Linux-Advocacy Digest #329, Volume #32 Mon, 19 Feb 01 20:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Matt Kennel)
Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation (CR Lyttle)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] ("Gary Hallock")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Interesting article ("Edward Rosten")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American (CR Lyttle)
Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta ("Jeepster")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux? (Bloody Viking)
Re: Linux web pads? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Robert Surenko)
Re: Linux web pads? (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:29:46 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:52:31 -0500, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:
:Karel Jansens wrote:
:>
:> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
:> "pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> >
:> > Ohhhh, actually I have one:
:> >
:> > Menu items that don't show up: in MS-office 2000 if you click on the
:> > menu's - you (wait for it) don't see all the menu items! Yes - it is
:> > true - you have to physically move your mouse cursor down the menu -
:> > indicating that you'd like to "reveal" all the menu options.
:> >
:> > Obviously the programmers knew it was brain-dead as they have added the
:> > option to disable this default annoyance.
:> >
:> > Now if that is not an innovation - what is?
:>
:> No, that's been done as well. I definitely remember a wordprocessor (Ami
:> Pro, DeScribe?) which had the ability to show 'simplified' menus for
:> really dumb users.
:>
:> Oh wait! I just remembered: GeoWorks Ensemble! That one had _three_
:> levels of menus: everything, 'dumb user level' and 'former Windows user'.
:>
:> It's bloody difficult to find _anything_ Microsoft invented, even
:> including the stupid or evil stuff.
:
:Which is PRECISELY why Microsoft has so much stupid and evil stuff.
Actually, there is at last, one truly new Microsoft architectural
innovation in system software.
Do a web search on "Secure Audio Path" and Windows.
Be afraid.
Summary:
1) drivers will have to be cryptographically 'certified' by MSFT to
be allowed in the system.
2) such drivers will be uniquely modified and keyed to specific
user's hardware.
3) files in encrypted form will stay that way and only decrypted via
a 'rights manager' that looks at your 'keys' and validates whether
you are allowed to use the file in unencrypted form, or whether you
are even allowed to copy it (e.g. a certain number of times) even
in encrypted form.
4) the operating system will verify whether all drivers (at various
levels) down the data path are allowed or not.
5) access keys to files and components may be invalidated by Microsoft
at any time.
6) removable storage media must have similar unique IDs which will be
checked.
The emphasis is of course on 'media files' but since bits are bits there
is no reason to suppose that there is any technical limitation to doing
this monitoring for all files and network connections.
The basic message is that your computer and your data and your
operating system are not yours, they function at the pleasure of
Microsoft and its corporate partners.
This isn't some academic gumflapping from some spiked-hair
leather-jacketed radical critical theorist---it is actual installed
software and technical capability.
Oh yes, don't forget that Windows XP now has the ability to remotely
control desktops and operating systems from one to another.
The central ideological of the personal computer was predicated on
removing the power from the priesthood of corporate masters that ran
IBM mainframes.
Microsoft has now come full circle and become precisely what it
originally wanted to destroy.
Now isn't it clear why it was so important to destroy Netscape?
Netscape the browser wasn't the central danger, it was Netscape the
ideology which had to be crushed, and it was. Netscape AOL is nothing
like Netscape.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: CR Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:34:15 GMT
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> Charles Lyttle wrote:
> >
> > Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> > >
> > > CR Lyttle wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Marten Kemp wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Charles Lyttle wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > <<snip>>
> > > > > > Apple made a big mistake. At first clones were permissible, but they got
> > > > > > that canned beans dealer to take over the company and he decided to
> > > > > > close the architecture. You couldn't even get bus specs without paying
> > > > > > lots of money and signing non disclosure agreements. Result : no one
> > > > > > developed software or hardware for Apple][ or Mac. They developed for
> > > > > > IBM instead. IBM, OTOH, considered the pc to be an "entry level" system.
> > > > > > You were supposed to buy a PC and then find out you couldn't live
> > > > > > without one of their mainframes and several dozen Displaywriters and IBM
> > > > > > networking systems. Well, it did that. IBM just didn't know what it was
> > > > > > passing up in the PC market. But if they hadn't done what they did,
> > > > > > perhaps PC sales would not have been so great. After all, look what
> > > > > > happened when they decided to close the "microchannel" specs. Seen any
> > > > > > microchannel recentlY?
> > > > > <<snip>>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Russ Lyttle
> > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > <http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
> > > > >
> > > > > The original PC, XT and XT-286 Tech References came complete with
> > > > > circuit diagrams of the system boards and BIOS listings, dunno about the
> > > > > AT. IMHO, this was entirely in keeping with large parts of the IBM
> > > > > corporate culture of the time, which didn't think about the large-scale
> > > > > cloning of their products. They, of course, got clobbered, not being
> > > > > prepared for the hotbed of competition in this arena. Microchannel has
> > > > > been described to me as a superior architecture that was doomed to
> > > > > insignificance when IBM tried to keep it proprietary. They got clobbered
> > > > > again and it's my feeling that their major claim to fame is laptops and
> > > > > high-end servers. IBM knows a *LOT* about large systems.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just my 2 dinars' worth.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Marten Kemp
> > > > Right. IBM was very ambivilant about doing the PC at all. It was, and
> > > > is, just an aside for them. They make lots of money in the big server
> > > > and in networking software. If IBM isn't the worlds largest company,
> > > > they are up there in the top four or five.
> > >
> > > Usually, it's GM. I believe that last year was the FIRST time in the
> > > history of Forbes that GM wasn't in the top 3 of the Fortune 500 list.
> > >
> > I sit here with all my GM stock asking not to be reminded of that fact.
>
> As long as GM's stock prices continue to go up, and they keep paying
> normal-sized or higher dividends, why the fuck do you care if they are
> #1 or #4, exactly?
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
AS long as they keep up the dividends, I don't care if the stock goes up
or down, or if the company is number 1 or number 100. I do care about
why a change happens. That can be a predictor of whether they are going
to keep paying in the future or not. GM, I am afraid, has been getting
rid of some of its best long term assets.
--
Russ
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:35:12 +0500
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
In article <8H0k6.53433$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In which version? What about all these Linux boxes with record uptime of
> over a year. Are they still operating on this older version?
Windows mentality. Unlike Windows, Linux does not need a reboot for
every upgrade. You can run the latest software and still have a large
uptime.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:36:57 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter Hayes"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19 Feb 2001 01:41:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking) wrote:
>
>> The "information wants to be free" idea comes from the GNU ideology as
>> well as freeware crypto with PGP. PGP is "Pretty Good Privacy", data
>> encryption strong enough that even the most resource posessing rogue
>> government (i.e. the US government) can't crack it.
>
> Unlike the UK where you get 2 years in jail if you don't provide the
> most fascist government in decades (if ever, and that includes Thatcher)
> with the key on demand - even if you've no idea what it is, and 5 years
> in jail if you tell anyone about their request for said key.
If you took them to the European court of human rights, the govt would
get slaughtered.
I hope that happens soon; it really needs to.
-Ed
>
> So no massively parallel processor needed.
>
> Peter
--
disclaimer. I am very pissed.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:37:53 +0000
>> Unlike the UK where you get 2 years in jail if you don't provide the
>> most fascist government in decades (if ever, and that includes
>> Thatcher) with
>
> Leftist socialism is merely fascism in disguise.
>
> That's what you get for electing the Labour party.
Labour is only a name. they are conservative.
-Ed
--
disclaimer. I am very pissed.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:38:42 +0000
In article <96s3lv$e0i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Steve Mading"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :> The Venn Diagram doesn't really tell the picture well, though because
> :> "UNIX" isn't at the same level in the taxonomy as Linux. It's a set
> of
> :> OSes, one level above the OS level. Comparing UNIX to Linux isn't
> like
> :> comparing apples and oranges. It's more like comparing a scalar to a
> :> set.
>
> : More like comparing fruit to apples :-)
>
> I thought of that example first and rejected it. Some of Linux lies
> outside Unix. There are no non-fruit apples.
yewberries.
-Ed
--
disclaimer. I am very pissed.
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:39:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> What is the difference between a "fixpoint theorem" and a "faith
>>>> in a belief"?
>>> Fixpoint theorems can be proved purely formally, without any recourse to
>>> semantics. "every contraction mapping in a locally compact metric space
>> Funny, but that does not answer the question.
> Proof in that area does not require deep belief, though it helps to have
> conviction. It's a formal game at bottom - like winning at Gin Rummy.
Well, I can respect that.
It's how I look at the results of my 5 senses. I don't have an absolute
belief in anything I see or hear, but I've found that if I pay attention
it helps "win the game".
However, maybe I'm strange. I feel that some studies like perhaps ethics
are somehow grounded in a "absolute" truth. Maybe because I fear the
alternative.
> Peter
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: CR Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:39:23 GMT
ant wrote:
>
> Hey, I am an ethnic Chinese in Hong Kong SAR. I do not entirely agree that
> if Chinese Govt use Linux will assist in Human Right Violation. Truth is
> that Chinese Govt is an oppressive regime. However, by promoting use of
> Linux, it also promote the spirit of Linux, which is to share, to respect
> individual, to have the control back in your hand. It is a distributed model
> (as opposed to a centralised and totalitarian Govt), access to free
> information (either hook on line or use encrypted messages) , as many
> discussion forum as one please ( as opposed to state controlled media)
>
> I mean: IT people has the power to change the world, for the better!
>
> Anthony
Linux has replaced the Colt as the great equalizer. Anyone can use Linux
and free software. That puts you on equal standing with the government.
I would like to point out that the oppressive governments in Poland, the
USSR, and East Germany weren't overthrown with guns, but with
typewriters and xerox machines. The government used them, but the people
did too.
--
Russ
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Jeepster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:50:22 -0000
Linvocates - they make the mormons seem normal.
Gotta love 'em.
> bad.... I've spent more time getting a modem to work
> under Win NT.
Then you don't understand what you are doing. You should be even touching a
computer in an administrative capacity.
Disgraceful, you are a user, nothing more, nothing less.
> bargain than even the finest monopoly bloatware, Win 2000.
And Linux with all its associate addons is not bloat? with KDE/Gnome added
its not? *LOL*
Again, you are a user not an administrator.
Now sit down boy, and stop whinging about matters that you don't understand.
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I decided to load this beta version of Red Hat Linux,
> 7.0.90. I did the upgrade to my RH 7 setup. I'm sad
> to report that it munged both my IDE-SCSI setup and
> my RTL8139 module, so that the CD and the network card
> wouldn't work.
>
> So I said, what the hell, and I just reinstalled, and
> re-did all the little tweaks I need to do all the
> things I do. Took me about 4 hours, I'd guess. Not
> bad.... I've spent more time getting a modem to work
> under Win NT.
>
> Got my IDE-SCSI back up, found that the rtl8139.o module
> is replaced by 8139too.o, which is not well regarded
> on Donald Becker's site, but seems to do the job okay.
> Got ssh back up, nfs, remote printing, Netscape.
>
> Even got Mozilla running (you'll see it in a couple of
> my posts), but it's too slow at present. Otherwise,
> pretty cool.
>
> All in all, I like this 2.4 kernel. Even the video
> looks a little better in some subtle way I can't put my
> finger on.
>
> However, I can't get hdparm to improve the disk performance
> like I could with the 2.2 kernel, so I'm thinking deep
> thoughts about that.
>
> I think Red Hat has to be careful, or they're going to
> have shitty upgrade problems akin to those you get upgrading
> from NT to 2000 Pro. On the other hand, I see so many things
> that Red Hat (and other distros) bring you. A much better
> bargain than even the finest monopoly bloatware, Win 2000.
>
> Man, I love Linux! It rox! Nothing is going to kill Linux.
> It will simply slowly mutate into something even better!
>
> Chris
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 00:59:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:57:50 GMT, Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.misc Ian Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
> [deletia]
> Then again, you are blathering about an historical even that
> was caught on tape and who's firsthand witnesses are still
> living.
Yes, but the experiment can not be repeated. In your previous
blatherings you claimed that the only way something can be known
is the Scientific Method, and it's reliable because the event can
be repeated.
Are you willing to say that there are other methods to "know" something
except for the Scientific method. If so, how?
Will we know that JFK was shot until the last witness dies and then
we officially un-know it?
> OTOH, it would not shatter my sanity to find out that it was
> all a load of hooey. I'm more worried about whether or not a
> CRT will suddenly electrocute me or if the wings of a 727
> will rip off.
Me either, although I would have to change my old "historical fact"
that can't be proven with the Scientifc Method to something else.
Perhaps this, How do we know the American Revolutionary War happened?
No tapes, no living witnesses.
> Here, you are only criticising a field of study (not necessarily
> even a science) that most of the hard line materialists here
> would themselves call "weak at best" anyways.
But that's the point, A Materialists claims that the Scientific
Method is the only way to know something.
> --
> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>
> That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> |||
> / | \
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:01:25 -0500
Nigel wrote:
>
> >
> > "Well, it doesn't say NOT to use dish-washing-out liquid in the video!"
> >
>
> Have we got a video.
If one more person asks if we have a video....
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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 (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her 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 Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:01:32 -0500
Nigel wrote:
>
> >
> > "Well, it doesn't say NOT to use dish-washing-out liquid in the video!"
> >
>
> Have we got a video.
If one more person asks if we have a video....
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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 (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux?
Date: 20 Feb 2001 01:03:06 GMT
Nico Coetzee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: > http://www.llnl.gov/asci/platforms/white/
: WOW! I guess that puts a dent in any M$ argument!
That gem of a supercomputer could be slowed down to a crawl by installing
Windows.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:03:53 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Karel Jansens wrote:
>Recently, I keep coming across articles praising a 'revolutionary new way
>of computing' (or something along those lines anyway), referring to those
>nifty 'web pads', A4-sized flat touch-screens that allow users to access
>the web away from their computer (although most of them seem to be limited
>to around 10 m, which sounds like they're developed for closets rather
>than homes). They've been popping up in several magazines, but the only
>one I've got at hand is on page 37 of the february 2001 issue of Popular
>Science.
>
>The articles usually boast about how the pads need 'only' a Pentium III to
>run Windows-Whatever (this was not mentioned in PS) for about 1.5 hours.
>This set me thinking: Could this not be the killer app linux might need?
>The X-Windows protocols, coupled with a wireless LAN (most households
>would initially only need two adapters: one for the desktop and one on the
>pad) seem to be a much more intuitive solution for this than a cumbersome
>Windows setup. All the more since linux-powered webpads would need to be
>nothing more than simple (ahum!) X-terminals.
>
>Wouldn't this look nice for the Home of the Future: the desktop is a very
>beefy machine, linked to the Net via cable or ADSL, but without screen,
>keyboard, sound- or graphics card (saving all that money for RAM and
>storage!), and every member of the household has her/his own pad, hooked
>up to the home server via wireless LAN, ready to run whatever app they
>have installed on the server.
>
>I bet it would look real nice on the company floor too.
I like that idea much!
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:05:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 16 Feb 2001 23:36:41 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>: That's why Materialism is hopelessly flawed. We all know that JFK
>>: was shot, but can't repeat the experiment. How do we go about
>>: proving a historical event.
>>
>>WTF does that have to do with materialism?
> Whether or not JFK was shot or not is a question of history.
> The techniques of historians are not the subject of this discussion.
I though we were disscussing how does a person "know" something?
Many have claimed that a repeatable experiment is the only way.
I've given an example of a fact that can not be repeated and can't
be proven with the Scientific Method.
> --
> Freedom != Anarchy.
>
> Some must be "opressed" in order for their
> actions not to oppress the rest of us.
>
> |||
> / | \
--
=============================================================================
- Bob Surenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.fred.net/surenko/
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:07:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
>
>Karel Jansens wrote:
>>
>> Recently, I keep coming across articles praising a 'revolutionary new way
>> of computing' (or something along those lines anyway), referring to those
>> nifty 'web pads', A4-sized flat touch-screens that allow users to access
>> the web away from their computer (although most of them seem to be limited
>> to around 10 m, which sounds like they're developed for closets rather
>> than homes). They've been popping up in several magazines, but the only
>> one I've got at hand is on page 37 of the february 2001 issue of Popular
>> Science.
>
>
>Aggggggh Popular science...better named "Popular Adolescent Fantasies"
>For DECADES these shitheads continued with the "personal hovercraft
>are just around the corner and cars will be obsolete" garbage...
>
>Not seeming to understand that it takes a hell of a lot of fuel to
>get anything up off the ground.....and completely out of the cost
>range of the average commuter whose current vehicle only pays for
>"rolling resistance" (not to mention almost no cost to sit still
>while idling...vs engine still on full power to hover in place).
>
>The best use for popular science is lighting kindling in the fireplace.
>
HA! I have to agree with that.
But it depends on what they have a story on.
Sometimes they cover things the NAVY or AIR FORCE is doing.
Sometimes they cover things like this scratch pad or whatever.
Some of their ideas are totally hair brained agreed.
I remember one idea they had for having web access and E-mail on
your refrigerator. Now, that was hairbrained.
But a scratch pad isn't that bad an idea. I want mine in color.
OR,
I'll take a keyboard with built in mouse and use that head mounted
TV which goes in your glasses. Color for that one also.
I have to have color or I'm pissed.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
