Linux-Advocacy Digest #385, Volume #32 Wed, 21 Feb 01 19:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Into the abyss... ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Allchin backtracks, now likes open source (Tim Hanson)
Re: Linux web pads? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Gerry)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Gerry)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Gerry)
Re: Allchin backtracks, now likes open source (Aaron Kulkis)
Other companies that deserve to and will die (was Re: Microsoft dying, was Re:
Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux) ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: What do I do with a Windows partition? ("Adam Warner")
Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American ("Edward Rosten")
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Into the abyss...
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:59:16 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Nigel wrote:
>>
>> > It was also acknowledged in that statement that some people prefer
>> > that
>> it
>> > not be called UNIX because of some silly trademark battle a few years
>> back,
>> > so they refer to the "-like" sufficx. Even FreeBSD shuns the direct
>> > assertation that they're 'UNIX(tm)' but leaves that up to the user to
>> > determine if that label makes that big of a difference.
>> >
>>
>> The usual label seems to be UN*X - close enough for anyone to know what
>> you mean but different enough to avoid trademark problems (although
>> UN?X would be more correct).
> What I see all the time is "*nix."
*n?x
would match most variants, including Linux.
-ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Allchin backtracks, now likes open source
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:00:09 GMT
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >
> > Charlie Ebert wrote:
> > >
> > > If the Government *WERE TO PASS LEGISLATION* which banned government
> > > contributions of code to Linux, private vendors would be using Linux
> > > anyway. There is nothing to stop those private vendors from using Linux.
> > > They are selling Linux to the Navy right now to replace Microsoft, Airforce
> > > too! There was an article about it in the Linux Journal this month.
> > > Don't forget about embedded Linux chips taking on Cisco! Cisco is very
> > > worried about this as now they have over 100 competitors when before they
> > > had none.
> > >
> > > Even if the Government were stupid enought to ban contributions of code
> > > from NASA or the NSA or whoever, the vendors would just haul it in anyway.
> > >
> > > Microsoft has to face the facts that it has died.
> > > It just has to face those facts.
> > >
> > > And if your a manager who's proposed Microsoft for your business,
> > > I think you should retire. You've just become useless to our
> > > organization. Retire.
> >
> > I dunno, our Windows project is going to be DII-COE compliant.
> > I hear rumors that the DII-COE geniuses want to phase out
> > the support for UNIX. In other words, the military wants to
> > become dependent on a single vendor for their operating
> > system. Sounds very outrageous. If true, I'm dumbfounded,
> > feckless, and fearful.
>
> The General in charge will get reamed up the ass some day.
> The military is VERY harsh on high-ranking officers who fuck things
> up. Maybe not immediately...but as soon as the failure happens, and
> the post-mortem analysis is done (and the military ALWAYS does
> post-mortem analysis of system failures)....the fingers will be
> pointing at the men who chose to use Windows....and the General
> who approved it.
One complaint I've heard is that the software decisions "are so
political." Sorry I don't have a link, but this was given as a reason
for Windows adoption in government, including the military. The gist of
the article was that the generals and admirals weren't making the
decisions, that Congress critters were micromanaging Windows into the
military over some objections. Naturally, those civilians responsible
will be nowhere nearby when the systems fail.
--
--
The sooner you make your first 5000 mistakes, the sooner you will be
able to correct them.
-- Nicolaides
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:07:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Karel Jansens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:04:00 -0100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>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 don't know if I'd *care* what OS is running on the pads, as long as
it is:
- reliable
- power-efficient
- user-usable ("user-friendly" is becoming a loaded term)
and of course
- standardized.
One issue about Win95 -- I don't know about newer operating systems --
is that it doesn't use the HALT (HLT?) instruction, causing a
microprocessor to run hotter than normal and wasting power [*] -- and
there's not a lot of power to waste in a battery. I suspect WinCE has
taken care of this issue by now (does anyone know?) and in any event
Linux hasn't been optimized for power consumption, but does know how
to HALT the processor. Presumably, somebody could patch it (after all,
what's open source *for*? :-) ); I think Linux might busywait for a
few microseconds in certain selected areas -- mostly in drivers.
(The rest of the waits are done through another call, which doesn't
busywait -- however, I forget the precise name thereof. It takes a
pointer to a datastructure.)
One nice thing about X is that it is the industry standard -- and has been
for over a decade. This means it's getting on in years, but it is still
quite useful, especially with XDMCP. One can also pipeline X events through
something such as ssh for instant event encryption. Unfortunately,
Netscape sucks. (However, konqueror and kdm might be able to step into
the breach and accomplish much the same thing -- if webpage designers don't
totally screw up the HTML in their pages, that is. The long-awaited Opera,
while not freeware, might also be useful here as well.)
I'll admit, I like it in principle (remember _2001_, for example;
the Newspad is getting very close to reality), although the lack of
a keyboard might cause some issues. However, that can be worked around
too by synthesizing Keydown and Keyup events and using a small tool
that looks like a typewriter keyboard at need. Note that applications
that discard synthesized events might have problems -- but I doubt
a lot of them care unless they're prompting for passwords, which could
be a problem.
[.sigsnip]
[*] I've never tested this myself, but there was an article about
a user who tried this with a 486 and discovered that Linux
ran cooler -- up to 30 degrees Fahrenheit. I do not know if
anyone's tried it on more modern micros, and advanced power
management has changed the picture somewhat: most of the power
presumably is spent keeping the disk drive spinning anyway,
an issue that a Newspad would not have to worry about.
Dynamic memory refresh, however, might be a worry; I don't know
how many microwatts a 64MB stick needs to not lose its memory.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 16d:05h:24m actually running Linux.
The Usenet channel. All messages, all the time.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerry)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:11:17 -0600
Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Where are you citing this number from?
> >
>
> Professor John Lott
> Law and Economics Fellow,
> University of Chicago
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. :)
The US's preoccupation with guns makes me wonder why they have such a
high crime rate if this "statistic" is true.
The NRA is not welcome in Canada, please stay out!
Thank you :)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.mac.com/gbeggs/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.GerryICQ.com/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerry)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:11:17 -0600
Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How's that?
> > Just look at this discussions about your .sig.
>
> You are free to discontinue this pointless thread at any time.
Again, you totally missed the point.
If you're worried about saving bandwidth, you would do EVERYONE a favour
by getting rid of your signature.
I completely disagree that your signature saves bandwidth.
For it to be on-topic and of any interest to the people reading your
messages, the majority of your messages would have to be in
participation of a flame war. Therefore it's wasting more space and not
accomplishing anything because it isn't stopping the flames
Otherwise the majority of your messages are in participation with
non-flame-wars. Therefore the signature is wasteful since it has nothing
to do with the thread and nobody CARES!
Do you see the contradiction in your logic now?
> > How much bandwidth is it taking up?
>
> You tell me.
I guess you can't recognize a rhetoric question.
I'll also note that you didn't answer ANY of my other comments in my
previous message.
By your logic, you agree with them.
(Because you said that if you don't respond to something, then by
implication you agree with them)
ie:
> If you think your signature eliminates flamewars, then by deduction, you
> are the cause of the flamewars.
> Try to be a bit more civil, and remove your signature.
and
> Me thinks you are bit too paranoid.
> Either that or immature.
Thank you for your agreement.
I'll expect your signature to be removed.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.mac.com/gbeggs/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.GerryICQ.com/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerry)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:11:18 -0600
Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Have a look for yourself:
> --
> 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.
How about a compromise.
Put the contents of your signature on a web page, and put the URL to it
in your signature. Then you can make it as long as you want (even going
through the whole alphabet if you like!)
Then anyone who cares can go read it.
The rest of us are left without you cluttering up our newgroup messages.
You can also keep track of the number of hits to your page.
I predict the number will be near zero.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.mac.com/gbeggs/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.GerryICQ.com/
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Allchin backtracks, now likes open source
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:12:37 -0500
Tim Hanson wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> >
> > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> > >
> > > Charlie Ebert wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If the Government *WERE TO PASS LEGISLATION* which banned government
> > > > contributions of code to Linux, private vendors would be using Linux
> > > > anyway. There is nothing to stop those private vendors from using Linux.
> > > > They are selling Linux to the Navy right now to replace Microsoft, Airforce
> > > > too! There was an article about it in the Linux Journal this month.
> > > > Don't forget about embedded Linux chips taking on Cisco! Cisco is very
> > > > worried about this as now they have over 100 competitors when before they
> > > > had none.
> > > >
> > > > Even if the Government were stupid enought to ban contributions of code
> > > > from NASA or the NSA or whoever, the vendors would just haul it in anyway.
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft has to face the facts that it has died.
> > > > It just has to face those facts.
> > > >
> > > > And if your a manager who's proposed Microsoft for your business,
> > > > I think you should retire. You've just become useless to our
> > > > organization. Retire.
> > >
> > > I dunno, our Windows project is going to be DII-COE compliant.
> > > I hear rumors that the DII-COE geniuses want to phase out
> > > the support for UNIX. In other words, the military wants to
> > > become dependent on a single vendor for their operating
> > > system. Sounds very outrageous. If true, I'm dumbfounded,
> > > feckless, and fearful.
> >
> > The General in charge will get reamed up the ass some day.
> > The military is VERY harsh on high-ranking officers who fuck things
> > up. Maybe not immediately...but as soon as the failure happens, and
> > the post-mortem analysis is done (and the military ALWAYS does
> > post-mortem analysis of system failures)....the fingers will be
> > pointing at the men who chose to use Windows....and the General
> > who approved it.
>
> One complaint I've heard is that the software decisions "are so
> political." Sorry I don't have a link, but this was given as a reason
> for Windows adoption in government, including the military. The gist of
> the article was that the generals and admirals weren't making the
> decisions, that Congress critters were micromanaging Windows into the
> military over some objections. Naturally, those civilians responsible
> will be nowhere nearby when the systems fail.
Ouch!
Nothing worse than Congressional ASSHOLES telling the Generals
what they need and don't need.
We end up with stuff like the Seawolf submarine....HUGELY expensive,
and *ZERO* admirals at the rank of 2-star or above wanted it....but
we've got three of 'em, because that's what Congress wanted.
>
> --
>
> --
> The sooner you make your first 5000 mistakes, the sooner you will be
> able to correct them.
> -- Nicolaides
--
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....
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Other companies that deserve to and will die (was Re: Microsoft dying, was
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux)
Date: 21 Feb 2001 23:13:00 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy dev null <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: You guys love the chicken-little thing, don't ya? Why do I think so?
: Because you bend over, grunt, and splatter this fetid verbal equivalent of a
: baby's diaper on usenet every couple of months or so. That's why.
: Be careful what you wish for. How will you advocate, er, I mean who are you
: going to smear once MS and its 'lusers' are gone?
Every other vendor of monopolistic, proprietary, bug-ridden shit that
threatens freedom, innovation, and justice will meet the same fate.
M$ was the biggest and worst offender, but there are others.
The folks who are friendly to open standards and free software, even
if they sell proprietary (but non-monopolistic) products, will get a
break - from me at least. I realize that it takes time and effort to
turn around a corporate culture, and that there are a lot of good
people in many companies (even some of the evil ones) who are trying
to get them to see the light. If I see progress in the right
direction, I'll encourage it.
However, I will personally expend every effort possible to see that
every member of the Bullshit Software Alliance, absent extenuating
circumstances, dies a humiliating and painful death. They are the
worst of the worst. In addition to any other crimes they may be
guilty of, each of these companies abuses, both through the BSA and on
its own behalf, the power of an illegitimate federal "government" to
bully people and companies into paying multiple times for software
they already legally own, and make a mockery out of even what little
is left of our justice system and our God-given, Constitutionally
protected rights.
These criminal organizations, masquerading as companies, include but
are not necessarily limited to Adobe, Apple, Autodesk, Bentley
Systems, CNC Software/Mastercam, Macromedia (Asia), Microsoft, Network
Associates, Symantec, and UGS. (I'm not including BSA Policy Council
members, who do not take the same active role in the BSA's criminal
activities; these are mostly hardware and service vendors, and include
some companies that are friendly to free software.)
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What do I do with a Windows partition?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:20:31 GMT
Hi Mart van de Wege,
> So you see I have plenty of drive space. The question is is there
> anything I can do with that 1.5G (5% of my total drivespace), does
> anyone know what would be useful, or should I just keep Win98 around
> (it's just wasting space now anyway)?
I'd keep it around:
(1) It could come in particularly useful if you are trying to
run a Win32 program using WINE. For example an application might not
install under WINE but it might actually run if it is already installed
under Windows.
(2) You may need it for those times when you need to open/edit a file in
one of Microsoft's proprietary formats.
(3) There may be a reason you have to test how a web site, for example,
looks under Internet Explorer.
(4) You can mount the partition under Linux and continue to use the free
space.
(5) You may have forgotten to migrate something (e.g. your bookmarks or
email) that you might later regret if you reformat the partition.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:27:20 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> > Diesel-electrics were NOT introduced to solve a fuel-consumption
>> > problem: they were introduced because they provide better torque from
>> > a dead stop than steam...allowing an increase in the gross tons per
>> > locomotive ratio.
>> >
>> > Also, they can be remote-controlled from one cab by electrical
>> > hookups, allowing ONE crew to harness the power of three or four
>> > engines. With steam, you would still need 1 or 2 people in each
>> > engine, and the linkage would probably (in those day) have to have
>> > been mechanical, not electrical.
>>
>> The 'electric' part of diesel electric is more coincidence than
>> anything. When you have huge engines, at power transmission becomes a
>> real problem. At the time, copper wires were the best way of
>> transferring the mechanical power from the engines to the wheels.
>> Diesel-mechanical didn't work well. IIRC, CAT developes a system a
>> decade ago or so for tirect transfer of mechanical energy for really
>> big vehicles.
>
> Wrong. It's because with an electrical link, you can run the diesel at
> full speed while the wheels are at a dead stop...WITHOUT having to worry
> about wear and tear on clutch systems.
Diesel cycle engines do not run most efficiently at full loads, unlike
Otto cycle engines.
Also, high power mechanical transmission systems are difficult to make.
One problem is clutching, but that is not the only problem. CAT switched
back to mechanical drives when they figured out how to make them work
better than a diesel electric system.
Also starting electric motors from a stop is a problem in itself because
they drain enormous currents which can strain the generators. If you
limit the current, then you limit the current, then you limit the speed
you can accelerate at.
>> There is no reason why steam trains could not all be controlles from
>> one cab. Poeerstations run on steam and they are automated these days.
>
> We're talking 1920 here.
If they had to tech to control diesel engines remotely, then they had the
tech to control steam valves remotely.
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:27:54 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> Why do the powers that be idly sit by and let it happen? That
> greatly concerns me. Whats more, some of the people involved in the
> making of the product don't seem to want to address these concerns
> and seem content to merely insult the people who bring them forward.
> Extremely immature. I don't want immature people developing my
> security software. I want people developing my security software
> taking allegations of insecurity seriously and doing all the can
> to squash those feelings. It seems the SSH community is doing nothing.
This troll needs to simply do "man ssh".
------------------------------
From: [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: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 23:28:39 -0000
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:03:32 -0500, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:11:06 -0500, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>>
>> >> There are lots of issues here. I don't have any problems with people keeping
>> >> guns in their home, though I have doubts about allowing sniper weapons or
>> >
>> >Define "sniper weapon" without making deer-hunting rifles illegal.
>>
>> The deer hunters can go f*** themselves for all I care. The last thing we
>> need is a bunch of savages who kill for pleasure carrying around military
>> grade weapons.
>
>Don't expect to get much support from the Union rank-and-file then.
You won't even get much support from accountants and lawyers
with rhetoric like that in some states...
Plus, I don't suppose that this hypocrite is a vegan by any
chance. (I really doubt it) Otherwise, all he's whining about
is people who do exactly what he does but without the middle
man.
>
>
>
>>
>> >> automatic weapons. I don't think convenience is an acceptable excuse for
>> >> making compromises on background checks. I also think there are some real
>> >
>> >true. Except that criminals who fail background checks rarely
>> >go through legal channels anyway....and smuggled guns are usually
>> >CHEAPER than legal guns.
>>
>> If that's the problem, maybe a crackdown on smuggling is what's needed.
>
>Yeah, right.
>
>Name ONE TIME in history when such an operation has ever succeeded.
>
>Especially when Yugoslavians are making the anti-smuggling operations
>totally pointless by making full-auto AK-47's in their basements
>and garages for approximately $30 each.
That's the ultimate problem with a attempting to ban
"bad devices" in technologically advanced societies.
Such societies can "roll their own". That's how such
devices originally came into being to begin with.
[deletia]
>> I;'ve consistently maintained that laws need to be backed up with
>> enforcement -- any plan to enact criminal law needs to be backed up
>> with an enforement plan to be useful.
>>
>> >When Isreal started encouraging civilians to not only purchase,
>> >but to openly carry military-grade rifles, PLO terrorist attacks
>> >dropped off by over 90%.
>>
>> Doesn't imply a causal relationship, and it's hardly a similar
>> situation.
>
>Are you arguing that it was just a coincidence?
[deletia]
--
>> Yes. And the mailer should never hand off directly to a program
>> that allows the content to take control.
>
>Well most mailers can, so I guess they all suck too.
Yup.
Candy from strangers should be treated as such.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
