Linux-Advocacy Digest #702, Volume #28 Mon, 28 Aug 00 05:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Open source: an idea whose time has come (Loren Petrich)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (javelina)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: news article
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (ZnU)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (ZnU)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (javelina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Open source: an idea whose time has come
Date: 28 Aug 2000 07:18:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Counterexample: Sleepycat.
>Sleepycat produce code that implements DBM-style databases. They
>release this code under the GPL. If companies want to put this code
>in proprietary products, they sell licenses to allow them to do this.
>So, in this way, the GPL is important to Sleepycat's business model.
So the GPL's infamous viral quality is beneficial quality for
Sleepycat -- one has to pay Sleepycat for non-viral versions :-)
>One idea that I don't think is used often enough is to release software
>on a time-delayed open source licence: it is released as proprietary, but
>will revert to open source after a time delay has occurred.
Sort of like what's happened with some of the older 3D game
engines, such as Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake, Descent 1 and 2, and Marathon 2.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: javelina <[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: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:18:31 GMT
Jack Troughton wrote:
> Wow, are you guys ever arrogant.
Arrogance is a hallmark of CSMA.
Last Friday I bought a sage iMac. Not only
is it better than any PC of any kind, but
anyone who bought a blue, red, white, or
graphite iMac is a complete loser!
Sage is where it's at.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 03:32:33 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
> >From "Understanding the Antitrust Laws" by Jerrold Van Cise:
> >
> >=====
> >[Smith and Marx agreed] that a free competitive economy was in the
> >public interest so long as the competing sellers and buyers were
> >individual persons. . . . The error of Adam Smith and Karl Marx--in
> >rejecting the possibility that monopoly could be curbed by law--arose
> >from their common belief that the lobbies of the monopolists would block
> >the enactment of any such legislation. [In The Wealth of Nations, Smith
> >writes that] 'neither the most acknowledged probity, nor the highest
> >rank, nor the greatest public services, protect [the legislator] from
> >the most infamous abuse and detraction, from personal insults, nor
> >sometimes from real danger arising from the insolent outrage of furious
> >and disappointed monopolists.'
> >====
[...]
>The sole point I was attempting to apply here was to demonstrate that
>Adam Smith is not always right. And if we accept that point, then why
>were you responding to Joe with the one-liner "Adam Smith say's [sic]
>you're wrong"?
Pardon me for confabulating the situation, but my sole aim was to refute
your claim that Adam Smith considered anti-trust laws to not be "valid",
in your words, which in context seemed to indicate "right". I would
contest the interpretation of the matter from the text book you quoted,
which I presume had some reason to show that Smith and Marx separately
"reject[ed] the possibility that monopoly could be curbed by law."
Their analysis of the issue of monopolies being able to block anti-trust
legislation didn't even seem to support that point, let alone yours.
But I am, indeed, quibbling, as you noted. My apologies. I just don't
like the idea that whether or not Adam Smith thought anti-trust
legislation "could be curbed by monopolist lobbies" is more important or
to be confused with whether Adam Smith thought that free markets would
curb monopolists to begin with. He was, of course, wrong on both
counts, if you believe he should be interpreted out of context to begin
with.
--
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]>
Subject: Re: news article
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:26:13 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >
> >Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> > > The difference is, with Linux, no one is trying to hide the known
> >> > > problems. Would someone please tell David about the "Windows has
> >> > > <insert-huge-number-here> 'defects' story"? I can't remember the
> >> > > details of it anymore.
> >> >
> >> > Are you referring to the 63,000 known bugs in Windows 2000 that
> >Microsoft
> >> > solved by reclassifing them as issues?
> >>
> >> Ashton-Tate used to call them "anomolies."
> >
> >Many think Borland went to hell after they took in Ashton-Tate.
>
> You know what I think? Well, I'm gonna tell you...
>
> I think Borland (what was the wunderkind's name?)
Phillipe Khan?
> was initially quite
> powerful and competitive. But after the tech founders started getting
> shut down by Gates, they let the business droids run the show, because
> they seemed to understand what Gates was doing, and said they could do
> better. Of course, if there's a company with monopoly power, I don't
> suppose they can be "competed with" by trying to acquire monopoly power,
> any more than they can be competed against with competitive strategies.
> Borland was doomed long before they took in Ashton-Tate. Ashton-Tate,
> of course, was doomed long before that, though they certainly could have
> made a better showing if they'd understood *why* dBase was a killer app.
>
Well, I can sure tell you this, the Borland company personality and that of
their customer and tech support sure changed after they aquired A-T. Most
of their best software they sold to other companies. The remainder was
gutted, their famious License really changed. For me the cutoff point was
when they required developers to pay them a royality for software compiled
using Borland C/C++ compilers or the Borland Pascal compilers. If a single
copy of software that was compiled with their compilers generated any
revenue royalities would be owed for each copy distributed including copies
given away. If someone were to write a program, compile it with Borland's
compilers and then distribute it a freeware, that person would have too keep
count of how many times the software a copies from person to person and then
pay Borland an on going royality for each copy. When that got slipped in
after with a version upgrade, that was that.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 03:38:28 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Said Joe R. in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [...]
>> >> Well, seeing as my wife is a student at Penn State, and the
>> >> Pennsylvania
>> >> State Employees Credit Union told me that Penn State is not classified
>> >> as a public institution, because it derives too large a proportion of
>> >
>> >Actually, the reason would be that Penn State employees are employed by
>> >the University and not by the state--unlike the State colleges.
>
>Actually, if the information on their web page is accurate, the reason
>is because the statutes legally classify them that way. But a duck is a
>duck even if you pass a law calling it a goose.
Since the statutes are what determine what is a public institution and
how, I'd say you're trying to avoid calling a spade a spade. Not to mix
metaphors, but Penn State may sound like a state university, but it
doesn't walk like one, look like one, or quack like one.
>> Well, that would mean Penn State is not a state college. All other
>> "public institutions" along the lines of state universities are, in
>> fact, included as "employed by the state", though many of them, in fact,
>> are not employed by the state, but their employer derives the majority
>> of their operating income from tax dollars.
>
>Penn State gets a good chunk of change from the state. I can't find a
>detailed breakdown of income, but there is some information at
>www.budget.psu.edu (lots of details about where the money goes, but not
>where it comes from).
All large universities get a good chunk of change from the state,
generally. Penn State probably gets more than some others, notably ivy
league, universities, but the plane fact is that it isn't a state
college. Not that this is at all an issue, as the discussion was
originally concerned with public education (notably primary and
secondary education, not colleges or universities).
[...]
>In Pennsylvania's unique system of higher education, Penn State has been
>defined by statute as a "state-related" institution. This definition
>means that the University is not entirely public; nor, despite its
>private charter, is it a private institution. Rather, it combines the
>best facets of a public entity with those of a private institution.
>=====
Thanks for the quote. At least now I know where Joe learned the phrase
'state-related'.
--
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.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:37:21 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Darren Winsper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> I wonder if he realises you can practically do that with Mozilla now.
> Take Chatzilla for example; you click on the "install Chatzilla"
> button and Mozilla takes the .xpi file and installs it. It's platform
> independant and easy. If Mozilla were to grow into a desktop shell,
> then this ideal could be at least partially realised.
You and I and many others know it, but I don't think he would accept it. It
conflicts with what seems to be his needs for the day. Imagine he is
Preston's character in the "Music Man".
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:20:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:32:37 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >
> > >> If you're asking if the American kid doesn't perform as well on
> > >> international tests by the time they enter high school, my answer
> > >> is "yes". The American kids are already behind at this stage.
> > >>
> > >> If you're asking if American kids are less "intelligent" than
> > >> Japanese
> > >> kids, well I refer you to your bible (1)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >So...based on what YOU have just told us:
> > >
> > > (A) There is a genetic component to intelligence
> >
> > Not quite. My point is that if you are prepared to accept the case made
> > by your bible, then this is true.
> >
> > BTW, the differences between the performance of different ethnic groups
> > on these tests is not obviously due to genetic factors. Indeed,
> > questions
> > regarding the origin of the difference is a contentious issue that is
> > worthy of debate.
> >
> > If you're interested in knowing what *I* personally believe, I find it
> > plausible that there is indeed a genetic component to intelligence.
> > However, I disagree that you can judge someone's intelligence based on
> > genetics alone. (1)
>
> A) I never claimed that intelligence was based "solely" on genetics.
> But...tell me, if you decide to scavange random parts from a
> 1975 AMC gremlin, and a 1935 Volkwagen bug, do you really believe
> that the end result will be something that beats a Ferarri?
>
> B) Of course intelligence is not based on genetics *alone*. The son
> of a tall parents who is malnourished will probably be short. The
> son of smart parents who is brought up in a primative cave will
> probably be an illiterate idiot.
>
> BUT! Genetics determine the *POTENTIAL*, not the outcome.
>
> Now...go into any ghetto, and it is quite apparent that the adults
> who are permanently living there are...at their maximum potential
> (if not exceeding it due to government subsidies).
That isn't quite apparent at all. You have no idea where those people
would be if they had been given the same opportunities you were.
> The point is... you have conceeded, that, just like EVERY OTHER HUMAN
> CHARACTERISTIC, there is genetic linkage for intelligence and
> intellectual potential.
How do you account for the fact that minorities are disproportionately
poor? Are they just genetically inferior?
> > >AND/OR
> > >
> > > (B) American schools are fucked up.
> > >
> > >So...is it (A), (B), or both?
> >
> > If the American schools are fucked up, it's probably not due to overly
> > leftist policies, since there are other education systems that are more
> > leftist that report better performance on tests.
>
> 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
genetically inferior people?
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:26:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ZnU wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe
> > Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > ZnU wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Marion
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Perry Pip wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > And you want my taxes to pay for vouchers for that shit?
> > > > > > > No way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As someone who started out in public schools, then switched
> > > > > > to private school, I can say without a doubt that the
> > > > > > education I got at the private school was _much_ better
> > > > > > then I could've gotten in the public system. My parents
> > > > > > sacrificed a lot for my sister and I (and we both let them
> > > > > > know that we appreciate what they did) to go to private
> > > > > > school. I have plenty of friends that went to public
> > > > > > school that wish they could've also gone to private school
> > > > > > and talk about how bad they were/are.
> > > > >
> > > > > It depends where you live. In rich suburbs, the public
> > > > > schools are of very high quality. They're properly funded. In
> > > > > inner cities, they're woefully underfunded, and they're
> > > > > horrible.
> > > > >
> > > > > > BTW, I think the proper system would be to give a tax
> > > > > > credit for someone that sends their kids to private
> > > > > > schools.. which wouldn't cost you anything in taxes.
> > > > >
> > > > > The solution is to properly fund inner city schools, not
> > > > > drain even more money away from them.
> > > >
> > > > The city of Detroit spends $11,000 per pupil...almost TRIPLE
> > > > what many private schools spend.
> > > >
> > > > And yet, the Detroit Public Schools are among the worst in the
> > > > country.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The small private school my kids used to go to cost $3,300 per
> > > student. I believe the tuition was about half the expense (an
> > > endowment paid the rest). So, for $6,600 per student, we got
> > > class sizes of no more than 20 students, quite adequate
> > > facilities, and an education that put the kids (on average) at
> > > about the 75th percentile, based on SAT scores.
> > >
> > > It's not about money.
> >
> > That private school gets to pick who it accepts, right? Will it
> > take kids with serious learning disabilities? Behavioral/emotional
> > problems?
>
> The public schools have the SAME abilities...only, the refuse to
> exercise them.
>
> The public schools can discipline those who are disruptive in the
> classroom offenders...but they refuse to do so.
They don't refuse to do so. The problem is that "discipline" doesn't
always work.
> The public schools can expel those who disrupt the school, but they
> refuse to do so.
And then where do they go? Again, if you don't pay for their schooling
now, you'll be paying for their incarceration later.
> Hoisted by their own petards.
>
>
> Actually, it's the tax-paying public who is paying for an K-12
> "education" but the money is instead being used for left-wing
> indoctrination.
What "left-wing indoctrination" would this be? Teaching kids about
sharing, tolerance and social responsibility? Yeah! That's downright
Communist!
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: javelina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:18:43 GMT
ZnU wrote:
> China has already stated it will enhance its
> offensive nuclear capability as a direct response
> to US deployment of missile defense. To me that
> sounds like the first step in a happy little arms race.
Good. Let China spend more of its money and time on
ICBMs and less on planes, tanks, and ships.
Nobody ever uses their ICBMs. That's the whole point.
Whereas non-nuclear military assets are utilized
on a daily basis.
A Chinese sub out on patrol or a tank rumbling along
its border worries me far more than the ICBM sitting
fat, dumb, and happy in its silo.
Everything that we can do to prevent China from
deploying a large blue water navy is alright by me.
Bring on the arms race!
Now if only the Chinese weren't shifting to Linux.
Pop Quiz: If a Chinese destroyer running Linux and
an American destroyer running Windows are out in the
middle of the ocean, which one will make it back to port?
Muahahahahahahahaha! I knew I could turn this post
into a pointed stick to poke into Microsoft's patootie.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
