Linux-Advocacy Digest #863, Volume #27 Fri, 21 Jul 00 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: MS Windows(tm) is prerequisite for Linux on-line seminar ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: No win situation for Linux market ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (phil hunt)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (phil hunt)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS Windows(tm) is prerequisite for Linux on-line seminar
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:44:26 -0400
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > Which proves that an idiot with a computer is still an idiot.
>
> <rant>
> It's truly amazing when you think about it. With all the advances in
> technology, and all the huge medical advances we have accomplished over
> the last couple of centuries, we still haven't found a way to cure
> stupidity. And the truly scary part about it is that as we gain more
The problem is, intelligence, or at least intellectual potential,
is governed by genetics...and we are SUBSIDIZING the unrestricted
reproduction of the most unintelligent AT THE EXPENSE OF THE
INTELLIGENT via the welfare system.
END WELFARE NOW!
> "knowledge" about the universe around us the average human being is
> becoming more and more stupid. Common sense is out (people use gasoline
Before modern medicine, these idiots usually figured out a way
to die by the age of 10 or so.
> as a solvent, and then light a lighter to see if they 'got it all off',
> they don't realize gasoline is flammable), intelligence is based on book
> knowledge (you can show people all the books and TV shows in the world
> on farming, yet they still believe that 'meat' comes from some magical
> factory), people are rated with "standardized" tests, instead of on the
Actually, modern standardized tests are QUITE accurate (as long as
you aren't handing out "gimme" points for having a particular skin
tone.)
> knowledge they do posses (MCSE's, and now Red Hat Certified Engineers?
The problem isn't so much the test, as the most intelligent of those
who are have gone through the course will tend to do the best...
the problem is that job-specific tests are actuall the WORST
indicators of long-term ability to succeed in a job....unfortunately,
the Supreme Court outlawed generic IQ tests in favor of "job-relevant"
tests, which favor those who have "experience" in the job already,
which tells you who will do the best the first week on the job,
but which are extremely poor predictors as to who will do the best
on the job 5 years from now....for THAT, a general IQ test is a MUCH
more reliable predictor.
Strangely enough, the ONLY institution allowed to administer general
IQ test for hiring is.... the US GOVERNMENT -- specifically, the
uniformed services... (military and law enforcement).
> Oh please), and stupidity is rewarded as long as you have the right
> level of luck. You don't need to know things, you just need to prove
> you can memorize things. Of course, applying those memorized things to
> the real world isn't something that is necissary. After all, once
> you've proven you 'know' it, you already have that cushy job. Why
> bother actually doing something with your knowledge?
>
> I pity my children for the world they will grow up in. Homogenized,
> stupid, semi-literate, and single-minded individuals with no concept of
> "reality" as it existed such a short time ago. Take away the
> electricity for 24 hours and you have riots. Why? Because people are
> too stupid to realize that we survived without it for thousands of
> years. They can survive without it for a few days can't they? Of
> course not, they might be forced to think. Or even worse, they might
> have to *gasp* work at something. At least I had the benifit of a few
> years on a farm. At least I know how some of nature exists. Will my
> children? I don't know.
> </rant>
What we need is a natural disaster on a large enough scale that the
terminally stupid will be absolutely too befuddled to survive.
Certain dictators gave eugenics a bad name. These days, we run
the exact opposite of eugenics...PROMOTING the reproduction of the
unfit through AFDC, WIC, Section 8 housing, etc.
>
> Sorry, I guess I'm feeling a little philosophical today. :(
Read "The Bell Curve", and you'll understand why, in fact, your
feelings are entirely consistant with reality.
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Nathaniel Jay Lee
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No win situation for Linux market
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:47:04 -0400
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 23:53:06 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >they are already relying on Linux, and the admins trust it MUCH
> >more than any version of windows. Give them a big-league CAD
> >platform (CATIA, UniGraphics, or SDRC I-Deas), and they'll jump
>
> I want:
>
> Pro Engineer
That's already ported to Unix, so it shouldn't be hard.
> AutoCad
LoseWare... it'll take a while.
> Xylinx Foundation
Never heard of it.
Write to the manufacturers, and tell them that you are willing to
pay money for Linux ports of these products, and that, in fact, you
might even be willing to pay MORE per seat for these products because
you get more productivity per employee when they are working on a
Unix/Linux platform than you do with windows.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:48:54 -0400
KLH wrote:
>
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:B31e5.3256$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Adam:
> >
> > I wonder - has ANY naval ship EVER had ANY malfuction of a computer system
> > that was running an OS other than Windows that caused it to have an
> > equivelent type of failure (not necessarily "lost control of it's
> propulsion
> > system" but equal in criticality).
> >
> > Considering the US and Soviet militaries rely far more on the Unix
> operating
> > system than any other OS - does anyone suggest that Unix has NEVER EVER
> > failed not a single time to crash and take the system down around it?
>
> Until this thread, I never thought the military used conventional PCs,
> especially at sea. I wonder, with nuclear powered ships, how the effect of
> radiation would have on a computer's processor.
It's simple.. you put the whole thing inside a battle-worthy enclosure
with mil-spec connectors.
>
> >
> > Because this is one incident. True or not. It's one. Just one. Of a
> version
> > of NT that has since been patched and wholesale upgraded. We know the navy
> > continues to use NT and to date not a single other malfunction has occured
> > (and been reported as this one has so often been) related to NT or
> Windows.
>
> You know, if we were talking about a web server crashing or an office work
> station crashing, one incident wouldn't matter much. But in this situation,
> one insident is far too much.
>
> But I would wonder, how often does the military use conventional PCs and, if
> so, what OSs do they use?
>
> >
> > So, does Unix share this success record? A SINGLE failure *during testing*
>
> Dude, all computers crash.
>
> >
> > db
> >
> >
>
> Best Regards,
> Kevin Holmes
> "extrasolar"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:50:42 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> KLH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:Ct1e5.124187$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:B31e5.3256$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Adam:
> > >
> > Until this thread, I never thought the military used conventional PCs,
> > especially at sea. I wonder, with nuclear powered ships, how the effect of
> > radiation would have on a computer's processor.
>
> Even if they are using to PC style computers, I hope they are using milspec
> semiconductors and the boxes are radiation hardend. Expecially when we
> consider the use of EMP weapons.
Most military computers and communications equipment are completely
encased in metal, and all communications wires (and often-times, even
power cables) are fully shielded, precisely for these reasons.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:06:14 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8l79k2$g0c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8l6kkj$dnf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8l67k0$k1e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> >
> > There was no such thing. There was a report of a crash induced
somewhere
> in
> > a system that just happened to have NT as its OS.
>
> From http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~steve/Spiro/stories/node75.html
And, like all the other reports, does not say that the OS crashed.
>
> -------------
> The Navy's Smart Ship technology is being considered a success, because it
> has resulted in reduced manpower, workloads, maintenance and costs for
> sailors aboard the Aegis missile cruiser USS Yorktown. However, in
> September, 1997, the Yorktown suffered a systems failure during maneuvers
> off the coast of Cape Charles, VA., apparently as a result of the failure
to
> prevent a divide by zero in a Windows NT application. The zero seems to
have
> been an erroneous data item that was manually entered. Atlantic Fleet
> officials said the ship was dead in the water for about 2 hours and 45
> minutes. A previous loss of propulsion occurred on 2 May 1997, also due to
> software. Other system collapses are also indicated.
>
> The "Smart Ship" initiative being piloted aboard the Yorktown is only part
> of a general migration to NT; US naval bases are currently piloting "Smart
> Base". The aim is to put in place a seamless service-wide operating
> environment. (Source: *Government Computer News*, 20 Apr 1998).
>
> The official account of the fault, by Vice Admiral Henry Giffin, was
quoted
> as follows:
>
> The Yorktown lost control of its propulsion system because its computers
> were unable to divide by the number zero ... The Yorktown's Standard
> Monitoring Control System administrator entered zero into the data field
for
> the Remote Data Base Manager program. That caused the database to overflow
> and crash all LAN consoles and miniature remote terminal units. The
program
> administrators are trained to bypass a bad data field and change the value
> if such a problem occurs again.
>
> ---------------
>
> Instead of "bypass a bad data field and change the value if such a problem
> occurs again" what ever happened to data validation by the data entry
> programs? The OS for such a critical system should be fault tollerant and
> the arcitecture of the network should have isolated and redundant systems.
> A suicidal sabotour could bring down the ship in combat by entering
invalid
> data?
>
> Network architecture that is valid for a business environment is of no
vaule
> in combat situations. Nasty things can happen to a network in the middle
of
> combat.
>
> From the televised report of the incident, the invalid data was entered,
the
> database manager of a non-critical system died and took the OS with it.
> That computer was also some more important processes and the error took
down
> the rest of the network.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 22 Jul 2000 00:53:01 GMT
Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Drestin Black wrote:
: >
: > why is it that VB being windows specific is a problem?
: >
: > how many people write applications with portability as their first concern?
: Any decent programmer. You never know when a program may have to be moved to
: another platform.
Traditionally, most UNIX programmers do take up a project with
portability/POSIX compliance in mind. But most Windows programmers
do not concern themselves with anything outside of Win32, because
in most cases, they do not need to.
8<SNIP>8
--
.-----.
|[ ] | Stephen Edwards | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| = :| "I'm too polite to use that word, so I'll just say,
| | 'bite me, you baboon-faced ass-scratcher.'"
|_..._| --SEGA's Seaman on the "F" word.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:52:43 -0400
abraxas wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Adam:
> >
> > I wonder - has ANY naval ship EVER had ANY malfuction of a computer system
> > that was running an OS other than Windows that caused it to have an
> > equivelent type of failure (not necessarily "lost control of it's propulsion
> > system" but equal in criticality).
> >
>
> AFAIK, not by internal catastrophe (physical damage). The military (including
> the navy) employes incredibly redudant systems, even going as far as FOUR
> HUNDRED LEVELS for some types of communications equipment on some vessels.
>
> No matter how bad windows is, it probably wont be able to break a ship
> completely. I doubt they have less than 100 hot spares for every last
> windows install on the boat, just like they would with any other operating
> system.
Not to mention multiple RAID arrays (like EMC equipment), physically
seperated, on any ship that is deemed "battle-worthy"
>
> -----yttrx
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 22 Jul 2000 00:59:50 GMT
Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
: >
: > Tim Kelley wrote:
: > > Well I don't particularly like the government or the military so
: > > I don't care. Actually it's pretty funny.
: >
: > Get back to us the next time there's a national emergency in your
: > area, and you want people who are willing to ignore the danger to
: > rescue your sorry ass.
: Think about when the last time there was a national emergency "in
: your area".
: What is the US military really used for Aaron?
Testing Microsoft products, what else? :-)
: "National emergencies" of US propped up dictatorships.
: "Economic emergencies" of multi-national corporations.
: "Moral emergencies" against it's own population (the drug war in
: case you were too dull to figure that out).
Actually, the military's intended use is to kill people and break things.
But I agree, that much of these "operations" lately stink of alternate
purposes (please, don't confuse me with Mark S. Bilk, just because I said
that, folks). *sigh* I can't wait until the day where we don't have a
democrat in the White House anymore.
Go GWB! :-)
8<SNIP>8
--
.-----.
|[ ] | Stephen Edwards | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| = :| "I'm too polite to use that word, so I'll just say,
| | 'bite me, you baboon-faced ass-scratcher.'"
|_..._| --SEGA's Seaman on the "F" word.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil hunt)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:17:41 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 21 Jul 2000 12:07:01 +0100, Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> No I disagree. If lots of commands used XML, then you could make
> >> a nice standard API for handling it. One shared library is all it
> >> would need.
>
> Phil> Yes, you could have a standard parser. And then on top of
> Phil> this, you would have to have another parser for each
> Phil> DTD. Consider this Python data structure: (6,"hello",-4.3)
>
> You would only need one parser. You would need many DTD's
>(at least if you wanted to validate the output. Most of the time that
>would not be necessary).
I was thinking in terms of calling the code that understands a particular DTD
a parser; equally, you could just as well say it isn't one.
> Phil> This could be coded in XML as:
> Phil> <array><int>6</int><string>hello</string><float>-4.3</float></array>
> Phil> or as:
> Phil> <list><value>6</value><value>"hello"</value><value>-4.3</value></list>
> Phil> or in many other ways.
>
> Yes. The point is that the requirement for a DTD would be a
>formal specification for the output of the program, in a way which was
>easily parsable. Well its certainly true that the author of a program
>could change the output every time they re-wrote it they would not be
>that likely to. And if they did the DTD would have to change.
That's a good thing about DTDs I hadn't thought of: they force the developer
to explicitly state what the file format is, in a way that can be mechanically
checked.
> Phil> Perhaps, perhaps not. If they were the same, they'd probalby
> Phil> be embedded in different levels, eg:
>
> Phil> <ps> <process> <pid>
>
> Phil> or:
>
> Phil> <ps> <user> <process-group> <process> <process-static-info>
> Phil> <pid>
>
>
> Again this would be made easier because any changes would be
>readily apparent (many of the parsers that I have written depend on
>odd parts of the document. For instance I wrote a BLAST parser that
>identified the start of the meat, by being three lines after the
>appearance of the name of one of the authors in the reference that
>they quote. Which obviously broke when they bought out the new
>version.
>
> In the example you give the PID is still contained as a
>sub-element of process, so the chances are it should all still work.
It could do, especially if the software was written to allow for
graceful degradation.
> Phil> I don't doubt it.
>
> Phil> The solution to this is well-defined file formats that don't
> Phil> change. Arranging for this is a sociological problem, not a
> Phil> technical one, and I don't think a technical fix will solve it
> Phil> very well.
>
> A solution based on things not changing is I think asking
>for trouble. Things do change, and always will. You ask for a
>"well-defined file format". Yes I agree. But defined how? By looking
>at the previous versions of the program? Or by having something like a
>DTD which defines the format accurately and machine readably?
Sometimes it's good to impose a structure like a DTD on people who would
otherwise be sloppy, yes.
--
***** Phil Hunt *****
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil hunt)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:50:25 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 21 Jul 2000 16:58:35 +0100, Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Phil> XML is verbose, yes.
>
> Phil> IMO that's a big problem with it.
>
> I don't see it as a problem just a compromise. I have a 20G
>hard drive in my machine. Size is not such an issue, and I would
>gladly trade it for data security, and software stability.
>
> Phil> XML is useful for some things, but it's also overhyped.
>
> It is my own feeling that pretty much everything in this
>industry is over-hyped. Indeed the industry itself is over-hyped. I
>mean seriously have computers actually made people happier?
Seriously, I doubt it.
I also seriously doubt whether agriculture, the wheel, writing, antibiotics,
the motor car, or any other technology made people happier.
Some people, e.g. Ted Kaczynsky(sp?), would agree with this.
--
***** Phil Hunt *****
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 22 Jul 2000 01:04:59 GMT
Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
8<SNIP>8
: And if you don't like all the good things the Government is doing for
: you, you can petition it with your grievences. You can also assemble
LOL!@# How about wonderful things like multiple-taxing of incomes...
should I be thankful for that too? How about politicians who care more
about getting pussy and money over helping their nation? Should I get all
glassy-eyed, and praise them as well?
Perry, you are quite naive.
8<SNIP>8
--
.-----.
|[ ] | Stephen Edwards | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| = :| "I'm too polite to use that word, so I'll just say,
| | 'bite me, you baboon-faced ass-scratcher.'"
|_..._| --SEGA's Seaman on the "F" word.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 22 Jul 2000 01:07:31 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: of a choice. Call me paranoid, but that's what I see.
You see well. Welcome to the bretheren...
[*Stephen attempts to stick Nathaniel with a hot branding iron...]
*GRIN* j/k
--
.-----.
|[ ] | Stephen Edwards | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| = :| "I'm too polite to use that word, so I'll just say,
| | 'bite me, you baboon-faced ass-scratcher.'"
|_..._| --SEGA's Seaman on the "F" word.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
