Linux-Advocacy Digest #432, Volume #28 Wed, 16 Aug 00 10:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest (Richard)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Joe Ragosta)
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft MCSE ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: MCSE != Engineer (Was: Microsoft MCSE ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates) ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates) ("Christopher Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:57:58 GMT
Perry Pip wrote:
> There is a big difference between bleeding freely and whether or not a
> person finds something "harmful to thier spirit". Your anology is
> meaningless.
Oh, that's right; because nobody ever gets depressed to the point where
they put a gun to their head and pull the trigger or even accidentally
forget to take the necessary precautions to make sure that they don't
slam into a concrete pillar when they're driving to work.
> >What is and is not harmful to people is the domain of psychology
> >and social science.
>
> It is not for elitist psychologists and social scientists to tell
> people what is or isn't deeply harmful to them spiritually.
What the fuck is this "spirituality" you've brought up now?
> No matter how you word it, the people who run businesses are not
> psychopaths. Neither is someone going to college. Nor is it a
> psychopathic decision to wnat to do so.
And we can rely on your training as a psychologist to determine that.
Do you understand the difference between an institution and the
people running this institution, cretin? Do you know what "emergent
behaviour" means? Do you even know what /psychopath/ means? Are
you aware that there is a world of difference between "psychopath"
and "psychopathic" and that I've never used the latter word?
Of course not. To you, black is white and white is black, and what
people say doesn't matter nearly as much as what you want them to
have said. You are *such* a strong projector that it's a wonder you
aren't in a mental institution. Do you get out patient treatment at
the very least?
> >If you honestly think that your experience is non-representative
> >and non-generalizable then why do you speak of it in general terms?
>
> I haven't. I have used specific examples to show execeptions to your
> generalities.
Oh, that's right "one in a trillion trillion". Yeah, people care
DEEPLY for that sort of stuff!
> Bullshit. Maybe 99.999% in your experience or in your dysfunctional
> family. Not in my experience or in my family. If one percieves ones
> own self as an unseparable part of the whole then nothing else but
> acting in the interest of the whole is in the interest of ones own
> self.
If one perceives oneself as an unseparable part of a group then one
is irrational and out of touch with reality and utterly incapable of
judging one's own self-interest.
> >You don't seem to understand very simple things about how humans think
> >and how science works.
>
> More like you have a bunch of preconcieved notions about both, and you
> expect me to agree with them.
Right now I'm just hoping you shut the fuck up and stop spewing more
of your idiocy on the USENET.
> I have followed those conventions. I have merely sited specific
> examples of human behavior (specific examples of data) or presented
> examples that are true in some cases (subsets of all data) that are
> exeptions to your generalities. I am not making or proposing any
> generalities of my own.
And this is PRECISELY how you've broken every single human language
convention I know of, fool. Nobody gives a shit about an "exception"
that amounts to less than 1% of cases when a model hasn't been
established for the other 99%. If you had said "I agree with every
last thing you say, *except* in these weird situations" then we
would have an established model for a large part of human behaviour
and you could bother me about the exceptions. But you didn't, did
you asshole?
And since *you* *yourself* argue that human behaviour is incredibly
complex and impossible to model, if you have a model that accounts
for 99% of human behaviour then that's a fucking miracle and you
should worship whoever came up with the model instead of pissing
on it. But hey, logic and self-consistency aren't important when
they're in your way, are they? Even being able to be this contra-
dictory in your behaviour proves that all of this is just bullshit
to you; that you just don't give a damn about models versus endless
lists of meaningless exceptions, or about any kind of meaningful
communication at all. The only thing you seem to give a shit about
it pointless pissing in the wind.
> If there are execeptions then your general model is wrong. And there
> are many.
Like I said, cretin, you don't know the first thing about how
scientific research is done out here in this thing we like to
call Reality. Scientific theories don't spring full grown from
the head of Zeus.
> >> We haven't any Black Death in my neighborhood hospitals.
> >
> >Do you understand the difference between "Black Death" and "LIKE
> >the Black Death"?
>
> Doesn't matter to the specific example I am presenting.
Then why the fuck did you bring up that stupid objection??
> I wouldn't want to. You live in a reality where self interest, the
> interest of others, and rationallity are in never ending in conflict
> with one another.
They are. And the sooner you realize that, the sooner you can start
acting in the interest of others instead of being a selfish asshole.
> >In fact, I wonder whether you inhabit ANY reality!
>
> I inhabit a reality where self interest, the interest of others,
> rationality and morality need not necessarily be in conflict with one
> another.
A common delusion. The problem with that delusion is that even if you
don't act selfishly, the delusion prevents you from seeing selfishness
and evil in others for what it is.
> >It might explain enough to alleviate your crushing ignorance and my
> >frustration.
>
> Your frustration is your problem and it has nothing to do with me. I
> suggest you go out and get a life, and most importantly, a better
> outlook on things.
The existence of morons posting on USENET is a public interest problem.
I've snipped your hysterical demands for URLs "proving" what any half-wit
can know from simple observation.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 08:46:58 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Would that then mean that there is a 'geek' version of Linux and a
> > 'dork' version of Linux?:-)
> >
> > I kind of like that idea.
>
> How about spliting Linux into two sepperate OS entirely those who can handle
> Linux as it is and like it can use the smartux OS (pronounced: smart tux)
> and the others that can't hack smartux would have the dumbux OS (pronounced:
> dumb ox).
Now that's funny.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 08:45:12 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> One of the biggest that still "gets me" is the episode near the beginning of
> the series of DS9 when Sisko talked about being a helpless observer when his
> father died. In several episode after that, there were references and
> allusions to Sisko's late father. A couple of seasons afterwards there he
> is the elder Sisko alive and well and a regular guest star thereafter.
>
I believe there was an episode where that was explained (in part) by a
time travel problem. Basically Sisko managed to save his father from
whatever it was that killed him and he 'got his father back'. Which was
also supposed to explain why he and his father became so close.
I kind of liked the way DS9 mixed things up with time travel and
different dimensions and Sisko's dream sequences and stuff. But the
trouble was that if you missed the wrong episode you had no idea what
the hell was going on.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:02:28 GMT
In article <I1nm5.1234$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mike Byrns"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "tinman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Actually, he went further. In the same interview, he claimed that
> > > > Windows does not have bugs.
> > >
> > > Post the article to backup your claim. I doubt it says anything of
> > > the
> > > sort.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > From the URL cited earlier in the thread
> > (<http://www.cantrip.org/nobugs.html>):
> >
> > FOCUS:
> > But there are bugs an any version which people would really like to
> > have
> > fixed.
> > Gates:
> > No! There are no significant bugs in our released software that any
> > significant number of users want fixed.
> >
> > FOCUS:
> > Oh, my God. I always get mad at my computer if MS Word swallows the
> > page
> > numbers of a document which I printed a couple of times with page
> > numbers. If I complain to anybody they say "Well, upgrade from version
> > 5.11 to 6.0".
> > Gates:
> > No! If you really think there's a bug you should report a bug. Maybe
> > you're not using it properly. Have you ever considered that?
>
> Thanks!
>
> You prove my point. You claimed Gates said that "...Windows does not
> have
> bugs.". He did not. He said that there are no significant bugs in
> Microsoft's released software that any significant number of users want
> fixed.
Which, in practice, amounts to essentially the same thing.
It's a flat-out lie and he knew it was a lie when he said it. Windows
has bugs that users want fixed. Lots of them.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:56:53 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Clue for the fucking clueless:
The way SHELVES get dusty is for all of the merchandise to be sold.
--
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 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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft MCSE
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:58:24 -0400
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >Tell it to IBM, who defined the title Systems Engineer 30+ years ago.
> IBM's
> > >title does not require what you claim it does.
> >
> > I just checked IBM's certification page and they don't seem to
> > have a "IBM certified systems engineer" certification.
>
> It's not a certification per se. It's a title, which is given to an IBM
> employee or business partner employee after having completed a certain
> amount of IBM sponsored training. It's not a generic certification.
>
Well, in the world of ACCREDITED ENGINEERING SCHOOLS it means a hell
of a lot more than someone who "plugs Tab A into slot B"
> Hell, they may not even use the title anymore, but they did up to about 3
> years ago.
>
> > And with thousand of degreed Electrical, Computer, Mechanical,
> > Chemical and Industrial Engineers engineers working for IBM I can see
> > why they don't bastardize the title Engineer. When they originally
> > coined the term Systems Engineer in the '60's I beleive they were
> > refering to people with electrical and computing engineering
> > backgrounds.
>
> Well, as a rule, in the 60's pretty much anyone who could work on computers
> was an engineer of some kind.
>
> I know that in the early 90's they were giving the title to people without
> degrees. My friend was an OS/2 specialist with a technical school diploma,
> and he was one of the youngest SE's IBM had ever christened (21) at the
> time.
--
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 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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MCSE != Engineer (Was: Microsoft MCSE
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 09:58:49 -0400
2:1 wrote:
>
> > > This seems to be a common mis-appellation in the industry. My own
> job title
> > > is "technical engineer" (I do Linux phone support). I don't have an
> > > engineering degree (nor do any of my fellow "engineers" AFAIK.)
>
> I'm an engineer, and I don't have a degree (yet).
>
> > That's sad. I think you would find Engineering school very rewarding.
>
> Yep. Engineering school is very rewarding :-)
>
> Aaron, how many of your messages are 1/10 the size of your .sig?
>
Depends on the newsgroup.
> -Ed
>
> --
> BBC Computer 32K
> Acorn DFS
> Basic
> >*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
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 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: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:05:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:I1nm5.1234$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "tinman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Actually, he went further. In the same interview, he claimed that
> > > > > Windows does not have bugs.
> > > >
> > > > Post the article to backup your claim. I doubt it says anything of
> the
> > > > sort.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > From the URL cited earlier in the thread
> > > (<http://www.cantrip.org/nobugs.html>):
> > >
> > > FOCUS:
> > > But there are bugs an any version which people would really like to
> > > have
> > > fixed.
> > > Gates:
> > > No! There are no significant bugs in our released software that any
> > > significant number of users want fixed.
> > >
> > > FOCUS:
> > > Oh, my God. I always get mad at my computer if MS Word swallows the
> > > page
> > > numbers of a document which I printed a couple of times with page
> > > numbers. If I complain to anybody they say "Well, upgrade from
> > > version
> > > 5.11 to 6.0".
> > > Gates:
> > > No! If you really think there's a bug you should report a bug. Maybe
> > > you're not using it properly. Have you ever considered that?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > You prove my point. You claimed Gates said that "...Windows does not
> > have
> > bugs.". He did not. He said that there are no significant bugs in
> > Microsoft's released software that any significant number of users want
> > fixed.
[snip]
>
> The date on this article put's it at about Windows 3.11 if I'm not
> mistaken.
> I also don't recall having many (if any) problems with Win 3.11 except
> for
> extremely slow computing on my 33mhz w/ 2mb RAM machine at the time, now
> Win95a is another story completely.
ROTFLMAO. Win3.11 was so full of bugs it was a joke. Of course, not
quite as many as 3.1 or 3.0, but it was a crappy OS.
> I also noticed that the end of the article was conspicuously absent so
> I'll
> quote it now:
>
> Gates:
> Guess how much we spend on phone calls every year.
>
> FOCUS:
> Hm, a couple of million dollars?
>
> Gates:
> 500 million dollars a year. We take every one of these phone calls and
> classify them. That's the input we use to do the next version. So it's
> like
> the worlds biggest feedback loop. People call in - we decide what to do
> on
> it. Do you want to know what percentage of those phonecalls relates to
> bugs
> in the software? Less than one percent.
OK. Let's do some math. Let's say the average phone call costs Microsoft
$10 (probaby way too high, but I'm feeling generous today).
That means they field 50 million phone calls per year. And let's say
that "less than one percent" means half a percent. That means that there
were 250,000 phone calls regarding bugs.
How do you reconcile that with "no significant number of bugs"?
I suppose you could argue that the bugs are there but the users don't
want them fixed, but why would they spend half an hour on hold for MS
tech support if they don't want the bugs fixed?
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:17:49 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8n98og$h71$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8n8388
>
> > However, WindowsNT was designed with a GUI in mind.
>
> But NOT intergrated. The original design had the NT kernel as a sepperate
> and independent unit. Above the kernel would be different programming
> environments including the core of the GUIs. Then above the environment
and
> the GUIs would have been the user interfaces. In effect it was a
> reimplementation of the unix kenel running X and window managers running
on
> X.
Presumably by "above" etc here you mean only the kernel was running in ring
0 and everything else wasn't ?
This is precisely how NT was implemented, prior to version 4.0. Afterwards,
the GDI was moved to run at the same privilege level as the kernel, for
performance reasons.
> NT was also supposed to have command line environments that would not
> require a GUI to even be installed.
It did, AFAIK, up to 3.51.
The overhead of the GUI, when not being used, is tiny.
> It was also supposed to support
> multiple logins like unix does.
It does and always has.
Or are we going to get the "doesn't ship with a telnet server" argument
again ?
> Rememer, NT was going to be the better unix than unix.
No, it wasn't. It was meant to replace Novell, not Unix (something at which
it has done exceedingly well - now Microsoft have decided to take aim on
Unix).
> Just because Microsoft went back on their promises and mixed together the
> elements from the different layers that it was designed with doing that in
> mind.
The only thing they've "mixed" is running the GDI at the privelege level of
the kernel. There are theoretical stability issues in this, but they are
largely that - theoretical.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:19:11 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8n98oj$h71$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8n8t56$hir$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > FVWM and Xfree86 3.x.x, compiled with -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
> > > options -m386. I compiled a few years ago when my primary workstation
> of
> > > the time which was a 386DX 16MB RAM machince.
> >
> > Ah, so you're cheating ;).
> >
> >
>
> How is that cheating?
The functionality is worlds apart, and hence the comparison is invalid.
It would be like me saying Linux is an absolute pig, because DOS uses so
much less memory.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
