Linux-Advocacy Digest #226, Volume #29 Wed, 20 Sep 00 01:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: GPL & freedom (Zenin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:16:20 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Britain recently outlawed handguns. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > > > > tripled
> > > > > > > > > > > since.
> > > > > > > > > > > Australia outlawed ALL firearms. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > > > > quintupled.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > So...quite obviously, the correlation between gun
> ownership
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > murder is tenous at best.
> > >
> > > Any refs for this??? I must have been dreaming when Michael Diamond won
> > > Olympic gold medal trap shooting yesterday then?? Maybe he was using a
> toy
> > > shotgun???
> >
> > Who did Micheal Diamond murder?
> >
> >
> <snip ridiculous sig>
>
> Again,
>
> What the hell are you talking about.
YOU are the one who dragged him into a conversation about murder...
so, perhaps YOU could tell us what the fuck the connection is.
So far, I see ZERO, other than that he supports my view of the
typical LAW ABIDING GUN OWNER.
> Are you so incapable of logical thought
> that you cant see the connection between your statement:
Again, YOU are the one who brought up an Olympic Gold Medalist shooter
in the context of murders.
Again...what the fuck is the connection, you blinkered fool?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:17:32 -0400
WimpyDyno wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Bob, that sort of logic reminds me of the gun nut's
> > > > > > > > > > > arguments,
> > > > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > know, the
> > > > > > > > > > > fact that the US has a very high % of houshold firearm
> > > > > > > > > > > ownership ,
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > it also has an extremely high death by firearm rate,
> > > > > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > > > > statistics are not realted!!!!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Switzerland and Isreal have even higher rates of firearm
> > > > > > > > > > ownership.
> > > > > > > > > > Not only that..but FULLY AUTOMATIC RIFLES* and yet, BOTH
> > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > lower
> > > > > > > > > > rates of death by firearms.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Both also require military service and so have a much
> > > > > > > > > larger
> > > > > > > > > number
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > people who are highly trained in gun usage and safety.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Which should, by your argument, RAISE criminality, as they
> > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > criminals know how to shoot straight.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Umm, whose argument?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It would definitely reduce the number of accidental gun deaths.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (FWIW, I wouldn't feel unsafe living in such a society,
> > > > > > > > > despite
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > number of guns around. I do feel unsafe living in a
> > > > > > > > > society
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > has
> > > > > > > > > fewer guns but even fewer trained, disciplined gun owners.)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So...bring back the draft.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That brings other problems, at least in our society.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Britain recently outlawed handguns. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > > > tripled
> > > > > > > > > > since.
> > > > > > > > > > Australia outlawed ALL firearms. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > > > quintupled.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So...quite obviously, the correlation between gun
> > > > > > > > > > ownership
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > murder is tenous at best.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Except of course that the issue is correlation between gun
> > > > > > > > > ownership
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > gun-related deaths.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You don't have an answer for that, do you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is no correlation between gun ownership and murder rates.
> > > > >
> > > > > Did you read what I wrote? Do you deny there is a correlation
> > > > > between
> > > > > gun ownershi and gun-related deaths?
> > > >
> > > > In many cases, it is a NEGATIVE correlation...fewer legally owned
> > > > guns INCREASES the rate of gun-related deaths.
> > >
> > > Did I ever deny that was possible?
> >
> > You never mentioned it.
> >
> > Why is that?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > Prof. John Lott did a 10-year study on it. "More Guns, Less Crime".
> > >
> > > IIRC, funded by the NRA.
> >
> > Bzzzzzzt! Wrong. Federal Government
> >
> > >
> > > > As usual, you're displaying your fucking ignorance.
> > > >
> > > > You should, like, do something about that.
> > >
> > > You assume too much.
> >
> > Yes...I made the mistake of assuming that you can fairly partake
> > in a logical conversation.
>
> You are needlessly antagonistic. It is in fact possible to have a
> conversation on usenet for mutual benefit in gaining information. It is
> rare, but it does happen. You have assured that this will not be the
> case here. Goodbye.
Translation: He WimpyDyno defeat.
>
> --
> | Andrew Glasgow <amg39(at)cornell.edu> |
> | SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
> | reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
> | to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:18:26 -0400
WimpyDyno wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > WimpyDyno wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers
> > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote in part:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : The Earth is a system of balances. If one thing gets out
> > > > > > > > > : of
> > > > > > > > > : whack,
> > > > > > > > > : 10 other things compensate to restore the balance.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is true of market economies also.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The problem is that it can take a really long time (from
> > > > > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > > perspective at least) for the damage to be corrected.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : This has been happening over billions of years. Many more
> > > > > > > > > : catastrophic
> > > > > > > > > : things have happened to the ecosystem that Humans could
> > > > > > > > > : ever
> > > > > > > > > : cook
> > > > > > > > > : up
> > > > > > > > > : and the ecosystem restored itself in a geological second.
> > > > > > > > > : The
> > > > > > > > > : amount
> > > > > > > > > : of data we, as humans, have collected scientifically over
> > > > > > > > > : the
> > > > > > > > > : past
> > > > > > > > > : 1-200 years is nothing. It's not even a nano-second in
> > > > > > > > > : geological
> > > > > > > > > : terms. To conclude or attempt to draw anything from
> > > > > > > > > : these
> > > > > > > > > : statistics
> > > > > > > > > : is meaningless and absurd to say the least.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We've collected substantial evidence of the earth's
> > > > > > > > > geological
> > > > > > > > > history.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The catastrophes of earlier geological ages did not destroy
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > earth,
> > > > > > > > > nor will our activities, but they *did* change the climate
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > ways
> > > > > > > > > that would have been horribly destructive to human
> > > > > > > > > civilization
> > > > > > > > > had
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > existed at the time. The fear is that our far smaller, but
> > > > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > potentially significant, activities might similarly cause
> > > > > > > > > destruction
> > > > > > > > > to human (and other) habitats in the relatively near
> > > > > > > > > future.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm not convinced that it will. I'm convinced that it
> > > > > > > > > might,
> > > > > > > > > though,
> > > > > > > > > and that the chance that it might is sufficient reason for
> > > > > > > > > us
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > continue to study and to evaluate our activities to make
> > > > > > > > > sure
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > aren't creating any potentially avoidable problems.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : Dinosaur populations excreted more methane and CO/2 than
> > > > > > > > > : humans
> > > > > > > > > : could ever hope to generate.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yep. But most of the sites of today's cities were under
> > > > > > > > > water
> > > > > > > > > then.
> > > > > > > > > Later, most of today's lakes and straits and mountains were
> > > > > > > > > under
> > > > > > > > > thousands of feet of ice. Neither of those outcomes would
> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > particularly desirable today.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : It's rather arrogant and self-important
> > > > > > > > > : to think that humans are so powerful that we could
> > > > > > > > > : permanently
> > > > > > > > > : change
> > > > > > > > > : or destroy the ecosystem and have it stay permanently
> > > > > > > > > : dead.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't think anyone is alleging that we could permanently
> > > > > > > > > destroy
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Earth. Only that our activities, if continued unchecked,
> > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > alter
> > > > > > > > > climate substantially enough, and for long enough, to have
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > detrimental impact on human and other habitats.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : We will
> > > > > > > > > : kill ourselves with war or accidentally releasing a
> > > > > > > > > : deadly
> > > > > > > > > : virus
> > > > > > > > > : into the world before we'll ever hope to destroy this
> > > > > > > > > : planet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Very possible. We've come damn close, more than once.
> > > > > > > > > Closer
> > > > > > > > > than
> > > > > > > > > most people are willing to believe.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : Granted, we shouldn't try, I agree we need to control
> > > > > > > > > : ourselves
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > That's all I'm saying. It's all that responsible
> > > > > > > > > environmentalists
> > > > > > > > > are saying too. (There are a lot of very *irresponsible*
> > > > > > > > > folks
> > > > > > > > > pretending to be environmentalists that are saying a lot
> > > > > > > > > more.
> > > > > > > > > Mostly, those are folks with political agendas, usually of
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > leftist
> > > > > > > > > variety, who *use* well-meaning but naive environmental
> > > > > > > > > activists
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > promote that agenda.)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > , but
> > > > > > > > > : this world has been through huge floods, all sorts of
> > > > > > > > > : geological
> > > > > > > > > : disasters (giant earthquakes, massive volcanoes spewing
> > > > > > > > > : millions
> > > > > > > > > : of
> > > > > > > > > : tons of CO/2, methane, and all other sorts of noxious
> > > > > > > > > : gasses
> > > > > > > > > : into
> > > > > > > > > : the atmosphere) and look where we are today, paradise.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We have an environment that is in many respects better than
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > ever
> > > > > > > > > has been (more free from infectious disease, for example).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The challenge is keeping it that way.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And in spite of the progress we've made, there still are
> > > > > > > > > serious
> > > > > > > > > problems such as air pollution in large cities, both air
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > water
> > > > > > > > > pollution behind the former Iron Curtain, rapid
> > > > > > > > > deforestation
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > certain areas (mostly South America and Latin America),
> > > > > > > > > and, to
> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > blunt, unsustainable development in certain parts of the
> > > > > > > > > world
> > > > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > > there simply is not enough guaranteed fresh water to
> > > > > > > > > sustain
> > > > > > > > > life.
> > > > > > > > > (The wealthy oil states of the Middle East, and the urban
> > > > > > > > > areas
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > southwestern U.S., are prime examples of this).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Preventable diseases still kill tens of millions in the
> > > > > > > > > poorest
> > > > > > > > > countries. Wars and famines caused mostly by statist
> > > > > > > > > political
> > > > > > > > > ideologies claim many more.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We're doing better than we did in the past in many ways,
> > > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > still much work left to be done.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As a libertarian I hope it can be done the way it should
> > > > > > > > > be,
> > > > > > > > > namely,
> > > > > > > > > by voluntary cooperation and consent.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But it does need to be done.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I don't know if global warming is something we can control,
> > > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > attempt to. But I certainly would like to know. And I
> > > > > > > > > certainly
> > > > > > > > > suggest caution in the meantime.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : We're do for
> > > > > > > > > : another ice age here in about 25-50,000 years or so,
> > > > > > > > > : we're
> > > > > > > > > : probably
> > > > > > > > > : just seeing the cycle repeat itself and seeing the
> > > > > > > > > : ecosystem
> > > > > > > > > : building
> > > > > > > > > : up and building up for the next ice age when it'll all
> > > > > > > > > : start
> > > > > > > > > : over
> > > > > > > > > : again and the same thing will happen 100,000 years after
> > > > > > > > > : that
> > > > > > > > > : like
> > > > > > > > > : it's done for the past several million years.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Probably.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But in the meantime I'd like those who will come after me
> > > > > > > > > to be
> > > > > > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > to enjoy the same, or better, environmental AND economic
> > > > > > > > > conditions
> > > > > > > > > that we have today.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To ensure this, we must avoid both extremes. We must not
> > > > > > > > > destroy
> > > > > > > > > people's livelihoods in a vain attempt to meet arbitrary or
> > > > > > > > > unrealistic goals that might not be necessary or even
> > > > > > > > > worthwhile.
> > > > > > > > > At
> > > > > > > > > the same time, we must not ignore the mounting evidence
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > warming
> > > > > > > > > *is* occurring, that human activities *may* be contributing
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > it,
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > that the costs for dealing with it *will* be staggering.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > : Humanity is not even a blink of an eye in the Earth's
> > > > > > > > > : history
> > > > > > > > > : and
> > > > > > > > > : it's not about to be destroyed by us.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Unlike some of my more left-leaning peers, I'm not
> > > > > > > > > concerned
> > > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > destruction of Earth, so much as I am about the destruction
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > human
> > > > > > > > > (and other) life on it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Joe
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Paging Chicken Little
> > > > > > > > Paging Chicken Little
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The Sky is Falling!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If someone tells me the sky is falling, I at least look up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is why......... you fail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this the portion of the evening when we randomly quote Star
> > > > > Wars?
> > > >
> > > > No...this is the portion of the evening when you disregard wise
> > > > analysis of why you are a loser.
> > >
> > > Have I insulted you in any way?
> >
> > Yes... you sided with the loser eco-propagandist.
> >
> >
> > > Didn't you at one point claim not to be the instigator in these flame
> > > wars?
> >
> > When ignorant assholes refuse to cease and desist from spreading lies,
> > then...i turn up the heat.
>
> You're more than a bit of an asshole yourself. AFAIC, this thread is
> over. It seems no one wants real information or reason, only what they
> want to hear.
Translation: WimpyDyno concedes defeat.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 04:27:52 -0000
D'Arcy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>snip<
: Here is the complete text:
:
: http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
:
: Point four:
:
: "The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to
: the public, so that the whole community benefits. (freedom 3). Access to
: the source code is a precondition for this."
This is a lie. You are not "free" to release your improvements, you
are explicitly *FORCED* to do so.
:> I've already said I see nothing wrong with the goal of the GPL. What I
:> have a problem with is calling it "free". The definition of freedom is
:> in direct opposition to the goal of the license.
:
: You are trying to take "free" out of context. Read the GPL and you will
: see that it is indeed providing the freedoms that it is trying to do. It
: is also more "free" than other licenses - wrt the "freedoms" that it is
: trying to provide.
:
: Stop trying to take the word "free" out of context when talking about the
: GPL and your head will stop hurting ;-) (mine too :-)
As soon as you take "free" out of the GPL...oh, wait, it doesn't
change it at all... :-/
That's the problem. The GPL redefines "free" for the context of its
own use in a deliberate and pointed effort to deceive its readers.
And you've fallen for it...hook, line, and sinker...
>snip<
: Also if you base your work on my work it is not entirly your work is it?
My part of the work is entirely my work, period. Your work is still
entirely your work and I never have the power to take control of it,
GPL or not.
If you think the BSD license fails to ensure the author's work
remains "free" for all to use, please site even just ONE SINGLE CASE
where someone has managed to removed BSD licensed code from the
community. You won't find it; because it can't be done.
--
-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: 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, 20 Sep 2000 00:29:33 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I don't play games with trolls. If you can refute my assertions, feel
>> free. If you can only hem and haw and argue from ignorance, you're
>> wasting your time. State your case or shut your trap.
>
>Aliens have come to earth and experimented with T. Max Devlin's brain,
>causing him to find the most illogical statements to seem perfectly
>reasonable, and finding reasonable statements to be difficult to fathom.
>
>If you can refute that statement, feel free Max. If you can only hem and
>haw and argue from ignorance, you're wasting your time. State your case or
>shut your trap.
>
>If you can't refute it, then it must be true. Right?
No, if I can't refute it, then it must be worth discussing.
The problem is you've conjoined several things together, in what is
known as a fallacy of distraction, specifically a complex question.
Whether or not aliens experimented on anyone's brain doesn't seem
logically related to whether I can find what you think is an illogical
statement is perfectly reasonable, or whether I would agree with your
comprehension of reasoning in general.
So that's a relatively dead end. Would you like to try again?
Here's some help for next time:
http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm
>> It wouldn't surprise me if they weren't. Only a moron would assume that
>> there aren't lock-in contracts whenever Microsoft is involved. They're
>> not interested in competing on their merits, remember; they don't see
>> anything wrong with breaking the law.
>
>You seem to be under the impression that you must sign a contract to use the
>Windows API. I've never done so, yet seem to be able to use things like IE
>all I want without threat of legal prosecution.
You seem to be under the impression that AOL does not have a contract
specifying that they will use the 'componentized browser' formerly known
as IE in their service in exchange for desktop space in Windows.
"289. In return for Microsoft's commitments, AOL agreed to base the
proprietary access software of its flagship online service for Windows
and the Mac OS on Internet Explorer 3.0 and to update that software as
newer versions of Internet Explorer were released. Another provision in
the agreement provided that "AOL and AOL Affiliates will, with respect
to Third Party Browsers, exclusively promote, market and distribute, and
have promoted, marketed and distributed, Internet Explorer on or for use
by subscribers to the AOL Flagship Service." Specifically, AOL agreed to
ensure that in successive six-month periods, neither the number of
copies of non-Microsoft Web browsing software it shipped (through any
sub-channel, including GNN), nor the number of new subscribers accessing
AOL (including GNN) with non-Microsoft Web browsing software, would
exceed fifteen percent of the total number of copies of proprietary
access software that AOL distributed through any channel (i.e., through
the Windows desktop or otherwise). AOL retained the right to distribute
non-Microsoft Web browsing software to subscribers who affirmatively
requested it, as long as doing so did not did not raise the relevant
shipment quotients above fifteen percent."
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#ve
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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
******************************
