Linux-Advocacy Digest #941, Volume #28 Wed, 6 Sep 00 01:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("D'Arcy Smith")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("D'Arcy Smith")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Chad Myers")
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (Zenin)
Re: Computer and memory (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Bob Germer)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Bob Germer)
Re: Computer and memory ("Chad Myers")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Zenin)
Re: Mandrake users: Don't try this at home! (Jacques Guy)
Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within. (Loren Petrich)
Re: How low can they go...? ("D'Arcy Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: 6 Sep 2000 04:10:48 GMT
On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 23:29:46 -0400, Gary Hallock wrote:
>Why state the obvious. Max, you are continually falling into this trap.
>Your only source of information is from this ng. Well, guess what, the
>rest of us actually get information from other sources. Sometimes, people
>don't tell you every thing simply because it is understood that everyone
>already knows. Sometimes people do tell you every little detail because
>your are a fucking asshole who ought to learn how to learn on his own.
>
This is the part that gets me -- I mean, we're supposed to spoon feed him
by scouring the internet for information that he can misapply in spreading
the very falsehoods that we are attempting to debunk, and we're also supposed
to address his questions by embellishing the answers in such a way as to
best suit his argument ( and it's not obvious how to do this, due to the
complete absence of logic in his arguments ).
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:12:18 GMT
"Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8p4b3e$sjk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:oHht5.9839$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8p40i7$onb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Who knows? Certainly, 9X isn't going to help for remote
administration.
> > VNC.
> True... or even NetMeeting (using Remote Desktop)
Yeah but with VNC I can see me Win box on my nice big Indy
monitor ;-)
..darcy
------------------------------
From: "D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:13:42 GMT
"Zenin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 400 miles (I think I mentioned that). You're quite right, 98 isn't
> going to help...but then, neither would NT. My point was about OS
> X, and the fact that if/when I switch them to it remote
> administration will be easier (possible).
Check out VNC... http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/
..darcy
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:20:54 GMT
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 04:01:50 GMT, Chad Myers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Make no mistake, partial birth abortions are infanticide and have nothing
> >to do with a woman's right to choose.
>
> How many are done each year for reasons other than the mother's health
> or the baby facing very severe birth defects? Give us a number, not a
> bunch of handwaving. My guess is close to none. This procedure is a
> last resort when things have gone terribly wrong.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pba.htm#end
The name implies biased slant, but this specific page has many facts
without spin or slant. I encourage you to read it before you make your
judgement.
To summarize: There are no concrete numbers on operations performed
in the U.S. as most states either have laws against it, or practioners
are usually shunned for doing it.
"Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion
Providers testified in government hearings that only about 450 D&Xs were
performed annually in the United States. Later, on ABC's Nightline
program, he admitted that he had lied about this figure in order to
match the the lies and rhetoric by the other side in the debate. He now
estimates that 3 to 4 thousand is a more accurate value."
"Although usually used in the fifth and sixth months, the partial-birth
abortion method has also been used to perform abortions in the third
trimester -- that is, the seventh month and later -- most notably by
the developer of the method, the late Dr. James McMahon. In a written
submission to the House Judiciary Committee in June, 1995, McMahon
explicitly acknowledged that he performed such abortions on babies
with no "flaw" whatever, even in the third trimester, for such reasons
as mere youth of the mother, or for "psychiatric" difficulties. Indeed,
even at 29 weeks -- well into the seventh month -- one-fourth of the
babies that McMahon aborted had no "flaw," however minor. McMahon's
submission showed that in a "series" of about 2,000 such abortions
that he performed, only 9% were performed for "maternal [health]
indications," and of that group, the most common reason was
"depression.""
"The Physicians' Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth (PHACT) -- a group of
over 600 physician-specialists (mostly in obstetrics, perinatology,
and related disciplines) -- has spoken out to dispute claims that
some women need partial-birth abortions to avoid serious physical
injury. PHACT says: "We, and many other doctors across the United
States, regularly treat women whose unborn children suffer these
and other serious conditions. Never is the partial-birth procedure
medically indicated. Rather, such infants are regularly and safely
delivered live, vaginally, with no threat to the mother's health or
fertility." In September, 1996, former Surgeon General C. Everett
Koop and other PHACT members issued a statement that "partial-birth
abortion is never medically necessary to protect a mother's health
or her future fertility. On the contrary, this procedure can pose
a significant threat to both."
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/keyfactspba.htm
This was from a search on yahoo for "Partial Birth Abortion"
Subsequent searches to find more information from a Pro-Choice
point of view failed. It appears that they don't have anything
to say on the subject? Perhaps they just want to keep things
hush-hush so the American public doesn't realize that we have
some of the worst attrocities mankind has known happening right
in our own back yard?
> I don't think women take the decision to have an regular abortion
> lightly, much less having it done in the third trimester. I'm real
> sure they and the doctor understand the implications. Yet we are
> supposed to believe that these are common enough and done for trivial
> enough reasons that they need to be banned, with no exceptions. Sounds
> like a big load of bullshit to me.
There has yet been proven a good reason to perform a PBA. In fact, in
most cases, it does more harm than good (not even factoring in the
loss of life of the child). Most babies with severe problems don't make
it to 21 weeks, let alone 30+ weeks. The main problems at that age
have hydrocephalus which can, in most cases, be releived post-partum
relieving the pressure with a cranial drip. The child will usually
come out unharmed (occurs quite often in the U.S.) or suffer only
mild brain damage with a slight occurance of mental retardation.
More mental retardation occurs from drug or alcohol use during pregnancy,
by way of comparison.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 00:23:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>> Why are you so purposefully confounding the issue?
>
>Sigh... if you actually paid attnetion to me sayint that my
>original post did not reflect one way or the other my
>opinions there... instead you made the assumption that I
>was on a particular side of the issue.
Why do you think I'm not paying attention to you saying that. I've
remarked on it at least once, I know. I didn't say "why are you on a
particular side of the issue", I asked "why are you confounding the
issue" with the seemingly conflicted comments which you make *about*
your seemingly conflicted comments. I'm assuming you'll get to this
matter in the remainder of your message, but I just wanted to point out
that you aren't clarifying things by being obtuse.
>> First you say "thus, it is reality you could write",
>
>It is reality.
That's what I said. Are you again being obtuse?
>> and then you say you were responding to
>> someone who said it was illegal to do so on a platform that didn't have
>> such a license.
>
>No. Nothing was said about a license. All that was said that it was
>illegal to write DVD software on (IIRC) Linux. It is not illegal to
>write such software - if you have a license.
>
>Get it now?
I hope so. The problem is you seem unaware that when you say whether it
is legal, you are referring to a license, and whether you have it or
not. It is not illegal to write such software - if you don't have a
license. IF, as you say you do, you believe that a 'reverse engineered'
GPL version is a 'good thing'. Perhaps you weren't aware that they are
related. No license - still legal. Get it?
>> You're still not making any sense.
>
>Because you aren't listening to what I am saying apparently.
Well, let me clue you in to something, D'Arcy. I'm not listening to
you; I'm reading your words. And I have a rather indefinite amount of
time to read them, to. So I think perhaps you meant "you don't
understand what I'm trying to say". That may be the case, but I think
its even more probably that you are not reading my words, and spending
the amount of time necessary to figure out what they mean. Otherwise,
you would know that I am reading your words, and know what they're
*supposed* to mean, and noticed that you are "not making any sense".
>> It is reality that you can write DVD software on linux whether you have
>> a license or not;
>
>Correct - but it is not legal if you do not have a license (apperently).
Ah, now we have 'apparently', which leads me to believe that you might
have some awareness of the issue I keep referring to. I think its
possible, then, that you are indeed being obtuse. It would definitely
be better, then, for me not to be obtuse.
So I'll ask you straight: Do you believe that it is legal to write DVD
software on Linux without a license, and do you believe that whether it
was reverse engineered would change that?
I'm not trying to make a big deal of this; I'm really just curious.
You've seemed to make at least some token gesture towards not being
clear on that opinion. It caught my attention, is all; please indulge
me, I'd appreciate it.
>Now how this is made possible by the MS monopoly (as you claim it is)
>I don't get... so feel free to tell me.
Well, since the DVD software is available on MS OSes, and not on Linux,
and MS is known to practice anti-competitive business practices, there
is really no reason at all to believe that MS hasn't at least
contributed to the fact that there is no DVD software on Linux. If
nothing else, if not for the monopoly (as the federal government claims
it is) there would most probably be a Linux vendor who'd want to buy a
license.
Regardless, the comment Jedi originally made was not that lack of DVD
software on Linux was 'made possible' by the MS monopoly, although I did
contribute to that idea myself. Jedi said that DVD support acted as a
'barrier to entry' into the PC OS consumer marketplace. Not by itself,
no, the licensing and or reverse engineering of DVD software does not
prevent Linux from being a PC OS. It does, however, present a reason
which would encourage a PC user who has Windows pre-installed without
alternative (supposedly, according to the OEMs themselves, what
maintains the monopoly) from replacing Windows with Linux; they wouldn't
be able to play their DVDs.
I hope you understand the situation further now, D'Arcy. I'm still
curious what your answer is to the question I posed. Feel free to email
me if you'd like.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
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: Zenin <[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: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:21:04 GMT
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>snip<
:>So... for example, Half Life would cost $250 a copy.
:>Would you buy it?
:>Probably not.
:
: No, I didn't buy it at $50, either. I'll wait till my brother gets bored
: with it, and use his.
Off-Topic:
If you want to play Half-Life, I suggest you buy your own copy and
not wait for your brother. So far, I've yet to meet anyone that has
liked Half-Life and has stopped playing. Half-Life (or more
correctly, the add-ons such as Team Fortress, Counter-Strike, and
FireArms) isn't a fad game for most people that play no more then
basketball is a fad game. If you like it...you'll like it for good.
>snip<
: You haven't bothered telling me why I need new software, anyway. I'm
: still playing DOOM II, and there's dozens more add-on levels than I'll
: probably get to in my lifetime. (OK, that's a fib; I actually bought
: StarCraft two years ago, so I'm still playing add-on levels for that, and
: only occasionally playing DOOM II.) I don't need Half Life just because
: its flashy new trash, 'superior' to what I have or not.
You *need* Half-Life man, I'm telling yah, you won't regret it.
"This is not your father's Doom" :-)
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: 6 Sep 2000 04:24:38 GMT
On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 02:35:39 GMT, Chad Myers wrote:
>
>Yes, Japan has many more advances than the US does. They even have
>less beuacracy in their government allowing for more widespread
>technology use without fear of government intervention.
Hahaha ... they have corporate welfare, protectionist trade policies
which have resulted in the survival of inefficient industries that really
deserved to dies, and entrenched corruption.
Cheers,
--
Donovan
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:25:26 GMT
On 09/05/2000 at 09:42 PM,
"Joe R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> But as I said, you're ignoring the impact of chemicals which have orders
> of magnitude higher greenhouse impact than CO2. Fluorocarbons.
> Bromocarbons. And so on.
Reputable and respected scientists are not at all in agreement with your
statements. Some agree. Many do not. You certainly are no authority.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 00:20:14 -0400
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 04:01:50 GMT, Chad Myers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Make no mistake, partial birth abortions are infanticide and have nothing
> >to do with a woman's right to choose.
>
> How many are done each year for reasons other than the mother's health
Considering that NO PBA's are done for reasons of the *mother's*
health....
> or the baby facing very severe birth defects? Give us a number, not a
> bunch of handwaving. My guess is close to none. This procedure is a
> last resort when things have gone terribly wrong.
The female body is DESIGNED to become pregnant.
>
> I don't think women take the decision to have an regular abortion
> lightly, much less having it done in the third trimester. I'm real
> sure they and the doctor understand the implications. Yet we are
> supposed to believe that these are common enough and done for trivial
> enough reasons that they need to be banned, with no exceptions. Sounds
> like a big load of bullshit to me.
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:30:35 GMT
On 09/05/2000 at 05:01 PM,
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> And yet, with ALL of our industrialization, the eco-paranoids are
> claiming a 1/2 degree change in 100 years.
> >
> > > How did mankind induce this anomoly, and what did we due to restore
> > > the prevailing climate to normal?
> Notice how he didn't answer this.
Because he cannot. Undisputed science demonstrates that the climate of the
earth has changed many times over the millenia. I wonder how the
eco-paranoids can explain the ice ages and tropical fossils well north of
40 degrees North latitude which occurred many millions of years before the
rise of man.
However, the thought does occur that morons such as those who got
government funding from their fellow nuts to study the effect of cattle
farts might try to blame it on dinosaur farts.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:31:43 GMT
"Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:6ait5.7781$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Grega Bremec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : "Don't give the beggar the fish he wants - teach him how to catch them
> : instead."
(... and they call us Americans ignorant and uncultured...)
> Neglecting the fact that you'd need to supply him some fishing equipment
> also. Tell him to get a job and then he can buy the damn fish :).
Job? Nah, the socialist government will provide him with a brand new
pole, a private lake fully stocked, bait for 3 years and a fishing boat
all courtesy of the the taxpayers.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:32:49 GMT
D'Arcy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Zenin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> 400 miles (I think I mentioned that). You're quite right, 98 isn't
:> going to help...but then, neither would NT. My point was about OS
:> X, and the fact that if/when I switch them to it remote
:> administration will be easier (possible).
:
: Check out VNC... http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/
I have. Perhaps it has advanced, but last I evaluated VNC it was
painfully slow over local 10baseT. I shutter to think what it might
be like over a 56k...X over a 56k would be considerably faster, and
that's sad...
pcAnyware is what we'll likely use for small issues as it's
considerably faster then VNC and actually usable over a modem. The
pcAnyware Java applet based client makes it easy to connect via my
FreeBSD workstaion. -OT: Oh yah, here's another "failed" Java applet
for JTK to suck on. :-)
Regardless however, the chances of effectively doing things like
say, an OS upgrade over any remote tool on a Windows box is
somewhere between slim and none, closer to none.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:37:45 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mandrake users: Don't try this at home!
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:38:26 +0100, Tim Cain
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Try dragging and dropping "/dev/mem" into the
> >"advanced editor"!!!
> I get a box that says "you do not have permission to read this file".
> Maybe that's because I'm not running as root? If you are running as
> root, or the perms of /dev/mem are wrong, well, then that could be bad.
Similar thing here, under Mandrake. Just did cat /dev/mem --
Permission denied. That figures:
[frogguy@localhost frogguy]$ ls -al /dev/mem
crw-r----- 1 root kmem 1, 1 May 5 1998
/dev/mem
The subject line should have been: "Linux users: Don't try this as
root!"
I'm sure there are lots of other things not to try, involving
/dev/zero
for instance (yes, I'm learning, slowly -- no, I haven't done anything
with /dev/zero, just come across a big DON'T).
Whare ar yew, Tymb, dshust wen wie knead ue toot hell uss
Lie-nux suxx bygg thyme? Cumb bakc!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within.
Date: 6 Sep 2000 04:38:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Loren Petrich wrote:
>> [on Alan Kulkis...]
>> >> It's because he lives in a grove of birch trees.
>> >> A special kind of birch trees, in fact.
>> >> John Birch trees :-)
>> >So says the communist agitator
>> Seen any Reds under your bed lately?
>No. But I've met a few. They're almost all closet-dictators like you.
Closest dictators? In the fashion of someone here who foams at
the mouth all the time?
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: "D'Arcy Smith" <[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: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:47:10 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> Why do you think I'm not paying attention to you saying that. I've
> remarked on it at least once, I know. I didn't say "why are you on a
> particular side of the issue", I asked "why are you confounding the
> issue" with the seemingly conflicted comments which you make *about*
> your seemingly conflicted comments.
I didn't make any conflicting statements... unless you assumed I was on
a particular side of the issue (particularily on the side that has no issue
with the licensing).
> >> and then you say you were responding to
> >> someone who said it was illegal to do so on a platform that didn't have
> >> such a license.
> >No. Nothing was said about a license. All that was said that it was
> >illegal to write DVD software on (IIRC) Linux. It is not illegal to
> >write such software - if you have a license.
> I hope so. The problem is you seem unaware that when you say whether it
> is legal, you are referring to a license, and whether you have it or
> not.
Somebody made a blanket statement that it is illegal wo write DVD software
for (IIRC) Linix. That unqualified statement is wrong - it can be done if
you
have a license.
> It is not illegal to write such software - if you don't have a
> license.
Apparently it is - or at least the license holder is willing to take people
to court over the issue - and get the police involved.
> IF, as you say you do, you believe that a 'reverse engineered'
> GPL version is a 'good thing'. Perhaps you weren't aware that they are
> related. No license - still legal. Get it?
I think we have hit the point of misunderstanding. Just because I say that
a license is (apparently) required does not mean that I think it should be.
> >> It is reality that you can write DVD software on linux whether you have
> >> a license or not;
> >Correct - but it is not legal if you do not have a license (apperently).
> Ah, now we have 'apparently', which leads me to believe that you might
> have some awareness of the issue I keep referring to. I think its
> possible, then, that you are indeed being obtuse. It would definitely
> be better, then, for me not to be obtuse.
The simple statement that it is illegal to write DVD software for
Linux is false. It is false because it is possible to do so without
problems by getting a license. That is all I was trying to point
out to begin with.
> So I'll ask you straight: Do you believe that it is legal to write DVD
> software on Linux without a license, and do you believe that whether it
> was reverse engineered would change that?
I beleive that it should be legal. I don't know if it is legal... that
will be decided in the court case.
> >Now how this is made possible by the MS monopoly (as you claim it is)
> >I don't get... so feel free to tell me.
> Well, since the DVD software is available on MS OSes, and not on Linux,
> and MS is known to practice anti-competitive business practices, there
> is really no reason at all to believe that MS hasn't at least
> contributed to the fact that there is no DVD software on Linux.
Uhhh... you lost me. MS, presumably, got a license for their
platform. I am not aware of any attempts by MS to stop other
platforms from getting a licence - are you?
> If
> nothing else, if not for the monopoly (as the federal government claims
> it is) there would most probably be a Linux vendor who'd want to buy a
> license.
Well that is a different story... and unfortunatly one that we can't
test out...
..darcy
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
