Re: Yet Another Tech Industry Whore-Out: Mozilla

[chrisv]

Red Blade wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Jul 2013 18:37:08 -0700, Snit wrote:

*plonk*

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: RMS rewriting history (rewriting book about himself)

[chrisv]

"Alexander Terekhov"  wrote 
news:4dc9823f.c91f6...@web.de...

Original:

http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch09.html

"Mark Fischer, a Boston attorney specializing in intellectual-property
law, recalls discussing the license with Stallman during this period.
"Richard had very strong views about how it should work," Fischer says,
"He had two principles. The first was to make the software absolutely as
open as possible. The second was to encourage others to adopt the same
licensing practices."

Encouraging others to adopt the same licensing practices meant closing
off the escape hatch that had allowed privately owned versions of Emacs
to emerge. To close that escape hatch, Stallman and his free software
colleagues came up with a solution: users would be free to modify GNU
Emacs just so long as they published their modifications. In addition,
the resulting "derivative" works would also have carry the same GNU
Emacs License.

The revolutionary nature of this final condition would take a while to
sink in. At the time, Fischer says, he simply viewed the GNU Emacs
License as a simple contract. It put a price tag on GNU Emacs' use.
Instead of money, Stallman was charging users access to their own later
modifications. That said, Fischer does remember the contract terms as
unique."

New version:

http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/faif-2.0.pdf

"Mark Fischer, a Boston copyright attorney who initially provided
Stallman's legal advice, recalls discussing the license with Stallman
during this period. "Richard had very strong views about how it should
work," Fischer says, "He had two principles. The first was to make the
software absolutely as open as possible." (By the time he said this,
Fischer seems to have been inuenced by open source supporters; Stallman
never sought to make software "open.") "The second was to encourage
others to adopt the same licensing practices."

The requirements in the license were designed for the second goal. The
revolutionary nature of this final condition would take a while to sink
in. At the time, Fischer says, he simply viewed the GNU Emacs license as
a simple trade. It put a price tag on GNU Emacs' use. Instead of money,
Stallman was charging users access to their own later modifications.
That said, Fischer does remember the license terms as unique."



regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)



RMS is a loser, a fscking filthy POS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ 



















































___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>On 4/13/2010 9:37 AM, RJack wrote:
>
>> The plaintiffs are required to make available with specificity (i.e.
>> non-moving target) the registered version (v. 0.60.3) of the BusyBox
>> source code used to create the binary which they allege is copied and
>> distributed, not the source code to some other BusyBox version.

What kind of a stupid POS would one have to be, to claim, as "RJack"
does above, that one can take, for free, a bunch of copyrighted
software, use it as the basis of your product, then being required
only to make redunantly available the original bunch of of software
that you took (which, obviously, was *already* available from wherever
it was taken).

An *incredibly* stupid POS, IMO...

>No, that is false. The defendants are required to make available the
>source to the version of BusyBox which they copy and distribute.

I wonder what the anti-GPL cranks are being paid to make public
jackasses of themselves on these issues.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>On 4/10/2010 9:32 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, like
>> "Not Found
>> The requested document was not found on this server.
>
>The links are working once more.



Indeed they are.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>On 4/8/2010 3:18 PM, RJack wrote:
>> Post a verifiable settlement agreement or
>> admit the SFLC cut and ran.
>
>It is not necessary to "post a verifiable settlement agreement"
>and it is probably impossible to do so, since settlements are
>often kept private. It is only necessary to see that the SFLC
>demands compliance with the GPL, and that such compliance exists
>once the suit ends. That will be true of Comtrend once they get
>their broken links fixed, just as it has been true with every
>other defendant with whom the SFLC has settled.

Odd.  I tried the top one myself, yesterday, and it worked fine.
Today, it's not.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL misappropriation

[chrisv]

Peter Köhlmann wrote:

>Hadron quacked:
>
>> David Kastrup  writes:
>> 
>>> Alexander Terekhov  writes:

 Meaning that material originally licensed under the BSDL must remain
 licensed under the BSDL (with just a few restrictions imposed on
 binary-only form) and not hijacked by the GPL retards, you moron
 Hyman.
>>>
>>> Seems like you don't understand the difference between copyleft and
>>> weak permissive licenses.
>> 
>> Wasn't it you who claimed all this was really easy to understand? And
>> yet months later you're still here fighting bitterly 

Hey, you stupid asshole.  Fsckhead trolls, like "Alexander Terekhov",
who pretend not to understand something are not evidence that it is
difficult to understand.  *Obviously*

You just made a fscking jackass of yourself *again*, "Hadron"!

>Fighting bitterly? Really?
>
>Against the likes of Alexander there simply is no "fight"
>
>Cretins like him would not understand something as simple as "1+1 = 2"
>
>Do you actually claim that bullshitters like Alexander or "RJack" have 
>anything of value to add?
>Do you actually claim that those cretins are not oxygen thieves?

Of course "Hadron" will support the anti-GPL cranks.  They are on
"Hadron's" side of being pro-Micro$oft and anti-FOSS.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Mining the Blogosphere

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

>> One poster to these news groups, amicus curious, aptly pointed out
>> that the SFLC was probably going to be able to walk away with
>> propaganda "victories" through voluntary dismissals until some company
>> found it financially worthwhile to end the SFLC's legal charades. It
>> appears that circumstance is well nigh at hand.
>
>It's not like you would tire sounding that trumpet of doom.  After a few
>years of that, the excitement wears off a bit.

"Amicus curious", also known as "rat", is a pathological liar and is
an unabashed supporter of the Microsoft Corporation.

-- 
"Well, to tell the truth, I would be one of the first to sign up as a
Bill Gates fan if there were a club being formed."  -  Rat
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: The SFLC dismissals should be coming soon

[chrisv]

> rat wrote:
>>
>> Depending on your view of the whole thing, they are either

Maybe rats are only capable of seeing those two views, but those of us
who are not rats interpret the situation differently.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>On 2/11/2010 3:14 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>>
>> The GPL seeks to deny creators of contributions forming derivative work
>> their copyright ownership in the sense that contributors are purportedly
>> impeded to license their copyright as they see fit and should use the
>> GPL and only the GPL instead.
>
>This is generally correct. Since those creators of derivative
>works do not have the right to create them without permission
>of the rights holders, caviling at the restrictions is pointless.
>The restrictions are known, and if they are not acceptable to the
>author who wishes to create a derivative work, then he should not
>create that work.

Man, you have the patience of a saint, dealing with these
mental-midget trolling assholes "Alexander Terekhov" and "RJack".

The "Alexander" POS actually claims that someone becomes a co-author
of something when they "agree and intend to do so", without needing
the agreement of the original author(s) - that they then obtain
legal/copyright authority over the entire work, equal to the original
author(s), in spite of the original aouthor(s) wishes and the fact
that the original work is copyrighted and released under the GPL.

I wonder how the fsckwit "Alexander" would feel if I claimed
co-ownership of his house, because I "agree and intend to do so" and
"contribute" by planting a tree in the yard, regardless of what he
wants.  Maybe I should then be able to sell, or give, rights to the
house to Microsoft!  Fsck the rights of the originator!

Sheesh!

I mean, what the HELL is so hard about the GPL and the concept of "if
you don't like the terms, DON'T USE THE CODE".

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>On 2/11/2010 2:21 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>>
>> Why didn't Erik Andersen fork the busybox to create his
> > own non-joint version of busybox?
>
>As far as I understand, he made changes to BusyBox to
>produce a new version. "Fork" would imply that he was
>making a version separate from one undergoing development
>by someone else. I do not know the history of BusyBox well
>enough to say if this was the case, but I would suspect
>that it wasn't.
>
>There is no joint copyright version of BusyBox, so asking
>why he did not create his own non-joint version makes an
>untrue implication.
>
>> They "agree and intend to do so" by posting contributions
>> to joint work projects like busybox

Good gravy, what a ludicrous claim.  You are a fscking idiot.

>They do not. They post contributions to GPL-licensed
>programs, and the GPL is the only documentation of
>their intent. If the GPL intended to create a joint
>work it would say so, and since it does not, no joint
>work is created. Indeed, since the GPL spells out that
>GPLed work may be distributed only under the GPL, while
>joint authorship would allow later authors to distribute
>the work otherwise, it is clear that the GPL intends not
>to create a joint work.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>On 2/10/2010 3:50 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>
>> The idea is that by doing a few modifying and copyrightable changes into
>> a "single program" in response to the GPL offer one becomes a joint
>> copyright owner of the entire work "as a whole" and can rightfully
>> license that entire work (with 'as a whole' as 'defined' and intended by
>> the GPL) in disrespect of the GPL.

Good gravy, what a ludicrous claim.  You are a fscking idiot.

>No, that's completely wrong: 
> A joint work is defined by the Copyright Act as:
> a work prepared by two or more authors with the
> intention that their contributions be merged into
> inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole.
>
>A second author cannot hijack someone else's work to become a
>joint author - joint authorship has to be consented to by every
>author of the work, including the first. Rather, the first
>author has authorized the preparation of derivative works only
>under the GPL, and any secondary author who makes changes and
>copies and distributes the resulting work other than under the
>GPL is simply infringing copyright.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: SFLC is succeeding.

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

>RJack  writes:
>
>> 1) Truth is an absolute defense to libel in this country Allen. Filing
>> seven consecutive copyright infringement lawsuits without standing,
>> followed by seven voluntary dismissals is I-N-C-O-M-P-E-T-E-N-T.
>
>Uh, you dismiss when the defendant settles and comes into compliance
>_except_ possibly when you are suing for damages

How many times so you need to explain this to that trolling piece of
shit "RJack"?

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden

[chrisv]

JEDIDIAH wrote:

> "Hadron" snotted:
>>
>> (snip lies)
>>
>> You have zero credibility. Go away.

LOL

A charge of "zero credibility", from the totally anti-FOSS, bald-faced
liar "Hadron" Quack.

> Bad rhetoric isn't a sufficient argument.

"Hadron" got to make a jackass of himself in several groups, today!

-- 
'What amazes me is the "zealots" continually harp on about the "number
of apps". The fact that more than half are incomplete, forgotten,
buggy and plain rubbish doesn't seem to matter.'  -  "True Linux
advocate" Hadron Quark
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden

[chrisv]

>Hadron quacked:
>
>> Alan Mackenzie  writes:
>>>
>>> The only people who find the GPL hard are those who seek a legal means
>>> of violating it.
>> 
>> And just about everyone that ever uses it, reads it or discusses it. 

Stop lying, "true Linux advocate" Hadron Quark.

>> I find it amazing that 

I find it amazing that you don't get your ass kicked on a daily basis,
asshole.

>> you keep insisting it is so easy and yet we see you
>> embroiled in nitpicking over meaning time and time again. You're either
>> very thick skinned or in denial.

Because stupid trolls keep repeating the same nonsense, and he's
slapping them down.  You, "Hadron", being a stupid troll yourself,
should know all about that...

-- 
"choice : for the brain dead."  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: PJ lies about Terekhov--again

[chrisv]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:

>?  That's pure nastiness, pure bile from a gutless poster, Rjack, who
>probably wouldn't say boo to a goose if the goose could see him and
>sqwawk back.

Sounds like cola's "Hadron" Quark.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: PJ lies about Terekhov--again

[chrisv]

Peter Köhlmann wrote:

>Hadron quacked:
>
>> Personally I would
>> never visit there because of the risk of trojans and virus.

Good decision, "Hadron".  In fact, you'd best keep all your Windows
machine off the Internet entirely.

Wait, didn't you claim that you were safe with Windows because you
knew "how to be safe", or something to that effect?

What a bone-headed fscktard you are, "Hadron".

>Well, your "Debian" seems to have been infected with that "windows you 
>have in a virtual machine", me thinks.
>You know, that windows you only start for very specific things, according 
>to your luatic claims
>
>How come you are afraid of viruses when you actually would run linux, 
>Hadron Snot Quark? Please explain.
>
>Seems to me that you once again have shown that you in fact do not run 
>linux, never have and never will

I predict "Hadron" slinking from this thread, now that he's
successfully made a jackass of himself.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: [Matt Asay Tells The Truth] Stallman: GPL doesn't guarantee software freedom

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

>Alexander Terekhov  writes:
>>
>> Apart from that, "or later" is utter legal nonsense because absent
>> sublicensing, the "later" license terms may come into effect only by
>> the affirmative act of the copyright holder and for that nobody needs
>> "or later" clause.

Idiot.

>Nonsense.  The "affirmative act" is accomplished in advance when the
>copyright holder acts according to the recommendation:
>
>How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs
>
>  If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
>possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it
>free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms.
>
>  To do so, attach the following notices to the program.  It is safest
>to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
>state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
>the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.
>
>
>Copyright (C)   
>
>This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
>it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
>(at your option) any later version.
>
>[...]

It's "real difficult" to understand that plain language, eh?

Sheesh, these anti-freedom trolls are incredibly dishonest and stupid.

-- 
Question:  Are you actually claiming that because linux supports NTFS
and VFAT it should also defrag them?
Hadron Quark's answer:  Yes.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: [Matt Asay Tells The Truth] Stallman: GPL doesn't guarantee software freedom

[chrisv]

>Alexander Terekhov  writes:
>>
>> One just can't be a party (licensor or licensee) to an intellectual
>> property license under unknown/unspecified/future/later terms.

God damn, you are a stupid POS.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Groklaw attacks Alexander -- Again

[chrisv]

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>Rjack is a complete waste of time.  A common troll.

Yep.  Plonked him long ago.

-- 
'poor UI experience, crappy GUI apps for the most part, lack of
gaming, distro hell and too much legacy confusion about what "Linux"
is.'  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, explaining what is wrong
with Linux
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Computerworld.com/Infoworld.com: Does GPL still matter?

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

> troll:
>>
>> Another Linux phony exposed.
>
>Stallman is hardly a "Linux phony".  If you had any clue...

The troll is a liar.  KF the lying POS.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> (snip)
>
>Why do you believe that permission to copy verbatim
>gives you the right to show chars in hex and rot13?
>Do you imagine that if you showed that to a judge he
>would agree that you have copied the work verbatim?
>Do you imagine that copyright law is a game that you
>play with the courts, who will smile at how clever
>you are? You really are a fool.

And proud of it, apparently.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

JEDIDIAH wrote:

> Hadorn snotted:
>>
>> You mean people break the law. Correct. And why the GPL and OSS in
>> general is going nowhere fast in the commercial world. Freeloaders like
>
> You're funny.

In a nasty, snotty sort of way...

>  You really shouldn't try so hard proving yourself to be a Lemming

If it's good for Micro$oft, "Hadron" is for it.

If it's bad for Micro$oft, "Hadron" is against it.

Simple as that.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

Tim Smith wrote:

> (verbose gibber snipped)
>
> Finally, a decent fraction of consumers will have experience with
> running console games of CDs.  They get decent performance there.

Oh really?  Gee, I'd have sworn that CDROM-associated delays occur quite 
frequently, while running games.
 
> There's simply nothing in their experience to indicate that a live CD
> should be slow, and there are things in their experience to indicate
> that it could be fast.

Nope.  Just the opposite, in fact.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

Erik Funkentroll wrote:

> On Fri, 01 May 2009 14:38:46 -0500, chrisv wrote:
> 
>> The average person is not thinking about any of that techy stuff.  The
>> average person tries running off a CD, sees and hears evidence that
>> there are performance repercussions to doing so, and accepts it.
> 
> No, the average person makes up their mind about something new within a
> few minutes.

No, the average Wintrolling idiot, like you, makes an ass of himself 
every few minutes.

> They will see it's slow and not care why, 

They will see its slow and know its because they are running of CD.

> that will be their first impression 

Nope.  Their "first impression" of CDROM's and the associated delays are 
usually long in the past.

> and it will be hard to shake that, 

Harder than to shake baby Hadron?

>  regardless of logic you might try to explain to them.

No explanation required.  It's an obvious situation.
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

JEDIDIAH wrote:

> How slow? A modern DVD drive really isn't that slow. It's not like
> we're talking about C64 floppy drive here. Most of the time you should
> not be touching the disk (regardless of OS). So the "CD problem" should
> be strictly limited to bootup (if they even exist).

Well, no.  In my experience, you fire-up FireFox, or OO, while running off
a LiveCD, and you're going to wait for a CD spin-up.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

> chrisv  writes:
> 
>> David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> I've been working with
>>> various kinds of storage media since the middle of the seventies, and
>>> dozens of operating systems.
>>
>> Good for you.  The average computer user also has a lot of experience
>> with the delays inherent in using CDROMs.
> 
> Running a demand-paging operating system from a CDROM is not something
> for which either access patterns or latency and readahead benefits or
> buffering strategies are within the normal user experience.

The average person is not thinking about any of that techy stuff.  The
average person tries running off a CD, sees and hears evidence that there
are performance repercussions to doing so, and accepts it.

> You should really get off your "everybody except me is a moron" high
> horse.  

Umm...  YOU are the one who is saying that everyone is too stupid to
figure-out this simple situation.

> It has no legs to stand on.

LOL  Spew some gibberish, maybe that will get you some "legs".
 
> You let your animosities get the better of you.

Learn how to take defeat better.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

> I've been working with
> various kinds of storage media since the middle of the seventies, and
> dozens of operating systems.

Good for you.  The average computer user also has a lot of experience with
the delays inherent in using CDROMs.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

> And?  There are live disks that install in 15 minutes on a good system.
> There are live disks that take 2 hours (take the TeXlive DVD).  There
> are differences in layout and effectiveness.  

How oddball a situation are you willing to stretch-for to make your
alleged point?

> As I said: the CD exacerbates the situation.  

Running off a CD is slow.

> If the result is worse than expected,

What might be "expected" by a newbie who has no experience in such
matters?  As soon I first heard the CD spin-up when I wanted to do
something, I would "expect" those kinds of delays when running off a CD.

You lose.

> it might point to the access patterns being worse than expected, and
> that may well reflect on the installed system performance.

Gibberish.  This is not that difficult a situation for the average
computer user to interpret.  You're just being ridiculous.

> If you don't get it, don't be sad.   At least you can sling mud competitively.

I see you can "sling mud" yourself.

>> So?  Is it not reasonable to assume that a PC operating system would
>> be "reasonably responsive" when installed on a modern PC?
> 
> If you never have been exposed to Microsoft operating systems, probably.
> But since the market leader does not meet that expectation, many
> experienced computer users will not take it for granted.

Good joke, but in reality Windows isn't that bad in the responsiveness
department.

My point remains.  (Most) people ain't that dumb.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

> David Kastrup belched:
>>
>> chrisv writes:
>>
>>> Seriously.  You're full of it, and you're wrong, Fuddie.  As usual, your
>>> FUD does not fly.
>>
>> I don't think he is wrong here.  

Well then, you're wrong, too.

>> Even if you know the details, you can't
>> tell what ratio of the slowness is attributable to inherent CDROM
>> access, what ratio is attributable to bad paging algorithms acerbated by
>> the CDROM (which would still have an impact when using hard disk), what
>> is attributable to a suboptimal storage layout and what is pure OS
>> creep.

Do you really think that "ratios of slowness" need to be calculated?
Sheesh, man, you're running off a CD.  You can hear it and see the
results.  You just throw-out the results of the "speed test" because
you're running off a freaking CDROM.  NO ONE is going to assume or
expect that the speed is _at all_ representative of what it's like
when it's running off HD.

Jeezez.  Most people aren't THAT stupid, much less 99% of them.

>> I am not exactly unversed with computers (having written my own
>> bootstrap loaders and BIOSes and target compilers and whatnot).  And
>> still I was quite unsure what difference to expect when installing
>> Knoppix on hard disk as compared to running from CD.

So?  Is it not reasonable to assume that a PC operating system would
be "reasonably responsive" when installed on a modern PC?

>> And yes, the impression "sluggish and basically not useful" can come
>> from a live CD.  

For the exceptionally dull-witted, maybe.  Most would recognize that
it's a limited trial, amazing in that it works at all!

>> It is nice for a look of _what_ you can do, but it is
>> hard to judge whether you would _want_ to do it in a reasonable
>> workflow.

Well, if one likes what one sees, one tries a full HD install and
system configuration.  Old (or new, for a price) spare HD's are
available, if one doesn't want to risk their Windows installation.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:01:48 -0500, chrisv wrote:
> 
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> 
>>>On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:36:13 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>
>>>> The beauty of a gratis LiveCD is that you can "try before you buy"
>>>> with no muss, no fuss and no risk.
>>>
>>>Except that a LiveCD will boot slowly, run slowly, and generally give a bad
>>>impression of the speed of Linux to anyone who doesn't understand the
>>>issues with a LiveCD.
>>>
>>>It's really a dual-edged sword.
>> 
>> Yeah, sure, Fuddie.  It's really rocket science to figure that out,
>> assuming that you haven't already read it.  "Gee, it seems that my CD
>> has to spin-up before things happen!"
>> 
>> "Gosh, maybe there's a speed compromise to running off a CDROM!?!?!"
> 
> Seriously.  99% of the computer using population would not know that, would
> not make the connection, or would simply not care.  "It's too slow, it
> sucks!"

Seriously.  You're full of it, and you're wrong, Fuddie.  As usual, your
FUD does not fly.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

JEDIDIAH wrote:

> Erik Funkentroll wrote:
>>
>> It's really a dual-edged sword.
>
>Your just spewing a lot of baseless bullshit.

Making an jackass of himself, really.  I guess since Micro$oft can't
do it, it must not be an indisputably cool and useful thing...

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:36:13 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> The beauty of a gratis LiveCD is that you can "try before you buy"
>> with no muss, no fuss and no risk.
>
>Except that a LiveCD will boot slowly, run slowly, and generally give a bad
>impression of the speed of Linux to anyone who doesn't understand the
>issues with a LiveCD.
>
>It's really a dual-edged sword.

Yeah, sure, Fuddie.  It's really rocket science to figure that out,
assuming that you haven't already read it.  "Gee, it seems that my CD
has to spin-up before things happen!"

"Gosh, maybe there's a speed compromise to running off a CDROM!?!?!"

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL traitor !

[chrisv]

JEDIDIAH wrote:

>None of us "religous" types have ever advocated anything of the sort.
>Once again, you Lemmings have to resort to blatant lies in order to make
>a point.

Indeed.  Lies so obvious that even the most naive newbie could see
through them.  Two weeks to try Linux??  

Shameless.

>The beauty of a gratis LiveCD is that you can "try before you buy"
>with no muss, no fuss and no risk.

Exactly.  Hell, it takes longer to burn the CD than it does to try
Linux.  The entire process can be done during the commercial breaks of
your favorite TV show.  What a "hardship"!

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: SFLC's GPL court enforcement -- track record

[chrisv]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

>Here's the SFLC's GPL "litigation" track record: 
>
>1. Dismissal Without Prejudice. 
>2. Dismissal Without Prejudice. 
>3. Dismissal Without Prejudice. 
>4. Dismissal With Prejudice. 
>5. Dismissal Without Prejudice. 
>6. Dismissal Without Prejudice. 
>7. Dismissal Without Prejudice. 
>8. Dismissal With Prejudice. 
>
>Uhmm. Sort of a pattern... 

Yes, your idiotic trolling with that same BS, after it's been
explained to you countless times.

>LOL!

*plonk*

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Rjack v. spammers

[chrisv]

dr_nikolaus_klepp wrote:

>Rjack wrote:

*plonk*

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: The GPL means what you want it to mean

[chrisv]

> rat wrote:
>>
>>Now that is more akin to the way that unsophisticates are lured into using 
>>the "free" GPL code and then are hammered for their birthright by the SFLC. 
>>"Ignorance is no excuse!", they say, "What's yours is now ours, you have 
>>been touched!" 

So, you think software developers just grab source-code and use it in
their projects, just assuming that it's free of copyright?  That would
be pretty stupid, don't you think, considering all GPL'ed software
will declare and reference the GPL?  Do you think willfully ignoring
the copyright and GPL notification should be an "excuse"?

Idiot.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: More FSF hypocrisy

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

> rat wrote:
>>
>> It is sort of cutting their own throat, though.  If something has no 
>> commercial value, being free as in beer, any case asking for monetary 
>> damages for violating its copyright could simply result in a summary 
>> judgement for zero compensation.
>
>The infringers would still be enjoined from creating further copies,
>which would be fine from a GPL enforcement point of view. I think the
>FSF might consider the loss of monetary damages for themselves to be
>a fair trade.

Rat thinks that their should not be any competition - that only one
"best choice" vendor should exist in the market..

-- 
"It is better that there only be one supplier who really is the best
so that everyone can have the best choice!"  -  Rat
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: TomTom sues Microsoft for patent infringement

[chrisv]

Doug Mentohl wrote:

>TomTom alleges that Microsoft infringes on four patents in Microsoft 
>Streets and Trips .. TomTom is asking for triple damages for willful 
>infringement, since it says it had notified Microsoft about its alleged 
>infringement ...
>
>http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/03/20/TomTom_sues_Microsoft_for_patent_infringement_1.html

This is getting interesting...

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL

[chrisv]

dr_nikolaus_klepp wrote:

>Hyman Rosen wrote:
>
>> Rjack wrote:
>>> It means source code nonexclusively licensed to the public
>>> without copyright scope of use restrictions.
>> 
>> Which is why the FSF and the GPL reject the term.
>
>you forgot to add "Idiot"

Well, we already have some extremely patient people doing a fine job
of explaining the GPL to the Micro$oft shills.  At this point, I'm
going straight to "idiot".

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL

[chrisv]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

>Anyway, the fork won't be called Java and won't have a chance
>to keep pace with IBM/SUN controlled open sourced Java project.

Do you understand what "open source" means, idiot?

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL

[chrisv]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

>If IBM acquires SUN you can be assured that open sourced version of Java
>will end up as either eclipse or apache project with its license changed
>away from the GPL pretty soon.

It would be forked.

>Buh-bye GPL'd Java.

Idiot.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>Rjack wrote:
>> If you think IBM didn't learn the meaning of "embrace, extend and
>> extinguish" from Micro$oft then you're a bigger Freetard moron than
>> I thought. Ever since Linux latched on to IBM's teat with Sequent's
>> SMP code contributions the "extinguish" handwriting has been on the
>> wall. IBM will wipe your socialist Freetard asses with the GPL.
>> Capitalism *always* wins.

The GPL *always* wins (and that's not a bad thing for capitalism,
BTW).

>My, so much foul, seething venom. Actually, all this proposed purchase
>does is demonstrate the visionary wisdom of Richard Stallman. 

Visionary indeed.  We owe him a lot.

>It is not
>prudent to rely on the good graces of companies or individuals, because
>they are all ephemeral. People die, companies are acquired or go under.
>By making software free, its authors are assured that come what may, no
>one can incorporate their work into products that can be delivered to
>users without giving those users the freedom to run, read, modify, and
>share the code.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: The GPL is unenforceable under U.S. copyright law

[chrisv]

Doug Mentohl wrote:

>"The GPL is unenforceable under U.S. copyright law", Rjack
>
>Produce any citation where a recipient of GPL code successfully fought 
>and won such a case.

FFS, hasn't the "Rjack" troll had it explained to him enough times
already?

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: MS partner sues Red Hat for patent violation ..

[chrisv]

Tim Smith wrote:

>Give me a break--I don't believe for an instance that either of you do 
>not know what IANAL means.  As Wikipedia notes, this is one of the most 
>popular internet acronyms, and it is almost impossible for anyone to 
>have the groups both of you read without having come across it numerous 
>times.

*Never* heard of it, myself.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: [Idiot] GCC's GPLv3 "Updated License Exception"

[chrisv]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

>ROFL.

Idiot.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>Rjack wrote:
>>
>> It is a verifiable fact that ever completed suit filed by the SFLC
>> was terminated by the plaintiff's voluntary dismissal.

Because the plaintiffs got what they wanted, the defendant's
compliance to the terms of the GPL.  Sheesh.

>It is a verifiable fact that in each such case the defendants
>made the GPLed sources available, as asked in the complaint
>against them, when they were not doing so at some point before
>the complaint was filed.
>
>It remains the case that no one is using your (incorrect) legal
>theories to openly violate the terms of the GPL. Everyone acts
>as if the GPL is a valid license which means just what it says,
>even people who are opposed to its principles.

Amazing how the anti-OSS trolls don't mind, at all, making complete
jackasses of themselves.

-- 
'A lot of OSS is simply crap. And if it were "for sale" they would
soon go out of business.'  -  "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[chrisv]

Rjack wrote:

>Cancer is a real disease. The GPL is a legal delusion in Richard 
>Stallman's marxist mind.

*plonk*

>Sincerely,
>Rjack :)

Go fsck yourself,
chrisv :)

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[chrisv]

>Hadron snotted:
>>
>> Freeloaders, thieves and general scroungers will indeed take advantage.
> > It's why the most used commercial SW projects in the world do not give
> > out their source codes as a general rule. If they did their hard work
> > would be distributed and cloned

That doesn't explain any need for patents, fsckwit.  Just keeping
their code secret, and having copyright protection, is sufficient.

>> But in la-la land feel free to dream that everyone would be nice to each
>> other.

Neither open source or closed-source depends-on "everyone being nice
to each other".  We all know that there are thieves and scumbags in
the world.  There are copyright laws and various licenses available to
prevent theft and abuse of code.

Software patents are not needed, you stupid shit.

-- 
"Too much choice is NEVER a good thing in SW."  -  "True Linux
advocate" Hadron Quark
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

> rat wrote:
>>
>> It is still a joke.  What firmware or software have you personally ever 
>> bothered to examine, change, or share?  The whole idea is preposterous.
>
>I haven't, but at 
>you can find that many people have been modifying their TiVos, and at
>
>you can find people who have read, changed, and shared GPLed software
>on a router, just as the FSF envisions.
>
>Notice that it only takes a handful of people to make the improvements,
>which can then be shared by many others who don't have the skills to do
>it themselves. That's what free software aims to accomplish, and that
>you find it preposterous says more about you than about the FSF.

This "amicus_curious" rat that you are talking-to is a Micro$oft shill
who has been lying and trolling in the Linux advocacy group for years.
Anything that goes-against his precious proprietary software model, he
does not understand.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[chrisv]

> rat wrote:
>>
>>  Pick something with a real value.

That would exclude your life, rat.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[chrisv]

David Kastrup wrote:

>Microsoft definitely is hurting, but if you take a look at the
>deployment numbers, they don't manage to seriously push Vista in the
>field because business is using XP rather than Vista.  So it would
>appear that Microsoft managed to shoot itself in the foot quite without
>the help of Open Source.

Well, a 4X leap in hardware requirement, to "upgrade" from XP to
Visduh, and the benefit to business is what, exactly?  The change was
so extreme that it pretty-much necessitated a new machine, a fairly
stout one at that.  And after spending all this money, performance may
actually drop, compared to the older machine?!

I mean, that's a hard sell.  

It gets even worse with laptops, where power consumption becomes
really important.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: GPL propaganda

[chrisv]

Andrew Halliwell wrote:

>Why all the GPL FUD "jack"?
>If you don't agree with the GPL, don't try to distribute any software under
>it. 
>
>simple as that.

He's a troll.  Simple as that.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Now it's my compiler!

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>Rjack wrote:
>> I know . . . the GPL grabs the wife , the kids, the family dog and
>> your SUV too. He. He.
>
>No. That would be copyright misuse.

Someone grabbed the troll's brain, and didn't give it back.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

[chrisv]

> rat (amicus_curious) wrote:
>>
>> Second, I am saying that the GPL has no utility because it is 
>> trying to protect against something that is not important.

LOL

You POS.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

[chrisv]

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>> There is nothing really worth stealing.
>
>A great deal of code is licensed under the GPL. I'm sure
>that somewhere in there is something that would be useful
>to someone who is writing a non-free program.
>
>But be that as it may, and regardless of the quality of
>the code involved, those who copy and distribute GPLed
>code must honor the license.

Do you realize that this "amicus curious" rat that you are
arguing-with is a real grade B scumbag and a pathological liar?  He'll
always take the immoral side of the issue.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

[chrisv]

Rahul Dhesi wrote:

>So amicus_curious, do you wish to benefit from the work of others and
>give nothing back in return?

Of course he does.  He's an immoral rat.  Ideally, he'd not only do
the above, but he'd then twist things around so as to screw-over the
people who actually did the work.

This is all covered in the Micro$oft Big Book of Dirty-Dealing
Business Tricks.

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

[chrisv]

Rjack wrote:

>Sincerely,
>Rjack :)

*plonk*

___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine

[chrisv]

Proven liar billwg wrote:

>"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
>
>>>If it does the job $10,000 better, sure, kelsey.  Wouldn't you agree?
>>
>> But it doesn't, you stupid fscking troll.
>>
>You only say that because you don't have any real work to do, chris! 

Dumbsh*t.  You made a claim that the abundance of quality freeware
that comes with Linux is a drawback.  That you're a stupid lying troll
is obvious to everyone.  LOL!!!

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine

[chrisv]

Proven liar billwg wrote:

>Well, kelsey, you are obviously hopeless, but consider that the 
>consumers don't see it that way.  They see linux as a cheapo substitute 
>for the real thing. 

Prove it, you filthy lying troll.  The truth is that most are not even
aware of it or what it's advantages are.  Of those who do have some
idea what it is, many don't think it has clear-enough advantages to
learn a new way of doing things.

>(snip claptrap)

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine

[chrisv]

Proven liar billwg wrote:

>>> Only the most ridiculous troll would complain about the $1-worth of  HD
>>> space that is taken up by the "freewares with the cute names" 
>>> provided
>>> by most Linux distributions.
>>
>> ... not to mention turn around and argue a $300-or-so retail package 
>> is
>> the answer to the $1 worth of consumed space. :)
>>
>If it does the job $10,000 better, sure, kelsey.  Wouldn't you agree? 

But it doesn't, you stupid fscking troll.

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine

[chrisv]

Proven liar billwg wrote:

>Well you didn't read far enough, kelsey.  

Well you haven't stopped lying, billwg.

>You missed the part where all 
>those freewares with the cute names just take up space 

Only the most ridiculous troll would complain about the $1-worth of HD
space that is taken up by the "freewares with the cute names" provided
by most Linux distributions.  Are you as financially bankrupt as you
are morally bankrupt?  LOL!!!

>and get in the 
>way of people who don't want to use them.  

Stupid lying troll.  No, they do not "get in the way".  Programs are
accessed via a well-organized and customizable menuing system,
supplimented by a quick-start bar, very similar to what all modern
OS's use.

Answer me this, you pathetic troll, do all the "favorites" that M$
pre-loads into their browser "get in your way" of browsing the Web?  I
don't think so, but it is another thing I have to clean-up after
installing Windwoes.

>All the crap that comes with 
>linux isn't making things easier, they are adding to the confusion. 

Only a truely pathetic piece of garbage, like you, would argue that
it's better to spend $hundreds on commercial software than it is to
have the equivalent software pre-installed for free, along with maybe
a GByte of HD space occupied by utilities that you'll never use.

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine

[chrisv]

Proven liar billwg wrote:

> XP Home is designed to do what the home user wants to do in the vast 
> majority of cases.

Not true, stupid troll.  In fact it comes with almost no applications. 
Compared to what Debian (ot most any other Linux) has, it's downright
pathetic.

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Free software movement similar to Islam?

[chrisv]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Organization: http://groups.google.com

Yahoo/google troll.   *plonk*

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Linus CHARGING $5,000 to use Linux name!!!!!

[chrisv]

Karen Hill (flatfish) wrote:

>Linus is now doing the ol' switchero.

Google groups.  New yahoo email address.  Same troll.

*plonk*

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: you're like monkeys in a cage

[chrisv]

Linønut wrote:

>The Ghost In The Machine poked his little head through the XP firewall and 
>said:
>
>> Pedant Point: Monkees.
>>
>> (Presumably they were a parody of the Fab Four: the Beatles.
>> They had their moments, humorwise.  I'm not sure they were
>> all that hot as a singing group qua singing group.)
>
>They had a couple o' nice tunes.

For sure.  Everyone (of that age) should have a Monkees Greatest Hits
CD...

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: you're like monkeys in a cage

[chrisv]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>Television is for monkeys.

*plonk*

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Re: Microsoft & Intel get massive tax breaks

[chrisv]

Yibbels wrote:

>Hello men (and boys),

*plonk*

___
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss