Linux-Advocacy Digest #146, Volume #28 Tue, 1 Aug 00 03:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Mike Byrns")
Re: A funny thing about Windoze networking (if you can really call it (Nico Coetzee)
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (Loren Petrich)
Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came... (Loren Petrich)
Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came... (Loren Petrich)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Loren Petrich)
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Loren Petrich)
Re: Windoze is physically destroying my hand! (was Re: Linux [..] (Ian Pulsford)
Re: A funny thing about Windoze networking (if you can really call it that). ("Erik
Funkenbusch")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Perry Pip)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Perry Pip)
Re: Linux, easy to use?
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Perry Pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:06:16 -0500
"petilon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jun Nolasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jun Nolasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > So, what's new? I personally know that Oracle does the
> >> > same thing in the RDBMS arena.
> >>
> >> And why should anyone believe you? Provide a link.
> >
> > Now that is a problem. As this was a contract bid,
> > obviously there will be no such link.
> >
> > But, why don't you drop by at:
> >
> > 220 East 42nd Street, 18th Floor
> > New York, NY
>
> Who lives at this address and what are you saying Oracle did?
Perhaps Mr. Nolasco's business? One of the premier ISPs in the NYC area?
They use NT and 2000! If I know your nix jihad you'll cower from the real
world and not visit face to face. And maybe because you are too poor :-)
That's what we Microsoft businessmen have in spades -- personality, and cash
:-)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:07:47 +0200
From: Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: A funny thing about Windoze networking (if you can really call it
>
Another strange thing equally amazing: Create an empty Word Document. Logic
says it must be 0 bytes, right? WRONG! 10.5 KB!
So, 100 users creating 1 empty Word Document everyday - roughly equals 267.6MB
of wasted space per year ((365-104{weekend-days})*100*10.5).
WOW!
Now start back-ups and you have, after one year, an extra 270MB of trash
waisting Tape space and Bandwidth.
Now that is how you manage TCO!
Cheers,
Nico.
--
==============
The following signature was created automatically under Linux:
.
Americans' greatest fear is that America will turn out to have been a
phenomenon, not a civilization.
-- Shirley Hazzard, "Transit of Venus"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:12:51 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> > > Fuck no, that ain't a life. Do you live in some sort of Escape from New
>> > > York nihilistic fantasy?
>> > Dependancy is for the weak and the stupied.
>> So you rather spill your guts while everyone laughs than depend on them
>> helping you.
>Is it necessary to whine to your neighbors?
>A) yes
>B) NO
However, what you call "whining to your neighbors" can get
assistance for you and keep you alive and possibly even restore your
health. And you can continue administering Yoonicks systems or speculating
about Communist conspiracies or whatever strikes your fancy.
>> Human 100%, so weaker than many animals, more stupid than many
>> people. Now, if I don't mind others depending on me, what does that
>> make me, in your opinion?
>How long have you been terrorized by the fear of failure?
I can't speak for him, but I don't have such a fear.
>Did you know...that where there is no "safety net", such fear
>inspires people to go on to GREAT achievement.
In the dreams of a chest-thumping Randroid.
In the real world, however, in the world that all of us wake up
in, making failure less dangerous is generally considered a Good Thing.
Safety precautions and safety devices are generally considered good
investments. In the software world, it's considered good design to have a
text editor warn if one really wants to quit editing a document if one
has changed that document without saving those changes. However, on
Kulkis principles, that is a big no-no. But Mr. Kulkis is silent about that.
Also, Linux's real-OS features may be interpreted as violations
of Kulkis principles, because if a program is kept from hogging the CPU
or trampling on other software, the result is keeping failure from being
dangerous.
So Linux, by Kulkis principles is bad, and DOS (for example) is good.
--
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: 1 Aug 2000 06:17:25 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:34:14 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> And do you *want* it to be easier to buy elections?
>>The only "election buying" is the Democrats and all of their "if you
>>vote for me, I'll make sure the taxpayers write a BIG WELFARE CHECK
>>for you....."
Baloney. There aren't that many welfare recipients, and they do
not vote in large numbers. Social Security and Medicare, however, do have
big constituencies, which is why the Republicans profess their undying
love for SS and MC.
And I love it when George W. Bush promises tax credits for
low-income housing -- and how the right-wingers turn silent about that.
>Not only that -- Democrats receive big donations from military-industrial
>sector. MI spends lots of taxpayers money, and Democrats like big
>spending and "creating" jobs that way (that's really a net loss when
>looking at whole economy, but that's different story). E.g. last
>year large donations to Democrats have been made by Martin Marietta.
The Republicans, however, receive even *more* such money, which
would make them more wicked than the Democrats.
--
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,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came...
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:18:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 26 Jul 2000 07:47:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote:
>>There's one thing that the laissez-faire Capitalists forget
>>when they claim that the laws of the Holy Market control
>>everything:
>>The laws of physics.
>>What happens when it takes more energy to explore, drill,
>>and pump a barrel of oil out of the ground than the energy
>>yielded when that barrel of oil is burned?
>Other sources of energy become economic. Or nuclear energy is used (yes, I know
>the hysteria, but it's not impossible to overcome). Or fusion happens:
However, alternatives simply do not get switched on
simultaneously. Mr. MK can prove me wrong by developing alternatives that
easily undersell oil, but he has chosen not to do so.
--
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:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:26:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> >Are you alleging that the Communists do not hold over 90% of the
>> >seats in the Russian Duma?
>> I wonder what Mr. Kulkis's criterion is for determining who's a
>> Communist; is it anyone who does not want the restoration of the Tsar?
>For the purposes of the above statement, all members of the duma
>whose official party affiliation is the Russian Communist Party
OK, here are the figures I found:
Communist Party: 113
Unity: 95
Fatherland All-Russia Alliance: 46
Union of Right-Wing Forces: 29
Yabloko bloc: 20
Zhirinovsky bloc: 17
Total of 441
So the Communist Party occupies only 1/4 of the Duma's seats
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 02:55:48 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> >> > > Fuck no, that ain't a life. Do you live in some sort of Escape from New
> >> > > York nihilistic fantasy?
> >> > Dependancy is for the weak and the stupied.
> >> So you rather spill your guts while everyone laughs than depend on them
> >> helping you.
> >Is it necessary to whine to your neighbors?
> >A) yes
> >B) NO
>
> However, what you call "whining to your neighbors" can get
> assistance for you and keep you alive and possibly even restore your
> health. And you can continue administering Yoonicks systems or speculating
> about Communist conspiracies or whatever strikes your fancy.
Of course, confirmed fellow-travellers like yourself will deny
the existance of Communist influence, despite the fact that they
are still in control of all but a handful of the formere Warsaw
Pact countries.
>
> >> Human 100%, so weaker than many animals, more stupid than many
> >> people. Now, if I don't mind others depending on me, what does that
> >> make me, in your opinion?
> >How long have you been terrorized by the fear of failure?
>
> I can't speak for him, but I don't have such a fear.
>
> >Did you know...that where there is no "safety net", such fear
> >inspires people to go on to GREAT achievement.
>
> In the dreams of a chest-thumping Randroid.
What does the Rand Corporation have to do with this?
>
> In the real world, however, in the world that all of us wake up
> in, making failure less dangerous is generally considered a Good Thing.
Only for weaklings like yourself, fat boy.
> Safety precautions and safety devices are generally considered good
> investments.
That's now what we're talking about.
> In the software world, it's considered good design to have a
> text editor warn if one really wants to quit editing a document if one
> has changed that document without saving those changes. However, on
> Kulkis principles, that is a big no-no. But Mr. Kulkis is silent about that.
>
> Also, Linux's real-OS features may be interpreted as violations
> of Kulkis principles, because if a program is kept from hogging the CPU
> or trampling on other software, the result is keeping failure from being
> dangerous.
Bad programs are allowed to die.
Bad protocals are allowed to whither on the vine.
Misbehaving processes (such as those that attempt to access memory
outside of their process space without permission) are summarily
executed by the operating system.
>
> So Linux, by Kulkis principles is bad, and DOS (for example) is good.
You really are a moron, aren't you.
>
> --
> Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
> My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.flame.right-wing-conservatives,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:34:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 26 Jul 2000 05:34:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
>>>They both agreed to it because it made them more money than a non-exclusive
>>>contract would have.
>> And how is that supposed to be the case? BE SPECIFIC.
>By reduction of cost leading to greater turnover. Have you
>ever analyzed supply and demand curves?
Non-answer.
>> That's like saying that paying taxes is 100% voluntary because
>Repeating the same fallacy over and over again doesn't make it true,
>Goebbels.
Same to you.
>>if
>>one does not like paying taxes, one can move elsewhere.
>On one area, one has to pay tax. On the same PC platform, one DOES NOT
>have to pay for Windows. Yes, SOME manufactures sell machines only
>with Windows, but NOT ALL OF THEM. Therefore, it's not like tax. Tax
>is inevitable financial burden. ...
Demonstrably false. Simply build yourself a floating city in
international waters and declare it a sovereign nation.
>>Such as to some
>>floating city in international waters (none exist at the moment,
>Scuze me? And what Sealand is?
Yes, and it can hardly be called a city. I notice that MK has not
moved there.
>And there can be more of them. For now, there are enough
>tax havens on natural land. Want to see something that does
>not have to be far from libertarian laissez faire? Visit
>Cayman Islands, 1 hour of flight from Miami. The microscopic
>govt is paid by... post stamps.
A tiny, poor place. Sheesh. I notice that MK has not moved there.
>>but there
>>are plans to build such cities, usually by those wanting to build
>>libertarian utopias).
>Utopia is not an option under any circumstances, you fucking
>hypocrite. You have been explained that, fucking hypocrite,
>but keep repeating your lies in Goebbels' manner, you fucking
>hypocrite.
Except, of course, for capitalist utopia.
>But you snip and snip every sensible argument not to have
>to progress the debate and have your lies exposed, you fucking
>hypocrite, so you could only repeat your lies again and again,
>you fucking hypocrite.
Weenie.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:30:39 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze is physically destroying my hand! (was Re: Linux [..]
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : Fscking mouse!
>
> I have the solution to your problem: stop fscking your mouse.
> --
But I love it so. I'll give M$ 1 point out of 1,000,000 they make
half-decent mice. Maybe the DOJ should have ruled them out of software
completely, they must make a little money out of peripherals after all.
IanP
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: A funny thing about Windoze networking (if you can really call it that).
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:05:16 -0500
"Nico Coetzee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Another strange thing equally amazing: Create an empty Word Document.
Logic
> says it must be 0 bytes, right? WRONG! 10.5 KB!
Why would logic say that? A word document is an OLE compound structured
storage file. This allows multiple "streams" of data to be saved in a word
document (such as versioning information for instance). This flexibility
comes at the price of a certain amount of metadata, much like a filesystem
on a hard drive has metadata which controls it's overall format.
For all intents and purposes, OLE structured storage is a filesystem within
a filesystem.
> So, 100 users creating 1 empty Word Document everyday - roughly equals
267.6MB
> of wasted space per year ((365-104{weekend-days})*100*10.5).
Why do you have 100 users creating empty word documents every day and
storing them on your server? Perhaps you should educate them not to do
that. While you're at it, you might want to educate them about not creating
unique copies of their databases every day as well, or not deleting all
their documents, since clearly such users are brain dead.
> WOW!
>
> Now start back-ups and you have, after one year, an extra 270MB of trash
> waisting Tape space and Bandwidth.
Ever heard of compression? Even in the unlikely situation that you
describe, empty documents compress down to a very small size.
> Now that is how you manage TCO!
Yes, hire stupid people that have nothing better to do all day but create
empty documents.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:57:07 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:09:51 -0400,
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Perry Pip wrote:
>
>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Originally chartered by the Government in 1864, and given a 10 million
>> >> acre land grant, it took nearly 30 years to fund and went thru several
>> >> bankruptcies.
>> >>
>> >> Perry
>> >
>> > The Burlington Northern was formed in 1979 primarily by the combination
>> >of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy and the Great Northern railroads.
>> >There may have been additional smaller roads included (anyone?).
>> > If there was a BN of 1864, is definitely not the BN of today (and
>> >anyway, today it's the BNSF).
>> >--
>>
>> The specific railroad we are discussing in this thread is the
>> transcontinental route from the Midwest to Seattle. This was built by
>> the Northern Pacific Railroad Company which was chartered in 1864. It
>> was later merged with Chicago, Burlington & Quincy.
>> See http://www.bnsf.com/about_bnsf/html/history.html
^^^^ ^^^^^^^
>> Perry
>
>No, it was the Great Northern.
>
The Northern Pacific was the *first* transcontinental to the Seatle
area and was eventually merged with Burlington. The Great Northern,
which was also transcontinental, also eventually merged with
Burlington was built years later. Hence it benifitted from the lessens
learned of the previous transcontinental railroads, and the fact that
the areas were already more ecomically developed because of the first
Seattle railroad. It's always alot easier to be second than it is to
be first when you are talking about feats of engineering. And in the
case of transcontinentals, Great Northern was more like fifth. If you
are basing your argument on the Great Northern, then your are missing
the fact the I am talking about investing in new technologies, not
general economic development. It's when something has never been done
before when up front costs are the highest, and when private investors
are the most afraid.
Perry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:57:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:11:16 -0400,
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Perry Pip wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:06:45 -0700,
>> Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Yet it was a transcontinental railroad, built with private funds,
>> >for purely pecuniary goals.
>> >
>>
>> Originally chartered by the Government in 1864, and given a 10 million
>> acre land grant, it took nearly 30 years to fund and went thru several
>> bankruptcies.
>
>Not the Great Northern.
>
I'm not talking the Great Northern. I'm talking the Northern Pacific,
which was the first transcontinental to the Seatle area and was
eventually acquired by Burlington. Look at the history page from
Burlington's web site http://www.bnsf.com/about_bnsf/html/history.html
under the section Northern Pacific. The Great Northern was started
years after the NP. It's always easier to be second than it is to be
first...you get to learn from the other guys mistakes. The hugest
investment is when you do it first. And when it's never been done
before is when investors are afraid of it.
Perry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 1 Aug 2000 03:04:17 -0400
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Pete Goodwin escribió:
>> > >
>> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bart Oldeman) wrote in
>> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > >
>>
>> > You are confusing the shell with the command names. The command
>> > names were designed to be short, though.
>>
>> Among other reasons the early unix filesystems were not able to handle
>> filenames as long as the new ones can.
>
>Version 7, circa 1978. Long filenames were implemented in both
>System III, circa 1980 and the first versions of BSD, circa 1979.
System V's idea of "long filenames" was 14 characters (according to
the SYSV_NAMELEN constant in /usr/include/linux/sysv_fs.h on any
Linux system), while UFS and EXT2-fs support file names up to 255
characters, though this had nothing to do with the length of Unix
command names. The reason old Unix command names were made to be
short was because users had to type them through hard copy terminals
connected at 300 BPS. There was a big difference between having to
type "list" (or "LIST" if you were on one of those terminals that
only supported capital letters) and only having to type "ls".
--
Microsoft. How do you want to lose your data today?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 1 Aug 2000 06:59:40 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:05:35 -0400,
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Perry Pip wrote:
>
>
>> >>
>> >
>> >I was criticizing the implicit claim that government officials, on
>> >average, have more/better foresight.
>>
>> And I don't see where I am making such an implicit claim. When you
>> compare foresight of business to foresight of Goverment you are
>> comparing apples to oranges, becuase the priorities are totally
>> different. When company ABC considers developing product XYZ, they do
>> an economic analysis. When they determine that the upfront R&D cost is
>> so high it could be twenty years or more before they break even they
>> shelve it. In contrast, when the government considers making upfront
>> R&D investments, they are considering "Benefits to Society". These
>> "Benefits to Society" could be social, military, economic, or a
>> combination of these. These benefits are extremely hard to quantify in
>> terms of dollars and yet must be compared the required tax
>> expendetures to determine their worth. Because of the subjective
>> nature of these benefits it will always be a matter of opinion, and
>> the opinions of the voters are the ones that matter.
>
>But it's being a matter of opinion is the problem.
People have different opinions. That's life.
>
>> Now a socialist
>> might tell you that since Government is interest in overall benefits
>> to society instead of simply profit or loss, it would have more
>> forsight.
>
>First, is government interested in the overall benefit to society?
That's government's charter in a democratic society. It's up to the
people to get involved and keep government on the right path. If they
don't, the effects can be devasting and they are the ones who pay!!
>Second, without a calculation of profit and loss, including the
>opportunity costs of foregone alternatives, how is the
>government to maximize overall social benefit?
>
Many things in life cannot be easily quantified, for example love,
happiness, family, peace of mind, health, freedom, intellect,
etc. etc. So it is with many factors that affect society as a
whole. We make personal decisions everday day based on things everyday
that can't be easily quanitified. Similarily, the poeple as a society
must make decision that affect public welfare. Money is not
everything!!
>> Identify what problem?? I'm just telling you the chain of command in
>> the Government. If the voters do not participate, that's their
>> problem.
>
>And how can the voters participate?
By making the effort to vote, petition, protest and make it known to
both elected officials and candidates what they want.
>The primaries were over before
>many people even got to vote in them.
Candidates are placed on the ballots by petition. Primaries are just a
formal way that two political parties do that. If you don't like the
way those two parties do primaries for national elections, then take
it up with those two parties, or support another party, or create your
own. It's in the hands of the people what their choices are. It's the
fault of the people they put up with the shit that those two parties
come up with.
>But at the federal level, the president must approve or reject the budget
>as a whole, as he has no line-item veto.
I think it would be good if he had it.
>But more importantly, how can
>government officials gauge the effects of small changes in policy?
>
You look at the appropriations in that area gauge that agianst what
are getting for it. Yes, it may be more difficult in government but it
needs to be done.
>> How is business more "fine tuned" than Government?? I'm not sure what
>> you're sayiing here.
>>
>
>Businesses have competitors, for one.
And business don't give a rat's ass how much pollution is in your
water supply either. There a good side and a bad side to many
things. And Again, money isn't everything.
>> >> >
>> >> >Really? Thomas Jackson and Microsoft might disagree there.
>> >>
>> >> How so? How is the MS trial effecting Government investments
>> >> (Congressional appropriations) in technology areas, i.e., NSF, DOE,
>> >> NASA, NOAA, research grants, etc. etc.
>> >
>> >It will certainly affect Microsoft's efforts if Jackson's ruling is upheld.
>>
>> Which has little to do with Government appropriations in technology
>> areas and everything to do with antitrust economics. Monopolism is
>> IMHO one area where the theory of capitalism turns out to be only
>> a theory.
>>
>
>Are you saying that this will have little effect, although it may affect
>Microsoft's competitors more than Microsoft.
>
I think it's good no one has too much power.
Perry
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
