Linux-Advocacy Digest #689, Volume #33 Wed, 18 Apr 01 15:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Am I ****? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000 ("Dreamspinner3")
Re: What's the point (Brent R)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: What's the point ("Todd")
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Mathew)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Mathew)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (The Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Dreamspinner3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: rec.photo.digital,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Am I ****? HP Photosmart C500 and Win 2000
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 13:44:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Dreamspinner3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What I find objectionable is that someone had to whine about the fact that a
child might see the particular word posted here. I feel, along with other
posters in this thread if you have read it through, feel that parents should
be WATCHING their kids and censoring what they do on the Internet, rather
than expecting everyone else to do it for them. Usenet is a wide-open field
and one should expect to see all kinds of stuff on it, including people who
like to use bad words. Thus parents should be supervising their kids
Internet activity and not expect everyone else in the world to censor
themselves just become they might offend their precious child. Parents
should be responsible for their children! That is that!
"Rick Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Dreamspinner3 wrote:
> >
> > Did you see me swearing at all? Hmmm???? Yes, I know what this group
is
> > about. Yes, I agree with you (suprise!!) such language as he used is
> > unpleasant. However, why whine about it? And you're the one who
mentioned
> > your children.... He has a right to post here. I just ignore and/or
> > killfile people I don't like. I don't whine about it or try to impress
my
> > morals upon them. I guess that is where we differ.
>
> This is not a difference. This is a similarity. Some "whine" about
> language, while you "whine" about whining. You try to impress your
> notion of proper discourse upon the "whiners."
>
> Why does the "photophile" have the right to post here, while the "whiner"
> does not? You could ignore the "whiners", just as you admonish them
> to ignore the references to human-camera sex. The kill file option works
> just as well with either.
>
> You do not find foul language objectionable, yet you find objections
> to foul language objectionable. Interesting.
>
> --
> Rick Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:48:47 GMT
"cat < nonsense > cola" wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 21:10:51 GMT, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >After six years of Windows and one GPF too many, I bought Redhat7 and
> > >installed it. I expected a learning curve, but nothing like I ended up
> > >with.
> > >
> > >I got my cable modem, printer, cdrom drives, and daily programs going,
> and
> > >it took me endless hours - most of them spent trying to fix my display
> > >resolution, only to find out the config file was XF86config-4 and not
> > >XF86config. How the hell was I supposed to know that?
> > >Then I started tackling my digital camera. I followed all the howtos I
> > >could find - no joy. And I still dealt with crappy looking fonts on my
> web
> > >browsers. And that's when I decided to throw in the towel.
> > >After wasting 2 solid weeks of vacation time accomplishing half of what I
> > >could do in a few hours under windows (even with the crashes and GPFs) I
> > >wiped my hard drive slick and threw on Windows ME.
> > >
> > >So my question is, for the home user, what's the point? Has anyone
> learned
> > >Linux from the ground up just to use it at home? What's the advantage?
> I'm
> > >convinced Linux is great if you want to run a server or whatever, but is
> > >there a point in home users running Linux?
>
> If you have an income, want to enjoy technology as it becomes available, (or
> within a reasonable time thereafter) and just want to 'do stuff' then no,
> there is no point in running linux. None at all.
> Better than 90% of computer users in the world run some form of windows,
> like it or not.
> If you have more than passing interest in computer science because you more
> than just 'enjoy it', then indeed, run linux.
>
> People in this group have been spreading BS for years about the ease of
> linux as an inducement to potential new users. They mention this 'learning
> curve' from time to time, as if it was nothing for the average computer
> using individual to give up hours a day just to setup and use email and the
> web, pull their hair out when adding hardware, or even trying to get the X
> window system up and running. Most of these people are tech savvy, in that
> they've been using computers, intently I might add, for some time.They more
> than likely program in more than two languages and love wrapping their head
> around any problem that crops up. The 'curve' just wasn't as great for them.
> Windows became too appliance like, too vanilla, crashes more than they would
> like, and since they're living vicariously through their F'n pc (in a lot of
> cases) the feeling of superiority that running a more complex (in terms of
> just day to day operations) operating system is just what their shallow ego
> needs for proper inflation. Many, and I mean MANY, of these very same people
> use Windows. They'll claim it's because they are somehow forced to. All too
> many of us know that is simply not the case. They use windows as well as
> linux for the very same reasons I, and many more do. It's touch and go, it's
> a much more satisfying web experience, and it supports much of the newer
> 'cool' hardware toys such as digital cameras, all in one output devices,
> games, and so on. Nothing beats sitting down and cranking out a script in
> one of many shells available under linux. Calling gawk, or sed to process
> text. It's really, really powerful stuff. Take some time and learn perl --
> there's next to nothing you can't do on your system. These advocates just
> simply forget who they are preaching to. They aren't close to any semblance
> of reality. They have just stared at the terminal for too long. Drifted too
> far from shore, I fear. (really, sometimes I think these cola aholes want
> people who they know don't have the patience or intelligence to try and
> setup and run linux, knowing very well many of these people will fail, and
> will from that day look up to the linux running pc user as being even more
> god-like. Sad, it really is. And a tad sick to boot)
>
> Use whatever works for you, and don't let these malcontented individuals
> with no concept of reality, no psychic center, and no clue outside of their
> logon prompt tell you different.
Wow... in a word... I agree. Just read some of the reply's in this here
thread.
Also, something that Linux users ofter forget to mention is that many of
those *nix scripting tools are available for Windows.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:49:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Charles Lyttle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:28:40 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I see the same thing. But NT is not often used where it could, due
>either a crash or lack of timeliness, do any damage to the work process.
>I have seem it tried several times. One crash shut down a process line
>permitting liquid nylon to harden in pipes and valves. 15 minutes off
>line cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Another caused
>disruption of a refinery operation. It took several days to get the
>plant cleaned up and back on line.
Dumb question, but .... whatever happened to the concept of redundancy?
I'll admit it adds to expense (specifically, equipment and software
licensing costs), but as far as I can tell, many web server farms using
NT have just that: web server farms, with multiple machines; this makes
the reliability quite adequate -- maybe even 99.999 % (5 minutes/year)... :-)
Granted, this is a far cry from industrial control processes.
(How long does it take for nylon to harden in a tube line, just out
of curiosity? Are we talking hours, minutes, or seconds?)
(ObLinuxPlug: Linux would work very well here :-) )
>
>I build SCADA system also. Several US cities are running systems I
>designed. But if the operator displays fail, the A-B PLCs and
>specialized computers will still run everything OK. The operator, just
>has to run around to check local controls like he did before the
>computers were installed.
Can't comment unless SCADA systems are things like those used in
metropolitan traffic projects with gigantic status screens showing
where every traffic light, streetcar, or train is.
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 1d:22h:34m actually running Linux.
We are all naked underneath our clothes.
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:53:53 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Welcome to Linux.
It takes endless hours to do simple things that under Windows is done
automatically.
And they say it is a conspiracy.
-Todd
"Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:vj2D6.4868$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> After six years of Windows and one GPF too many, I bought Redhat7 and
> installed it. I expected a learning curve, but nothing like I ended up
> with.
>
> I got my cable modem, printer, cdrom drives, and daily programs going, and
> it took me endless hours - most of them spent trying to fix my display
> resolution, only to find out the config file was XF86config-4 and not
> XF86config. How the hell was I supposed to know that?
>
> Then I started tackling my digital camera. I followed all the howtos I
> could find - no joy. And I still dealt with crappy looking fonts on my
web
> browsers. And that's when I decided to throw in the towel.
>
> After wasting 2 solid weeks of vacation time accomplishing half of what I
> could do in a few hours under windows (even with the crashes and GPFs) I
> wiped my hard drive slick and threw on Windows ME.
>
> So my question is, for the home user, what's the point? Has anyone
learned
> Linux from the ground up just to use it at home? What's the advantage?
I'm
> convinced Linux is great if you want to run a server or whatever, but is
> there a point in home users running Linux?
>
> thanks - eric
>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 04:51:58 +1000
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, silverback
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Sun, 15 Apr 2001 00:12:12 GMT
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 20:19:39 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>silverback wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 02:33:42 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>
> >
> > [snip for brevity]
> >
> > >>> >Oh, you mean like PG&E, which went bankrupt because they were forced to
> > >>> >operate under a Marxist economic model......
> > >>>
> > >>> oh you mean they couldn't cut it in a free market asshole. Remember
> > >>> asshole it was fools like you that deregulated the market.
> > >>
> > >>Was PG&E forced to operate under price-control regulation?
> > >>a) no
> > >>B) YES
> > >
> > >nope
>
> Pull your head out of your ANUS, Mathew
Why are you refering to me,I am not quoted here.
>
>
> http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell011201.asp
>
>
> Thomas Sowell
>
> Electricity shocks California
>
> http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- AS
> AN ECONOMIST, whenever I hear the word
> "shortage" I wait for the other shoe to drop. That
> other shoe is usually "price control." So it was no
> great surprise to discover, after the electric power
> shortage in California made headlines, that there
> were price controls holding down the price of
> electricity to the consumers.
>
> In the absence of price control, a shortage is usually
> a passing thing. When prices are free to rise, that
> causes consumers to buy less and producers to
> produce more, eliminating the shortage. But when
> the price is artificially prevented from rising, the
> shortage is prevented from ending.
>
> The electric power shortage in California is not
> unique. What is a new twist, however, is that there
> are no limits on how much the wholesale electric
> power suppliers can charge the utility companies
> that directly supply the consumer. Since the utility
> companies have been paying more for electricity
> than they were allowed to charge their customers,
> they were operating in the red and the financial
> markets are downgrading their bonds. Buying high
> and selling low is the royal road to bankruptcy, and
> bonds in a bankrupt company are not usually worth
> much.
>
> Nor is it any great surprise that "consumer
> advocates" are denouncing the utilities for seeking a
> rate increase -- or that politicians are proposing a
> small increase, completely inadequate to cover the
> cost of the electricity bought by the utilities. In the
> never-never land of California ideology, it is
> considered terrible if the public should have to pay
> the full cost of what it wants.
>
> In California, prices higher than you like are
> attributed to "greed" or "gouging" and the answer is
> either more government regulation or having the
> government take over the utility company
> completely and run it. There are people who are old enough to know
> better who get their 15 minutes of fame by going on television and
> repeating the sophomoric slogans of their youth, back in the days of
> Berkeley in the 1960s. And there are media people who take them
> seriously -- or at least pretend to.
>
> But just as there is no free lunch, there is no free
> electricity. And the idea that the government can
> run businesses at lower costs flies in the face of
> worldwide evidence that whatever enterprise
> politicians and bureaucrats run has higher costs.
> That is why even left-wing governments have been
> privatizing in recent years, even if this fact has not
> yet gotten through to those Californians who are still living with the
> ideological visions of their Berkeley youth.
>
> Far from lowering the cost of producing electricity, government at all
> levels has for many years and in many ways been needlessly increasing
> that cost.
>
> Nothing forces prices up like restricting the supply. It has been years
> since anyone has built more electricity-generating facilities in California
> because the environmentalists, the courts, the state and local governments
> and assorted wackos have made it virtually impossible to build a
> hydroelectric dam, a nuclear power plant or a facility that uses coal or oil
> to generate electricity.
>
> There are all sorts of bright ideas for generating electricity by using
> sunlight or windmills. It never seems to occur to those who espouse these
> ideas to ask why people who have spent a lifetime working in the
> electricity industry do not share their enthusiasm for these schemes.
> Could it possibly be that the costs of generating electricity this way are
> higher?
>
> There are already vast arrays of aging windmills in the hills leading out to
> California's central valley as monuments to the utopianism that seems to
> flourish in the golden state. All that is needed is Don Quixote.
>
> Politics is supposed to be the art of the possible but, in California
> especially, it is often the art of the impossible. Somehow politicians must
> make it seem possible to get benefits without paying costs. But if we are
> too squeamish to build a dam and inconvenience some fish or reptiles,
> too aesthetically delicate to permit drilling for oil out in the boondocks
> and too paranoid to allow nuclear power plants to be built, then we
> should not be surprised if there is not enough electricity to supply our
> homes and support a growing economy.
>
> The easy answer that is preferred is to use electricity generated outside of
> California -- somewhere out in the real world beyond our borders.
> >
> > I do wonder. Presumably, if PG&E didn't like it, they could have
> > declared Chapter 7, liquidated, and gone into some other line of work.
> > But that's a long and complex process -- "hey buddy, did ya wanna
> > buy a spare transmission tower or generator?" :-)
> >
> > (I believe they're operating under Chapter 11 at the moment. I'd
> > have to check, but that's what most businesses filing bankruptcy do AFAIK.)
> >
> > Another possibility is for PG&E to file suit charging unfair pricing
> > practices by the PUC, the state's regulatory authority for electricity
> > pricing (amongst other things). This makes it by default a quasi-socialistic
> > concept -- the regulation of the electricity price for the common good.
> > Only in this case it backfired badly, and now we'll have to suffer
> > all summer.
> >
> > Note that the regulation of electricity prices started in 1996; this means
> > that the 46% increase already granted (which is not enough, BTW) translates
> > to about 7.9% a year over 5 years. Had the PUC granted those increases,
> > we might have had a few shiny new power plants by now.
> >
> > Of course TURN would have a fit -- and I can't blame them too much.
> > But all this is electrons through the transmission wire. :-)
> >
> > [rest snipped]
> >
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> > EAC code #191 0d:10h:30m actually running Linux.
> > This is not a .sig.
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> 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:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 04:53:41 +1000
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Sun, 15 Apr 2001 03:53:00 -0400
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >Mathew wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Jim Richardson wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 03:51:42 GMT,
> > >> > silverback, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >> > brought forth the following words...:
> > >> >
> > >> > >On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 01:24:34 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > >> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >>Goldhammer wrote:
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 13:33:15 -0400,
> > >> > >>> Rob Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> > Right. Fascism is characterized by the *state-directed* control of
> > >> > >>> >the economy,
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Hmm. Sounds like communism.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>Precisely.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>Communism and Fascism are merely different sides of the same coin.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >bullshit you lying sack of shit. Fascism is the polar opposite of
> > >> > >communism. They have nothing in common.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Fascicsm=control by a ruling oligarchy that murders it's population.
> > >> > Communism=control by a ruling oligarchy that murders it's population.
> > >>
> > >> What about Capitalist Fascist dictatorships like the
> > >> Philippines,particulary under Marcos.
> > >
> > >Capitalism and Fascism are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE TERMS,
> > >you goddmned fucking moron.
> >
> > As I understand it, capitalism is an economic system, fascism is
> > a political one. Therefore, the two terms are mostly independent.
> >
>
> No. Fascism is an economic system which is USUALLY accompanied
> by a police state and/or totalitarian government.
>
> While Japan is not a totalitarian government, it IS a police state.
Do they have something akin tho the CIA?
>
>
>
> > A similar dichotomy exists for communism and socialism. In fact,
> > the Red Chinese are becoming the Green Chinese -- green as in
> > capitalist money, as opposd to their old communist system.
> > Whether they'll succeed under their current authoritarian political
> > system isn't very clear yet but at least they've had the sense to
> > keep their hands off (mostly) the Hong Kong economy, which is of
> > course already capitalist.
> >
> > I suspect that they'll want to at some point do the equivalent of
> > the Rural Electrification and the Interstate Highway projects, though.
> > (They might do the same thing as Vietnam, though, and go all-cellular.
> > Whatever works, I guess. :-) )
> >
> > [rest snipped]
> >
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> > EAC code #191 0d:11h:41m actually running Linux.
> > The US gov't spends about $54,000/second. I wish I could.
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:55:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Charles Lyttle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:33:15 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Greg Cox wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >
>> > I thought that a few years ago, the U.S.Navy tried a computer
>> > controlled battleship, and the computers ran Windows NT (probably 3.51
>> > in those days), and it crashed so bad the ship had to be towed into
>> > port. (I may not have the facts exactly correct, but it was pretty
>> > much like this.) Maybe the computers were not exactly your
>> > bargain-basement PCs, but the software must have been. If the U.S.Navy
>> > is dumb enough to use Microsoftware in a battle-critical system, why
>> > would not some private industry be just as dumb?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> The version of the story I heard was that the first ship of a new class
>> of Navy ship was out testing a new ship's control system programmed
>> using a custom database running on NT4 and the DB software crashed, not
>> NT. I believe the story goes that the captain said in his report that
>> the DB software crashed a couple of times and was successfully restarted
>> but the ship was towed in on the third crash with the system left in its
>> crashed state for later analysis by the developers...
>>
>> --
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Essentially the version that was posted here. The DB crash, iirc, was
>due to the cook entering too many items in a dinner menu. This crashed
>the DB, the DB took down NT. It got restarted without anyone knowing why
>it crashed, the cook did it again. When it crashed, it took out
>propulsion. On the third try, the Captain decided to call for a tow
>until the problem could be solved.
>
>One joke was that it should be intuitive that entering 4 entrees in the
>dinner menu will shutdown the ships propulsion. The Navy fixed the
>problem by making a new regulation prohibiting more than 3 entrees at a
>meal.
Oh man...what a way to solve a problem!
I hadn't been aware that it was the cook putting in too many entrees
that was causing the database to crash. Reminds me of the old song
(poem?) about the lack of a horse's shoenail causing loss of a battle...
OTOH, a database crashes when it will -- one hopes very infrequently,
but how does one specify that a DB will crash when, say, a scratch page
fills up and gets flushed out to a disk that's already full?
One also hopes that next time the Navy designs a slightly more robust
system that won't go down every time the DB server decides to powder
its nose.
(One would also think that the propulsion DB system and the cook's
DB system were on different systems. Like the cooks' DB system is
ultra-critical to ship's operation -- he could write things down on
index cards or paper notebooks if he had to. Note quite as convenient
of course, but certainly not life-threatening.)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 1d:23h:40m actually running Linux.
The EAC doesn't exist, but they're still watching you.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
