Linux-Advocacy Digest #912, Volume #33 Wed, 25 Apr 01 15:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Tired of XEMACS, moving to VIM (Brian V. Smith)
Re: Linux is for the lazy ("Andy Walker")
Re: Why left-wing communist assholes hate Reagan. (was Re:
Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.) ("Kelsey
Bjarnason")
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Chad Everett)
Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare? (GreyCloud)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Roy Omond)
Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Anne & Lynn Wheeler)
Re: Bye all. Wow the Linux scene has changed. ("MH")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian V. Smith)
Crossposted-To:
gnu.emacs.help,alt.religions.vim,alt.religion.emacs,fj.editor.vi,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Tired of XEMACS, moving to VIM
Date: 25 Apr 2001 17:09:55 GMT
In article <9c3g1q$afs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> Wires, yes. Sondering? no. They crimp the wires with their fingers (any
|> weenie can crimp using teeth).
Wires! We dreeaamed of having wires! We had to wet our skin and make connections
with our fingers!
--
===============================================================
Brian V. Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www-epb.lbl.gov/BVSmith
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
I don't speak for LBL; they don't pay me enough for that.
Check out the xfig site at http://www-epb.lbl.gov/xfig
To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, the
glass is half empty. To the engineer, the glass is too small
for a decent safety factor.
------------------------------
From: "Andy Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is for the lazy
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:23:15 -0000
woolfy wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>What is your point??
>
>On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 14:08:24 +0000 (UTC), Brian Langenberger
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>After some deliberation, I've come to the conclusion that Linux
>>(and Unices in general) are built by the lazy, for the lazy.
>>As proof of this, let's look through the whole gamut of
>>UI tools.
>>
>>First of all, notice that the most commonly-used shell commands
>>are two letters long (cd, ls, mv, cp, and so forth). Why not
>>"list", or "move", or "copy"? Because that's too many letters
>>to type, and so laziness prevails.
>>
>>Then there's the standard directory structure. These are
>>typically three letters (/usr, /tmp, /bin, /etc.). Why?
>>Because typing in long directory names is tedious.
>>Laziness wins again.
>>
>>Notice that all the modern command shells support tab-completion?
>>Yep, another point for laziness. Nobody wants to type in the
>>whole name "foobar" when nothing else has the same name
>>beyond "foo".
>>
>>Moving on a bit more, we come to X11. Here's a tool absolutely
>>dedicated to servicing the lazy. Don't want to get up and
>>walk down the hall to the server? Easy, just pop open a
>>half dozen X clients from it and pretend you're sitting right
>>in front of it.
>>
>>I'm sure many of you can think of more, but I think the point
>>is clear: if you want to add a really successful feature
>>to the Unix UI, make it a feature that facilitates laziness -
>>because I'm really enjoying not having to do so much work... :)
>
I prefer to call it more efficient, only a half-wit would want to type more
characters than they have to. I wish people would stick to lower case in
file names as well, I'm fed up with having to keep pressing the shift key!
------------------------------
From: "Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why left-wing communist assholes hate Reagan. (was Re:
Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.)
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:28:49 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "moderate" feminists, by definition, aren't proposing laws.
By _what_ definition? If one chooses, as you appear to, to define
"feminist" as "one of the radical types like Dworkin" then yes, that would
be the case. Most folks, however, tend to define "feminist" as "supportive
of equal rights for women". Not _more_ rights, not _superior_ rights, just
_equal_ rights.
Most of the feminists I know are, indeed, working to have laws passed, or at
least amended, if for no other reason than to give some actual teeth to
notions such as "equal pay for work of equal value." Most of them, however,
regard the Dworkin crowd and their ilk as the looney fringe. It should also
be noted that most of the ones I know are also involved in other areas, such
as rights of the physcially or mentally challenged, minority rights and so
forth.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 Apr 2001 12:05:56 -0500
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:26:10 -0500, Bud Frawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:53:23 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
>>
>> You just said the your cousin OWNED the company...therefore whatever
>> he says *IS* company policy.
>
>your the biggest dumass goin if you think the owner of a company can
>change the union rules everytime he want's! he CA'NT! he has to follow
>the union rules or guess what? he's just asking for a strike! that's the
>problem with republiCONS! they think the rich fat cat company's can just
>walk on top of the backs of the poor anytime they want! wake up junior
>it's 2001!
>
>>
>> The fact that the union disagreed is a definite sign that
>> "company policy" =/= "unioin policy
>>
>>
>> > that's why they call it an agreement! if the company want's to
>> > give the secretery a raise why did they sign the contract? there the
>> > one's that are the morons! now whose the idiot? it's not me I can tell
>> > you that much!
>>
>>
Did you find a lawyer yet? I am still holding my breath waiting for this
BIG (made up) story to "hit the papers".
>>
>> How did the secretaty make more money for the company than the all the
>> salesmen?
>>
>>
> what a moron! I guess you do'nt know who spend's the most on dinner when
> there doin a big deal! it's not the secretery that's for sure!
>
>
Does this answer that you provided really make sense to you?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:55:47 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:36:17 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Sat, 21 Apr 2001 03:43:17 -0400
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >Donn Miller wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Public " wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > lungs. The man was allegedly became irrate shortly
>> >> > after entering the store and discovering that CompuUSA
>> >> > was no longer carrying the Windows 98 Operating System.
>> >>
>> >> Are you kidding?! If Windows 98 suddenly became extinct,
>> >> Mr. Military Man would go on a Windows-sized rampage,
>> >> wiping out all Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris users.
>> >
>> >Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris users are the GOOD guys (as well
>> >as HP-UX, IRIX, pt/x, etc. AIX guys are suspicious characters,
>> >and should be supervised closely.
>>
>> Erm....would you mind explaining that? :-) Especially since
>> IBM is promoting Linux in its latest billboard ads (the ones with
>> "peace, love, penguin")?
>
>
>Obviously, you've never dealt with AIX administration beyond
>the use of smit.
Guilty as charged. :-)
>
>
>AIX has nothing to do with the penguin.
That much I know. In fact, older versions of AIX were --- interesting.
'ls' in particular had IBM-style diagnostics. I think they
got around to removing that, though.
>
>AIX is a PERVERSION of Unix, the last, dying gasp of the old
>customer-abusing culture saturated IBM at that time.
>
>Look at the config files. Not only do they have different
>names (which is irksom enough), but a RADICALLY different
>internal structure.
I don't have access to AIX at the moment, or I would look at
said config files. In any event, that answers my question. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 8d:07h:07m actually running Linux.
Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:06:16 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 22 Apr 2001 18:36:26 +0100
<9butoj$583$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> > Also, embedded links, tables are cool too.
>>>
>>> All of my messages are pure text, and hey, look, embedded links:
>>>
>>> http://www.google.com/
>>>
>>> Imagine that, you stupid fuckhead.
>>
>> Now try a link to a gif :)
>
>If you want a better idea, take a look at the image at:
>
>protocol://gif.org/image.gif.
Are you sure you didn't mean http://gif.org/image.gif
or http://www.gif.org/image.gif?
(Am I missing something here?)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 8d:08h:43m actually running Linux.
[ ] Check here to always compile your own software.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:08:32 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The Microsoft zealots always quote marketshare at some point, have you
> noticed?
> > I started thinking about that, why is it important? Is it important?
> >
> > I think "why" marketshare is somewhat important, is because you need a
> > community of users and developers to create the various software. The days
> > where one could write all that they need are long gone.
> >
> > The real issue is how big does that market need to be? How many active
> > users/developers does it take before a system is self sustaining? Also,
> does
> > open source make this number larger or smaller than the equivalent closed
> > source?
>
> It's more than just number of users. There has to be a viable market as
> well. Many software developers don't see the Linux market as viable even
> though it probably has enough users to otherwise make it so (if it were a
> closed source platform, like the Mac).
>
> The reason is that Linux users are always screaming about price, and how
> things are free. ISV's see this as "Nobody wants to pay for software, and
> I'm not going to write it for charity".
It does have a ring of truth to this. However, our local communities'
problem is getting a good stable O/S for home use that isn't expensive
and yet have good quality software that isn't too expensive that one
could use a few years. My neighbors don't want crashes and freezes that
happen three or four times a day.
We are willing to pay. Its really a wonder why anyone hasn't pushed the
Moss-Magnusen Warranty act on Microsoft.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:08:53 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> nunnayabidniz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >homosexuality is not genetic, it is a choice.
>>
>> Why did you choose to be heterosexual?
>
>because successful DNA are those that reproduce.
That isn't an answer. Why did YOU CHOOSE to be heterosexual?
>There are only two explanations for homosexuality
That you are capable of accepting. Given your obvious bigotry and
scientific illiteracy, I'd hardly consider your opinion to be worth
anything.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:09:53 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Not to mention the desire to keep one's genitals feces-free.
Unlike your nose.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:09:57 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:55:56 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:26:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical) wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:15:10 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>chrisv wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> LOL! Maybe right after you "prove" to everyone that you're not
>> >>>> actually using Windows 98, right?
>> >>>
>> >>>The only way to prove it would be to reveal what platform I'm
>> >>>actually running.
>> >>
>> >>Yes, I realize that you have an excuse. You always have SOME excuse
>> >>for just NOT "answering the damn question" when you bluff has been
>> >>called.
>> >
>> >next, kulkis will drop the thread and pretend the conversation never
>> >happened. he is nothing than a tired little punk who lies and tries
>> >to intimidate.
>>
>> should be: "nothing more than"
>
>moron
ouch, that hurts coming from a lying dip shit such as yourself.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:10:28 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:55:22 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:15:10 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>chrisv wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> LOL! Maybe right after you "prove" to everyone that you're not
>> >>> actually using Windows 98, right?
>> >>
>> >>The only way to prove it would be to reveal what platform I'm
>> >>actually running.
>> >
>> >Yes, I realize that you have an excuse. You always have SOME excuse
>> >for just NOT "answering the damn question" when you bluff has been
>> >called.
>>
>> next, kulkis will drop the thread and pretend the conversation never
>> happened. he is nothing than a tired little punk who lies and tries
>> to intimidate.
>
>You lose.
actually, i just haven't won, yet.
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:13:15 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS PL wrote:
[snip]
> > Actually, IBM offered three OSes originally: MS-DOS, CP/M,
> > and one other- I think it was Xenix or something like that.
> >
>
> MS_DOS was low cost and the others were artificially high.
Presumably their makers throught they were worth it.
Can't think why.
[snip]
> > It was also so trivial that it bought Microsoft
> > very little. It was Windows that put MS where
> > they are now- but that is another story.
>
> It was having DOS chosen by IBM and the later per processor licenses
> that did it.
As I said, IBM offered three choices and MS-DOS was
the one consumers favored early on. But that didn't
matter much- had (say) CP/M won out, Microsoft
could still have persued their Windows strategy
by running Windows on CP/M.
Microsoft's volume discounts were no doubt helpful
in a general way later on, but hardly a primary factor.
OEMs, after all, had to be shipped volume before volume
discounts made any sense for them.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:12:04 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:55:47 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:15:10 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>chrisv wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> LOL! Maybe right after you "prove" to everyone that you're not
>> >>> actually using Windows 98, right?
>> >>
>> >>The only way to prove it would be to reveal what platform I'm
>> >>actually running.
>> >
>> >Yes, I realize that you have an excuse. You always have SOME excuse
>> >for just NOT "answering the damn question" when you bluff has been
>> >called.
>>
>> next, kulkis will drop the thread and pretend the conversation never
>> happened.
>
>You lose
>
>> he is nothing than a tired little punk who lies and tries
>> to intimidate.
>
>No, I'm an old war vet.
>
gee, a unix programmer, war vet, law enforcement officer, maritime
expert and a constitutional lawyer all rapped up in one foul little
slimy package.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:15:16 -0500
"pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > It's more than just number of users. There has to be a viable market as
> > well. Many software developers don't see the Linux market as viable
even
> > though it probably has enough users to otherwise make it so (if it were
a
> > closed source platform, like the Mac).
>
> What is a viable market? I am a developer and I DO see a viable market
> in the server space. I do think that the desktop space needs a lot more
> work for "average" users, but even now there is still a BIG market if
> you can find the right product.
Server space yes, and this is primarily where Linux is currently getting the
vast majority of its "shrink wrap" support.
Desktop still has yet to be seen. Companies like Eazel are not doing well,
while companies like Loki are barely getting by. "Breaking even" is not a
quality for a viable market. Profit is.
> > The reason is that Linux users are always screaming about price, and how
> > things are free. ISV's see this as "Nobody wants to pay for software,
and
> > I'm not going to write it for charity".
>
> Linux users DON'T talk about price - they talk about freedom.
Strange, but i've read hundreds of messages here bitching about the price of
Office, Windows, license consts, etc. Many Linux users *DO* talk about
price as their prime motivating factor.
> Most of us
> have wads of cash for the right products: hardware OR software. In fact
> for many users of Linux (such as in business networking) price is not
> even a consideration. But I do take the point that many companies are
> not well informed about this distinction and are put off by this. Many
> companies have a far too simplistic model of how to make money from open
> software and therefore just do not examine the potential or they even
> think that they _must_ produce open software.
There are very few companies in the Linux market that are even "breaking
even". Just recently, everyone cheered when Red Hat said they "effectively"
broke even, and Red Hat is the largest of the group. We've seen the
failures of non-german SuSE, Stormix, and many other Linux vendors.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:14:45 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:13:25 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 03:48:20 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >theRadical wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:43:17 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:10:20 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:27:59 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:26:20 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:49:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:31:15 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:06:25 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >the Democratic Party is a bunch of Marxists, who, knowing
>that using
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >the name Communists would be bad PR, engage in a campaign of
>deception
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >to get the populace of the country to vote for their own
>enslavement.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >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?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> i'm still waiting for you to show up to repossess my vehicle and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> explain your ridiculous theory that a ship captain is nothing more
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> that a paper pusher.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Spot the strawman arguments.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> strawman? you threatened to confiscate my car as part of you duties
>> >> >> >> >> >> as a law enforcement officer.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >Wrong on two counts.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >I said, by your logic, I should, as a government agent, be able
>> >> >> >> >> >to confiscate your car
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> wrong, you said you WERE a government agent
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Yes, I am.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> well then, show up and confiscate my vehicle asshole.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >That wouldn't be fun...you'd be expecting me.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Nah, it's much more fun to snatch it when you least expect it,
>> >> >> >and have made absolutely no provisions for alternative methods.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >You know...those alternative methods that you insist EVERYBODY ELSE
>> >> >> >should be using.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> you are nothing but a chicken shit usenet bully. why don't you quit
>> >> >> spewing your crap and shut the fuck up.
>> >> >
>> >> >So, in other words, when TheRaDICKal wants the government to steal
>> >> >everybody's self-defence tools, that's ok,
>> >>
>> >> i NEVER have advocated confiscation of weapons dick head.
>> >
>> >..but that's what you dream about every night, isn't it, fascist prick.
>>
>> not at all asshole. however, thanks for admitting that you lied about
>> me wanting to "steal everybody's self-defense tools." you make it
>> very easy to prove you are nothing but a lying sack of shit.
>
>You claimed that anyone who can't "prove" to your satisfaction that they
>need a weapon should have it confiscated.
i never said such a thing. you are lying. your conjecture is not
fact. otherwise, post the quote
right here --------->
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >but if the government
>> >> >wants to steal TheRaDICKal's car, that's a horrid crime.
>> >>
>> >> what government? i am waiting for you to show up and try to take my
>> >> car you lying piece of shit.
>> >>
>> >> talk about strawman.........
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Game
>> >> >Set
>> >> >Match.
>> >>
>> >> yeah, right.
------------------------------
From: Roy Omond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:18:46 +0100
Michael Lyle wrote:
[... snip snip ...]
> I never read much about the specifics of DECnet,
> so I can't comment, but I certainly felt that it was proprietary and
> far too complex.
Wow ! That's a really balanced and thoroughly logical conclusion.
You "never read much about the specifics of DECnet", but you still
felt that "it was proprietary and far too complex", despite admitting
that you "can't comment".
The mind doth boggle.
*sigh*
Roy Omond
Blue Bubble Ltd.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:21:46 -0500
"Peter Köhlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > It's more than just number of users. There has to be a viable market as
> > well. Many software developers don't see the Linux market as viable
> > even though it probably has enough users to otherwise make it so (if it
> > were a closed source platform, like the Mac).
> >
> > The reason is that Linux users are always screaming about price, and how
> > things are free. ISV's see this as "Nobody wants to pay for software,
> > and I'm not going to write it for charity".
>
> BS to the extreme.
> In the last 12 month I *bought* linux-software for more than 1500$,
> compared to just about 300$ for wintendo (for the kids).
> Give me the progs (and not this shit like office), and I will gladly pay
> for them if they are good.
Peter, do you *HONESTLY* think you are a typical Linux desktop user?
> Do you have *any* idea at all what tools like Kylix or JBuilder actually
> cost, Erik?
Yes. Kylix is $999 for the lowest-end product that can produce a non-GPL'd
program. And I am betting heavily that they don't sell much for a number of
reasons (First, a proprietary pascal language is not something most Linux
programmers are going to endorse. Second, its way too expensive, even for a
Windows product).
> Certainly not, otherwise you just would be trolling like our beloved
> SSH-guru Chad or our "mainframe expert" Jon Johanson.
Just because they are selling it for $1000, doesn't mean they're going to
make any money on it. Indeed, if they thought they could sell a lot of
units, they would charge much less. The Windows version of Delphi costs $89
for standard version and $499 for the professional version, both of which
can make commercial applications.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Reply-To: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:30:22 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
>
> Mr Stallman did not invent the concept, he just advocates something
> patterned after the operating procedures used with the PDP-1 at
> MIT about 1962 or so. Quite a bit before anything called "XMODEM"
> I would say.
while not '62 ... I worked with both HASP (starting mid '67) and CP/67
(starting 1/68) which had distributed source. I think that it was
between the june 23rd, 1969 announcement (where everything became
separately priced ... presumably, at least in part to various
gov. activities) and 370 that a lot more attention was paid to
software ownership (started seeing copyright statements in source and
then later in the '70s the big furor over "OCO" ... object-code-only
... debate that crops up in some newsgroups & mailing lists to this
day).
i believe early machines in the '50s may have had freely available
source ... but there would have been much less of it. One could
contend that gov. activities to make everything separately priced is
as much to do with the situation as anything else.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bye all. Wow the Linux scene has changed.
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:31:16 GMT
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Apart from you snide remarks, do you have any valid input into this
> discussion forum?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ROTFLMAO
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
