Linux-Advocacy Digest #188, Volume #28 Wed, 2 Aug 00 18:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux & FreeBSD - security questions (Ian Pulsford)
Re: If Microsoft starts renting apps
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Re: Linux, easy to use?
Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix
Re: If Microsoft starts renting apps (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Perry Pip)
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: If Microsoft starts renting apps
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (josco)
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch? (Perry Pip)
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept? (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: Pestov lie-gest, volume 1 (Tholen) (tholenbot)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 07:01:52 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux & FreeBSD - security questions
Des Dougan wrote:
> I know little about FreeBSD, other than its background and that it is
> a closed development rather than the open environment Linux flourishes
> in. That said, I am working with a client who has been led to believe
> that FreeBSD is more secure (as a web hosting platform) than is Linux.
FreeBSD is no more closed than is the Linux kernel. Anyone can submit
changes to the kernel, but only a few people ultimately decide what goes
into official kernel releases. Same with FreeBSD, anyone can submit a
change but whether it goes in or not is up to the core team.
IanP
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apps
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:06:23 GMT
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:06:28 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:04:17 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >OK, shall we now fight over what was meant as a joke?
>>
>> Sure, why not... '-)
>>
>> >
>> >Nah, I got worse things to do with my time, er I mean...
>>
>> FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
>
>As the children gather around the two combatants the circle forms...
>
>Then suddenly a shout goes up, "Here comes the principle!" and the crowd
>quickly disipates.
...nahs, it's gots ta be da warden...
principles is for kids...
>
>;-)
'-ppp
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:09:56 GMT
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:40:57 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:45:18 GMT,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>You don't need hundreds of different network cards to build a netowrk,
>>>and that's what those 40 different drivers support.
>>
>> Yes you do actually. Some Beowulfs go up to the 500 range.
>
>500 nodes yes. But 500 *different* *types* network cards? No. Follow the
>links to different clusters from www.beowulf.org and find me a URL to
>a beowulf cluster using more than 40 *different* *types* of network
>cards.
500 cards is plenty of room for diversity.
If my company rounded up all their spare cards I would expect
there to be quite a cross section actually.
...contemplates evil thoughts about spare parts and Beowulfen...
>
>> That and how distinct those 40 cards are is not entirely known.
>
>40 drivers, Jedi. Look at the source code to those drivers and you'll
>see they support hundreds of cards.
>
>> There could be some redundancy in there.
>
>Some code reuse, yes. However this does not change the fact the Becker
>has done an enormous amount of driver development work above and
>beyond what he needed to do for Beowulf.
>
>And FYI, Becker does not work for NASA. He worked for CESDIS which was
>under contract to NASA. That contract has expired, and the Linux
>driver support has been taken over by Scyld Computing Corporation, for
>whom Becker is the CTO. http://www.scyld.com/linux_network_drivers.html
>
>> No, I'm talking about the other US government departments that
>> are completely outside of NASA and have been able to better
>> contain costs with this work.
>
>That's why the government shares technology. Like I said originally,
>it has more than paid for itself.
>
>> So is hacking into the wee hours of the morning if that sort of
>> activity is your idea of fun...
>
>Sure.
Wierdos like that is why we have Free Software.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:13:02 GMT
On 2 Aug 2000 16:16:36 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Palmer) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> >
>>> >>And xterm is a Lie-nux DOS box, but Lie-nux loosers insisst on calling
>>> >>it "xterm", probly to avoid traidmark infridngement.
>>> >
>>> >xterm existed long before DOS boxes, and comparing an xterm to a DOS box
>>is
>>> >a bit of a joke.
>>>
>>> Their both the same thing- you tipe commands in them and stop using GUI.
>>>
>>> >Any of the UNIX shell's easily beat the crap out of DOS
>>> >boxes - apart from readability.
>>>
>>> Tha'ts why Windo's has a GUI. DOS box's sucks.
>>
>>Are you suggesting that the Windows graphical user interface has totaly
>>replace the command line in all functionality to the point that it nolonger
>>includes Dos Boxes? Are you also suggesting that Windows no longer ships
>>with any non-GUI programs?
>>
>>
>
>Windo's has a few legasy DOS programms, but noboddy ever uses them. Its' not like
>UNIX whear peopole still half to rite shell script workarounds and eddit config fials
>all the time because THEAR IS NO OTHER WAY.
There are other methods; those methods just aren't quite as easy
or quite as fast once you've got the automation script in place.
Some of us have better things to do with our time than babysit
a dain bramaged Windows-esque user interface.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.alpha
Subject: Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:17:41 GMT
On 2 Aug 2000 16:16:46 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Tim Palmer wrote:
[deletia]
>>> >> Explain to the end-user how to compile/install a framebuffer
>>> >> SVGA kernel.
>>> >
>>> >Why?
>>>
>>> Because they half to to make their graffics work.
>>>
>>
>>I have graphics, and I haven't compiled a framebuffer SVGA kernel.
>
>You must have one of the holy graffix cards that Lie-nux actulley SUPPORT'S.
The fastest gaming card today is officially and fully supported
by the chipset vendor: Geforce II.
Contemporary chipsets from the other major vendors are also supported
including that problem child: ATI.
3dfx has supported Linux in some form or another for over 2 years.
Matrox users are enthusiastic enough to fend for themselves quite
nicely. John Carmack even lent a hand to their efforts.
[deletia]
>>> Window's 98.
>>>
>>
>>It's a somewhat improved Windows 95, but it's hardly a revolution.
>>
>>Colin Day
>>
>
>It wa a hell of an emprovement over DOS.
An abacus is an improvement over DOS.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apps
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:15:04 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:06:28 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:04:17 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >OK, shall we now fight over what was meant as a joke?
> >>
> >> Sure, why not... '-)
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Nah, I got worse things to do with my time, er I mean...
> >>
> >> FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
> >
> >As the children gather around the two combatants the circle forms...
> >
> >Then suddenly a shout goes up, "Here comes the principle!" and the crowd
> >quickly disipates.
>
> ...nahs, it's gots ta be da warden...
>
> principles is for kids...
>
Then you got my point.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 2 Aug 2000 21:06:31 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:19:40 -0500,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:09:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:53:57 -0500,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> 'support' is really an absurd feature when it comes to
>>>>>> consumer computing.
>>>>>
>>>>>How so?
>>>>
>>>> Companies that don't want to waste the time or the money on you.
>>>> TEch support people that are no more than people willing to read
>>>> the manuals and are just paid to answer the phone for calls from
>>>> people not willing ot read the manual. TEch support people that
>>>> aren't even that bright and just drone off of a script.
>>>>
>>>> I never bother with the first tier of support drones for exactly
>>>> that reason. Niether do any of my colleagues in or out of MIS,
>>>> regardless of the service level involved.
>>>
>>>I know plenty of people who'd rather pay $.15 per minute to speak with
>>>someone rather than read the manuals.
>>
>>$.15 per minute??
>>
>>$.15 per minute == $9.00 per hour. Who works for that wage?? You must
>>be getting some pretty sharp tech's for $9.00 per hour...huh?? Hell,
>>telco charges are more than that in most cases. If you are getting
>>what you think is usefull tech support from someone who makes $9.00
>>per hour then you must be worth even less.
>
>The customer generally pays only the long distance fee; the
>Quicken/Microsoft/whoever pays the tech support person to answer the
>phone and support you with any problems.
>
>That was pretty obvious....
Really?? Microsoft provides free tech support over the phone?? That's
news to me. How do I get it??
Perry
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:19:10 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:40:57 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:45:18 GMT,
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> So is hacking into the wee hours of the morning if that sort of
> >> activity is your idea of fun...
> >
> >Sure.
>
> Wierdos like that is why we have Free Software.
>
I find it humorous that even amongst technologically inclined people
there is no respect shown to others that are technologically inclined.
Wierdos, geeks, nerds, dorks, space-case, freaks, etc.
The labels never end.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:27:26 GMT
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:19:40 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:09:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:53:57 -0500,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> 'support' is really an absurd feature when it comes to
>>>>>> consumer computing.
>>>>>
>>>>>How so?
>>>>
>>>> Companies that don't want to waste the time or the money on you.
>>>> TEch support people that are no more than people willing to read
>>>> the manuals and are just paid to answer the phone for calls from
>>>> people not willing ot read the manual. TEch support people that
>>>> aren't even that bright and just drone off of a script.
>>>>
>>>> I never bother with the first tier of support drones for exactly
>>>> that reason. Niether do any of my colleagues in or out of MIS,
>>>> regardless of the service level involved.
>>>
>>>I know plenty of people who'd rather pay $.15 per minute to speak with
>>>someone rather than read the manuals.
>>
>>$.15 per minute??
>>
>>$.15 per minute == $9.00 per hour. Who works for that wage?? You must
>>be getting some pretty sharp tech's for $9.00 per hour...huh?? Hell,
>>telco charges are more than that in most cases. If you are getting
>>what you think is usefull tech support from someone who makes $9.00
>>per hour then you must be worth even less.
>
>The customer generally pays only the long distance fee; the
>Quicken/Microsoft/whoever pays the tech support person to answer the
>phone and support you with any problems.
>
>That was pretty obvious....
No it wasn't.
http://www.intuit.com/support/quicken/options/live_phone.html
For general 'tutorial' class tech support you will be
paying $1.95 per minute actual human phone support.
For Microsoft, the terms of what does and doesn't constitute
'warranty' support is a bit vague (certainly moreso than for
Quicken) with non-warranty support being $35 per incident.
IOW, Microsoft and Intuit don't want to have your lazy ass leeching
free training off of their unpaid support lines.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:26:06 -0400
CompleteDolt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:58:54 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >>
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" escribió:
> >> >
> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
> >> > > >SemiScholar wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:58:09 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >Democracy is 6 wolves and 2 lambs voting on what to have for dinner.
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Wrong. Democracy is 10 lambs and 1 wolf voting on what to have for
> >> > > >> dinner.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >Oh really. Look at any democratic system,
> >> > >
> >> > > You can't. There aren't any.
> >> > >
> >> > > >> In most other systems, it's the wolf alone who decides.
> >> > > >> Democracy is the only system in which lambs stand a chance.
> >> > >
> >> > > >Visit any high school,
> >> > >
> >> > > High schools aren't democratic.
> >> >
> >> > Wrong. They are the very embodiment of a pure democracy...MOB FUCKING
> >> > RULE!
> >>
> >> What do you propose as an alternative to democracy?
> >
> >A Constitutionally-limited Republic.
>
> That _is_ a democracy. A republic is one form of democracy.
>
> >
> >We have one in the US. Now if we could only imprison those
> >legislators who insist upon passing unconstitutional laws.
> >(Lets say, each federal legislator who voted for an unconstitutional
> >law spends one day in jail for every day which said unconstitutional
> >law was in effect. This will only have to be enforced 2, maybe
> >3 times before they all get the message that unconstitutional laws
> >at the Federal level will no longer be tolerated.)
>
> Who decides which laws are unconstitutional?
The Constitution itself makes it clear what laws are constitutional
and what laws are not. If there is still any confusion, then the
authors of the document can be consulted, via their writings in
"The Federalist Papers," "The Anti-Federalist Papers" and the like.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >> What are the means you intend to use, or support using, to impose
> >> your alternative way of government?
> >>
> >> Do those means involve violence?
> >
> >Of course not.
>
> Dreeeaaamm, dream dream dream, dreeeeeeaaaaaammmmmm.
Apparently, CompleteDolt is incapable of imagining a system
which doesn't depend upon violence.
How childish.
>
> - SemiScholar
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
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] ()
Subject: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apps
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:29:08 GMT
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:15:04 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:06:28 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:04:17 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >> >OK, shall we now fight over what was meant as a joke?
>> >>
>> >> Sure, why not... '-)
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Nah, I got worse things to do with my time, er I mean...
>> >>
>> >> FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
>> >
>> >As the children gather around the two combatants the circle forms...
>> >
>> >Then suddenly a shout goes up, "Here comes the principle!" and the crowd
>> >quickly disipates.
>>
>> ...nahs, it's gots ta be da warden...
>>
>> principles is for kids...
>>
>
>Then you got my point.
<foghorn leghorn>
I say... I say... It's a joke son.
</foghorn leghorn>
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:30:28 GMT
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:19:10 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:40:57 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:45:18 GMT,
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> So is hacking into the wee hours of the morning if that sort of
>> >> activity is your idea of fun...
>> >
>> >Sure.
>>
>> Wierdos like that is why we have Free Software.
>>
>
>I find it humorous that even amongst technologically inclined people
>there is no respect shown to others that are technologically inclined.
>
>Wierdos, geeks, nerds, dorks, space-case, freaks, etc.
>
>The labels never end.
What's this OTHERS BS...
When I speak of people with a pathological need to hack into
the wee hours of the morning, I was including myself...
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:40:11 -0700
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Perry Pip wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:53:57 -0500,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I know plenty of people who'd rather pay $.15 per minute to speak with
> >someone rather than read the manuals.
>
> $.15 per minute??
>
> $.15 per minute == $9.00 per hour. Who works for that wage?? You must
> be getting some pretty sharp tech's for $9.00 per hour...huh??
$9.00 is the starting wage for in-n-out burgers in CA.
http://www.in-n-out.com/
Maybe 0.15 minute is a token charge to give some incentive to RTFM.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: 2 Aug 2000 21:42:47 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:09:56 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:40:57 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:45:18 GMT,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>500 nodes yes. But 500 *different* *types* network cards? No. Follow the
>>links to different clusters from www.beowulf.org and find me a URL to
>>a beowulf cluster using more than 40 *different* *types* of network
>>cards.
>
> 500 cards is plenty of room for diversity.
>
> If my company rounded up all their spare cards I would expect
> there to be quite a cross section actually.
>
> ...contemplates evil thoughts about spare parts and Beowulfen...
But then you'll have a soupercomputer not a supercomputer:<)
>>> So is hacking into the wee hours of the morning if that sort of
>>> activity is your idea of fun...
>>
>>Sure.
>
> Wierdos like that is why we have Free Software.
>
But are those wierdos as weird as those who spend all their time
posting on c.o.l.a.?=-)
Perry
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:42:00 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:19:10 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:40:57 GMT, Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:45:18 GMT,
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> So is hacking into the wee hours of the morning if that sort of
> >> >> activity is your idea of fun...
> >> >
> >> >Sure.
> >>
> >> Wierdos like that is why we have Free Software.
> >>
> >
> >I find it humorous that even amongst technologically inclined people
> >there is no respect shown to others that are technologically inclined.
> >
> >Wierdos, geeks, nerds, dorks, space-case, freaks, etc.
> >
> >The labels never end.
>
> What's this OTHERS BS...
>
> When I speak of people with a pathological need to hack into
> the wee hours of the morning, I was including myself...
Like I said, I find it humorous...amongst technologically inclined
people...no respect...others...technologically inclined.
Sometimes that includes ourselves. While within our own circles it is
endearing to put ourselves down, it makes others believe that there is
something wrong with us because we don't walk around with heads four
times too big for our bodies. (See my recent conversation about someone
being offended at the word geek and asking for an apology, I was
promptly told I had a serious lack of self-respect.)
Anyway, every once in a while I find it disturbing, but mostly I find it
funny (hence the term humorous).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is "ease of use" a dirty concept?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:43:18 GMT
In article <8m9a77$4dp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) wrote:
> In article <8m6lmj$r17$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The final result is that the functionality can not be moved away
from
> > the toolkit except by doing massive reingeneering of all current
> > toolkits. Which will not happen.
>
> The closest you can (reasonably) get is to have a common protocol "on
> the wire" so that different toolkits can talk to each other. This is
> what Xdnd represents, and in doing so it is a great improvement on
> what went before (speaking from experience!)
Indeed, and Xdnd, and having toolkits that support it, is good
because of that. Xdnd is "just" a nice specification.
Of course, "just" is sort of a understatement, considering we
somehow lived 20 years without "just" that.
Additionally nice is the consensus on representing data types
as mime types.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:54:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
[About Galileo]
> And it was just earlier this year was it not that the Catholic
> church apologized for that. 200 years to say "we're sorry".
Well, I know that from our millenium all the events in the previous
one seem to blend, but please check your dates a bit ;-)
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[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: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:00:28 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You do understand the difference between an APPLICATION and an
>>>>>>OPERATING SYSTEM, do you not?
>>>>>
>>>>> We do. Microsoft doesn't.
>>>>
>>>>I believe the above question is still open. :-)
>>>
>>>Really? Then why did MS try to make IE part of the OS??
>>
>>They didn't. They made IE part of *WINDOWS*, which has always been a
>>product consisting of *BOTH* an OS and a bunch of applications.
>
>Which they inseparably glue together. Poor design, and only done for
>purposes of extending a monopoly.
>
What in Windows is "inseparably glued together"? Certainly not IE and
the OS. Certainly not any of the other bundled applications and the
OS. So what exactly are you talking about?
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pestov lie-gest, volume 1 (Tholen)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:08:08 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Else it's just a whole lot of hot air
> coming from the old geyser.
Illogical. How predictable. Still flying around irrelevant airspace in
your hot water balloon, Malloy?
--
On what basis do you claim "It's all about the Pentiums, baby"?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
