Linux-Advocacy Digest #573, Volume #28 Tue, 22 Aug 00 18:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:28:15 -0400
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > ZnU wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > ZnU wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The "losers" under a Bush administration will be just
> > > > > > > > > about everyone. Bush's proposed tax cut eliminates all
> > > > > > > > > chance of paying off the national debt, yet it only
> > > > > > > > > gives $43/year back to the average american family.
> > > > > > > > > Where does the rest go? You guessed it: the top 2% or
> > > > > > > > > so of the economic scale.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The president doesn't create the budget, he only has the
> > > > > > > > power to approve it in it's entirety or return it to
> > > > > > > > congress, now who has really been creating the budget
> > > > > > > > deficit for the past 20 years? And who in the past four
> > > > > > > > has managed to turn it (the deficit) around?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If the Republicans did all the work to balance the budget,
> > > > > > > why are they trying to damn hard to unbalance it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Are you, ZnU, smoking large amounts of crack before writing
> > > > > > to USENET?
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you really denying this? In just the last few months the
> > > > > Republicans have tried to pass two tax cuts that would
> > > > > eliminate or significantly reduce the surplus, and Bush wants
> > > > > to take things even farther.
> > > >
> > > > A surplus is merely another name for OVER-TAXATION.
> > > ^^^^^^^
> > >
> > > You misspelled "deficit." All that interest ends up costing quite a
> > > bit more in the long run.
> >
> > Interest is a result of debt which is a result of deficits cause by
> > over-spending....
> >
> > The federal debt CANNOT Be paid off early like a home-owner's
> > mortgage. The T-bills can ONLY be paid off when they mature. Anybody
> > who has any knowledge of how the federal debt works is aware of this.
> >
> > Since you are blissfully unaware, it demonstrates that your are
> > basically unqaulified to comment
>
> You're setting up strawmen again. I haven't said a word about the
> timeframe to pay off the national debt.
Upon maturity of the outstanding Treasury bills, you idiot.
--
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 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]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:28:15 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> >> Because its a stupid idea. We thought you were technically competent
> >> enough to know that.
> >
> >Who's "we"?
>
> Everyone who thought that you were technically competent enough to know
> that, I suppose. I hadn't taken a survey, but I was being charitable in
> including Nathaniel. He may not have thought you were technically
> competent at all, for all I know.
Include me in that we. Otherwise I would not expended so much effort trying
to get through to him.
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:33:24 -0400
Perry Pip wrote:
>
> Another question that you have repeated numerous times. I will try to
> answer it more elaborately for you:
>
> 1) Military benefit: Better ability for the U.S. to protect it's borders.
>
That is a legitimate use of government spending, although the US wasn't
really threatened from the West.
>
> 2) Benefits to democracy: A much safer speedier means of transportion to
> Washington D.C. for representives of California and other States,
> necessary for equal representation of these states in our political
> system.
>
OK
>
> 3) Industrial benefit: Opening up the west to the industrial
> revolution in the East, providing resources to the east in return for
> finished products to the West.
>
My claim was if the West were that rich in minerals, then a
trancontinental railroad should have been economically
justifiable to private firms, although the military/political
considerations might have tipped the balance.
The rail net of the South was somewhat degraded during the
Civil War. How much had been repaired before the Trancon RR
was built?
>
> With political, social, economic and military isolation, California
> may have someday had a perfectly justifiable reason to secede from the
> Union. (Unlike the South, which had an utterly stupid reason). Lincoln
> wanted to keep the country unified. I think he made a good
> decision. That's my opinion.
>
California (and several other states) had threatened secession in 1861.
However, I don't think any state would have seceded after Sherman's
march through Georgia and the Carolinas.
>
> >> You haven't made one practical suggestion on what could have
> >> alternatively been done that could have had as much benefit as the
> >> transcontinentals.
> >
> >Railroads in more populated areas, for one.
>
> What was needed at the time was railroads to interconnect populated
> areas separated by vast distances and difficult terrains.
>
Was the need just political/military, or was it economic as well?
Yes I have asked that before, but we haven't decided it.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 18:43:04 -0300
"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
>
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> >>
> >> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
> >> >>
> >> >> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >>
> >> >> > It seems to be the central issue, I think. If it is simply a matter of
> >> >> > one Usenet poster showing or failing to show respect for another Usenet
> >> >> > poster, I'd suggest it has nothing to do with the Linux community.
> >> >> > Though I must admit that Usenet is a much stronger part of the Linux
> >> >> > community than most other communities.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is more so a problem when the person showing a lack of basic respect for
> >> >> the long time users of Linux is a member of a official development team of a
> >> >> well know project like Roberto is for the KDE development team.
> >> >
> >> >This is wrong in so many ways I must speak.
> >> >I show a lack of respect for long time users of Linux?
> >> >I lack respect for SOME of them, indeed.
> >> >I am a member of a "official development team" in the same way anyone
> >> >willing to spend his time coding is, so it's not too "official", really.
> >> >
> >> >> He seems to
> >> >> discount the concerns of the very user base that have assisted building OS
> >> >> into a platform that makes his project possible.
> >> >
> >> >Nonsense. If you feel a need to throw an ad hominem at me,
> >> >I'm game, but be specific, or go fuck yourself.
> >>
> >> Good for you, Roberto. You have every right to say "fuck you" to anyone
> >> who second-guesses you.
> >>
> >> But if you don't mind, could you accept an honest and humble plea to
> >> re-examine, possibly, even double-check, whether your being as honorable
> >> in your support of a project which seeks to extract profit on
> >> potentially dubious value?
> >
> >Hmmm... KDE doesn't seek to extract profit. So no.
>
> That's what I don't understand. Does QT seek to extract profit?
Qt is a piece of software, it has no intentions.
If you mean TT, the company that writes Qt, I suppose they do.
They are not KDE, though.
> >> Do you really think so little of your
> >> ability to write software? Shouldn't your honest work be sufficient for
> >> providing an honest and equitable level of profit without preventing
> >> access to the ideas which underlay your efforts?
> >
> >I have no clue of what you are talking about.
>
> By using QT you invest effort into limiting the liberty of the users of
> your product.
No. I grant the users whatever freedom I feel like granting. To
"reduce" their freedom, they would have to come from a previous
situation where they had more freedom than I gave them. Their
previous situation was "not having my product", so they don't.
> If the only reason you have to use QT is that it works,
> and you like it, and you're familiar with it, and the only reason you
> have to avoid using QT is that you get hate mail for using it, I would
> think you'd have enough professional pride to question more strongly the
> choice to use QT.
Why? I don't make decisions about how I spend my free time
based on hate mail.
> I know it isn't necessarily only your personal
> decision, and wouldn't go so far as to suggest that your ethical
> response should be to quit KDE, but it might be more like
> "pigheadedness", rather than, as you said "a strong ego" which prevents
> you from considering this issue more seriously.
I considered them seriously. I decided it was not worth it.
--
Roberto Alsina (decided)
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:30:14 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >A surplus is merely another name for OVER-TAXATION.
>
> Not when you do accounting like a government does, it isn't. Its more
> like "cash reserves", though the whole point is that it isn't cash, and
> it isn't in reserve. Its a *projected* surplus. Now who would be
> stupid enough to "give back" a *projected* surplus, before you've even
> collected it? George W. Bush, it seems, and he's willing to put 'and
> the government shouldn't have any money in reserve, either, so lets give
> back the money we already collected' on top of it.
>
> The question of the "balanced budget" is far more complex than any
> ingenuous reading of the words as a phrase could allow. It is *not*
> like any person, or even company, "balancing their budget". Likewise,
> the term "deficit spending", which relates to the discussion. If the
> government didn't practice "deficit spending", then there would be no
> need to balance the budget. There would, indeed, be no way to unbalance
> the budget, to my understanding. I'm not an economist, but it seems to
> me that your declaration that "a surplus is over-taxation" is kind of
> like saying that you owe the finance charges on your credit cards before
> you even make any purchases.
>
> A lot like treasury bonds, isn't it? So the money we're supposed to
> give back is the interest we are then going to need to pay? Again, I'm
> sure its not that simplistic, but that's the only thing, I think, we can
> be sure of. That, and whether Reagan/Bush was the cause of the bad
> economy of the 80s or the effect, and whether Clinton was the cause or
> the effect of the business boom which continued that trend. In both
> bust and boom, 80% of the increased income accrued to the richest 20% of
> the populace. (There's no telling how many below the line got pushed
> above the line by the remaining 20%, but it was fewer than those who got
> pushed deeper down at the same time.)
>
> I recall an interesting comment by Arthur C. Clarke concerning the
> prospects of a flat tax. Through one of his characters, Clarke said
> that a flat tax is a recipe for revolution. It may be tolerated for a
> short time, but eventually it leads to the masses rebelling against the
> inherent oppression of the luxurious few.
>
> I'll bet you're a real big fan of the flat tax, aren't you, Aaron?
No...
A flat tax is like this:
One guy earning $10,000 / year goes into the grocery store, and
pays $1.70/pound for hamburger.
Another guy comes in, and he earns $1050,00/year, so they charge
him $17.00/pound.
FUCK THAT!
the only MORALE tax is a head tax.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> -- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
> of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
> Research assistance gladly accepted. --
>
> -----= 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! =-----
--
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 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] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:36:42 GMT
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:52:36 -0300, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>>
>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:57:06 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>> >> >
>> >> > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[deletia]
>> >> > > Y9ou said something like that I disrespected the linux user base, or
>> >> > > some such. Can't tell, because you sniped it.
>> >> >
>> >> > Why it that a problem? Can't you read back the thread?
>> >>
>> >> Nope, lame expires.
>> >
>> >Setup your own server with decent expires.
>>
>> Quite. It's not like setting up leafnode is exactly rocket science...
>
>Shut up, Jedi, this is grownup talk.
Ironically enough, you deleted anything that could be construed
as anything else.
The guy has a point. This is a BUSY group and archiving it for
longer than some relatively lame NNTP server might be in order.
Such things are not difficult to achieve.
Infact, such things were preferable before the advent of cable & DSL.
Then again, aren't you the author of an NNTP client yourself?
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:31:47 -0400
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ZnU wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > ZnU wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > > Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
> > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The president doesn't create the budget, he only has the
> > > > > > > > > > power to approve it in it's entirety or return it to
> > > > > > > > > > congress, now who has really been creating the budget
> > > > > > > > > > deficit for the past 20 years? And who in the past four
> > > > > > > > > > has managed to turn it (the deficit) around?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If the Republicans did all the work to balance the budget,
> > > > > > > > > why are they trying to damn hard to unbalance it?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Are you, ZnU, smoking large amounts of crack before writing
> > > > > > > > to USENET?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are you really denying this? In just the last few months the
> > > > > > > Republicans have tried to pass two tax cuts that would
> > > > > > > eliminate or significantly reduce the surplus, and Bush wants
> > > > > > > to take things even farther.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And I suppose the Democrats are just going to let that surplus
> > > > > > sit there reducing the debt, rather than spending it on bigger
> > > > > > government health care and *ahem* Gore's own $500 billion in
> > > > > > proposed tax cuts?
> > > > >
> > > > > Gore has promised to pay off the debt. Bush has not. Of course,
> > > > > it's rather difficult to attack Bush on the issues, since he almost
> > > > > never talks about them....
> > > >
> > > > Paying off the debt is already IN the budget, you moron.
> > > >
> > > > ALL treasury bills have a maturity date. To cannot retire the debt
> > > > any sooner than the maturity dates on the T-bills. To retire the
> > > > debt, all that needs to be done is to refrain from rolling over the
> > > > bonds as they mature.
> > >
> > > How will this be possible after the Republicans have starved the
> > > government giving their tax breaks?
> >
> >
> > Tax breaks stimulate commerce, idiot!
>
> Ahh. Another proponent of trickle-down economics. Of course, some people
> see that for what it really is: a way for rich people to justify their
> exploitation of the system.
For your information...WORKERS always get paid.
OWNERS only get paid if there's anything left over after paying workers.
Therefore, the trickle-down is with the WORKERS at the top, and
the excess trickles-down to the owners.
Micro-economics: learn 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 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: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 18:45:49 -0300
"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
>
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> >>
> >> Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >On Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:05:04 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> >> >>Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >
> >> >>Screw KDE. Its a commercial development project.
> >> >
> >> >That is an outright lie. KDE is free software. Even RMS agrees that
> >> >QT satisfies the definition of free software, despite his misgivings
> >> >about that license.
> >>
> >> Maybe you should clarify. AFAIK, KDE requires the 'consumer' to agree
> >> not to copy certain libraries. This is not free software. Please
> >> correct me if I'm mistaken in either regard.
> >
> >You are mistaken.
>
> Then please correct me. I don't recall asking "please contradict me
> with no explanation if you think I am mistaken". Stop being a troll,
> for christ's sake.
Well, I would have expected this to be obvious, but let's take the long
road:
You are mistaken, KDE doesn't require the consumer not to copy certain
libraries, and never has required such a thing.
> [...]
> >> I was under the impression that KDE was a directly commercial venture
> >> which seeks to make money on distributing their developments. I don't
> >> consider that an inherently unethical act, but I do question why it is
> >> considered competitive with GNOMES purely open approach.
> >
> >What gave you such a weird impression?
>
> The FSF rhetoric, probably, or a media report of the same. This is an
> old post you're responding to, though. I recalled more of the details
> concerning QT and the non-commercial nature of KDE while reconsidering
> the matter.
Ok, no, KDE is not a directly commercial venture, and we are not seeking
to make money on distributing our development.
> [...]
> >A lot of KDE code is "more free than GPL". Check out the KOffice
> >licensing.
>
> Please, I have no more time for any more research; I've already got
> enough to last me for months. And I don't want to get into another
> discussion of "there is nothing 'more free' than GPL", which I'm afraid
> is still the case, when the metaphor "free software" is properly
> understood.
It's so free you could link it to GPL code, and the GPL would
be the license deciding the distribution restrictions.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:39:00 GMT
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:57:44 -0300, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina escribi�:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:57:06 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> > >
>> > >Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > >> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > > I'm game, but be specific, or go fuck yourself.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Now what did I say the earn a reply with that tone from him?
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Y9ou said something like that I disrespected the linux user base, or
>> > >> > > some such. Can't tell, because you sniped it.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Why it that a problem? Can't you read back the thread?
>> > >>
>> > >> Nope, lame expires.
>> > >
>> > >Setup your own server with decent expires.
>> >
>> > Quite. It's not like setting up leafnode is exactly rocket science...
>>
>> Shut up, Jedi, this is grownup talk.
>
>Gah, sorry, I was too quick. I could setup leafnode, and have
>setup INN a few times in my previous job as a university netadmin.
>
>I don't want to do it, though.
Too lazy to bother to be able to keep track of an entire thread.
Who's the child now, really?
[deletia]
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:34:36 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >Roswell appears to have been the result of some AF test apparatus
> >escaping the test range.
>
> Well, that, and a fascinating display of human nature spread out across
> more than fifty years.
Everybody wants a religion... even if the religion is "bug-eyed guys
with greenish-grey skin"
>
> [...]
> >> Anyone who is capable of *interstellar* space travel in the Enstienian
> >> universe we live in would know that any sentient life is a needle in a
> >> haystack. The question is whether we'd be able to recognize them, and
> >> they us, from some large-scale ant-farm or a particularly bizarre
> >> fungus.
> >
> >alternatively.... we are descended from same ?
>
> What? Space aliens?
Who knows. We have a fairly complete fossil record of the evolution
of many species...but none for man.
Interesting, no?
We talk about "colonizing" Mars and such...maybe our existance
on Earth was the result of a colonization?
I have no particular belief...I'm just tossing out ideas for discussion.
--
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 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
******************************
