Linux-Advocacy Digest #757, Volume #28 Wed, 30 Aug 00 19:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Joe R.")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: Programs for Linux
Re: Open source: an idea whose time has come
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Gary Hallock)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum? (Gary Hallock)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Cool Idea (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:35:52 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Yes, the dooooooooo choose it. They choose to NOT do what it
>takes to not be a poverty-stricken loser. They choose NOT to
>pay attention in school. They choose NOT to get work in any number
>of low-skill high-paying jobs (admittedly, the work SUCKS, but,
>that's precisely why the pay is so high).
Why? Why did they choose to be poverty-stricken losers, Aaron?
[...]
>Name ONE adult who is in poverty who would still be there no matter
>what choices and actions they made in their life.
Your lack of logic precedes you. This is as bad as that sig-line
bullshit. Name ONE adult in poverty who *wouldn't* still be there no
matter what choices and actions they made in their life. They are both
null sets, because you're trying to compare the past and the present in
a way which denies that anything is different between them but for
someone's choices and actions. Since there are poor, and will always be
poor, then you cannot know whether they would "still" be poor if under
different circumstances, including their own choices. You also can't
guarantee that the right choice at the time they made it was always the
right choice in retrospect. You kind of have to take their word for it.
Just like we take your word for it when you rail on and on about how
you've been poor and now aren't, so anyone who is poor can be not-poor,
but for their strength of will and self-reliance. Self reliance doesn't
do shit for you, to be honest. You don't even "choose" which choices
you make; you're just a monkey with a brain, and you make your choices
based on what that brain's learned, and little else. You didn't decide
what to learn or remember. You might feel you've decided how to use
what you've learned or remembered, but that doesn't mean that you always
make the right decision. If people always controlled whether they were
poor, why were you poor on multiple occasions?
So now that you're not poor, you feel you've earned the right to tell
those who are "fuck you"!? Well, fuck you, sir.
>Almost all of those in poverty are those who CHOSE to not apply
>themselves in school.
Well, I know that can't be true, because I 'CHOSE' to not apply myself
in school, and I'm not in poverty. But I still can't pay all my bills.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 22:28:19 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:06:48 GMT, D. Spider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It appears that on Wed, 30 Aug 2000 05:10:31 GMT, in
>comp.os.linux.advocacy "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 21:04:11 GMT, Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>>> >
>>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> >> On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 12:03:12 GMT, Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> >> >news:8oe1jv$ddc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[deletia]
>>> Yes it was. It swapped like a motherfucker. That reduced it's
>>> effective speed to the speed of disk rather than the speed of
>>> DRAM or of CPU.
>>>
>>I just don't agree with you. Win3.11 was what I used for 3 months, and it
>>didn't hit the drive any were near as often as Win95, 3.11 did crash about
>>5 times a day, though. I also used 3.11 for 6 months before I got my
>>computer at college. I guess you don't know what pain can truly be until
>>you C64 GeoPublish without an REU. That is the most painful experence, I
>>have ever had.
>
>It is possible to reconcile your rememberance and his, if we assume
>that he was trying to run larger apps than you were. SPSS for instance
>would do exactly what he he describes on an 8 meg machine, you really
>had to have 16 to run it comfortably.
I was previously accustomed to running an OS and a machine that
required no swapping out to disk what so ever. I also saw no
point in running a 33mhz 486 with 8M as if it were an MC68000
with 1M RAM.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:39:37 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] () in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
> Living well should never need to imply "beyond one's means".
[...]
Just in case it was lost in the rhetoric; wise words.
>>> > Many of the working poor have two jobs.
>>> What part of "living beyond one's means" do you not understand
>>
>>What part of "underpaid" do you not understand?
>
> It's time for Mr. "living beyond one's means" to back up
> those generalities with data. It might be intriguing to
> see what this person thinks the 'lower classes' should be
> willing to put up with.
Whatever he did, I presume, as his entire position seems to be based on
the fact that he, as a putatively capable healthy young white male, was
once 'poor', and managed to pull himself up by his own bootstraps. It
would be interesting to see his reaction to some real numbers.
--
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: "Joe R." <[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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 22:38:22 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Said Joe R. in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 12:51:08 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >There's an interesting case I read about in the paper today. The
> >> >government siezed custody of a 3 year old kid who weighed 120 lb,
> >>
> >> I believe that was a state government, not the feds. And doctors did
> >> say there was a health threat.
> >
> >Hypothetically, perhaps at sometime in the future.
> >
> >Her heart was in good condition and there was no immediate health threat.
>
> Why did she weigh 120 lbs? If the parents didn't realize what they were
> doing, and they were the ones doing it (and apparently the doctors said
> it was), then of *course* the child should be taken from them and cared
> for; the parents should be cared for, too, they're obviously disturbed.
> This is child abuse, plain and simple, unless you *know* otherwise.
So you're assuming that they're guilty?
Besides, where do you draw the line? 115 lb? 110 lb?
Or, do you start removing kids from smokers' homes? After all, second
hand smoke is a known danger -- every bit as much (or more) as obesity.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:41:23 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:11:30 +0100, C Lund wrote:
>> >> Fuck you. I've never been a republican.
>> >
>> >You sure sound like one.
>>
>> According to Kulkis, the Republicans are "socialists".
>>
>> >I wasn't talking about "welfare slobs", I was talking about the working poor.
>>
>> According to Kulkis, the world is neatly partitioned into "philosopher kings"
>> and "welfare slobs". A welfare slob is anyone who's not a philosopher king.
>>
>
>You will never discern shades of grey if you do not first acknowledge
>the existance of black and white.
Regardless of how black or white the extremes, the entire world is made
of nothing but gray.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.caldera,alt.os.linux.mandrake,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Programs for Linux
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 22:36:25 GMT
On 30 Aug 2000 21:43:23 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy robert w hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>
>: and if you want a fallback position, get win4lin (v1 is now only $35 I
>: hear) and run M$ software in a stable linux environment; and keep the
>: techie side of your id alive by experimenting with wine.
>
>How does this compare to VMware?
It's less flexible and reliable when it comes to odd kernel
versions, it supports less hardware features, it's not dependent
on some funky virtual file system and it's supposed to be faster.
Anyone get it working under Mandrake 7.1?
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Open source: an idea whose time has come
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 22:34:31 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 02:55:50 GMT, Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[deletia]
>Can you say "vertical markets"? The Windows world is absolutely THRIVING in
>targeted applications. Case in point, SalesLogix Corporation of Scottsdale,
>AZ http://www.saleslogix.com/. Started only a few years ago by Pat Sullivan,
>the creator of the Act! contact manager that is not the property of
>Symmantec, it has become tremendously successful in the salesforce automation
>vertical market. Even the creator's of venerable shareware like WinZip and
>ACDSee are making enough to support their families on their own terms. I
>don't see how open source benefits the creator -- it's not like you can
>really give up your day job.
Beyond the utiltity that you derive from your own work, it's not
really supposed to. It's supposed to benefit EVERYONE rather than
just a select few as current copyright law does.
Bear in mind: the only reason that the sort of people who live off
of the likes of ACDSee and WinZip might not be able to do so in the
future is the abusive practices of larger artificial property holder.
Without the lack of balance that has existed in copyrights as of late,
people like Stallman would have no audience.
IOW: the industry brought it on itself.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:46:03 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> The only thing "false" about my statements were the fact that it was my
> opinion; they may be mistaken, but they aren't false. I did not "know I
> was ignorant" (isn't that an oxymoron?) because as far as I knew my
WRONG. It is quite possible to know you are ignorant. It is NOT an
oxymoron. Do you even know what the word means? You have admitted that you
are ignorant on many subjects, including KDE, Qt, and Trolltech. You seem to
think it is an advantage to be ignorant. You know, Max, I am ignorant on many
subjects also. But I don't go around spreading lies based on my ignorance.
>
> statements were correct. Libelous? Cut me a break. This is Usenet and
> I was talking about an open source software project!
You attacked Roberto personally, claiming his was a whore and implying that he
got kickbacks of some sort from TrollTech. Yes, LIBELOUS.
You made claims about KDE that were totally false with ABSOLUTELY no information
and you KNEW you had not information on which to make those claims. Here is
just a sample of your dirty work:
> Screw KDE. Its a commercial development project. They're trying to leverage
> free software for their own
> private gain; GNOME rules. Any ideas KDE can come up with, GNOME can
> replicate. That's not FUD, that's the
> god's honest truth.
>
> The only thing they have is the talent of their programmers. I refuse to
> impugn Roberto's programming
> capability due to his opinion. He isn't working for a big commercial
> software developer, maybe, but that just
> means he's an amateur whore.
>
> Now, I have to point out that I don't have anything against whores. I think
> anybody should be free to do
> what they think is ethical, and I refuse to impugn Roberto's ethics because
> of his opinions on these matters.
> He's not wrong; he's just mistaken. It seems to me that if the investors who
> pay Roberto were confident in
> their product, they'd admit that the only reason they'd need to keep any of
> their code 'commercial' is because
> they want to profiteer, and can't be satisfied with simple honest profits on
> their production. And if Roberto
> were confident enough of his coding abilities, he'd resent their insistence
> that they need to restrict access to
> it in order to make a profit on it. He should have more of an interest in
> building his intellectual capital by
> maintaining ownership of is work.
Let's see, in this short excerpt you call Roberto a whore and claim that the
investors of KDE (whoever they are) pay Roberto.
>
> I am claiming what I stated, no more and no less. I can't force you to
> understand it, but please don't bother trying to paraphrase it unless
> *make sense*. It just makes it obvious you have nothing to say of the
> matter.
NO, but it is obvious that you have nothing useful to say. You just like to
spread lies. Around here that's called FUD.
>
>
> The longer this crap goes on the more possible it seems that I really do
> simply make too much sense for some people to deal with. Somewhere in
> the sands of time they got stuck in "troll mode", and they don't seem to
> realize that I have no interest in "disengaging" as most posters do,
> eventually. I've seen *many* of the most vehement and abusive posters
> make some startlingly good observation and provide useful information,
> like you, Gary, and Aaron and Loren. But even you guys are not a whole
> lot better than 'JS/PL' and Joe and Christopher and, of course, my old
> buddy 'Roger'.
>
Whatever.
>
> Its easy to seem to be trolling, of course. I've done it myself; as far
> as I know, Nathaniel still doesn't read any of my posts, or at least he
> hasn't responded to the last few. He was convinced I was being an
> asshole in using his statements as the point of a discussion on just why
> Windows sucks as much as it does, or rather how it sucks as much as it
> does, and why. No matter how I tried to assuage his anxiety that I was
> attacking him by arguing against his opinion, every time I tried to use
> something he said as an example of the kind of problematic behavior I
> was trying to talk about, he'd go wild.
You are the troll, Max.
>
>
> So I figure this a good chance that you, Gary, and a handful of others,
> at least, are just so used to going through the "Wrong!" motions, that
> you end up wasting all your time. There's a lot to be said for heated
> flame-war meta-discussion, of course. Apparently, some people post for
> almost no other reason. But I'm not here for that.
But your posts clearly indicate that that us exactly why you are here. And you
have openly admitted such in the past.
>
>
> I don't post to Usenet through any great humanitarian impulse, really,
> and I don't consider debate here to be "productive", really, on a
> real-life scale. I post to Usenet, as I've said several times recently,
> to *discuss*, not to *be right*. And you, and many others, seem to
> waste far too much time trying (futilely, IMHOBTJMO) to "prove me
> wrong". I don't 'care' if I'm wrong, I *want* to be wrong. Which is to
> say that I want to state my opinion as a falsifiable theory, and watch
> it get knocked over, validly, fairly, and intellectually. When I set it
> back up, I don't care to be distracted by lots of yammering about how
> 'ignorant' I was; I want to hear something better. It isn't *insulting*
> when I'm actually shown my error, its *gratifying*. I'm not here to win
> the discussion; I'm here to discuss. But by the same token, if you
> aren't producing a better theory or providing your own, potentially
> false, opinion, then you're just wasting my time, and yours. Mine,
> because I don't fall for it; yours, because you might have something
> better to do.
>
You are simply making of a fool of yourself, Max.
>
> And frankly, I think its a problem that there are too many people on
> Usenet who can't keep up with an honest discussion without resorting to
> ad hominem argument. An ad hominem attack isn't just something you can
> *quote*, which they do to teach the concept with a simple example. Ad
> hominem argument is when you use the word "wrong" as an entire sentence;
> its when you don't present a superior counter-proposal to the persons
> position in verbose graciousness but just say "prove it". Its when you
> don't contribute more ideas than ridicule. Its 'meta' discussion that
> isn't meta-discussion, but just a more passive-aggressive kind of flame
> war.
>
Sometimes wrong is all that is needed. That has been true in many repsonses to
your posts.
>
> It doesn't upset me much that you guys so misunderstand and misrepresent
> me; I'm used to it. That's happened to me my whole life (not that I'm
> unique in the slightest). What bothers me is that nobody seems to have
> much else to do; every exchange ends in squabbling, and any real
> discussion between sensible people is quickly torn apart by
> ankle-biters. If I'm going to waste my life on Usenet, I'd rather waste
> it doing something a bit more intellectually stimulating than fighting
> off this kind of nonsense.
>
Oh, I understand you quite well. I don't believe I mispresent you at all. You,
on the other hand, just love to spread lies and FUD.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 22:49:22 GMT
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 22:09:43 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>Byron A Jeff wrote:
> [...]
>>> Absolutely. I'm also intimately familiar with families that have no
>>> resources or no will to support anyone.
>>
>>So, what you're saying is....I am somehow obligated to support some
>>old coot who is so detestable, that even his own family hates him?
>
>Yes.
Keeping unsightly bums and urchins off the street is one
of the burdens of being contributing member of society.
If you don't like such things then becoming Amish or a
mountain man of some kind may be in order.
>
>>> So to put it bluntly if one is unlucky enough to be born into a family that
>>> cannot support them, then we simply discard them. Right?
>>
>>If you can't support kids, you shouldn't be having them.
>>If you do have kids, then it is your obligation to support
>>them, and YOUR shame if you don't.
>
>If, then. If, then. I bet you'd make a decent programmer, but as a
>political scientist, you have a rather narrow reference.
Nah. He has no sense of exception handling. Things WILL go
wrong. This is simple engineering and you have to accomodate
for that. One simply has to deal with what is not with what
you would rather things be. This includes dealing with the
poo scattered around by stupid people.
Clean up the poo, or you end up walking in it. Plus, cleaning
the poo early is usually cheaper than cleaning it up later on
(something any software engineer should be aware of).
>
>>Don't be laying any guilt trip on *me* for refusing to pay
>>for some DangerAsshole's slew of juvenile delinquent thugs.
> [...]
>>> And children are punished for the sins of their parents?
>>
>>Darwinism in action.
Except we aren't living in the jungle.
>
>It appears you're unredeemable, and entirely too thickheaded to make any
>sense. No, letting children starve is not an acceptable answer, Aaron.
[deletia]
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:57:01 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum?
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
> SuSE and RedHat will shortly release version 7 of their distros, but (and
> fell free to correct me if i am wrong), those will contain little or nothing
> new compared to the previous one.
>
> Kernel 2.4, KDE 2.0, GNOME 2.0 (or Helix or whatever...), will all be
> released at least 2-3 months from now.
>
> I think it smells Remond style greed to release versions only to keep the
> market going (ie. the money), and its not helping Linux to conquer the
> desktop market.
>
> Realesing versions that for the last year basicaly havent changed at all
> (last major upgrade was Kernel 2.2, KDE 1.1 and Gnome 1.0.something)
>
> /IL
Redhat 7.0 contains XFree86 4.0 and beta copies of KDE 2 and Koffice. It
also contains the 2.4 kernel headers so it looks like it may be 2.4 ready.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 22:54:58 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:11:30 GMT, Joe R. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "Joe R." wrote:
>> >
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > javelina wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Jack Troughton wrote:
[deletia]
>> > > Put all of that in the case.
>> > >
>> > > Keep buying more components and install as time permits
>> > > until the whole computer workds.
>> > >
>> >
>> > That's ridiculous.
>> >
>> > There's no way it's an hour job.
>> >
>>
>> I was just talking about physical assembly, not purchasing components.
>>
>
>That's the problem--the Wintrolls keep bragging about how fast it is to
>do something, but they only count a small portion of the total time.
>
>Just like they talk about how cheap PCs are, but then leave out half the
>components.
Sometimes you don't NEED half of the components. Other times you
need OTHER components. The potential means that ANY computer
purchase is going to have some overhead.
What if you don't LIKE the Rage128? What if you want Gigabit
ethernet? What if you want a larger disk or DVD versus CD?
Thoughtful shopping is no more or less time consuming should you
decide to alter your platform of choice.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within.
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 23:02:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:33:14 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>http://www.freep.com/news/metro/dicker30_20000830.htm
OH NO!
Linux is the direct cause of low school scores across the nation!
Danger Will Robinson!
Um...wait...Linux isn't being *used* in schools yet....???
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- next thing you know we'll be arguing Keynesian economics...
oh, wait, that's the next thread over...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Cool Idea
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 23:04:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 29 Aug 2000 18:22:54 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On 29 Aug 2000 00:50:12 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:48:11 -0500, Joe Kiser wrote:
>>>X Windows should support moving the mouse awound with the arrow keys on
>>>the keyboard and clicking with the Ctrl/Win/Alt keys. Then I wouldn't
>>>have to leave the keyboard.
>>
>>I believe some window managers support this type of thing. IIRC, you can
>>bind mouse moves to the keyboard in fvwm for example.
>>
>>In practice, it's best to use the mouse as a mouse, and use things like
>>window-cycling bindings and other keybindings if you just want to switch
>>apps or use the "panel"/"taskbar" or whatever.
>
> It is perfectly viable to control the graphics cursor
> with the keyboard. There's really no good reason to
> not support that sort of feature.
Unless somebody refused to license the patent.... :-) :-)
[snip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- hey, someone patented cursor XORing, why not?
------------------------------
From: [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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 23:00:39 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:56:39 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>Peter Ammon wrote:
> [...]
>>> I'm not saying that "everyone pays an equal percentage of what they can
>>> afford" is necessarily a just taxation system, but it does seem to be
>>> the philosophy behind a progressive tax.
>>
>>And by that same philosophy, if the guy earning $10,000/year pays
>>$1.50/pound for hamburger, then the guy earning $30,000/year should pay
>>$4.50/pound (or more) for hamburger.
>
>If taxes were hamburger, yes.
Actually this probably works out in real life.
There are quality/price tiers when it comes to many things. Those
of us that can spend more for better 'quality' while those that
make less buy whatever they can afford.
[deletia]
One could view that as a free market 'diversity tax'.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
