Linux-Advocacy Digest #878, Volume #33 Tue, 24 Apr 01 14:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism (WesTralia)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product ("JS PL")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1 ("Edward Rosten")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: MIcrosoft: Words, denial and WTF! ("MH")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Windows 2000 Rocks! (Neil Cerutti)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males ("Edward Rosten")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Chad Everett)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:19:07 -0500
"Gunner ©" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 07:41:11 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >theRadical wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:12:14 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:31:15 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >ANYBODY who seeks to enslave others sacrifices any claim to his own life.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >Hope that helps.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> which means soooo [sic] much coming from a fucking idiot twat such as
> >> >>> yourself.
> >> >>
> >> >>Gonna come say that to my face?
> >> >
> >> >WEEEEE! I get dibs on the video rights! And we can split the fee when
> >> >we send numbnuts body to a medical school.
> >> >
> >> >Aaron... try to draw it out as long as possible, so we can see lots of
> >> >his blood and hear the sounds of breaking bones.. Ive already got a
> >> >buyer for the master tape.
> >> >
> >> >Gunner
> >>
> >> why doesn't it surprise me that a sick gun nut fuck like gunner would
> >> think such trash?
> >
> >Because he's got a good sense of humor. :-)
> >
> >Sue
>
> Thanks Sue!
>
> And of course..I have a good business sense as well. I could indeed
> sell a video of Aaron giving the Radical a serious attitude adjustment.
> ..Afterall.. wouldnt Libertarian/Conservitive, with more than 6 weeks
> on the net.. love to see a troll who's limited vocabulary includes
> "sick gun nut fuck" , get his shit scattered? Then there are the
> T-shirt rights...and the bumper sticker, beer and popcorn
> residuals..hence the request to draw it out as long as possible.
>
> T-shirt example:
> Front Side..
> "This is a troll." (picture of a gnormlish nerd like Radical in front of
> a computer)
> Backside..
> " This is a troll after Aaron" (picture of a roadkill with a sandaled
> foot and clawed, broken fingered hand, sticking out of the puddle)
>
> Picture the Budwieser frogs... "grease" "a" "troll"
>
> And while Ive never met Aaron..I suspect I could sell a few copies to
> the School of the Americas....
>
> Hell.. with the sheer number of trolls out there.. we could completly
> replace roller derby and the XFL... hummm this would be a great follow
> up for Nascar!
>
> Anyone know where we can find Dolt the Jolt? I might even sign up for
> that one myself......
>
> Gunner
Errrr...first you are going to need to get Aaron's mom to sign a
waiver. Then you have to negotiate through Aarons agent - me.
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:30:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina"
>
>
>> >Such as stating a soldier killing in war equates to murder.
>>
>> Which I never did, in those terms. Go check the archives and see.
>
>
>See the three examples below.
Sure enough, let's!
>You, Roberto, are not a truthful man.
You, bill, are not a smart man.
>
>This is from 4 April 01 in the "communism" thread
>
>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> And indeed I consider all soldiers fighting a war their country starts
>> to be assassins, in many ways.
>> --
>> Roberto Alsina
Bzzt!. Here I equated killing in some wars to murder. Not "killing in war".
>______________________________________________________________________
>__________________________________________________________
>
>
>This is from a post of your dated 21 Apr 01 in this thread.
>
>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>> I personally believe any killing not in self defense, including
>> killing at war, should be considered murder.
Bzzt!. Here I equated some killings at war with murder. Not "killing in war".
>_______________________________________________________________
>
>And here is a 22 Apr 01 post of yours from this thread
>
>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>> >Interesting. So you belive that a soldier that initiates a contact with
>> >the enemy in a war and kills said enemy in the process is a murderer.
>> >Does that mean he also has to be tried for war crimes?
>>
>> No, I think he should be tried for murder.
>> Of course if he is defending himself from an agression it
>> may count as self defense.
Bzzt!. Here I equate some killings at war (notice how the example depends
on the killing soldier initiating the contact) with murder, not "killing
in war", and specifically say that it may be self-defense, thus not
punishable.
Your examples are simply examples of your inability to read.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:32:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina"
>
>> Well, the constitution doesn't say "In most of the US, a citizen owns guns
>> simply because they choose to. No other reason is required. Freedom is
>> simply choice." That is not the law, and that is not the constitution.
>> That is a shallow description of the law.
>
>But it is a fact.
Whatever.
> The only reason I "need" in order to own as many guns as
>I want to own, is that I choose to own them. That is fact. That is the
>reality.
Choosing is not a reason. Choosing is the outcome of a reason. You are
a confused man.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:32:47 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina"
>
>> Social organizations. Voluntary work. Lobbying.
>
>For whom have you lobbied and for what?
Is that any of your business?
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:33:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina"
>
>> >Are you saying our societies are the same. Please, describe this
>"global"
>> >society for us all.
>>
>> Let's put it this way: there's a lot of local colour.
>
>And that is your description of the "global" society you say exists.
No, it ain't. I was just not responding to your question.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:35:02 -0400
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:29:49 +0100, Hullo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >As far as I know you get a couple of free calls with each product. Like
most
> >of you I don't find I need to resort to support lines for help, but this
> >person does. I am just curious to know what they said about the original
> >technical problems described. I don't have great hopes of the poster
> >actually being serious enough to
> >
> >a)Call them
> >b)Report honestly
> >
> >
>
> You don't seem to get how crappy Windows 2000 Professional is, do you?:
>
> "The built-in Windows 2000 drivers for CD-R, CD-RW, and DVD-R devices
> treat them as read-only devices".
>
> NOTE: "No version of Microsoft Windows to date (Windows 2000, Microsoft
> Windows NT, Microsoft Windows 98, Microsoft Windows 95, or Microsoft
Windows
> 3.x) natively supports the ability to write to CD-R, CD-RW, or DVD-R
devices.
> Writing to (or "burning") these devices requires third-party drivers
and
> software in Windows 2000."
>
> Third-Party Software - The following third-party software is known to
support
> Windows 2000, but you should check with the manufacturer for proper
version
> and updated software.
>
> Adaptec CD-R Software
> Easy CD Creator version 3.5c
> Easy CD Creator versions 4.0, 4.02 (4.02 is officially supported on
Windows 2000)
> Adaptec DirectCD 3.01
> Adaptec Easy CD Creator version 3.5b or earlier, and Adaptec DirectCD
versions 3.0 or earlier, are not supported on Windows 2000-based
> computers and may encounter problems if you install them.
> See Q237468. Visit
http://www.adaptec.com/tools/compatibility/win2k_cdr.html.
>
>
> All those third party products cost $MONEY$, and the two I've tried
reguire
> you to be administrator to write to CDs.
Due to continuous improvement, Windows XP will have built in ability to
write to cd's. Then we shall all witness the weeping and wailing and
knashing of teeth from anti-MS crowd about the harm big bad Microsoft is
purposely inflicting upon Adaptec et al.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:35:35 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina"
>
>> >> The guy is holding your TV in both hands. He probably has his legs
>> >straddling
>> >> the window. In what way is he a danger? Where has he been violent?
>> >
>> >Since you, of course, are such an expert on law throughout the USA, you
>do
>> >realize that in some jurisdictions the scenario you pose above is enough
>to
>> >justify use of fatal force.
>>
>> Who cares? In Afghanistan, talking to a man is enough to justify
>> imprisonment.
>
>
>And exactly how does this apply to your scenario of , "The guy is holding
>your TV in both hands. He probably has his legs straddling the window. In
>what way is he a danger? Where has he been violent?"?
"The law says the situation grants punishment" is not a reason to say
the punishment is morally deserved. Afghanistan is just an easy example.
>> >> Well, you are free to imagine all you want, but they have not.
>> >> If you shoot a burglar, that's unarmed, and who was not a danger
>> >> for you, you deserve to go to jail for murder.
>> >
>> >Some places you may. Other places you may not. Depends on the laws of
>the
>> >jurisdiction.
>>
>> I said you DESERVE it. Learn to read.
>
>You have nothing to say about it. Whatever you say matters not.
It matters to me. If you don't care for my opinion, feel free to not read
them.
> You have no input into our laws.
Not now. Oh, well, I do have SOME, but it's very remote.
>You'll never sit on a grand jury in the USA, nor
>will you ever sit on a trail jury in the USA.
Now, that you can't tell. I could immigrate, you know.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:37:51 +0100
>> Don't blame Linux for your shortcomings as an administrator. If you
>> were competent, you'd have a precess limit, snd so the machine would
>> not be effectively taken out by that.
>
> It's the default on Mandrake.
So? You know how to fix it, so fix it. Besides, the best is different for
everybody. The installer is not telepathic.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:38:10 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:15:25 -0500, WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>billh wrote:
>>
>> "T. Max Devlin"
>>
>> > If the prosecution proves you were in no mortal danger, or would not
>> > have reasonably believed you were in mortal danger, then self-defense
>> > becomes wrongful death. If you want to play games, that is. But I
>> > think the fact that you pulled my comment out of context is enough to
>> > show your lack of argument.
>>
>> In some jurisdictions in the USA a stranger invading your house is grounds
>> for use of fatal force. You're not required to show that you were in, or
>> thought yourself to be in, mortal danger.
>
>
>Yep, this is very true in South Carolina and Texas (probably other
>states also). The law is referred to as the "Don't Ask" law. If
>an intruder breaks into my house here in Texas then the State gives
>me the right to be judge, jury, and executioner. The incident won't
>even go to the grand jury.
Actually, I think the situation right now is that it is not legal
to kill the intruder, but that the attorneys hace decided not to
prosecute that specific crime.
There's a gulf between "legal" and "not prosecuted".
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MIcrosoft: Words, denial and WTF!
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:38:16 GMT
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yes, this is another look at the Microsoft machine and the arrogance it
> displays. First of all, this all MHO, no more, no less, however, most
> Linux advocates and ex-windows users probably agree with me.
I'm sure. Except there is a difference between Linux advocate and Linux
Zealot.
Of course they're arrogant. They're huge.
> Patches, bug fixes, service packs, normal words in the world of
> computing, no OS are immune to bugs and problems, however, how one word
> these problems is an interesting topic.
I'm seg-faulting whilst parsing this sentence. And I use the word 'sentence'
very loosely.
I don't even think Larry Wall could hope to fix it.
> Lets look at the SUN, a UNIX power house, they refer to Solaris OS
> updates and bug fixes, as "patches". Thus telling the public, there have
> been some errors in the Solaris (or what ever) product, and here are
> some files to correct the problem, and on top of that, here are some new
> features. Lotus refers to these files as either fixes or patches, thus
> going along the same line as SUN for the reasoning, both have taken
> responsibility for the errors.
>
> Now we come to Microsoft, who don't call them "patches" or "fixes", but
> "service packs", thus avoiding the admittance that maybe in one of their
> products there is a bug. Talk to a Microsoft rep. and they prefer to
> call it an "update", as if to say to the customer that it enhances the
> reliability even more, whilst making sure they don't mention the fact
> that they (Microsoft) were too sloppy to ensure that there weren't any
> bugs in the original code.
Semantics. 'Service' implies that something is being fixed to me.
If you want to nit pick, and spin out of control, that's fine with me as
well.
> Security alerts are even more hilarious, they are not referred to as
> "security holes" or "bugs", instead they are called "security
> vulnerabilities", thus offloading the responsibility for "creating the
> hole" on the shoulders of hackers/crackers/script kiddies, instead of
> taking the responsibility themselves for the error.
Again, semantics. Vunerability denotes weakness, doesn't it?
Arrogance, to me, is referring to folks who use scripting tools as 'script
kiddies'
> The arrogance goes further than mear words, it heads into their
> advertising, there customer service, the whole company culture that
> surrounds Microsoft. You ring up Microsoft because Visual Basic 6 (with
> latest service packs) doesn't work with Microsoft Office 2000, the first
> question you get asked it how you are going to pay for the support! I
> shelled out $350 fucking dollars, why the hell should I shell out even
> more money to line Bill Gates Pockets? I paid for the software, I want
> the support that goes with it. Compare that to SUN, I have a copy of
> SUN Forte Developer 6, I didn't even have a support contract with SUN
> and they still helped me, so it definitely shows where each companies
> priorities lye.
What problem are you having with VB6 and O2K?
All of the libraries were registered fine on all the machines I've seen.
Access? You just need an updated library if you're using the DAO paradigm.
Granted, it wasn't a very good way of going about it. But who said MS really
paid attention to the details?
VB is a scripting nightmare but what you're mewling about is a minor
issue --fixed with very little research.
You'll simply have to do better.
> Office XP, yet another over hyped, under performing suite. The people I
> know, who kept with Lotus Smart Suite are quite happy about the fact
> that they aren't on the upgrade tread mill, and the cost of it has
> stayed constant, and in some cases gone down since the original
> purchase. Compare what you get for $NZ300, Lotus Smart Suite,
> w/Database, Browser, Wordprocessor, etc etc, compared to Microsoft's
> $1300 suite which does the same thing! when are people going to wake up
> to the hype, its a black hole, sucking users in with the promise of
> enhanced productivity, however, once sucked in, and have relised that it
> has not delivered, they dare not tell anyone of their stupid decision,
> and they stick with Office, even though Corel Wordperfect Suite 2002,
> Lotus Smart Suite 2000, or StarOffice could have achieved the same feats
> at 1/10th the price.
Lotus smartuite. Hah. If only Lotus / IBM had some of those 'smarts' in
their marketing dept.
Office, when properly configured, is unmatched as an office suite. Like it
or not. I don't really like using it unless I have to. I do like Excel
though.
Whether most people 'need it', as is a point of argument constantly with
LinZealots --(telling everyone else what they do and don't need)-- is not at
issue. So please don't start braying that tired tune.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:41:25 +0100
>>> Hey nimwit! We had a poster trying to lecture us that homosexuals
>>> want to just "live their own private lives". But that isn't true is
>>> it.
>>
>>Yes it is. Homosexuals are normal people. Normal people generally want
>>to live quiet lives. In general, homosexuals want to live quiet lives
>>like everyone else on the planet (in general).
>
> Can you think your way out of a wet paper bag? In one post, you say
> that you can't generalize because "not all" have a political agenda, and
> the next post *you yourself* generalize when you say that they want to
> live quiet lives!
It is you, not me who can not reason. There is no basis for assuming
homosexuals are not normal.
Most normal people want to live quiet lives.
That is based on observation.
Based on that it is a reasonable assumption to assume that most
homosexuals want to live quiet lives.
Seeing one politically active group is not sufficient for concluding that
all homosexuals are politically active.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:44:06 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Apr 2001 17:20:52 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 24 Apr 2001 14:57:22 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>On 24 Apr 2001 12:37:55 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:43:43 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >On 23 Apr 2001 19:31:57 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>Bzzzt. Not everything is a dichotomy.
>>>>>>>> >>In this case, in particular, you are presenting something that is NOT
>>>>>>>> >>a dichotomy as if it were one. That's why it's a FALSE dichotomy.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>Don't they teach logic in Perdue?
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >Oh brother! Roberto lecturing on logic.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I actually did precisely that a couple of times. With lanctern and all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Talk about malpractice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wanna discuss Gödel's theorem's proof? Start by proposing an alternate
>>>-----------------|||||||||||||||||||||||------------------------^^^^^^^^^
>>>> -----T---
>>>>Chad, read here:----------------------------------------------------+
>>>>
>>>>>>paradox for the setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Roberto Alsina
>>>>>
>>>>>This sentence is false.
>>> ---------T-------------
>>> +--------------------------------- Roberto, read here
>>
>>Well, either you don't know the meaning of "alternate" or are not
>>familiar with Gödel's theorem's proof.
>>
>>>>Follow the instructions above, then try again.
>>>>--
>>>>Roberto Alsina
>>>
>>>Read your instructions above, then try again.
>>
>>What a putz.
>
>You obviously don't understand your own instructions. Maybe English is not
>your primary language.
Indeed it isn't. It's more like my fourth. Yet I seem to know one more
meaning of alternate than you do!
>What a doofus.
>
> 1 : occurring or succeeding by turns <a day of alternate sunshine and rain>
> 2 a : arranged first on one side and then on the other at different levels
> or points along an axial line <alternate leaves> -- compare
> OPPOSITE b : arranged one above or alongside the other
> 3 : every other : every second <he works on alternate days>
> 4 : constituting an alternative <took the alternate route home>
> 5 : ALTERNATIVE 3
> - al·ter·nate·ly adverb
Webster: "Alternative: The course of action or the thing offered in place of
another."
I thought the intended meaning was obvious. I meant (5), and then in (5)
I meant the above.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 Rocks!
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:44:12 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WJP posted:
>ISTR with my Apple //e a quasi-GUI called "Geos". This would
>have been circa 1984. I had a devil of a time getting that
>installed on the 10meg HD. Can't be sure, as my memory of late
>is frequently porous.
I ran GEOS on my C64, also.
And again in 1994 (then called Geoworks) on my dad's Gateway PC
running Win95. He had a friend at work that was a Geos junky and
gave him a CD to try out. Complete replacement desktop and
application suite, though I thought the applications were more on
the level of Microsoft Works than StarOffice or Lotus SmartSuite.
I wonder if it's still being sold?
Hmmm. A quick net search says, yeah. The company now sells a
suite of software and servers for Application Service Providers.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*** You found a dead moose rat and sold the hide for $400. ***
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:48:03 +0100
>>Care to explain how the Longman English dictionary and the Collins
>>dictionary are not real dictionaries? Mabey I'll check in the Oxford
>>English Dictionary (full length verson), or is that not a proper English
>>dictionary either?
>>
>
> The Oxford English Dictionary will be just fine.
Well, I'll go and look if I get the chance. I still wonder what is wrong
with Longmans and Collins?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 12:25:49 -0500
On 24 Apr 2001 17:30:55 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>You, Roberto, are not a truthful man.
>>
>>This is from a post of your dated 21 Apr 01 in this thread.
>>
>>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>
>>> I personally believe any killing not in self defense, including
>>> killing at war, should be considered murder.
>
>Bzzt!. Here I equated some killings at war with murder. Not "killing in war".
>
Bzzzt! Wrong.
You clearly stated that you personally believe that [any killing not in
self defense] includes [killing at war].
include: to take in or comprise as a part of a whole
You stated that [killing at war] is a subset of [any killing not in
self defense].
You did NOT say: I personally believe any killing not in self defense,
including certain kinds of killing at war, should be considered murder.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:52:18 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernd Paysan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>> IIRC, Zuse had it working on a fully automatic (and turing-complete)
>> machine in the early 40's: the Z3 (formerly the V3).
>>
>> The Germans did, in fact have real, working computers before anyone
>> else.
>
> Not "the Germans", the Z3 was just in Zuses' parent's living room (the
> first home computer ;-),
Um, that was the Z1. The Z3 came later. One of Zuse's machines was used
in a factory for making wings. It had the first ADC as well.
> and the German war industry did not use
> computers for calculation. After the war, Zuse applied for a patent on
> the German PTO, and this application was rejected, because of prior art
> ;-). No, the examiner didn't know of Babbage's "analythic engine".
>
> BTW: The Z3 is about 60 years old, it was first publically demonstrated
> on May, 12th 1941.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
