Linux-Advocacy Digest #356, Volume #35 Mon, 18 Jun 01 09:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: More microsoft innovation (macman)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Stephen Cornell)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Matthew
Gardiner)
Re: New BSD Advocacy site! (Richard Thrippleton)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (Tim Adams)
Re: The Win/userbase! (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance (Thaddius Maximus)
Re: OT: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance (Thaddius
Maximus)
Re: MSnbc calls MS on MS's FUD campain! (Nick Condon)
Re: OT: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance and (Thaddius
Maximus)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: macman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More microsoft innovation
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 12:11:10 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Sandman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, macman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > None of it, since none of your objections are "facts". They're all
> > > just paranoia.
> >
> > Is that supposed to be an answer?
> >
> > The facts are very, very simple. A web page author creates a page the
> > way they want it. Smart tags add things the author never intended.
> >
> > I personally believe in intellectual property. This is a massive
> > violation.
>
> Actually, I came to think about something... What if I have a anti-IBM site
> for example. A site where I claim IBM is evil and IBM is this and that. How
> inappropriate if every "IBM" is linked to the site, stock quotes and
> company info and the company homepage, something I would -never- want to
> promote on my anti site.
>
> Hmmmm. I can see the email going to the webmaster from an unsavvy IE user:
> "Thank you for the link to IBM stock quotes, it helped me write my report"
> - GAAAH! :-D
That's EXACTLY the kind of thing I consider evil about Smart tags. Not
only do they deface the web site, it could entirely change the overall
meaning.
------------------------------
From: Stephen Cornell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: 18 Jun 2001 13:25:40 +0100
> >>Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>>No, that would be LINEARLY, you idiot.
>
Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Pay attention idiot, having sex with multiple partners is the same as
> having sex with everyone *your* partners have had sex with, and
> everyone whose had sex with your partners' partners' partners. That
> is not close to linear, its exponential.
[hope I got those attributions right]
I don't usually agree with Kulkis, but on this one he's right. If *you*
double the number of partners *you* have, you double your exposure to
the disease (and your *probability* of contracting disease less than
doubles). The exponential growth in exposure to infection occurs
if *everyone* increases the number of partners they have.
Stephen.
--
Stephen Cornell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel/fax +44-1223-336644
University of Cambridge, Zoology Department, Downing Street, CAMBRIDGE CB2 3EJ
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:26:45 +1200
mike@ihdudy wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew says...
>
>
>>Telephones and cars are task dedicated devices,
>>
>
> so is the PC.
>
> people use the PC to do a task. send email. write a letter. call
> someone. draw a picture. etc..., all are tasks.
The are different tasks done in the same device. For all this to happen
there needs to be an OS to manage resources etc etc. However well the OS
manages these resources will dictate whether the over all user
experience is enjoyable. Ease of use has nothing to do with OS's. People
get pissed off when they expect something to work, like in the book or
manual, and find it doesn't because of some "quirk" or bug. Thats what
gets people pissed off, thats why people find computers complicated,
because they spend half their time reading up on the latest work-arounds
to get simple tasks accomplised.
Also, have you ever used UNIX? or Linux? ever done anything outside the
whining you are displaying? have you ever seen a UNIX desktop?
Years ago, when there were large UNIX servers, people would log onto
these servers via dumb terminals, running either CDE or opendesktop as
their GUI, they didn't need to worry about booting up, or whether there
video card it set correctly, whether the printer was detected.
Unfortunately, Bill Gates and all his wisdom threw the idea out the
door. Now, after 10 years of Bill Gates denouncing centralised
processing, we are now going back into that direction. Unix is here to
stay, GET OVER IT!
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Thrippleton)
Subject: Re: New BSD Advocacy site!
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 13:24:09 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Cogburn wrote:
<snip>
>Its a difference of opinion, some people aren't bothered by that
>possibility, some are.
That was partly my point; the people that aren't bothered by that
will likely BSD license their code. And these people _want_ the code to be
taken by everyone and anyone, hence it's 'using'. Of course if MS were to
try incorporating GPLed code into Windows that would be stealing, or maybe
some other crime that I can't remember the name of.
Richard
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:28:32 +1200
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>
>>Improved networking. When copying files from CDROM to the hard disk, I
>>don't want my download speed to come to a crashing hault.
>>
>
> That doesn't have much to do with networking, I guess. It's to do with the
> kernel not handling I/O well enough.
> It's not supposed to affect the download speed, unless the TCP/IP part of
> the kernel has to wait for CPU cycles.
>
>
Windows 2000 Pro doesn't do it, neither does BSD, IRIX or Solaris, so
why does Linux suffer from that problem?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
From: Tim Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 12:33:27 GMT
in article FAaX6.85742$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Daniel Johnson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/17/01 6:56
PM:
> "Tim Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> in article cA4X6.1949$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
> Daniel
>> Johnson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/17/01 12:06 PM:
> [snip]
>>> The functionality it adds is to enable your browser
>>> to browse PDF-format pages.
>>
>> No! It allows you to view PDF files in your browser.
>> It doesn't make the PDF file a web page.
>
> What is a "web page", in your view? Is it just
> arbitrarily defined to be "an HTML file"?
While I don't limit web pages to HTML since there are several variations
(XML and the like) I also would include something along the lines that it
uses a graphical interfaces and hypertext links for easy navigation between
sites.
>
>>> That it is implemented as a plugin seems pretty
>>> immaterial to me. Do you really thing that all the PDF
>>> files out there will suddenly become 'web pages'
>>> if and when someone writes a browser with native
>>> PDF support?
>>
>> So if some company writes a plugin to display the source code of .exe
> files,
>> all .exe files currently available for downloading on the internet become
>> web pages?
>
> It would. However, what you describe is not
> possible, and would not be useful were it possible.
I know a person who would find it very useful. He would, and has, taken
source code, modified it and returned it to the original author. In one case
several years ago he de-compiled a small (~18K) screen print program, and,
while keeping all of the functions intact, returned a 4k program to the
author.
It wouldn't be a web page however but a source code file.
The same with viewing PDF's online. They are not web pages but PDF files.
>
>> That is what you are say regarding PDF files.
>
> Yes, it is. 'Web pages' are a user interface
> element; it is possible to make even Word
> documents into web pages, though only
> MS is so silly as to actually do it. :D
But they don't instantly change from Word documents to web pages just
because you can view them on the web UNLESS you indeed convert them to some
form of HTML, which is what MS, Adobe, and others offer as a 'save as'
option in several programs. This 'save as' (real poorly IMO) adds the tags
for you.
>
> [snip]
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Win/userbase!
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:50:03 +1200
> The answer to all of this is, anybody who bases their E-business
> on MS products are fucking nitwits.
>
> MS products are getting more and more expensive every day.
> MS products have secret back doors which shouldn't be there.
> MS products have been proven to have no security as the OS
> was designed and written by monkeys.
> MS products introduce new features which people get and do
> not need. Case in point is the Links shit with IIS.
>
> Computers ARE a life necessity. If we didn't have them, we
> couldn't exists at current population counts. Millions of
> people would die. Computers have become a very important
> part of our lives. That's why I use Linux as I feel a computer
> is more of a tool to aid mankind than some novelty GUI toy
> you reboot every 36 hours because it develops a belly ache
> or get's infected by software written by a 12 year old from
> the Phillipines. Then ask the FBI for help in tracking
> them down.
>
> MS is turning the internet and it's security problems into
> a campaign which rivals the drug wars we're curently loosing.
> I'm shocked they don't go before congress and speak of this
> issue. If MS products WERE secure, there wouldn't be a fucking
> problem.
>
> This is WHY people who support MS products are complete idiots.
>
> In all of this Mathew Gardner has only said one thing I agree
> with. The Market place should determine which OS is the king.
>
> It is with this confidence that I declare Mathew Gardner a
> 3/4th's looser in this message.
>
> And I declare Erik Fuckenbush a complete idiot.
>
Also, let me put it this way. As more of the US economy shifts onto the
net, so the number of cyber crimes will increase. Rogue states will no
longer rely on archaic and crude means of terrorism, they will strike
the US where is really hurts, the economy. As more companies become
dependent on the net, so will the number of rogue states that use the
interenet the terrorist battle ground of the future. We have already
seen the damage DOS attacks, unsecure servers etc etc can have on
business that are totally online dependent. Wait until more companies
move online exclusively, then you will see the shit fly even faster.
People will start to demand quality, and IMHO, Microsoft is not up to
meet the demands of business is this new era. *BSD, Linux, UNIX, proven
technologies will once more become the backbone of the internet.
Companies no longer willing to take the risk associated with deploying
Windows based solutions. Fortunately/unfortunately, depending who you
are, Microsoft will not be able to meet the challenge. We have already
seen the relax security, MSCE's not properly trained in security
proceedures, users ignorant of the risks of using the net for B2P, B2B,
P2P commerce transactions. Companies choose Microsoft because the
support structure is so cheap, however, the quality of that support is
either absolutely pathetic or average. The number of times I have heard
people's servers being cracked almost to the stage of hilarious. People
are now going to pay more for a reliable, secure solution vs the ad-hoc
solution provided by Microsoft.
Do I have any simpathy for those who use unsecure solutions, such as the
products from Microsoft? no, I have no sympathy what so ever. If your
server is cracked and hacked, then tough luck, you had the chance to
move, you didn't take the opportunity, now you have a dead server,
thousands of dollars lost per-minute of downtime, not including the long
term damaged reputation that it has caused.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Thaddius Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 13:53:03 +0100
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> > The term "representative democracy" was devised by the democratic
> >> > party and the tabloid press. Repeat an error often enough and long
> >> > enough and people will start to believe in the big lie.
> >>
> >> BS. It is a description of a system where a buncha of representatives
> >> are elected (democratically) to run the country.
> >>
> >
> > Give it a rest Ed. The fact that the people of the US choose
> > representatives is not indicative of a "representative democracy." For
> > the US to be a
> > "representative democracy" the elected representatives would have to
> > consult the people on each and every matter and cast their vote
> > accordingly. This is clearly NOT the case in the US.
>
> That's not a representative democracy, that is a democracy, period.
>
>
> > In a "representative democracy" sovereign power resides in and is
> > exercised by the whole body of free citizens through represenatives.
> > This is clearly NOT the case in the US.
>
> No, the representatives are elected democratically. They the npass laws
> without further referendum.
>
> > Yes, in both systems there are representatives elected by the people,
> > but in the US sovereign power does not reside in, nor is it exercised by
> > the whole body of free citizens. The US is clearly NOT a
> > "representative democracy."
> >
> > We have "representatives" but this does not make the US a
> > "representative democracy."
> >
> >
> >
> >> The confusion is that "democracy"=="representative democracy" which is
> >> not true.
> >>
> >
> > The only confusion lies in your incorrect understanding of the US form
> > of government. We have no democracy in the US, we are a Republic!
>
> You have a representative democarcy.
>
> You seem to misunderstand what a representative democarcy is. Yopu are
> comfusing it with a true democracy. Under the *correct* definition, the
> US is definitely a representative democarcy.
>
> -Ed
>
Please enlighten yourself to the form of US government and representation.
http://www.indixie.com/indixie/Articles/Republic.htm
....
------------------------------
From: Thaddius Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: OT: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 13:56:14 +0100
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Thaddius Maximus"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Edward Rosten wrote:
> >>
> >> > "Republican government: One in which the powers of sovereignty are
> >> > vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either
> >> > directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome
> >> > those powers are specially delegated."
> >> >
> >> > "Democracy: That form of government in which the sovereign power
> >> > resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens
> >> > directly or indirectly through a system of representation."
> >>
> >> If you look at both of those carefully, the US fits under the
> >> description of a representative democracy and republic. Why can't
> >> something be both? Hint: it can.
> >>
> >> -Ed
> >>
> >
> >
> > In a "representative democracy" the people have sovereign power through
> > representatives. WE DON'T HAVE THAT HERE IN THE USA!!! Seesh...
>
> I ahev tried to explain to you what a "representative democracy" is. You
> realy do not understand. Please reread some of my more recent posts on
> the subject.
>
Don't worry Ed, even US politicans don't understand the type of government
in which they partake.
http://www.indixie.com/indixie/Articles/Republic.htm
The US is a "represenative democracy" only to those who like
feelgood buzzwords.
....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Subject: Re: MSnbc calls MS on MS's FUD campain!
Date: 18 Jun 2001 13:02:44 GMT
Ian Pegel wrote:
>> MSnbc (remember what the MS stands for) shines a light on MS FUD!
>
>God I'm stupid! But what does FUD mean?
>From the Jargon File (http://www.eps.mcgill.ca/jargon/)
FUD /fuhd/ n.
Defined by Gene Amdahl after he left IBM to found his own company: "FUD is
the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that IBM sales people instill in the minds
of potential customers who might be considering [Amdahl] products." The
idea, of course, was to persuade them to go with safe IBM gear rather than
with competitors' equipment. This implicit coercion was traditionally
accomplished by promising that Good Things would happen to people who stuck
with IBM, but Dark Shadows loomed over the future of competitors' equipment
or software.
For example, IBM salesmen would say things like: "Oh, we think
$COMPETITOR's products are great and we hope the rumours about their
financial difficulties aren't true".
After 1990 the term FUD was associated increasingly frequently with
Microsoft, and has become generalized to refer to any kind of
disinformation used as a competitive weapon.
--
Nick
------------------------------
From: Thaddius Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: OT: Where is American pride?... (was Re: European arrogance and
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:01:50 +0100
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3b2a2d2a$0$94313$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Thaddius Maximus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Rotten168" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Thaddius Maximus wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > drsquare wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 23:38:54 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > > > > > > ("Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >"Rotten168" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Well, let me throw this one at you, how do you feel about the
> fact
> > > > that
> > > > > > > >> here in America, somebody under 21 can buy a gun and serve his
> > > > country,
> > > > > > > >> but he/she can't even walk into a friggin' bar and order a beer?
> > > > Where's
> > > > > > > >> the American freedom there?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >It is preposterous, and such laws are a result
> > > > > > > >of the liberal mindset.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Liberal mindset? How are such draconian laws liberal?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >That law was as recent
> > > > > > > >as the 70's, IIRC. The reason why laws like
> > > > > > > >that one get put into place is because of
> > > > > > > >a lack of patriotism, and pride. People just
> > > > > > > >apathetically allow these idiotic politicians
> > > > > > > >to do their own bidding, without saying a damn
> > > > > > > >word.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, that's democracy for you. If I was the absolute dictator of
> the
> > > > > > > world, such things would never happen.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For the last time - the USA is NOT a democracy and has never been a
> > > > > > democracy. The USA is a republic!
> > > > >
> > > > > *sigh* I swear to God I've had to pull out Webster's every damn time I
> > > > > get involved in a flame war on USENET.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ahem.
> > > > >
> > > > > democracy n. 1. government by the people, either directly or through
> > > > > representatives
> > > > >
> > > > > republic n. a state or government in which the supreme power rests in
> > > > > all the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives
> > > > > elected by them
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd say either or both would apply.
> > > >
> > > > I agree. I think it would be more accurate
> > > > to say that it is a republic, that has a
> > > > democratic election and legislation process.
> > >
> > >
> > > None of you get it! Do you??? It doesn't matter what you
> > > think or believe, the FACT is the USA is a Republic. You
> > > cannot change this!
> > >
> > > Please take the opportunity to educate yourselves:
> > >
> > > http://www.chrononhotonthologos.com/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm
> > > http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2000/tst121200.htm
> >
> > Ask 10 people what the word Republic means, and you'll get
> > varrying answers.
> >
> > IIRC, Jefferson referred to America's style of government
> > as "Representative Democracy". If you wish to argue with
> > him, feel free.
> >
> > -c
>
> One more thing, many states have Democratic-type election
> processes for electing officials. This is the "Democracy"
> part of Representative Democracy. We elect our officials
> Democratically, but we don't vote on every single little
> law or act. However, many states do have a Proposition
> framework which is, in essence, Democracy. The people
> themselves can vote on invidual laws and acts for the
> state, rather than having representatives do it.
>
> -c
please educate yourself on the form of government that
is in place in the USA.
http://www.indixie.com/indixie/Articles/Republic.htm
Also, neither the Constitution nor the Federalists Papers
even remotely suggect a democracy or democracy-like form
of government. The Federalist Papers in particular go
out of their way to draw the lines between a republic and
a democracy.
Face it, terms like "democratic" and "represenative
democracy" have no basis in US government are nothing
more than buzzwords that you seem to not be able to
neither get out of your head, nor let go of.
....
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
