Linux-Advocacy Digest #688, Volume #28 Sun, 27 Aug 00 18:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (ZnU)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Mike
Marion)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (ZnU)
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Re: Large disks still not supported on Linux?
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Pat McCann)
Re: Just converted (Cihl)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
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: 27 Aug 2000 21:15:46 GMT
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:32:37 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> If you're asking if the American kid doesn't perform as well on
>> international tests by the time they enter high school, my answer
>> is "yes". The American kids are already behind at this stage.
>>
>> If you're asking if American kids are less "intelligent" than Japanese
>> kids, well I refer you to your bible (1)
>
>
>
>So...based on what YOU have just told us:
>
> (A) There is a genetic component to intelligence
Not quite. My point is that if you are prepared to accept the case made
by your bible, then this is true.
BTW, the differences between the performance of different ethnic groups
on these tests is not obviously due to genetic factors. Indeed, questions
regarding the origin of the difference is a contentious issue that is
worthy of debate.
If you're interested in knowing what *I* personally believe, I find it
plausible that there is indeed a genetic component to intelligence.
However, I disagree that you can judge someone's intelligence based on
genetics alone. (1)
>AND/OR
>
> (B) American schools are fucked up.
>
>So...is it (A), (B), or both?
If the American schools are fucked up, it's probably not due to overly
leftist policies, since there are other education systems that are more
leftist that report better performance on tests.
(1) Your idols, H&M agree with me on this one. They do not argue that
there is determinism in individual cases; indeed, they caution readers
that their findings do not justify this sort of simple minded bigotry.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[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 21:18:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.
But it's unclear in this case if the sub was totally flooded
immediately.
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
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: 27 Aug 2000 21:24:19 GMT
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:35:28 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis 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?????
That people who wouldn't finish high school in other countries finish
it in the US ? It doesn't prove that the said illiterates would have
done substantially better under a different system.
>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.
Well, this is a spurious anecdote, and as such, it doesn't really prove
anything. Instead of offering staistics, you're attempting to construct
a case built on spurious anecdotes, and IMO, that is not a case at all.
I'd conjecture that if he was born in another country, he wouldn't be
admitted to university in the first place. In other words, I dispute
your claim that his incompetence was somehow caused by the University.
I don't wish to completely dismiss the issue though. I believe that
Universities need to hold their athletes to respectable academic
standards, and obviously, they've failed in this instance.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
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 17:25:07 -0400
"Joe Ragosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [...]
> > >> >Really? Count your standard deduction and personal exemption and
> > >> >that's
> > >> >$7000 tax free. If you make $21,000 and have no dependents, a third
> > >> >of
> > >> >your income is tax-free right off the bat. Now let's say you make
> > >> >$80,000... where do you come up with $24,000 in itemized deductions?
> > >>
> > >> The question is where do I come up with $7000, not $24,000. And I
> > >> don't; I generally come up with about $3000, but my goal is not to
> > >> minimize the amount I contribute to society. Most others in my shoes
> > >> might easily pay a crafty accountant to shave another $4K off my tax
> > >> bill, through whatever means necessary.
> > >
> > >You have a strange concept of the tax laws. There's no way that a
> > >"crafty accountant" is going to find an extra $4K in deductions unless
> > >you've missed some very, very obvious things.
> >
> > That's my point. I may very well have done so, or been able to find
> > greater loopholes with which to lower my tax bill in some other way. I
> > don't even bother to try, as I don't get any kind of "warm and fuzzy"
> > feeling by trying to minimize my taxes.
>
> But you somehow believe that the system allows people who want to do so
> to escape their tax burden. In general, that's not true.
>
> >
> > >That's a very common misconception. For the vast majority of "wealthy",
> > >there are no magic loopholes or no way to hide your money. Sure, they
> > >can lie about what they contribute to charity, but the poor can do
that,
> > >too and no one's advocating cheating.
> >
> > Sorry, I've enough money, and dealt enough with those who have even more
> > money, to know that the loopholes may not be magic, but they do exist
> > and they are taken advantage of by the wealthy and inaccessible to the
> > poor.
>
> Please be specific. No more of your "feelings" or bizarre definitions.
>
> Please explain which loopholes you're talking about that a clever
> accountant could have used to save you $4 K on your taxes.
>
> >
> > >Given that you think that the poor pay a higher percentage of their tax
> > >bracket than the rich, you really ought to learn how the tax laws work
> > >before spouting off so much.
> >
> > Screw your clueless assumptions about how tax laws work; give me data or
> > shut the hell up. I'm not going to waste even more time chasing down
> > your logical fallacies on this topic as well as the others I've trampled
> > on your putatively intellectual arguments.
>
> Wait a second.
>
> You're the one who said that a clever accountant could have saved you
> $4,000 on your taxes. YOU made the claim. Please tell us exactly which
> loopholes you're referring to.
>
> And no more of your fantasies. Please be specific.
I study those itemized deductions like a hawk, there's not a whole lot left
these days unless you have paid one hell of a medical bill or dare to tell
them you give $249.00 a week to the church.
There is one called "Uninsured or Underinsured loss" which came in quite
handy a couple years ago. That was one fine deduction! :-)
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:29:07 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you get into the details, which teachers see, but most people don't -- you
> find that the students with the problems are by and large the ones with
> problem homes. And it comes with them to school -- and what happenes to them
I'm not arguing that point, but they shouldn't be allowed to graduate (so
called "social promotion") if they can't do what's required. The fact that
the families can often complain to the school and get their child through
shows that there's a problem in the public school system.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc. - http://miguelito.org
Like the man said "Nothing is foolproof, because fools are so ingenious"
------------------------------
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 21:30:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe
Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Marion
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Perry Pip wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > And you want my taxes to pay for vouchers for that shit? No way.
> > > >
> > > > As someone who started out in public schools, then switched to
> > > > private school, I can say without a doubt that the education I got
> > > > at
> > > > the private school was _much_ better then I could've gotten in the
> > > > public system. My parents sacrificed a lot for my sister and I
> > > > (and
> > > > we both let them know that we appreciate what they did) to go to
> > > > private school. I have plenty of friends that went to public
> > > > school
> > > > that wish they could've also gone to private school and talk about
> > > > how bad they were/are.
> > >
> > > It depends where you live. In rich suburbs, the public schools are of
> > > very high quality. They're properly funded. In inner cities, they're
> > > woefully underfunded, and they're horrible.
> > >
> > > > BTW, I think the proper system would be to give a tax credit for
> > > > someone that sends their kids to private schools.. which wouldn't
> > > > cost you anything in taxes.
> > >
> > > The solution is to properly fund inner city schools, not drain even
> > > more
> > > money away from them.
> >
> > The city of Detroit spends $11,000 per pupil...almost TRIPLE what
> > many private schools spend.
> >
> > And yet, the Detroit Public Schools are among the worst in the country.
> >
>
>
> The small private school my kids used to go to cost $3,300 per student.
> I believe the tuition was about half the expense (an endowment paid the
> rest). So, for $6,600 per student, we got class sizes of no more than 20
> students, quite adequate facilities, and an education that put the kids
> (on average) at about the 75th percentile, based on SAT scores.
>
> It's not about money.
That private school gets to pick who it accepts, right? Will it take
kids with serious learning disabilities? Behavioral/emotional problems?
Below average intelligence? You can't just leave these people out of the
system; if you don't do your best to educate them they'll only be even
more of a burden on society later.
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:32:48 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tad McClellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:27:47 +1000, Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> It seems that too many people are so worked up about the XML format
that
> >> they are crediting it with magical properties.
> >
> >Yeh, there seems to be a lot of hype. I guess it's the new toy syndrome.
> ^^^^^^^
>
>
> Structured markup is not new. It is (at least) 20 *years* old.
>
> I am dumbfounded that most everybody thinks that XML is
> "something new"...
>
>
> So it isn't really "new toy" syndrome, it is more like
> "a very old toy that I just now discovered" syndrome :-)
XML is something "new"; but, it is just a new implementation of the same old
idea. Take an old idea reimplement it, give it a new name, throw in a few
new term and a lot of hype. That is all XML really is. The problem is that
too many people read the hype and don't really understand what it really is,
soon you hear about XML replacing programs. In time the reality of the
situation starts to sink in, but in the mean time what foolishness does it
generate!
I have seen all this so many times before. Some of the problem seems to be
that the neophytes discount the vaule of the wisdom of experience. So
instead of learning from us they have too make all the same mistakes that
were made before and have to learn the lessons first hand. And then there
are thoise who never learn and fall for it over and over again.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Large disks still not supported on Linux?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:11:57 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [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! :-)
Really? That is great news! Thanks for the info.
The 1024 cylinder limit has never been a problem for me, but getting past it
will be of great assistance to many others.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
From: Pat McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 27 Aug 2000 14:46:28 -0700
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Said Pat McCann in alt.destroy.microsoft;
> >
> >I told you what implications I was worried about. You didn't bother
> >commenting on them.
>
> I don't think you did. I think you indicated what those implications
> might derive from, that HISWORD is a partial program, but you didn't
> indicate what the real impact of the practical cases might be, which is
> what I consider "the implications".
It was a post or two before I introduced HISWORD. Feel free to assume
the implications were of no merit. It no longer matters much.
> consider it central to the issue. In truth, any definition of what a
> program is in any universal sense would be little more than a hasty
> generalization.
I didn't care what a "program" is in universal generality or in law. I
wanted two separate handy terms or phrases by which we could agree to
use to refer to two very different things unambiguously. Nor did I care
what "a compilation" was. The entire program with supporting libraries
might or might not be a compilation but I wanted to be able to refer to
"the something". "A compilation" would be ungrammatical; "The
compilation" would be merely confusing, especially if "the compilation"
is not "a compilation".
> Please stop insisting that I'm somehow arguing inconclusively or unfairly.
Will do. In this thread, at least.
> Well, see, the only reason you see that statement as addressing the
> point any more "head on" than any other time I've said something, is
> because we know share enough of a conceptual framework for you to
> understand it enough to deal with it, at least.
No, it was "head on" because it provided terms for "the program" and
"the program plus libraries" (in your words). Unfortunately, "a program"
and "a compilation", might be descriptive, but they are poor replacement
terms, especially if later arugement shows the second one to not be a
Section 101 compilation in some cases.
> Don't let me distract you, if you'd rather be doing something
> else. If I had a life, I probably wouldn't post much, either.
I hate that expression. (You might have noticed that some guy who tired
of thinking about what he was discussing on g.m.d. brought his thread to
a close today with "get a life".) You have a life and I dare guess it is
more valuable to society than that of the jerks that would tell you to
get one; it's certainly valuable to you, in any case. People have a
great need to make others around them conform to their life choices
because it lets them feel they have done the right thing if others do it
too. These same people get outraged if you suggest how their lives
should be led. Don't be afraid to live your own life your own way
unless you need that same confirmation. We all do to an extent; if that
is the case or you don't like your life, then by all means take the bull
by the corns and change your life today; not maybe tomorrow. End of sermon.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Just converted
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:48:20 GMT
Mig wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > In article <hFkp5.7599$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > Telephone lines are simply not going to be accurate. Two calls from
> > the
> > > same line can give vastly different performance on the same machine.
> > >
> >
> > Uuuhh, mine's really consistent. 'Course I can throw rocks from the
> > back yard and hit the rooftops of both my ISP and the local telco CO.
> > And my Windoze transfers are always slower than Linux, on the same line,
> > at the same times of day, with the same box, to the same site. No I'm
> > not going by the bogus "connected at" number, just comparing download
> > times for similar sized files. Windoze is appalling; its so slow you'd
> > think its copying my entire disk image and personal data up to
> > microsoft.com at the same time I'm trying to ftp a file.
>
> Nonsens... Every test i made allways gives me something very close to the
> ideal result on both Windows and Linux.. not even after having changed the
> MTU could i measure any difference on Windows.
> For doing that test you have to use a
> 1) Server so close to you as possible
> 2) Do a number of downloads
> 3) Remove software compression (and ideally hardware comp)
> 4) Download compressed files
> 5) Optimise the modem speed (and no its not necessarily the maximum connect
> speed it can achive)
> 6) And before i forget.. the same time of day.. and dont use a browser but
> a FTP client or somethin more exact
>
> Youll find that both OS perform the same.. certainly Micros~1 Windows can
> saturate a modem/ISDN connection - well if it doesnt bluescreen .. hehehe
>
> Cheers
What you'll see often on a dialup-connection in Windows 95/98, or any
other TCP/IP connection for that matter, is that downloads, of any
kind, often block and then resume after 3 to 5 seconds or so. This
should happen every 10 minutes or so.
The Windows 95 TCP/IP stack is old, buggy and lacks good compatibility
with IPv4. Microsoft needs to rewrite the TCP/IP stack for their
consumer OS's.
--
A single "thank you"-note is worth more than a billion dollars.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
