Linux-Advocacy Digest #589, Volume #29 Wed, 11 Oct 00 01:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.)
Re: The Power of the Future! (joseph)
Re: The Power of the Future! (joseph)
Re: The Power of the Future! (joseph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:30:19 -0400
Marty wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Marty wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Loren Petrich wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Loren Petrich wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Responsibility can mean giving others handouts, it would seem.
> > > > > > It's called CHOICE, retard.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Can you comprehend the idea of DECIDING to give something to a particular
> > > > > > person, as opposed to having the fruit of one's labors CONFISCATED and
> > > > > > distributed to shiftless and lazy drunks, drug addicts and whores, and
> > > > > > their demon spawn.
> > > > >
> > > > > You sure have a vivid imagination, don't you?
> > > >
> > > > Are you alleging that the welfare rolls are NOT filled with drunks,
> > > > drug-addicts, and out-of-wedlock-breeding sluts.
> > >
> > > One of the tenants upon which this country was founded is that it is better to
> > > let 1000 guilty men go free than it is to imprison an innocent man. Applying
> > > this logic a bit further, the government has decided that it is better to feed
> > > 1000 people who don't deserve it than it is to let someone who does go
> > > hungry.
> >
> > Here's a solution: GET A FUCKING JOB.
> >
> > The remaining *TRUE* hardship cases can be handled through private charity.
>
> Here's a scenario:
> An individual relies on the use of their body for a job. They have worked at
> this job all of their lives and have become expert in this field (whatever it
> is). A drunk driver smashes into them head-on and paralyzes them from the
> neck down.
>
> I guess this falls into the latter category you mentioned. Unfortunately,
> it's a very common scenario.
>
> > > Sure there are loads of folks living off of welfare and government
> > > programs who have no intention of working or changing their situation, but
> > > there are some hard-working individuals who have hit hard times and need the
> > > government's support to get them back on their feet.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > First...AFDC, WIC, SSI, etc, do NOT encourage anybody to "get back on their
> > feet"...quite the opposite...it encourages them to further indulge in their
> > pathological behavior.
> >
> > FUCK THAT!
>
> Admittedly, there are loads of problems with the way many of these programs
> are structured. It's just proof that good intentions are rarely enough to
> accomplish something truly good and lasting.
>
> > If the government wasn't confiscating %50 of what I earn, I could
> > be helping numerous people actually
>
> I'd be interested to see a study of some sort comparing voluntary charitable
> donation rates as income increases, to determine if needy folks would actually
> be better off without the mandatory systems in government today (given how
> "leaky" these organizations can be).
>
> > By the way...since when was it an American principle that 1000 people
> > should be held accountable for the self-destructive behavior of one?
> >
> > Answer: Never...this country was founded upon the principle of
> > PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY.
>
> That's the flip side of the coin, and one that the founders of these
> organizations in the government obviously didn't forsee.
>
> > If you FUCK UP and find yourself impoverished, then you had best
> > start to un-fuck yourself if you want to get out of poverty.
> >
> > Being broke is a matter of circumstance
> > Poverty is a way of life.
>
> I imagine that 50 years ago, if one walked up to a common street bum and asked
> him/her how he/she got there, that they'd have an interesting story to tell.
> If you did the same today, I'd wager they'd be much more likely to tell you
> that the street is where they've spent their whole lives.
Did they not attend the public schools which the liberals swear up and
down are doing a more than adequate job of educating their students?
Newvertheless...EVERY child has an opportunity to get an education.
If the adult panhandler is one of those who decided to fuck off rather
than study...well, I have not one ounce of sympathy...
the TAXPAYERS ALREADY PAID for this shit-for-brains knucklehead to get
a proper education, but he/she decided to be a shit-head instead.
At that point...my sympathy amounts to ZEEEEEEEEEEEEERO
>
> One interesting and unfortunate exception comes to mind. A man named Tim used
> to be an IBM employee (a software engineer I believe) in Endicott, NY. One
> day he suffered from a severe stroke which took away most of his mental
> capabilities. He had to quit his job because he could no longer serve IBM in
> his previous capacity. Today, he spends his days gathering up soda cans from
> around town and recycling them, as it is all he can handle anymore. He's out
> there every day, and somehow he manages to gather enough to keep a humble roof
> over his head and stay fed. (We always make it a point to help him out and
> bundle up some cans for him and leave them on the porch of our building.)
> This man could have been earning $100K/year easily and fate smote him to the
> point where he can barely scrape by even though he's working his ass off (the
> only way he really can) every day. Unless he receives a very generous gift,
> he'll be confined to a life of poverty in spite of a strong work ethic. Folks
> like him are few and far between, but they do exist.
Sad..but the prudent person would have purchased disability insurance
(typically a mere $10/year rider on top of life insurance)....and thus
would have been covered against this risk.
By the way, SSI should pay for this. (That's what FICA was supposedly
set up for in the first place).
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
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 (D) 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: 11 Oct 2000 04:40:27 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Loren Petrich wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 05:04:05 GMT, Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
>> >> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > >> Purdue out-of-state tuition is NOT subsidized, and I wasn't
>> >> > >> getting anything from my parents, either.
>> >> > > Cry me a river. I presume that you reimbursed the government for the
>> >> > >cost of military training also.
>> >> > Yes I did, with hard work, sacrifice and months and months away from
>> >> > my family, whilst you enjoyed the freedoms I was protecting.
>> >>
>> >> Enjoy feeling sorry for yourself. Did you pay in MONEY???
>>
>> > Loren, you owe every serviceman a LOT more than what you have paid
>> > them. If it was not for us, you would be the impoverished subject
>> > of some totalitarian regime.
>>
>> Hah. If it wasnt for you sitting in a comfortable chair in front of
>> some kind of 'communications' console? You arent FIGHTING, friend, you're
> My "office" is my rucksack. I'm the commo NCO with an infantry line company.
> you know...where the fucking battle is.
>> (if youre in the reserves, especially) wimping out.
> Sorry, Loser, but you're behind the times...about 2 fucking decades,
> to be exact.
> If you're in the reserves, you are MORE likely to go to war than
> in the Regular army. Why? Because the US Army Reserves hold nearly
> all of the logistic units required to fight a protracted war. The
> remainder are in the National Guard... almost ZERO are in the active
> duty army.... General Abrams (for whom the tank is named) deliberately
> broke up the army like this, so that never again could another bunch
> of politicians get the nation mired in another fiasco like Viet Nam...
> Therefore, he made it IMPOSSIBLE to fight a protracted war without
> mobilizing the Guard and Reserve.
> Reserve troops have been mobilized in large numbers for EVERY war
> except the Viet Nam War.
> Nearly 100$% of state militia units saw combat in the Civil War.
> 75% of the combat troops in Cuba and the Phillipines in the Spanish-American
> war were State Militia and Reservists
> 90% of National Guard and Reserve divisions saw combat in WW1
> 90% of National Guard and Reserve divisions saw combat in WW2
> 80% of the Combat units in the Korean War were National Guard
> 95% of the logistical units in the Gulf War were National Guard and Reserve.
> If the Gulf war had lasted 2 weeks longer, National Guard troops would have
> composed 2/3 of the COMBAT troops in theater.
> For your info. When I was in 1-138th ADA (Stinger), Lafayette, Indiana,
> our unit had the HIGHEST weapons recertification rate in the entire army,
> we set the range record on the Ballistic Aerial Target range (using
> obsolete Redeye missiles, no less!), and in general pissed off the cadre
> at Fort Bliss because we were more proficient soldiers than our Regular
> Army counterparts.
> Currently, the majority of the US Army Bosnia is 49th Armored Division,
> Texas National Guard. In fact, the ENTIRE US Army, Bosnia force is
> under the command of the 49th Armored Division commander....who is,
> of course...a National Guard officer.
Wow, you sure are touchy about the army, arentcha.
>> You are a coward
> Why don't you tell us about the last time YOU saw machine gun bullets
> flying mere inches above your head....
You tell me first. :)
> Tell us about the last time YOU felt the concussion of a grenade's shock wave.
Ah, alright well that can and indeed does happen during some kinds of weapon
training, granted.
> How many dead bodies have YOU seen?
Ah, I may have an unfair-non-military advantage of having worked closely
with a coroner in college for a study.
>> and an idiot.
> Then your intelligence must be down with the snails.
Because I think youre an idiot, im stupid.
I think I understand.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: 11 Oct 2000 04:41:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Static66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2000 21:21:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Loren Petrich wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 05:04:05 GMT, Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> > >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
>>>> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > >> Purdue out-of-state tuition is NOT subsidized, and I wasn't
>>>> > >> getting anything from my parents, either.
>>>> > > Cry me a river. I presume that you reimbursed the government for the
>>>> > >cost of military training also.
>>>> > Yes I did, with hard work, sacrifice and months and months away from
>>>> > my family, whilst you enjoyed the freedoms I was protecting.
>>>>
>>>> Enjoy feeling sorry for yourself. Did you pay in MONEY???
>>
>>> Loren, you owe every serviceman a LOT more than what you have paid
>>> them. If it was not for us, you would be the impoverished subject
>>> of some totalitarian regime.
>>
>>Hah. If it wasnt for you sitting in a comfortable chair in front of
>>some kind of 'communications' console? You arent FIGHTING, friend, you're
>>(if youre in the reserves, especially) wimping out. You are a coward
>>and an idiot.
>>
> No you sir are an idiot.
> You do not have the faintest clue. A man with a rifle is just that. An
> army without logistic services and communication is worthless..
> I happen to be what is know as an " F.O." forward observer. I (part of
> a 4 man team) am dropped ahead of the front line by helo (or put on a
> beachhead and then hike my ass and 200 lbs of gear inland) Then I sit
> on a hill and rain steel down upon the enemy. that is to say
> coordinate air strikes, call artillery strikes, adjust their fire
> until the target is DEAD. Call in navel guns, etc etc.
> so do not talk to me about cowards.
I wasnt talking to you in the first place.
=====.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:46:03 -0700
From: joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Drestin Black wrote:
> "Jason Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rvoft$nc7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <39e2aab3$0$5789$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <snip> >
> > >W2K is running 100% of the web servers at Hotmail but the application
> itself
> > >has not yet been ported. Look for that to change before the year is out.
> > >
> >
> > I berated somebody for making an inference about Hotmail's poor
> > performance lately but now I guess maybe I was wrong. I rarely deal with
> > Hotmail addresses but of late the few I've dealt with took 3-4 hours to
> > receive mail that I sent. I guess corporate decision making doesn't take
> > into account that if something ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
> If that is so then I think you don't realize that you have further
> reenforced the nickname for Solaris "slowaris" because it's the Solaris
> portion of Hotmail that handles the actual routing/delivery of mail - NOT
> the W2K/IIS front end server pool.
>
>
> yes, i would agree that the reason they are fixing the hotmail application
> is because solaris cannot scale well enough to handle the loads hotmail
> generates.
MS uses Solaris.
They do becasue windows was and is a PC class OS from a shrink wrap software
company.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:50:28 -0700
From: joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Mike Byrns wrote:
> Dolly wrote:
> >
> > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > >
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Mike Byrns" <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:Rd2E5.118331$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Dolly wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Sam wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Is of course Linux.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Exclusively ? I think not!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It may also be it's weakness.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
> > > > > > > >Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If Microsoft kept growing at the rate it did for the last 5-10-15-20
> > > > > > > years (pick one) it would soon be, not only the total IT industry,
> > > > > > > but the entire economy. Obviously not sustainable
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> > > > > > > >keyboard is subcontracted out.
> > > > > > > >They don't make anything but software.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AMD don't own a fab shop, does that make them not a threat to Intel ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Really? That's weird... AMD has MADE chips for
> > > > > > Intel when Intel couldnt keep up... what do you
> > > > > > think the little M AMD meant? MANUFACTURED by
> > > > > > AMD. I have a bunch here they made for Intel.
> > > > > > It's part of what gained them access to the
> > > > > > Intel x86 architecture - making a bunch for
> > > > > > Intel when they were in the bind.
> > > > >
> > > > > Christ are you going to be one of those Kulkis, Devlins and Blacks that
> > > > > make these wild ass statements that stretch credibility and then post no
> > > > > evidence to back it up? When the hell was this momentus event supposed to
> > > > > have happened? AMD did make 386 and 486 chips but they were NOT Intel
> > > > > designs. BTW, I agree with you that AMD do own fabs, in Texas and Germany
> > > > > but I, after having been a Intel and Microsoft systems engineer and
> > > > > programmer for over a decade have no recollection of AMD EVER making chips
> > > > > for Intel.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Excuse me?! I always backup my "wild ass" statements. Ask me of something I
> > > > didn't support with evidence. Don't you DARE lump me in with Kulkis or
> > > > whoever that other dude is.
> > >
> > > Then start being a little more temperate. It pains me to see Windows folks come
> > > across just as wacko as the rabid Mac and Linux fanatics. Think about it --
> > > there's really no reason to do so. Windows is the best mix of all they have to
> > > offer -- there's no reason to get bent when rebutting these folks. Don't sink
> > > to their losing methods. You obviously know your stuff. Why not beat them with
> > > facts and logic. It's not any more difficult than getting emotional and quite a
> > > bit more satisfying at least for me!
> >
> > More links so you dont get as emotional
> > (as in past responses to my posts) that
> > way you dont further invalidate your
> > above claim.
> >
> > This shows the start of the decline - 1.5 years ago
> > 1.4 million clients analyzed...
> > http://leb.net/hzo/ioscount/data/r.9904.txt
>
> European Education numbers? That's convincing. Most on LANs by the
> number of "HP/JETdirect Printers" represented. How about some global
> numbers?
>
> > And from CNET:
> >
> > "update Linux will pose a significant threat
> > to Microsoft for market share among server
> > operating systems over the next few years,
> > according to new research released today."
> >
> > It links to IDC but doesnt give the specifics
> > of the new info... and the rest of the article is
> > the old out of date info... but still indicates
> > a decline on MS's part.
> >
> > http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-2332817.html
> >
> > http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1546430.html
>
> Funny how that table show shows NT market share at 38% in 1998 and, well
> whaddya know, still 38% in 1999! No decline.
No growth either. Seems contrary to the spin and nonsense out of redmond - no
wonder MS stock is stuck in neutral.
If anyone things UNIX is losing doesn't understand how to count servers. One Solaris
server != a Windows2000 PC.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:02:05 -0700
From: joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Not to mention that the average newbie installing Linux tends to take
> the Install Everything selection so as not to miss anything, and this
> typically starts up all kinds of services that leaves her wide open to
> attack.
Well, Red Hat 6.2 has an install is conservative and doesn't even enable ftp
for the workstation.
Generally speaking, any system on a network is vulnerable to sucessful attacks.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
