Linux-Advocacy Digest #303, Volume #29 Mon, 25 Sep 00 14:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Unix more secure, huh? (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively ("Matt")
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: How low can they go...? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (STATIC66)
Re: The Linux Experience
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively ("Matt")
Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one (Tony Tribelli)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (STATIC66)
Re: The Linux Experience (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (STATIC66)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix more secure, huh?
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 14:27:53 GMT
On 25 Sep 2000 13:43:47 GMT, Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: A transfinite number of monkeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 02:05:50 GMT, Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >> IP address please... :)
: > Nice strawman. Besides, if you were truly resourceful, you'd already
: > know it, and wouldn't have to ask.
:
: I didn't know reading USENET headers counted as resourcefulness. You
: learn something every day...
Reading the Usenet headers wouldn't do anything to tell him what my IP
addresses *on my home LAN* are. They would only tell him where I posted
from, which it just so happens are NOT the same machine...
--
Jason Costomiris <>< | Technologist, geek, human.
jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
------------------------------
From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:25:35 -0700
Does it matter? my point was that M$ makes Good deal of money off the
windows products. Even if the figures are skewed to M$ favor, the difference
between windows revenue and applications revenue was what I was interested
in. So I don't care about stock manipulation or OEM prices, VS retail
prices.
Matt
> >Does this include OEM copies, and if so, does it OEM prices?
> >
> >Colin Day
> >
>
> Also, does it include stock manipulation?
>
> --
> Jim Richardson
> Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
> WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
> Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:27:34 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Mike Byrns in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>
> >> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> I've explained this only a half dozen times. Why don't you email it
to
> >> >> all the other trolls: I only use a single computer; a laptop
provided by
> >> >> my company. I don't *have* a 'home PC'. I won't dual boot, and I
have
> >> >> a Linux box (an old Gateway laptop) at the office, but mostly I just
use
> >> >> Sun boxes when I use Unix.
> >> >
> >> >Pathetic.
> >>
> >> Your ongoing tirade of posturing, you mean? I'd agree, but I wouldn't
> >> have thought to mention it, as its not unusual that your various
> >> trolling excuses are generally pathetic.
> >
> >I'm rubber and you're glue, that bounced off me and stuck to you ;-)
> >You come off like a really smart kindergartner, Devlin.
>
> LOL.
>
> >> >Quit complaining about the operating system you freely choose to use,
or
> >> >switch. It's very simple, AND the answer to all your Microsoft
problems.
> >>
> >> You are a moron.
> >
> >This *IS* the real issue, but you chose to ignore it.
>
> This is bogus arm-waving; you choose to ignore the criminal activity
> which has resulted in Microsoft enjoying monopoly power, and the reality
> of that power.
>
> >The truth is, you
> >could go out and get a computer with linux loaded on it RIGHT NOW -- but
> >you choose to use your laptop from work and spend half your day (or
> >pretty damn close) bitching about it on USENET. Shall we take up a
> >collection? How does the Max Devlin Memorial Computer Fund sound?
>
> Like moronic hand-waving.
>
> The truth is, Microsoft, whether you wish to believe it or not, makes it
> more expensive and more difficult to get a computer with Linux loaded on
> it. It isn't that it would cost me money; it is that it is less
> valuable to me *and* costs more money than it would had not the various
> felonious strategies not been performed by *Microsoft*. This has
> nothing whatsoever to do with yours truly; I feel no personal
> responsibility for the situation, and do not apologize for not making it
> my problem any more than it is. When it is convenient and productive
> for me to buy a Linux box, I will. Until then, it is Microsoft's fault,
> not my own, that I am not already doing so.
You expect anyone with any Linux experience whatsoever to believe that (of
all people) Microsoft?? makes it more expensive to use Linux? There's like
200 OEM's on this page alone http://www.linux.org/vendors/systems.html who
will gladly deliver you a Windows free system for a competetive price of a
system with Windows. I've checked out a few systems and the prices seem to
be about the same as any system that comes WITH windows installed.
So how is it "more expensive and more difficult" as you say? It took me
about one minute to find 200 vendors of non-windows systems. So your
"difficulty claim" is out the window. Show me an example of a non-windows
system costing more money than an equal system that comes with windows (+/-
3%).
You can find an app to do anything you currently need the Windows OS to run
(and probably for free) so your reasoning for USING windows to BASH Windows
in your leisure time holds no water.
For that matter you don't even need to dual boot. I've never used it but -
Mandrake for Windows would probably do the job and I know from experience
that VMware Workstation for Microsoft® Windows will do the job quite
handily. So stop lying about being "forced" to use Windows to bash
Microsoft. You most definitely not forced to do it and no one on earth would
ever believe that you are.
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[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: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:44:26 -0400
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> The truth is, Microsoft, whether you wish to believe it or not, makes it
>> more expensive and more difficult to get a computer with Linux loaded on
>> it. It isn't that it would cost me money; it is that it is less
>> valuable to me *and* costs more money than it would had not the various
>> felonious strategies not been performed by *Microsoft*. This has
>> nothing whatsoever to do with yours truly; I feel no personal
>> responsibility for the situation, and do not apologize for not making it
>> my problem any more than it is. When it is convenient and productive
>> for me to buy a Linux box, I will. Until then, it is Microsoft's fault,
>> not my own, that I am not already doing so.
>
>You expect anyone with any Linux experience whatsoever to believe that (of
>all people) Microsoft?? makes it more expensive to use Linux? There's like
>200 OEM's on this page alone http://www.linux.org/vendors/systems.html who
>will gladly deliver you a Windows free system for a competetive price of a
>system with Windows. I've checked out a few systems and the prices seem to
>be about the same as any system that comes WITH windows installed.
>So how is it "more expensive and more difficult" as you say? It took me
>about one minute to find 200 vendors of non-windows systems. So your
>"difficulty claim" is out the window. Show me an example of a non-windows
>system costing more money than an equal system that comes with windows (+/-
>3%).
>
>You can find an app to do anything you currently need the Windows OS to run
>(and probably for free) so your reasoning for USING windows to BASH Windows
>in your leisure time holds no water.
>For that matter you don't even need to dual boot. I've never used it but -
>Mandrake for Windows would probably do the job and I know from experience
>that VMware Workstation for Microsoft® Windows will do the job quite
>handily. So stop lying about being "forced" to use Windows to bash
>Microsoft. You most definitely not forced to do it and no one on earth would
>ever believe that you are.
>
Ah, but didn't you know that Max considers himself way above everyone
on earth? After all, why should the beliefs of everyone on earth stop
Max from "thinking harder"? LOL!
BTW, I hope you're prepared for the inevitable Devlin bullshit
response: "I refuse to seek out alternatives to monopoly crapware. If
there were a free market, I wouldn't have to."
------------------------------
From: STATIC66 <[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, 25 Sep 2000 17:45:24 GMT
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 21:36:44 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:31:25 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >
>> > >> They don't refuse to do so. The problem is that "discipline"
>> > >> doesn't always work.
>> > >
>> > >Then expel them.
>> >
>> > Your emphasis on "expelling" people is not going to raise
>> > educational standards. In short, you seek to raise "performance"
>> > statistics by hiding weaker students from those statistics. In
>> > short, this is a scam, because it doesn't do anything to increase
>> > the nation's education level. It merely makes certain statistics
>> > easier to misapply.
>> >
>> > >> And then where do they go? Again, if you don't pay for their
>> > >> schooling now, you'll be paying for their incarceration later.
>> > >
>> > >Where they will serve as an example to others.
>> >
>> > "serve as an example" ? If the point of the criminal justice system
>> > was to "make examples" of people, wouldn't it be more effective to
>> > publically execute them or stone them to death ?
>> >
>> > Be aware that the kind of barbarism you are advocating no longer
>> > exists in civilised countries.
>> >
>> > >> What "left-wing indoctrination" would this be? Teaching kids
>> > >> about
>> > >
>> > >Global warming and other Eco-leftism
>> >
>> > What is wrong with discussing environmental issues in schools ? I
>> > don't recall any given view being "pushed".
>>
>> Pushing LIES is directly contrary to the purpose of education.
>
>Why are all those scientists telling lies?
So they get more funding..
>
>> > >Pro-homosexuality propaganda
>> >
>> > Why are you so strongly opposed to homosexuality ? I notice you
>> > offered no
>>
>> Ever hear of AIDS?
>
>AIDS spreads just as well or better though heterosexual sex. Some of the
>countries with the highest AIDS rates in the world have virtually no
>homosexuality.
Homosexuals are at the highest risk.
They also have the highest infected population.
Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and has nothing to do with
reading,writing,math..it is a discussion better left to the parents.
it has no place in public education..
>
>But of course here again science must be wrong because you say so.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:48:10 -0000
On 25 Sep 2000 16:48:39 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:40:25 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>On 25 Sep 2000 15:04:05 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>Well, there's another problem already. The problem is that documentation
>>>is scattered willy-nilly. There's manpages, info pages, and /usr/doc.
>>
>> /usr/doc is not "willy-nilly".
>
>(a) Not all of the documentation is in /usr/doc.
However, "doc" is a rather obvious mnemonic. Also, the
sorts of documentation in /usr/doc do tend to conform
to common characteristics as opposed to manpages.
Merely dumping everything together is "willy-nilly"
as opposed to subjecting something resembling
structure to it.
>(b) /usr/doc is not willy nilly, it's a subset of willy-nilly.
No, I suspect it's just "deviant".
--
MSDOS is not dead, it just smells that way.
-- Henry Spencer
Truth is hard to find and harder to obscure.
------------------------------
From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 10:49:32 -0700
> > I stand corrected. Note, however, that my post was in the form of a
> > question, not a statement of facts.
>
> Are you an idiot? Are you a silly troll who can do nothing but start
> flamewars? Do you have to hide your stupid drivel by asking questions?
> When it turns out you're flat wrong, do you have to cover your butt my
> pointing out that you were only asking questions? Are your posts even
> worth reading?
>
I would consider bob's posts to be more valuable than yours. Looking back in
the thread I see that he was asking people to confirm or refute his
statement. I did. You are the Troll who has resulted to name calling and
flames. Bob and I were somewhat civil in our debate.
As for censoring you from a news server I'd agree that it is wrong, and I
ask bob to explain his statement.
Matt
------------------------------
Subject: Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one
From: Tony Tribelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:52:58 GMT
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The 'misrepresentation' at point here, btw, is the studious ignorance
> Anthony exhibits of the fact that it is, indeed, a very accurate
> knowledge of and wide experience with NT which backs my position ...
I eagerly await for your arguments to rise to the level you claim to be
capable of.
> ... I am
> not misrepresenting it in the slightest; I could stay up all night just
> describing the tribulations its caused me the last three days alone, and
> it wasn't even a very bad three days.
>
> Anthony, your 'Windows software is crap because its popular and there's
> a lot of crap' is just missing the point. It is *Windows*, and,
> generally, Microsoft software, which is crap, not simply the hundreds of
> thousands of crappy programs which run on it, nor the few that aren't
> crappy. It is a competitive environment in some areas, still, and there
> is good software for the Windows environment. Too bad it can never do
> any better than the crappy OS on which its running.
WinNT is not a crappy OS, feel free to support opinion.
> Mark's query was both genuine and cogent; you write for a crappy OS
> because it is a monopoly, not because it is a good OS. Since Microsoft
> does anything they can, literally, to inhibit any benefits of their OS,
> either in popularity or in technical capability, from providing
> cross-platform opportunities for competition, the only result is that,
> protected by a monopoly, the OS and all other Microsoft software gets
> crappier and crappier and more and more problematic and more and more
> expensive.
I'm not arguing whether various apps are bloated and buggy, some are. I'm
not arguing about the politics around Microsoft, MS does act like a bully at
times. I merely argue that WinNT itself is not a crappy OS. Feel free to
offer some reasons why WinNT is crappy in your opinion, something other than
it's not Unix please.
> And you can't see your way out of it. And then expect us to take your
> opinion of the OS seriously.
>
> Being a cross-post between cola and com-wna, I've gotta admit that I
> must be guilty of trolling myself, to some extent. But if you don't
> think I've made a case, then I suggest you start thinking of a new line
> of inquiry, and quite with the "SmartShips is not evidence that NT is
> crap." Nobody needs the Navy to tell them that NT is crap; most of us
> have figured it out on our own.
Actually contrary to desires of various Linux and Mac people a divide by
zero error did not take down WInNT. In the one incident described, the chief
engineer on board the ship at the time and the software developer of the
system say the problem was not with WinNT. The magazine that originally
broke the story also moved aware from their "early speculation" (their
prhase not mine) of WinNT. WinNT may or may not be a problem, I think using
a general purpose computer in some of the proposed roles is a mistake
regardless of whether it runs WinNT or Unix (see older posts - no need to
repeat), but the Yorktown Smartship incident described is not evidence of a
WinNT problem.
Tony
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[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, 25 Sep 2000 15:01:00 -0300
El lun, 25 sep 2000, STATIC66 escribió:
>On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 21:36:44 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:31:25 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >> They don't refuse to do so. The problem is that "discipline"
>>> > >> doesn't always work.
>>> > >
>>> > >Then expel them.
>>> >
>>> > Your emphasis on "expelling" people is not going to raise
>>> > educational standards. In short, you seek to raise "performance"
>>> > statistics by hiding weaker students from those statistics. In
>>> > short, this is a scam, because it doesn't do anything to increase
>>> > the nation's education level. It merely makes certain statistics
>>> > easier to misapply.
>>> >
>>> > >> And then where do they go? Again, if you don't pay for their
>>> > >> schooling now, you'll be paying for their incarceration later.
>>> > >
>>> > >Where they will serve as an example to others.
>>> >
>>> > "serve as an example" ? If the point of the criminal justice system
>>> > was to "make examples" of people, wouldn't it be more effective to
>>> > publically execute them or stone them to death ?
>>> >
>>> > Be aware that the kind of barbarism you are advocating no longer
>>> > exists in civilised countries.
>>> >
>>> > >> What "left-wing indoctrination" would this be? Teaching kids
>>> > >> about
>>> > >
>>> > >Global warming and other Eco-leftism
>>> >
>>> > What is wrong with discussing environmental issues in schools ? I
>>> > don't recall any given view being "pushed".
>>>
>>> Pushing LIES is directly contrary to the purpose of education.
>>
>>Why are all those scientists telling lies?
>
>So they get more funding..
>>
>>> > >Pro-homosexuality propaganda
>>> >
>>> > Why are you so strongly opposed to homosexuality ? I notice you
>>> > offered no
>>>
>>> Ever hear of AIDS?
>>
>>AIDS spreads just as well or better though heterosexual sex. Some of the
>>countries with the highest AIDS rates in the world have virtually no
>>homosexuality.
>
>Homosexuals are at the highest risk.
>
>They also have the highest infected population.
These days, the most infected population and the highest risk population
are synonimous. And you seem to be using statistics from 1995. Try
endovenous drug addicts.
>Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and has nothing to do with
>reading,writing,math..it is a discussion better left to the parents.
>it has no place in public education..
Law abiding is also a lifestyle choice. So is voting.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: STATIC66 <[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, 25 Sep 2000 17:56:36 GMT
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:09:40 -0400, Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>ZnU wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:31:25 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >> They don't refuse to do so. The problem is that "discipline"
>> > > >> doesn't always work.
>> > > >
>> > > >Then expel them.
>> > >
>> > > Your emphasis on "expelling" people is not going to raise
>> > > educational standards. In short, you seek to raise "performance"
>> > > statistics by hiding weaker students from those statistics. In
>> > > short, this is a scam, because it doesn't do anything to increase
>> > > the nation's education level. It merely makes certain statistics
>> > > easier to misapply.
>> > >
>> > > >> And then where do they go? Again, if you don't pay for their
>> > > >> schooling now, you'll be paying for their incarceration later.
>> > > >
>> > > >Where they will serve as an example to others.
>> > >
>> > > "serve as an example" ? If the point of the criminal justice system
>> > > was to "make examples" of people, wouldn't it be more effective to
>> > > publically execute them or stone them to death ?
>> > >
>> > > Be aware that the kind of barbarism you are advocating no longer
>> > > exists in civilised countries.
>> > >
>> > > >> What "left-wing indoctrination" would this be? Teaching kids
>> > > >> about
>> > > >
>> > > >Global warming and other Eco-leftism
>> > >
>> > > What is wrong with discussing environmental issues in schools ? I
>> > > don't recall any given view being "pushed".
>> >
>> > Pushing LIES is directly contrary to the purpose of education.
>>
>> Why are all those scientists telling lies?
>
>Haven't you learned to anticipate the answer to these sorts of questions
>by now? They must be part of a left-wing conspiracy, just like
>teachers.
>
>But I think it's clear that there are environmentalists out there who
>look at certain scientific measurements or trends and draw unjustified
>conclusions about causality. Likewise there are people on the other
>side who pretend that even the measurements don't exist.
Are you saying it is not possible for a scientist to fabricate data??
I think it happens much more often than you are willing to accept.
Perfect example..GLOBAL WARMING being caused by humans.....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: 25 Sep 2000 17:57:51 GMT
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:48:10 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> However, "doc" is a rather obvious mnemonic. Also, the
> sorts of documentation in /usr/doc do tend to conform
> to common characteristics as opposed to manpages.
Yeah, they do have common characteristics -- they don't actually
include user documentation.
ruffbruff% find /usr/doc|head
/usr/doc
/usr/doc/adjtimex-1.3
/usr/doc/adjtimex-1.3/README
/usr/doc/ldconfig-1.9.5
/usr/doc/ldconfig-1.9.5/README
/usr/doc/vmware
/usr/doc/vmware/CHANGES
/usr/doc/vmware/README
/usr/doc/vmware/EULA
/usr/doc/vmware/DHCP-COPYRIGHT
> Merely dumping everything together is "willy-nilly"
> as opposed to subjecting something resembling
> structure to it.
That would be fine if /usr/doc had some "structure". Maybe they need
to make a directory called
"/usr/doc/READMES_and_COPYING_and_other_files_that_dont_belong_anywhere_else"
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 25 Sep 2000 17:59:36 GMT
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:59:54 -0300, Roberto Alsina wrote:
>El lun, 25 sep 2000, T. Max Devlin escribió:
>>Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:18:42 GMT, Richard wrote:
>>>
>>>>> You are asking unpaid programmers to follow management without
>>>>> questioning? You are insane.
>>>>
>>>>No, I'm asking that they stop writing code without doing explicit
>>>>architectural design first. And if they can't do such design then
>>>>let someone else do it.
>>>
>>>Why should they ? In fact, why should any hobbyist be forced to pursue
>>>their hobby according to your guidelines ?
>>
>>An interesting, if inane, discussion. The short answer to your
>>question, I think, would be "interoperability and compatibility."
Easy to address this -- Richard doesn't believe in either interoperability
or compatibility. So as far as his argument goes, that's a pretty
questionable answer.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:00:32 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> Which is why no implementation of a research OS is useful.
> At lest not until a whole lot of abstraction is thrown away.
Oh, so I guess that non-technical factors like massive inertia and
politics are completely irrelevant, right?
------------------------------
From: STATIC66 <[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, 25 Sep 2000 18:01:58 GMT
On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 05:34:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 22:15:50 -0700, Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 00:58:20 GMT,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> brought forth the following words...:
>>
>>>On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:06:48 -0700, Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On 28 Aug 2000 23:08:13 GMT,
>>>> Donovan Rebbechi, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>> brought forth the following words...:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:53:38 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>[deletia]
>>>>>>Ever hear of AIDS?
>>>>>
>>>>>(a) Ever hear of condoms ?
>>>>>(b) Ever hear of a heterosexual with AIDS ?
>>>>>(c) I still don't see how AIDs would be considered a problem under your
>>>>> ideology. It seems to be the perfect way of cleansing the world of
>>>>> the sexually immoral and their "genetically inferior" offspring.
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>What I don't understand re: aids, is if aids is not a "homosexual disease"
>>>>(whatever that's supposed to mean) why is it that people who advocate
>>>>containment or quarantine are called homophobes?
>>>
>>> ...differences in who believes what and how it is presumed
>>> that certain people or groups of people fit in with these
>>> differences.
>>>
>>
>>I don't know if I can parse this, are you saying that only homophobes
>>think of aids as a gay disease, therefore all who think of aids as a gay
>>disease are homophobes?
>
> It's probably remarkably easier to advocate abusing those
> that you think you have nothing in common with.
Who advocated the abuse of anyone??
>
>>
>>> BTW, what other blood borne or venereal diseases have prompted
>>> quarantines either now or in the past before they were treatable?
>>
>>
>>um, syphillis.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
