Linux-Advocacy Digest #816, Volume #28 Fri, 1 Sep 00 19:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: So ya' wanna' run Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn.....
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Re: How low can they go...?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
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: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:40:02 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 12:44:44 GMT,
Joe Ragosta, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>> >
>> Since the biggest cost to the poor is taxation of one sort or another,
>> why do you think the poor have such a tough time?
>
>
>The biggest cost to the poor is taxation of one sort or another?
>
>Care to back that up?
14% SS (your employer pays about half, but it comes out of the money
you would be getting if the govt wasn't), a couple percent for the mediscam,
call it 15% for fed taxes, and 6% more if you live in a state with a state
income tax. Add 6% for sales taxes (minus the food) and we are allready
approaching a 45% tax burden. Now, everything you buy has, in addition to
any sales tax, costs incured by previous levels of taxation. Granted, food
isn't taxed directly, but you pay for the taxes the farmer and the grocery
store pay. To top it off, you pay taxes on taxes. Example, say you pay 15%
withholding on your paycheck, then another 7% directly to SS (ignoring the
wad that your employer took out allready) you have paid 15% of 7% to the IRS,
and 7% of 15% to the SSA, sick...
and people complain about tithing...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
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: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:47:35 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 28 Aug 2000 10:43:08 GMT,
Donovan Rebbechi, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:20:20 GMT, ZnU wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>
>>How do you account for the fact that minorities are disproportionately
>>poor?
>
>Minorities are not disproportionatly poor if you control for IQ.
I am a little confused by this statement, are you saying that minorities
tend to be of a lower IQ? or that the poor tend to be of a lower IQ?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[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: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 18:59:40 -0400
Curtis Bass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> That's the problem. I believe you _are_ being as accurate, consistent,
>> and practical as you can. Yet you're still incomprehensible.
>
>Max may be "incomprehensible" to certain individuals, but he is by no
>means universally so, as I comprehend him rather well, but then I tend
>to have a stronger grasp of English than many, perhaps even most of the
>people whom I read here in USENET. One reason I don't engage in the
>discussion is primarily due to my own ignorance of the subject matter,
>to which I freely admit (but I tend to write quite eloquently on
>subjects with which I am familiar), yet I can credit Max for providing
>URLs and arguing from a position of research, citing what seem to be
>relevant cases and precedents. His opponents seem to simply say "you are
>ignorant, you don't know what you're talking about, yadda yadda yadda"
>and leave it at that.
>
>If I am alone in my assessments, then I rather pity Humanity . . .
>
My first impression of Max was very similar to yours. All I can say
is, let's talk again *AFTER* you've debated him on a subject with
which you're familiar and he isn't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
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: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:48:46 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:11:14 GMT,
ZnU, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ZnU wrote:
>
>> > > But the USA is the only country where the leftists have committed
>> > > to causing societal collapse from within. If the US is weakened,
>> > > the rest of the world is easily blackmailed.
>> >
>> > What exactly are you talking about? The more "leftist" countries, on
>> > average, have lower poverty rates and better educational systems than
>> > we
>> > do. How do you account for this? Do they simply have fewer of these
>>
>> The leftists in THIS country are in collaboration with the leftists
>> in the other countries. The overall goal is to weaken the US relative
>> to the other countries, so that the US will become even weaker than
>> them.
>
>Why? What would they gain? What is your evidence for this absurd claim?
>
>> Simply put...a large percentage of the education establishment
>> should be put on trial for treason.
>>
>>
>> Do you not have a brain capable of figuring this out yourself?
>
>Damnit! Why do they never tell me about the vast left-wing conspiracies?
>
>--
they're too busy selling secrets to the Communist Chinese...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
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: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:09:21 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 00:55:29 -0500,
Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8on2n3$hdh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > That doesn't stop X from being able to crash the OS though. Any
>software
>> > that accesses hardware, regardless of the mode it's using can crash the
>> > computer.
>>
>> Unless the OS is written to prevent one user mode process from crashing
>the
>> entire system.
>
>No. I will repeat this again. *ANY* OS that allows direct hardware
>manipulation from a given process (user or kernel) can crash the machine.
>All I have to do is set the video hardware to an invalid state which faults
>the bus and the system is toast, user mode or not.
>
>In fact, this is why Netscape can often crash systems running X.
Are you confusing crashing the X server with the OS <again> ?
I have had netscape bomb, I have (once or twice in 4 years) had netscape
kill the xserver, I have never had netscape take down the whole system.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
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: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:19:26 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:54:03 -0400,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said Jim Richardson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:33:43 -0400,
>> T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> brought forth the following words...:
>>
>>>Said Courageous in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>>
>>>>> At best, this system will waste $60 billion of US tax payer money.
>>>>
>>>>Many incidental technologies generally flow from such efforts.
>>>
>>>"Star Wars" is not landing a man on the moon, I'm afraid.
>>>
>>>>> At worst, it will waste much more and start a another cold war.
>>>>
>>>>I believe this is doubtful.
>>>
>>>Well, if you had a background in foreign policy, and the temerity to
>>>post with your real name, perhaps we might care about your belief, one
>>>way or the other.
>>
>>Speak for yourself, I value his belief/opinion as much as I value yours...
>
>I was speaking for myself. And anyone else who *agreed* with my
>opinion. Just because you haven't sorted things out is no reason for me
>to support a pretense of ignorance.
>
I don't know what your reasons for supporting ignorance are, frankly,
it'd probably be amusing to hear them.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:54:47 GMT
On Sat, 2 Sep 2000 08:36:11 +1000, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8oov7p$sp1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:28:06 +0200, Christophe Ochal
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > >
>> > ><cut>
>> > >
>> > >> Plus, since 'no one can get away with not buying Windows' anyways,
>> > >> there's really no compelling reason to put barriers in place of
>> > >> those of us that actually know what they're doing.
>> > >
>> > >What, you think everyone should *buy* winblows? With what use? A
>cupboard
>> > >holder?
>> >
>> > No, I'm just saying that the intallation media should be less
>> > user hostile for those of us capable of doing system wipes
>> > and building our own machines.
>> >
>> > A Quarterly driver update would be a good idea two.
>> >
>> > A Quarterly OS update would be even better, but that's not
>> > something I would ever expect a megacorp like Microsoft to
>> > ever do.
>>
>> Careful of what you ask for! Do you really want Windows 2000 Quarter 1,
>> Windows 2000 Quarter 2, Windows 2000 Quarter 3, Windows 2000 Quarter 3,
>> Windows 2001 Quarter 1, ... ?
>
>Have you people never heard of Service Packs ?
Do they contain the full driver set?
Can they be used only by themselves to install a system?
We are NOT talking about Redhat style errata RPMS.
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:52:29 GMT
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:02:40 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> They don't. And anyone can clone it. And if they sue the cloner,
>> as long as the cloner didn't do anything illegal, the cloner will
>> win. Big deal.
>
>Unless the cloner does not have enough money to fight back. Then the one
>who is in the right would lose and possibly be made destitute in the
>process.
Also, a very bad precedent could be set.
--
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:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:56:39 GMT
On Sat, 2 Sep 2000 08:35:38 +1000, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Terry Sikes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8oou80$rah$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Don't you think it's telling that Apple, a much more innovative
>> multimedia company than Microsoft, made OpenGL it's primary 3D API
>> last year?
>
>The only reason Apple did that, is because they know they don't have enough
>market oomph to push their own proprietry version. Apple are the best
>example of Not Invented Here syndrome around, if you think they chose OpenGL
>because it was open, or the promote open standards, you're very naive.
They certainly chose OpenGL because it was open. That's what allows
them to use it. Otherwise, they could have just implemented a version
of DirectX.
Such a thing is possible of course.
However, Microsoft would have to let Apple do that first.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:24:40 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8op67s$ppo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > [...]
> > >No thanks... I happen to disagree with the findings of fact.
> >
> > Well, in legal terms (barring any outrageous surprises in the near
> > future), that would make you "an unreasonable man."
>
> I'd like to know what apparently automatically makes a judge infallible?
> After all, that's why there's two levels of appeals courts above him.
>
> I only know of one person deemed to be completely infallible, and that's
the
> Pope. And even that's a lie.
Pabal infalibility was only desided by a popular vote of cardinals about
one-hundred years ago.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So ya' wanna' run Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn.....
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 16:00:54 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thomas Corriher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 16:20:32 -0700
> Didn't Abraham Lincoln's computer use core memory? I think
> I remember that from history class.
No, but the mechanical computer from that century did use cogs and gears.
Can you imagine the power consumption not to mention the weight and cost of
our modern computers with their memory sizes if we were still using core?
256 Megs of RAM would have needed 2,147,483,648 or 2,415,919,104 toridal
ferris cores wound with miles of copper wiring.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:49:33 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ls -l /proc/<pid>/fd suggests that X is opening a lot of sockets.
> I don't know if it has to open one per client (for its end of
> the socket connection), or what, although another ls -l sure suggests
> that it does.
They are anon unix domain sockets, i.e. sockets that do not exist in the
file system. There is usually one per active client.
> Yeppers -- and of course the name spaces are totally different;
> Unix domain networking uses pathnames, whereas TCP/IP uses /etc/host
> entries, DNS, and a few other things which I don't know at this time.
> (Compatibility? What's that?) Sigh...but both work reasonably well.
OK, you are close. Internet domain networking uses IP addresses and port
numbers for its naming system. Host name is a distinct layer created for
our convienence, DNS resolution and multilevel donmain named were introduced
to replace /etc/host when it got too big for standard use. However, it is
up the the resolver library or some other means to resolve a host.doman into
an IP address, it is the IP address that is used in internet domanin
netoworking.
> Let's hope they're complementary. :-)
They are just different pathways for the data to be communicated between the
clinets and the host.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:55:05 GMT
On Sat, 2 Sep 2000 08:36:56 +1000, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8op64i$o23$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > >Careful of what you ask for! Do you really want Windows 2000 Quarter
>1,
>> > >Windows 2000 Quarter 2, Windows 2000 Quarter 3, Windows 2000 Quarter 3,
>> > >Windows 2001 Quarter 1, ... ?
>> >
>> > ...better than a random collection of system libraries installed
>> > by a random collection of end user applications.
>>
>> Granted that it would be more ordered, but would you want to have to
>> purchase an upgrade fro Microsoft every three months paying them from
>around
>> $80.00 to about $300.00 each time for each Windows computer you are
>> responsible for?
>
>Service packs are the "quarterly updates" you're asking for, and they're
>free.
No they aren't. They're incomplete.
--
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
******************************
