Linux-Advocacy Digest #687, Volume #28 Sun, 27 Aug 00 17:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: NETCRAFT: I'm confused ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Eric Bennett)
Re: Large disks still not supported on Linux?
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (ZnU)
Re: Large disks still not supported on Linux?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:35:28 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:19:38 GMT, Mike Marion wrote:
> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> >The fact that _anyone_ can graduate from High School without basic skills like
> >reading shows that there's a serious problem.
>
> Would you care to back up your bold claim with some statistics ?
WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK IS GOING ON when ILLITERATES are being
given high school diplomas?????
In case you weren't aware of this trend...a football player...
not *ONLY* a high school graduate...no...he was *ALSO* a
UNIVERSITY GRADUATE, *SUED* the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
for graduating him when he couldn't even read his own diploma.
The case recieved national attention.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:43:05 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
>
>
>> >It forces the major candidates to fully justify all of their positions,
>> >instead of just being able to ignore certain things because they assume
>> >they have all the extremist voters locked up and don't need to defend
>> >their moves toward the center.[...]
>>
>> I think you mean "locked out", not "locked up".
>
>No, I meant locked up. If Nader isn't around, Gore can be as
>conservative as he wants, so long as he is less conservative than Bush,
>and those at the extreme left will still have to vote for him over Bush.
>With Nader around, that isn't the case, and Gore can't assume he's got
>those people locked up.
Good point, thanks for the clarification. But I would point out that
the large number of non-voters indicates more are being "locked out", in
the mainstream as well as the extremes, than "locked up". The fallacy
of campaign coverage which leads to the "two party lock-out" is, I
think, similar to some of the difficulties people have understanding the
Microsoft situation. Poll results are much like market share; they
assume that a pie chart reflects reality too broadly. When we hear how
many would vote for one or the other or "don't know" or "third party",
they don't seem to take into account the fact that there is no
deterministic mechanism for including those who won't vote, or might
vote. They should present at least an accurate, if not consistent, set
of statistics, and take the average percentage of non-voters off the top
when identifying "support" for either candidate, or neither. It
wouldn't sound right, though, to describe BOTH major candidates
"backing" to be such low numbers as "7%" or even "19%", or whatever they
might come out to.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:38:33 -0400
Chad Irby wrote:
>
> Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad
> > Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > bobh{at}haucks{dot}org wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 23:33:45 GMT, Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >"First-world" nations have nuclear submarines that work, and don't
> > > > >screw
> > > > >around for a week before asking for help in rescuing the crew.
> > > >
> > > > The US has lost two nuclear subs over the years. I don't know how
> > > > long
> > > > they "screwed around" though.
> > >
> > > For the ten to twelve seconds that it took for the crews of those subs
> > > to die horribly?
> >
> > Which is apparently what happened here?
>
> We don't know yet, except that due to the Russians screwing around, we
> didn't get anyone down there in time to find out.
>
> Note that the two major US sub disasters of the last half-century
> occurred in deeper waters, and were over in a couple of seconds.
Even at a mere 100 feet, all sub disasters are "over in a couple of
seconds".
Once the boat is flooded, it doesn't matter how long it takes to sink
to the bottom.
>
> --
>
> Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
--
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]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:45:40 -0400
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:04:00 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Bob Hauck wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:35:31 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > >What's bad about it? It maintains superiority, which is good.
> > >> >
> > >> > The major problems with missle defense are:
> >
> > >> So...then, your idea is...
> > >>
> > >> Expand the number of ICBM's in the American arsenal, AND
> > >> build large numbers of decoys, and blast China to hell if
> > >> they launch even one missile.
> >
> > I think that is basically the current policy, isn't it, minus the
> > decoys? Anyway, Aaron, the only reason I saw this is because JS/PL
> > replied and quoted it. You are in my kill file.
> >
> >
> > >Now if there was a way to stop missiles immediately after launch.....
> >
> > Yes, IF there were a way, that would be really cool. A lot of other
> > things would be really cool IF there were a way to do them. I think
> > non-technological solutions (i.e. arms reduction and a posture of
> > reduced readiness to launch on all sides) are both less costly and more
> > likely to actually work than SDI.
>
> The Russians have proposed a joint ship-based system to intercept
> missiles immediately after launch (before they leave the atmosphere). It
> would be dramatically cheaper and more realistic.
It's a sucker's bet, your fool.
How is a ship-based interceptor system supposed to work against a
rocked launched from deep within Russia? The rockets will be out
of the atmosphere while they are still thousands of miles from the
coast.
>
> The US won't hear of it, of course, because this SDI thing is really
> just an excuse to give billions to dollars to the defense contractors
> for the next few decades. A system that was cheap and could actually be
> built in a reasonable period of time wouldn't allow for that.
Actually, we *HAVE* tested ship-based systems -- kind of a giant
"Patriot" system to sit off the coasts of N. Korea, etc.
There are certain problems with this, though
1) They don't do anything for launches that are deep inland.
Have you looked at a globe and checked out the size of Russia???
2) They won't be of much help against any sub-launched ICBM.
Yes, it is *best* if you can arrest the terrorist in his home..
but we STILL post armed security at all military installations.
why is that.
--
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: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NETCRAFT: I'm confused
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:09:12 -0500
"Nico Coetzee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Every now and then some M$ preacher refers to netcraft for this or that
> stat. Well, am I the only one that find it strange that Apache is the
> only platform currently with a obvious positive trendline? Even the M$
> line has a downward curve since just before 2000.
Actually, netcrafts survey is not a very accurate representation. Since the
advent of "domain squating", there are companies that own literally 10's of
thousands of domains that all point to the same "You can buy this domain"
page on the same server. This really skews the statistics.
The number of IIS servers being installed are still growing. And it seems
to be growing at a fairly regular rate. The Apache servers are growing at a
faster rate, which increases overall marketshare, causing it to appear that
IIS's market share is going down, when it's growing at the same rate it was
the previous month.
> And Linux remain the dominant OS platform, no matter how you look at it.
No, not really. If you look at it the correct way, you see that Linux is
not the dominant OS platform. Most IIS sites are single user sites (though
there are a few big multi-host sites on IIS). We don't know how many of
those Linux sites are really the same site with a different domain. *IF*
(and i'm making these number up obviously), the average number of sites per
server is 3 for Linux, and the average for IIS is 1.5, then there are half
as many Linux servers as there are NT servers. But since we don't know this
information (Netcraft doesn't break out unique IP's, just Unique domain
names... and even if they did it wouldn't prove much since you can have
multiple IP's on the same server) it's hard for these numbers to really mean
anything.
> Don't you people find this funny?
Yes, but not in the same way you do.
------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:55:38 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> They should present at least an accurate, if not consistent, set
> of statistics, and take the average percentage of non-voters off the top
> when identifying "support" for either candidate, or neither. It
> wouldn't sound right, though, to describe BOTH major candidates
> "backing" to be such low numbers as "7%" or even "19%", or whatever they
> might come out to.
That could be very useful in some ways, but they way it is done now is
the best way for the polls to answer the question they are trying to
answre, which is "who is going to win?"
--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
Anybody that wants the presidency so much that he'll spend two years organizing
and campaigning for it is not to be trusted with the office. -David Broder
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Large disks still not supported on Linux?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 09:50:20 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RCS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Er9q5.3670$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I was wondering if the upcoming kernel 2.4 supports larger harddisks than
> previously?
> ( or maybe its lilo that needs to be updated for this?)
>
> As it is today, it is some hassle to install Windows and Linux on the same
> machine due to this.
>
> Also, since you don't get newer computers with harddisks less 6 GB (more
or
> less) any more, it is some hassle also to install Linux by itself on one
> harddisk.
>
> Of course, you could get through the partitioning if you have some
> experience, but for beginners this is something that will turn them of
> trying Linux.
>
> Of course, as always, I could have missed something :-)
Linux can handle disks larger thn 6Gig, actually the first cut off was
around .5 Gig. The was imposed by the first design of the ATA. The latter
cut off around 8 Gig is imposed by the hardware. Depending on your computer
and disk controlllers both these limits are gone.
It sounds like you problem is locating all of lilo within the first logical
1024 cylinders of your drive. The reason that need to be done is only
because lilo depends on your compuer's bios to access the disk. If this is
not workable for you, don't install lilo on your hard drive. There are
other options, you could boot into Linux but using loadlin which is a dos
program so you would have to first boot dos and then run loadlin to boot
Linux. Or you could just copy a kernel to a floppy and use it as a boot
floppy for Linux.
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:01:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe
Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 18:04:53 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > > > >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > > >> Again, you make the flawed assumption that the unfitness of the
> > > > >> parents implies the unfitness of their children.
> > > > >
> > > > >That's the safe way to bet.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to go on statistics alone, and make blanket assumptions
> > > > based on averages, I ask you this -- would you endorse a company
> > > > policy that dictates that African Americans shouldn't be hired due
> > > > to the fact that the "safe way to bet" is that they have inferior
> > > > "intelligence" ( despite considerable overlap of different ethnic
> > > > groups ... ) Oh, I refer you to your "bible" for the relevant
> > > > statistics.
> > >
> > > No. Simply overturn the Supreme Court ruling that disallows IQ tests
> > > for job placement.
> >
> > It's impossible to even come up with a single number to accurately
> > represent microprocessor performance and you think the same can be done
> > for the human brain?
>
> I'm curious about this Supreme Court ruling. When did they rule that?
>
> My company uses entrance exams for executive positions. They've found
> that people who score higher on the exam tend to do better jobs than
> those who score poorly.
>
> What's wrong with that--either legally or ethically?
Possibly nothing. Depends on the exams and how they're interpreted. IQ
tests pretend you can determine general intelligence (whatever that is)
by measuring things like how long it takes you to make block patterns
and how well you can repeat strings of numbers. Do you consider those
reasonable criteria for measuring the ability of job applicants?
Sometimes high intelligence isn't even the most important criterion;
good communication skills or initiative can be more valuable in certain
positions. You'd almost certainly be doing yourself a disservice by
pre-screening applicants based on IQ.
All that said, I suspect the reason for the Supreme Court ruling (I'm
guessing here; I don't know anything about this case specifically) is
that you can make a reasonably strong case that IQ tests are biased.
Some of the test relies on "general knowledge," which varies from
society to society, and contrary to what all the talk of inclusion might
lead you to believe, the US is far from being a single heterogeneous
society.
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Large disks still not supported on Linux?
Reply-To: Steven Smolinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:03:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It sounds like you problem is locating all of lilo within the first logical
> 1024 cylinders of your drive. The reason that need to be done is only
> because lilo depends on your compuer's bios to access the disk. If this is
> not workable for you, don't install lilo on your hard drive.
Actually, just get a new version of lilo. The 1024 cylinder limit has been
conquered! :-)
Steve
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:02:05 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...endless ad hominem and style over substance arguments deleted...]
> >OK. Then where's the factual evidence to back up your position. You
> >don't have any. You merely assume that it's true.
>
> I presume it is true, as it fits all of the available evidence, so far
> as I am aware. I have justified my position through reason and evidence
> (you might not have realized what all that "quoting from precedent" was
> all about, but that's called 'backing up your position' among those less
> prone to heated squabbling and more interested in reasoned discussion
> than yourself), and still await any attempt to confront, let alone
> refute, that position. Your protests that no argument against my
> position is necessary is simply yet another of your logical failures.
> I'm reasonably sure that it is based on your inability to even
> comprehend what my position is, and your implied insistence that this is
> not due to your own lack of ability is rather empty in that regard.
Do you employ the use of a random word generator in your posts? Or are you
just unable to form sentences?
Which is it?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
