Linux-Advocacy Digest #160, Volume #34 Thu, 3 May 01 14:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Bought out by MS geeks... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: "Portability is for Canoes" (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (T. Max Devlin)
Re: To Aaron (T. Max Devlin)
Re: To Aaron (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Just for chuckles (T. Max Devlin)
Re: XWindows loading on startup ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: To Aaron ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: To Aaron ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are
liars. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: there's always a bigger fool (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bought out by MS geeks...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:46 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 2 May 2001
>> [...]
>> >But regardless, that wasn't what I meant. I meant that most Unix
>> >programmers that write Windows code, tend to do so with a Unix mindset,
>[...]
>>
>> Either most do, or all tend to, Erik. Your abstraction error is
>> showing.
>
>What are you talking about? I never said all.
That's the problem. If you'd have said "all tend to", then you wouldn't
have performed an abstraction error. If you'd said "most do", your
statement would likewise have been correct. You were compelled to say
"most tend to" because you knew for a fact that your statement is a
fabrication: a very small number do, because all tend to, but not very.
>> [...]
>> >Indeed, it might be said that most Unix programmers will need to have
>> >windows experience within a few years, since some level of interaction
>> >will probably be necessary.
>>
>> Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha! Sounds like a quote that could have come from 1992.
>> "Interaction" with Windows is the problem, you see. Microsoft pretends
>> to support it, but they're a monopolist, so...
>
>You don't understand my point. No matter what your position is, my point is
>likely to be true. If you believe that Linux/Unix will dominate the future,
>then you'll need Windows experience to port apps from Windows to Unix, if
>you believe the opposite, you'll need the experience to go the other way.
Oh, is that what you meant by "interaction"? No matter what the future
holds, though, I don't believe your point is valid. I've never seen
anyone with Windows experience port Windows apps to Unix very well,
while those experienced with Unix seem to do a fine job porting apps
from any OS. Porting from Windows is always a major pain, of course,
due to Windows' incredibly bad design, but not as much as porting to
Windows, for the same reason. It doesn't matter how much you know about
Windows or Unix, porting from Unix to Windows is probably the most
difficult vector. (Presuming your intent is a robust and scalable
result; a simple functional cobbling, removing a great deal of Unix code
and substituting for OS Windows calls, might be trivial, but would
generally not be worth even that little amount of time.)
You are right that people learning to program for Windows need to learn
things "different" than Unix; threads versus processes, et. al. But so
will future Unix programmers, once any value in this approach is folded
into Linux. Linux is not proprietary; the market has no reason to
reject developments because they are not "holy and pure", like Microsoft
does. (Holy and pure meaning able to maintain or extend monopoly power;
any similarity to a "not invented here" attitude is purely coincidental,
as evidenced by the fact that nothing was invented there to begin with.)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: "Portability is for Canoes"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:47 GMT
Said pookoopookoo in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001 00:10:43
>> Or you can have Java which gives you neither portability nor speed!
>
>Hey that smarts...Java was a great idea. <dreamy look> oh what could've
>been...
>
>Too bad it wasn't open source.
It would have had to be GPL, or MS would have just used it to screw
everybody. At the time, not even Sun considered that acceptable. They
probably still wouldn't: they are developing *technology*, not just
software. They need to be able to maintain sufficient control of the
technology until it has matured to the point where no one vendor can
screw up the market. This is the path they took for NFS and NIS and
SBus and several other technologies they've donated to the world. The
presence of the monopoly makes this tough to do for Java, though, and it
is too important a technology (or too great an idea, you might say) to
take chances. Thus, Sun's recent reversal in submitting parts of Java
to standards bodies, and the lawsuit which made MS tuck their tail
between their legs and run for cover.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:48 GMT
Said Bobby D. Bryant in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 02 May 2001
22:44:52 +0600;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> MS has never understood the difference between a closed off LAN and a WAN such
>> as the internet. They treat things like everyone is one big happy family.
>
>Yeah, I liked their response to the bug-of-the-week a few weeks back: (quoting
>from memory) "Visiting a hostile Web site is not a plausible exploit scenario."
I saw that one too. I still can't believe it. That calls for an
all-caps GUFFAW!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:49 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 2 May 2001
>This was *5* months ago.
Its tough to keep current with the many failures of security inherent in
MS products, unfortunately.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:50 GMT
Said Matthew Gardiner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9cqfpu$7vi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>>
>>> > This was *5* months ago.
>>> >
>>> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> > news:9cpb35$fkt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> >> Yes, just when you thought Microsoft security couldn't possibly get
>>> >> any worse, they pull out this little doosie:
>>> >>
>>> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/18664.html
>>> >>
>>> >> Matthew Gardiner
>>> >
>>> But the news just keeps on truck'in. Had this been a Linux article, and
>> the
>>> patch had been out for 2 years you would have said, "see, see, I told you
>>> Linux was un-secure", double standards in the purist form.
>>
>> You have never heard me make such an argument. I have argued about the
>> recent bout of Linux Worms based primarily on patched fixes, but only to
>> point out that bitching about MS security patches not being applied is the
>> pot calling the kettle black.
>>
>And also Microsoft claiming that closed source software more secure than
>opensource, that is definately the pot calling the kettle black.
Nice take, Matthew.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.support.fat-acceptance
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:51 GMT
Said Brent R in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 02 May 2001 17:10:40 GMT;
>Nomen Nescio wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) wrote:
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> >SO what? A small chance is better than ZERO, is it not? If a person
>> > >> >is gay, then "more gays" is good for that person, _period_.
>> > >>
>> > >> What an absurd statement, you're the one being completely illogical. If a
>> > >> hetrosexual can be "converted" then clearly they already have homosexual
>> > >> leanings.
>> > >
>> > >Proof?
>> >
>> > So if I get you right, you can allow yourself to be seduced by someone of the
>> > same sex whilst having no attraction to members of that sex? Do you have
>> > experience of this?
>>
>> he does. it involved a russian paratrooper who went by the name 'irina'
>> though he also liked to be called mr. frufru.
>> many hamsters knew what it was to roast in the flames of thier passion
>> on that day i can tell you.
>> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>>
>> men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
>> more even than death
>> - bertrand russell
>
>
>Can someone please tell me how a post titled "Why Linux Is no threat to
>Windows domination of the desktop" turned into a debate about
>homosexuality????
It says its name is 'jackie tokeman'.
>This is what I mean about the sheer entertainment value of this NG!
Jackie isn't near as entertaining as Chad Myers or any of the other
trolls. He just doesn't have the mental competence, and just starts
calling people "fag-ass" and "homo" as soon as he feels threatened.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:51 GMT
Said Matthew Gardiner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001
>>>Well, a few posts back some one commented on the issue at hand then Jackie
>>>replied saying that that person wrote like a homosexual, and the debate
>>>went from there.
>>>
>>>Matthew Gardiner
>>
>> Jackie knows all about writing like a homosexual. He gives lessons.
>>
>I assumed Jackie was female.
When was the last time you heard a female try to insult someone by
calling them homosexual? Its obvious he is a very young boy, probably
still in grade school. He's become convinced of his mental prowess by
being able to annoy adults. Guffaw.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:52 GMT
Said Matthew Gardiner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001
>Interconnect wrote:
>
>> Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9cpmp9$nj4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> this year, the US government has allocated $19billion in farming
>> subsidies,
>>> would you regard this as free trade in action?
>>>
>>> Matthew Gardiner
>>
>> Also (among other things) they still have tariffs on lamb imports from
>> Australia.
>>
>> Other protected industries include Sugar and Bananas.
>>
>> Free trade? *shrug*
>>
>Its called "free trade on the US's terms", aka, fuck everyone else, we are
>going to use tarriffs and subsidies then bitch and moan because China does
>the same thing!
Free trade does not require international free trade. Its called "free
trade for US firms within the US", and whether foreign companies get to
participate is entirely up to the US, and whether we think it would
benefit us; it is presumed if allowed that it would benefit the foreign
company, which is why we use tariffs and subsidies rather than simple
regulation. If it is worth their while to overcome this 'uneven playing
field' (actually an even playing field, taking both the international
capital and the international production into account) then they can
benefit from the opportunity of free trade within the U.S.
When it comes down to it, if you are unable to say "fuck everyone else"
if it is necessary to avoid "fuck me", then you are simply not being
honest, or reasonable.
I'm not claiming that every aspect of the U.S. position on tariffs and
subsidies is reasonable, or even honest. I'm merely pointing out that
presuming otherwise is begging the question.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:53 GMT
Said Matthew Gardiner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001
>> I think that is what a lot of people call "Corporate Welfare".
>> More and more family farms are being driven out of business by large
>> corporate farms.
>> I suppose there are some links to this, as I have read this in the
>> newspapers. Someday, the family farm will be a memory.
>>
>16-17 years ago the government removed all subsidies off agriculture and
>industry, 16-17 years later, New Zealand is now an agricultural
>power-house, the 2nd largest dairy producer, China's 4th largest trading
>partner, NZ lamb is exported all around the world, people in the UK pay up
>to $25-30 a kilo for it. Thats what removing subsidies has done for New
>Zealand, it turned a once pathetic, slow, inefficient agricultural sector,
>into a professional, market driven business.
I think you're confusing migrating from a socialist state to a free
market and government subsidies. They are not the same thing.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just for chuckles
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 17:45:54 GMT
Said Adam Warner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 3 May 2001 11:52:18
[...]
>No centralized security - users must manually synchronize user accounts
>across servers
>[Um, let's see. How about a cron job: apt-get update; apt-get upgrade]
No, this would be NIS, or Kerberos.
>"A number of OEMs offering 99.9% uptime guarantees on Windows NT Server 4.0"
>(as if the three nines was supposed to be impressive)
As if its not a lie, as well.
[...]
>But the funnies problem of the lot with Linux, according to Microsoft:
>
>Linux has "Poor support for Java"
LOL!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: XWindows loading on startup
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:48:59 -0400
O'Banion wrote:
>
> I'm new to the whole linux world, and I installed XWindows and Gnome during
> the initial install. I am running Debian 2.2. The problem that I am having
> is that XWindows loads automatically on boot. I've been trying to figure
> out how to keep it from loading, but haven't figured it out. Can anybody
> point me in the right direction?
If you are new to Linux and Unix, then you should NOT be running Debian.
Debian is for those with years of experience with Unix and/or Linux.
Get SuSE or RedHat.
>
> Thanks
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:50:56 -0400
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> this year, the US government has allocated $19billion in farming subsidies,
> would you regard this as free trade in action?
No. Unfortunately, the US is currently saddled with a "mixed" economy.
This is a legacy of the socialism which was started under Presidents
Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt.
It too, will die eventually.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:52:11 -0400
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> > I think that is what a lot of people call "Corporate Welfare".
> > More and more family farms are being driven out of business by large
> > corporate farms.
> > I suppose there are some links to this, as I have read this in the
> > newspapers. Someday, the family farm will be a memory.
> >
> 16-17 years ago the government removed all subsidies off agriculture and
> industry, 16-17 years later, New Zealand is now an agricultural
> power-house, the 2nd largest dairy producer, China's 4th largest trading
> partner, NZ lamb is exported all around the world, people in the UK pay up
> to $25-30 a kilo for it. Thats what removing subsidies has done for New
> Zealand, it turned a once pathetic, slow, inefficient agricultural sector,
> into a professional, market driven business.
We may see the same thing happen in the US, if the Democrats
can be kept OUT of power for a decade.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles,soc.men,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are
liars.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 18:01:15 GMT
Said billh in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 03 May 2001 16:15:01 GMT;
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> billh wrote:
>> >
>> > "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> > > > That's your problem, Kulkis, every thing you post about the military
>is
>> > "off
>> > > > the cuff". It's why you are mostly wrong. Your classics of "class
>2
>> > food",
>> > >
>> > > I never claimed such. Food is class I.
>> >
>> > Don't you ever stop lying? This is really pathetic, even for you,
>wannabe.
>> > I refer all her to: Your post (news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...)
>from 27
>> > Apr 2001 in the
>> > thread, "Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)" proves you a liar. I
>repost
>> > it below:
>>
>> NOBODY but Bill Hudson else can find this message on their servers.
>>
>> Interesting...verrrrrrrry interesting.
>
>Funny that you're the one incorrectly using roman numerals for classes of
>supply. Interesting...verrrrrrrry interesting. LOL!!!
Pardon me, sir, but it appears you've engaged in forging someone's post.
I hardly think the choice of arabic or roman numerals matters, in
comparison.
Followups set. Aaron might be an annoying prick, but he's less of one
when you're not around.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 18:01:16 GMT
Said billh in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 03 May 2001 16:05:38 GMT;
>"T. Max Devlin"
>
>> Rational, non-violent soldiers when duly authorized to use force. They
>> are never authorized to use violence, unless they are unethical and
>> their government is unfounded and their nation is not free.
>>
>> Violence is not generally tolerated in the U.S. Armed Forces. Punch
>> your commanding officer and see what happens, if you think it is. Or
>> beat a civilian, for that matter.
>
>Consider the highway of death during desert storm. The Iraqi's met
>overwhelming violence, much of it executed by U.S. forces. Totally
>authorized.
I'm sorry, the U.S. *never* authorizes violence. Use of force is all
that can be authorized by any amount of authority by either the
government or the military commanders, regardless of the situation or
circumstance.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 18:01:17 GMT
Said Zippy in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 03 May 2001 15:58:22 GMT;
>>
>>I'm not quite sure what your comments are supposed to mean, or how they
>>are supposed to pertain to mine, Zippy.
>>
>>The 'restraint of trade' which contracts violating the Sherman Act cause
>>is not necessarily a restraint on either of the parties to the contract.
>>If a contract between two parties has the effect of "unreasonably"
>>(oops) restraining trade by a third party, the contract is felonious.
>>
>AFAIK, that's the ONLY reading of the Sherman ANTI-TRUST Act. Is there some
>other felonious type of restraint which can be placed upon free trade? You
>seem to be implying that the government can place restraints upon "free
>trade" which are also in violation of the Sherman ANTI-TRUST Act, which
>just isn't true. The Sherman ANTI-TRUST Act wasn't geared toward
>preventing the government from attempting to control trade.
>
>If I'm putting words in your mouth, then I apologize in advance.
No, but you're putting words in my head, and I don't know how they're
supposed to fit together. ;-)
I pointed out that the restraint could be imposed on either a party to
the contract, or someone who is not party to the contract, and the
Sherman ACt still condemns the contract. I don't understand why you
keep bringing the government into it, seriously. It might confuse
things further, but I have to point out that the government can be a
party to a contract as well, and all consent decrees are considered
contracts between the government and the monopolist. In this way, it
seems the government 'restrains trade' by enforcing the anti-trust law.
Is that the point that is confusing you?
When the ink was fresh on the Sherman Act, the Supreme Court themselves
had to determine what the Sherman Act meant. They stumbled when they
realized that 'restraint of trade' could be applied to any contract, as
it 'restrains' by 'constraining' the parties to the contract itself!
They therefore realized that Congress could not possibly have been
outlawing contracts, so they stated (we must presume they were correct,
and this has been the legal principle for more than a hundred years now)
that it is only contracts which "unreasonably" restrain trade (they
believes section 2, outlawing monopolization, was a 'clue' to the
understanding of the statute in this regard). This negates all of the
bullshit protestations (common and frequent, and often used even by
Microsoft very recently) that claim that the sherman act outlaws routine
business transactions because when you sell something, you remove the
likelihood a competitor will sell the equivalent to that customer, thus
all business 'restrains trade'.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
