Linux-Advocacy Digest #171, Volume #28 Wed, 2 Aug 00 04:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch? (Christopher Browne)
Re: Scheme == Beginners language (Christopher Browne)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Stuart Fox")
Apache Wins in Another Survey (Arthur Frain)
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch? ("Jeffrey B. Siegal")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown (Ed Cogburn)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: LOSEDOS can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 07:03:52 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jeffrey B. Siegal would say:
>Christopher Browne wrote:
>> There is still _cost_. The costs of installing and running the mail
>> servers. The costs of maintaining the network connections.
>
>Not if those costs are already being covered by the need to mainatain those
>facilies for some other purpose which exists whether or not email is
>transferred. In that case, the cost to maintain the faciltiies *for
>transferring email* is zero.
The marginal cost _might_ be zero, but that is not, a priori, true.
It's only true if there are _no_ incremental costs involved in
increasing the amount of traffic. That may well be true for small
amounts of traffic, but is _not_ true if:
a) traffic grows, or
b) there is _any expectation at all_ of there being any Quality Of
Service greater than "none at all."
>> They may be "fixed" costs, relatively inelastic to moderate increases
>> in traffic. It may not _ever_ be worth attaching a per-message price
>> so as to charge by the message.
>>
>> The costs are, nevertheless, costs.
>
>But they are not costs to *transfer* email. They are costs to
>*maintain* the facility. Not the same thing at all.
The costs are incurred as a result of the need to be _able_ to
transfer email.
And quite frankly, any site that treats the cost of managing message
transfer as being zero is one that is likely to be about to become a
Spam Forwarder.
If you turn on Sendmail _without_ doing some amount of traffic
analysis, traffic management, and security maintenance, then you're
just _asking_, in these "spam-laden" days, for someone to latch onto
your server and use it to help solicit sales of phone sex and
multilevel marketing scams.
I'd rather suggest that those that _pretend_ it's free of cost are
those most likely to become vulnerable to security holes, as the PHB's
(Pointy Haired Bosses) involved are liable to allocate _no_ employee
time to system management...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/>
Rules of the Evil Overlord #139. "If I'm sitting in my camp, hear a
twig snap, start to investigate, then encounter a small woodland
creature, I will send out some scouts anyway just to be on the safe
side. (If they disappear into the foliage, I will not send out another
patrol; I will break out the napalm.)" <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Scheme == Beginners language
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 07:04:23 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when [EMAIL PROTECTED]
would say:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) writes:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Bruce R. Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Use what the professionals use when teaching programming: Scheme
>>
>> They do? Where? I'm not aware offhand of anywhere teaching scheme as
>> a primary language (unlike C, Java, and SML.)
>
>It's been the primary language at MIT at least since 1986, probably
>before. And MIT's not alone.
>> Let's face it, scheme is one of these odd minority languages, deeply
>> off the beaten track. If RMS and the FSF wasn't pushing it (via
>> guile) who would have heard of it outside the AI community?
>
>Most of the discussion I see on comp.lang.scheme is not guile-specific.
There is _very little_ discussion of Guile on comp.lang.scheme; _far_
more mention of other implementations.
>I think the CS education community is most represented.
Indeed.
>The AI community tends to use Common Lisp a lot, though many like
>Scheme for its elegant simplicity.
"Scheme" is short for "Schemer," and was originally created to explore
the use of continuations in AI applications. Its name consciously
parallels "Conniver" and "Planner," other AI systems of the time.
I'm not sure that Scheme is in _widespread_ use in AI work; it lacks
the large "library" of standardized functionality that CL includes as
part of the standard language. But I digress...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/scheme.html>
"If roach hotels worked on pointy haired people, Microsoft would die."
-- Pete Koren
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:27:00 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Refresh my memory....
>
> Exactly how is re-installing the operating system, re-installing all of
> the applications, and then having to tweak all of the settings through
> a gui every couple of months "easier to maintain and operate"
Is that what you have to do when you run NT? I certainly don't.
>
> In EXCEEDINGLY RARE the event of catastrophic failure on a Unix machine,
> all you have to do is
>
> a) reload the absolute minimal base operating system (30 min max.)
> b) recover from last night's backup tapes.
As with NT.
<Snip massive and completely pointless sig>
------------------------------
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Apache Wins in Another Survey
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 00:29:23 -0700
There is a new survey of web server usage at
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200007/weighted.html.
This survey is different from Netcraft in that
it doesn't just count sites - to quote:
"The technique measures how authoritative a
web server appears to be on the internet by
how often it is referenced by other sites.
The idea is that a server that is referenced
by hundreds or thousands of sites wil in
general have much more traffic than a web
server that is referenced only a hand full
of times, or not at all."
So for the top 50 sites, Apache is in first
place with a weighted share of 31% while
IIS is in third place with a share of 17%.
Geez - Apache isn't even double IIS, unlike
Netcraft.
Oh, wait - I scrolled down the page a little,
and for the top 250 sites, Apache is in
first place with 58% and IIS is in third
place again with 11% - Apache has over 5X
the weighted market share of IIS - even
better than Netcraft.
If you scroll all the way to the bottom of
the page, for the top 1000 sites, Apache's
share goes to 60%, and IIS stays in third
place with 11%.
Looks like IIS has to be running a lot of
tiny unimportant sites to get the numbers
it gets in the Netcraft survey. Apache
still ends up with 60% plus, just like
in Netcraft.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: "Jeffrey B. Siegal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 00:41:35 -0700
Christopher Browne wrote:
> The marginal cost _might_ be zero, but that is not, a priori, true.
>
> It's only true if there are _no_ incremental costs involved in
> increasing the amount of traffic.
One way this might be true is if email is a lower impact use than other
uses for which you are already being paid. For example, ISP customers
generally require that the ISP provide email service. If ISP customers
spend more time sending and receiving (reasonably-sized) emails, that is
probably less time spent browsing graphical web sites, viewing streaming
media, playing network games, etc. All of these are more resource
intensive than email. So the ISP would actually prefer, from a cost
point of view, that its users use email more rather than less.
> The costs are incurred as a result of the need to be _able_ to
> transfer email.
Which, again, is not to say there is a meaningful cost associated with
actually transferring the email.
> And quite frankly, any site that treats the cost of managing message
> transfer as being zero is one that is likely to be about to become a
> Spam Forwarder.
I don't believe there is a connection. Spam forwarders are sites which
allow themselves to be used by senders who are unaccountable. The
reason for requiring that customers be accountable is not to assess
costs, but to prevent abuse. Even if email is completely costless, it
still makes sense to discourage abuse if you want email (or any other
potentially abuse-prone service) to remain useful.
> I'd rather suggest that those that _pretend_ it's free of cost are
> those most likely to become vulnerable to security holes, as the PHB's
> (Pointy Haired Bosses) involved are liable to allocate _no_ employee
> time to system management...
The cost of security holes and general management is a completely
different issue from the cost of actually processing email.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:48:26 -0400
From: Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> "Colin R. Day" wrote:
> >
> > The Americans only ran out of gas once in WWII, and that was
> > when they outran their supply bases racing across France.
>
> Prompting Patton to set up the "RedBall express"
>
> He designated certain MSR's to be one-way (either to the front or
> from the front). This simple changed tripled the efficiency of his
> logistics tail in his sector.
It still wasn't enough. When Monty started Operation Market-Garden,
supplies to the Brits in the North got priority, Patton had to
"starve" some.
====== 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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:53:05 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > You dare to claim "unix boxes are essential to running microsoft.com?"
> > >
> >
> > Yes. And based on the existance of Unix boxes at microsoft.com,
> > Microsoft believes this, too.
>
> Prove it or continue to be considered the poorest liar on usenet
>
Look who's making accusations of spreading lies...
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:54:30 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:8m411b$i2a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <uveh5.11098$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > > > > heaviest tasks.
> > > >
> > > > The PC bus architecture has the I/O throughput for that sort of stuff?
> > > > The usual tactic is to get a proper mainframe or Sun Enterprise or
> > > > what-have-you[*], and I've never heard of a port of NT to that size of
> > > > iron...
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, actually, it does. This is proven all the time. Benchmarks head to
> head
> > > against the biggest iron Sun can muster is defeated by Compaq and Dell
> boxes
> > > using Wintel.
> >
> > Only on machines that cost as much or more than similarly equipped Sun
> > boxes.
> >
>
> wrong wrong wrong wrong - again and again and again you are wrong and proven
> wrong and demonsrated pathetically stupid and did I mention wrong?
>
Really?
Show me an NT box with 80 GB/sec bandwidth
Show me an NT box with 700 GB/sec bandwidth.
> Sun is beaten by 3 times the performance on hardware that costs 1/2 the
> price! Over and over it's proven that sun hardware costs too much and
> delivers squat. The pierced masterbaters who worship sun hardware have
> failed to recognize their idol has been left behind...
Crack addict....
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: Loren's 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:55:39 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If Microsoft has such a good platform, then why are the servers
> > > > > > that come under the heaviest usage Unix machines?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How come no Lose2000 machines?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
> > > > >
> > > > > Now that's a compelling argument! Also completely false.
> > > > >
> > > > > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > > > > heaviest tasks.
> > > >
> > > > EVERY Fortune 500 company I have worked at keeps their most
> > > > important databases on AS/400's and Unix machines.
> > >
> > > which demonstrates exactly what we've been saying all along. You are
> full of
> > > it! And, besides, so what if 1 or 2 F500 companies keep "most" of their
> > > "important" databases on AS/400s and Unix machines according to
> ex-employee
> > > kookis. All the rest run on less expensive, easier to maintain/operate
> and
> > > more productive Windows/Intel boxes.
> >
> > Refresh my memory....
> >
> > Exactly how is re-installing the operating system, re-installing all of
> > the applications, and then having to tweak all of the settings through
> > a gui every couple of months "easier to maintain and operate"
> >
> > In EXCEEDINGLY RARE the event of catastrophic failure on a Unix machine,
> > all you have to do is
> >
> > a) reload the absolute minimal base operating system (30 min max.)
> > b) recover from last night's backup tapes.
> >
> > ta-daaaaaaaaaaaaah, perfect restoration.
> >
> > Unix engineer goes back to desk, relaxes, posts to Usenet,
> >
> >
> > Meanwhile, drestin adress will be working overtime on his LoseNT box,
> > long into the night...going home when he has achieved the mere goal
> > of "getting it running"...and then will resume working on this ONE
> > BOX for the next two day.
>
> No - you miss the scenario completely. When the rare even of a Wintel box
rare = 15 times/year.
> failure occurs, my clients simply... continue onwards as if nothing happened
.............Because....nobody uses that NT shit anyways.....
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: Loren's 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:56:10 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> so, what you are saying below is - you simply can't. You are ignorant and do
> not posses even remotely enough intelligence to even cut & paste an answer
> eh?
I'll let you ponder that before I answer.
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Everything is redundant.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No it *isn't*, that's the entire point. How many times must
> > > > it be pointed out to you?
> > >
> > > but, you are wrong and we're trying to educate yo.
> >
> > Um... you're lacking in two crucial areas, Drestin Adress
> > Specifically: knowledge and wisdom.
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The Microsoft TPC database is split into equal chunks, if
> > > > any chunk/machine is lost then all processing stops for that
> > > > part of the database.
> > >
> > > prove that statement and maybe we'll listen.
> >
> > What's the point. Every other time something is we show you proof
> > of this, that or the other, you ignore it.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > ICQ # 3056642
> >
> > I: "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"
> >
> > J: Loren's 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
> >
> > A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
> >
> > B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
> >
> > C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
> > sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
> > that she doesn't like.
> >
> > D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
> >
> > E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> > ...despite (D) above.
> >
> > F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
> > response until their behavior improves.
> >
> > G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> > adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
> >
> > H: Knackos...you're a retard.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: Loren's 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:56:52 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Bob Hauck wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 29 Jul 2000 11:57:44 -0500, Drestin Black
> > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Remember how we always laughed at people when they'd stay
> stupid
> > > things
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm laughing now, at the advocate who does not think before
> posting.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >well, it turns out that Linux onces again "innovates" - it's
> now
> > > > > possible to
> > > > > > > >actually, physically destroy your hard drive using some simple
> code
> > > > > (link
> > > > > > > >provided)...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But not by accident, and not unless you are root, and not just
> on
> > > > > > > Linux. This being a problem with the IDE _hardware_, it would
> > > affect
> > > > > > > all other systems that support IDE. Some of _them_ do not have
> any
> > > > > > > security at all so any user can do this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And...of course...who keeps promoting IDE instead of the far
> > > > > > superior SCSI....Microsoft, of course.
> > > > >
> > > > > No fuckhead - I promote SCSI, always have always will, don't even
> have
> > > an
> > > > > IDE drive. MS promotes SCSI, only a confused trolling fudster like
> > > yourself
> > > > > would think otherwise. How pathetic.
> > > >
> > > > Oh really, then why does MS always spearhead the drive to "update"
> > > > IDE protocols every time they become obsolete.
> > > >
> > >
> > > and why shouldn't they? That has nothing to do with their prefered HD
> > > interface....
> >
> > You really are fucking dense.
>
> "The wise man is mocked by fools!"
And YOU are the fucking dense fool.
>
> thank you for proving this true kookus... you fool!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: Loren's 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: LOSEDOS can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:59:25 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > you missed the point - this doesn't just trash partion tables or
> make
> > > data
> > > > > inaccessible - it actually physically destroys the firmware - as in,
> IDE
> > > > > drive => brick.
> > > >
> > > > And you are alleging that IDE controls codes are available only in
> > > > Linux and Unix?
> > >
> > > Nope.
> >
> > Then you admit that LOSEDOS CAN DESTROY YOUR HARD DRIVE!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
> absolutely - and faster and better than losenix too !! :{)
Good.
Now... how do you propose that Delphi protect the users from the
inevitable virus attack that is going to come along....
We already *KNOW* that the average *nix user doesn't have the proper
permissions for the code to run as designed........
How are YOU going to protect your Lose* systems?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: Loren's 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
