Linux-Advocacy Digest #361, Volume #35 Mon, 18 Jun 01 13:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Tuomo Takkula)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! ("Ayende
Rahien")
Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance (Rotten168)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (SSunbird)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ("Rich Soyack")
Re: Is Linux for me? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux on the Desktop ("Linux Man")
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (SSunbird)
Re: NT on Alpha stuff... (was Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!) (Bob Hauck)
Re: Is Linux for me? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (SSunbird)
Re: Is Linux for me? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: New BSD Advocacy site! ("Bracy")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tuomo Takkula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: 18 Jun 2001 17:57:07 +0200
Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tuomo Takkula wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, but from this side of the Atlantic, the USA resemble more a
> > third world country in many respects, than the 'top of the world'...
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tuomo
>
> How so?
Schools which spit out kids which can neither read nor write, the
medical system which has the highest per capita expenses on the planet
(eg. twice as high compared to the German per capita expenses), and
still manages to keep parts of the population out, the social system
which is partly nonexisting, the crime rate, the fact that any
Texanian idiot is allowed to shoot you if you happen to step on
`their` ground (which happens to be stolen from the native
population), the fact that you might get rejected at the border w/o
any possibility of appeal just because the officer didn't like your
face, colour or whatever,... do I need to go on?
Seriously, if you step back and and consider the States just from the
news and how they treat their own population and other people, then
they are at times in an equivalence class with the worst war zone of
the planet or some corrupt dictatorship. At the same time the States
also provide everything and more for anyone who has enough money to
buy it, but then again, this is also the case in any banana republic.
I do not claim that the news show the whole picture (they certainly
don't) or that everything is allright in Europe (it certainly isn't,
and as far as for instance the medical system in Sweden is concerned,
it sucks), but certain things that happen in America do make me
concerned. These don't fit into the picture of a highly industrialized
democratic country with a working education system, administration,
justice and executive system.
Again, we do have problems in Europe, but I'd claim that there is a
certain eagerness to address these, whereas in the States very often
the laissez-faire principle is prevalent, or hide behind a
misunderstood and distorted freedom.
If you don't know what I mean, then ask yourself: can you name areas
in the States which you would not enter at, say, 3 o'clock in the
morning? Do you haev a problem with that? Do you think such areas
should exist?
I cannot name any such place in Scandinavia.
Best regards
Tuomo Takkula
PS. Just for the record: I live in Sweden, more precisely in
Gothenburg. We just experienced Sweden's worst riots, during the
European Union summit last weekend. The police is now thinking of
buying water cannons -- they didn't have any since the sixties...
___
"Microsoft OS's are good because they encourage Intel to produce
faster CPUs for the rest of us to run Unix on."
George Dau
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:35:39 +0200
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9gklgr$sv3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> >>
> >>Windows does not and will not *ever* equal 'car' or 'telephone'!
> >
> > What a idiot.
> >
> > The concept was that it is a tool, like a car and telephone.
> >
> > Your brain must be too small to understand simple concepts.
>
> You're the one with the undersized brain.
>
> car, telephone ---> single use tool
Car is a multi use tool, you drive in it, takes stuff in it, kill with it,
all sorts of things.
> computer ---> multi use tool
>
> The computer can do thousands more jobs than a car ot telephone and as
> such is a very different device.
>
> Comprende?
To how much uses the average users put his computer?
------------------------------
From: Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:08:25 GMT
Thaddius Maximus wrote:
>
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "Thaddius Maximus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Thaddius Maximus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Rotten168 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thaddius Maximus wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Edward Rosten wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > *sigh* Obviously for you the devil is in the details. Please
> > > > > > > > > read the following over and over and over until it sinks in.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *huff*
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.chrononhotonthologos.com/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm
> > > > > > > > > http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2000/tst121200.htm
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Our elected representatives make decisions for the people based
> > on
> > > > what
> > > > > > > > > they believe is in our best interest (republic), they do not tally
> > up
> > > > > > > > > our opinion on each matter and then decide accordingly
> > (democracy).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes: I didn't say it was a democracy...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As for your statement that we "democratically elect the
> > > > > > > > > representatives," I have no idea what that means. We do elect
> > > > > > > > > representatives.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ...it is a *representative* democracy.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You vote for representatives. This part is a democratic process. the
> > > > > > > > representatives are selected in a democratic manner.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You DEMOCRATICALLY select people to represent you. They are then
> > free to
> > > > > > > > pass laws within certain limits, but not based of further
> > referendum.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That is what a *REPRSENTATIVE* democracy is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As you can probably see a country (eg the US) can be both a republic
> > and
> > > > > > > > a *representative* democracy at the SAME time.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Just because it is not written in the constitution, does not make it
> > > > > > > > false.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Ed
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ed, Ed, Ed.... *sigh* In a "representative democracy" the people
> > exercise
> > > > > > > sovereign power through their representatives. WE DON'T HAVE THAT
> > HERE
> > > > > > > IN THE USA!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We don't? So why am I casting votes for representation then?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Look, in a represenative democracy the people exercise sovereign
> > > > > power THROUGH a represenative.
> > > > >
> > > > > In a republic the people delegate their sovereign power to a
> > > > > represenative.
> > > >
> > > > Says who?
> > > >
> > >
> > > The US Constitution. Representatives vote on bills with our
> > > best interest in mind.
> >
> > As opposed to a Representative Democracy where the representatives...?
> >
>
> We have a representative government which is a Republican
> government. Why is it that as soon as you see the word
> representative, you have to tag the word democracy to it?
>
> "Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of
> sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the
> people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by
> the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated."
>
> Please read the Federalists Papers #10.
You didn't answer his question.
--
- Brent
"General Veer, prepare your underpants for ground assault."
- Darth Vader
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: SSunbird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:04:39 -0500
Rich Soyack wrote:
> Ah yes. 20 years of research and this is what you think they've come up
> with?
failure to use protection when you should is simply stupid. so i guess
my point is if you're safe it matters a whole lot less what kind of
acts you're participating in.
sometimes it takes a "duh" for people to get it though.
ssunbird, all that research and people still don't listen to the single
most important result
(you-know-who:try not to spit your coffee)
------------------------------
From: "Rich Soyack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:16:35 GMT
"SSunbird" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Rich Soyack wrote:
>
> > Ah yes. 20 years of research and this is what you think they've come up
> > with?
>
> failure to use protection when you should is simply stupid. so i guess
> my point is if you're safe it matters a whole lot less what kind of
> acts you're participating in.
>
> sometimes it takes a "duh" for people to get it though.
>
> ssunbird, all that research and people still don't listen to the single
> most important result
>
> (you-know-who:try not to spit your coffee)
When one asks sensible questions about AIDS all one gets is dogma.
Rich Soyack
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Is Linux for me?
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:21:33 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jack Tripper
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 16 Jun 2001 17:00:03 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 20:42:23 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jack Tripper
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>>on Sat, 16 Jun 2001 14:16:06 -0500
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>
>>>>>I don't mind reformatting the whole
>>>>>hard drive,
>>>>
>>>>I wouldn't bother doing that just yet.
>>>
>>>I've been reading up a bit on disk partitioning and apparently it
>>>*does* involve erasing all my programs? Don't I have to reformat the
>>>whole hd anyway, to ge the partition? Or, is it simply a matter of
>>>creating the space (yeah, and I meant 8.4 MEGS) and partitioning it?
>>>I'm very confused. From reading all your comments it's obvious that
>>>because of my limited UNIX experience I shouldn't put all my eggs in
>>>one basket.
>>>Thanks for all your help! And what I meant with all that GUI HTML
>>>interface stuff was a program like netscape composer, editors for
>>>making web pages.
>>
>>To (hopefully) clarify the partition issue.
>>
>
>I just wanted to say, thank you Mr. Ghost In The Machine, for typing
>all this out for me. I'm going to try to digest it, surf around on
>google for some FAQs and stuff, and hopefully when I post again on
>this matter I won't be so ill-informed.
>btw - is "Ghost In The Machine" a Police ref or the actual Koestler
>book ref? Both are excellent!
Not sure how to answer that; it sounded good at the time. :-)
But yes, there's a lot going on that may elude the casual user;
most users have 1 disk, 1 partition, 1 OS, and that's about it.
But add Linux and things get interesting. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 2d:07h:14m actually running Linux.
Does this message really exist? Where?
------------------------------
From: "Linux Man" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux on the Desktop
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 09:38:46 -0700
Outlook (not free but can work with Exchange)
http://www.bynari.net/Products/TradeXCH/body_tradexch.html
In article <9gl7bv$ola$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "tom"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still use windows for MS Office, because well it is a damn good suite
> of software.(well Outlook and Word are anyhow, theres plenty of crap in
> their too but adding plenty of crap is Microsofts Motto it seems) . I
> think as a server linux kicks ass. But are their good alternatives to
> Outlook and Word on Linux? (I guess are there arent too many good
> alternatives on Windows too).
>
> a variation of Linux is still the server of choice.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: SSunbird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:28:42 -0500
Ed Cogburn wrote:
> Pay attention idiot, having sex with multiple partners is the same as
> having sex with everyone *your* partners have had sex with, and everyone
> whose had sex with your partners' partners' partners. That is not close
> to linear, its exponential.
adding another partner does NOT have an exponential effect on
your total exposure. duh.
let's say partner #1 has been with 10 people, and each of those has been
with 10, and each of those 10, etc....this is an exponential function.
but adding another person that has also been with and has the same
order of fan out would simply add one more contact where an existing
one is. this would, given identical population trees, double the
contact number exactly.
ssunbird
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT on Alpha stuff... (was Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!)
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:38:26 GMT
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 21:07:06 -0700, Stephen S. Edwards II
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 11:11:00 -0700, Stephen S. Edwards II
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > How exactly? Just because people were not purchasing
>> > Alpha, PPC, or MIPS boxen to run WindowsNT because
>> > they were way overpriced, and not significantly any
>> > more powerful than modern ix86 boxen?
>>
>> For some things they _are_ significantly more powerful than x86. They
>More accurately, they _were_ significantly more powerful,
>but the line was pretty much wiped up once the Pentium
>IIs and IIIs came out.
No, they _are_ more powerful. Pentium II's and III's do not have a 64-bit
address space for user processes. This can be very useful for enterprise
applications like data mining. Why do you suppose people buy SPARC and
PA-RISC? The same reasons apply to Alpha.
Yeah, the volumes are small, but the prices are large.
>> also had better SMP capability for a long while. People _did_ and _do_
>> buy them, but not with Windows, because Windows on Alpha is still a
>> 32-bit operating system even though the chip is a 64-bit chip. By
>
>More accurately, WindowsNT boots with the ARC firmware,
>as opposed to the SRM firmware.
IOW, it treats a 64-bit CPU as if it were a 32-bit one. I don't care what
the name of the firmware is or all the details about how you boot it, that's
all irrelevant. The bottom line is that NT on Alpha is limited compared to
the alternatives. The alternatives _do_ sell and _do_ make money for
Compaq. NT on Alpha is much deader than the Alpha itself and the reason is
the lack of 64-bit support.
>The point is, even though WindowsNT still ran in 32-bit
>mode, it could take advantage of some of the features
>of Alpha hardware at the time, but not to an extent that
>the same version of NT running on ix86 boxen would be
>shown to be so inept.
Do you think that maybe if it ran in 64-bit mode it could do things that are
difficult or impossible on x86? Things like mmap()-ing large databases,
that would make x86 look "inept"? The fact that NT can't do something even
though the CPU can is an argument against using NT, not against the CPU.
And that's what the customers noticed too. So they bought Tru64 instead.
>3D animation is one of the common apps I've seen NT on
>Alpha used for.
But there are other applications outside of your little world. The 64-bit
address space is a big advantage for some...or do you think Intel is wasting
their time with Itanium? All of Intel's major competitors already offer a
64-bit CPU, and their are operating systems for all of them.
>If it was a money maker, don't you think they would jump on it in a flash?
I have no idea. There seem to be complicated motivations behind a lot of
what MS does that I don't pretend to understand. However, if it were
trivially easy, then I'm pretty sure they would have done it just to be able
to trumpet their "64-bit enterprise-class operating system".
The market that Alpha sells into is quite unlike MS's traditional ones. And
since they couldn't make a competitive offering by just "tweaking" their
high volume product, they probably did not think it was worth it. IOW,
a full 64-bit port was too hard for the money they thought they'd make. I
think this argues against such a port being trivial.
>A true 64-bit WindowsNT would be very cool, but at
>this time, it would be a lot of work all for not.
All of the enterprise-class operating systems are 64-bit. AIX, Solaris,
HP-UX, etc. Intel and AMD are moving into 64-bit chips now. MS wants to go
after the enterprise market, yet they have no 64-bit port of NT. That says
to me that doing one is harder than you think it is. If it were easy they
would have done it for Datacenter, which sells in small volumes at high
prices into enterprise accounts. Just like Alpha and the other RISC chips.
>> It bombed because it did not take advantage of the Alpha systems like
>> OpenVMS and Tru64 Unix and Linux did (and do). If you want to run
>
>This is true to an extent. But do you know why WindowsNT
>had this limitation in the first place?
I don't care why they _started_ the way they did. After more than 30
million lines of code are under the bridge, I'm sure that a lot of changes
have been made. Linux started as a 386-only OS, yet _it_ runs on a number
of 64-bit chips.
>> There was a 2 GB RAM limit on the original NT, even on Intel. It was
>
>Again, because of MIPS. In fact, WindowsNT was
>originally implemented on MIPS processors.
So howcome Linux and Solaris manage to take full advantage of whatever
processor architecture they run on? On some platforms, they have a 32-bit
address space, on others they are 64-bit. Why couldn't MS do this?
If they designed it so that it could only be "lowest common denominator",
then that is Microsoft's fault, not MIPs'.
>> done that way so the kernel could directly map all of RAM into the
>> kernel's reseved space. This simplified various kernel tasks. Linux
>
>No, it was done that way, because MIPS was the
>very first chip that NT was implemented on.
Why did MIPS do it that way? For the reason I gave. Why did MS keep that
limit on Intel? Because it was convenient. There's no law of nature that
says they couldn't do it differently on different architectures. Other
operating systems manage that.
>> BTW, the longer they go _without_ an Alpha or PPC port, then harder it
>> will be to create one in the future. The reason is that without there
>> being an active port, there is no reason not to put in "x86-ism's" that
>
>Again, the 32-bit limitation was not an "x86ism". It
>was a "MIPSism".
You misunderstood. I was talking about things like the "large memory"
support on Intel. New stuff (like the 30 million lines of new code in W2K)
that is added for Intel can end up making the whole thing less portable if
it isn't tested on other platforms. Just because marketing says it is
"designed to be portable" doesn't mean it is. If it hasn't been ported, you
don't really know how portable it is, and the longer you go and the more
stuff you add before the next port, the more likely it is that you will run
into serious problems when you _do_ port it.
>They have the manpower, and the money. They can
>pretty much do what they damn well please with
>the code. Why is that so far-fetched?
Oh, I don't doubt that they can and eventually will make a 64-bit NT. I
just doubt that it is a trivially easy thing like you and Chad seem to
believe. If it were so easy, they would have done it, if only for marketing
reasons.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Is Linux for me?
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:38:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Terry Porter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 17 Jun 2001 07:57:37 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On 16 Jun 2001 23:55:29 -0700, /p@ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jack says...
>>
>>> I mostly like
>>>to use my computer for internet stuff - writing web pages, random
>>>surfing, email, stuff like that. I also use it for mp3s.
>>>
>>
>> Linux is a good OS and stable. But for what you want to use the PC
>> for, I recommend windows.
>
>Nope, Windows is virii infested, expensive, and you need to constantly
>upgrade.
Win2k is expensive, but not unreasonable. However, it's also
a resource hog; it's far from clear that it can outmaneuver Linux
in that regard. (Linux is a bit cheaper, too.)
>
>>
>> Windows IE is a much better browser.
>
>Crap, its a matterof personal prefference.
>
>> There is more support for windows
>> on the web,
>
>????????
/p- is correct AFAIK; many websites are IE-only. They have difficulties
if browed by any other browser. (One wonders whose fault that is.)
>
>> and I found that browsing using windows and IE is much more
>> pleasent that Linux/Netscape.
>
>Netscape sucks, but Linux/Mozilla rules.
Mozilla has its own problems, like lack of a Java runtime environment.
(Unless they've fixed that by now. Would be nice if they could
hook in an existing java into the browser, somewhat like IE.)
And yes, Netscape has problems.
>
>>
>> Now if you want a server, then I say Linux is the better choice.
>
>I say use your Linux box for both, as Linux serves and workstations
>and doesnt raise a sweat.
I'm not sure if "workstation" is a good term for this; "workstation"
implies someone actually has to do work in order to get it to work.
Perhaps "productivity station" might be a better description of a
Linux box. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random political correctness here
EAC code #191 3d:16h:40m actually running Linux.
Does this message really exist? Where?
------------------------------
From: SSunbird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:30:06 -0500
jet wrote:
> What do you have against 12 year olds?
interesting you should bring that up. someone accused my son of acting
like a 15 year old on the net. in four years, he'll catch up to that.
ssunbird
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Is Linux for me?
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:44:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ian Pegel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:03:02 +0100
<9gir9q$7r0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>> Vi is the only HTML editor anyone ever needs...
>
>Come on! I could cut my lawn with a pair of scissors but I choose not to.
>Just because you can do something the hard way...
Editing a complicated webpage using VI can be characterized as such.
However, there are other tools available; apart from the move obvious
ones such as DreamWeaver and Netscape's Composer, one can also pass
the HTML text through various reformatters, if ones reasonably good
with Perl. With XHTML one can even pass it through an XML parser
and do all sorts of manipulations -- however, I don't know offhand how
many browsers support XHTML. (Of course, it's fairly trivial to
convert from XHTML to HTML, as far as I know.)
My main problem with editing HTML is keeping all of the table tags
straight, if one has tables-within-tables.
>
>Ian
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 3d:16h:59m actually running Linux.
[select one]
Most advice is free. Sometimes, it's worth it.
Life's getting too complicated, even listening to the radio.
This is my other .sig.
Life's getting too complicated, even listening to the radio.
Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
No electrons were harmed during this message.
Does this message really exist? Where?
No protons were harmed during this message.
------------------------------
From: "Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New BSD Advocacy site!
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:32:13 GMT
In article <9gl7tb$g9v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Bracy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <9gkd87$8lg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>
>
>>> I see you dont actually work with either one.
>
>> I see you don't bother to read message headers.
>
> I said "work", dipshit, I didnt say "play with".
Oh, I see.... unless I have a foul mouth and engage in personal
insults, I'm only playing around? Maybe I should tell my boss
to "f--- off" so that he'll know that I'm working.
"Work" with yourself.
Is that better?
Bracy
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
