Linux-Advocacy Digest #210, Volume #28 Thu, 3 Aug 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Loren Petrich)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: Microsoft
Ruling Too Harsh (Loren Petrich)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: Microsoft
Ruling Too Harsh (Loren Petrich)
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Se�n � Donnchadha)
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (SemiScholar)
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (Loren Petrich)
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came... (Loren Petrich)
Re: MSN Drops Newsgroup Support (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Stuart Fox")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:34:52 -0400
Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:Ichi5.11662$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8mbt5v$k3v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > Is it just me, or is Aaron, a confirmed MS hater posting from Windows
> 98?
> >
> > You need to reference the message so we can all look at the headers to
> > confirm it. If he is using 98 then he certainly looks foolish :-)
> >
> Just look at any of his headers
Windows droids don't understand how easy it is to munge headers.
>
> Path:
> SnUK!sn-xit-uk!supernews.com!194.42.224.136.MISMATCH!diablo.netcom.net.uk!ne
> tcom.net.uk!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!news
> .alt.net!usenet
> From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Newsgroups:
> alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian
> ,talk.politics.libertarian,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.society.liberalism,soc
> .singles
> Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:57:00 -0400
> Organization: Altopia Corp. - Usenet Access - http://www.altopia.com
> Lines: 107
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <8m5pp3$v9m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <8m723h$7af$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {TLC;RETAIL} (Win98; U)
> X-Accept-Language: en
> Xref: SnUK alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:532516 misc.legal:70731
> talk.politics.misc:526453 alt.politics.libertarian:166205
> talk.politics.libertarian:119589 comp.os.linux.advocacy:185126
> alt.society.liberalism:402916 soc.singles:138711
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:39:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >What part of "volountary exchange of goods and services" do you
>> >not understand?
>> That's a very idealistic view of capitalism, something that
>> suggests some college student who has just discovered the works of Ayn Rand.
>> And this view of capitalism has often been used to defend
>> Microsoft, which Mr. Kulkis hates.
>FALSE PREMISE And you know it, YOU GODAMNED LYING BASTARD!
>Microsoft's contracts are anything BUT "volountary"
How were they "not voluntary"?
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:41:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Christopher Browne wrote:
>> People living hand to mouth have little room to invest, and there
>> seems to be a sizable sector in the US that are distant from even
>> _considering_ having a brokerage account.
>You are using the same static economic model that the Democrats
>used when they laffed at Arthur Laffer's suggestion that lowering
>the tax rates would increase tax revenue.
>Turns out that Laffer was correct.
The Reagan Administration *RAISED* some taxes, such as payroll taxes.
>I was purchasing stock at the age of 12 with money I earned
>DELIVERING NEWSPAPERS.
Let's see ... at the age of 15, with the stock that Mr. Kulkis
purchased, he was able to unseat the Board of Directors of some major
corporation.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:44:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> * Businesses also have bureaucracies. And sometimes very obnoxious
>> bureaucracies.
>Big deal. They can't do a thing when you say the two magic words:
>"I quit!"
However, if all the alternatives are equally bad, then
love-it-or-leave-it won't help.
>> * One can always move to another country.
>Ever try it?
I've half-thought of doing so if some right-wing fascists take over.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:47:20 GMT
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:45:04 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Stuart Fox wrote:
>1. One low-income adults are from the lower-end of the intelligence pool
As a PhD student in math, I'm hardly "high income" or "low intelligence".
In other words, the above is just plain false.
>2. Intelligence is genetically linked. Correlation > 0.5 (where
> a correlation of 1.0 is absolute correlation)
(a) How do you measure "genetically linked",
(b) How do you isolate it as an independent variable ?
(c) What does "smart" mean anyway ? Your measure of "smart" could also
be flawed.
>Thus, it is no great surprise to find out that the stupid children
>of stupid low-income adults do worse academically than the smart
>children of smart high-income adults.
It's no surprise, but there are several possilble explanations, and
proving anything is kind of difficult ( especially when a lot of
people who do these kinds of tests make obvious conceptual errors
because they are trying to get results to say what they want them to )
>The less intelligent you are, the poorer you are.
>The less intelligent you are, the less intelligent your kids will be.
The relationship is nowhere near as deterministic as you naively believe.
If it was as rigid as you seem to think, you most certainly wouldn't
be earning 2-5 times as much as I am.
>There is complete agreement on this matter by all involved in
>the field of human intelligence research.
Yeah, right. And I suppose you're a leader in this field ?
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Se�n � Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:47:47 -0400
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>That's the law? "A monopoly can't do certain things"? Are you serious?
>
>No, actually, there's only one statute, and many different precedents
>which define the authority of the statute. The statute, called the
>Sherman act, quite simply says "it is illegal to restrain trade", and
>"it is illegal to monopolize". Has some other bits of less concern in
>there, and there's also the Clayton Act and other anti-trust laws, but
>none of them are related to this case. MS was convicted of *both*
>restraint of trade (for bundling IE to "cut off their air supply") and
>for monopolization (for strong-arming OEMs, partners, and customers).
>There is some debate over whether the restraint of trade conviction will
>be over-turned by the Supreme Court (the only ones with the authority,
>given the circumstances) but none whatsoever, actually, about the
>monopolization charge.
>
If all this is true, then I have absolutely no problem with the
monopolization charge. I haven't bothered to look at the details of
the OEM deals; I simply don't give a damn about them. So if this
particular shoe fits, then I say MS is gonna have to wear it, and more
power to the DoJ for nailing them on it. On the other hand, I think
the restraint of trade bit is 100% preposterous in this case.
>>>
>>>It's all in the Findings of Fact in the current case.
>>
>>I looked, but I couldn't find anything that justifies disallowing IE
>>in Windows while allowing Navigator in Solaris, Konqueror in Linux,
>>and whatever was the Web browser in OS/2. Did I miss it?
>
>No, you just refused to see it. Two *products* cannot be tied together
>in order to restrain trade (kill off the competition). You have to beat
>them *competitively*, not by market manipulation.
>
But that's exactly what IE did. The magazine reviews were practically
unanimous; the bundled version of IE (4.x) had overtaken Navigator in
almost every way. Why did the judge simply ignore this?
I think this is a really interesting point. IE 4.0 was characterized
by two simultaneous developments (a) it was integrated with the
Windows shell, and (b) it won all the reviews. How do we know to which
development we should attribute its sudden rise in popularity?
>>
>>BTW, because Windows had shipped with a componentized IE for quite a
>>while before the case went to court, MS is *ENTIRELY* correct when
>>they say that removing it is impossible without damaging the product.
>
>That's bullshit. Its software. Nothing can "damage" it.
>
Yeah, right. Try taking the standard shell out of any of the Linux
distributions without changing anything else (config files, etc.). See
if you have a usable system after that.
>>
>>Also BTW, I still don't grasp the significance of the internal memos.
>
>It shows that their intent was not to provide a web browser for the
>benefit of the consumer, but to prevent competition. Which is to say
>"restrain trade".
>
That's ridiculous. If their intent was to prevent competition, then
why did they bother making IE *BETTER* than Navigator, to the tune of
nearly unanimous praise? Why is the judge determining the intent of a
corporation based on the email snippets of a few individuals, when the
actions of the company as a whole say something entirely different?
Also, unless I'm missing something, isn't intent insufficient in this
case? I realize that "attempted monopolization" is illegal, but
"attempted restraint of trade"?! Doesn't some actual damage have to be
demonstrated? And doesn't the judge's ultimate ruling that Netscape
was *NOT* forced out of the market severely undermine that charge?
>>
>>I mean, if hurting Netscape was really the only reason MS had to
>>include IE, then there would have been no reason to redesign the thing
>>from the ground up just prior to the integration.
>
>It is if you have a consent decree that says you are allowed to
>integrate, but not bundle.
>
So what they did was expressly permitted by the consent decree?
>>
>>The fact that
>>Microsoft did redesign it as a set of reusable components, to the
>>benefit of users and software developers alike, shows that hurting
>>Netscape was most certainly *NOT* their only intention, but rather a
>>sweet little bonus. And yet the Judge chose to completely ignore all
>>that, focusing entirely on several lines of email. What ever happened
>>to "actions speak louder than words"?
>
>He didn't "completely" ignore that fact. He *specifically* ignored the
>*per se* rule which you are actually referring to. The point is,
>though, that the "reusable components benefit" was the sweet little
>bonus; the intent and purpose of integrating IE was to "cut off their
>air supply". Why are you choosing to completely ignore all the facts,
>in order to continue your empty charade of confrontation with an empty
>issue of "argument from cluelessness?"
>
I'm not ignoring the emails at all. I'm simply questioning the
soundness of using a few emails out of tens of thousands during a
period measured in years to determine the intent of an entire
corporation. I'm saying that although the emails seem damning, a
totally different picture of intent emerges when you consider the
*OTHER* facts in this case - something that you and the judge refuse
to do for some reason.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:50:26 GMT
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 05:54:51 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>How is it that you pass back and forth between vapid ignorance and
>brilliant insight between sending one post and writing the next?
He doesn't. He alternates between agreeing and disagreeing with your
viewpoint. Agreeing with an idiot doesn't make you one, and disagreeing
with a moron doesn't make you a genius.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (SemiScholar)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:56:17 GMT
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:50:02 GMT, "Marcus Turner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:19:23 GMT, "Marcus Turner"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> >> >but merely yet another political body,
>> >>
>> >> No - they are not political. That's why they are appointed for life.
>> >
>> >Perhaps Partisan would be a better word. There are distinct tendencies
>> >within the group.
>>
>> I don't think that's accurate either. I think they are not "partisan"
>> just because they have opinions about how the world should and does
>> work. But that doesn't make them "Democrat" or "Republican". I think
>> they are always free to view the world on the "liberal/conservative"
>> continuum as they choose, but that's not "politics", that's
>> "philosophy".
>
>"Philosophy" _is_ a better word than Partisan or Political but I'm not
>entirely happy with it either.
>
>But I also don't have a better suggestion.
Well, I think we can agree that the human beings on the court do not
give up their opinions, philosophies and biases when they put on the
robes. I theory they are supposed to, but I think we can agree that
they don't. And I think it's probably impossible for them to do so.
They are, after all, only human.
- SemiScholar
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:51:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> In the Soviet Union, for instance, it was considered a bit
>> dangerous to know too much Lenin, because one will likely know more than
>> many Party bosses, and they don't like getting embarrassed.
>And yet, this is the kind of system you promote for the U.S.
In your birch-grove-inspired dreams.
>> Let's protect property rights on the honor system, shall we?
>Yet another moronic red-herring from Loren Petrich, Communist
>Agitator and apprentice of confusionism.
>Are you equating the use of force to ENFORCE a contract which both
>parties have entered into volountarily (with full knowledge that
>breach of contract brings the spectre of the use of force) is the
>same thing as the use of force to COERCE people into entering
>into a contract INVOLOUNTARILY?
Pure evasion. There is no attempt at a general theory of what
ought to be voluntary and what ought not to be.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:52:11 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> >Notice who EVERY time I make a mention of anything that brings
> >attention to the fact that Communism is NOT dead, and can, and
> >does, still present a credible (if dormant) threat to our
> >freedom, LOREN Communist Agitator PETRICH always comes up with
> >his smarmy little attempt to shut down the discussion.
>
> >You still have not provided a shred of evidence to counter the
> >testimony of high-ranking defectors from Soviet Russia.
>
> This from someone who has not provided a shred of evidence that
> such claims can be taken seriously. I did a bit of research on the
> German-reunification question recently, and here's this link:
>
> http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/96winter/boll.htm
>
> It discusses very clearly the diplomatic maneuvering between the patrons
> of each half of the formerly-split Germany -- and it is clear that the
> Soviet Union had *lost* East Germany to the US, NATO, and West Germany.
> It nowhere takes seriously the notion that the Soviet Union's leaders had
> been trying to fake a retreat from East Germany. So I think it far to say
> that the rest of Mr. Kulkis's conspiracy theories have the same quality.
Read "The Perestroika Deception" and get back to me.
> --
> Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
> My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came...
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:54:10 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> However, "love it or leave it" tends to be very inefficient.
>Actually, it is VERY efficient.
Which Mr. Kulkis has demonstrated by moving to a libertarian utopia.
>> Mr. Kulkis has not been moving to a libertarian utopia, to name
>> just one example.
>Not moving to a place which does not exist is not failure.
Is Mr. Kulkis too lazy to create one?
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: MSN Drops Newsgroup Support
Date: 3 Aug 2000 19:45:07 +0200
In article <8lsbk2$mgb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dealing with those pesky Internet standards the Microsoft way. Hmmm...
>I wonder if MSN will offer a Linux advocacy message board?
>
>http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1555559.html?tag=st.ne.ni.rnbot.rn.
>ni
They tried to give convenience as the reason, but there is no
competition for a newsgroup in an xterm with a keystroke-based interface
for convenience and speed, especially in large traffic situations where
you have to sift.
With web based things you have to point, click, and then _wait_ for each
message (sometimes each piece of a message) to download. And when they
have ads that auto-reload, caching becomes irrelevant.
I find slashdot unreadable for this reason, for example.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
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: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:54:22 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Do you mind posting the sed script?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
