Linux-Advocacy Digest #609, Volume #34 Fri, 18 May 01 21:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! (Michael Vester)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Dell Meets Estimates ("Xrayjuan")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
The truth about shared-source (Dave Martel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rick <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 20:13:44 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > Indeed, he is, because it is reasonable.
> > >
> > > I dunno. Seems like he's insulting the
> > > intelligence of, well, practically everyone.
> >
> > They buy what "everyone else" has. Thats the whole point of
> > monopolizaiont, you know. To make sure you are THE vendor.
>
> I think you need to sit down and think that
> through again. Are you *sure* the whole point of
> monopolization is to appeal to herd instincts?
>
Yup. People buy "what everybody else has". micro$oft made sure what
everybody else had is micro$oft.
> Is that really consistant with the other things
> you like to claim?
>
Yup.
> [snip]
> > > They *are* buying apps. In cardboard boxes, even.
> > >
> > > Doesn't do them any good unless they have a computer
> > > than can run them though.
> > >
> > > So they buy that too.
> > >
> > > Nobody buys Windows to play Solitare, you know.
> > >
> >
> > I given my students a choice between cards and a computer to play
> > solitaire. None of them has taken the cards.
>
> They must think you are very silly then. :D
>
No, they dont. BTW, you can stopped that idiotic grinning. You dont
drool too, do you?
> I doubt they have to pay for that computer;
They dont.
> if they did they'd take the cards.
>
Really?
> [snip]
> > > I know what you are saying; but you are mistaken. You've
> > > put the cart before the horse.
> >
> > Intel/clone based computers are percieved as the cheapest computers. m$
> > has illegally monopolized the OS market. You still dont get it.
>
> Are you suggesting that x86 computers are *not* the cheapest?
>
They are percied as the chepest becasue most people only look at intial
purchase price. The dont include cost of ownership.
> [snip]
> > > > As are 'wintrolls'. Most realize they shouldn't admit to it, since it
> > > > is a label for people who are dishonest, and nobody would voluntarily
> > > > accept it.
> > >
> > > Apparently I do not realize I should not admit it, since
> > > I just called myself a Wintroll.
> >
> > And. therefore, you support one of the moet immoral and unethical
> > companies in existance.
>
> Yes, yes, we *know* you don't like them.
>
And you support one of the most immoral and unethical companies in
existance.
> [snip]
> > > > But, even still, users buying Windows computers are
> > > > completely rational, and that is why monopolization is illegal, since
> > > > Windows is *obviously* not the most efficient OS in the world.
> > >
> > > It is the *best* OS for the desktop.
> >
> > No, its not.
>
> Is so. :D
>
Is that drool coming out of that idiotic grin?
> > > Efficiency just
> > > isn't that important in a world where Moore's law
> > > continues to apply.
> >
> > .. so window$ just got moved to "good enough" status, again?
>
> It's the best.
no. Its not.
> Being the fasted on meager hardware
> is not important. The feature set *is*.
>
Feature set? window$ has the best? AHAhahahahahhaaha. BAhahahhahaha.
> > > It's the developer toolset that counts.
> >
> > That is just so much bullshit. Developers write for whatever market they
> > can make money in. On the desktop, thats pretty much m$, because m$
> > stole the market. If XYZ OS held 90-95% of the market, and m$ helpd
> > 3-5%, developers would drop m$ and flock to XYZ.
>
> Other way around. If the developers flocked to XYZ
> for whatever reason, then it would have the lions
> share of the market.
>
No kidding.
> Developers *do* develop for platforms that
> aren't the market leader. They do it if they
> can produce a better product thereby.
>
> Remember way back when when Illustrator
> came out? The market leader was DOS then,
> wasn't it? Quite convincingly, no?
>
The Macintosh and Pagemaker produced a whole new market. Desktop
publishing. THATS why Aldus programmed for the Mac.
> But Aldus didn't care; they could not have done
> as good a job on DOS, so they went with the
> Macintosh.
>
> There are quite a few apps like that. They had
> to migrate to Windows, when it became strong
> enough to support them. But that took quite
> some time.
>
They migrated -from- the Mac becauee, when the app came out, the Mac
would have been the dominant platorm... in that area.
> [snip]
> > > I'm a Wintroll. :D
> >
> > Yeah, we know. BTW, thats an insult. Yo can stop grinning now.
>
> : |
>
> [snip]
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:40:11 -0700
wendy wrote:
>
> I tried to install Mandrake 8.0 on my Athlon based system and it
> virtually destroyed all of my data.
>
> It overwrote my Bootmagic bootloader with some "grubby" thing and
> rendered my win 2000 partition useless.
>
> I lugged the entire system to CompUSA where I bought it and they got
> it back for me thank goodness without any data loss.
>
> They also told me that they get many customers in there who try to
> install Linux and it trashes their systems....
>
> What a piece of crap this Linux garbage is...
>
> And before you tell me everything I have done wrong I told Linux to
> install on the Linux drive, not the mbr. It still put that grubby
> thing in there.
>
> Good name for a linux program..
>
> wendy
A new handle for our cute and loveable Flatfish?
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
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: Sat, 19 May 2001 00:22:36 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
[snip]
> >Weeeeeell...
> >
> >Jackson seems to think that the "application barrier"
> >is a matter of compatibility; if that were true it would
> >have fallen long ago. Products like WINE and Open32
> >would be the threat. Java would of course be
> >no threat, since Win32 apps can't run on Java.
>
> Jackson stated clearly what the application barrier is; we have no need
> to guess what he "seems to think" unless you'd rather make shit up than
> pay attention to facts. Jackson documented the fact that the
> application barrier is fiscal; whether compatibility or some other
> technical explanation is available is irrelevant.
Fiscal?
I suppose you could say it's expensive to develop
a real competitor to Windows, but surely that would
be a very silly thing to try to hang Microsoft
with, no?
> 'Win32' can run on anything that runs Win32; this is software. Getting
> hung up on what you call it is a scam, not an efficiency of the market.
I don't understand what you mean by that;
"Win32" can't run at all. Win32 apps run on such
platforms as support the bits of Win32 they need;
no two match exactly.
------------------------------
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: Sat, 19 May 2001 00:24:10 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
> >> No, fuck you, take your please and ram it up your fuck-head ass. Stole
> >> the market. Thank you.
> >
> >Now, now. No need to be uncivilized.
>
> Apparently, you are in error, you slimey dishonest piece of shit.
Well, I still don't see the need to be uncivilized.
I much prefer the witty reparte of civilized
flamewars, don't you? :D
[snip]
> >> When MS is the only solution which can be profitable. "Best" assumes
> >> there are feasible alternatives. "Monopoly" assumes there is criminal
> >> restraint of trade. Both assumptions are valid.
> >
> >Hmm. I'm surprised to hear you admit that there
> >are feasible alternatives. It smacks of, you know,
>
> Reason. It smacks of reason, not childish word games such as you play,
> you pathetic fool.
Well, yes, that too.
But I didn't want to suggest that I wasn't
expecting reason from you. Pointlessly harsh,
don't you know. :/
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:26:12 -0700
Yawn.
Sorry, couldn't finish reading this.
If you decide to stop playing word games, let me know.
J
The Danimal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> jet wrote:
> > The Danimal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > jet once again demonstrates an astounding lack of self-insight:
> > > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > You guys STILL have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is
> > > > > anything OTHER than defective behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Defective in what way?
> > >
> > > a. Would you marry Aaron Kulkis?
> > >
> > > b. Would you marry a homosexual man?
> > >
> > > If the answer to both questions is "no," then we may conclude
> > > that you consider both men to be defective as potential
> > > marriage partners. You don't want to marry Aaron Kulkis
> > > because in your mind he carries showstopping defects.
> > > Ditto for the gay guy.
> >
> > I won't marry a woman, but I don't consider women "defective". You're
just
> > playing word games.
>
> Actually I'm just joining in your word game. You seem to be
> arguing with Aaron over a suitable definition for "defective."
>
> Women are not potential sex partners for you; they are your
> competitors. If they can defeat you in competition then they
> are less defective than you are. The cool thing about competition
> is that the competitors don't define "defective"; rather,
> the judges do.
>
> For example, in the purely hypothetical scenario in which a
> younger, more attractive woman shows up and steals away a middle-aged
> woman's boy toy, we can be pretty sure Mr. boy toy regards the
> younger sleeker model as being less defective. If the middle-aged
> woman weeps over her loss she demonstrates that she regards his
> judgement as being relevant.
>
> > When Aaron says gay men are "defective", I don't think he just means he
> > doesn't want to sleep with them.
>
> Right. Aaron is pointing out that gay men are too defective to compete
> effectively with Aaron for what Aaron wants: attractive young women.
>
> Aaron can afford to mock gay men for serving his interests because he
> knows they will keep serving his interests no matter what.
>
> > > Most women I know do not want to share their beds with men who
> > > frequently stick their dicks up other men's assholes. Clearly
> > > these women regard that as defective behavior. Instead these
> > > women prefer to give the best of themselves, their care and
> > > attention, and the bulk of their free time to men who do not
> > > carry what they clearly regard as the homosexual defect.
> > >
> > > Jet, whenever you'd like to demonstrate that you don't regard
> > > homosexuality as undesirable behavior you could start by
> > > desiring homosexuals; i.e., treating homosexual men with the
> > > exact same respect, attention, care, and preference that you
> > > lavish on the minority of heterosexual men you regard as
> > > nondefective.
> >
> > Look, if Ricky Martin is gay, he can wipe his dick off and stick it in
me
> > anytime.
>
> Do you require a straight man to have SMV (Sexual Market Value)
> as high as Ricky Martin before you will fuck him?
>
> If not, then you are implying that for a gay man to overcome the
> serious defect of his gayness in your mind he must be at the
> very top of the SMV scale.
>
> -- the Danimal
>
> p.s. Try picking examples that support your claims rather than your
> opponent's claims.
------------------------------
From: "Xrayjuan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Dell Meets Estimates
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 20:33:47 -0400
Wow! what a technical explanation " Linux rocks " : - 0
"2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9e47rb$6n5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Shun Yan Cheung wrote in message <9e45ri$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>Don't count on it. Most Fortune 500 companies wouldn't touch Linux for
> >>anything mission critical....
> >
> >I find this a bit odd, since Linux is very stable and
> >its speed is getting pretty respectable.
>
> The "mission critical" canard is balony.
>
> IBM, which supports everything the customer wants, is spending a cool
> billion on Linux.
>
> Linux rocks!
>
> Of course, my comment was about Dell and the mid-server market.
>
> 2 + 2
>
>
> >Perhaps the lack
> >of support is a factor. Another Linux weakness is hacker-
> >vulnerability. Linux systems get hacked very frequently and
> >it's a sys. adm. nightmare to keep up with the patch work...
> >Perhaps the latter is more of a reason not to use Linux in mission
> >critical tasks ?
> >--
> >``Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly''
>
>
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:34:24 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The Danimal wrote:
> >
> > jet wrote:
> > > The Danimal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > jet once again demonstrates an astounding lack of self-insight:
> > > > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > You guys STILL have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is
> > > > > > anything OTHER than defective behavior.
> > > > >
> > > > > Defective in what way?
> > > >
> > > > a. Would you marry Aaron Kulkis?
> > > >
> > > > b. Would you marry a homosexual man?
> > > >
> > > > If the answer to both questions is "no," then we may conclude
> > > > that you consider both men to be defective as potential
> > > > marriage partners. You don't want to marry Aaron Kulkis
> > > > because in your mind he carries showstopping defects.
> > > > Ditto for the gay guy.
> > >
> > > I won't marry a woman, but I don't consider women "defective". You're
just
> > > playing word games.
> >
> > Actually I'm just joining in your word game. You seem to be
> > arguing with Aaron over a suitable definition for "defective."
> >
> > Women are not potential sex partners for you; they are your
> > competitors. If they can defeat you in competition then they
> > are less defective than you are. The cool thing about competition
> > is that the competitors don't define "defective"; rather,
> > the judges do.
> >
> > For example, in the purely hypothetical scenario in which a
> > younger, more attractive woman shows up and steals away a middle-aged
> > woman's boy toy, we can be pretty sure Mr. boy toy regards the
> > younger sleeker model as being less defective. If the middle-aged
> > woman weeps over her loss she demonstrates that she regards his
> > judgement as being relevant.
> >
> > > When Aaron says gay men are "defective", I don't think he just means
he
> > > doesn't want to sleep with them.
> >
> > Right. Aaron is pointing out that gay men are too defective to compete
> > effectively with Aaron for what Aaron wants: attractive young women.
> >
> > Aaron can afford to mock gay men for serving his interests because he
> > knows they will keep serving his interests no matter what.
> >
> > > > Most women I know do not want to share their beds with men who
> > > > frequently stick their dicks up other men's assholes. Clearly
> > > > these women regard that as defective behavior. Instead these
> > > > women prefer to give the best of themselves, their care and
> > > > attention, and the bulk of their free time to men who do not
> > > > carry what they clearly regard as the homosexual defect.
> > > >
> > > > Jet, whenever you'd like to demonstrate that you don't regard
> > > > homosexuality as undesirable behavior you could start by
> > > > desiring homosexuals; i.e., treating homosexual men with the
> > > > exact same respect, attention, care, and preference that you
> > > > lavish on the minority of heterosexual men you regard as
> > > > nondefective.
> > >
> > > Look, if Ricky Martin is gay, he can wipe his dick off and stick it in
me
> > > anytime.
> >
> > Do you require a straight man to have SMV (Sexual Market Value)
> > as high as Ricky Martin before you will fuck him?
> >
> > If not, then you are implying that for a gay man to overcome the
> > serious defect of his gayness in your mind he must be at the
> > very top of the SMV scale.
> >
> > -- the Danimal
> >
> > p.s. Try picking examples that support your claims rather than your
> > opponent's claims.
>
> Brilliant, Dan...just brilliant.
Says a total idiot.
I picked Ricky Martin because he is someone I think is hot looking, that Dan
would know. I find men who work with me attractive enough to fuck, (gay or
straight, it would make no difference.) but if I used their names, you
wouldn't know who I was talking about.
J
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:36:39 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> jet wrote:
> >
> > The Danimal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > jet once again demonstrates an astounding lack of self-insight:
> > > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > You guys STILL have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is
> > > > > anything OTHER than defective behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Defective in what way?
> > >
> > > a. Would you marry Aaron Kulkis?
> > >
> > > b. Would you marry a homosexual man?
> > >
> > > If the answer to both questions is "no," then we may conclude
> > > that you consider both men to be defective as potential
> > > marriage partners. You don't want to marry Aaron Kulkis
> > > because in your mind he carries showstopping defects.
> > > Ditto for the gay guy.
> >
> > I won't marry a woman, but I don't consider women "defective". You're
just
> > playing word games.
> >
> > When Aaron says gay men are "defective", I don't think he just means he
> > doesn't want to sleep with them.
> >
> > > Most women I know do not want to share their beds with men who
> > > frequently stick their dicks up other men's assholes. Clearly
> > > these women regard that as defective behavior. Instead these
> > > women prefer to give the best of themselves, their care and
> > > attention, and the bulk of their free time to men who do not
> > > carry what they clearly regard as the homosexual defect.
> > >
> > > Jet, whenever you'd like to demonstrate that you don't regard
> > > homosexuality as undesirable behavior you could start by
> > > desiring homosexuals; i.e., treating homosexual men with the
> > > exact same respect, attention, care, and preference that you
> > > lavish on the minority of heterosexual men you regard as
> > > nondefective.
> >
> > Look, if Ricky Martin is gay, he can wipe his dick off and stick it in
me
> > anytime.
>
> Ricky Martin wouldn't even touch you with with his dick.
Oh, I'm crushed. It would be his loss, anyway.
> Hope that helps, wall-victim
What are you going to do when your mail order bride turns 40?
Still waiting for an answer on that one! LOL.
J
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:37:33 -0700
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:15:10 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >> Look, if Ricky Martin is gay, he can wipe his dick off and stick it in
me
> >> anytime.
> >
> >Ricky Martin wouldn't even touch you with with his dick.
>
> Of course not. He would probably use condoms. Or are you just jealous?
You know Aaron is listening to "Sound Loaded" as he types.
J
With one hand.
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:38:36 -0700
Ray Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9e406f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Rich Soyack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Ray Fischer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Ray Fischer wrote:
>
> >> >> And where do you suppose the men gets AIDS?
> >> >>
> >> >> From women.
> >> >
> >> >Bzzzzzzzt! Wrong.
> >> >There is no transport mechanism for any such infection to happen.
> >>
> >> Well, it seems that the United States Centers for Disease Control
> >> believes otherwise.
> >>
> >> But what do they know? The all-knowing homophobe Kulkis says
> >> otherwise.
> >>
> >> http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/faq/faq21.htm
> >>
> >> Can I get HIV from having vaginal sex?
> >>
> >> Yes, it is possible to become infected with HIV through vaginal
> >> intercourse. In fact, it is the most common way the virus is
> >> transmitted in much of the world. HIV can be found in the blood,
> >> semen, pre-seminal fluid, or vaginal fluid of a person infected
> >> with the virus. The lining of the vagina can tear and possibly
> >> allow HIV to enter the body. Direct absorption of HIV through
> >> the mucous membranes that line the vagina also is a possibility.
> >>
> >> The male may be at less risk for HIV transmission than the female
> >> through vaginal intercourse. However, HIV can enter the body of the
> >> male through his urethra (the opening at the tip of the penis) or
> >> through small cuts or open sores on the penis.
> >
> >What was left out of this statement was the fact the there would have to
> >be vaginal lessions for the AIDS virsus to be effectively transmitted to
the
> >male in vaginal intercourse.
>
> Indeed? So you too know better than the US CDC and all of those
> medical researchers? A woman needs a vaginal lesion in order
> to lubricate. Another thing I never knew.
LOL. Perfect.
J
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 00:43:57 GMT
On Fri, 18 May 2001 22:11:12 GMT, wendy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They also told me that they get many customers in there who try to
> install Linux and it trashes their systems....
Up to your old tricks again steve/clair/flatfish/sponge/whoever-you-are?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Rick <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 20:48:09 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
> > >> No, fuck you, take your please and ram it up your fuck-head ass. Stole
> > >> the market. Thank you.
> > >
> > >Now, now. No need to be uncivilized.
> >
> > Apparently, you are in error, you slimey dishonest piece of shit.
>
> Well, I still don't see the need to be uncivilized.
>
> I much prefer the witty reparte of civilized
> flamewars, don't you? :D
>
When have you been involved in witty reparte? You merely disregard
anything that conflicts with your point fo view, and then add that
idiotic grin thing.
> [snip]
> > >> When MS is the only solution which can be profitable. "Best" assumes
> > >> there are feasible alternatives. "Monopoly" assumes there is criminal
> > >> restraint of trade. Both assumptions are valid.
> > >
> > >Hmm. I'm surprised to hear you admit that there
> > >are feasible alternatives. It smacks of, you know,
> >
> > Reason. It smacks of reason, not childish word games such as you play,
> > you pathetic fool.
>
> Well, yes, that too.
>
You agree you area pathetic fool?
> But I didn't want to suggest that I wasn't
> expecting reason from you. Pointlessly harsh,
> don't you know. :/
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:46:43 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ray Fischer wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Edward Rosten wrote:
> >
> > >> > And where is your evidence that people have no choice over their
> > >> > homosexual behavior?
> > >>
> > >> Homosexual people often claim that. For instance Chronos Tachyon
claims
> > >> that he had no choice what so ever. I expect there are varying
degrees of
> > >> choice avaliable depending on the person. Also, using myself as an
> > >
> > >So, you admit that it's a defect.
> >
> > Is being black a "defect"?
> > After all, it too is genetically determined.
>
>
> Only if having a brain is also a defect, because that's genetically
determined, too.
>
You don't have that defect.
>
> Clue for the clueless: being genetically determined is NOT what defines
> a "defect"
What does?
J
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:47:58 -0700
Dr S.J. Cornell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > No matter what the cause : genetic, environmental, abuse, disease,
> > > > whatever ... it's DEFECT causing DEVIANT BEHAVIOR.
> > >
> > Stephen Cornell wrote:
> > > And I also note that you are incapable of producing a coherent
> > > argument as to why it should be considered a `defect'.
> >
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is sterility a defect
> > a) no
> > B) YES
>
> If you had been paying attention, you'd know why this is irrelevant:
> homosexuals can, and do, have children.
>
> You seem to be trying to argue that homosexuality is a defect, because
> it directs resources away from reproduction. Tell me, is it deviant
> behaviour for hererosexuals to adopt children who are not genetically
> their own?
And what about using birth control?
J
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The truth about shared-source
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 18:38:31 -0600
Just passing on an interesting URL:
<http://shared-source.com/>
Looks like a site set up to refute Microsoft's anti-GPL FUD, also has
a point-by-point comparison of shared source and open source.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
