Linux-Advocacy Digest #2, Volume #29 Fri, 8 Sep 00 14:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows ("Tristan Wibberley")
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Computer and memory
Re: Computer and memory
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (David Dorward)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds this just
a little scary? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Computer and memory (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (jabali)
Re: Computer and memory (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Computer and memory (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Tristan Wibberley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 17:09:00 +0100
Lina wrote in message ...
Will an end-user alternative similar to Linux appear anytime
>soon?
Most current Linux distributions try to cater for power users and computing
professionals *as well as* end-users and IMHO end up doing neither very
well.
Linux itself is a core technology which can be built upon with tailored
interfaces. This has been done for power users (see Debian), but not yet (or
not adequately) for end-users. Linux can dominate both markets, but it will
be dissimilar between them.
Windows is an (otherwise unnamed) poor core combined with a good end-user
interface,
Linux is a good core
Debian Linux is a good core (Linux) with a good power-user interface,
Corel Linux is a good core (Debian Linux) with a passable end-user
interface,
etc..
All IMHO
------------------------------
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: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:23:47 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Christophe Ochal in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Said Christophe Ochal in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >How about their browsers, and how they introduced propriety systems into
>> >webpages? Like eg what's it called again, ActiveX?
>>
>> I think you mean 'ASP', Active Server Page. ActiveX is a *different*
>> evil thing, isn't it?
>
>ActiveX is used for webpages too (there's a setting in the IE prefs for it)
>
>> >Or their Java engine? (That got them a conviction)
>>
>> I hadn't heard any news, but I wasn't really watching what happened
>> after the anti-trust trial got started. Do you have any info or links?
>
>I just remember the outcome that forced them to rename their Java VM to M$
>VM, because SUN had pulled them to court, T.Max might have some links tho
Ummm..... Perhaps you missed the "From:" line.... LOL (thanks for the
compliment)
Microsoft got an injunction preventing Microsoft from releasing or
distributing any software that didn't have the Sun JVM in it; Sun
recognized that they were allowed to 'monkey with' Java itself, and the
contracts allowed for modifications as necessary to Java to make it work
well on Windows. The licensing contracts allowed this, although Sun
said in their complaint that MS had modified it in ways that could not
be mistaken to be for efficiency and were purposefully done to decrease
intercompatibility. The main thing Microsoft did, though, is not
include Sun's JVM (which would provide perfect compatibility, at loss of
efficiency and limited support, to cross-platform Java). It was really
embarrassing watching Microsoft try to squirm out of answering the
question put directly to them: why, after signing an agreement to
license Java from Sun containing an explicit requirement to include Sun
JVM in any distribution, didn't the Microsoft Java development kit not
include the Sun JVM? The judge wondered, as well, and slapped an
injunction on Microsoft. That was the beginning of *last* summer
(1999), and as far as I had heard, everything else was put on hold
waiting for Sun's programmers to go over the Microsoft Java source code
to try to determine what was random incompatibility and what was
'fitting' Java to Windows, which Microsoft did, after all, have an
agreement allowing them to do.
I don't know what happened to it after that, as there was no real 'news'
once the monopoly trial started. Apparently, nothing really happened
after that. Microsoft 'capitulated' to Sun's demands by not labeling
their stuff Java, then by getting Java support from a third party.
"Microsoft Java", at this point, looks like its actually Rival Software
Java, since MS can't use the Java logo for their own crud. Following
that move, Microsoft, of course, started making noises about how Java is
superfluous and proceeded to attack interoperability from another
direction; engrossing of the XML efforts by using 'XML/HTTP' as a
"replacement" for DCOM RPC (otherwise known as 'ActiveX'). That isn't
working out for them too well, either. Microsoft has been forced to the
point where they have to try to develop *new* stuff just to try to
prevent the old stuff from threatening their monopoly. The funny part,
of course, is that Microsoft is generally unable to develop new stuff
that isn't complete crap. If monopolies were capable of competing on
merits, they wouldn't be monopolies.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:54:18 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This thread is kind of one of those that could have gone
> on for weeks and weeks if someone hadn't flubbed and
> brought up the no-no topic. Kind of makes me wonder why
> we are all in tech oriented groups, and talking about
> politics. Amazing where the conversations go.
Yea, if this were fidonet we would all have gotten rewarded for a parts in
this discussion with the infamous 30-day vacations.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:18:23 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The Balkan conflicts would probably resolve themselves if
> we weren't in there pushing each side in just the way we
> want them. (This is where the blood sucking leaches shit
> comes into play. Push each side of the war, just to keep
> the trouble stirring. If they stopped fighting eachother,
> they may see who's been pushing the fight along.)
That sound pretty much like England's part in the U.S. Civil War.
> Bullshit! If it wasn't for our involvment in a lot of the
> 'battles' in the world right now, they would eventually
> end. We find it more economically advantageous to keep
> the battles alive and keep the governments involved
> distracted as we usher the riches of those countries into
> the States. (Picture this, two people walk up to you in
> the street. One swats you about your head and pisses you
> off, you put all of your effort into 'attacking' the
> person swatting you over your head. While you are busy
> being pissed off at that person, the other reaches into
> your pocket and cleans you out. He doesn't share any of
> the wealth he got from you with the other person, just
> leaves you two to battle out after having stirred up the
> trouble between you in the first place.)
The ironic part it the person in the Administration who handles our
international affairs is not a U.S. citizen based on the requirement and
deffinitions of citizenship set forth by the founders of this nation.
> 2. I've worked in factories. The only thing I can think
> of that qualifies as slightly 'heroic' was yelling at
> someone to get out of the way when I saw a bunch of
> equipment falling off of a rack in the warehouse. Not a
> big deal, and if someone else had seen it, they would have
> done the same.
Maybe, maybe not. All too many would watch and remain silent or just turn
their backs.
> I have a right to critisize the US if I want to. Believe
> it or not, that's one of the rights that our forefathers
> fought for. Now, I choose to exercise that right.
Fought for and died for, it was hard won for us by the dearest price they
could pay. If it were not for the First Amendment right of the Freedom of
Speech, none of the rest of the Bill of Rights would be possible.
The American "system" is the (final?) evolutionary result of what transpired
at Runnymead all those years ago. And that would not have happened if King
John was not such a pill.
> (unless you want to email me, feel free, it's been awhile
> since I've been mail bombed).
Email bombing is plain stupid, and yet how many times it happen when "they"
don't like our opinions. The most pathetic attempt of email bombing is when
it is launched by using point and click interfaces.
------------------------------
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: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:29:31 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9Jrt5.911$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > I hadn't heard any news, but I wasn't really watching what happened
>> > after the anti-trust trial got started. Do you have any info or links?
>>
>> I just remember the outcome that forced them to rename their Java VM to M$
>> VM, because SUN had pulled them to court, T.Max might have some links tho
>
>There was no such outcome of a ruling. The Microsoft JVM was always named as
>such.
That isn't the issue. Microsoft tried to leave out the Sun JVM, because
it provided cross-platform capabilities. Their JVM, which was also
under attack, was called Microsoft JVM, until they realized they can't
monopolize with it and *nobody* was interested in supporting it, so now
its still called the Microsoft JVM (though boxes containing it weren't
allowed to say they included 'Java'), but now its actually the Rational
JVM.
"Microsoft has not totally pulled the plug on the Java tool, however. It
has instead signed a deal for rival tools vendor Rational Software to
continue development of Visual J++.
Richard Hamblen, developer tools product manager at Microsoft UK, said
the Rational deal is 'great news for developers because of the strength
of the company's Java technology offering which is not hampered legally
or technically like Microsoft's Java offering.'
The Seattle software giant does not fully endorse the so-called
write-once-run-anywhere basis of Java as defined by Sun Microsystems. As
a result, Visual J++ focuses on the Windows platform. After a legal
battle with Sun, Microsoft was forced to remove a Java logo from
packaging and documentation for Visual J++."
>From an article on vnunet, which generally soft-pedals the Microsoft
shenanigans, in December 1999.
http://www.vnunet.com/News/104030
--
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: David Dorward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:25:22 +0100
Lina wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Will an end-user alternative similar to Windows appear anytime
> soon?
www.kde.org
www.gnome.org
www.winehq.com
www.mandrake.com
--
David Dorward
http://www.dorward.co.uk/
------------------------------
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: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:36:35 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ermine Todd in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>And as the case is playing out, Sun is losing on every point. First, it's
>been ruled that it was a contract and not a "copyright" issue. 2nd, it's
>been ruled that Sun did illegally deny updates and information to MS as
>specified in the contract, 3rd, that Sun did not validate the Java 2 code as
>meeting the test suites according to the contract, 4th, that MS did have the
>right to add extensions and provide a version optimized for Windows and 5th,
>that it wasn't just a simple "distribution" agreement.
>
>The only thing that MS has been required to change as a result of the suite
>was 1) that the default mode would be for the extensions to be disabled and
>2) that MS, until the suite is settled, could not refer to their version as
>"the" reference version for the Windows platform.
In other words, the result was that MS could not call what they were
trying to monopolize with 'Java'. Because the contract said they needed
to include the Sun JVM as a run-time environment (not necessarily the
only one) with their Java and *THEY DIDN'T*. The empty protestations
you've listed, all of the 'counter-claims' made by Microsoft, were just
arm-waving. First, only Microsoft, not Sun, ever called it a copyright
issue (you know how they love to do that.) Second, Sun was under no
duty to provide updates or information once Microsoft broke the terms of
the agreement. Third, whether Sun's new Java development was validated
(it did have problems) or not has nothing whatsoever to do with whether
Microsoft's did (it flatly failed entirely). Fourth, the second reason
(besides the blatant failure to follow the contract by including Suns
JVM) Sun sued was because they wished to prove that Microsoft's 'embrace
and extend' attempt were not in any way designed to 'optimize' Java for
Windows (and its probable they would have demonstrated that, if not
proven it, had the trial continued; apparently it was dropped when
Microsoft capitulated on all counts.) Fifth, nobody ever said it was a
simple agreement, but it would, in fact, have been close to a 'simple
distribution' agreement for anyone but Monopolysoft.
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: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:28:44 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:G99u5.6898$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> This has been done for power users (see Debian), but not yet (or
> not adequately) for end-users.
"power users" ARE end-users.
I think that "neophytes" is a better term for you misuse of the term
"end-user".
------------------------------
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: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:43:00 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>How do you compensate for the users who don't frequent those websites either
>by choice or by imposed policy? What about those with platforms that can
>not run http clients? What about those who may have chosen to not let their
>browser report the correct OS or client software? How do you compensate for
>those?
>
>How do you normalize the data? You would need to compensate for those who
>may only hit those sites once or twice a month or a year compared to those
>who hit it several times a day.
>
>Do you eliminate the repeat hits by those who repeat hit the sites by having
>to refreash their screens?
>
>Stats like those you are citing are heavly biased by a self-selected, even
>though unknowingly, population.
>
>So how do you unbias the statistics?
The basic theory is that the number of people not hitting the large
number of web sites surveyed is evenly distributed, according to the
same statistical relationships that are evidenced by the people who do
hit those web sites.
Statistics cannot be biased; merely misunderstood or misrepresented.
Repeat hits and self-selection by themselves do not remove validity from
the statistics; instead, they illustrate that the bias which causes the
self-selection or provides the repeat hits is subject to the same
distribution probabilities as the data itself, making it both invisible
and unimportant.
The point is, if you want numbers to show the fact that .5% of computers
in use are Amigas (which I think is a gross over-estimate, for all the
thousands of people still happily and productively using Amigas), then
you're going to have to look at numbers, not statistics, regardless of
how those statistics are collected or analyzed.
--
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: 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: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:45:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>> So how do you unbias the statistics?
>
>I don't need to unbias the statistics, I just believe that the numbers are
>very accurate and the things you speak of such as refreshing the pages would
>be done to all clients, and ip spoofing, I would guess, is done by about 1
>out of 10,000 visitors (if that). You can trash the numbers all you want, no
>OS user % stats are perfectly accurate. I base decisions on the stats though
>because I think they are the most accurate available at any given snapshot
>in time.
Well, dude. You've finally gotten something right. The permutations
that 'mjcr' is looking for are not statistically relevant, in the method
and sampling provided. The small proportion of spoofing, and the even
distribution of refresh hits, and such, just don't show the numbers he'd
like to see. We shouldn't forget that this may mean they are not
appropriate numbers for refuting whatever his contention was, but
apparently we may have proceeded past that point, already.
I'm curious; just what decisions do you base on the web usage stats?
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds
this just a little scary?
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:51:32 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Anthony D. Tribelli in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Morphing "failures associated with NT" into "failures caused by NT" is not
>very good "re-quoting". It is plain English, but whether it is accurate is
>a big unknown. Which has been, and remains, my question. Your offerings
>contain the assumptions, the conjecture. I'm still waiting to see real
>info on these incidents.
Only because you aren't going to get them, and you know it. This kind
of position is an argument from ignorance, nothing more. And in this
case, its real ignorance, not the pro-forma kind used widely as a
logical fallacy.
The 'morphing' you've indicated might seem like bad 're-quoting', but
its really fundamental (I mean basic, as in you should know this
already) troubleshooting. Particularly in a closed system such as NT,
to care about whether it was the system which caused the repeated and
frequent failures, or merely whether it was associated routinely with
those failures, is a self-defeating proposition.
When working with technology, if a certain product, feature, platform,
or configuration repeatedly or routinely, particularly if the 'repeated'
failures are 'non-repeatable', you don't waste time figuring out who to
blame. You replace the component which is associated with those
failures with one that isn't a complete piece of crap.
Anything else would be moronic. Pro-forma idiocy is not an effective
approach when the goal is to get systems that work, rather than to avoid
blaming the monopoly because their products are complete crap.
--
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] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 17:56:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>
>Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> This thread is kind of one of those that could have gone
>> on for weeks and weeks if someone hadn't flubbed and
>> brought up the no-no topic. Kind of makes me wonder why
>> we are all in tech oriented groups, and talking about
>> politics. Amazing where the conversations go.
>
> Yea, if this were fidonet we would all have gotten rewarded for a parts in
>this discussion with the infamous 30-day vacations.
>
Ah, for moderation.
I still spend a little time on Slashdot. It's nice if
you're feeling like you don't want to put up with the
garbage to adjust your threshold. Of course, on slashdot,
most of the moderators appear to be complete idiots and
moderate based on opinion, rather than content. Perhaps
we need automated moderation.
Sorry for the off-topic rant (in an off-topic thread);-).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: jabali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 18:19:28 +0100
"Lina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is the percentage of computers and servers running Linux now.=20
Anybody's guess. My guess is that two to five million machines have linux
installed against an estimated 100 million for windows - another guess
really - but a much lesser number is used as the main working machine. It=
is
said that majority of web-servers are running on Linux though M$ would ce=
rtainly
dispute that.
>Will an end-user alternative similar to Linux appear anytime soon?
You mean another OS like Linux ? Are not you happy with the revolution ? =
:)
Linux is currently the only end-user system alternative to windows on a P=
C=20
(IBM compatible in older terminology). Of course you also have Mac-OS.
--=20
jabali
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:02:41 GMT
References trimmed back because SLRN burped the first time.
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 08 Sep 2000 15:08:19 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Fri, 8 Sep 2000 11:17:22 +0200, Christophe Ochal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>>diZt5.17875$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>><cut>
>>
>>> Vikings, Romans, Nazis and Crusades need I go on? Maybe learning your
>>> European history may help. The Europeans killed more native americans in
>>> the first 100 years, than the USA ever did. It wasn't though war but
>>> though disease. More than half of the population for the americas were
>>> wiped out though European diseases.
>>> 'Nam was started by the French. The Nazis killed more people than the USA
>>> ever did, in any single war.
>>
>>vikings, Romans, Crusades, these were committed by both our ancestors, as
>>for the Nazis yes, they killed millions of people, but tell me, how many
>>were killed in Hiroshima in one day?
>
>About the same as a week of carpet bombing. Is dying from nuclear
>fire really any worse than getting splattered by tnt?
It's more dramatic, perhaps. I've seen black and white pictures of
shadows from The Bomb. One realizes quickly that they used to be people,
caught in the wrong attitude and changed to nothing but a light
shadow on an adjoining wall, pole, or tree, in the flick of an eye.
Sobering.
Death by fire is probably more painful, though (smoke inhalation).
A person who is converted into a shadow probably felt a bit of
heat at most (we'll never know). The ones that really suffered
are probably the ones who died of rad poisoning, farther out. 2 weeks
at most, one's hair falls out, other nasty things happen,
probably lots of poisons and tumors, I don't know. (I'm not sure
I want to.)
And then there are the long term effects; at least with firebombing
one doesn't have to worry about contaminated food. (Small
comfort, that!)
May we never drop The Bomb again; may we never have to.
But when ya gotta, ya gotta.
Of course, what all this has to do with Linux, NT, or Windows,
I'll never figure out. :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:05:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chris Street - remove antispam in email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spoke thusly:
>On Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:16:12 GMT, "Chad Myers"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Chris Street - remove antispam in email"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>> I suggest you take the time and trouble to actually learn a little
>>> history. Also if you want to try flims like Private Ryan as reliable
>>> sources of evidence, fine. Just don't wonder why everyone is killing
>>> themselves laughing.
>>
>>Private Ryan was fairly accurate. I figured Nathaniel was devoid of
>>any intelligence or culture, so the only way to reach him would be a
>>movie, since the word "books" isn't in his vocabulary.
Books isn't in my vocabulary? Jesus, this is hysterical.
I have a huge library full of books at home, both
historical and fictional. And I don't just read the tripe
cropped up by the idiots that are in politics either. I
read real history.
You keep saying I'm an idiot for disagreeing with you.
What exactly do you think makes America great if I'm not
allowed to disagree with you? Or is America only supposed
to be great for those that agree with you?
Ah fuck it. Arrogant morons take up too much of my time,
and have certainly wasted enough of my life (remember the
story about my dumbass uncle thinking he could fight a
full grown holstein bull? He was an arrogant dumbass too.).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
