.
> >> I might have given that statement some credit if it wasn't for the way
> >> you use the word "liberal" - as if it was a bad thing.
> >It most assuredly is in the way it is used in the US. Liberal here means
> >an all-controlling, big brother goverment which attempts to control every
> >action of every citizen except the elite ruling class.
> More precisely, it is Mr. Germer's favorite content-free insult.
I only insult assholes who first insult the intelligence of everyone else.
You certainly qualify.
> This seems to me projection of every unpleasant experience Mr. Germer
> has had in the world of Big Business.
I have been involved with Big Business in many ways over the past 40+
years. With a couple of exceptions, they have all been positive
experiences. But you being totally unfamiliar with real computers and the
real world have no way of evaluating anything to to with anything other
than fellow Mac supporters who are about as meaningful as an athletic
supporter in a woman's closet.
> >> You seem to have committed the typical US right-winger fallacy of
> >> equating socialism with communism.
> >You have just repeated the propaganda of the elitist liberals. Just
> >because one believes in the right of a citizen to own his own property,
> >make his own decisions, enjoy freedom of choice in all he or she does does
> >not make one a 'right winger'.
> However, has anyone ever created a fully-functional
> anarcho-capitalist utopia anywhere?
I never advocated such a thing. I have not use for the right wingers ala
Pat Buchanan. But even they are more acceptable than the all-controlling
liberal nutcases of the left which most assuredly does include that
airhead wannabe President Algore.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Keith T Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:58:27 -0400
"Yannick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Dcy05.1124$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Keith T Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
> EVK%4.917$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Yannick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8hnsiv$ldv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > [Big snip, cause this is getting too long, look at the previous message]
> >
> > > > sure that
> > > > > I will keep this ownership, and therefore keep control on my
> > > project.
> > > > > If he wants to deny access to me, then yes, he can take ownership
> > > and
> > > > remove my
> > > > > permissions.
> > > > > If I belong to groups that have permission to access the files
> > > > nevertheless, then he can
> > > > > explicitly
> > > > > deny the access for me, overriding granted access.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yannick.
> > > > >
> > > > If you are in a place where this can happen, then undoubtably you DO
> > > NOT own
> > > > the
> > > > files, the company you work for owns the files, and should they for
> > > some
> > > > reason decide
> > > > that the sysadmin should change the ownership/access to the files,
> > > then he
> > > > should be able to.
> > > >
> > > > Keith. (sysadmin) Williams
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I'm afraid I don't understand your point here, could you rephrase it,
> > > please ?
> > >
> > The company you work for owns the data, not you.
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
>
> Of course. But NT security ownership is closer to the notion of who is
responsible
> for those files towards the company. And, as I said earlier, the sysadmin
can take control
> of the files at any moment, even for files he doesn't own hand has not
been granted direct
> access to. Only it requires him to take ownership of the files, maybe for
the two
> following reasons :
> 1. Remininding him he's not responsible for those files (he's responsible
for the systems
> and
> its apps, not for the data processed by them, except in keeping the data
safe (backup
> policies)).
> 2. Acknowledging this taking of ownership because he cannot give the
ownership back
> himself, he has
> to ask the former owner to.
>
> Yannick.
>
hoho, don't tell them that at my company.. it's on "my" equipment so I am
responsible
for their safety and availability although the chances are VERY good that I
have never heard
of the files before. As well, I have often taken ownership of files, and I
have yet to ask a user
to take ownership back. They don't care who owns them as long as they can
access them.
Keith.
>
------------------------------
From: "Keith T Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 01:00:02 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Quoting Yannick from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 21:14:11
> >Keith T Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message
:
> [...]
> >Of course. But NT security ownership is closer to the notion of who is
responsible
> >for those files towards the company. And, as I said earlier, the sysadmin
can take control
> >of the files at any moment, even for files he doesn't own hand has not
been granted direct
> >access to. Only it requires him to take ownership of the files, maybe for
the two
> >following reasons :
> >1. Remininding him he's not responsible for those files (he's responsible
for the systems
> >and its apps, not for the data processed by them, except in keeping the
data safe (backup
> >policies)).
> >2. Acknowledging this taking of ownership because he cannot give the
ownership back
> >himself, he has to ask the former owner to.
>
> Yet Another Silly Idea from Microsoft that sounds good to people who
> don't actually have to (nor have the time to) implement such a silly
> idea for whatever pie-in-the-sky fantasy about software functionality,
> which might sound like a good idea but falls apart in the real world,
> that they have in mind.
>
> Having the operating system attempt to implement a security model based
> on the notion of who "is responsible to the company" is relatively
> ludicrous, given the typical implementation of software in a modern
> company. Note 1: the sysadmin is responsible to the company for all
> files on a system, as that is what a sysadmin is; no-one but the
> sysadmin is responsible for any files but end-user generated documents.
> Note 2: application of this Silly Idea, on the rare occasion it is
> feasible in real life, is not hampered by not gratuitously bolting it on
> to the bog-standard OS.
>
Sorry Max, but you have me confused on this one.
Keith.
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> Manager of Research & Educational Services
> Managed Services
> ELTRAX Technology Services Group
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
> my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
> applicable licensing agreement]-
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
