Linux-Advocacy Digest #576, Volume #34 Thu, 17 May 01 19:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Win 9x is horrid (quux111)
Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux? (quux111)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Donn Miller)
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: ("Interconnect")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: ("Matthew Gardiner")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 17:06:47 -0400
Stephen Cornell wrote:
>
> > > > > > Edward Rosten wrote:
> > > > > >> If you have really firm evidence that homosexualtiy is genetic, I
> > > > > >> suggest you publish.
> > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > Then you admit that it's a choice.
> > >
> > > > Edward Rosten wrote:
> > > > > Do you think ceberal paulsy a choice? Hint: it isn't genetic.
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > So, you admit that it's a result of a defect of some sort.
> > >
> > Stephen Cornell wrote:
> > > For some animals, sex is determined environmentally. If you are a
> > > crocodile, being male is neither genetic nor a choice - do you
> > > therefore believe that it is a defect?
> >
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If the environmental effect causes the crocodile successfully seek out
> > reproductive opportunities, and take advantage of them, then no, it is
> > not a defect.
>
> But that wasn't your argument. First, you argued that homosexuality
> had to be a choice, if it wasn't genetic; then, you argued that it had
> to be a result of a defect, if it was neither genetic nor a choice. I
> was pointing out that your logic is fallacious: an environmentally
> determined trait is not necessarily a `defect'.
No. I'm just noting that no matter WHAT excuse homosexuals use,
it STILL doesn't justify their behavior.
No matter what the cause : genetic, environmental, abuse, disease,
whatever ... it's DEFECT causing DEVIANT BEHAVIOR.
>
> > On the other hand, if it causes the crocodile to prefer trying to get
> > sex from dead logs than other crocodiles, then yes, it's a defect.
>
> So, now you're arguing that homosexuality is a defect because it stops
> them from reproducing. Wrong - plenty of homosexuals *do* have
> children. Moreover, most of us humans engage in sexual activity that
> has no hope of leading to reproduction - do you believe that oral sex
> is defective behaviour? There are also lots of cases of animals who
> have sex without any prospect of reproduction. Ever heard of bonobos?
>
> Moreover, one doesn't need to reproduce in order to increase the
> fitness of one's genes - look at social insects, or cooperatively
> breeding birds. There are many situations where the adaptively
> advantageous strategy is *not* to attempt to breed. Labelling one
> particular behaviour as a `defect' simply because it doesn't lead to
> reproduction is nonsensical.
> --
> Stephen Cornell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel/fax +44-1223-336644
> University of Cambridge, Zoology Department, Downing Street, CAMBRIDGE CB2 3EJ
--
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: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:40:17 +0200
Mart van de Wege wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter K�hlmann"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>>
>>> "Peter K�hlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>> >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> > Again, Netcraft only counts host names, not servers. The same
>>>> >> > server
>>>> > can
>>>> >> > server 10's, 100's, even thousands of hosts.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Each running its own software.
>>>> >
>>>> > No, it doesn't.
>>>> > Get *some* clue before you post.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> Yes, it does. If you want. And if it�s a IBM/390. Get *some* clue
>>>> before you post.
>>>
>>> No ISP will use a s/390 for this, dimwit. *No one* will use it for
>>> this, for that matter. That is beyond stupid.
>>>
>>>
>> Tell *that* to IBM.
>> And to the finnish ISP who did just that.
>>
>> Dimwit
>>
>> Peter
>>
> Uhh Peter,
>
> Before pedantic trolls start picking at you, allow me a question: isn't
> Telia Swedish? At least I seem to recall that it was Telia who ordered an
> S/390 to be it's main server.
>
> Mart
>
Yes, Telia is swedish. But if I remember correctly, there was a deal with a
finnish ISP some weeks ago.
But then, the message could simply just got it wrong and Telia was meant.
I just read it and nearly forgot about it, why shouldn�t they use linux.
It certainly was a better choice than MS.
But it simply does not matter for the argument, because Ayende wrote
something which was just plain wrong.
Peter
--
The sticker on the side of the box said "Supported Platforms: Win 95,
Win NT 4.0 or better", so clearly Linux was a supported platform.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 21:42:10 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>> So in essence, its not such a big deal?
>>
>> Only if you consider a hidden back door in every IIS server on the planet
>> which gives the user the capability to steal everything off the server and
>> run a muck across your intra-net no problem.
>>
>> Of course if you didn't you probably also think Intel made risc chips
>> and thought highly of them...
>>
>> --
>> Charlie
>> -------
>
>In the context that if you are stupid enough to run IIS, then you deserve
>everything you get. I have no sympathy for those who choose IIS, then bitch and
>moan because some script kiddie did some background research in the
>vulnerabilities on IIS, and chooses to exploit these holes.
>
>Matthew Gardiner
>
I don't either!
And I don't think we should call the COPS to get them
to come down off their pedistles either.
Just let them jump off.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 21:44:33 GMT
In article <lTWM6.1272$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > The HP-9000 isn't running on a risc based processor bone head.
>> >
>> > I the HP-9000 is running on the 64 bit version of the Intel
>> > chip. That isn't a risc based processor.
>> >
>> > EPIC is not RISC you fucking meathead and HP isn't using
>> > any motorola chips either.
>> >
>> > It is the commercial version of the Itanium and it's been
>> > in use for 1.5 years now.
>> >
>> > There is no model of HP-9000 which runs on a non-intel
>> > chip.
>> >
>> > Thanks blockheads for playing!
>> >
>> > If you were real computer professionals you would know this.
>> >
>> > Intel won't release a chip into the market until MS says
>> > it's time to go.
>> >
>> > http://isearch.intel.com/scripts-search/search.asp?
>> > isoCode=en&q1=risc&SearchCrit=ALL
>> > &category=ALL&mh=25&MimeType=ALL
>> >
>> > They call it the IA-64!
>> >
>> > And I'd like to say the both of you are something worse
>> > than mis-informed. You have your fucking heads up
>> > your ass.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Charlie
>> > -------
>>
>> CALM DOWN CHARLIE! shit, I was only guessing.
>
>And he's still wrong. The HP-9000 is still running under PA-RISC, not IA64.
>
Yeah, Intel doesn't make a RISC processor. They think RISC stinks.
Nice try EF. Thanks for playing.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (quux111)
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: 17 May 2001 21:14:07 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:DFWM6.1264$[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> "quux111" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "pookoopookoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>> news:JvSM6.644$[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>>
>> >>Even if MS weren't one iota bad, their OS
>> >> still isn't as good as unix, because unix doesn't sufer from the
>> >> DLL HELL that Windows does.
>> >
>> > Yes it does. If you want to install different applications and they
>> > require different libraries or depend on certain conflicting files,
>> > the net effect is the same. Not only that, it's exacerbated in Linux
>> > by the fact that just installing a simple game or maybe a new Window
>> > manager can conflict with some other app. As any Linux advocate,
>> > they'll tell you the same.
>>
>> Wrong. Linux, unlike Windows, uses library versioning, which means
>> that you can have several versions of the same library on your system
>> at the same time. Try that with Windows! I've done it myself: I can
>> run KDevelop (which uses QT1.44 libraries) and KDE 2.0 (which uses
>> QT2.x libraries) at the same time with no problem at all.
>
> Kindof. The problem is, what happens if one program requires glibc to
> built with a certain set of libraries, while another application
> requires glibc to be built with a different set?
>
Don't even get me started on glibc bustage.... The major sore point I have
with Linux remains glibc. It's a bloated mess, and they seem to break it
more with every point upgrade it goes through. Stuff built against 2.2.2
will sometimes barf and die horribly when run against an old-but-still
serviceable 2.1.3 installation (Debian Potato, f'rinstnace).
I separate this from the "DLL hell" thing because generally Linux handles
this a lot more gracefully than Windows, but glibc is a problem, no
question.
>
>> Likewise with Applix office: it was built against gtk+1.2.7 libraries,
>> but it runs fine on my gtk+1.2.10 system.
>
> This is an entirely different problem. We're not talking about
> versioning, but about dependancies.
>
>> When specific applications experience problems, it is the fault of the
>> programmer, not the OS.
>
> And when Windows developers say this, Linux developers say that the OS
> should handle all problems.
>
I'll say this: the OS should provide a *mechanism* to solve the problems,
which Linux does (the aforementioned library versioning). Windows is lame
because it can't differentiate between DLL's -- even MSVCRT.DLL can bung
you up if an application blithely installs an older version over your newer
one. Same with CTRL3D.DLL; older apps will stick an old version over the
newer one and cause all kinds of havoc.
A sane OS would permit multiple versions of the same library to live side-
by-side.
quux111
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (quux111)
Subject: Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux?
Date: 17 May 2001 21:16:44 GMT
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:9e1cji$g38$[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> I killfiled yttrx, and I suggest everyone else do the same. He
>> obviously has some serious anger-management issues. My hide is pretty
>> flameproof, but I have better things to do than listen to some
>> mental-defective idjit rant and rave.
>
> it's odd. He never ysed to be like this. never mind, he'll be in my
> killfile if he comes out with another post like that.
>
> -Ed
>
>
I've only got him in the dungeon for a month; maybe his manners will
improve. If not, he gets a permanent pass to /dev/null.
quux111
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:00:15 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Rich Soyack wrote:
>> >> "Ray Fischer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> > >False premise #1: that I use hookers
>> >> > >False premise #2: that men can get AIDS from women in normal vaginal sex.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's how it spreads in most of the world, dimwit. Through
>> >> > heterosexual intercourse.
>> >>
>> >> But the most common vector is not vaginal sex but anal sex, when it comes to
>> >> sex.
>> >
>> >And vaginal sex is a very very low-percentage risk for WOMEN ONLY.
>> >
>> >It presents NO danger (AIDS-wise) for men.
>>
>> WRONG, you stupid asshole!
>>
>> MOST cases of AIDS are from HETEROSEXUAL transmission, and that
>
>Yes, FROM MEN TO WOMEN.
And where do you suppose the men gets AIDS?
>From women.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:06:23 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
[snip]
> > Not at all. Developers just keep on flocking to
> > Microsoft's banner, when MS is the best solution.
>
> Do they? Or do developers "flock to m$ becasue it has a monoply?
If they did Microsoft would not find Java threatening,
but they do.
They are afraid they'll lose mindshare among developers;
and they should be. Java has been making inroads,
"monopoly" or not.
> > Sure, they know that MS might try to buy them
> > out if they are successful enough. They *like*
> > that, it means MS drives up with a dump truck
> > full of money.
>
> If m$ takes aim at a company, it will buy, lie, cheat steal, anything at
> all to gain marketshare, as has been demonstrated (and ignored by you).
The easy way is just to buy out the little beggars.
And they do do that.
> > They also know that if for some reason MS can't
> > or won't do that, they can still compete with
> > Microsoft and *win*. Others have; MS doesn't
> > have black magic.
>
> No, they have an illegally gained and held marketshare.
That's just your way of saying you don't like
Microsoft. But it's still true that companies have
been able to successfully compete with Microsoft
in the past, even so.
> > The anti-MS zealotry you see from developers is
> > pretty much the exclusive province of the he open
> > source community. That is still pretty small
> > potatoes, all told.
>
> Tell that to Digital research, Go, Stack, Vobis, IBM, Lotus, etc, etc,
> etc.
You mean their *lawyers*, I think.
Not developers.
[snip]
> > I'll buy that. Nimbleness is very important when
> > competing with Microsoft.
>
> What does nimblensess have to do with being stabbed in the back?
Knife-fights don't involve a lot of stabbing the back,
unless one participant is a whole lot slower and clumsier
than the other.
Which has been known to happen. But not much.
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:13:34 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > Well, I dunno. Macs aren't *that* invisible. More retailers
> > do sell PCs, because they know that users who *do* have
> > a clue will usually prefer them (or rather the applications
> > that run on them);
>
> Thats total bullshit. People buy Windows machines because..."everyone
> else has them"
You are very sure of that. But I don't believe it;
I think the conventional wisdom still applies:
it's the apps users care about.
> > those that do not won't know the
> > difference.
>
> Thats bullshit too.
Oh?
> > It's perfectly sensible.
>
> No, you are not.
Well, I'm a wintroll. But the users buying
Windows computers are being completely
rational.
[snip]
> > I do know there are exceptions, but nearly all desktop
> > app development is done on Windows these days,
> > and it isn't because developers are idiots who can't
> > see what's so plainly obvious to T Max Devlin. :D
>
> No, its because m$ stole the marketplace.
Developers don't need to care much about
that.
Consider how long it took game developers
to get with Microsoft's program. They stuck
to DOS because they could make better games
that way, and they knew perfectly well
that the users would follow.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:14:55 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
quux111 wrote:
> Don't even get me started on glibc bustage.... The major sore point I have
> with Linux remains glibc. It's a bloated mess, and they seem to break it
> more with every point upgrade it goes through. Stuff built against 2.2.2
> will sometimes barf and die horribly when run against an old-but-still
> serviceable 2.1.3 installation (Debian Potato, f'rinstnace).
FreeBSD's libc generally handles things like this much better. Of
course, I don't think FreeBSD even has wide-char support yet in its
libc. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong...)
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 08:29:22 +1000
Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> > > The real problem here is that most users are complete morons. They
never
> > > understood DOS, Windows or Linux. Sure they seemed to achieve
something
> > > with Windows but when it went wrong, they didn't have a clue and, as
> > > someone who worked on a help desk for some years, I got sick and tired
> > > of dealing with these cretins who shouldn't have been allowed anywhere
> > > near a PC.
> > > Like women drivers who don't know how to change a wheel, the
technology
> > > is beyond them and they should leave it to the big boys who really
> > > understand it. Sorry guys - you are too stupid to have a computer.
> > >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > Doesn't the above just summarise the problem with the populous.
> >
> > Doesn't the above summarise your problems? Your bias? Your sexism?
>
> Nope, it shows the end user is, by default, a complete and utter moron
beyond
> belief. One only needs to go into a super market, and see the number of
> people who put their eggs and bread first on the conveyer belt at the
> checkout. The number of users who want to get a P4 because it has a
"bigger
> number than PIII". Or, because Bill Gates says its good, obviously he's
> right. Better still, users, who buy crap machines from Compaq, IBM and
HP,
> then one year down the track they want to upgrade something, say the
graphics
> card because they heard from a friend that their game will run better, and
> get told by their local computer shop that they can't upgrade.
>
> It is about time the end user got out of this ignorance. These are the
exact
> same people who protest against globalisation and Free Tebet, they know
> diddly squat about, but because some communist, aka, trade unionist rants
on
> the news about things, because it would mean the end of their pampered
union
> lifestyle, and whats worse, they, the ignorant public, believe them!
>
> It is about time people started reading books and started educating
> themselves instead of sitting in front of a televison for 4 hours each
night
> watch Septic Tank crap like "Roswell" and "Mad about you". The politicians
> know that, and play on peoples ignorance. Its quite funny seeing people
run
> on policies that the educated 10% known won't work, whilst the 90% sit in
an
> ignorant slumber.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
Well said Matt.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:21:23 -0400
Ray Fischer wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Rich Soyack wrote:
> >> >> "Ray Fischer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > >False premise #1: that I use hookers
> >> >> > >False premise #2: that men can get AIDS from women in normal vaginal sex.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That's how it spreads in most of the world, dimwit. Through
> >> >> > heterosexual intercourse.
> >> >>
> >> >> But the most common vector is not vaginal sex but anal sex, when it comes to
> >> >> sex.
> >> >
> >> >And vaginal sex is a very very low-percentage risk for WOMEN ONLY.
> >> >
> >> >It presents NO danger (AIDS-wise) for men.
> >>
> >> WRONG, you stupid asshole!
> >>
> >> MOST cases of AIDS are from HETEROSEXUAL transmission, and that
> >
> >Yes, FROM MEN TO WOMEN.
>
> And where do you suppose the men gets AIDS?
>
> From women.
Bzzzzzzzt! Wrong.
There is no transport mechanism for any such infection to happen.
Try again, idiot.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
--
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: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:30:56 +1200
That's actually quite common unfortunately. I own an SGI o2, and I have
found that when I do obtain a piece of software, it has been compiled for
the lowest possible processor, a R4400 32bit MIP's, so, the if it is
possible, I normally try to recompile it.
Matthew Gardiner
"Michael Marion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> > I'm quite interested in the Cray cluster as well as the new "super" they
> > are designing in conjunction with SUN Microsystems that will use the new
> > Ultra Sparc III.
>
> Especially once things are optimized for US3 chips too. That's our
biggest
> gripe right now... there's just nothing really available that's been
compiled
> for US3 chips, so you don't see as big a jump in speed as one would expect
> from the new architecture. Then again... most commercial software for
> SPARC/Solaris isn't even Ultra-1 optimized! Most software is still just
> 32-big SPARC compiled... I think the only software I use regularly that's
> ultra optimized at all is Realplayer8. :/
>
> --
> Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior
Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
> Homer: "I'm not normally a religious man, but if you're up there, save me,
> Superman!" -- Simpsons
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:33:25 +1200
I must of been thinking about something else.
Matthew Gardiner
"Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9du44r$qed$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Se�n � Donnchadha" wrote:
> >
> > > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Of course fool. By using a secure operating system in the
> > > > first place an E-mail virus not only can't trash out the
> > > > OS core but it can't get at your address book.
> > > >
> > > > Linux provides this, Microsoft doesn't.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yeah. Linux "provides" this by lacking a standard API-accessible
address
> > > book. And if someone your legs off, you should be thankful because now
> you
> > > have "tripping protection".
> >
> > Please elaborate, also, proof read your sentences.
>
> Translation:
> Linux is more secure because there is no way to access the adress book in
> Linux.
> Similar to providing protection from falling down by cutting your legs.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:37:03 +1200
Demonstrating that there is ignorance left, right and centre, not just in
the computer world.
Matthew Gardiner
"Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It is about time the end user got out of this ignorance. These are the
exact
> >same people who protest against globalisation and Free Tebet, they know
>
> I don't know what's it is like over there, but the anti-globalisation
> protestors I've seen in the UK are very educated about the subject. A lot
more
> so than most of those sitting at home watching the protests on the news.
I've
> no real experience with "Free Tibet" types.
>
> >diddly squat about, but because some communist, aka, trade unionist rants
on
> >the news about things, because it would mean the end of their pampered
union
> >lifestyle, and whats worse, they, the ignorant public, believe them!
>
> What does that rant has to do with the above?
>
> ian.
>
> \ /
> (@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
> /(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
> | |
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
