Linux-Advocacy Digest #7, Volume #29 Fri, 8 Sep 00 18:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Computer and memory (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform (IE for Linux) (.)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Jim Broughton)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Harlan Grove)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: 8 Sep 2000 20:58:18 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in group comp.os.linux.misc The
Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -- check out the demise of Commodore Amiga,
> for example; it still can do things other computers cannot, but
> has long since been passed by in the mind of the general public.
Like what? I've heard this before but I'd liek to hear some
examples. The last time I had contact with a commodore I was
11, and hardly knew what computers could do...
------------------------------
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 21:10:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: [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.
>
>Slashdot really doesn't offer any alternative, however.
>Take the infamous "+1, insightful" or "-1, flamebait" ratings.
>Insightful to whom? Flamebait to whom? And then the
>metamoderation phase reiterates the opinion aspect with its
>"agree"/"disagree" checkboxes. The whole place generates
>plenty of heat but very little light and I've found that no
>amount of moderation tweaking has, or likely will, made any
>difference.
Well, some of the more scientific threads on slashdot
generate some actual interesting debates on real merit.
Although, if you don't have a high tolerance for 'hot
grits down your pants, Natalie Portman naked and
petrified, and how 'bout a beowulf cluster of these' type
of posts, you probably couldn't even enjoy wading through
those threads. I do know that some of the trolls claim
they are trolling to destroy the moderation system because
they think it sucks and they will stop when they stop
getting 'marked down'. I don't know how true that is, but
they do have a point. (And I agree with the stupid
Insightful/Flamebait markings. Most of the time it is
just a difference of opinion.)
>
>Automated moderation, while desirable, isn't likely to be
>feasible; computers are just too stupid for that. And
>considering the web site is cobbled together in perl,
>I have my doubts it'll get any sort of upgrade without a
>complete overhaul.
True enough. Have you ever tried wading through Slashcode
at all? There's a good way to destroy some serious
amounts of time and accomplish very, very little.
>
>As you might've noticed, I've seen quite a bit of Slashdot
>and have come to dislike it more and more with time.
>I'm not sure if it's the prevailing knee-jerk attitude or
>the lack of any real "community" (contrast it to a site like:
>http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/ and see what I mean)
>but I really don't care for it.
Actually, I've seen some nice 'community' sites, but most
of them wouldn't appeal to the primarily teen-aged morons
that seem to populate slash. Which probably explains why
they are 'nice' community sites. ;-).
>
>: Sorry for the off-topic rant (in an off-topic thread);-).
>
>That's just normal for usenet. It keeps life interesting :)
>
Guess so.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 21:20:29 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 8 Sep 2000 02:06:41 -0500
<Z_%t5.136$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Wrong. In Linux, you can write a signal handler for any signal (other
>> than 9--SIGKILL), ***INCLUDING*** mathematic exceptions (which is what
>> is produced by a div_by_0 error.
>
>And with NT you can provide a Structured Exception Handler to handle any
>fault except NMI.
Exactly. The failure lay in a poorly programmed application that failed,
not in the OS. The OS stayed up, but even the most rabid Linux Loony
or Windows Wacko would not expect to include ship control elements in
a generic distribution of either OS. :-) Therefore, the ship was dead in
the water; can't pin Microsoft for that one (much as one might like to :-) ).
One would hope that this bug was subsequently patched; there's also
no reason why the Armed Forces shouldn't use NT for any application
it can support, subject to the usual testing; the nature of a competitive
market, after all, is to provide solutions to customers who are willing
to buy, and the Navy is a customer, after all, albeit a slightly unusual one.
It's up to the customer to find the solution that most suits it,
based on the customer's criteria, which may include price, reliability,
functionality, ease of use / learning, application availability,
compatibility with existing hardware, and compatibility with new hardware.
One would hope Linux is included in the evaluation, but I
for one certainly don't want to *exclude* NT from consideration, either,
for such would be just as anticompetitive as some of Microsoft's prior
actions are now alleged to have been.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform (IE for Linux)
Date: 8 Sep 2000 21:42:28 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ingemar Lundin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry! cant belive you...that is simply not possible
None the less, it is indeed true.
abbie
> /IL
>> Its far, far worse than 'nutscrape' on any platform.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> abbie
>>
--
"It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
with computers"
---Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's national infrastructure
protection center commenting on Y2K concerns about hacker attacks
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 17:44:16 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 01:36:39 -0400, JS/PL wrote:
>>
>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> Well, most people don't know I'd be happy to help, if they need some
>>> advice. Feel free to email me. And I hope to be starting a web page
>>> soon.
>>
>>It will no doubt be a page thanking Bill Gates for making it possible for
>>your home computer to boot up?
>
>It completely escapes me why anyone would come to Max for advice, unless
>they are in need of a completely worthless and groundless opinion from
>someone who is willfully ignorant.
Yea, that would actually about cover it. It seems they've been going to
specialists for advice, but all this 'worthwhile' and 'common knowledge'
opinion still won't make the shit work.
And then they call me...
>But hey, at least he's willing to offer
>free advice ( in this case, you get what you pay for, if that )
I've been thinking of starting a web site. I won't be able to keep up
this pace for long, without getting paid for it.
I'm still on the fence between subscription and advertising, though. I
don't see anything at all wrong with advertising to support a web site.
But I consider it criminal that more than 80% of the delay in accessing
most web sites is waiting for the ads. I'll only use it if its
zero-wait-time, and loads *after* the content, and I don't think there's
any companies that do that now, considering how much more lucrative
profiteering off the public's bandwidth is. (If any of ELTRAX's
customers at DoubleClick or any of the other web companies are reading
this, please pass this along to the appropriate people, and have them
call me if they need any help.)
So it'll probably be subscription-based. If anyone reading this would
be interested in paying five or ten bucks a year to have T. Max Devlin
available to answer *your* question, send me an email.
--
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: Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 21:53:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in group comp.os.linux.misc The
>Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > -- check out the demise of Commodore Amiga,
> > for example; it still can do things other computers cannot, but
> > has long since been passed by in the mind of the general public.
>
> Like what? I've heard this before but I'd liek to hear some
> examples. The last time I had contact with a commodore I was
> 11, and hardly knew what computers could do...
The amiga had many capabilities. TRUE Multitasking (priority based round robin.)
The ability (with add on components) of producing commercial quality video. Some
commercials were done (dont ask for name I know them not) and most cable companies
used the
amiga for the program schedule channel output. (saw a few of those guru meditation
system faults on my local cables program channel) (for you windows users thats like
a BSOD). Was the first real affordable desktop computer that had full scale rendering
software. (allthough slow as hell without a 68030 or better) A built in graphical
user
interface (not great but not bad either). It did all that running stock at 8mhz.
First computer to offer 6.5 million color output (albiet for stills with stock
hardware).
Used a 2 button mouse as apposed to apples 1 button. Also had a robust shell language
too
boot. REXX a software programming (language?) was pioneered on the amiga and later
spread
to other operating systems. (although it never really caught on and got left in the
dust)
Too damm much to list.
--
Jim Broughton
(The Amiga OS! Now there was an OS)
If Sense were common everyone would have it!
Following Air and Water the third most abundant
thing on the planet is Human Stupidity.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 17:59:17 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 03:42:10 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>>the main point being that ignorance is not a defence against libel.
>>
>>The main point was to have a pretense to say "Max is a sex offender". I
>>though we went over that, already.
>
>I'd like to take this opportunity to define what I consider to be necessary
>ground rules for any kind of reasonable discussion.
I'm all for that. I do it all the time, you might have noticed.
>For a sensible debate to take place, I and only I must be regarded as the
>definitive authority on the meaning of my own words.
Excuse, me, you used a handy pretense to say "Max is a sex offender".
So obviously, we aren't in the 'sensible debate' area, any more.
>If misinterpret one of my comments, I reserve the right to correct you.
>You do not have the right to offer an alternative theory on what I "really"
>mean ( well, you do, but I am within my rights to say "I don't mean that",
>and you have to accept it )
I didn't say you meant I was a sex offender. I never said or thought
that you did. In fact, I don't care if you do, and for all you know, I
am. You can 'mean' whatever you want, but what you *said* was "Max is a
sex offender" when there was really no reason whatsoever for doing so,
but as a cutesy example of, supposedly, an unknown fact. The
circumstances hardly justify it; you could have said Bill Gates is a sex
offender, and it would have made your argument at least make sense.
>Likewise, I undertake to discuss the actual content of your post, rather
>than try to redefine what you "mean" and put myself on a pedestal as the
>authority on "what you really mean".
Bullshit; you're wiggling around expecting intelligent people to pretend
that you didn't go out of your way to post the words "Max is a sex
offender". Considering you were talking about slander, and whether the
fact has to be true to be considered slander, it might have made more
sense to use someone you *know* isn't a sex offender, or is. I can't
redefine your argument for you, so, since your argument didn't make
sense, its rather easy to see that it was just an excuse to post "Max is
a sex offender". (To anyone else named Max who might get upset at my
own repeated posting of these words, I apologize. My point is obviously
to illustrate that I frankly don't care how many people post those words
on Usenet, whether they're true or not. If I were willing to be cowed
by an appeal to popularity, I wouldn't be here. I am not emotional,
anxious, or upset by Donovan's posting them, but merely by his
intellectual dishonesty is using such a pretense in place of actual
discussion.)
>It is impossible for us to have any kind of sensible discussion if we
>allow ourselves to rewrite someone else's arguments. This strategy should
>be seen for what it is -- a moderately refined version of the strategy
>of sticking ones fingers in ones ears and saying "na na na ... I'm
>not listening".
If you'll forgive me, the lesson you were supposed to learn from all
this is that a sensible discussion doesn't require using a pretense to
call someone a sex offender, you moron.
>In short, your style is immature, arrogant and disrespectful, and I don't
>believe that you are reasonable enough to be worth talking to right now.
I believe you're an intellectual midget, who hasn't the ability to
understand the very concept of honest discussion or reasoned debate.
While there have been some comments you've made that have been
worthwhile, and would contribute to a discussion if presented honestly
and respectfully, any fool who thinks that using a pretense such as you
have is a game for children, not intellectual discussion. I would just
as soon you not pretend to talk to me, now or any other time, until you
learn that I'm not here to play games, but to engage in reasoned and
reasonable discussion on whatever topic I might be find entertaining,
including whether KDE is a commercial enterprise.
--
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: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:00:01 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 02:57:20 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>>Sure, you're right, Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>on Mon, 4 Sep, my mistake. If you think I'm 'dumb' because I mixed the
>>two trolls in the thread up, then all I can say is...
>
>May I remind you that the two of us are not the ones posting misinformation
>and libel in this discussion ?
No, you cannot, because anyone with an ounce of intelligence and access
to the full thread knows its a lie.
--
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: Harlan Grove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 21:51:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
jabali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
>Linux is currently the only end-user system alternative to windows on
>a PC (IBM compatible in older terminology). Of course you also have
>Mac-OS.
Don't care much for OS/2 or BeOS, do you? Well, BeOS may not be viable
in the long term, but OS/2 will be around for years to come.
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
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:06:33 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 02:57:20 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>
>> (2) Like I said, I am the sole definitive authority on the meaning of
>> my own words.
>
>Just an observation. I don't think that is true for the meaning of your
>words, if what you just said were true, what ever words used by anyone could
>take on any meaning and communitcations would not be possible.
Even you fall prey, so easily, to the post-modernist myth. No, it
doesn't make any words take on any meaning, unless you don't care if
anyone understands you. As 'sole definitive authority on the meaning of
my own words', I have no responsibility or ability to decide what you
think the meaning of my words are, except, of course, my words.
>However, you are the sole definitive authority on your intended meaning.
I don't quibble about 'intent'; it's second-guessing, at best. I say
what I mean. Someone else says what they think I mean. I tell them if
they're right or not. Get it?
You're confusing what I mean by what I say with what is factual. The
same failure that many post-modernist philosophers make when they write
clap-trap like "how could he die of a disease that wouldn't be
identified until 200 years later?" and such. It is the inability to
understand what I've said about what and who defines words, not the
understanding or the reality of it, which leads to imagination trying to
take the place of intellect; the crux of the post-modern flaw, I think.
Words are defined by how they're used; that's what makes it natural
language. Those overly-familiar with a putatively similar construct,
programming languages, may not be considering that fact enough. I
decide how I use the words I use, and thus define them. You hear and
interpret them as you will. If we can get anywhere close to each other,
by reasoned discussion and analytical evaluation, then we can write that
definition in a dictionary. But dictionaries are an 'after-the-fact'
observation, not a definitive description of what a word *means*.
--
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: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:10:12 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Thu, 7 Sep 2000 08:30:21 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 02:57:20 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>>
>>> (2) Like I said, I am the sole definitive authority on the meaning of
>>> my own words.
>>
>>Just an observation. I don't think that is true for the meaning of your
>>words, if what you just said were true, what ever words used by anyone could
>>take on any meaning and communitcations would not be possible.
>>
>>However, you are the sole definitive authority on your intended meaning.
>
>You are correct. That is what I meant. My point is that Max has been arguing
>with me as to what my intended meaning was ( since it's quite clear that
>the literal meaning clearly does not in any way accuse him of any felony )
No, I haven't. I've been pointing out that the excuse you used to say
"Max is a sex offender", was just that. Other examples would have been
far more clear.
>What is clear is that Max did not understand my original post, and then
>proceeded to do what he always does when he doesn't understand what's going
>on -- go on the attack, like a rabid dog.
What is clear is that you expect me to suddenly turn shy and take this
kind of bullshit seriously, in the great wave of self-doubt which you
expect to wash over me any time. It ain't gonna happen. I know
reasonable discussion when I see it, and I know schoolyard games. I
just think its incredible you can go so long desperately (or naively)
hoping that other people can't see the same for themselves.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
