> But, as I understand the issue, this is _not_ part of his specified > punishment -- it's just a side-effect of the manner in which the > government wants to impose a portion of his punishment.
If he don't like it he could always take the alternative; going to jail. All things considered, being forced to run Windows for a few months isn't all that big a sacrifice when the alternative is sharing cell with Bubba. > You appear to be arguing that someone convicted of a crime should lose > rights under the law beyond those which the law specifies as being taken > away. Is this a correct inference? I don't think think running Linux is a basic human right. --- Lars Hansson
