Linux-Advocacy Digest #343, Volume #32 Tue, 20 Feb 01 05:13:04 EST
Contents:
Microsoft dying, was Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (unicat)
Re: Who is the most heavily killfiled person on cola? (Ian Davey)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] ("Mart van de
Wege")
Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Humor from Alan (Ian Davey)
Re: Linux web pads? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Humor from Alan ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Is innovation a blessing? (was Interesting article) ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Nick Condon)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Edward Rosten")
MS seeks Gov't help to stop blacks from using computersRe: Microsoft (unicat)
Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls. (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 04:14:54 -0500
From: unicat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Microsoft dying, was Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
The following are the opinions of the author, no more no less...
You don't understand how serious of a threat Linux is to Microsoft.
Microsofties are fond of pointing to the overwhelming presence of
windows on the desktop to show Microsoft's good health, but this is
an oxymoron. Microsoft is their own worst enemy on the desktop.
Win ME sales are lagging at 20% of Win98, and WIn2K is a non-
starter for corporate usage (after all it took 5 years to debug NT4,
why upgrade now?) Microsoft is trying to milk a few more dollars
out of the suckers, uh, I mean faithful microsoft users with another
featureless upgrade called Win XP (extremely pointless?)
But why do you think their stock is worth 1/3 of what it was a year ago?
Because anyone with two functioning braincells realizes that microsoft
is a dying company, and is dumping them.
Does that mean that people are removing WIndows from their desktops?
NO.
Just think of all the VAXes out there still running VMS, even though DEC
no longer exists.
It will be ten years after Microsoft's assests are sold at auction
before all
those legacy windows applications are ported to Linux.
Remember, though, that Microsoft isn't making one penny from the people
who just keep using Win 98, duh....
Microsoft could go into the embedded OS business, but Linux has them
outmanouvered already. Without their desktop productivity software to
leverage
off of, MS products tend to go over like a turd in a punchbowl. (Anyone
still
using MS Bob?, Win CE, anyone?)
If Microsoft can't get the Fed to outlaw Linux, they'll have to
make some desperation moves to try to save themselves,
like going into the hardware business...
They're already creaping into the hardware business, with the XBOX.
Yeah,yeah, it's not a PC, its a gaming platform. But if you add up the
component
costs (CPU, memory, graphics card, DVD, hard drive, etc.) they come to
about $700, yet the XBOX is suposed to sell for under $500.
Why would microsoft subsidize this box just to get it into your home?
Because it's the next generation of PC, idiot!
It's a PC with no local software, a thin client, that will download
everything it needs
from MSN. At a cost of only $50/mo per household.
Of course, Dell, Gateway, and Compaq are too bloated from gorging at the
microsoft
trough to rouse themselves in time to avoid disaster.
Remember when DEC gave the core of VMS to MS to use as the basis of Win
NT?
They thought it would save them when NT was available for their Alpha
processor.
Then MS cancelled their support for the Alpha, and cheap intel servers
running NT
killed off the VAX, and well, now their's no more DEC...
Well the current crop of PC makers could be the next round
of casualties in the microsoft eat-their-own-young business strategy.
Except that the X-BOX is going to flop like a 400 pound diver going off
the high-dive.
By the time it ships It's going to be twice the price of a PS/2, and the
ultra-powerful
graphics won't be visible because they'll be obscured by the poor
resolution of
NTSC TV sets.
Unless, of course, you augment your $500 XBOX
with a $2500 HDTV set (snort,choke).
That is, unless microsoft starts shipping an affordable HDTV resolution
monitor.
(Sorry about that, Dell, Compaq, and Gateway, I guess the XBOX really
was a PC after alll...)
And then there's the "Stinker" phone (think of a game boy with a modem).
The next generation of mobile access
device, if only MS could line up a US manufacturer. But I'm sure that
they'll
do very well in Malaysia, people over there love to squint at poor
resolution badly colored images....
One thing is pretty clear, if MS does stay in business, it won't be by
selling
Windows, it will be by becoming a hardware company (microhard?)
It isn't a question of whether Linux will displace windows, only when.
petilon wrote:
> After killing innovation in the web browser market by distributing
> IE for free, Microsoft is now calling Linux a "threat to innovation"
> because it is being distributed for free.
>
> "There is always something enamoring about thinking you can get
> something for free." says Jim Allchin of Microsoft.
>
> Read the outrageous story at:
> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4833927.html?tag=owv
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Who is the most heavily killfiled person on cola?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:35:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:22:09 -0500, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Like it or not, my .sig *does* accomplish it's intended purpose:
>> > keeping the lamer flamers away.
>>
>> Doubt it.
>
>Before I made up the .sig, I was wasting time, (and bandwidth)
>on refuting 50-100 flames /day.
>
>fuck that.
>
It may already have achieved its purpose though, so why not start dropping
them off one by one at random, and only maintain ones that keep popping up?
You can always add a link to an archive of the ones that have been removed.
Or randomly generate your .sig so it has only one or two entries at a time.
A lot of these people are probably long gone and you're the only one keeping
their memory alive.
And to be consistant, you've also misspelled Lose95 in your newsreader header.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:30:36 +0100
In article <%5kk6.42136$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad
Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I quote Tatu Ylonen:
>
> "The confusion is made even worse by the fact that OpenSSH is
> also a
> derivative of my original SSH Secure Shell product, and it
> still looks very much like my product (without my approval for
> any of it, by the way). The old SSH1 protocol and
> implementation are known to have fundamental security problems,
> some of which have been described in recent CERT vulnerability
> notices and various conference papers. OpenSSH is doing a
> disservice to the whole Internet security community by
> lengthening the life cycle of the fundamentally broken SSH1
> protocols."
>
> SSH 1 still seems to be install on a large number of hosts.
>
> Is Tatu mistaken when he claims that his own product (I assume
> he's from SSH.com, right?) is "fundamentally broken"?
>
> OpenSSH still ships with SSH1 functionality (and SSH2,
> admittedly)
>
> -Chad
>
Uhhmm Chad,
Has the thought never popped up in your piggy little head that
Tatu Ylonen is not necessarily a disinterested party in this?
IOW it is to his advantage to paint a black picture of SSH.
This is the same as asking Microsoft which Linux distribution to
use. Of course they are going they say: "None, buy Windows 2000
instead".
You, Mister Myers, are not very smart are you? Quoting an
obviously biased source is *not* going to help your argument.
Mart
--
YahDu (Yet another happy Debian user)
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:41:04 +0000
>> bad.... I've spent more time getting a modem to work under Win NT.
>
> Then you don't understand what you are doing. You should be even
> touching a computer in an administrative capacity.
Then you've never administered more than a few computers ever. Hardware
can be a problem under any OS. Win NT is an exception.
> Disgraceful, you are a user, nothing more, nothing less.
You are the disgrace for your lack of knowledge an unwillingness to admit
it.
>> bargain than even the finest monopoly bloatware, Win 2000.
>
> And Linux with all its associate addons is not bloat? with KDE/Gnome
> added its not? *LOL*
No. Most of the stuff that comes with Linux is useful. A 1G install
covers all the stuff I have needed so far for everything.
> Again, you are a user not an administrator.
>
> Now sit down boy, and stop whinging about matters that you don't
> understand.
Rather ironic since you're the kind of person you are complaining about.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:32:06 +0000
Nick Condon wrote:
> BSD's license is open to that kind of abuse. Experience suggests that it
> promotes forking, a la Free/Net/OpenBSD. The late 80s Unix fragmentation
> happened because of similar licensing problems; it wouldn't have happened
> had the original Unix been GPLed.
The GPL does not prevent fragmentation (for example, I could take GCC and
make a bunch of incompatible changes that the current maintainers think are
completely wrong-headed, and then distribute it under a different name, so
starting a fork, and nothing in the GPL stops this from happening.) Instead
a lack of fragmentation stems from having a community that feels inclusive
and which is determined to work together.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Humor from Alan
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:45:27 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Tim Hanson wrote:
>>
>> Here's a good one from Alan Cox. It's on today's set of patches:
>>
>> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:14:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Alan Cox
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Linux 2.4.1ac19
>>
>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan/2.4/
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Nothing particularly humorous there...are you sure that's
>the right URL?
>
I think he meant this:
>> "An innovation a day keeps the monopolist away"
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:45:08 +0000
In article <pNjk6.265959$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mmnnoo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't see that a web pad is anything but a laptop without a keyboard -
> for some reason they've chosen to remove the least expensive but most
> useful component of the laptop computer and call it a new product.
good point.
> Feel free to disagree, but remember not to use a keyboard in composing
> any rebuttal.
Well, the Palm products remove the keyboard for size reasons. If the web
pad is going to be big enough for one, it really should have one.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:47:34 GMT
In article <Ntqk6.392$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Ed Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <Xqmk6.374$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >I happen to agree that people in their garages can overthrow MS. Most
> Linux
>> >people seem to think they can do just that. Congress and the DOJ
>> >doesn't seem to think that is true.
>> >
>> What you don't seem to understand is that Microsoft is lying about
>> how likely it is that a few people in a garage will survive long
>> enough to affect them.
>
> [ followed by...]
>
>> Open Source will eventually topple Microsoft whether the program is
>> Linux or something else. These are impassioned people who are
>> willing to contribute what little they can because it gets returned
>> many times over.
>
> Do you enjoy contradicting yourself?
Actually there isn't a contradiction there. In the case of a few guys, in
a garage, producing say a Linux distro, MS isn't going to be sent
reeling from that.
When you take the entire Open Source movement (BSD, LINUX, GNU, etc) as a
singular entity, the picture changes. There's no way MS, in their present
form, can compete with it over the long haul. Open source's quality and
polish are improving at a rapid rate. Just look at the differences
between Linux distros from two years ago and now. MS is right to be
concerned. They're being faced with something they're ill equipped to
compete against. The only recourse they have is fighting a P/R war. And,
they've just recently started it. I'm kind of anxious to see how it plays
out... It's gonna be a dirty one, I'm sure! <g>
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
Presently lurking in his Linux Partition
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:52:50 +0000
<snip>
> So, Edward Rosten: No, you do not _have_ to redistribute. You are free
> not to redistribute.
Yes, I know that. I was talking in the context of passing software on, in
which case you have to redistribute.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:58:02 +0000
> I think that Stallman is a zealot; a inflexible, overly idealistic
> crusader with a paranoid streak a mile wide who has never heard of the
> term "compromise" except in the context of "to compromise one's
> principles".
>
> That said, I admire him immensely. He is one of those people who
> maddeningly, infuriatingly refuse to accept that the will of the
> majority is right, that the status quo is by and large a good thing, and
> has both the unmitigated gall and heinous presumption to actually do
> his best to change things.
>
> Agree with him. Disagree with him. Just don't ignore him, 'cause you
> can't.
>
That is the best descriprion of RMS I have heard.
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Humor from Alan
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:51:34 +0000
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> Tim Hanson wrote:
>> Here's a good one from Alan Cox. It's on today's set of patches:
>>
>> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:14:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Alan Cox
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Linux 2.4.1ac19
>>
>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan/2.4/
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Nothing particularly humorous there...are you sure that's
> the right URL?
Tim failed to quote Alan's message (bad Tim, bad!) and this meant that
what you seem to have taken for Tim's tag-line was actually Alan's, and
that was (probably) what Tim was commenting on.
>> "An innovation a day keeps the monopolist away"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is innovation a blessing? (was Interesting article)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:46:44 +0000
Emery Lapinski wrote:
> Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What not everybody knows is where the standard rail gauge comes from.
>> The modern railways gauge comes from mine rails, which where used with
>> horse or donkey driven carts, and was therefore the standard cart wheels
>> gauge.
>
> Sorry, your story is an urban legend:
> http://www.urbanlegends.com/misc/railroad_gauge.html
According to that, nobody's quite sure where the standard gauge came from
(though, in line with the best tradition, there's plenty of wild guesses)
beyond "Oh, it just happened that way, with a lot of amplification by
economies of scale."
Still, there are some aspects that are interesting. Wider railways give a
smoother ride (irregularities in the rails translate into less angular
displacement) and narrower railways are probably cheaper to build (less
land needs to be bought, less material is needed to build up the same cant,
things like that...)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: 20 Feb 2001 09:58:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron Kulkis) wrote:
>Peter Hayes wrote:
>> Unlike the UK where you get 2 years in jail if you don't provide the
>> most fascist government in decades (if ever, and that includes
>> Thatcher) with
>
>Leftist socialism is merely fascism in disguise.
>
>That's what you get for electing the Labour party.
I can't remember the last time anyone accused the Labour party of being
socialist. It used to be a point of pride, they regarded themselves as
socialists, but then quietly dropped it.
Note for USians: The British usage of "socialist" roughly translates to
"liberal" in American English, rather than the American usage which implies
something very similar to "communist".
--
Nick
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:06:34 +0000
>> > > The "information wants to be free" idea comes from the GNU
>> > > ideology as well as freeware crypto with PGP. PGP is "Pretty Good
>> > > Privacy", data encryption strong enough that even the most
>> > > resource posessing rogue government (i.e. the US government) can't
>> > > crack it.
>> >
>> > Unlike the UK where you get 2 years in jail if you don't provide the
>> > most fascist government in decades (if ever, and that includes
>> > Thatcher) with
>>
>> Leftist socialism is merely fascism in disguise.
>>
>> That's what you get for electing the Labour party.
>
> I can't say I follow UK politics too well, but I doubt that's the
> problem. The problem is that a government typically operates at or
> slightly beyond the legal limits of its authority. With no full
> equivalent of the US Constitution to restrict its powers, the UK
> government can get away with more, and does.
That's not the problem. We have the European Laws of Human Rights which
the country is bound to (ie a higher authority). This is in direct
violation of that law (ie reversing the burden of truth). That would be
like the US government doing something unconstitutional. I am not aware
of any cases that have gone to court, but if they make it as far as the
European court, the gouvernment will not have a leg to stand on.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 05:06:39 -0500
From: unicat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: MS seeks Gov't help to stop blacks from using computersRe: Microsoft
petilon wrote:
> After killing innovation in the web browser market by distributing
> IE for free, Microsoft is now calling Linux a "threat to innovation"
> because it is being distributed for free.
>
> "There is always something enamoring about thinking you can get
> something for free." says Jim Allchin of Microsoft.
"After all, if you give software away for free, then even blacks will be
able to access the internet. And Microsoft certainly wouldn't want
that to happen..." (is what we know he was thinking)
>
>
> Read the outrageous story at:
> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4833927.html?tag=owv
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls.
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:09:07 GMT
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : here's an example which computes the trapezoid approximation to an
> : integral.
>
> : (defun trapezoid-rule (fn a b n)
> : "apply the trapezoid integration rule"
> : (let ((h (/ (- b a) n))
> : (x a)
> : (sum (* 5d-1 (+ (funcall fn a) (funcall fn b)))))
> : (loop for i from 1 below n do
> : (incf x h)
> : (incf sum (funcall fn x)))
> : (* h sum)))
>
> : there is 1) no recursion and 2) no lone parentheses.
>
> And it demonstrates exactly what I was talking about.
> Following it by eye is a pain. Unless I pull it up
> into a paren-matching editor, or make pencil-marks
> on it, I can't follow what matches to what (I can
> guess by the indentation,
> but if my purpose was to
> find a syntax error (missed a paren), then I can't
> rely on the whitespacing.)
this is why you use an indenting editor. hit a key and it indents
for you. then you keep ignoring the parentheses. use the computer,
it's right there in front of you.
> Maybe it's just me. When
> I see a repeating pattern, my mind tends to parse that
> as one solid object, so when I see ")))))", My low-level
> visual processor doesn't catalogue that as "five
> parentheses", but as "a block of ascii art with a curvy-
> line pattern, made out of parenthesis characters". In
> other words, I catalogue it as a single object consisting
> of 'several' parenthesis. To force my brain to actually
> COUNT them, I have to 'zoom in' my attention so I no longer
> think of the pattern. Thus I can't see the big picture and
> the little picture at the same time like I can in C. (This is
> really hard to try to explain in words. I *liked* the
> functional style, as a learning tool, and I use it in C when it
> seems to make more sense that way, but the mega-parenthesis
> syntax alone is a showstopper for me with Lisp.)
all i can say is that your approach is not helping you. let the
computer count the parens and indent, that way you don't have to.
learning lisp is as much about un-learning habits as it is about
acquiring new ones.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:09:09 +0000
>> I can't say I follow UK politics too well, but I doubt that's the
>> problem. The problem is that a government typically operates at or
>> slightly beyond the legal limits of its authority. With no full
>> equivalent of the US Constitution to restrict its powers, the UK
>> government can get away with more, and does.
>
> True. And the public demand that Parliament outlaw handguns will, in
> the final analysis, prove to be the key step which costs British
> subjects even the appearance of freedom.
No. We live in a democracy and we are free to not have guns if we wish. I
think there is more freedom in restrictive gun laws because it means that
I am free to live my life without getting shot. I want that freedom.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
