Linux-Advocacy Digest #621, Volume #28 Thu, 24 Aug 00 17:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (david
raoul derbes)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (mark)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (mark)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (david
raoul derbes)
Engineers needed for Distributed Computing Company ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (ZnU)
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates) ("Christopher Smith")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Craig
Kelley)
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows (Matthias Warkus)
Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic
Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating)
(Matthias Warkus)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david raoul derbes)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:16:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <Az%o5.250$v3.3240@uchinews>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(david raoul derbes) wrote:
>
>
>> First off, are you really so certain that "the dollar amounts.. [paid]
>> by the wealthy are a hell of a lot more"?
>
>Yes.
>
>>
>> A fair number of pretty wealthy Americans pay *no tax whatsoever* in this
>> country. There are all manner of tax shelters and dodges that wealthy
>
>A very small number.
To be sure, a very small number of people. But maybe a hell of a lot
of dollars.
>Statistically, the wealthy pay a far, far higher percentage of their
>income in taxes than the poor. I can't believe anyone would even
>question that fact.
What percentage do the wealthiest pay in this country? According to my
father-in-law, who used to work for H. & R. Block, 39.3%. Last year,
my wife and I were in the 32% bracket, and believe me, we earn a
hell of a lot less than most people we know; I'm a schoolteacher
and my wife is an artist. We have investments. No one would call
us wealthy.
>> people can avail themselves of, which poor people have no chance of.
>> For one, as you know, mortgages. There is a substantial tax benefit to
>
>Oh, I see. So mortgages are a tax loophole that only the rich can get?
>
>You might want to check into reality some day.
You might want to read what I said, which is immediately below.
>> having a large mortgage. Poor folk can't qualify for home ownership, so
>> fat lot of good that does them. (OK, you don't have to be wealthy,
>> thank God, to qualify for a mortgage; but you have to be to qualify
>> for a *large* mortgage.) But a poor person can't find a down payment,
>
>Let's see if I get this right.
>
>Let's say you make a million dollars per year. You have a choice of a
>mortgage for $1,000 per month or $10,000 per month.
>
>Depending on where you are in the amortization schedule, a different
>amount of that counts as interest. For convenience, let's say the first
>mortgage costs you $10 K per year in interest and the latter is $100 K
>per year in interest.
>
>In the 28% incremental bracket, you pay $7,200 after tax for the former
>and $72 K after tax for the latter. So, the larger mortgage costs you
>more money.
Yeah, and it saves you a lot more, too; in one case, you save 28K,
and in the other case, 2.8 K. I don't see the difference of 25.2K
as pocket change, but I'm not wealthy.
>Of course, you're also ignoring the AMT which phases out deductions like
>the mortgage deduction so you really get _less_ tax break than if you
>made less money.
Phases out? It had no effect on my taxes. None. It was just a nuisance
to have to figure out, even courtesy of MacinTax.
>As I said, you really ought to check your facts.
And maybe you should read more carefully.
>
>> and doesn't have the income to qualify for the loan. And that is only
>> the most obvious example. There are scandalous examples of laws passed
>
>Not to mention obviously wrong.
Ah. It is "obviously wrong" that poor people cannot qualify for a mortgage,
and it is "obviously wrong" that the mortgage I have does not save me
some money in taxes.
Please, point out the obvious errors!
>
>> by our Congress that have, no kidding, exactly *one* beneficiary, who
>> turns out to be (a) wealthier than Yoko Ono and (b) a significant
>> contributor and probably constituent of the guy sponsoring the
>> legislation.
>
>There are abuses--no doubt. But that doesn't change the fact that the
>vast majority of "wealthy" individuals and families pay a huge tax
>burden.
The fact that you put "wealthy" in quotes tells me that despite your
antagonism, you and I are much closer to each other's positions than
you grant. The majority of the tax burden in this country falls on
what I would call middle class. I have no problem bearing my current
tax bill. I wish *only* that people far wealthier than I bear an
equal *percentage* of their income tax. You think they are doing so.
I fear that they are not. I am pretty confident that I am getting
a better break (because I figure my income tax out, and I see the
breaks put in for people with mortgages, investments in real
estate, etc etc) than lots of people earning 25 or 30K. And I don't
think that's fair. I suspect the breaks I am getting are even
more pronounced at the upper end. I suspect *you* suspect that
yourself, judging by the "wealthy" in quotes.
>> I have no problem at all paying people a tax refund even if they paid
>> no taxes, if they are working and trying to support a family. Would you
>> rather they started robbing banks? Robbing *you*? Are you opposed to
>> welfare in all its forms? Try doing without it... I don't mind paying
>> *these* taxes: it's the money we use to support e.g. the helium stockpile
>> (no kidding) that bothers me...
>
>Excuse me, but what's the difference if they rob me directly or rob me
>via the Government (other than the obvious difference that it costs me
>more if the government is involved due to beaurocratic inefficiency)?
Joe, how likely is it that the government is going to pull the trigger
after you give them your wallet? It happens all the time on the street.
I regard many forms of welfare as cheap insurance, frankly. People who
become justifiably angry and who in this country can easily get a gun
scare the hell out of me.
If you want peace...
David Derbes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:06:39 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, fred wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 09:26:47 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 09:24:12 +0100,
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark) wrote:
>>>
>>> >I have no doubt that Microsoft pay lots of people to inhabit various
>>> >advocacy newsgroups, check some of the others, eg., the 'sun' groups
>>> >have regulars who explain how much better NT is than Solaris or
>>> >whatever, it's a bit harder there 'cos they have to argue the hard
>>> >platforms as well, but they still try - anything for money, I guess.
>>>
>>> Your theory is not supported by facts.
>>
>>What you mean to say it that Mark has not proven those facts. Facts can
>>exist even if they have not yet been proven.
>
>No, I am certain I meant exactly what I said.
No - I said what I thought, and I still think it. I'm happy to accept
circumstantial evidence for this theory.
>
>>By saying "Your theory is not supported by facts", you are stating that
>>Mark's theory is false. Where is your proof of that, fred? By not proving
>>your theory, you are are stand on ground that is no more solid than is Mark.
>
>I can prove it by counter example... I am not paid, therefore Mark's
>theory is false.
>
>
No - at most that could only say that you're not one of the lots. If
I believed you, of course, which I may or may not.
My theory is still a perfectly valid theory, and like all scientific
theories, will remain standing until someone proves it untrue. I
stand by my strong background in Physics to support this :)
It fits my observations fully and completely.
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
"A compiler is a program that takes the pseudo-English gibberish produced
by a programmer and turns it into the sort of binary gibberish understood
by a computer." Linux for the uninitiated ... by Paul Heinlein
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:10:01 +0100
In article <8nhsmn$3pc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) wrote:
>In article <p8Xm5.18872$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8nfes0$9ck$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> <snip>
>
>> > You have given a non-denial denial.
>[snip]
>> > Do you deny, without
>> > qualifications, that you have any financial motives for supporting
>> > Microsoft?
>>
>> I state for the record and without any qualification
>> that I do not have ANY financial motives for supporting Microsoft.
>
>[snip]
>
>> My company and I uses and resells some MS products
>> and we profit from doing this.
>> THAT is how I profit from "MS doing well."
That, to my mind, fully supports my theory.
>
>If you're dealing exclusively with MS products, platforms and
>software, I'd say that you have a huge financial incentive
>for promoting Microsoft over Linux or UNIX.
Thanks for your vote of confidence :)
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
"A compiler is a program that takes the pseudo-English gibberish produced
by a programmer and turns it into the sort of binary gibberish understood
by a computer." Linux for the uninitiated ... by Paul Heinlein
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david raoul derbes)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:27:09 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <LZep5.291$v3.3837@uchinews>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(david raoul derbes) wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (david raoul derbes) writes:
>> >
>>
>> >The very rich who pay no taxes are a rarity (although they should be
>> >dealt with).
>>
>> I did not claim there were lots of these people; I suspect it is under
>> five hundred individuals, and I'd bet the ranch it's under a thousand.
>> But I'd also bet it's a ton of money that isn't taxed.
>
>But the number is insignificant, so your complaint is meaningless.
Oh? What evidence have you that the amount of money is meaningless?
I will admit at once that the number of individuals (who, we're agreed,
are wealthy, no?) is small. Some people earned fifty or sixty million
last year (I think Dick Cheney got 24 million from Halliburton alone.)
We might be talking about a billion dollars, even if we only have
five or six hundred individuals. I don't claim that Cheney is one
of these lucky untaxed individuals, but it is certainly not beyond
imagining that other untaxed individuals have earned Cheneyesque sums.
>>
>> Another poster (? Eric Bennett?) suggested a plausible scenario in which
>> a family might own a farm worth a million or two, and have a simply
>> disastrous year, in which the income was zero. That isn't so far fetched,
>> but as someone who actually owns half of a family farm, I can tell you
>> that even after three disastrously bad years, we are still paying
>> income tax. It's a rare year when your income is zero. It might be
>> not enough to cover a loan at the bank, but it ain't zero.
>
>ROTFLMAO.
>
>You need to learn the difference between "revenue" and "profit". If you
>don't bring in enough money to cover your bank loans, you didn't make
>any profit, so there's no income tax due.
Oh, dumb me! And I thought I had to pay my bills with *after-tax*
dollars! Jeez, why didn't *I* think of that! Say, that will reduce
my mortgage by 32%! Terrific!
Thanks, Joe! :-)
>> I think the real resentment with the taxes stems from two perceptions: a
>> widespread (and I think accurate) perception that the code isn't fair,
>> and a widespread (probably accurate) fear that much of the money is
>> wasted.
>
>Which is sufficient reason to not want the government to take any more
>of my money than necessary.
Fair enough.
>There's a third reason, as well (partly a combination of the first two).
>Every time I sit down to do my taxes, it pisses me off that even with a
>PhD, it takes hours of sweating and numerous phone calls (followed by a
>final check with an accountant) to try to get things right. There's
>absolutely no reason for that level of complexity.
In this I am in complete agreement with you (see another post in this
thread.)
David Derbes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Engineers needed for Distributed Computing Company
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:21:35 GMT
I have a incredible opportunity available with a Bay Area company that
is creating a technology that will revolutionize networking. They are
building a set of scalable and reliable services for networks, that will
function as the building blocks for higher level applications. This is
the next generation of Internet computing. The idea was developed at
MIT by a group of engineers focused in distributed computing.
They are well funded by the leading venture capital firm, Kleiner
Perkins Caufield and Byers and their board of advisors is impressive...
Vinod Khosla is the key advisor (he was the founding CEO of Sun
Microsystems), distributed computing experts from MIT and Stanford, as
well as seasoned Internet entrepreneurs.
Feel free to respond to this message and send your resume to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or call 415-865-3699 and ask for Christie.
Thank you.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re:
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:24:37 -0400
Asher Langton wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> <snip everything>
>
> Being new to c.o.l.a., I ran a deja.com search on posts by this Kulkis
> to see why he's such an irritating moron. And surprise, surprise, his
> posts reveal that he's not only irritating, but also a completely Foul
Yes, I am a severe irritation to stupid people.
> Person, disliked widely across usenet.
>
> In other words, *plonk*.
--
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: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:40:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe
Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <Utap5.270$v3.3535@uchinews>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (david raoul derbes) wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> A fair number of pretty wealthy Americans pay *no tax whatsoever* in
> > >> this
> > >> country. There are all manner of tax shelters and dodges that wealthy
> > >> people can avail themselves of, ...
> > >
> > >You make it sound so easy.
> > >
> > >If you truly understand this to be true, you can describe,
> > >in simple English, the simple accounting to make this happen.
> >
> > I believe that a little research will reveal those lucky Americans who
> > have a net wealth of several tens of millions who paid no tax, none,
> > last year. How they did it I don't know; I am neither an accountant
> > nor an attorney. People who are in a position to know (Cokie Roberts
> > on ABC's "Sunday Morning" and Nina Totenberg on NPR) have said over
> > the years that there are such people (not a hell of a lot, under
> > a thousand), and I believe them.
>
> There are, of course, legitimate reasons why a person could have a net
> worth of millions of dollars and have no income.
>
> Many family farmers, for example, will have a huge net worth but little
> or no income in a bad year.
>
> >
> > Try Nader's web site, or Google.
>
> And there are also a number of people who claim to be poor who file
> multiple fraudulent tax returns to get an earned income tax credit--some
> of them have received dozens of EIC checks per year for years.
>
> The few people who abuse the system shouldn't be considered as typical.
But these rich folks aren't doing anything illegal, they're just taking
advantage of loopholes. The system needs fixing.
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
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: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 07:01:08 +1000
"Asher Langton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> <snip everything>
>
> Being new to c.o.l.a., I ran a deja.com search on posts by this Kulkis
> to see why he's such an irritating moron. And surprise, surprise, his
> posts reveal that he's not only irritating, but also a completely Foul
> Person, disliked widely across usenet.
>
> In other words, *plonk*.
No, no - those are just "hit and run attacks" meant to spread lies and
discredit him :).
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 Aug 2000 14:56:28 -0600
Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <LZep5.291$v3.3837@uchinews>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >
> > Another poster (? Eric Bennett?) suggested a plausible scenario in which
> > a family might own a farm worth a million or two, and have a simply
> > disastrous year, in which the income was zero. That isn't so far fetched,
> > but as someone who actually owns half of a family farm, I can tell you
> > that even after three disastrously bad years, we are still paying
> > income tax. It's a rare year when your income is zero. It might be
> > not enough to cover a loan at the bank, but it ain't zero.
>
> ROTFLMAO.
>
> You need to learn the difference between "revenue" and "profit". If you
> don't bring in enough money to cover your bank loans, you didn't make
> any profit, so there's no income tax due.
That's not correct.
What if you buy a cadillac with the bank loans?
> There's a third reason, as well (partly a combination of the first two).
> Every time I sit down to do my taxes, it pisses me off that even with a
> PhD, it takes hours of sweating and numerous phone calls (followed by a
> final check with an accountant) to try to get things right. There's
> absolutely no reason for that level of complexity.
Just give up and pay an accountant to do it. :) (That's what I do
and I have a minor in mathematics, a bachelors in CS and I'm in a
masters program right now
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:57:29 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >
> >But the fact that the designers intended it to be that way doesn't
> >mean that they succeeded.
>
> An argument from ignorance; it doesn't mean they didn't, and does
> indicate that there is more than a chance likelihood it does.
How much more?
> It is a
> successful programming language by some counts; one can presume that was
> due to achieving its stated purpose, unless you have some evidence to
> the contrary.
>
Ever hear of unintended consequences?
> [...]
> >But if there are no objective criteria of intuitiveness, then your claims
> >for BASIC in that regard are equally arbitrary.
> [...]
> >The fact that something was designed to be x doesn't mean that
> >it is x.
>
> You're trolling, Colin. I'm afraid you've been reduced to an argument
> from ignorance. Be a man and admit it (or just give up); its happened
> to all of us.
>
Nope. I was inquiring. I may be ignorant of language design, but that's
a different issue.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:21:43 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 24 Aug 2000 10:43:56 -0600...
...and Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Take a look at MacOS X Bundles:
[schnipp]
> Linux is halfway there already with RPM and deb; but the ultimate goal
> is to just get rid of them.
Uh-oh, I feel another flamewar coming up on NeXTish .app encapsulation
vs. the classic Unix way of spreading an application out over bin,
lib, share etc...
mawa
--
In real love you want the other person's good. In romantic love you
want the other person.
-- Margaret Anderson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and
Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth
stagnating)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:23:28 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:57:29 -0400...
...and Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sandrews wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roberto Alsina
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I have more sides than the average icosahedron. So do you, probably.
> > >
> >
> > What`s a icosahedron ???
>
> a 12(?) vertex regular solid.
Nope. You mean a dodecahedron. An icosahedron's got twenty vertices.
For the laymen out there, an icosahedron looks like a ball made of
twenty triangles, the sides of all triangles being of the same length.
mawa
--
(Warum ich gerne in Deutschland lebe:)
...aber unter diesen Bedingungen gibt es in Deutschland keinen Bill
Gates, meine Damen und Herren...
-- Edmund Stoiber
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
