Linux-Advocacy Digest #925, Volume #32 Tue, 20 Mar 01 13:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: the truth about linux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban ("Calum")
Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism (.)
Re: Linux @ $19.95 per month (David Steinberg)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Chris Croughton)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, was Why open source software is better (Bruce
Scott TOK)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, was Why open source software is better (Bruce
Scott TOK)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Austin Ziegler)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, was Why open source software is (Austin Ziegler)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the truth about linux
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:11:38 -0500
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Edward Rosten wrote:
> > >
> > > > The MSCEs also recommend defragging the hard drive once a week and fix
> > > > the registry as well.
> > > > I've never had to defrag under Solaris and I don't have a registry to
> > > > fix.
> > >
> > > I've only once seen a harddrive that needed defragging under Linux. It
> > > was abused with a cycle that went like this:
> > >
> > > Create a large bunch of small and medium sized files and a couple of
> > > huge ones. Delete some and repeat hundreds of times.
> > >
> > > By the end, it couldn't sustain an 8x write on to a CD.
> > >
> >
> > This is easily solved by dumping the filesystem to tape, (using
> > tar, or dump, or whatever you prefer) deleting
> > all of the files on that filesystem, and reloading the files
> > back from tape.
>
> Thats what I thought. Windows defragging takes more time than a tape
> backup does.
Ain't that the truth.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Calum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:13:34 -0000
>
> Hopefully you people will see that's it's just a propaganda FUD
> machine full of lies and deceit.
>
What? Microsoft? Yeah ;o)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism
Date: 20 Mar 2001 17:14:59 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 8<SNIP>8
> First of all, Aaron R. Kulkis is considered a
> blithering idiot by both COLA and COMNA
> participants. Secondly, if you think that
> there are no irrational, childish, idiotic
> NT advocates, then you might want to lurk
> about on some of the various IRC nets.
Actually, kulkis and chad meyers are almost exactly the same person. Substitute
"linux" for "windows" appropriately, and you absolutely cannot tell them
apart.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux @ $19.95 per month
Date: 20 Mar 2001 17:34:39 GMT
Chad Myers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Anyhow, there is not, nor ever has been discussion of ever changing
: the free nature of Windows Update. It doesn't make sense for MS
: since they have a different business model than Red Hat and... oh yeah,
: MS can make money without having to charge for every little support
: service they offer like Red Hat who is scraping the barrel.
In other words, Microsoft is still milking far more money out of its
customers than Red Hat.
Thanks for the confirmation.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Croughton)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: 20 Mar 2001 17:36:50 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:37:53 -0500, Shades
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Bryant Charleston, MCSE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:t5dn6.1205$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> If you compose a text document in Star Office 5.2, will it be readable on
>a
>> Windows platform (as a text or Word doc) ? I can't seem to find any FAQs
>> that address this issue. Thanks for any help!
>
>I thought it was supposed to but maybe not. Can you save as an RTF file?
>If so Word will work with this also.
I think you have to SaveAs a Word<n> document (or as text, RTF or some
other common format). As far as I saw (before giving up) it wouldn't
support anything later than the first WordForWindows (Word6, I think)
format, but they may have extended it.
(When I wanted to use it to make some simple paper forms, just a few
lines and boxes, it decided to take so long to load that I gave up and
created them in raw PostScript, it was faster and more portable!)
Chris C
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:15:24 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Sam Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>My take on the whole stupid argument:
>
>GPL supporters don't believe it should be possible to take free software and
>create non-free software out of it. (This is commonly refered to as 'making the
>software non-free - if you didn't know that, then now you do - feel free to
>argue about the term being misleading. Don't pretend that you don't
>understand what the other person is saying though - since now you know...)
This is also for me the entire point of the GPL. If I spend my effort
to write free software, the software is still mine. It is not public
domain (something GNU have taken great pains to explain). If someone
takes my software and creates close source stuff out of it to make
money, he has taken something of mine and violated my right to determine
what happens to what is mine. The GPL allows me to say "this is my
creation, do with it what you will, except you cannot prevent anyone
else from doing the same". It is my right to do that even if many
people might think it is misguided. The GPL allows me to have my way
with my property.
Everything else is secondary.
[rest deleted as it does not concern me]
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:23:55 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Masterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> "T" == T Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I feel I must reject any argument, on the face of it, which attempts
>> to declare that without profiteering, some facet of modern
>> technology 'would not have been possible'. Such a position is
>> self-defeating.
>
>Really!?! Are we not all "profiteers" at heart? Its just that the
>term "profit" has different meanings for different people. Profitting
>from your work would seem to be anything but 'self defeating'.
No we are not. Some of us do this for fun and really do want to keep
profit out of it. All the way out of it (this goes for any turbulence
code I write, for example).
>I think a strong case could be made for saying that, if there was not
>a strong case for "profit" (in the monetary sense) from the work done
>on many projects, then the investment money necessary to fund the
>development of those projects would not have been forthcoming. While
>the development of such a project may still have been 'possible', it
>would have taken _*considerably*_ longer for the project to come to
>fruitition.
What you say holds well for what you want to apply it to (ie, your
creations), but the creations of other people are affected by other
motives (ie, theirs), and if they want to be "anti-profit" then that is
their right. No matter how "irrational" or "emotional" it might be, it
is their right and must be respected.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:31:31 +0100
In article <yfEr6.17298$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From the users point of view, many useful things simply can't exist because
>of the GPL restrictions.
That is irrelevant to anyone who chooses to restrict the use of their
code by applying the GPL.
>> If you think that non-free software is OK, then you will not agree with
>> the GPL and it's rationale. Since that is the basis of it.
>
>I think that unrestricted software is OK.
Fair enough. I think that restricted software is OK too, as long as no
theft or highjacking is involved, ie, the people who restrict the
software are restricting only their own product.
>I think we are at about the point in the argument where it is
>time to present some evidence that the restrictions are required
>or even useful. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary in
>terms of code that remains freely available without the GPL.
The existence and momentum of the entire GNU suite is itself a powerful
argument for the GPL. Maybe that code that remains freely available
without the GPL isn't the centerpiece of the puzzle. I note there have
been many efforts to make Emacs clones, and I am quite sure Emacs would
have been highjacked were it not for the GPL. Money and greed do
powerful things and not everyone is so holistic and reasonable when a
lot of money is involved. RMS has personal experience with that and the
GPL was his reaction to it. Whether you want to use it or not is of
course up to you.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, was Why open source software is better
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:37:59 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:41:02 +0000, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>So the definition of a non-communist is someone who thinks that
>>property rights must always considered more important than human
>>rights?
>
>Property rights *are* human rights.
So why are so many people arguing that others should not be allowed to
use the GPL to protect their own property?
The GPL is there for those who want to, to use. It is merely a tool one
can use to protect one's own rights.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, was Why open source software is better
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:44:11 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>You would THINK you have a right to OWN property in the United States
>but this is not true either. If you fail to pay your taxes on
>the poperty you "OWN?" you will loose it to court ordered forfeiture.
>
>Every deed in this nation has had that clause built into it for
>150 years.
(remember to qualify "this nation" with "USA" [or whichever nation is
being referred to])
There is also the minor matter of Eminent Domain, whereby richer
developers can take away your land and leave you with a scrap somewhere
else. The Indians are not the only people this happen (-ed) (-s) to.
Any simple homeowner is at risk, given the simple misfortune of having
one's own home in a place someone else finds potentially lucrative
(don't laugh, exactly this happened to my brother's neighbor just east
of Seattle). This applies to the USA, where land plunder is part of the
culture since earliest times. I don't know what the situation in
general in Europe is, but I suspect that at least in Germany the
property rights of a simple citizen are stronger than that. In the US,
"property rights" are just a smokescreen for capitalist theft. And the
Government always helps "them" do it.
>You CAN choose to view the GPL license as a destroyer of property
>rights or you can CHOOSE to view it as an ensurer of property rights
>as I do. With the GPL I'm assured that my work won't be copied,
>cloned and even fobidden from MY USE by another power.
Exactly. US law by itself does not give you that...
>Given that, the GPL seems more durable than basic landrights in
>the United States. And that's the truth and it's a fucking shame.
Exactly.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:50:07 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 22:12:49 -0800, Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Frankly, I don't believe that very many people -- aside from a few
>>anti-GPL zealots -- really care about the "deceptive nature" of the GPL
>>or of the term "free software."
>
>How would you feel if something YOU thought was important was being used and
>perverted for someone else's own political ends?
It is not so "used and perverted". It is only stopping you and others
from doing that to what isn't yours.
Funny how making a thief give back stolen property often (usually)
results in protestations of thievery (this is the way Allachin went so
nonlinear against Linux, for example).
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 14 Mar 2001 14:35:38 +0100
In article <CyDr6.17208$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> >But that isn't even the principle. Copyleft has "I won't share (this)
>> >with you if you won't share (everthing of yours that uses it) with
>> >the world".
>> >
>> >You don't see anything wrong with that? I do on many counts. First, in
>> >typical GNU-speak, it isn't sharing at all; it's trading of valuable
>> >intellectual property rights (as is done by the "evil" corprorations).
>>
>> The GPL is anti-competitive, I agree. But it is sharing, *real*
>> sharing.
>
>Real sharing with restrictions...
>
>> Not "sharing for a fee".
>
>Instead of a fee, it demands political concessions. You are restricted
>from sharing unless you allow them to control your behaviour.
Yes, I have the right to do that when the object at concern is my code.
>>The only people who have a problem
>> with the GPL are people who don't want to share.
>
>Or people who thing others should make their own choices.
Make your own choice with your own code, but don't take the property of
others to do it...
>> It isn't the
>> intellectual property rights, but the value of them, which is the issue.
>
>Will you trade away your ability to make your own decisions for
>a bit of code?
One might do in ceertain circumstances... in that case one chooses a
different license. I claim the right to determine what is done and not
done with my code by others.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 13 Mar 2001 13:42:13 +0100
In article <7M7r6.124$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Note that I am NOT anti-GPL, yet it is so funny that my proven claims
>that it isn't free somehow cause those with sloppy thinking to lump
>me into an anti-GPL group. I am in an anti-lie group, and that might cause
>me to be at odds with many GPL supporters. Because I am 'truth in advertising',
>it might make some of the GPL dogma spewers hate me, but that is their
>problem.
Your claims are not as proven as any others being made here. Simply
declaring QED as you are doing does not constitute a "proof". You are
making a lot of sadly rather typical assumptions about one's right to
use things from other people and then do something with those things
that those other people specifically do not want. The point is, those
thinks you take from other people to make your closed code _are_ _not_
_yours_.
That is the whole point of the GPL in my mind, and it is the reason I
think it is such a good idea. We owe nearly everything we have in the
free software world to it, and the reason it has worked is that its
author already had direct personal experience of things he and his
colleagues had created being snapped up and trademarked by others who
can only be called parasites. Bloody plunderers... the GPL is our best
defense against them.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:57:39 -0500
Anonymous wrote:
>
> aaron wrote:
> > > I'm not saying this is the whole problem, just part of it. And, given
> > > the previous excuse, 5 years (its actually more like 3 for the solid
> > > Linux environment that runs X-Windows) is not that long in the big IT
> > > departments.
> >
> > Then why did M$ try to imply that Lose98 makes Lose95 obsolete,
> > and now Lose2000 and LoseME make Lose98 obsolete?
>
> because they want to make lots of money.
Translation: Your best interests are none of their concern.
And yet, you *STILL* trust them....why is that?
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> well duh
>
> men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> more even than death
> - bertrand russell
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:58:38 -0500
Anonymous wrote:
>
> aaron wrote:
> > Quantum Leaper wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Shades wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Unix has half a dozen GUI's that are so good that Mafia$oft
> > > > > > copied (in their own, usual, less-than-elegant way) as much of
> > > > > > this functionality as they could.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now....if Unix is supposedly soooooooooo difficult to use, then
> > > > > > please explain why Mafia$oft is copying Unix ON THE BASIS OF
> > > > > > EASE OF USE.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not understand this statement. Where is MS copying Unix on ease of
> > > > > use? All the newest GUI's I have seen on Linux look a lot like
> > > something
> > > > > I have seen before.
> > > >
> > > > Ah..more like what you've seen before were copies of Unix GUI's already
> > > > in existance. For example, the Windows2000 GUI is a (faulty)
> > > implementation
> > > > of the unix/linux-land Enlightenment GUI.
> > > >
> > > I remember the Mac users were saying MS copied Mac with Windows 95, but
> > > after I talked with alot of my friends who have used alot of different OSs,
> > > included Unix. The general feeling is MS copies EVERYONE but only tried to
> > > take the best parts. BTW you can run Enlightenment (clone) on NT4 as an
> > > explorer replacement, might ever be available for 2K.
> >
> > M$ gives new meaning to the phrase "not invented here"...as there
> > is not a single feature of an M$ platform which was invented by
> > Microsoft.
>
> who cares?
For a company which prides itself on it's ability to "innovate"...
the fact that it has not actaully innovated *ANYTHING* is quite
interesting...don't you think...
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> more even than death
> - bertrand russell
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
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,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 13:01:07 -0500
On 14 Mar 2001, Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
> Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 22:12:49 -0800, Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Frankly, I don't believe that very many people -- aside from a few
>>> anti-GPL zealots -- really care about the "deceptive nature" of the GPL
>>> or of the term "free software."
>> How would you feel if something YOU thought was important was being used and
>> perverted for someone else's own political ends?
> It is not so "used and perverted". It is only stopping you and others
> from doing that to what isn't yours.
> Funny how making a thief give back stolen property often (usually)
> results in protestations of thievery (this is the way Allachin went so
> nonlinear against Linux, for example).
Funny. You started out reasonable. You ended with this post.
1) Jay is referring to the "use and perversion" of the concept of
"freedom" that the FSF and its less honest supporters pull.
2) Exactly how does the use of freely available software constitute
"theft"?
3) If you want to place the restrictions of the GPL on your code, that's
great and it is your choice -- but don't call it free. It ain't.
-f
--
austin ziegler * Ni bhionn an rath ach mar a mbionn an smacht
Toronto.ON.ca * (There is no Luck without Discipline)
=================* I speak for myself alone
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, was Why open source software is
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 13:01:46 -0500
On 14 Mar 2001, Bruce Scott TOK wrote:
> Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:41:02 +0000, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> So the definition of a non-communist is someone who thinks that
>>> property rights must always considered more important than human
>>> rights?
>> Property rights *are* human rights.
> So why are so many people arguing that others should not be allowed to
> use the GPL to protect their own property?
They're not. Try reading the actual arguments instead of the
preconceptions.
-f
--
austin ziegler * Ni bhionn an rath ach mar a mbionn an smacht
Toronto.ON.ca * (There is no Luck without Discipline)
=================* I speak for myself alone
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
