From tfournet at tfour.net  Mon Oct 17 08:56:53 2005
From: tfournet at tfour.net (Tim Fournet)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:56:53 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] [Fwd: Re: [brlug-general] to release or not to release,
 intellectual retentiveness.]
Message-ID: <4353ADA5.2070108@tfour.net>

(First Post!)

I've been toying around with the idea of an IP-escrow service as an 
alternative to using the USPTO which has been abused by lawmakers for 
the past 100 years. Allow someone to register a 'patent' for something 
like 3 years for a small fee, then increase the fees exponentially for 
longer periods of time. If someone wants a 70 year patent on something, 
it's going to cost them a prohibitive amount of money. If the company 
can no longer pay the upkeep on a patent, it defaults to public domain. 
This theoretical company could provide the services like putting patent 
holders in touch with manufacturers (for a referral fee) or build an 
advanced search tool and charge money for using it.

I see some obvious problems with this idea, but maybe they can be 
addressed either by the market or by regulation.

Dustin Puryear wrote:

>How would you stop a company from having trade secrets? I don't understand
>that logic. And the fact is that a company will either keep trade secrets or
>use patents. I don't think there has been any other solution available in a
>capitalistic society, at least not one that has been shown to work.
>
>I guess what I'm saying here is I'd like to see a realistic alternative
>offered. Something that would actually work in a capitalistic (e.g., US)
>setting.
>
>And as far as reverse engineering, you are assuming that "the magnitude
>of the problem" is immediately apparent. In my mind, for reverse
>engineering to supplant patents you would have to reverse engineer all
>innovations, regardless of the economics at the time. Otherwise, you lose
>knowledge. You never lose knowledge with patents.
>
>It's a trade-off.
>
>Do I think we need patent reform? Sure! But I still believe that patents
>solve an important problem: How do we ensure we don't lose knowledge? I 
>don't think that reverse engineering can solve that problem.
>
>---
>Puryear Information Technology, LLC
>Baton Rouge, LA * 225-706-8414
>http://www.puryear-it.com
>
>Author of "Best Practices for Managing Linux and UNIX Servers"
>Download your free copy:
>http://www.puryear-it.com/bestpractices.htm
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: Eric G Ortego
>To: General at brlug.net
>Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:55 AM
>Subject: Re: [brlug-general] to release or not to release,intellectual
>retentiveness.
>
>
>
>
>
>On 10/14/05, Dustin Puryear <dpuryear at usa.net> wrote:
>This is semi-political, so when I have the new list up it will go there.
>
>Eric, you are right. Patents are used as weapons. I don't doubt that for a
>second. (Do note that I'm not limiting myself to software patents here.) The
>quesiton though is this: Is there a better way? Without patents, many, if
>not most, innovative ideas will remain inside a company as a trade secret.
>We will have to rely entirely on people reverse engineering implementations
>to get to the original idea. Every idea! Even if at the time there was no
>solid commercial interest to reverse engineer. Otherwise, when an inventor
>or company disappears then society loses that new idea.
>
>I don't see that as a problem as long as we don't persecute those who
>reverse engineer the secret solutions. The magnitude of the problem will
>dictate how important a solution is. With any great solution open or closed
>it will stick around until there is not a problem to be solved or there is a
>better solution.
>
>
>
>
>That's very risky to me.
>
>
>
>
>The whole basis for a patent is that we, as a society, would rather grant an
>inventor a temporary monopoly than risk losing a lot of innovative ideas
>because they were retained as trade secrets and not properly documented for
>public use after a patent expired.
>
>I think we are solving today's problems with yesterdays solutions. The  same
>goes for copyright. These were laws based on what we had back in the 1800's.
>There isn't any good reason every single student should pay so much for
>texts.
>
>
>
>A patent is just an incentive for a company to release a trade secret to the
>public.
>
>Its hard for me to denounce anything that looks like it promotes disclosing
>knowledge but maybe companies shouldn't be allowed to have secrets when
>there is a chance that it negatively affects the well being of society .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>General mailing list
>General at brlug.net
>http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>General mailing list
>General at brlug.net
>http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
>  
>


_______________________________________________
General mailing list
General at brlug.net
http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net



From tfournet at tfour.net  Mon Oct 17 09:25:42 2005
From: tfournet at tfour.net (Tim Fournet)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:25:42 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] [brlug-general] to release or not to release,
	intellectual retentiveness.
In-Reply-To: <6f3edef40510170334o7537caf3re5d1fefe330240f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6f3edef40510141420v451b3fa0v978c337987647d71@mail.gmail.com>	<20051014222104.24279.qmail@web32704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6f3edef40510170334o7537caf3re5d1fefe330240f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4353B466.5030309@tfour.net>

Eric G Ortego wrote:

>
> They get to purchase it. Why can't they just make it? Maybe its not 
> possible now, maybe it wouldn't even be practical for most in the 
> future, but IMO it should be a possibility for those who want it to 
> solve their problem and are willing to go through the troubles of 
> learning how. The disservice is done by withholding knowledge and 
> giving control of that knowledge's use to a corporation who may use it 
> against anyone who trespasses onto their market.

I hope you're not suggesting that farmers learn how to brew their own 
pesticides ;) . Manufacturing pesticides is very difficult and very 
dangerous. It's also one of those areas where patents are a good idea. 
They allow someone to invent a pesticide, even if they don't have the 
manufacturing abilities required to sell the product themselves in 
volume and get them to market. Just the act of getting it approved for 
use in each state is a LOT of work, something that you'd need the 
resources of a large company for. It's also not really practical to keep 
it as a trade secret, as the government needs to know the composition in 
order to approve it. Patents (or my escrow idea) protect the private 
inventor and allow him to sell his idea. The time period doesn't have to 
be long at all. In this example, it's imperative that his product gets 
on the market as soon as possible, but a few years from now, the 
inventor would have gotten justly compensated for his contribution.


From ericortego at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 12:58:03 2005
From: ericortego at gmail.com (Eric G Ortego)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:58:03 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] [Fwd: Re: [brlug-general] to release or not to release,
	intellectual retentiveness.]
Message-ID: <6f3edef40510171058x590ac67cs6b0ec2613c285b8c@mail.gmail.com>

*Tim Fournet wrote:*
> I hope you're not suggesting that farmers learn how to brew their own
> pesticides ;) .

I think a farmer with enough resources who wants to ought to be able
to. I bet one would need to be certified or licensed due to the
nature and dangers of a process like that, but I was questioning the
reasoning used to slow others from immediately competing.

> Manufacturing pesticides is very difficult and very
> dangerous.

No doubt about it.

> It's also one of those areas where patents are a good idea.
> They allow someone to invent a pesticide, even if they don't have the
> manufacturing abilities required to sell the product themselves in
> volume and get them to market. Just the act of getting it approved for
> use in each state is a LOT of work, something that you'd need the
> resources of a large company for.

I haven't seen anything which suggests countries without patent laws have
trouble getting products to market. Its a large industry, a large problem,
a solution is needed and someone will try to solve it but someone else
often will not be satisfied with the first solution. Why slow the second?

> It's also not really practical to keep
> it as a trade secret, as the government needs to know the composition in
> order to approve it.

I agree, maybe companies shouldn't be allowed to keep those kinds of secrets.

> Patents (or my escrow idea) protect the private
> inventor and allow him to sell his idea.

I like the escrow idea, but tell that to Nikola Tesla.
(rhetorical...hes dead)

> The time period doesn't have to
> be long at all.

Time is certainly one of the biggest factors but it seems clear to me that the
push for more power & value will always be a main goal of patent
purchasing corporations.
FYI, one of the fastest growing industries in America is....Lobbying!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6448213/did/8307867/

> but a few years from now, the
> inventor would have gotten justly compensated for his contribution.

One would hope.
But do you even need to be the inventor to be granted a patent?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051017/0f29da8e/attachment.htm

From doug_riddle at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 18 09:46:58 2005
From: doug_riddle at yahoo.com (Doug Riddle)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 07:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [brlug-poly] Constructionist or Interpretationalist
Message-ID: <20051018144658.55518.qmail@web32704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Here is a timely political question:

What type of jurists do we need on the supreme court?

The constructionists/origininalists want to see
jurists that try to abide by the framer's intent,
meaning that the constitution, and its ammendments,
should be viewed in the light of what the authors of
the constitution and the authors of the ammendements
meant to accomplish when they penned and ratified the
constitution and subsequent ammendments.  By this they
intend to leave the creation of laws and modification
of the constitution with the congress and the body of
the electorate.

Interpretationalist seem to think that the ammendment
process is too slow to adapt to societal needs and
that the judges should act as mediators between an
increasingly divisive congress and the sociatal sheep,
the helpless, hapless masses of non-voting sheep.

The Louisiana statewide election of October the 15th,
2005, had a 13% turnout.  13 people out of a hundred
showed up to direct their government on how to run
their business and spend their money.

As sad a state of affairs as that is, it still beats
the snot out of having nine people in robes in
Washington DC tell two branches of governemnt what
laws to write.

If you want justice, bring your cause to the people. 
There is a reason a jury of your peers can vacate a
law.  Your peers can tell justice and a law's intent
from the letter of the law.  However, when a jury does
that, it is a one time only event.  When a Jurist does
it, it is precedent, and becomes codified.

A jury of your peers elected the people that wrote the
laws, and can, in certain circumstances, over-ride
them on a case-by-case basis.  A Jurist should never
be allowed to second-guess an elected body.

An example from real life.  A woman is beaten by her
husband repeatedly for years.  Their son grows to be
about thirteen and dad starts in on him.  Mom tries to
defend him and dad knocks mom out; son shoots dad
twelve times.  The prosecution claims that since son
had to stop and find the box of bullets and reload the
revolver it constitutes second degree murder, a crime
of passion, rather than manslaughter, a fit of
reaction and anger, and certainly not an attempt to
protect his mother because trace evidence indicates he
searched for the bullets, reloaded the pistol, and
emptied into dear old dad again before checking to see
whether or not mom was OK.

The defense case is pretty weak.  A lot of people who
should have come forward a long time ago testified
about the years of abuse.  Neither mom or son remember
a blessed thing about the death of dear old dad.  Mom
was out cold, and son doesn't remember coming home
from school that day.

The prosecution wants junior tried as an adult, and
given the gravity of the case, it is.  The prosecution
wants junior to get twenty to life.  After all Mr.
District Attorney has designs on political office, and
a tough-on-crime record would help.

The jury of registered voters vacates the law and
finds junior innocent of all charges.  A jury can do
that.  A jurist, or judge, cannot.

A jurist can vacate a law by declaring it
unconstitutional, and they need scant reason for doing
so, but they cannot vacate a law in the way a jury
can.

A jury can let one person go because they perceive the
letter of the law in a single case being applied in a
fashion contrary to the intent of a law.

A jurist can sweep away a law because they perceive
the intent of a law being contrary to their views of
law.

So, I ask again, what sort of supreme court justice
should we hope for?



Warmest Regards,

Doug Riddle
http://www.dougriddle.com
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography."
 - Ambrose Bierce


From dpuryear at usa.net  Wed Oct 19 09:36:58 2005
From: dpuryear at usa.net (Dustin Puryear)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:36:58 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] Constructionist or Interpretationalist
References: <20051018144658.55518.qmail@web32704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <010601c5d4ba$96cf49e0$b601a8c0@wec.wnet>

The Founders saw the Supreme Court as a way to police the other two branches
as well as to help intervene when the two branches contradicted one another.
Additionally, the Supreme Court provides a single Federal entity that can
unify lower Federal courts when they too contradict one another (e.g., if
one lower court nullifies a law while another upholds it). Finally, the
Founders explicitly gave the Supreme Court the ultimate power to determine
the constitutionality of laws, so I think it would be a hard argument to
propose otherwise.

At least, that's how I see it.

So I look for a Supreme Court that understands its role in the Federal
government.

Judicial activism is another matter, and one that every Party in the history
of the US has been guilty of fostering. It's hard to really define judicial
activitism though since it's normally the term used by the losers to
describe a decision with which they disagree.

---
Puryear Information Technology, LLC
Baton Rouge, LA * 225-706-8414
http://www.puryear-it.com

Author of "Best Practices for Managing Linux and UNIX Servers"
Download your free copy:
http://www.puryear-it.com/bestpractices.htm

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Riddle" <doug_riddle at yahoo.com>
To: <Politics at brlug.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 9:46 AM
Subject: [brlug-poly] Constructionist or Interpretationalist


> Here is a timely political question:
>
> What type of jurists do we need on the supreme court?
>
> The constructionists/origininalists want to see
> jurists that try to abide by the framer's intent,
> meaning that the constitution, and its ammendments,
> should be viewed in the light of what the authors of
> the constitution and the authors of the ammendements
> meant to accomplish when they penned and ratified the
> constitution and subsequent ammendments.  By this they
> intend to leave the creation of laws and modification
> of the constitution with the congress and the body of
> the electorate.
>
> Interpretationalist seem to think that the ammendment
> process is too slow to adapt to societal needs and
> that the judges should act as mediators between an
> increasingly divisive congress and the sociatal sheep,
> the helpless, hapless masses of non-voting sheep.
>
> The Louisiana statewide election of October the 15th,
> 2005, had a 13% turnout.  13 people out of a hundred
> showed up to direct their government on how to run
> their business and spend their money.
>
> As sad a state of affairs as that is, it still beats
> the snot out of having nine people in robes in
> Washington DC tell two branches of governemnt what
> laws to write.
>
> If you want justice, bring your cause to the people.
> There is a reason a jury of your peers can vacate a
> law.  Your peers can tell justice and a law's intent
> from the letter of the law.  However, when a jury does
> that, it is a one time only event.  When a Jurist does
> it, it is precedent, and becomes codified.
>
> A jury of your peers elected the people that wrote the
> laws, and can, in certain circumstances, over-ride
> them on a case-by-case basis.  A Jurist should never
> be allowed to second-guess an elected body.
>
> An example from real life.  A woman is beaten by her
> husband repeatedly for years.  Their son grows to be
> about thirteen and dad starts in on him.  Mom tries to
> defend him and dad knocks mom out; son shoots dad
> twelve times.  The prosecution claims that since son
> had to stop and find the box of bullets and reload the
> revolver it constitutes second degree murder, a crime
> of passion, rather than manslaughter, a fit of
> reaction and anger, and certainly not an attempt to
> protect his mother because trace evidence indicates he
> searched for the bullets, reloaded the pistol, and
> emptied into dear old dad again before checking to see
> whether or not mom was OK.
>
> The defense case is pretty weak.  A lot of people who
> should have come forward a long time ago testified
> about the years of abuse.  Neither mom or son remember
> a blessed thing about the death of dear old dad.  Mom
> was out cold, and son doesn't remember coming home
> from school that day.
>
> The prosecution wants junior tried as an adult, and
> given the gravity of the case, it is.  The prosecution
> wants junior to get twenty to life.  After all Mr.
> District Attorney has designs on political office, and
> a tough-on-crime record would help.
>
> The jury of registered voters vacates the law and
> finds junior innocent of all charges.  A jury can do
> that.  A jurist, or judge, cannot.
>
> A jurist can vacate a law by declaring it
> unconstitutional, and they need scant reason for doing
> so, but they cannot vacate a law in the way a jury
> can.
>
> A jury can let one person go because they perceive the
> letter of the law in a single case being applied in a
> fashion contrary to the intent of a law.
>
> A jurist can sweep away a law because they perceive
> the intent of a law being contrary to their views of
> law.
>
> So, I ask again, what sort of supreme court justice
> should we hope for?
>
>
>
> Warmest Regards,
>
> Doug Riddle
> http://www.dougriddle.com
> "War is God's way of teaching Americans geography."
> - Ambrose Bierce
>
> _______________________________________________
> Politics mailing list
> Politics at brlug.net
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
>
>



From doug_riddle at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 19 10:40:51 2005
From: doug_riddle at yahoo.com (Doug Riddle)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [brlug-poly] Constructionist or Interpretationalist
In-Reply-To: <010601c5d4ba$96cf49e0$b601a8c0@wec.wnet>
Message-ID: <20051019154051.49415.qmail@web32711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


--- Dustin Puryear <dpuryear at usa.net> wrote:

> The Founders saw the Supreme Court as a way to
> police the other two branches
> as well as to help intervene when the two branches
> contradicted one another.
> Additionally, the Supreme Court provides a single
> Federal entity that can
> unify lower Federal courts when they too contradict
> one another (e.g., if
> one lower court nullifies a law while another
> upholds it). Finally, the
> Founders explicitly gave the Supreme Court the
> ultimate power to determine
> the constitutionality of laws, so I think it would
> be a hard argument to
> propose otherwise.
> 
> At least, that's how I see it.
> 
> So I look for a Supreme Court that understands its
> role in the Federal
> government.
> 
> Judicial activism is another matter, and one that
> every Party in the history
> of the US has been guilty of fostering. It's hard to
> really define judicial
> activitism though since it's normally the term used
> by the losers to
> describe a decision with which they disagree.

While packing the superior courts is a practice as old
as the courts, the system depends on the ability of
the those appointed to refrain from exceeding their
boundries.  Adam's appointment of Marshall comes to
mind.  He made that appointment knowing Marshall would
act as a brake of Jefferson's anti-federalist efforts,
yet Marshall, for all of being a thorn in Jefferson's
side, upheld the rights of the exeutive branch in
every particular.

When it came to packing the courts, the most blatant
and successful was FDR, and in that case both parties
screamed bloody murder and created the term limits on
the executive branch.

The amendment process is, at the end of the day, the
only way to curtail the judiciary.  Ignoring an
amendment, especially a new one aimed at directing the
judiciary exactly how to determine what is, or is not
the law of the land, for instance, the 16th amendment,
would allow Congress to toss them all out of office,
en mass.

Judical activism to me is more of a creeping
collection of precident, than a five-four decision. 
Judges, at least the professional Jurists we have been
appointing for a long time, tend to give undue weight
to precident, tying language not in the constitution
to the interpretataion of the constitution.

As mentioned on The First Amendment Center?s site,
much of the current ?law? concerning the first
amendment and the freedom of
religion is the Supreme Court?s interpretation that
includes Article IV wherein religious tests for
holding office are banned.  Encroachment on freedom to
express one?s religion is constant, and as recently as
2000 Congress passed the Freedom of Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act to prevent state and
local governments from restricting free expression of
religion. 
http://www.fac.org/rel_liberty/history/overview.aspx

Likewise, one can see how this body of
interpretational law is being used to build a
government of no religion which was not their intent.
Specifically, article IV was amended by the bill of
rights.  To use article IV to modify a later amendment
is abhorant to the amendment process.

Regardless of political affiliation, I want a superior
court to restrict themselves to examining the acts of
Congress in light of the Constitution which grants
Congress the charter to enact laws in the first place,
not some codified set of qualifications and
modifications used to justify previous decisions.

> 
> ---
> Puryear Information Technology, LLC
> Baton Rouge, LA * 225-706-8414
> http://www.puryear-it.com
> 
> Author of "Best Practices for Managing Linux and
> UNIX Servers"
> Download your free copy:
> http://www.puryear-it.com/bestpractices.htm
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Doug Riddle" <doug_riddle at yahoo.com>
> To: <Politics at brlug.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 9:46 AM
> Subject: [brlug-poly] Constructionist or
> Interpretationalist
> 
> 
> > Here is a timely political question:
> >
> > What type of jurists do we need on the supreme
> court?
> >
> > The constructionists/origininalists want to see
> > jurists that try to abide by the framer's intent,
> > meaning that the constitution, and its
> ammendments,
> > should be viewed in the light of what the authors
> of
> > the constitution and the authors of the
> ammendements
> > meant to accomplish when they penned and ratified
> the
> > constitution and subsequent ammendments.  By this
> they
> > intend to leave the creation of laws and
> modification
> > of the constitution with the congress and the body
> of
> > the electorate.
> >
> > Interpretationalist seem to think that the
> ammendment
> > process is too slow to adapt to societal needs and
> > that the judges should act as mediators between an
> > increasingly divisive congress and the sociatal
> sheep,
> > the helpless, hapless masses of non-voting sheep.
> >
> > The Louisiana statewide election of October the
> 15th,
> > 2005, had a 13% turnout.  13 people out of a
> hundred
> > showed up to direct their government on how to run
> > their business and spend their money.
> >
> > As sad a state of affairs as that is, it still
> beats
> > the snot out of having nine people in robes in
> > Washington DC tell two branches of governemnt what
> > laws to write.
> >
> > If you want justice, bring your cause to the
> people.
> > There is a reason a jury of your peers can vacate
> a
> > law.  Your peers can tell justice and a law's
> intent
> > from the letter of the law.  However, when a jury
> does
> > that, it is a one time only event.  When a Jurist
> does
> > it, it is precedent, and becomes codified.
> >
> > A jury of your peers elected the people that wrote
> the
> > laws, and can, in certain circumstances, over-ride
> > them on a case-by-case basis.  A Jurist should
> never
> > be allowed to second-guess an elected body.
> >
> > An example from real life.  A woman is beaten by
> her
> > husband repeatedly for years.  Their son grows to
> be
> > about thirteen and dad starts in on him.  Mom
> tries to
> > defend him and dad knocks mom out; son shoots dad
> > twelve times.  The prosecution claims that since
> son
> > had to stop and find the box of bullets and reload
> the
> > revolver it constitutes second degree murder, a
> crime
> > of passion, rather than manslaughter, a fit of
> > reaction and anger, and certainly not an attempt
> to
> > protect his mother because trace evidence
> indicates he
> > searched for the bullets, reloaded the pistol, and
> > emptied into dear old dad again before checking to
> see
> > whether or not mom was OK.
> >
> > The defense case is pretty weak.  A lot of people
> who
> > should have come forward a long time ago testified
> > about the years of abuse.  Neither mom or son
> remember
> > a blessed thing about the death of dear old dad. 
> Mom
> > was out cold, and son doesn't remember coming home
> > from school that day.
> >
> > The prosecution wants junior tried as an adult,
> and
> > given the gravity of the case, it is.  The
> prosecution
> > wants junior to get twenty to life.  After all Mr.
> > District Attorney has designs on political office,
> and
> > a tough-on-crime record would help.
> >
> > The jury of registered voters vacates the law and
> > finds junior innocent of all charges.  A jury can
> do
> > that.  A jurist, or judge, cannot.
> >
> > A jurist can vacate a law by declaring it
> > unconstitutional, and they need scant reason for
> doing
> > so, but they cannot vacate a law in the way a jury
> > can.
> >
> > A jury can let one person go because they perceive
> the
> > letter of the law in a single case being applied
> in a
> > fashion contrary to the intent of a law.
> >
> > A jurist can sweep away a law because they
> perceive
> > the intent of a law being contrary to their views
> of
> > law.
> >
> > So, I ask again, what sort of supreme court
> justice
> > should we hope for?
> >
> >
> >
> > Warmest Regards,
> >
> > Doug Riddle
> > http://www.dougriddle.com
> > "War is God's way of teaching Americans
> geography."
> > - Ambrose Bierce
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Politics mailing list
> > Politics at brlug.net
> >
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Politics mailing list
> 
=== message truncated ===


Warmest Regards,

Doug Riddle
http://www.dougriddle.com
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography."
 - Ambrose Bierce


From williamhill2 at cox.net  Fri Oct 21 07:40:15 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 07:40:15 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
Message-ID: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>

Thanks Dustin, I'm glad there's a space for politics here. ?When I feel like a 
technical problem has roots in poor moral or bad laws, this is the place to 
take it. ?Tolerance of bad business practices and poor morals hurts everyone 
and creates a society where everyone is open to abuse. ?Bad technology, in 
turn, aids people who want to abuse their neighbors. ?

I'll also take criticisms of Microsoft products here too. ?It seems that there 
are many people who take these criticisms personally. ?The responses I've 
gotten for saying things like, "XP is unusable" have no place of a tech list. ?
Yet, Microsoft and other closed source software companies make life miserable 
for everyone and they deserve censure. ?


From andrewmb at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 12:37:56 2005
From: andrewmb at gmail.com (Andrew Baudouin)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:37:56 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <43592774.7080900@gmail.com>

Will Hill wrote:

>Thanks Dustin, I'm glad there's a space for politics here.  When I feel like a 
>technical problem has roots in poor moral or bad laws, this is the place to 
>take it.  Tolerance of bad business practices and poor morals hurts everyone 
>and creates a society where everyone is open to abuse.  Bad technology, in 
>turn, aids people who want to abuse their neighbors. 
>  
>
Railing against the tolerance of bad business practice is one thing.  
Making statements as to the usability of a particular OS  given said 
business practices is another thing entirely.  None of the 
aforementioned belong on a tech list.

>I'll also take criticisms of Microsoft products here too.  It seems that there 
>are many people who take these criticisms personally.  The responses I've 
>gotten for saying things like, "XP is unusable" have no place of a tech list.  
>Yet, Microsoft and other closed source software companies make life miserable 
>for everyone and they deserve censure.  
>  
>
"XP is unusuable" is a ridiculous comment.  I have no qualms about 
letting you know that.

Microsoft provides software and services for a cost.  A business or a 
person has the obligation to compare its needs to that which Microsoft 
meets with their software.  If they choose to invest, great.  If they 
choose not to, then great also.

>_______________________________________________
>Politics mailing list
>Politics at brlug.net
>http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
>
>  
>




From sroddy at gmail.com  Sat Oct 22 16:27:41 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:27:41 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>

Will, you better set the hook, I think you got a bite! ;-)

On 10/21/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Will Hill wrote:
>
> >Thanks Dustin, I'm glad there's a space for politics here. When I feel
> like a
> >technical problem has roots in poor moral or bad laws, this is the place
> to
> >take it. Tolerance of bad business practices and poor morals hurts
> everyone
> >and creates a society where everyone is open to abuse. Bad technology, in
> >turn, aids people who want to abuse their neighbors.
> >
> >
> Railing against the tolerance of bad business practice is one thing.
> Making statements as to the usability of a particular OS given said
> business practices is another thing entirely. None of the
> aforementioned belong on a tech list.
>
> >I'll also take criticisms of Microsoft products here too. It seems that
> there
> >are many people who take these criticisms personally. The responses I've
> >gotten for saying things like, "XP is unusable" have no place of a tech
> list.
> >Yet, Microsoft and other closed source software companies make life
> miserable
> >for everyone and they deserve censure.
> >
> >
> "XP is unusuable" is a ridiculous comment. I have no qualms about
> letting you know that.
>
> Microsoft provides software and services for a cost. A business or a
> person has the obligation to compare its needs to that which Microsoft
> meets with their software. If they choose to invest, great. If they
> choose not to, then great also.
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Politics mailing list
> >Politics at brlug.net
> >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Politics mailing list
> Politics at brlug.net
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051022/fd392013/attachment.htm

From williamhill2 at cox.net  Sun Oct 23 13:01:07 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:01:07 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200510231301.07742.williamhill2@cox.net>

Just for you, Shannon, I'll tell you why XP is unusable for me.  To continue 
your analogy, this is a small fish that I'd usually throw back where it could 
die or grow larger and be more fun.  

It's funny to post here as what follows is mostly a technical discussion.  

XP's closed source nature make it buggy and useless.  The list of problems 
starts with power management and extends to a lack of applications, stupid 
data formats, poor GUI and printer management.  It would be easier to say 
that everything Microsoft is second rate and leave it at that, but I'll go 
into details for someone who loves file permissions on systems with 12 minut 
half lives.  

Power management, the  most important feature in a laptop to me, is wasted in 
an OS that works best when booted daily.  The whole point of mobile computing 
is to take your work with you.  Even the best session management, which XP 
has none of that I'm aware of, fails to bring up your work exactly as you 
left it.  So, without power management, you lose your place and have to waste 
your time booting your computer and looking up all the things you need to get 
the job done.  Compare that to having everything you need already opened when 
you open the lid.  

XP's sorry single screen GUI makes place keeping difficult anyway.  If I've 
got more than two or three documents to look at in several programs, the 
single screen gets crowded fast.  Not being able to slide documents to the 
side so I can look at them easily is frustrating, but not nearly as 
frustrating as their pathetic task bar which reduces everything down to a few 
icons that continuously change positions.  Finding your work is like playing 
"hit the gopher".  I don't remember how to make the screen split, to it's 
very difficult to compare things side by side.  As I recall, it was different 
in every application and changed from version to version.  It was much easier 
for me to discover these features in Enlightenment and KDE applications where 
they are very useful.  

All of the above assumes I have programs to work with, which is not true.  In 
the non free world of XP, I have to pony up money or search the world wide 
web for applications that are probably trojaned.  Out of the box, XP does not 
even include a spell checker.  I need the red letters kmail and most other 
free text editors give me.  I also want tools like a spreadsheet, iso writer, 
compiler and so on.  I was amazed to learn that XP Home does not include 
programs, like flash, Real, Xine, xmms, noatum and so on, for watching movies 
or listening to music the way that Mepis does.  The average person who really 
uses their computer for work and play will have to dig up dozens of extra 
applications.   It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what Debian 
provides at no cost.

Once I've managed to find and purchase what I need, I'd then spend all sorts 
of time actually putting the software on my machine.  The install process is 
typically an insulting affair of "I submit", reboots and other nonsense.  If 
only that were the end of my troubles instead of the beginning.

Between crashes caused by malice and incompetence, install is never over.  
Because the companies that own this process think they need to earn money by 
selling you the very same program next year, the cycle goes on and on.  
Because non free companies don't co-operate, there's a good chance your next 
upgrade will screw up one of the applications you need.  Things get really 
messy when the owner goes out of business and you have to get your work back 
out of their roach motel.  Roach Motel?  That's another way of saying 
non-free data formats suck life.  Your work goes in and never comes out and 
this was done intentionally to make migrating to "competing" applications 
difficult.  I could rant for hours about what a disgusting mess things like 
the Outlook format are.  Microsoft's ballooning install requirements prove 
that the complexity of these formats is more for planned obsolescence than 
for performance reasons.  When you add worms, Microsoft got more fragility 
than they wanted from the registry.  The only way to keep XP free of worms, 
spyware, adware and all that is to wipe and reload, a task that's only made 
less tedious by yet another program you have to find and master.  Bill Gates 
especially hates programs that allow end users to duplicate his software, so 
programs that make backup easier are a particularly difficult thing to keep 
working.

So, let's say I'm in one of those 12 minute miracles of non free software.   
I'm not reloading, virus scanning, Windoze updating, or anything like that.  
I've gotten all the programs I think I need.  I'm plowing through the 
painfully disorganized GUI and getting work done with the greatest of 
determination.  I have actually produced something that is worth sharing or  
demanded by others.  Now what?

In my case, I'm stuck trying to share that work even with myself.  XP does not 
have ssh and I would not trust it if it did.  There are free samba clients 
out there, so I can use that to get my work of that one computer but it would 
be much easier if I could use a file manager like Konqueror to securely move 
things around my network like I do now.  Without those programs, I'm stuck 
choosing between a completely insecure home network and sneaker net.  

Getting my work to others is an even bigger pain.  In the XP world, I'm stuck 
emailing Microsoft formated junk.  I'd like to print out a pdf, but I have to 
get more software to do that.  Awful things happen when I start mailing Word 
docs, for example.  If I've bothered to use any text formating, it gets 
screwed up if I change printers or computers due to inconsistent font sets.  
As things are, I simply sftp pdfs or html to any of several web servers that 
I can then direct my friends.  

Free softare is all about sharing, non free is all about sucking money.  The 
net result is that non free software is expensive and difficult to use where 
free software is cheap and easy.

That's why XP is useless to me.  

On Saturday 22 October 2005 04:27 pm, Shannon Roddy wrote:
On 10/21/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > "XP is unusuable" is a ridiculous comment. I have no qualms about
> > letting you know that.


From andrewmb at gmail.com  Mon Oct 24 09:00:04 2005
From: andrewmb at gmail.com (Andrew Baudouin)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 09:00:04 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <200510231301.07742.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>
	<200510231301.07742.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <3fc325330510240700h55a3e0e1n892a39881d034731@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/23/05, Will Hill <williamhill2 at cox.net> wrote:
>
> Just for you, Shannon, I'll tell you why XP is unusable for me. To
> continue
> your analogy, this is a small fish that I'd usually throw back where it
> could
> die or grow larger and be more fun.
>
> It's funny to post here as what follows is mostly a technical discussion.
>
> XP's closed source nature make it buggy and useless. The list of problems
> starts with power management and extends to a lack of applications, stupid
> data formats, poor GUI and printer management. It would be easier to say
> that everything Microsoft is second rate and leave it at that, but I'll go
> into details for someone who loves file permissions on systems with 12
> minut
> half lives.
>
> Power management, the most important feature in a laptop to me, is wasted
> in
> an OS that works best when booted daily. The whole point of mobile
> computing
> is to take your work with you. Even the best session management, which XP
> has none of that I'm aware of, fails to bring up your work exactly as you
> left it. So, without power management, you lose your place and have to
> waste
> your time booting your computer and looking up all the things you need to
> get
> the job done. Compare that to having everything you need already opened
> when
> you open the lid.


Have you even used XP??????

This is a giant laugher.

ACPI and laptop hardware has been supported better on Windows since before
Linux distributions even thought about supporting it.

This wins the made-up statistics award for 2005. You remind me of the
LSU/Les Miles bashers who invent things like "LSU was #1 in recruiting under
Nick Saban....The defense never gave up this many yards under Nick Saban"


XP's sorry single screen GUI makes place keeping difficult anyway. If I've
> got more than two or three documents to look at in several programs, the
> single screen gets crowded fast. Not being able to slide documents to the
> side so I can look at them easily is frustrating, but not nearly as
> frustrating as their pathetic task bar which reduces everything down to a
> few
> icons that continuously change positions.


The application icons never change position. As you open more programs they
stack to the right.

Finding your work is like playing
> "hit the gopher". I don't remember how to make the screen split, to it's
> very difficult to compare things side by side. As I recall, it was
> different
> in every application and changed from version to version. It was much
> easier
> for me to discover these features in Enlightenment and KDE applications
> where
> they are very useful.


In MDI applications, Window-Tile.

Did you just admit that you haven't even used windows since '95? I believe I
detect that.

All of the above assumes I have programs to work with, which is not true. In
> the non free world of XP, I have to pony up money or search the world wide
> web for applications that are probably trojaned.


This is simply fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Name an open-source
application, and there is probably a windows build for it. GiMP, gaIM,
OpenOffice, X-Chat....all have windows builds. Infact, the X=Chat developers
insidiously charge money for the windows builds. Would you go as far as to
say that those applications have trojans?

You better stop now while you're ahead.

Out of the box, XP does not
> even include a spell checker. I need the red letters kmail and most other
> free text editors give me. I also want tools like a spreadsheet, iso
> writer,
> compiler and so on. I was amazed to learn that XP Home does not include
> programs, like flash, Real, Xine, xmms, noatum and so on, for watching
> movies
> or listening to music the way that Mepis does. The average person who
> really
> uses their computer for work and play will have to dig up dozens of extra
> applications. It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what
> Debian
> provides at no cost.


This is an outright lie.

Debian provides nothing. MEPIS is a customized build that third-party people
put toghether with Debian as a base. They spent a lot of time setting up
repositories to automate installation of the aforementioned programs.

First of all, Winamp is free and that takes care of all of the
aforementioned needs. It is actually easier to download the Winamp
installation build from their website than use Debian's apt-get utility. It
is trivial to use Firefox/IE's automated install capability for Real and
Flash.

Why do you feel the need to make up things to support your argument?


Once I've managed to find and purchase what I need, I'd then spend all sorts
> of time actually putting the software on my machine. The install process
> is
> typically an insulting affair of "I submit", reboots and other nonsense.
> If
> only that were the end of my troubles instead of the beginning.


My stomach hurts.

Between crashes caused by malice and incompetence, install is never over.
> Because the companies that own this process think they need to earn money
> by
> selling you the very same program next year, the cycle goes on and on.


You are free not to buy them if you don't want to. You are also free to
continue running Windows 95 if you choose to do so as well.

Because non free companies don't co-operate, there's a good chance your next
> upgrade will screw up one of the applications you need. Things get really
> messy when the owner goes out of business and you have to get your work
> back
> out of their roach motel. Roach Motel? That's another way of saying
> non-free data formats suck life. Your work goes in and never comes out and
> this was done intentionally to make migrating to "competing" applications
> difficult.


Let's say you sold widgets and competed with a lot of other companies who
also sell widgets. WOuld you not do everything legally and ethically
possible to make sure everyone buys your and ONLY YOUR widgets?

People who rant about this show their absolute lack of understanding of all
things business-related.

I could rant for hours about what a disgusting mess things like
> the Outlook format are. Microsoft's ballooning install requirements prove
> that the complexity of these formats is more for planned obsolescence than
> for performance reasons. When you add worms, Microsoft got more fragility
> than they wanted from the registry. The only way to keep XP free of worms,
> spyware, adware and all that is to wipe and reload, a task that's only
> made
> less tedious by yet another program you have to find and master. Bill
> Gates
> especially hates programs that allow end users to duplicate his software,
> so
> programs that make backup easier are a particularly difficult thing to
> keep
> working.


Sigh. Are you actually going to give well-thought out examples or just
continue to spew FUD?

By the way, what do you make of all of the bugs and insecurities that have
showed up in Firefox now that it has reache dcritical mass?

So, let's say I'm in one of those 12 minute miracles of non free software.
> I'm not reloading, virus scanning, Windoze updating, or anything like
> that.
> I've gotten all the programs I think I need. I'm plowing through the
> painfully disorganized GUI and getting work done with the greatest of
> determination. I have actually produced something that is worth sharing or
> demanded by others. Now what?
>
In my case, I'm stuck trying to share that work even with myself. XP does
> not
> have ssh and I would not trust it if it did.


No "Linux" "has" ssh. All require you to download from an internet
repository. How, again is that more complicated than googling PuTTY and
downloading the executable to your computer?

There are free samba clients
> out there, so I can use that to get my work of that one computer but it
> would
> be much easier if I could use a file manager like Konqueror to securely
> move
> things around my network like I do now. Without those programs, I'm stuck
> choosing between a completely insecure home network and sneaker net.
>
You not knowing how to secure a Windows network is not the same as all
Windows networks being "insecure".

Getting my work to others is an even bigger pain. In the XP world, I'm stuck
> emailing Microsoft formated junk. I'd like to print out a pdf, but I have
> to
> get more software to do that. Awful things happen when I start mailing
> Word
> docs, for example. If I've bothered to use any text formating, it gets
> screwed up if I change printers or computers due to inconsistent font
> sets.
> As things are, I simply sftp pdfs or html to any of several web servers
> that
> I can then direct my friends.


You don't have to "get more software" to do that. There is a free office
system that runs just fine under XP (and this argument is about the
usabillity of the Microsoft Windows XP operating system, not all of its
third party software) called Open Office which allows you to do that
seamlessly.

Are you really arguing that Microsoft has a worse printing system than
Linux? I'm dumbfounded.

Free softare is all about sharing, non free is all about sucking money. The
> net result is that non free software is expensive and difficult to use
> where
> free software is cheap and easy.


You are a liar.

That's why XP is useless to me.


Congratulations.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051024/f675eded/attachment-0001.htm

From ericortego at gmail.com  Mon Oct 24 16:45:34 2005
From: ericortego at gmail.com (Eric G Ortego)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:45:34 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <3fc325330510240700h55a3e0e1n892a39881d034731@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>
	<200510231301.07742.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<3fc325330510240700h55a3e0e1n892a39881d034731@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6f3edef40510241445v209f14cqe4eea5f0f4e9be30@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/24/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> ACPI and laptop hardware has been supported better on Windows since before
> Linux distributions even thought about supporting it.
>

Are you actually going to give well-thought out examples or just continue to
spew opinions?

Of the laptop toting XP users I have met they are all amazed at how fast my
desktop is ready, right where I left off I might add, when I open the lid. I
have used XP on several laptops and in allot of instances(maybe caused by
some human) the laptop won't sleep and wake as I expect, instead just
"regular" shutdowns and starts ups, or worse the battery drains to death
while "sleeping." When they do hibernate it takes considerably longer and
that on machines about 3 times the speed of my own.

This wins the made-up statistics award for 2005.
>

Aren't 99% of all statistics made up on the spot? But it is sad that
generalizations are too often accepted at face value.

You remind me of the LSU/Les Miles bashers who invent things like "LSU was
> #1 in recruiting under Nick Saban....The defense never gave up this many
> yards under Nick Saban"
>

O.o *beware* mud puddle, slippery when wet.

 The application icons never change position. As you open more programs they
> stack to the right.
>

Icons do change place when a domain computer abruptly dies reverting to an
older copy of the profile, I see this every single day on multiple PC's. NT,
2000, XP on seperate networks.


> This is simply fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Name an open-source
> application, and there is probably a windows build for it.
>

For the most you are correct, but doesn't that say something about the
quality of those open source applications?
The design surely must be more thought out. From the small differences like
system logging, to the larger like drawing to the windowing system. They
have to account for all types of systems they wish their code to run on.

 GiMP, gaIM, OpenOffice, X-Chat....all have windows builds. Infact, the
> X=Chat developers insidiously charge money for the windows builds.
>

Whats wrong with charging money for software? Build it yourself if you think
paying the authors or the builders is insidious. Sheesh, I decry a
hypocrite.

 Would you go as far as to say that those applications have trojans?
>

You can audit the code your self if you fear that there may be malware
included. Not the case for closed source apps, or even closed source
freeware.

 You better stop now while you're ahead.
>

Heh

Out of the box, XP does not
> > even include a spell checker. I need the red letters kmail and most
> > other
> > free text editors give me. I also want tools like a spreadsheet, iso
> > writer,
> > compiler and so on. I was amazed to learn that XP Home does not include
> > programs, like flash, Real, Xine, xmms, noatum and so on, for watching
> > movies
> > or listening to music the way that Mepis does. The average person who
> > really
> > uses their computer for work and play will have to dig up dozens of
> > extra
> > applications. It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what
> > Debian
> > provides at no cost.
>
>
> This is an outright lie.
>

How is that a lie?

Debian provides nothing.
>

Debian provides package management tools. Pretty good ones.

First of all, Winamp is free and that takes care of all of the
> aforementioned needs.
>

But Winamp doesn't come with XP either.

It is actually easier to download the Winamp installation build from their
> website than use Debian's apt-get utility.
>


Maybe so, maybe as easy, maybe not... if you put 2 computer-ignorant people
on PC's (XP & mepis) telling one to install Winamp and the other to install
xmms I would put my nickle on the mepis luser to finish first. If you show
them how to do it then ask them a week later to do it again, I would still
put my nickle on the mepis luser.

Why do you feel the need to make up things to support your argument?
>

Aren't 99% of all statistics made up on the spot? Its sad that often
generalizations can actually work to convince others.

 You are free not to buy them if you don't want to. You are also free to
> continue running Windows 95 if you choose to do so as well.
>

You must continue to run windows 95, unless you choose to upgrade or cannot.
Often apps only work on one specific system in which they were built to run.
This is one reason Microsoft has looked bad for breaking so many apps with
their service packs. Its also one of the reasons that I read the
installation documentation on important Windows only applications.


>  Let's say you sold widgets and competed with a lot of other companies who
> also sell widgets. WOuld you not do everything legally and ethically
> possible to make sure everyone buys your and ONLY YOUR widgets?
>


I would not, because there is nothing ethical about doing everything legally
possible to make sure everyone buys *only my* widgets. What you describe
sounds allot like Communism, and a bit like the essence of Microsoft. In a
free market I should do everything legally and ethically possible to try to
convince you that you want to buy my widget and make sure you know if you
have bought the widget which I sell. To suggest that I(or my company) should
do everything legally & ethically possible to eliminate the choice of which
widget everyone can buy sounds socialist.

People who rant about this show their absolute lack of understanding of all
> things business-related.
>

Ranting does not show lack of understanding, maybe lack of self control and
maybe overzealous conviction.


>  By the way, what do you make of all of the bugs and insecurities that
> have showed up in Firefox now that it has reache dcritical mass?
>

Disclosed, therefore avoidable & likely to be fixed.

 No "Linux" "has" ssh.
>

No windows has a mouse.

All require you to download from an internet repository.
>

Most *nix distributions come with openssh installed just like most PC's come
with a mouse.


Free softare is all about sharing, non free is all about sucking money. The
> > net result is that non free software is expensive and difficult to use
> > where
> > free software is cheap and easy.
>
>
> You are a liar.
>

lol, you are a funny.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051024/22f35501/attachment.htm

From andrewmb at gmail.com  Mon Oct 24 17:28:34 2005
From: andrewmb at gmail.com (Andrew Baudouin)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:28:34 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <6f3edef40510241445v209f14cqe4eea5f0f4e9be30@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>
	<200510231301.07742.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<3fc325330510240700h55a3e0e1n892a39881d034731@mail.gmail.com>
	<6f3edef40510241445v209f14cqe4eea5f0f4e9be30@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3fc325330510241528v6861eb22yd20edd31e9c62205@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/24/05, Eric G Ortego <ericortego at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/24/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > ACPI and laptop hardware has been supported better on Windows since
> > before Linux distributions even thought about supporting it.
> >
>
> Are you actually going to give well-thought out examples or just continue
> to spew opinions?
>

Not an opinion. If you had read my reply to Will you would have realized it.
In 1998 I had a 300Mhz PII Thinkpad running Windows 98 which could suspend
and resume with opening and closing of the lid. Suse 6.2/Whatever 2.2 kernel
I was running side-by-side with it barfed. My statement was true. Historically,
Windows supports hardware and power management better than Linux
distributions do. I can come up with anecdotal evidence RIGHT NOW (TM) that
current Linux distros suck arse at hardware support and power management,
but that is what it is...anecdotal.

Of the laptop toting XP users I have met they are all amazed at how fast my
> desktop is ready, right where I left off I might add, when I open the lid. I
> have used XP on several laptops and in allot of instances(maybe caused by
> some human) the laptop won't sleep and wake as I expect, instead just
> "regular" shutdowns and starts ups, or worse the battery drains to death
> while "sleeping." When they do hibernate it takes considerably longer and
> that on machines about 3 times the speed of my own.
>

I wouldn't be surprised if 100% of those issues were human related (certain
drivers for hardware not playing nice). My IBM Thinkpad w/533E Celeron works
just dandy suspending and resuming under Windows 2000.

I won't make an argument about present day support for Linux suspending and
resuming...it's an historical one.

 This wins the made-up statistics award for 2005.
> >
>
> Aren't 99% of all statistics made up on the spot? But it is sad that
> generalizations are too often accepted at face value.
>

I wasn't the one making said generalizations.

You remind me of the LSU/Les Miles bashers who invent things like "LSU was
> > #1 in recruiting under Nick Saban....The defense never gave up this many
> > yards under Nick Saban"
> >
>
> O.o *beware* mud puddle, slippery when wet.
>

:D

> The application icons never change position. As you open more programs
> > they stack to the right.
> >
>
> Icons do change place when a domain computer abruptly dies reverting to an
> older copy of the profile, I see this every single day on multiple PC's. NT,
> 2000, XP on seperate networks.
>

He's not talking about that issue. Read the message. Besides, how is that a
problem? Different profiles have different application icon settings.

This is simply fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Name an open-source
> > application, and there is probably a windows build for it.
> >
>
> For the most you are correct, but doesn't that say something about the
> quality of those open source applications?
> The design surely must be more thought out. From the small differences
> like system logging, to the larger like drawing to the windowing system.
> They have to account for all types of systems they wish their code to run
> on.
>

Not really. It's a matter of standardizing on toolkits. All of those use GTK
(windows port is available). The toolkits handle all of the underlying
syscalls.

User applications shouldn't make a habit of writing to the syslog anyway.

GiMP, gaIM, OpenOffice, X-Chat....all have windows builds. Infact, the
> > X=Chat developers insidiously charge money for the windows builds.
> >
>
> Whats wrong with charging money for software? Build it yourself if you
> think paying the authors or the builders is insidious. Sheesh, I decry a
> hypocrite.
>

You are the champ at not reading messages. I was poking at Will because his
champion free software developers were *GASP* charging money for software!

Would you go as far as to say that those applications have trojans?
> >
>
> You can audit the code your self if you fear that there may be malware
> included. Not the case for closed source apps, or even closed source
> freeware.
>

Again, you aren't reading. He was saying he trusts the repositoires of
Debian and doesn't trust sourceforge.net <http://sourceforge.net> win32
builds of free software.


You better stop now while you're ahead.
> >
>
> Heh
>
> Out of the box, XP does not
> > > even include a spell checker. I need the red letters kmail and most
> > > other
> > > free text editors give me. I also want tools like a spreadsheet, iso
> > > writer,
> > > compiler and so on. I was amazed to learn that XP Home does not
> > > include
> > > programs, like flash, Real, Xine, xmms, noatum and so on, for watching
> > > movies
> > > or listening to music the way that Mepis does. The average person who
> > > really
> > > uses their computer for work and play will have to dig up dozens of
> > > extra
> > > applications. It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what
> > > Debian
> > > provides at no cost.
> >
> >
> > This is an outright lie.
> >
>
> How is that a lie?
>

"It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what Debian
provides at no cost." is a lie.

Real and Flash are free. WMP/Winamp is a free replacement for xmms, xine,
and noatun. You can get XP Home for under a hundred dollars and all of the
rest for free.

It is a lie.

Debian provides nothing.
> >
>
> Debian provides package management tools. Pretty good ones.
>

Way to quote edited parts of my sentence. Mature.

First of all, Winamp is free and that takes care of all of the
> > aforementioned needs.
> >
>
> But Winamp doesn't come with XP either.
>

WMP does...and that destroys your argument. Besides, winamp is a free piece
of software, and I was arguing that end. He was saying he has to pay
hundreds of dollars to get equivalent versions of noatun, xmms, and xine.

It is actually easier to download the Winamp installation build from their
> > website than use Debian's apt-get utility.
> >
>
>
> Maybe so, maybe as easy, maybe not... if you put 2 computer-ignorant
> people on PC's (XP & mepis) telling one to install Winamp and the other to
> install xmms I would put my nickle on the mepis luser to finish first. If
> you show them how to do it then ask them a week later to do it again, I
> would still put my nickle on the mepis luser.
>

Then you would lose.

Why do you feel the need to make up things to support your argument?
> >
>
> Aren't 99% of all statistics made up on the spot? Its sad that often
> generalizations can actually work to convince others.
>

No generalization would convince anyone to switch from Windows.


 Let's say you sold widgets and competed with a lot of other companies who
> > also sell widgets. WOuld you not do everything legally and ethically
> > possible to make sure everyone buys your and ONLY YOUR widgets?
> >
>
>
> I would not, because there is nothing ethical about doing everything
> legally possible to make sure everyone buys *only my* widgets. What you
> describe sounds allot like Communism, and a bit like the essence of
> Microsoft. In a free market I should do everything legally and ethically
> possible to try to convince you that you want to buy my widget and make sure
> you know if you have bought the widget which I sell. To suggest that I(or my
> company) should do everything legally & ethically possible to eliminate the
> choice of which widget everyone can buy sounds socialist.
>

There sure is. Businesses everywhere do it all of the time. Undercutting
price and adding value is one way. Making sure your support of widgets is
superior is another way. How is that communist?

Microsoft beat Unix and high-dollar software vendors by undercutting price.
They are trying to beat Linux right now by adding value and usabillity. They
are losing on price and Linux is steadily gaining, IMO.

Forcing everyone to share and freely give away all of the software they
write is what is communist.

People who rant about this show their absolute lack of understanding of all
> > things business-related.
> >
>
> Ranting does not show lack of understanding, maybe lack of self control
> and maybe overzealous conviction.
>

I'll potentially agree with you on there.

By the way, what do you make of all of the bugs and insecurities that have
> > showed up in Firefox now that it has reache dcritical mass?
> >
>
> Disclosed, therefore avoidable & likely to be fixed.
>

Yet common arguments that OSS is better due to number of bugs alone doesn't
hold water.

No "Linux" "has" ssh.
> >
>
> No windows has a mouse.
>
> All require you to download from an internet repository.
> >
>
> Most *nix distributions come with openssh installed just like most PC's
> come with a mouse.
>

Good point.

However, that's at least considering that openssh is a requirement to do
work, which it isn't.

Free softare is all about sharing, non free is all about sucking money. The
> > > net result is that non free software is expensive and difficult to use
> > > where
> > > free software is cheap and easy.
> >
> >
> > You are a liar.
> >
>
> lol, you are a funny.
>

omgwtfbbq?

_______________________________________________
> Politics mailing list
> Politics at brlug.net
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051024/e0a2a9eb/attachment-0001.htm

From ericortego at gmail.com  Mon Oct 24 20:07:50 2005
From: ericortego at gmail.com (Eric G Ortego)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:07:50 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <3fc325330510241528v6861eb22yd20edd31e9c62205@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510210740.15840.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<43592774.7080900@gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510221427s4fe73455l6c6aeb4d72423329@mail.gmail.com>
	<200510231301.07742.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<3fc325330510240700h55a3e0e1n892a39881d034731@mail.gmail.com>
	<6f3edef40510241445v209f14cqe4eea5f0f4e9be30@mail.gmail.com>
	<3fc325330510241528v6861eb22yd20edd31e9c62205@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6f3edef40510241807x4357236ao5479be1ea5afe9ab@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/24/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>  Not an opinion. If you had read my reply to Will you would have realized
> it. In 1998 I had a 300Mhz PII Thinkpad running Windows 98 which could
> suspend and resume with opening and closing of the lid. Suse 6.2/Whatever
> 2.2 kernel I was running side-by-side with it barfed. My statement was
> true.
>

But Will was discussing XP. XP wasn't available in 1998. I didn't take your,
"Have you even tried XP", to be a precursor for de-validating his XP
usefulness argument with data from your experience with windows 98 vs
Suse1998.

Historically, Windows supports hardware and power management better than
> Linux distributions do.
>

Historically Windows spends less up time. I haven't had any troubles with
power management in linux at least since kernel 2.4.

I can come up with anecdotal evidence RIGHT NOW (TM) that current Linux
> distros suck arse at hardware support and power management, but that is what
> it is...anecdotal.
>

hardware support? I want to see you run windows xp naively on a powerbook
then Ill concede that your anecdotal evidence of "suck arse hardware
support" could have credibility. How about XP on a gumstix? That should be
easy.
I'd be interested in seeing your "suck arse" power management evidence.


> I wouldn't be surprised if 100% of those issues were human related
> (certain drivers for hardware not playing nice). My IBM Thinkpad w/533E
> Celeron works just dandy suspending and resuming under Windows 2000.
>

Cool, my ppc-linux 800mhz shuts down in under 3 seconds, resumes in under 7.

 I won't make an argument about present day support for Linux suspending and
> resuming...it's an historical one.
>

Yea I know.


>  I wasn't the one making said generalizations.
>

I wasn't suggesting that you were.

 He's not talking about that issue. Read the message. Besides, how is that a
> problem? Different profiles have different application icon settings.
>

My mistake, one of my annoyances not Will's. Its a problem because data can
be lost, its not just the icons positions that can get overwritten.


> Not really. It's a matter of standardizing on toolkits.
>

What? Ok then maybe that says something about the opensource toolkits.
Sheesh, what toolkit is 7zip written with? I like the windows version alot.

All of those use GTK (windows port is available).
>

Alot of apps are not based on gtk, or qt.
I don't think that the windows version of openoffice uses gtk but I could be
wrong.

The toolkits handle all of the underlying syscalls.
>

Which can make them appealing to application developers willing to work with
the toolkits and their accompanying licensing policy.

User applications shouldn't make a habit of writing to the syslog anyway.
>

local6 nuff said
And Windows applications have a habit of no logging at all.


> Again, you aren't reading. He was saying he trusts the repositoires of
> Debian and doesn't trust sourceforge.net <http://sourceforge.net> win32
> builds of free software.
>

I did read that, but I didn't think that you were so dense.
Nothing in debian can go in to the debian archives without a trusted key in
the debian keyring. They are signed on upload by a member of the debian
project. That member has to be connected in a web of trust with the entire
rest of the project. Someone is accountable for the build.

Sourceforge is just a public anonymous repository. Find out who built what
if you can, I wouldn't trust it over a project like debian either.


> "It would cost me hundreds of dollars to duplicate what Debian
> provides at no cost." is a lie.
>

Ah, well maybe it would. You don't know how *he* would go about doing that.
It might not cost you hundreds of dollars. But I find it a bit harsh to call
him a lyer for that.

 Real and Flash are free. WMP/Winamp is a free replacement for xmms, xine,
> and noatun. You can get XP Home for under a hundred dollars and all of the
> rest for free.
>
> It is a lie.
>

Realplayer is nice, I even got them to build me a ppc-linux version of it.
Flash doesn't work for me on linux(so it sucks by default), WMP sucks and
winamp is pretty damn nice but is the only one that is truly free.

Debian provides nothing.
> > >
> >
> > Debian provides package management tools. Pretty good ones.
> >
>
> Way to quote edited parts of my sentence. Mature.
>

Well if you want to start schoolyarding, that was an entire sentence of
yours that I quoted.
Excuse the truncation of the rest if the paragraph which I wasn't responding
to.


> WMP does...and that destroys your argument.
>
WMP isn't free...<tinfoil hat>and I wouldn't trust it. *beedy eyes*</tinfoil
hat>

Besides, winamp is a free piece of software, and I was arguing that end. He
> was saying he has to pay hundreds of dollars to get equivalent versions of
> noatun, xmms, and xine.
>

I suspect the cost of XP is a large part of that hundreds of dollars.
XP Home full version is around $200 is it not?


>  Then you would lose.
>

HA, then lets find 2 mawmaw's without computer usage experience and
experiment.


> No generalization would convince anyone to switch from Windows.
>

Since it is often generalized, Freedom might.


> > I would not, because there is nothing ethical about doing everything
> > legally possible to make sure everyone buys *only my* widgets. What you
> > describe sounds allot like Communism, and a bit like the essence of
> > Microsoft. In a free market I should do everything legally and ethically
> > possible to try to convince you that you want to buy my widget and make sure
> > you know if you have bought the widget which I sell. To suggest that I(or my
> > company) should do everything legally & ethically possible to eliminate the
> > choice of which widget everyone can buy sounds socialist.
> >
>
> There sure is. Businesses everywhere do it all of the time.
>

Just because business do it doesn't mean that its ethical especially in a
free market economy.

Undercutting price and adding value is one way.
>

One way of what, eliminating choice? Read your own question.

"WOuld you not do everything legally and ethically possible to make sure
everyone buys your and ONLY YOUR widgets?"

By doing everything possible(within your criteria) to make sure everyone
buys ONLY my widget I am eliminating choice for everybody. Customers are
left with 1 choice, buy my widget or no widget. By saying this your agreeing
with RMS's view on the GPL. After all he is just doing everything legally &
ethically possible to make sure everyone gets only HIS widget. Choice is
great... percisely why I choose gentoo as my linux widget.

Making sure your support of widgets is superior is another way.
>

Another way to have a potentially more atractive widget, yes.

How is that communist?
>

Competing isn't commanding is.

Microsoft beat Unix and high-dollar software vendors by undercutting price.
>

Very well, then they ramped up licensing costs as evident with the change of
TS CAL from 2000 Server to 2003 Server. And they are a monopoly. A free
market implies competition.

They are trying to beat Linux right now by adding value and usabillity. They
> are losing on price and Linux is steadily gaining, IMO.
>

Oddly enough I think they can still beat linux on price. That is i they pick
the proper time and have sufficient .... yea the proper time is all.

Forcing everyone to share and freely give away all of the software they
> write is what is communist.
>

I can agree that forcing everyone to is. But everyone choosing to isn't.


> Yet common arguments that OSS is better due to number of bugs alone
> doesn't hold water.
>

I can agree partly. Public bug disclosure is important IMO. Do you trust
company X to disclose widget vulnerabilities? Its a fact that people don't
write perfect software. It doesn't matter if its Microsoft, SUN, or Linus.


>
> However, that's at least considering that openssh is a requirement to do
> work, which it isn't.
>

It is for me. That or I would need one hell of a KVM and lots of very long
cables.
Maybe consider that a mouse is a requirement to do work with windows, which
it isn't.


> omgwtfbbq?
>

Oh my gawd want to find big beautiful queen?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051024/2ec6ea03/attachment.htm

From williamhill2 at cox.net  Mon Oct 24 20:51:48 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:51:48 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Tax for all LSU Students.
Message-ID: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>

If you thought you could avoid the Microsoft tax by building your own computer 
while studying at LSU, guess again!  In an ugly parallel to the RIAA's effort 
to suck more money from Universities, Microsoft has made a deal with LSU.  A 
spam broadcast to all students let them know just how lucky the were to now 
be taxed by Microsoft through their student technology fee.  Stuff like this 
only delays the inevitable adoption of free software and I resent paying for 
it.  Details of the dirty deed is glorified in the spam and at this site:

http://www.lsu.edu/microsoftFAQ

Salient details are quoted:

"Student licensing was funded through a commitment from the Student Technology 
Fee made by the STF Oversight Committee."

Ugh! my dollars at work.  I'm committed, this sound serious.

"LSU is one of only a handful of schools doing online distribution of 
software, and the only school that distributes licensed software 100% 
online. ... Indiana University, as the developer of TigerWare's base software 
(IUWare) is the only other university to have such an extensive software 
distribution system. Other universities, however, do have more modest 
versions of software distribution systems; University of Texas is one such 
institution. "

A M$ tax pioneer, woot.  I've read that MIT students have had access to 
Autodesk and other useful programs through their Athena Net for years.  

"Students who receive Microsoft software from TigerWare will be able to take 
the software with them when they leave LSU; to continue to use it, and to 
have a legitimate license for the product so that subsequent upgrades to new 
versions can be purchased at a reduced upgrade cost."

That's how things worked for my little brother.  When XP died, he became a 
Linux user.

"What about Linux/UNIX users?

None of the Microsoft software runs on Linux/UNIX systems. "

Not that I want their junk, but Wine support would be nice for those that do.

"TigerWare senses what type of device is trying to access it, and depending 
upon the system (Windows, Mac, or Linux) automatically presents the 
appropriate software set to the connecting user. "
 
So, they won't even give me the chance to download and try it because they 
identify me as a Mac user.   Anybody heard of an OSXbox or Mac Wine?

"Does this mean I don't have to buy the Microsoft Windows operating system 
when I buy my computer?

No, you still must buy the operating system when you buy a new computer. The 
CLA only provides for upgrades to a previously purchased operating system 
license. "

So you still have to pay your $100 Microsoft tax to start the ball rolling.
 
"Does this mean I don't have to buy Microsoft applications like Office Suite 
or OneNote when I buy my computer?

Yes, you need no longer purchase these products 'bundled' on your new computer 
purchase. ... Simply order the system with only the operating system, and 
then download the Microsoft applications you want ... . If a computer vendor 
tells you that "these applications are bundled at no additional charge" press 
harder on them, as it is not the case that these software products are given 
away; their costs are rolled into the overall bundle price. "

Wow, a nice admission but what a nasty thing to do to their vendors!  I wonder 
when they will admit that they make Dell and others charge more for a PC 
without M$ than one polluted with it.  Dare they admit to the dreaded M$ Tax?  
Not from the nonsense here, promoting "free software" that you have already 
paid for but can only have under their exact conditions.

"The reason for acquiring the CLA is to allow for standardization WITHIN the 
Microsoft software toolkit, so that users that are using this company's 
products can have access to the most popular ones, and get the latest 
versions/upgrades without paying an additional amount. By eliminating the 
problem of supporting multiple versions of Microsoft operating systems and 
applications, and facilitating the most modern software for users who choose 
this company's products, LSU will gain significant support benefits. 
Strategically, the Office of the Chief Information Officer and ITS envision a 
diverse computing platform and software environment consistent with an 'IT 
Abundance' model."

Another amazing admission - that Windows versions are inconsistent and that 
inconsistency costs lots of money to support.  I'll bet they think this will 
help them solve their worm problems - ha!  Good luck to them supporting all 
of those people who take the plunge only to find out their favorite software 
does not run under XP SP2 or whatever the latest and greatest is.

Not all is wasted, however, LSU is promissing Linux from the same place:

http://tigerware.lsu.edu/list.aspx?id=48

Not all of it is up yet, but the "distro_name.lsu.edu" sites are very cool 
sounding.  I imagine it will cost them much less to mirror that software than 
M$'s dump price and think that small portion of their budget is well spent.  
I look forward to speedy Mepis iso downloads and a full debian mirror.


From brad at selu.edu  Tue Oct 25 08:38:35 2005
From: brad at selu.edu (Brad Bendily)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:38:35 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [brlug-poly] thanks
In-Reply-To: <3fc325330510241528v6861eb22yd20edd31e9c62205@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0510250836550.1670-100000@cliffy.selu.edu>


On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Andrew Baudouin wrote:

> On 10/24/05, Eric G Ortego <ericortego at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/24/05, Andrew Baudouin <andrewmb at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ACPI and laptop hardware has been supported better on Windows since
> > > before Linux distributions even thought about supporting it.

I'd really like to continue reading this thread, but you guys
continue to keep using HTML in your mail and well it's impossible to
follow the thread in pine.

bb



From andrewmb at gmail.com  Tue Oct 25 08:38:55 2005
From: andrewmb at gmail.com (Andrew Baudouin)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:38:55 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Tax for all LSU Students.
In-Reply-To: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <3fc325330510250638t512fdc9bwe96c0ead423b5e59@mail.gmail.com>

More FUD!

On 10/24/05, Will Hill <williamhill2 at cox.net> wrote:
>
> If you thought you could avoid the Microsoft tax by building your own
> computer
> while studying at LSU, guess again! In an ugly parallel to the RIAA's
> effort
> to suck more money from Universities, Microsoft has made a deal with LSU.
> A
> spam broadcast to all students let them know just how lucky the were to
> now
> be taxed by Microsoft through their student technology fee. Stuff like
> this
> only delays the inevitable adoption of free software and I resent paying
> for
> it. Details of the dirty deed is glorified in the spam and at this site:


LSU has been under the CLA for several years now. The STF has not changed in
amount since they have elected to use part of it to get software from
Microsoft.

The Student Technology Fee Oversight committee voted to use funds to do
this. It was a democratically supported decision.

http://www.lsu.edu/microsoftFAQ
>
> Salient details are quoted:
>
> "Student licensing was funded through a commitment from the Student
> Technology
> Fee made by the STF Oversight Committee."
>
> Ugh! my dollars at work. I'm committed, this sound serious.


See above.

----- snip -----

Not all of it is up yet, but the "distro_name.lsu.edu" sites are very cool
> sounding. I imagine it will cost them much less to mirror that software
> than
> M$'s dump price and think that small portion of their budget is well
> spent.
> I look forward to speedy Mepis iso downloads and a full debian mirror.


You are so far behind the times.

debian.math.lsu.edu <http://debian.math.lsu.edu> has been running for years
and years now. fedora.lsu.edu <http://fedora.lsu.edu> has been serving
redhat ISOS since 5.2. There are gentoo, mandrake, and suse mirrors as well.

_______________________________________________
> Politics mailing list
> Politics at brlug.net
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051025/0197a724/attachment.htm

From sroddy at gmail.com  Tue Oct 25 16:54:37 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 16:54:37 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Tax for all LSU Students.
In-Reply-To: <3fc325330510250638t512fdc9bwe96c0ead423b5e59@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<3fc325330510250638t512fdc9bwe96c0ead423b5e59@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510251454m2ae368e1oc8ac25b81da21020@mail.gmail.com>

>
> LSU has been under the CLA for several years now. The STF has not changed
> in amount since they have elected to use part of it to get software from
> Microsoft.
>


Maybe not, but I would rather it if I could opt out of M$ crap and not pay
that portion of the fee. I view it the same as Social Security. I should be
able to opt out.

Speaking of opting out, I am about to opt out of this list if it is only
going to be for Andrew and Will to have their personal little war.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051025/871b424b/attachment.htm

From andrewmb at gmail.com  Tue Oct 25 21:21:15 2005
From: andrewmb at gmail.com (Andrew Baudouin)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:21:15 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Tax for all LSU Students.
In-Reply-To: <8d48b6ba0510251454m2ae368e1oc8ac25b81da21020@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>	<3fc325330510250638t512fdc9bwe96c0ead423b5e59@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510251454m2ae368e1oc8ac25b81da21020@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <435EE81B.7020404@gmail.com>

Shannon Roddy wrote:

>
>
>     LSU has been under the CLA for several years now.   The STF has
>     not changed in amount since they have elected to use part of it to
>     get software from Microsoft.
>
>
>
> Maybe not, but I would rather it if I could opt out of M$ crap and not 
> pay that portion of the fee.  I view it the same as Social Security.  
> I should be able to opt out.

I would agree with you there. Unfortunately your federal government 
doesn't agree.

>
> Speaking of opting out, I am about to opt out of this list if it is 
> only going to be for Andrew and Will to have their personal little war.

I am going to respond to every ludicrous anti-MS thread posted.  Care to 
start one?

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Politics mailing list
>Politics at brlug.net
>http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051025/8d8a7905/attachment.htm

From williamhill2 at cox.net  Wed Oct 26 07:53:27 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 07:53:27 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] A silver lining.
In-Reply-To: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <200510260753.27555.williamhill2@cox.net>

The LSU IT people are enthusiastically supporting Linux as part of this 
program and deserve great praise.  They are annoyed by the browser 
misidentification I pointed out and are actively working on more official 
Linux support.  

They pointed out links to Windoze and Linux platform sites that get around the 
browser misidentification problem.  Konqueror, despite the word Linux in it's 
ID string, is misidentified as OSX.  At the bottom of the page, right above 
the copyright notices are these links:

http://tigerware.lsu.edu/default.aspx?platform=1
http://tigerware.lsu.edu/default.aspx?platform=4

1= Windows
4 = Linux
3 = blank page.

So far, there's not much software behind the Linux page.  Obviously, that's a 
low priority for IU and Microsoft in a program that's designed to dump 
Microsoft onto students.  That it's there at all is a miracle.

Given the tigersoft site is run on IIS, the overwhelmingly M$ oriented spam 
that announced it and the browser identification problems, we see that IU's 
Microsoft influence does not end with the ability to distribute Microsoft 
software online.  

LSU's IT department would like to expand that coverage.  They already have 
links to a free version of RHE4 and plan all to host all of those other iso 
images.  They also responded positively to a the idea of identifying software 
that runs with Wine. though they doubt they will be given resources for that.  

I'm glad LSU IT is like that, regardless of student government follies.  They 
seem to have their head in the right place.  I suspected things were this way 
and all of my communications with them have been overwhelmingly positive, in 
both directions.  GO TIGERS!

If you write them, and you should, be sure to praise them for their continued 
and expanding Linux support.  They were happy to see that someone cared and 
no one needs a bunch of grumpy complaints.  That's what this list is for!  
Couch your requests as positive suggestions they can implement.  You know 
that they are going to face all the usual problems expanding Linux support, 
including official blocks, astroturf and other badness Microsoft is the 
master of.

Their work order on this subject is quoted here:

========== WO # 140087 ================
Thanks for the info! ?

Yes, this sounds like a similar problem to the one we were experiencing awhile 
back - I'm passing this on to our sysadmin to look into it. ?Although it's 
frustrating to be directed to the Mac page by default when you're running 
Mepis, there should be links to both the Windows and Linux pages at the 
bottom of the Mac page. ?If you're not seeing those, please let me know - 
that would be a separate issue altogether. ?

With regard to applications that will run through Wine, it's certainly 
something worthwhile we'd like to pursue. ?Please understand though that it 
may take quite awhile to do the appropriate testing given the number of 
applications we are providing through TigerWare and the limited resources we 
can dedicate to doing so. ?I completely agree, however, that it's a direction 
we need to take fairly soon if at all possible.

In the meantime, I'm keeping this ticket open until we can get a resolution 
for the browser problem. ?We'll let you know as soon as we have the problem 
fixed.
========== WO # 140087 ================


On Monday 24 October 2005 08:51 pm, Will Hill wrote:
> If you thought you could avoid the Microsoft tax by building your own
> computer while studying at LSU, guess again! 


From ECRichards at fbd.com  Wed Oct 26 08:38:15 2005
From: ECRichards at fbd.com (Richards Jr, Edward C.)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:38:15 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] US Drink/Drive Laws Could Push Open Source
Message-ID: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B127@fbdmail.sb.int>


http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2144253/florida-court-friday-hear

Ed 


This email, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any review, use, distribution or disclosure of included information by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited.  If you are not a named recipient or authorized to receive and / or act on information sent to a named recipient, or have reason to believe you are not or should not be one of the named recipients, please notify sender accordingly by reply email and delete all copies of this message prior to forwarding, copying or otherwise reproducing this message or attachments thereto. For information regarding the export control status of items discussed in this document, please refer to the project control list. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Richards Jr, Edward C..vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 176 bytes
Desc: Richards Jr, Edward C..vcf
Url : http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051026/71726d24/RichardsJrEdwardC..vcf

From ECRichards at fbd.com  Wed Oct 26 08:41:55 2005
From: ECRichards at fbd.com (Richards Jr, Edward C.)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:41:55 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ wants YOU!
Message-ID: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B128@fbdmail.sb.int>


Apparently, Uncle Steve (Ballmer) wants to lure us back into the M$ family. 

"The Cool Factor 

Microsoft also intends to specifically target Linux users with new capabilities in Windows and other products, Ballmer said. For example, Microsoft plans to go after the high-performance computing community with a forthcoming compute-cluster product, he said. 


In order to make these visions a reality, Microsoft will need to reverse its decline as a cool place to work among the industry's brightest stars, Bittman said. 


"They deliver cool stuff, Vista is cool. But the most interesting place to be is not Microsoft; they have to make it interesting," Bittman said. He noted that Ballmer took great pains to emphasize the amount of innovation that is taking place at Microsoft, from Web services development to the Xbox 360." 

from http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123108,00.asp

Ed 


This email, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any review, use, distribution or disclosure of included information by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited.  If you are not a named recipient or authorized to receive and / or act on information sent to a named recipient, or have reason to believe you are not or should not be one of the named recipients, please notify sender accordingly by reply email and delete all copies of this message prior to forwarding, copying or otherwise reproducing this message or attachments thereto. For information regarding the export control status of items discussed in this document, please refer to the project control list. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Richards Jr, Edward C..vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 176 bytes
Desc: Richards Jr, Edward C..vcf
Url : http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051026/ee90ff2b/RichardsJrEdwardC..vcf

From sroddy at gmail.com  Wed Oct 26 09:41:19 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:41:19 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ wants YOU!
In-Reply-To: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B128@fbdmail.sb.int>
References: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B128@fbdmail.sb.int>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510260741raa07debxb2dc03592bf77a88@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/26/05, Richards Jr, Edward C. <ECRichards at fbd.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Microsoft also intends to specifically target Linux users with new
> capabilities in Windows and other products, Ballmer said. For example,
> Microsoft plans to go after the high-performance computing community with a
> forthcoming compute-cluster product, he said.



Working somewhere where we have well over 1,000 nodes of HPC cluster, I can
PROMISE you that will never happen. Not here, or anywhere else that is
serious about HPC.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051026/dce3b344/attachment.htm

From sroddy at gmail.com  Wed Oct 26 09:45:04 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:45:04 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] A silver lining.
In-Reply-To: <200510260753.27555.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<200510260753.27555.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510260745j19076dbcl718d237a8ad1f258@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/26/05, Will Hill <williamhill2 at cox.net> wrote:
>
>
> I'm glad LSU IT is like that, regardless of student government follies.
> They
> seem to have their head in the right place.
>


Except for the inept network people who throw the dart at the dartboard to
figure out which service we will block today. (note - block, not filter)

Yesterday, ICMP
Today, SMTP
Tomorrow, Why not 80?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051026/99276bbb/attachment.htm

From williamhill2 at cox.net  Wed Oct 26 13:01:48 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 13:01:48 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] Reveille Counts the Cost, Fellow Students Outraged.
In-Reply-To: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <200510261301.48723.williamhill2@cox.net>

A fellow Medical Physics student gave me some more dirty deal details and told 
me about this article with actual dollar amounts:

http://www.lsureveille.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/10/24/435c4e163d8c0?in_archive=1

He and another fellow student were aggravated, even though they are Microsoft 
users, and felt like they are paying two or three times for the same 
software.  Their view of it is that the $562,446/year deal provides only "the 
most basic software bundle that comes with any new computer and already 
installed in all of the campus labs,"  and that "13" students will actually 
benefit from it.  If they need one of the wizbang feature or programs not 
provided by the bundle, they will find it already installed in one of LSU's 
many labs.  

To put things in perspective, LSU students pay about four million dollars a 
year in technology fees at a rate of $75/semester.  So, the average student 
will get to pay Microsoft:

$140/year * 4 years * 1/8 = $75

For software most either own or don't want.  Few students, as Microsoft 
already knows, will actually take the time and trouble to change their 
operating system or programs they depend on.  The whole point of giving in 
and paying the cost of the Microsoft tax by buying a Dell, for example, is to 
not have to fool around with computers and get what they need to do their 
work.  Installing software, for them, is a dangerous exercise which rewards 
them with features they don't know about or want at the risk of things they 
need.  Those few students with really old or skimpy software usually have 
hardware that matches and won't run MicroShaft's latest and greatest.  
Students who are thrifty like that have moved on to free software already.

The tax is levied, three times on students.  Once at time of purchase, where 
the bundle is always cheaper than a software free computer.  A second time 
when the school puts it in the lab, often paying twice for the software by 
having to wipe out the bundled software for "pro" versions licensed for 
public or corporate use.  Finally, a third time to make it available for 
download again.  

On Monday 24 October 2005 08:51 pm, Will Hill wrote:
> If you thought you could avoid the Microsoft tax by building your own
> computer while studying at LSU, guess again!  


From williamhill2 at cox.net  Wed Oct 26 14:27:17 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:27:17 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ wants YOU!
In-Reply-To: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B128@fbdmail.sb.int>
References: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B128@fbdmail.sb.int>
Message-ID: <200510261427.17934.williamhill2@cox.net>

Vapors are often cold on expansion.  

It's just a joke, no chair throwing please.

On Wednesday 26 October 2005 08:41 am, Richards Jr, Edward C. wrote:
> Vista is cool.


From ECRichards at fbd.com  Wed Oct 26 14:29:18 2005
From: ECRichards at fbd.com (Richards Jr, Edward C.)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:29:18 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ wants YOU!
Message-ID: <DEC418C2B95EC74091436558B0E994FA0157B12B@fbdmail.sb.int>

Please understand I was NOT saying that Vista is cool, but was only quoting from the article. :) 

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Will Hill [mailto:williamhill2 at cox.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:27 PM
To: Politics at brlug.net
Subject: Re: [brlug-poly] M$ wants YOU!


Vapors are often cold on expansion.  

It's just a joke, no chair throwing please.

On Wednesday 26 October 2005 08:41 am, Richards Jr, Edward C. wrote:
> Vista is cool.

_______________________________________________
Politics mailing list
Politics at brlug.net
http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/politics_brlug.net


This email, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any review, use, distribution or disclosure of included information by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited.  If you are not a named recipient or authorized to receive and / or act on information sent to a named recipient, or have reason to believe you are not or should not be one of the named recipients, please notify sender accordingly by reply email and delete all copies of this message prior to forwarding, copying or otherwise reproducing this message or attachments thereto. For information regarding the export control status of items discussed in this document, please refer to the project control list. Thank you.



From williamhill2 at cox.net  Thu Oct 27 19:56:35 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:56:35 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <200510271956.35781.williamhill2@cox.net>

Not content with choking student inboxes with product announcements, Microsoft 
agents descended on Free Speech Alley today.  The spam announcing their 
intention to push "one note" arrived yesterday.  Today, a few students under 
the direction of a marketing agent, were out proclaiming the virtues of "free 
software" and indeed had a the touted "one note" on display.   I arrived late 
to the show, so there may have been more.  If Microsoft is looking to get 
back the "cool" factor they never had, this was not it.

The show was decidedly second rate.  They had two beat up laptops and an older 
model tablet PC set out on three ratty tables.  All of the reps were plump 
and slovenly dressed.  They were also poorly trained and had little 
experience with the software they were pushing.  Other groups, with fewer 
tables, were staffed by young healthy looking people who brought better props  
and attitudes.  The Microsoft people did not even bother with a table cloth 
and acted harassed by the trip outdoors.  A ripped up piece of carboard had 
something spammy about winning an XBox scrawled on it.  I wish that I had 
taken pictures to directly compare it with the Linux booth from the CCCC open 
house.  Most people would expect more from a company with billions of dollars 
in the bank.

The first thing I saw was an older woman standing between all the tables 
shouting about downloading "free software".  She was mostly wearing black and 
had on big sunglasses.  Her skin needed more sunlight.  She was handing out 
purple rubber band bracelets from China with yellow writing about tigerware 
and being smart.

I listend to her blather for a while and then asked her, "Is it really free?"  
She, of course, answered yes.  I told her that I thought it had already been 
paid for and she backpeddled.  I let her know that I knew that LSU had paid 
$500,000 for the "free" downloads and she just about shat.  

Not knowing what to say, she shut up.  I decided not to ask her if I could 
share what I downloaded with my friends and point out the implications for 
"ownership" of that $500,000 software.   Instead I took one of her little 
bracelets and told her that my little girl would love it.  The poor woman was 
unable to recover her bravado in the time that I stayed to look at the 
demonstrations.

"One note" was a disappointing little tabbed text editor for note taking.  
that also had a microphone.  If it had any wizz-bang features, the 
demonstrator was unaware of them.  I was left to imagine a typical Microsoft 
cluster of impossible formats, missing features, annoying features and poor 
stability that rivals Clippy for utility.  A program that indexes notes and 
integrates a camera and microphone with an easy to use editor  could come 
close to the flexibility of paper.  I'd still want to smack the keyboard 
operator, but the idea is cool.  I can imagine a note taking menu for Kword 
with buttons for grabbing a board shot, movies and recorder controls.    

Finally, I asked questions about downloading software and got a demo.  Indeed, 
lots of applications were offered to the Windoze client that never showed up 
when I checked it out under Konqueror.  I do wish they would let me look at 
and download software I've paid for that's supposed to be free.  The 
demonstrator was unable to tell me much else of use.  The "minimum" operating 
system the site really works with is Windows 2000.  This is the official 
Microsoft support cut off of software they were still selling two years ago, 
but no one there mentioned that and I'm not sure how they enforce it.  It's 
not worth my time to figure it out either.  For those of you intersted in new 
versions of software you have, the downloads might work better if you start  
out in Paws.  The first thing you will have to install is a new operating 
system.  Have fun with your $500,000 "commitment."

Overall, I preferred Free Speech Alley when it was a bunch of bible thumpers, 
school politicians and nut cases.  The blaring music and corporate barkers 
are more like a freak show of greed than a place to exchange ideas and voice 
opinions.  Microsoft is right at home in the new Alley, but they still don't 
have their act together.  






On Monday 24 October 2005 08:51 pm, Will Hill wrote:
> If you thought you could avoid the Microsoft tax by building your own
> computer while studying at LSU, guess again! 


From sroddy at gmail.com  Fri Oct 28 18:45:12 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 18:45:12 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <200510271956.35781.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<200510271956.35781.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>

Will, you remind me of a person on one of the politics boards I am on.
Blinded by hatred, refusing to be impartial, and consumed by your desire to
shit on M$ every time you get the chance. The difference is that you hate M$
and he hates Bush.

I don't like it, you don't like it, but unfortunately, many or most of the
students are probably thrilled that they can now get M$ products for "free"
through LSU. Most universities are doing this now. Hell, even Caltech does
it. And they are complaining about budget problems. No raises last year,
tuition increases, layoffs, etc. The JPL situation doesn't help. And, yet,
they still buy massive license agreements with M$. It is the way it is done
now. like it or not.

On 10/27/05, Will Hill <williamhill2 at cox.net> wrote:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051028/0b7798a2/attachment.htm

From williamhill2 at cox.net  Fri Oct 28 21:20:01 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 21:20:01 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Tax for all LSU Students.
In-Reply-To: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <200510282120.01669.williamhill2@cox.net>

Goaded off list, I've considered the Microsoft perspective on this deal.  They 
are going to make a hell of a lot of money per copy of software they 
distribute.  In fact, they are going to do better than ever this way.

The tax is about 1/8th of the $150 per year tech fee.  Per student $18.75  
almost looks like a reasonable price to pay for a new version of XP, Office, 
and Outlook.  

How about $18.75 for the mere ability to download that set?  A safety blanket, 
in case you decide what you have is not good enough and you are afraid of 
free software.  That's not such a great deal, but we are still not thinking 
straight.

Let's compute the revenue from Microsoft's perspective, per copy.  It's far 
more expensive when you consider how many students will actually use the 
service.  If my friends are any guide, most students already have new 
versions of the very same programs.  That's what they are counting on.

If every student goes to the trouble of reinstalling all of their software 
every year, Microsoft will see a meager $18.75 per copy.  That's still good 
money for a binary copy shot through the web, but not the kind of Michael 
Dell money that keeps Microsoft's profit margins at 70%.  Here's a little 
table:

18.75 for all,
37.50 for half,
75 for on quarter of the student population.

Now we are up into Michael Dell revenue, but that's not a realistic estimate 
is it?  I'll be very surprised if 25% of the student population bothers to 
swap out all of their software every year.  25% every four years sounds more 
reasonable to me, so let's multiply that table by four years:

75 x 4 = $300 / per software set.

You can tack on the additional $40 or so that they made when Dell sold the 
computer in the first place. 

So, with this deal, Microsoft is going to make better than retail profits 
keeping LSU students using Microsoft software.  Students won't find a cheaper 
deal when they want it, and I can't imagine a better deal for Microsoft.  If 
I did imagine a better deal, I would not tell you.

That's the kind of money Microsoft will report to their share holders, who 
like them, still think of bits as things that you can put into a box and sell 
copies of.  



On Monday 24 October 2005 08:51 pm, Will Hill wrote:
> If you thought you could avoid the Microsoft tax by building your own
> computer while studying at LSU, guess again!  



From metanoid at gmail.com  Sat Oct 29 10:51:25 2005
From: metanoid at gmail.com (John Hebert)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 10:51:25 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<200510271956.35781.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/28/05, Shannon Roddy <sroddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Will, you remind me of a person on one of the politics boards I am on.
> Blinded by hatred, refusing to be impartial, and consumed by your desire to
> shit on M$ every time you get the chance. The difference is that you hate M$
> and he hates Bush.
>
> I don't like it, you don't like it, but unfortunately, many or most of the
> students are probably thrilled that they can now get M$ products for "free"
> through LSU. Most universities are doing this now. Hell, even Caltech does
> it. And they are complaining about budget problems. No raises last year,
> tuition increases, layoffs, etc. The JPL situation doesn't help. And, yet,
> they still buy massive license agreements with M$. It is the way it is done
> now. like it or not.



Shannon, what's up with the JPL situation? I hadn't heard they had problems.

I assume most universities are given "an offer they can't refuse" by
Microsoft; higher license fees resulting from an audit vs. blanket coverage.
Or, they sincerly like the offer that Microsoft is giving them.

Will, you are kinda boring to read sometimes when what you offer is
opinionated invective. I mean, I assume that LSU is run by fairly smart
people who took a look at the numbers and said to Microsoft "Ok, we'll pay
that." If you value freedom, then you must allow LSU to make their own
business decisions. If you are really convinced Microsoft is commtting some
crime, then you are going to have to come up with better arguments than what
I have seen so far, or do something about it. How about running for Student
Government and starting a movement to revoke the technology fee paid by
students? Heck, offer Linux software instead. Microsoft would probably
counter-offer a lower fee. ;)

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051029/e16c78dd/attachment.htm

From sroddy at gmail.com  Sat Oct 29 13:11:59 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:11:59 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<200510271956.35781.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
	<49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510291111w5ea85976ib7a880b2090f1786@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/29/05, John Hebert <metanoid at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Shannon, what's up with the JPL situation? I hadn't heard they had
> problems.
>

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=18289

Can't find the original article that was on JPL's site.

NASA/Congress has cut funding. I think JPL just laid off 10% across the
board. They are administered by Caltech, therefore it cuts into Caltech's
bottom line. Caltech has had some serious budget problems for the last few
years. Rumor has it that a lot of it was because of a financial officer
asleep at the wheel around the time of dot-bust. (totally unsubstantiated,
though he is no longer there... Also, I heard a rumor that MIT hired him
afterwards. Go figure...)

> "Ok, we'll pay that." If you value freedom, then you must allow LSU to
> make their own business decisions.
>

I would only comment that Caltech/MIT is privately funded, where LSU is a
state funded school. So, for LSU, there should be some oversight by
taxpayers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051029/2564a421/attachment.htm

From metanoid at gmail.com  Sat Oct 29 13:29:54 2005
From: metanoid at gmail.com (John Hebert)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 13:29:54 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <8d48b6ba0510291111w5ea85976ib7a880b2090f1786@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<200510271956.35781.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
	<49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d48b6ba0510291111w5ea85976ib7a880b2090f1786@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49e372d20510291129n2c05e05fq82e1dc24c97839ef@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/29/05, Shannon Roddy <sroddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/29/05, John Hebert <metanoid at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Shannon, what's up with the JPL situation? I hadn't heard they had
> > problems.
> >
>
> http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=18289
>
> Can't find the original article that was on JPL's site.
>
> NASA/Congress has cut funding. I think JPL just laid off 10% across the
> board. They are administered by Caltech, therefore it cuts into Caltech's
> bottom line. Caltech has had some serious budget problems for the last few
> years. Rumor has it that a lot of it was because of a financial officer
> asleep at the wheel around the time of dot-bust. (totally unsubstantiated,
> though he is no longer there... Also, I heard a rumor that MIT hired him
> afterwards. Go figure...)
>
> > "Ok, we'll pay that." If you value freedom, then you must allow LSU to
> > make their own business decisions.
> >
>
> I would only comment that Caltech/MIT is privately funded, where LSU is a
> state funded school. So, for LSU, there should be some oversight by
> taxpayers.


Good point, but I'll guess that even if whatever oversight board that
normally watches LSU's budget knew about the Microsoft deal, they would
probably not know about alternatives. However, I do believe that software
developed with public funds (taxes) should be open-sourced.

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051029/ac1e15c5/attachment.htm

From williamhill2 at cox.net  Sat Oct 29 15:23:17 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 15:23:17 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
	<49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200510291523.18071.williamhill2@cox.net>

Sorry to bore you, John, I'm not as good as you are with interesting 
conspiracy theories.  

I had not imagined any crime was committed.  One of my fellow students 
immediately thought and said, "someone got bought," but I dismissed that.  No 
one at LSU, I hope, could be bribed for so small a deal.  Your audit 
extortion threat sounds more likely.  If anything like that has happened, I 
can only hope the threatened party steps forward with recordings, email and 
all of that and the responsible Microsoft employees are prosecuted.  

No, all I thought was that it's a bad deal for LSU and that Microsoft 
misrepresented it in their email and in public.  I've computed how bad a deal 
this is in my last message on this thread.  My conclusion was that LSU 
students will spend more per copy for Microsoft software than if they had 
gone out and bought it retail.  Microsoft representatives, on the other hand, 
were shouting in public that Microsoft had provided students with "free" 
software.  Expressing my opinions and those of other students might embarrass 
some people, but I doubt it infringes on their freedom.  

Besides mouthing off here, I've encouraged LSU to do more for free software 
and praised them for their current efforts which I outlined in "a silver 
lining."  Last summer, when this plan was announced, I tried to get in touch 
with student government representatives to offer free software assistance.  
The inclusion of Mepis at Tigerware may be a result of this, but no one ever 
responded.  

On Saturday 29 October 2005 10:51 am, John Hebert wrote:

> I assume most universities are given "an offer they can't refuse" by
> Microsoft; higher license fees resulting from an audit vs. blanket
> coverage. Or, they sincerly like the offer that Microsoft is giving them.
>
> LSU is run by fairly smart
> people who took a look at the numbers and said to Microsoft "Ok, we'll pay
> that." If you value freedom, then you must allow LSU to make their own
> business decisions. If you are really convinced Microsoft is commtting some
> crime, then you are going to have to come up with better arguments than
> what I have seen so far, or do something about it.


From williamhill2 at cox.net  Sat Oct 29 15:50:13 2005
From: williamhill2 at cox.net (Will Hill)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 15:50:13 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
	<49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200510291550.13795.williamhill2@cox.net>

As this has leaked onto the list, I'll have to respond to it.

Shannon, you remind me of Slashdot astroturfers.  Microsoft shat on me, not 
the other way around.  Why should I be quiet about it?  

My opinion here is mild.  I've counted the costs, expressed my friends' 
opinions, shown what a sweet deal this is for Microsoft and given LSU's IT 
some praise and things they can do to improve the system for everyone.  

The only blinding I've had was not knowing what Windows users would think of 
this.  My windows using friends also think they got a bad deal.  They already 
have the software and resent paying for the ability to download it again.  
Blinded by "anti-zealot" rhetoric, I was surprised to hear this - Microsoft 
users are supposed to be happy regardless of how screwed they are.  

LSU has it's own budget problems.  Blanco had put a hiring freeze on LSU as 
soon as she was elected.  So it is with every Democrat in her post.  In the 
last two months, however, a huge portion of the tax base has been wiped out.  
LSU is target #1.  

The tech fee is small next to LSU's budget and won't solve larger problems, 
but I'd like to see it put to better use.  


On 10/28/05, Shannon Roddy <sroddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Will, you remind me of a person on one of the politics boards I am on.
> Blinded by hatred, refusing to be impartial, and consumed by your desire
> to shit on M$ every time you get the chance. The difference is that you
> hate M$ and he hates Bush.
>
> I don't like it, you don't like it, but unfortunately, many or most of
> the students are probably thrilled that they can now get M$ products for
> "free" through LSU. Most universities are doing this now. Hell, even
> Caltech does it. And they are complaining about budget problems.


From sroddy at gmail.com  Sat Oct 29 18:07:22 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:07:22 -0500
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <200510291550.13795.williamhill2@cox.net>
References: <200510242051.48744.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<8d48b6ba0510281645n3669c6b4n3b3808a771479909@mail.gmail.com>
	<49e372d20510290851o15056915n7faa26a6b5266fbf@mail.gmail.com>
	<200510291550.13795.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510291607i7842b70csc02d56a7d0474bdc@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/29/05, Will Hill <williamhill2 at cox.net> wrote:
>
> As this has leaked onto the list, I'll have to respond to it.


Nothing leaked. It was intended to go to the list.

Shannon, you remind me of Slashdot astroturfers. Microsoft shat on me, not
> the other way around. Why should I be quiet about it?
>
> My opinion here is mild. I've counted the costs, expressed my friends'
> opinions, shown what a sweet deal this is for Microsoft and given LSU's IT
> some praise and things they can do to improve the system for everyone.
>
> The only blinding I've had was not knowing what Windows users would think
> of
> this. My windows using friends also think they got a bad deal. They
> already
> have the software and resent paying for the ability to download it again.
> Blinded by "anti-zealot" rhetoric, I was surprised to hear this -
> Microsoft
> users are supposed to be happy regardless of how screwed they are.
>

I would have to say, that your poll of four people is not representative of
the larger population of students. Most people don't put two and two
together and realize that they are paying twice. The average person is
probably just fine with having "free" software. Just like the average person
is an uneducated voter, or worse, doesn't vote at all. I would also venture
to say that your associates are not the average computer users either. Think
english majors, polisci, business, etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051029/7096d520/attachment.htm

From brad at selu.edu  Sun Oct 30 23:29:03 2005
From: brad at selu.edu (Brad Bendily)
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:29:03 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <200510291550.13795.williamhill2@cox.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0510302317350.24802-100000@cliffy.selu.edu>

> 
> The tech fee is small next to LSU's budget and won't solve larger problems, 
> but I'd like to see it put to better use.  

I've not been really sure where to stick this in, but about 6-7 years ago
the powers that be at SLU decided that the exact same deal
on our campus was not a benefit. We are a lot better off buying
a separate copy for every machine than forming that software 
contract.
I think part of the problem
was that the administration/faculty/staff HAD to buy in first
then the students had the option for some dollar amount. I can't
remember the specifics, but being on the Tech Fee Committee I was
sure that we would get a raw deal. Right now, as Will pointed
out, we buy computers with the OS, no need to pay for that again.
And it cost the university around $35 for the Office suite.
on each computer. 
So, all the labs have the office suite and so does all faculty/staff.
And all computers have the OS that was bought with their
computer. To purchase XP outright is pretty cheap too.

A while back ray worked up a list of OSS that showed a cost
comparison and how much OSS saved the the university. Shortly
after Firefox and OpenOffice were mandated to be installed 
on every computer, alongside of the MS Office suite. At this
point students are on there own at home. My personal opinion
is that MS should give the software out to free for students
any way. What better way to get them on your side, give it
for free while they're students and then when they get real
jobs they won't know any better and will continue to pay for
the software. I think our CS department has some sweet deal
worked out for the VB and .NET compilers. I don't know
the details of that, but I think anyone who wants one can
get a copy of that software for free. As long as they're
students or faculty.



From sroddy at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 00:29:06 2005
From: sroddy at gmail.com (Shannon Roddy)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:29:06 -0600
Subject: [brlug-poly] M$ Spams Free Speech Alley.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0510302317350.24802-100000@cliffy.selu.edu>
References: <200510291550.13795.williamhill2@cox.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0510302317350.24802-100000@cliffy.selu.edu>
Message-ID: <8d48b6ba0510302229i61d4a852sa1622641aff5738e@mail.gmail.com>

>
> My personal opinion
> is that MS should give the software out to free for students
> any way. What better way to get them on your side, give it
> for free while they're students and then when they get real
> jobs they won't know any better and will continue to pay for
> the software.



In reality, that is basically what M$ has done, but they still get paid. The
students will be too stupid to realize (not all of them, but a sizeable
number) that they are paying for it via the tech fee, and will think that
they are getting M$ software for free.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://brlug.net/pipermail/politics_brlug.net/attachments/20051031/d9ad34c1/attachment.htm