Linux-Advocacy Digest #7, Volume #34 Sat, 28 Apr 01 01:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product ("JS PL")
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Terry Porter)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Chris Morgan)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Matt Kennel)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Another example of Microsoft not living in the real world: ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Communism (Gunner ©)
Re: Unwelcome changes in Linux advocacy. (Brent R)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 04:11:07 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Les Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 19 Apr 2001 05:14:45
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [...]
> >> No, you thought I couldn't; I knew I couldn't, and we both knew that I
> >> wouldn't. Stop playing troll-games, you little prick.
> >
> >I can play just as long as you can. And I'm not little.
>
> I don't play troll games, Les, because I'm not a prick.
Then what do you call your months of content-free postings touting
a bizarre opinion with no facts to support it?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 00:12:42 -0400
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 26 Apr 2001 23:57:08 -0500, Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:9c6rsi$j17$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Chad Everett wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Bingo buddy! Exactly correct. Windows 2K Pro is crappy.
> >> >
> >> > If only I could afford the damned thing to find out. I imagine
there's
> >> > some illegal iso's of Win 2K out there on the web, though.
> >>
> >> There is a perfectly legal trial version.
> >> If you can't afford it (I think it's 5$), then you've other problems.
> >
> >He runs Linux - he can't afford a haircut - what makes you think he could
> >afford real software?
> >
> >Remember - linux is free if your time is worth nothing.
> >
> >
>
> Remember Windows costs money, you'll have to buy additional software to
> make Windows even functional, and you'll have to spend even more money
> in the form of time after that, unless your time is worth nothing.
Last time I checked wasn't it supposed to be a no-no to add any additional
functionality whatsoever to the Windows OS? Even when MS decides to add the
slightest bit of additional functionality such as an application which
enables one click retrival and/or rendering of files from remote file
servers they tend to get sued for harming their consumers with such
horrendous actions! The shit will really hit the fan when everyone finds out
they've added CD writing to XP and Adaptec sales take a nosedive.
BTW - that is the ultimate Linux tag line! Those ten little words nearly sum
it all up! "Remember - linux is free if your time is worth nothing." They
way I see it, over the past couple years, I'm down about $1000.00 just
trying to "startx".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 28 Apr 2001 04:14:53 GMT
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:16:45 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>>>> What FUD is that Terry?
>> Pete .... come on mate, I was drinking coffee and it could be all over my
>> screen ...
>
> C'mon Terry, put up, or shut up. Where's the FUD I'm supposed to have
> posted?
No supposed to, have.
FUD, means 'Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt'
.
And you Pete Goodwin,specialise in spreading FUD.
Very little you try with Linux works, while the *same* things work for us.
Your continual posts stating what doesnt work, together with your history
of ignoring advice (you have even said you *don't* want advice) makes you
a FUDmeister.
Like it or lump it.
>
>>>> Please point out ANY posts I've made that are (i) untrue (ii) lies (iii)
>>>> etc. You'll have a hard time.
>> The cleverest lie of all, is one that contains some truth.
>
> How about some _evidence_?
This is COLA, evidence is not required. No one has asked you to *prove*
that the things you claim don't work, are factual.
>
>> Pete also claims that he has had no success doing things that most of us
>> here, found to be no brainers, things that worked first time.
>
> Like what Terry? Got any examples?
No Pete, I don't keep a database of your posts, so I rely on my memory.
You'll just have to trust me :)
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 28 Apr 2001 00:16:23 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Molitor) writes:
> One of the larger troubles TCP/IP has is its routing, which
> isn't scalable in any reasonable sense.
[MAJOR SNIP]
> On the other hand, I am not personally aware of a network that
> scales better, except for the telephone network,
[MAJOR SNIP]
With respect, this strikes me as unintentionally comical. As far as
you know, it's the second best system in the world at routing scaling,
yet routing scaling is one of its major problems?
This classic paper puts my view rather more eloquently than I can
http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html
Of course the reader may side with Richard Gabriel which I think is
what he wanted , but I side with the belittled "New Jersey" approach.
Chris
--
Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net> http://www.mihalis.net
Temp sig. - Enquire within
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 04:18:53 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Yet, on a software project, the implementation details are not
> >dependent on the API almost at all.
>
> So any random arrangement of code will support any API you imagine?
> Somehow, this doesn't seem like its going to work.
Consider the unix API for file, device, and stream i/o:
open()
read()
write()
lseek()
ioctl()
These cover just about anything any program might need to do
to any device or file, and except for the device-specific things
passed through ioctl() the program doesn't need to change or
even know when wildly different devices are involved.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 04:34:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Molitor) writes:
>
>> One of the larger troubles TCP/IP has is its routing, which
>> isn't scalable in any reasonable sense.
>
>[MAJOR SNIP]
>
>> On the other hand, I am not personally aware of a network that
>> scales better, except for the telephone network,
>
>[MAJOR SNIP]
>
>With respect, this strikes me as unintentionally comical. As far as
>you know, it's the second best system in the world at routing scaling,
>yet routing scaling is one of its major problems?
Yup.
Just because you know the problem doesn't mean you know
what the answer is ;) The chaps building rockets to go to the moon
knew the problems, but not the solutions, for a while.
Actually, I do know some answers to making routing scale,
but they have the disadvantage of being theoretical. See any comments
made by Noel Chiappa on any of several mailing lists during the
time IPv6 was being botched.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 04:46:00 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On 16 Apr 2001 23:39:14 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:Regardless of them taking a while in coming, what is the connection to
:wine and bread?
:
:Exodus 24:8 And Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said,
:"This is the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you according
:to all these words."
:
:Apparently the "blood of the covenant" was not meant to be drunk, but
:sprinkled?
:The blood of the first covenant is simply blood. Why did Jesus use wine?
Everything makes sense if you remember that he was Jewish and said
this at a Pesach(passover) Seder meal, which has rites and stories
with ritual wine, unleavened bread (matzah) and flesh (lamb).
(Actual sacrifices were done in the Temple, later destroyed by the Romans.)
Drops of wine are taken from the cup to the plate, each to commemorate
the plagues applied to Egypt and the Pharoah, so there is some 'sprinkling'
there.
:Isn't Jesus actually saying that he is the sacrificial lamb, and then the
:blood of the new covenant actually *is* his blood, or represents his
:blood? In that case, isn't my simple "is my blood" actually right?
Since the lamb's blood was to mark the houses of those who would be
passed over upon the 10th plague, the analogy of blood to represent
protection from wrath is clear.
But of course the wine was meant to be drunk (you are required to
drink 4 cups) as part of the joy of release.
:Roberto Alsina
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 04:48:20 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >Count the examples of products that offered competition to the
> >developing monopoly that contained free-but-not-GPL'd code
> >(Sun's products for example). Now count the ones that contained
> >GPL'd code and compare them.
>
> Why? Sun was getting its ass kicked for more than a decade by MS
> shenanigans.
Would it have done better or worse without a network protocol
that interoperated with a large number of other vendors' products
and a set of applications that worked identically across platforms?
> Now that Linux is the most popular non-monopoly OS around,
> you're going to claim that their obviously capitalist use of non-GPL
> software somehow casts doubts on GPL?
Yes, 'now' is way too late to have had any effect at preventing a
monopoly, and the GPL prevented many possible competitive
uses of the covered code.
> Again, you're simply arguing that
> it is somehow better for 'production' of software, but the only
> 'examples' you can provide by way of gedanken experiments to prove your
> theory is the use of more commercially exploitable licenses to promote
> commercial sales.
I keep pointing out the very real example of BSD TCP/IP and you
are the one pretending that it doesn't clearly demonstrate the advantage
of allowing vendors to provide competing variations of a freely
available reference version.
> Forgetting, again, that, yes, commercial sale of
> licenses is precisely what the GPL is INTENDED to accomplish.
You are imagining things again.
> The
> "products that offered competition to the []* monopoly" that are non-GPL
> (regardless of any other putative feature of their license**) might very
> well ALWAYS outnumber the GPL codebases, since there is need for only
> one GPL codebase to begin with, and it lends itself to services more
> than products, by design, again.
Yes, but I prefer products that work over ones that need service all the
time.
> >Let me know if you actually come up with an example where you
> >think GPL'd code was used in something that could have prevented
> >the monopoly from developing. I can't think of a single one.
>
> Actually, you've already cited dozens yourself, I would say, by claiming
> that BSD availability of fundamentally important codebases (any Internet
> protocol, for starters) DIDN'T contribute to the development of the
> monopoly.
Dozens of what?
> No code no matter how designed could have "prevented the monopoly from
> developing" to begin with, this is a fantasy which you have but I don't
> share. The 'development'* of the monopoly is not a matter of software
> and code, it is effected by anti-competitive strategies quite distinct
> from any technical or commercial merit of the product itself.
Yes, but the anti-competitive strategies revolved around specific
products and worked only because there were no equal or lower
cost equivalents to provide competition. The GPL had a hand
in preventing existing code from being used in competitive ways.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another example of Microsoft not living in the real world:
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 00:05:18 -0500
"Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Me thinks this is an advertising ploy from Microsoft. For sure Itanium
> > ain't
> >> going to be on the average desktop. In fact it will be promoted for the
> > high
> >> performance server market. 1GB is nothing on such servers these days.
> >> The 1GB requirement is to show this is for a real power system. Of
> >> course I could be completely wrong and Microsoft are admitting just how
> >> crappy
> > their
> >> OS is and that 2GB will be a minimum requirement just to get the thing
> >> ticking over. Surely Microsoft aren't that crap? :-)
> >
> > Not only that, but 1GB of memory costs about $200.
> >
> > If you want ECC, it's about $500. Not a big deal for anyone running a
> > big server.
>
> Ever hear of the phrase "it's the principal of the matter"?
If it were the principle (not principal) of the matter, then Linux wouldn't
even exist, since it would need to have been written completely in assembly
language to make it the most efficient piece of software on the planet.
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 22:06:13 -0700
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:44:29 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Mathew wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>
>> > "Gunner ©" 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.
>>
>> This is illegal,I hope you know.
What is the fact its illegal have to do with it? Attempting to destroy
the Constitution is illegal as well..but I see cases of it ever day on
the net. Besides.. I can make you sign a waiver that says you are
undergoing every bit of it voluntarily. <EG> Wanna bet you wont sign?
Gunner
>>
>
>Get a grip, fascist wanna-be.
>
>> >
>> > Weenie wouldn't dare show his face in Detroit.
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Gunner
>> > >
>> > > ""The greatest evil is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and
>minuted)
>> > > in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices...like the
>> > > bureaucracy of a police state or a thoroughly nasty business concern."
>> > > C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Aaron R. Kulkis
>> > Unix Systems Engineer
--
"Confronting Liberals with the facts of reality is very much akin to
clubbing baby seals. It gets boring after a while, but because Liberals are
so stupid it is easy work." Steven M. Barry
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Unwelcome changes in Linux advocacy.
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 05:09:55 GMT
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 14:21:35 +0100, pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> pip wrote:
> >> > We are not living in the dark ages. I had hoped we had progressed in our
> >> > thinking.
> >>
> >> And this backs your claim that punishing malefactors = "running out
> >> of rational arguments against their conduct" how, exactly?
> >
> >The only punishment that is given is the damage to the reputation of the
> >Linux community. If that is rational then I am not.
>
> The majority of foul-mouth, insulting posters in COLA are actually
> Windows users, paid by Microsoft to do so. Microsoft hopes that
> by making linux advocates look as bad as possible, they can
> turn others genuinely inquiring into Linux or curious about
> Linux advocacy away. Just as Balmer claims that Linux is
> anti-capitalist and un-American, the foul mouth, insulting
> posters on COLA want to make Linux advocates look anti-social and
> deviant.
Please tell me you're joking, you don't really believe this right?
I would love to be paid my Microsoft to flame on USENET (to flame *any*
position). What could be funner than that, besides being allowed to
count Bill Gates' money... unsupervised of course.
> Don't confuse real, actual Linux users with COLA posters. Most
> professed advocates in COLA are actually Windows users....and
> they know who they are.
Oh God... don't even go there.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
