Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #35 Fri, 15 Jun 01 04:13:03 EDT Contents: Re: Gadget-lover's product suggestion: Linux Home Server ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Linux wins again (Erik Funkenbusch) Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Ketil Z Malde) Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Ayende Rahien) Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux (GreyCloud) Re: OT: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance (GreyCloud) Re: OT: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance (GreyCloud) Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance and (GreyCloud) Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance and (GreyCloud) Re: OT: The point of all of this... (was Re: Where is American pride?) (GreyCloud) Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance and(GreyCloud) Re: Windows makes good coasters (JS \\ PL) Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS (GreyCloud) Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (GreyCloud) Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? (GreyCloud) Re: Redhat video problems. (Marada C. Shradrakaii) Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (GreyCloud) Re: Getting used to Linux (GreyCloud) Re: netscape 6.1 - anyone? (Ayende Rahien) Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (Ayende Rahien) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Gadget-lover's product suggestion: Linux Home Server Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 06:14:42 GMT Flacco wrote: Unfortunately things are headed just as much in the opposite direction. Producers - of hardware, software, and content - don't mind making product improvements when they have to, but not if it means allowing you to skip commercials, easily switch to competing products, or pay for information only once - or not at all. Why should Sony's content division create information accessible on any old device when it can instead lock you into Sony's hardware division? And why should the media gods allow some nobody to make up their own DVD player and pipe video all over the place? Not when the DMCA can stop it. It's not like some little newcomer is going to come along with enough money to take over the industry by catering to the customer's needs. So yes, it would work, and no, it won't happen. Are you saying that a system like this would be illegal under the DMCA? I'm unaware of either DVD player or cable TV set-top box with digital video out, and the DeCSS case showed what will happen if you try to make your own. It's obviously a desirable feature, so something like the DMCA was needed to prevent indepent manufacturers from meeting the consumers' needs. -- From: Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Linux wins again Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 01:14:40 -0500 Linux Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Linux stops Solaris and the best the over priced W2K can do is come close to a tie on one benchmark while falling far behind on another! http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a.htm Interesting benchmark, however it's a bit difficult to gauge any real statistics from them. For starters, though the machines are identical, it only gives on architecture and any given OS can perform better or worse on any given machine (for instance, the quality of the SCSI drivers alone might make a difference). To show a real test, you should do the same tests on identical hardware using several different architectures. -- Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft From: Ketil Z Malde [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 06:48:33 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Maynard Handley) writes: I said nothing about Mac or Linus users switching to Windows. I know. I thought of subverting them as the potential revenue stream. I see now that was not what you had in mind. If people want to dispute my reasoning, the points to dispute are my claim that the mass market of consumers do not upgrade because they perceive it to be a major hassle, I don't think that is the main obstacle. In my opinion, people in general upgrade hardware when they no longer can bear the performance of their systems. Basically, I think Intel should pay MS to make software bigger and slower. (Oh, they already do that for free :-) -kzm -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants -- From: Ayende Rahien [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:04:02 +0200 Colin Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... The Ghost In The Machine wrote: Hahahahahah Oh yeah XP is a killer OS
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #34Sun, 6 May 01 13:13:14 EDT Contents: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Eugenio Mastroviti) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Karel Jansens) Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Karel Jansens) Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) (Salvador Peralta) Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech (Edward Rosten) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Daniel Johnson) From: Eugenio Mastroviti [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 16:55:32 +0100 Edward Rosten wrote: And for goodness sake can any Linux advocate say with a straight face they can easily connect their Linux box to an ISP? I haven't tried (the home computer has a winmodem) but I have heard plenty of success stories. I have to say I was very disappointed with SuSE 7.1 I used 6.4 with a company notebook and a PCMCIA modem, and in about 2 minutes I could dial my ISP. With my desktop PC and ADSL, and SuSE 7.1, it took me all of 5 minutes and I had (horror!) to edit a config file by hand because I was annoyed by a DHCP warning at boot time A horrible experience. I had to call in a couple of neighbours and my cat to help me type vi /etc/dhcpcd.conf... lucky thing my cat is skilled at typing... They should be working on this issue night and day because nobody is going to use Linux is they cannot connect to the Internet. I'm not on the internet at home on my computer, yet I still use Linux. My life consists of more than just surfing. Well, it's true that most people nowadays use their computers to surf the Net. It's also true that with any one of the recent distros, the only ways you can have problems with it are: 1) having a Winmodem 2) Having a DSL connection and a fa311 card (I HATE the wretched thing) 3) being brain dead But instead they prefer to call users names rather than address the issue. Bullshit. I concur. Simply put, there is *no* issue there Is there a plan to address this issue? I hope not. the advantages of plain text config files have clearly shown their advantages compared to binary databases for configuration. Note that most of the files are not read very often. Simple example: a *very* moronic programmer in my company, who acquired the root password from one of our junior sysadmins (she's still being flogged on a daily basis), screws up a number of files in the /etc directory. We restore them from backups. 20 minutes. Something (the most interesting explanation came from Micro$oft support: age of the registry file, whatever that means) fucks up the registry file on the only NT server in the company. You guessed it, 4 hours downtime, disks reformatted, clean install, restore from backups. Eugenio -- From: Karel Jansens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:05:45 + Daniel Johnson wrote: Aaron R. Kulkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Daniel Johnson wrote: Oh yes. Most of the stuff DOS does, you'd use DOS for. So does Windows. Remove Command.com from a Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, or 98 system, and tell us what happens. Command.com is a shell. It's like /bin/sh in Unix. This doesn't mean Unix runs on /bin/sh. OK. How about this: I remove /bin/sh from my linux system and reboot, and you remove ~\command.com from your Windows 9x system and reboot. Then we check which one of us actually can get any work done. And _then_ I suggest you study up on what shell actually means and come back when you know. -- Regards, Karel Jansens == You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!! == -- From: Karel Jansens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 17:21:24 + Pete Goodwin wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] says... It is? I've just
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #32 Sat, 17 Feb 01 01:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Interesting article (Charlie Ebert)
Re: I will give MS credit for one thing (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Interesting article ("Todd")
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 05:42:27 GMT
In article 96kp45$6d$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Bloody Viking wrote:
Todd ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: As a Windows 2000 advocate, I'd have to agree that MS is going to kill
: themselves if they forge ahead with .NET.
: What the hell are they thinking? I hope they don't really think people are
: going to buy into their plan... it might make even diehard windows users
: change...
Actually a group of people cornered me at work over in another department
and they started poking fun at my being a Linux user, my opinions, my
comments, so-on so-forth. Their motivation was to rub in the idea that
this court ordered breakup would not happen for Microsoft.
I hadn't developed any feelings for this issue other than they had been
convicted and I told them that if you had a murderer convicted of a crime
,by their reasoning, we should just let the bastard go free. I explained
this wasn't going to be a trial nor appeal but an attempt to get the sentence
changed as they were already convicted of the crime.
It never really sank in with them.
I left this encounter, not really feeling like I got my ass chewed but rather
wondering about the entire matter. I felt that if Microsoft wasn't broken
up then the competition from Linux would indeed eventually destroy them
and I posted a prediction of 2005 for that event based on what I knew of
the marketplace at that time.
My prediction has not waivered in that time and I still think 2005 is
the approximate time where Microsoft will loose it's king of the hill
status to Linux.
I had considered the court and Linux influences on the situation and
*NEVER* gave a second thought about Microsoft internal actions. I really
didn't feel Microsoft would have any reason to change their business strategy.
It wasn't necessary for them to change their business strategy.
But Microsoft took this court ordered breakup possibility very seriously.
They created .NET so that if the OS was ever seperated from the Applications
.NET would keep the OS and Application layers together anyway. It would
also eliminate the copyright infringement problems they were experiencing
in the workplace.
I *NEVER* considered Microsofts own internal actions of creating .NET and
it's impact on the health of Microsoft at large.
When I look at .NET now I feel Microsoft has over-reacted and indeed set
the company on a course of destruction. Business's are not going to allow
this day to day intrusion in their lives by Microsoft. They don't want
the threat of a lawsuit hanging on the second by second actions of their
employee's without any way of controlling .NET's functions.
Without .NET you have no functionality under this new gameplan yet there
is no CONTROL of how .NET serves the business.
And of course, there is the new campaign to attack all open source software,
especially Linux, by using their political infuence within the Federal
Government. This action is extremely disasterous for them. It looks bad
in the eyes of the general public for a software giant to whine and demand
special laws passed to stop an operating system known as Linux which has
less than 3% of the overall market,,, whining and complaining that Linux
will be their deaths. It's clearly insanity.
Or is it One of the basic problems with Linux is nobody has any clue
as to the latests installed base. All we know is how many hackers are
working on the code. We don't have any idea of where it's being used and
by how many people as Linux generally isn't sold, it's downloaded for free.
The residential Windows customers will be the first ones to leave and
the home PC industry will begin to die as they will simply loose interest
in the internet and PC's. They will not be converting to Linux soon.
There will be a slight increase in home appliance useage but home appliances
will not fill the void until 2008-2009.
30% of Microsoft's business base will be completely sheered off leaving
Microsoft with a cash shortage to pay dividends. Their return on investment
will be diminished due to decreased customer base and by and large this
will all be due to .NET actions and not Linux competition.
And then we STILL have
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #31Fri, 5 Jan 01 01:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Could only... (JM)
Re: Could only... (JM)
Re: Could only... (JM)
Re: Could only... (JM)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (JM)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. (JM)
Re: The 2.4.0 kernel was released at 4pm pst. ("Adam Warner")
Re: The 2.4.0 kernel was released at 4pm pst. ("Adam Warner")
Re: Why Hatred? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Conclusion (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Red Hat dead/dying? (Donn Miller)
From: JM [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 05:51:11 +
On Thu, 04 Jan 2001 05:18:00 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)) wrote:
It is illegal to discharge a weapon with the intent to murder
another human being.
We could shorten this to it's illegal to murder.
But it is definitely not illegal to hose down a burglar, or intruder on
your own premises in over 1/2 the states of this nation.
So if someone has invited you to their house, someone else in the
house could just kill you?
All of those activities WERE ALREADY ILLEGALso, exactly *what*
would another law do, exactly?
Nothing. I often MARVEL at our seatbelt laws. Or how about the
ones which force you to buckle up on an aircraft.
And this is relavent how?
We even have a new felony law which states if you travel more than
1/4 mile from the red lights of a police vehicle OR you turn off
on another street or exit a highway while being followed by a
police vehicle with it's red's on, you are automatically guilty
of a felony. Not seeing the lights is no excuse.
And this is relavent how?
Do you think it would have prevent those with criminal intent from
getting weapons? If you believe that, you're insane.
You can buy almost any kind of pistol at your local truckstop for
under $300.
Yes, anyone who feels like causing trouble can wander into their
corner shop.
irrelevent drug talk snipped
example, a person who owns a gun, must have it locked in a safe place to
ensure that it is out of the reach of kiddies and undesirable
characters.
How many undesirable characters obey such laws?
None.
And what about everyone else? What about people who just decide to
leave it on the table, then some 10 year old comes and steals it
before gunning down some people outside.
If you fail to hear to this requirement, you are liable for
any damage that occurs if the gun is stolen and was not safely stored.
How many undesirable characters obey such laws?
None.
How can they decide not to be held liable for what happens with their
own guns?
We maybe a shitty little country in the south pacific and that 99% of
American youth don't know wheren the hell it is, but at least we have
out shit together.
Well, you are turning away from Socialism...but, any man who is
prohibited from carrying a weapon to defend himself is only a serf.
Anybody who lives in a nation which doesn't trust it's own citizens
to carry a firearm is living in a dictatorship or a communist country.
Anyone who lives in a nation which allows its citizens easy access to
tools designed to murder people is living in a anarchist country.
You have no freedoms. Don't think you have freedoms if you can't
even carry a lousy pistol.
Don't think you have freedoms if people are free to carry about
weapons and could just shoot you if you happened to disagree with
them.
Gun control laws are merely a re-establishment of the medieval class
system: The elite get to arm themselves, while the un-washed masses
are targets for crime.
I think it's merely a setup for a total police state where
"criminals" and "citizens" don't exist seperately.
Or a society where those with guns get to bully and threaten those who
don't.
I am 100% in favor of banning all financial aid and military support
for countries which don't even support the right for their own
citizens to bear arms.
I'm all in favour of banning all financial aid and military support
for countries which don't even support the right for their own
citizens to feel safe in their own country.
If the government doesn't trust it's citizens to carry their own
arms then what kind of government do you have?
An government that realises people can't be trusted to have casual
access to guns.
--
From: JM [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 05:51:12 +
On Thu, 04 Jan 2001 08:17:19 +, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Jacques Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Charlie Ebert wrote:
If the government doesn't trust it's citizens to carry their own
arms then what kind of government do you have?
Do you know that in New South Wales (Australia), it is technically
illegal to carry a Swiss knife? "Technically" because really the
police is not so stupid
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #30 Wed, 15 Nov 00 18:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (mlw)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Tim Smith)
Re: Debian Sells Stale Beef (David Dorward)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Michael Livshin)
Re: More Linux good news! (Mig)
Linux INstability Netscape : Insights? (tom)
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (Gary Connors)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Curtis)
Re: Linux INstability Netscape : Insights? (Mig)
Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Re: Linux INstability Netscape : Insights?
Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Re: True GTK+ will eliminate Qt in next few years?
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 16:46:08 -0500
Bruce Schuck wrote:
"Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:NF5Q5.20477$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
"Bruce Schuck" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:VM2Q5.126334$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Create a shortcut with any command line flags you want in windows.
Easy. Intuitive.
Every script needs a shortcut? That's bad.
Scripts don't NEED shortcuts.
The shortcut feature is wonderful. It allows the logical grouping of
executables and scripts and ducments.
If the filesystem had general purpose links and symlinks as unix
has had for eons, you wouldn't need the limited-function concept
of shortcuts.
Limited function? Shortcuts are great!
Set your own icon if you want to make it easier to remember.
I don't want icons, I want to connect them with pipes so
each one can be used as a component of another.
So what do you do? Type ls at the comand prompt to search for you the
script
you want to run and then type in the name of the script with the command
line switches every time?
No, that's the point of making the script able to invoke it's interpreter
with the command line flags it needs.
How do you find you thousands of scripts? Through ls right? Archaic.
Sounds down right archaic.
Downright handy. And any time the typing becomes cumbersome you
just write a higher level script to invoke the frequently used
combinations with a single command.
When typing gets cumbersome you type more.
Yuck. Old fashioned. I can't see
this catching on for normal desktop users.
What device did you use to produce the words above?
A) mouse
B) KEYBOARD
GAME
SET
MATCH
YOU'RE A FUCKING DUMBASS
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
--
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 16:50:42 -0500
Les Mikesell wrote:
"Bruce Schuck" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:_LdQ5.126629$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Isn't it still impossible to completely turn off active-x in IE?
Of course it's possible. And easy. And you can turn it on and off for
trusted/untrusted sites so you can leave it on for internal corporate
sites
and turn it off for all others.
Has this been fixed?
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0%2C4586%2C2322425%2C00.html
and is the problem mentioned here about anyone being able
to redistribut
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #29 Thu, 21 Sep 00 22:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Computer and memory ("Chad Myers")
Re: "Overclocking" Is A Bad Idea (Jim Broughton)
Re: Unix more secure, huh? ("Otto")
From: Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 01:15:39 GMT
2:1 wrote:
Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But helping incompetent users does not necessarily help you, if you have
to simplify the system, you might have to remove some of the power of
it.
Define "incompetent" and please explain how the programmer
possesses this mythical quality.
2) programmers are used to ignoring, defending and even
accepting whenever the system /they/ created misbehaves.
^^
That's to do with bugs. That is entirely different from the model uses
for interaction.
No, it most emphatically doesn't have anything to do with bugs. It
has to do with *high-level architectural decisions* which "hackers"
never make consciously and explicitly and thus always do badly.
The programmers, especially OSS ones, *are* the users. They have the
emmotional attachment to the software. Why should they bend over
backwards to change something that they created and they like,
considering that noone is paying them to do it.
Because it's better if they change it? Because the system would be
simpler, more elegant, more beautiful *and* more powerful?
"I like it" isn't a rational argument for anything. You've just implicitly
asked "Why should programmers be rational?"
That's right, there are universal principles of beauty. Christopher
Alexander writes about these principles in On The Nature Of Order.
Well, that's just damn wrong. Beauty is subjective. Take the example of
Well that's just damn wrong. And there's a pile of research siding with
me. For example, it is known that a certain waist to hip ratio is
considered
most appealing across all cultures. Different cultures rationalize it in
very
different ways (some say it's sexy, others say those are "good childbearing
hips") but that doesn't matter.
that group of (black) people, where the women stretch their bottom lips
until they are very big (I forget the name of those people). I,
personally find that deeply unattractive, but those peopls seem to
really like it. If that isn't a difference of opinion anout beauty,
then what is? Even *birds* display different taste when it comes to
artistic appreciation.
There are two components to beauty;
the hardwired biological component
the socialized /exaggeration/ of an already existing beauty trait
That tribe is only able to do this because it's already hard-wired into
humans that long necks are beautiful.
It's noteworthy that I've never heard of a culture that considers
warts to be beautiful. The thing about the 'beauty myth' is it's not
a myth!
There may be some things universally regarded as beautiful. Others are
definitely not. Judging by discussion on this group, OS interfaces are
not of the universally appreaeciated kind. Compare a known windows
advocate to a command line junkie (me). That's a real, unresolvable
difference in taaste. We just like different things.
There are universal principles behind the human perception of Order
and Elegance that apply equally well to physical phenomena, urban
planning, architecture, tapestry weaving and software design. Do you
seriously suggest that it is *random*??
As a programmer, I don't share the code just to spiet users. If the
users don't like the code, then they can use something else, or (group
together and) pay someone else to make something that thay like. They
can't expect the world to get better with no financial or labour
contributions (complaining doesn't actually get the work done).
Maybe. In any case, you asked how programmers' gifts to users
could be reconciled with hatred of users, I demonstrated this.
*: note how much more tolerant programmers/academics
are to uneducated and incompetent people who intend to join
the ranks of the programmer/academic class.
It is usually because the other kind of user is unwilling to even try to
learn, so the programmer/academic has to keep going over the same points
over again. That irks some people.
This is just bigotry. It is generally incorrect that those who do
not seek to become academics have a lesser interest in learning
the subject. What they do have is a vastly lesser willingness to
submit themselves to unnecessary and unnatural contortions.
It is possible to teach advanced concepts to laypeople. In fact,
it is possible to teach advanced concepts to *schoolchildren*.
Th
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #28Sat, 5 Aug 00 21:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: post-installation SCSI setup?? (Perry Pip)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating (fred)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Spud")
Re: I'm curious (sfcybear)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Austin Ziegler)
Re: Unix user 10yrs + says Linux is bollocks (Jodren)
Re: Unix user 10yrs + is a fool (Jodren)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Lee Hollaar)
Re: God damm Microsoft (Courageous)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Isaac)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Isaac)
Re: Unix user 10yrs + says Linux is bollocks (Jeff Szarka)
Re: "pure" Linux?? ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Tom)
Re: Slipping away into time. (Charlie Ebert)
From: T. Max Devlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 19:09:55 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donal K. Fellows in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Austin Ziegler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the former, only the instructions are copyrightable. In the latter,
the ingredients are part of the instructions and are therefore
copyrightable.
I'd have thought that both are copyrightable. Or is this something
that varies between locales (are books of phone numbers copyrightable?
It certainly takes a fair amount of effort to assemble them...)
Yea, it sure does, doesn't it? Now you are actually discussing the
issues of *databases*, though, not literary works. That is a whole new
discussion, and is much more controversial than anything we've talked
about so far. Considering the amount of consternation which we've
already encountered, I'd just as soon not deal with databases, at least
for now.
Of
course, with a short list of things in a restricted domain, it is
actually quite difficult to prove that one version is derived from
another, and the last thing the person bringing the case wants is to
find that they are actually in violation of someone else's copyright,
so losing even that protection that they thought they were enjoying.
It isn't whether something is derived from something else, but whether
it is a literary work protectable by copyright to begin with. Lists of
ingredients are not literary works, no matter how much time it takes you
to figure them out; writing a recipe is a literary work, regardless of
how trivial it is. I think the root of it all is quite literally that
one is "figured out", and one is "written", though that could as easily
be interpreted as simply begging the question, I'll admit.
Conceptual facts are often like that, because concepts are, in reality,
whatever we think that they are. The danger of post-modernist arguments
from ignorance is obvious. The practical reality of the matter is that
intellectual property has no physical reality. Software is both an
engineering and an artistic effort. The fact remains, however, that it
is far more a matter of engineering than artistry.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
=== Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ==
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: post-installation SCSI setup??
Date: 5 Aug 2000 23:16:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try the following as root.
modprobe NCR53c406a
If that causes it to recognize your drive then you just to to put that
somwhere in your startup scripts.
Perry
On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:37:31 -0800,
Alan Murrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (B'ichela) wrote:
What exactly do you mean by this? What type of devices are you
Okay, you're right, I should have been a tad more specific. I have a Zip
drive attached to a SCSI card that I would like to be able to access.
However, my SCSI card does not seem to be able to be recognized. Here is
the info for the card, which i got from the Win95 info:
Acculogic ISApport/10 adapter SYM53406
Someone suggested I try using the NRC53c406a.O chip setup, and considering
the similarity in "ID numbers", I would like to tryt hat. However, now
that my system is set up, I do not know
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #27 Thu, 22 Jun 00 13:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Charlie Ebert the LinoShill (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Linux internal books ("bmeson")
Re: It's all about the microsurfs (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(James Lee)
Re: X can't be that slow (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux Usage Surveys (was: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't
accept the future. (James Lee)
Re: Wintrolls in panic! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: X can't be that slow (OSguy)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: It's all about the microsurfs (Jacques Guy)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Gary Connors)
Re: X can't be that slow (OSguy)
Re: Charlie Ebert the LinoShill (Pete Goodwin)
Re: High School is out...here come the trolls...who can't accept the future. ("John
Hughes")
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Charlie Ebert the LinoShill
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 10:56:28 -0500
Charlie Ebert wrote:
Terry Porter wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 02:10:45 GMT, Charlie Ebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So now we have this Charlie Ebert person, who has YET to back up any
of his wild ass claims with any proof.
snip of wasted bandwith
Yeah life is hard Simple Simon aka "Steve/Heather/Amy/Keys88".
Charlie always backs up his posts with facts, and experience, something you
have NONE of, being a lying anonymous Wintroll.
This Wintroll, (simon777) has ZERO credibility, save your valuable
time and killfile him.
And as I said before Simon777.
Just pick up any computer magazine from your office or Grocery store.
Now, is that so hard.
That's a BIG BOY.
Charlie
Forgive me for answering this moron in your post Charlie, but hes been
KILL-FILED here for a while now.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 19 hours 53 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
Terry,
He's just a Microsoft Stock Holder. Just a Microsoft Stock Holder!
That's all. Nothing to worry about.
He's scared because he's going to loose all his retirement money he
has in Microsoft Stock.
What he doesn't realize is Linux didn't do that damage to Microsoft.
Linux did not cause the Microsoft stock to fall!
IT was Bill Gates! Bill Gates caused your stock to drop.
There is something to be said about the a situation where by
the MOST SUCESSFUL SOFTWARE COMPANY IN THE WORLD HAS IT'S OWN
LEADER RESIGN FROM IT DUE TO HIS OWN ACTIONS.
And let's not forget that the whole Windows thing is Bill's Idea
from the beginning.
DOS was Bill's idea from the beginning.
NOW, Bill is telling us that he's wrong and he's resigned
Now, that's a company I would just love to have ton's of stock in .
Charlie
Actually dude, I think you missed the real point of Billy resigning as
CEO. He's made himself what, Chief Applications something or other, or
Chief Software architect or something. What he is really doing is far
more insidious than it at first appeared. He is stepping down from
being head of everything to put himself into position to be head of
Applications. Why do this? Well, it's pretty simple, if a little
lengthy to explain.
Bill knew that eventually Microsoft is going to lose the court battle.
This means that Microsoft will eventually be split up. Now, in this
case Bill had two choices. Either he stays in charge of the Windows
division (which I'm sure he would love to do) and makes a trusted ally
(Ballmer?) be in charge of the Apps division, or he puts himself in
charge of the Apps division, and leaves a trusted ally in charge of
Windows. If he were to leave the Apps to someone else, he was not
garaunteed what he really wanted. His goal (stated many times over) is
to see Windows on every computer, top to bottom. If he trusted that
apps division to someone else, they may not be in line with that goal.
They in fact, may actually try to make the apps division stronger. They
would do this by porting apps to other platforms, therebye creating
larger revenue streams for the apps division. But, if Bill himself is
in charge of the apps division, he can steer them in the "proper"
direction to keep Windows in the dominant position. Making sure that
the Apps division doesn't really make more than token efforts to port
apps to other platforms (making sure Mac gets older versions of Office
apps and other little moves here and there) he can still make sure the
apps division concentrates on creating stronger apps on the Windows
platforms. This will keep promoting Windows. He can trust the Windows
division head to do what is "right" to keep Windows in a d
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254
Linux-Advocacy Digest #254, Volume #26 Tue, 25 Apr 00 12:13:40 EDT
Contents:
Re: on installing software on linux. a worst broken system. (Stuart Krivis)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability (Stefan Ohlsson)
Re: Government to break up Microsoft ("Otto")
Re: Linux kernel 2.4 (Glitch)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability ("Otto")
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: i cant blieve you people!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: These OS debates are simply Hillarious! (Jason Long)
Factory pre-installed Linux. (mlw)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (David Steuber)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (George
Russell)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (The Ghost
In The Machine)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (The Ghost
In The Machine)
Re: Grasping perspective... (was Re: Forget buying drestin UNIX...) ("Drestin Black")
Re: Microsoft tries to scam its Insurance Company (Stephen Bodnar)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability ("Drestin Black")
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? ("Drestin Black")
Re: MS caught breaking web sites ("Drestin Black")
Re: Why Linux should be pronounced with a long I (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
(Christopher Browne)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart Krivis)
Subject: Re: on installing software on linux. a worst broken system.
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 07:30:24 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 12:58:11 GMT, The Cat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rpm -Uhv etherape-0.5.3-1.i386.rpm
error: failed dependencies:
gnome-libs = 1.0.0 is needed by etherape-0.5.3-1
libglade = 0.11 is needed by etherape-0.5.3-1
Excellent, now you know what you need.
But you just told him he didn't know what he needed. You need to make
up your mind here Terry, you can't have it both ways. Now did he know
what he needed? Or did he not know what he needed?
rpm -Uhv gnome-libs-1.0.58-1.i386.rpm
error: failed dependencies:
gtk+ = 1.2.1 is needed by gnome-libs-1.0.58-1
libjpeg.so.62 is needed by gnome-libs-1.0.58-1
Ditto.
Seems to me that these are basic libraries that should have been
installed with 11 gig of SuSE "install everything" option .
This is one place where debian's dselect and the *BSD ports system are much
better. They handle the dependencies for you.
I could envision a frontend for rpm that would keep track of what the sytem
had, then look at what a new rpm requires, and finally, go out and grab the
required stuff off the net. I bet someone could even make money off a thing
like this by charging a subscription fee. It sure would save a lot of grief
by avoiding "dependencies hell" is a RH-type system. :-)
The one saving grace with Linux (or other unix) is that it is generally
possible for a knowledgable user to figure out what is needed and then
provide it when installing new software.
With Windows, you may never know why something doesn't work or is flaky in
use. You also don't stand much chance of fixing it. (I hope that Win2K does
indeed solve some of the problems with DLL versions.)
--
Stuart Krivis
*** Remove "mongo" in headers for valid reply hostname
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability
Reply-To: Stefan Ohlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 Apr 2000 13:32:56 +0100
Chad Myers wrote:
Seeing as how a simple buffer overrun was mistreated as a "backdoor" that was
purposely placed by Microsoft, I thought it was only fitting to see how
Open Sores can fall victim to the same thing.
http://xforce.iss.net/alerts/advise46.php3
"With this backdoor password, an attacker could compromise the web server as
well as deface and destroy the web site."
"If the affected "piranha-gui" package is installed and the
[default] password has not been changed by the administrator, the
system is vulnerable."
So, if the admin installs the package and does not alter the default
password, then people who know this default password can log in.
Any secutiry-concious admin would change it upon installing.
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] · http://www.mds.mdh.se/~dal95son/ · [ ICQ# 17519554 ]
Gabe: [burning stolen money] It costs a fortune to heat this place.
/Cliffhanger
--
From: "Otto" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Government to break up Microsoft
Da
