Linux-Advocacy Digest #916, Volume #28 Tue, 5 Sep 00 08:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised.... (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet! (Ian Davey)
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451793 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?] ("2 + 2")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (mlw)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (mlw)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (mlw)
Re: A guise for Marxism (Was: businesses are psychopaths (Phillip Lord)
Re: Computer and memory ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: Computer and memory ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: Computer and memory ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: Computer and memory ("Christophe Ochal")
Re: Computer and memory ("Christophe Ochal")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: ZDNet reviews W2K server; I think you'll be surprised....
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 12:20:40 +0200
Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Just to save you the effort, 'sfcybear'.
> >
[snip]
I tried to follow the discussion, even if I'm not really
expert on networking issues. What I got is that in order to
have a standard network feature like DNS work with W2K you
must figure out how to do it, then modify something, install
something, write scripts etc. in other components of the
network. In my textbook knowledge, the basics of networking
are that you may interconnect different users and servers
without anyone being aware of what are the insides of the
other, in order to avoid countless problems. That's
something having even a standard name: "interoperability".
If Microsoft has achieved to foul that with W2K, the only
conclusion is that W2K is crap, not a debate on how to make
this crap work.
--
Ing. Giuliano Colla
Direttore Tecnico
Copeca srl
Via del Fonditore 3/E
Bologna (Zona Industriale Roveri)
Tel. 051 53.46.92 - 0335 610.43.35
Fax 051 53.49.89
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 10:33:06 GMT
In article <8p2ecp$cke$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "by" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hmm, I see things differently.
>
>If we're talking about copying files here, isn't it better to say 'make
>a copy of the file' instead of 'make an image of the file' ?
The original poster seemed to have their terminology completely confused
anyway. Image has a definate meaning which is different to copy.
>But that doesn't really matter. Maybe the Unix/Linux terminology is the
>original and thus the 'correct' one (99% don't care), but in the long
>run, it doesn't matter which terminology pervails because it's just
>semantics.
But semantics are the whole point, if two words mean different things you
can't just use them interchangeably. A disk image is very different from a
copy of a disk for instance. If you were to use one when you meant the other
all you'd do is confuse the issue.
>On the pragmatic side, given the fact that there're more windows users
>out there, given the fact that a significant portion of their users come
>from windows background, given the fact that unix/linux technies can get
>by with either terminology, and given the fact that regular windows
>users will be stuck when they encounter unfamiliar jargon, Red Hat
>should have used the windows terminology.
Why would a system built on tried and tested technology with well defined
terminology suddenly want to start using terminology from an unrelated (and
proprietry) technology? Especially where the terminology from that other
product probably means something different to what you intend anyway. Next
you'll be saying that all file managers should be referred to as explorers...
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451793
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 10:48:54 GMT
Here's today's Malloy digest. Interestingly, he still didn't respond to the
proof of his continuing lies, but engaged in his "parrot" mode again.
195> Here's today's Tholen digest. Not surprisingly, he didn't respond to the
195> proof of his continuing lies.
What alleged "proof", Malloy? My evidence is below. Where's yours?
195> Oh, well. To the digest improper!
195>
195> [Wake me, will ya, when Tholen has something significant to say? Thanks!
195>
195> Bye!
==========
Malloy likes to hear himself. The evidence:
"I take it Tholen has attempted to digest me, but since no message
to that effect appears on my newserver today, I present an oldie:"
--Joe Malloy
Maybe it's because he has trouble seeing. The evidence:
"Where does he say anything about clergy, Tholen?"
--Joe Malloy
"It follows from your pontificating actions and the discussion
of the clergy..."
--Eric Bennett
And the question of Slava's that he continues to ignore:
Message-ID: <N8On5.61$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 20:11:34 +1000
"Why do you post exactly the same thing in each one of your
'digests', and then hypocritically accuse Tholen of not saying
'anything of value'?"
--Slava Pestov
"[who is this "Slava," Tholen, one of your sock puppets?]"
--Joe Malloy
And proof that Malloy still lies:
"Notice how he *doesn't* post from his work account"
--Joe Malloy, 2000 August 31
] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Tholen)
] Date: 26 Aug 2000 05:37:32 GMT
] Message-ID: <8o7l2s$sr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"he had a little chat with TPTB, you see."
--Joe Malloy, 2000 August 31
There is no "TPTB" here, Malloy, nor was there any "chat"
with any similar group of people.
------------------------------
From: "2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?]
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 07:04:30 -0400
Greetings,
I'm going to do what I have suggested others do, ie set out an Elements of
Proof, in this case.
Elements Necessary (Key in Microsoft Case Only)
I Sherman Act Violation- requires both I and II Cites
A Possession of Monopoly.
1. Control Prices
2. Can Exclude Competition
3. Benefit to Consumer. Some would disagree on whether this one is
necessary.
The focus on competition is on whether the proported monopoly CAN EXCLUDE
competiton, not whether, as Max suggests, that gaining the monopoly somehow
or always prevents competition, and this is in itself illegal.
Notice that proving the above does not establish that the accused has done
anything illegal.
IMHO, this is the most likely finding, notwithstanding the
middleware-in-relation-to-products questions raised
II Maintain Monopoly Improperly.
A. Prevent Competition, etc.
1. Not Explained on Product, etc., Grounds (also Benefit to Consumer)
B. Had Effect of Continuing Monopoly
This would be a ruling that, while the browser was tech tying, the
non-browser parts of the case were proven. This may be unlikely.
III Or Gain New Monopoly Improperly.
A. Markets/Products are Separate
1. No Tech Tying-negates this element since there is no separate
Product/Market
B. Products are Tied--reduced "hurdle"; monopoly along with separate
markets/products are sufficient; so called per se rule
C. Prevent Competition--not required; this is the so-called "rule of reason"
I see the rule of reason analysis thrown in by the judge in the same way
that the DoJ/Boies threw in all the extra allegations, like
RealAudio/RealPlayer.
It's material that is not actual needed, but paints the accused in a bad
light with the hopes that this will help turn the tide on the relevant
issue, ie tech tying.
Any changes suggested? Instead of pontificating, cite cases and quote
materials. Try to find some analyses done by others or the parties (no sound
bite lawyers please; they're just trying to get business for the most part).
2 + 2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: 5 Sep 2000 11:07:50 GMT
In article <QPXs5.32679$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> WinNT and 2K have security and permissions which are superior
> to *nix (DAC instead of G/U/E) so again this bug is a moot point.
Many Unixes have access control lists as well as the standard
permissions bits. But people seem to be quite happy in practise with
the simpler model of security for most tasks. (If you only have a
small number of different collections of people in your ACLs and only
wish to associate a single collection with one file or directory, the
traditional mechanism is good enough.)
Plus, there's more to security than the capabilities offered by the OS
kernel. Userland configuration and standard application behaviours
are similarly important, and that's where Unix (including Linux) kicks
NT/2K's pants. (If apps usually want to write to a shared directory
or execute random code downloaded over the 'net outside a sandbox,
whatever security certification the OS kernel has is pretty much moot
anyway...)
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practise. In
practise, there is." A marvellous saying that applies to a lot of
human activity, both online and not...
Donal.
--
"[He] would have needed to sell not only his own soul, but have somehow gotten
in on the ground floor of an Amway-like pryamid scheme delivering the souls
of kindergarten students to Satan by the truckload like so many boxes of Girl
Scout Cookies." -- John S. Novak, III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: 5 Sep 2000 11:10:06 GMT
In article <Eo_s5.32760$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Windows NT 4.0 has acheived C2 red and orange book security ratings
> from the DoD.
Has it done it with a network card connected and in use?
Donal.
--
"[He] would have needed to sell not only his own soul, but have somehow gotten
in on the ground floor of an Amway-like pryamid scheme delivering the souls
of kindergarten students to Satan by the truckload like so many boxes of Girl
Scout Cookies." -- John S. Novak, III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
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: 5 Sep 2000 11:16:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
D. Spider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Make a system that any fool can use...
...And you've got something that has no computers or moving parts at
all. And not a right lot of fixed parts either.
Donal.
--
"[He] would have needed to sell not only his own soul, but have somehow gotten
in on the ground floor of an Amway-like pryamid scheme delivering the souls
of kindergarten students to Satan by the truckload like so many boxes of Girl
Scout Cookies." -- John S. Novak, III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:41:53 -0400
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
>
> No, im not a MS employee.
>
> And second..*any* new version *is* more stable than the previous coming from
> MS.
This is not always true. DOS version 4.x was hardly more stable than
3.31. Windows NT 4.0 sp2 was not more stable than sp1.
Anyway, yes of course a product should improve with time, through the
versions, however, MS does a very bad job accepting limitations and
problems while a version is current. They resist criticism, until they
know when the next release or SP will be, then they totally trash the
previous version. It isn't an honest behavior.
At least with Linux, one gets the sense the developers are up front with
them, if something is buggy, they'll tell you.
>
> FreeBSD -style stability? that vill simply never happen as regard to a MS
> OS..why?
> 'cause (and lets face the hard truth)
> *nix system stability is *mainly* due to only a very low-level generic
> support for ide-based hardware *and* a minimum multi-media support.
really? Hmm, could you elaborate? What support is not present in Linux?
>
> Shure enough if MS would only support scsi and cut down the multimedia
> support to a very minimum (as in *nix systems) *and* not having *any*
> vendor-specific hardware support (again...as in *nix systems) they would
> match *nix system stability for sure.
Please give some supporting argument for this. You made a statement,
fine, but the statement implies some statistical information or at least
a study of some kind. It would have to break down Windows failures into
logical groups and cross reference those with similar groups in other
operating systems, or state that those groups do not exist.
Unless you have done this study or can reference this study, I don't
think we can accept this statement.
>
> /IL
>
> PS do take note that it is the intel platform i am talking about DS
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > David Steinberg wrote:
> > >
> > > Ingemar Lundin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > : Well... NT is a piece of crap!!
> > > : Change to Windows 2000 ;-)
> > >
> > > Wow. What a brilliant solution: declare that what was Microsoft's very
> > > best, top-of-the-line, enterprise-ready solution just a few months ago
> is
> > > crap, and then hand over another $300 to the makers of that "crap" for
> > > their newest, best, top-of-the-line, enterprise-ready solution.
> > >
> > > Say, you don't work in Microsoft's marketing department, do you?
> >
> > This is so Microsoft.
> >
> > They always tout that this current version of (pick your product) is:
> > stable, fast, etc. unlike that previous bug ridden version. And then,
> > with the next service pack or version, they say the same things about
> > the previous version.
> >
> > That is one of my real hard reasons for not trusting Microsoft. You can
> > not believe anything they say about their products.
> >
> > They also have the money to shut the press up as well. Security bugs in
> > competitors are announced the minute they are discovered by an
> > organization. When security bugs are found in Microsoft products, the
> > press waits for Microsoft to have a patch. It is evil.
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.mohawksoft.com
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:48:09 -0400
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
>
> None of that you say contradicts what i have posted before except for one
> thing...wich *ide* cd-rw:s do Linux support and *how*? (not counting
> cheating like scsi-emulation)
>
> /IL
>
It isn't cheating at all. It is how it is supported. Why would it be
called cheating if you make an API which is common for applications but
supports two radically different I/O busses?
SCSI is just a better protocol. I have long thought that they should get
rid of raw IDE disk support, and replace it with the SCSI disk support.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:52:15 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> It's not a conspiracy theory, just plain old anti-trust considerations.
> Have you some reason to suspect that RedHat was acting
> anti-competitively in their hiring practices?
>
Typical Max.
Gary
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:53:16 -0400
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
>
> uhu? and...again, whats your point?
>
> /IL
The point is that using scsi emulation for ATAPI CDRW devices was a very
smart thing to do. It unified the interface to similar devices over
different busses.
I have seen atapi scsi miniport devices on Windows too. Is that
cheating?
An efficient design decision that makes less work for coders is not
cheating, it is called innovation.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: A guise for Marxism (Was: businesses are psychopaths
Date: 05 Sep 2000 12:04:53 +0100
>>>>> "Perry" == Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Perry> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 00:26:31 GMT, Richard
Perry> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As for happiness, that isn't a motivation in my case. If all
>> injustice were wiped from the face of the universe then I would
>> be less miserable but I still wouldn't be "happy". I am gratified
>> to be free from the handicap of trying to achieve, or even
>> believing in, happiness.
>>
Perry> That sounds very depressing indeed. Too bad for you:(
>> You say you would "like" to see a small-medium country go the
>> anarcho-syndicalist route, well I'm *desperate* for the entire
>> planet to go that route.
Perry> Anarcho-syndicalism is just a marxism hybrid under the guise
Perry> of a fancy name to hide that it is just another form of
Perry> marxism.
I think that most Marxists would disagree with this. Indeed
I have been present at endless discussions between Marxists and
anarchists arguing about it.
Its perfectly reasonable to say that both anarchism and
Marxism are extreme, left wing, and revolutionary ideologies, but this
does not make them the same thing.
Perry> The fundamental problem is that any time a country tries this
Perry> bullshit the ideal of anarchy inevitably fails, and
Perry> totalitarian state socialism ensues to fill the vacuum.
Where is the inevitability about this? Stalinism didn't
happen as a result of inevitable historical forces. Possibly the
activities of the white army had something to do with it. They may
have lost but they still fatally wounded the Russian revolution.
Perry> You wanna talk about psychopathy and exploitation let's talk
Perry> about Lennin and Stalin.
No two ways about it, Stalin was a bit of a nutter. There
again Churchill who wanted to machine gun unarmed miners at
Tonypandy, and was largely responsible for the disastrous Gallipoli
campaign, had a fairly loose grip on humanity. The practical upshot of
it all is that any one who wants to be a "world leader", and actually
gets there is likely to be a bit nuts.
Perry> What anarchists fail to admit to themselves is that humanity
Perry> is not yet socially evolved enough for a very large society
Perry> without some form of controlled hierarchy.
They fail to admit this, probably because they do not think
that it is correct. What you are saying here appears to me is that
they we can only have a society based around inequality and enforced
by main force. I do not accept this, and hope that I never do.
Perry> If it comes, it will come thru improved communication and
Perry> understanding of one another.
So if we just talk lots eventually at the top of the
"controlled hierarchy" will say "good grief, you are right, we can
have an egalitarian democratic society" and promptly return all that
they have purloined down the ages. Seems likely to me.
Phil
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:02:20 +0200
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
8ou77e$loj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Person 7" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Wed, 7 Jun 2000 14:06:58 +0200, in comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,
> >> ("Olivier Borgeaud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> >>
> >> >2. Memory is actually very cheap
> >>
> >> Memory is NOT cheap
> >
> > Comparatively speaking, it's very cheap.
> > With PC100 prices flirting with $1/MB,
> > it's very cheap.
> >
>
> There goes chad again, talking out of his ass.
>
> Chad, there are other people in the world besides americans.
Thank god for that! Can you imagine what a mess the world would be
otherwise? ^_^
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:03:55 +0200
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
rczs5.31954$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Perhaps you should be writing your government then.
>
> It's not America's fault your country(ies) are behind
> in technology.
>
> -Chad
It's not us European's fault that M$ *NEEDS* such big patches & SP's.
BTW, are we being arrogant today?
<cut>
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:05:31 +0200
Grega Bremec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
> >Perhaps you should be writing your government then.
> >
> >It's not America's fault your country(ies) are behind
> >in technology.
> >
> >-Chad
>
> American attitude at its best!
>
> "Noooo, we won't tell you how to encrypt your data using 8192-bit
> strong encryption. But it's not our fault if you can't figure it out
> on your own..."
>
> DOH!
Actually, encryption is tied to some very stupid laws in the States,
basicly, if the feds can crack the encryption, it's not allowed to be used
by the public, talk about "right to privicy"
<cut>
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:06:34 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
8ouhib$5jn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Grega Bremec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > ...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
> > >Perhaps you should be writing your government then.
> > >
> > >It's not America's fault your country(ies) are behind
> > >in technology.
> > >
> > >-Chad
> >
> > American attitude at its best!
> >
>
> Please don't condem us all for the opinions of the few. In this case the
> few is a one who not many of us would be consider to be representitive of
> us.
How much would it cost to give this guy a beating? 1$/hit ? <Grin>
Amon_Re
------------------------------
From: "Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:18:54 +0200
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
vXAs5.31972$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Grega Bremec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > ...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
> > >Perhaps you should be writing your government then.
> > >
> > >It's not America's fault your country(ies) are behind
> > >in technology.
> > >
> > >-Chad
> >
> > American attitude at its best!
>
> Heh... foreign snobbery/conceitedness at its best!
>
> Look, we can sit and wait around for the rest of the world to catch up.
It's not a matter of catching up, you need to understand how economy works
first, America is one big place, with LOTS & LOTS of people using a service,
if the company that privides the service to its customers for free, it will
have it's incomes from eg advertisement, if you were to apply the same to
smaller countries, you'll see that due to the lower number of people using
the service, this isn't gonna work, because they'll have less incomes
> If Americans are so stupid as you imply, then why are you having all
> these problems?
We *ARE NOT* having problems, and you *ARE* acting stupid with this reply,
the statement made was a simple financial one, a statement not due to the
technological state of a country
> Instead of sitting their bitching and whining, why don't you either
> move to America, or get your government to get into the 21st century,
> aside from that, just quit your bitching.
I'd rather kill myself then move to a country with such a poor social
security system, at least in Europe the goverment takes care of the less
fortunate (tell me, what's mroe humain, free health care, or free internet?)
> > "Noooo, we won't tell you how to encrypt your data using 8192-bit
> > strong encryption. But it's not our fault if you can't figure it out
> > on your own..."
>
> What the hell are you talking about?
I dunno neighter
> Look, I can understand if you're sore because you got left in
> the 20th century, but don't try to blame it on us.
Is time going faster in the States? Last time i checked we *WERE* in the
20th century, still a few more months to go...
Amon_Re
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
