Linux-Advocacy Digest #885, Volume #27 Sun, 23 Jul 00 02:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: I had a reality check today :( ("Spud")
Re: Leninist USEFUL IDIOT denies reality, attempts a smear campaign (Loren Petrich)
Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came... (Loren Petrich)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: (NM)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chad Irby)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
The old Basics sucked under the hood as well (was Re: BASIC == Beginners language)
(Ray Chason)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts (was: If Microsoft starts renting apps)
(Clell A. Harmon)
Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Spud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 20:58:59 -0700
[snips]
"Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Doesn't spread viruses as described in
http://www.msnbc.com/msn/432208.asp ?
File not found
Our Web servers cannot find the page or file you asked for:
http://www.msnbc.com/msn/432208.asp
So no, it doesn't spread viruses as described on that page.
> But if you're talking about *mail* servers -- the "Love Bug"
replicated
> in Lookout. It spammed from Lookout. If Lookout had been properly
> designed, there would have been no virus.
Never heard of "Lookout". Perhaps you should try Outlook, from
Microsoft, which doesn't have these problems.
Example: Melissa and variants. I've received umpteen instances of
this; yet I haven't distributed a one. Similarly, with MS's
announcement of a certain Active-X HTML mail bug, I ponder it's
effectiveness; I haven't received such a mail yet, but I'm not really
worried about it, either.
About the only failing of Outlook and Outlook Express is the latter's
defaulting to a less secure mode of operation; this is perhaps a poor
decision, but let's face it - the mechanism is there to stop most such
viruses being effective. However...
Let us note how Melissa et al worked. Did they magically fire just
because you read your mail? No. They sent attachments, which the
user had to open and execute. I'm sure most folks will tell you that
executing unknown code is probably a bad idea, for safety reasons.
You know what can happen if you do this? You can spread viruses, such
as Melissa.
Now let's see... can Linux mailers get attachments? Yup. Could I
write, oh, a Perl script or some such which targetted popular mailers
under Linux to do much the same thing Melissa did? Likely. Ah, so,
the fact that Linux has scripting and has mailers that can handle
attachments means it is just as vulnerable to these things as Windows
with OE - or indeed, Windows with any other mailer that can handle
attachments.
Clue time: Windows wasn't the problem. Nor was OE. Nor was Outlook.
The problem was - and is - unsafe computing practices... and sorry,
Linux users can fall prey to that as readily as Windows users.
As far as I can tell, the only reason Windows is generally targetted
for such things, rather than Linux, is sheer volume; with > 100
million Windows boxes out there, your chances of getting such a virus
to spread are a lot greater - because chances are you will eventually
hit someone who's not well-enough versed in safe practices to avoid
it. Which is to say... Windows remains a hell of a lot more popular
that Linux, but if Linux ever changes that, then _it_ will be the
target of such attacks, using much the same mechanisms, with much the
same effects, for much the same reasons. Will you then be telling us
how pathetic Linux is, because it propagates such viruses? Or will
you finally clue in to reality - that the viruses do not represent a
failure in either Windows or OE, but in the unsafe use of the tools?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Leninist USEFUL IDIOT denies reality, attempts a smear campaign
Date: 23 Jul 2000 03:59:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>Let's see...who is more credible:
>A: A person who sits back and gobbles up the propaganda, like yourself
>or
>B: A person who does the research, and visits places himself, like me
Reversing the two would be more plausible.
>> The birch trees I have in mind are John Birch trees :-)
>Demonstrating once again that you admit that you are unable to
>even compete in this argument without resorting to slander.
Are you unable to laugh at yourself?
>Belorus is TIGHTLY allied with Russia, and they have been negotiating
>UNIFICATIONS.
Belarus maybe, but the Ukraine?
>> Communist university administrators? Mr. Kulkis, you've been
>> living in groves of birch trees for too long.
>Demonstrating once again that you admit that you are unable to
>even compete in this argument without resorting to slander.
Same to you, with your accusations of Communism.
>Explain why they impose Leftist speech codes on our campuses.
Like what do you mean?
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came...
Date: 23 Jul 2000 04:02:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> The birch trees I have in mind are John Birch trees :-)
>Are you implying that there is a birchy-man hiding under our collective
>beds?
No, that your views are childish, Red-under-the-bed conspiracy theories.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: NM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 04:24:00 GMT
Poverty is worse under any other system.
NM
Poor people have cars here (etc)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 18:10:13 GMT, MK
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Socialism in any form ALWAYS results in political and bureaucratic barriers.
> >It's only a matter of where in particular they are put. Laissez faire
> >does not have this problem -- supply follows the demand.
> >
>
> Capitalism has problems of its own. Poverty is one of them.
>
> --
> Microsoft Windows. Beyond crappy. Beyond belief.
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 04:32:33 GMT
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > [...]
> > >Because, to compete with "the browser" (primarily Netscape) which
> > >threaten[ed,s] to make the OS obselete, Microsoft have turned
> > >Windows into a delivery system for Internet Explorer.
> >
> > That is illegal.
>
> I see. It's illegal to compete with a superior product ?
No, to compete with an inferior product (Explorer as it existed when
Microsoft decided to give away, then bundle it) by tying its
distribution to that of a popular product (Windows).
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 01:11:05 -0400
Gary Hallock wrote:
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > Actually - I never ever have need for this function in BASIC which is why i
> > was unfamiliar with it so I just jotted out a brute force solution - the
> > first thing to pop to mind. I didn't sit and dwell on it or spend more than
> > a few seconds to pound out the code. Someone just said "couldn't be done in
> > VB" - and I did. That's all.
> >
> > Your version from the C version is more efficient.
>
> So I guess you have never written a program that has to send data over a
> network.
Nope... "Computer Expert" drestin never ventures outside the plantation.
>
> Gary
--
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: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: The old Basics sucked under the hood as well (was Re: BASIC == Beginners
language)
Date: 23 Jul 2000 04:24:15 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>I've used some of the old basics and they were horrendous. They encourage
>bad practices such as the use of GOTOs, and writing directly to memory.
>They're not really "structured". They are certainly not "object oriented".
If you peek under the hood of one of the old interpreted line-numbered
Basics, at least the various Microsoft implementations, you find something
about as horrible as the language itself.
1) The program area
Lines were stored as a byte to mark the length of the line in memory,
two bytes for the line number, a variable number of bytes for the code,
and a zero byte to mark the end of the line. The line text was encoded
with special non-ASCII "tokens" for each keyword.
Encoding the keywords was a clever idea as far as it went: it reduced
memory usage and allowed faster execution as the interpreter didn't have
to reparse the same keyword over and over. Unfortunately, the encoding
scheme was not standardized. PRINT might encode as 0x93 on one platform
and 0x87 on another. Furthermore, the program was saved on disk in this
encoded format. Saving a program on one computer, and loading it on
another, resulted in gibberish even if you got past the incompatible
floppy disk formats.
Worse, no effort was made to index the lines. A GOTO required a linear
search through the lines; hence the more lines a program had, the slower
it ran. This property made a bad situation worse with regard to
structure: a programmer looking for maximum performance had to avoid
using comments, and stuff as many statements as possible on each line.
Something as simple as an ordered list of (line, address) pairs would
have improved performance by allowing a GOTO to use a binary search.
Worst of all, the parsers were broken. They would match a keyword
whether the keyword was delimited or not. Naming a variable COLOR$
produced a syntax error, because the parser would match the keyword OR
embedded in COLOR. (To all users of the Queen's English: yeah, I know,
I know.) This deficiency, combined with the fact that only the first
two characters of a variable name were significant, all but forced the
use of one- and two-character variable names.
2) The list of variables
Variables were stored after the program area, in a format such that each
variable and each array element used the same number of bytes.
Unfortuately, the variables were stored in the order they were created.
Finding a variable required a linear search, just like the GOTO.
Maintaining the variables as a sorted list would have allowed a binary
search. This would have slowed an optimal garbage collector to
O(N log N), but as we'll see, the garbage collector was hardly optimal.
3) The string area and garbage collection
A program that did lots of string processing would often freeze for
several seconds for no apparent reason. This was the garbage collector
kicking in when memory was exhausted.
The strings were stored as (length, text) pairs, building up from the
end of memory. When memory was exhausted, a garbage collector would
look for unused strings. Unfortunately, the (length, text) pairs were
inadequate. The garbage collector had to search the entire list of
variables to determine whether a single string was in use, resulting in
O(N^2) running time.
4) Later improvements
In time, Microsoft fixed some of these deficiencies. Later Basics could
save programs in ASCII format (the command was SAVE "FOO.BAS",A) that
another Basic with this same feature could read correctly. GW-BASIC had
a proper parser that required keywords to be delimited; COLOR$ was thus
a legal variable name. The Commodore 128 sported an improved garbage
collector: strings were stored as (address of variable, length, text)
triplets, allowing the garbage collector to run in linear time. (With a
sorted variable list, this improvement would have made garbage
collection only O(N log N), because the variable may move between
garbage collections and an O(log N) search would be needed to find it.
This would still have been a vast improvement.)
But it was too little and too late. By the time these improvements
came, the day of line-numbered Basic was almost over.
The old Basics, then, were a perfect example of the importance of optimal
data structures. GOTO was O(N); variable retrieval was O(N); garbage
collection was O(N^2). It would not have taken much to make GOTO O(log N),
variable retrieval O(log N), and garbage collection O(N log N). Add this
to the broken parser and the nonuniform file format, and we see quite
clearly why the old Basics sucked.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 01:18:48 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8l8nv2$3pc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > >> >>> >There are vendors selling W2K solutions with 99.999% uptime - just
> > >> >>> >like the other *nix vendors.
> >
> > >> What I didn't find anywhere was any mention of "Windows" anywhere near
> > >> "99.999". But maybe I missed something? So please point me at the right
> > >> stuff!
> >
> > >Front page:
> > >Stratus ftServers: Enhancing Sofware Reliability and Availability for
> > >Windows 2000
> >
> > Yep. Not a single mention of *any* uptime percentages, let alone 99.999%.
> >
> > Come on, if you don't have anything better than that, simply admit that
> > you lied, and that you do not, in fact, have any information about anyone
> > selling 99.999% Windows solutions.
> >
> > Please tell me that isn't the case! Please tell me you have at least one
> > URL that actually mentions 99.999% and Windows together, even if it is
> > with a worthless "guarantee".
> >
> > >http://www.stratus.com/whitep/ftserver/
> > >Continue there. MS has information about this company too.
> >
> > Great. Did you *read* that white paper? Did you notice what was missing
> > from it?
>
> So, you are calling me a liar eh? And when proven dead wrong you will do
> what?
>
> Allow me go go way way past 99.999% - let's go right for 100% - yep, 100%
> hardware and software availablity and I'll point you here:
>
> http://www.stratus.com/products/nt/dhbrown.htm#_Toc464017357
>
> where it says:
> Stratus positions Melody as the "world's most reliable Windows Servers,"
> well suited for lights-out operation with features such as remote power
> on/off and remote console. Complementing the Melody hardware, Stratus will
> offer the industry's first program guaranteeing zero unplanned downtime, or
> 100% availability excluding planned downtime. The company's commitment to
> zero unplanned downtime is ambitious, considering that it must include
> outages related both to hardware and to the Windows 2000 operating system.
Notice "The company's commitment to zero unplanned downtime is
ambitious,
considering that it must include outages related ..... to the Windows
2000
operating system"
In other words...compared to any OTHER operating system, this is going
to
be a MIRACLE if it's accomplished.
Meanwhile, AS/400's have been running with ZERO DOWNTIME for years
already.
>
> Now - there it is in black and white. 100% availability for both hardware
> and the OS. I'll await your apology.
--
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: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 01:23:32 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > Actually, when I was one of those mere 20 people doing the O/S and
> > > > application support for ALL of GM, I can tell you that it wasn't
> > > > anywhere close to stressful.
> > > >
> > > > Boring is more like it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So, Aaron, you claim that GM has(had) a grand total of 20 people doing
> the
> > > "O/S and application support for ALL of GM"?
> >
> > That is the size of the entire UNIX Break/Fix team for all of GM,
> > supporint ALL flavors of Unix and ALL Unix apps.
>
> are you prepared to say that at this moment in time there are <=20 people in
> ALL of General Motors handling support for ALL flavors of Unix and ALL unix
> apps?
1. It's EDS, not GM
2. That is the size of the Break / Fix team.
(First level and 2nd level help desk)
Application roll-out is about 5 people.
Now, there are *mentors* on some sites, to assist users who are
unfamiliar
with all of the inticacies of UG, for example, but that has nothing to
do with O/S nor Application failure, so they can be disregarded.
Similarly, there are a couple of on-site techs at each facility, but
they do little more than swap keyboards, mice, spaceballs, monitors,
and arrange for hardware support engineers from Sun, HP, etc. when
there are serious failures.
> Care to put some money on this?
Considering that I worked at EDS quite recently, and was in the heart of
all these things, I *AM* an authority in this regard.
--
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: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 01:26:33 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <snip>
> > Ye gods; strings to do endianity flips? Try this one:
>
> > I'm not sure which one would be faster or is cleaner, but both would
> > beat your string handler.
>
> Ghost and everyone else - HONESTLY! I wasn't trying to win an award or make
> the singular most efficient function. I looked at it, and hammered out the
> quickest way I could think of. brute force and ugly, yep. Works, yep. Just
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, it didn't work.
Inefficient and functional failure.
And you dare call yourself a professional????
With pros like you, who needs idiots?
> had to prove the point that it could be done. THAT'S ALL! As I wrote
> elsewhere, these kind things I hate doing because of precisely this. it
> would not have matter WHAT code I wrote, someone can always comment: "oh,
> you are stupid, you could have done it this way instead." :)
>
> Anyway, yes, string for math - lame to be sure, but, I never do endian
> operations, ever. So, I just did the quickest thing I could think of. That's
> all...
keep backpedalling, moron.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clell A. Harmon)
Subject: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts (was: If Microsoft starts renting
apps)
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 05:33:26 GMT
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.fan.bill-gates,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 20:10:00 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.fan.bill-gates;
>> >> All of this discussion about Microsoft renting apps with .NET
>> >> got me to thinking...what are we facing if, in fact, Microsoft
>> >> does start renting apts???
>> >>
>> >> Microsoft Apts 2000
>> >>
>> >> WINDOW
>> >>
>> >> No apartment may ever have more than one window. Residents might
>> >> forget which window they were looking out of and get confused.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Hilarious! Where'd it come from?
>
>I wrote it.
No, really.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 01:42:53 -0400
Ray Chason wrote:
>
> Tim "Rosie" Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >SUPER RESIDENT
> >
> >Certain tasks can only be peformed by the Super Resident. The Super Resident
> >can move into and out of
> >any appartmant he want's.
>
> 1) This is *my apartment*. I *AM* the @$%# Super Resident.
>
> 2) Windoze NT also has this feature.
>
> 3) Any clueful Linux (or NT) user will do most stuff from an unprivileged
> account, the better to avoid such situations as....
>
> >TRASH
> >
> >Every Resident get's an R-M wand. Whattever the end of the wand touches is instantly
> >vaperized. It is
> >not the responsibbillaty of Red Hat Apt's if you vaperize your dog, your girlfrend,
> >or your Netscape TV.
>
> BTW, this differs from the D-E-L wand in Windoze...just how?
>
> >NEWSPAPER
> >
> >Ressidant's get the LIE-nux Inquieror. Because our printing pres doesnt' work,
> >the articall's are all
> >starecas'ed. There are no picchors in the Lie-nux Inquieror, and the text is
> >reely raggid-looking.
>
> Yeah, just like Lookout breaking your lines as it did. That's better than
> mile-long lines but it's not quite there.
>
> Now go back and RTFM for Lookout again.
It's not "Lookout"... it's "LOOKOOOOOOOOuuuuuuuuuuuuut!!!!!!"
>
> --
> --------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
> PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
> Delenda est Windoze
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
