Let me tell you of my reason that I no longer use Earthlink. When I used dial up, I had Mindspring using Linux. When ever I called for support (which was not often since I do tech support myself), I had a working solution within 30 minutes tops. Also, I never heard any complaints from the techs that I used Linux and "we do not support that."
When Mindspring was bought out by Earthlink, I had a sudden problem with dialing into my local POP. I could connect to another POP that was long distance, but not to the local one. When I called Earthlink for tech support, I got no support because of being on Linux _AND_ no return call for over two weeks when I was told that a "Linux Expert Manager" would call me within an hour. After the two weeks of no support, I called and complained to a manager and I was told that someone would call me right away. After a week of being Ignored, I received a email from the Tech Support Manager..... And I Quote, "As usual, linux users must solve their own problems. That is why I use windows. Have a nice day!"
I never signed on to Earthlink again and refuse to use any of their business services.
I know you most likely did not have anything remotely to do with that situation. Even if you did, I don't care because it was a couple of years ago.
But I will never forget the poor support that I received.
Well, if they are talking about cross platform support for games and applications, I guess everyone who owns an XBox better start putting money away for virus protection. Lets face it, Microsoft may push their new security conciousness, but the record shows that they are the main target of 99.99% of the virus attacks.
If they start porting cross functionality to the XBox and other devices, watch out for the virus attacks that will come afterwards.
I am not a fan of Microsoft if you have not guessed. It just does not make sense to me to place yourself and your information on a system that has over 50K individual virus infections that could attack it. Why doesn't everyone place their head on a chopping block and give someone an axe, because you are pretty much doing the same thing. Your only relying on metal collar (virus scan software) and possibly a block of wood with holes (firewall) to turn the blade from your neck.
I am not trying to start a flame war, but I don't think putting yourself in that situation is very smart. Give me a system that works and does not have any or that many significant virus infections attacking.
Technology has increased stress in my life but has the ability to decrease it to some degree.
I support the technology of today as an IT support professional. Technology has increased stress in my life tenfold over decreasing it for the following reasons.
1. My boss can call me on his and my cell phone any time of the day, no matter where I am. Constant communication with someone who has me working when I am on vacation, in meetings, school or even in the bathroom because he did not pay attention to when I showed him what to do and when to do it, definitly builds stress.
2. The constant times when I am on call for support because some user cannot connect to a web page and does not understand that the after hours support are for down systems only. So much for having some private time with my SO.
3. Trying to answer support phone calls of users who ("are too busy to read the directions" or "too important - do you know who I am?") expect you to know everything about any remotely electronic system that you have never seen before.
Don't get me wrong. I like working IT and I tolerate doing support. But for everytime that I can remotely connect to the server and make one change and fix the whole network (thus saving me from driving a couple of hours), there is ten that you just wish you could beat your head into the wall and get rid of the problem by throwing the system out the window.
I think I have a permenant flat spot on my head since Windows 3.0 came out. Yes, I supported windows since ver #1.1
an intelligent judge or two to say 'hey, [edited] you know what you're doing, you're just trying to siphon off the tit of someone who's actually made something of himself.
Made something of himself stealing or buying up the technology that he claims to have created.
Dos - Bought from CPM
Windows - Developed out of Work with IBM - OS/2 and stolen from Apple (who happened to steal it from someone else).
Excel - Bought from a company that I do not remember the name of
Powerpoint - ditto
Word - ditto
etc, etc, etc.
Bill Gates cannot even claim to believe that the mouse would be a usable product even. He stated back in the mid to late 80's that it would never be a usable product. Hmmmm..... the great innovator? The only thing he innovated was a good marketing monster.
I do not think he is the devil incarnate either, but I would love to see M$ broken up and him being penniless and destitute. Vindictive, yes..... in reality, it will not happen unless we get someone with some intestinal fortitude.
The only problem here is the term Lindows is being used to directly confuse
AC, I do not agree that it is being used to confuse. I think the most important thing that a computer user can use is common sense and intelligence. Unfortunately, neither tend to be used when a computer is only a user of a Microsoft product. I say that because this whole arguement was hashed out before about 1988 to 1990 time frame with the "DOS" system. There was IBM PC/DOS, DR DOS, MS DOS and a few others. MS tried to stop everyone from using DOS as a name. It did not get as far as this farce, but it was the same arguement.
Windows is a generic term in the computer field and in other industries. When you are talking about using windows on a computer, only the simpletons would jump to the conclusion that it is Microsoft.
I personnally use at home, Macintosh, Linux, MS Windows and OS/2. If I had more working computers, I would have Beos and a few others running. I do not care for Microsoft products as a whole. I certainly do not think that "Windows" is only Microsoft.
I'm sorry, but Microsoft does not designate that I cannot work on a computer using a windowing like operating system or open the windows in my house to get a breath of fresh air. Because what they are peddling stinks and it always has.
five shells represent a molehill, and you're trying to turn them into the mountain of anthrax, botulinum toxin
I never believed that hype. Did I believe that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. Yes, I did and still do. Do I think it a mountain of stuff? No. I believe that for as many road blocks that were put in the way of the U.N. inspectors from both sides, I think that they found a lot of the stuff and destroyed it. What they did not destroy, the Iraqi's destroyed when it became clear that the U.S. was going to not give up on seeing Iraq in compliance with the U.N. Resolutions.
Do I think there was a spin on the justification for war? Of course! There is always spin thrown in the State of the Union and any justification for almost everything. I may lean toward the Republicans, but I do not follow them blindly nor do I thing they have our best interests at heart. I think less of the Democrats (sorry to say because I used to vote the party line without question). Now I distrust most and hope for the best.
I choose to look at the justification for war as this. The U.N. set forth some resolutions that were agreed upon, and the Iraqi's stated that they would honor them. Did they? No. They were found in violation of them. I believed that the vote at the U.N. had more weight than they led everyone to believe. To me, the vote was either a validation of a world based government or a paper tiger. The U.N. did not stand up to Sadam and backup their own resolutions. It took the U.S. and some other countries to do that along with some backbone by the military branches to force Iraq to comply. To me, the U.N. has become a paper tiger and should no longer have a valid say in what goes on unless they change and start backing up their resolutions with some muscle. I certainly don't want the U.S. to be the worlds police force.
I say that with sorrow, because the U.N. could have been great. It was back in 1950 when they backed up their resolutions with troops that did not have "Rules" on when to shoot. The only bad thing about the U.N. is that no commitee ever won a war. It needs a leader to do that. I may not fully trust him, but Bush has taken a black eye and turned around and gave our enemies two in return. Clinton just stood their looking stupid when he got his black eyes, but the military and the state departments died then. What was done then? A few missiles and that was it. When given that choice, I stand for the U.S. and the simple fact that the enemies are starting to run. Not all will run, their will be more black eyes in the future (and privately, I do not expect to see the end of this war), but that does not make me believe that it is wrong.
I appologize if it sounds like rah, rah bull$hit! That was not my intention. I just believe that my life is important, but not as important as yours, your (and my brother) Marine friend or anyone elses that has an opinion.
You see, and I appologize for the long windedness of this, but I beleive that is what makes the Marines so powerful and deadly to our enemies. The simple willingness to sacrifice your life for the sake of others. Do I want to die? Hell No! But if dying means that you or others live, survive and the nation continues on, then Hell Yes! The simple fact that I would choose myself over someone else makes the difference.
I understand the choice that my brother Marine made, believe me. I once made it myself when I left the military. Do I have hard feelings, absolutely not! As I said before, it is about choice that this constitution was built on and I may not agree with you or others about the choice that you or they have made, but I still support the right to make that choice. And I will defend that choice with everything that I can. Will it include terrorism if it comes to that. Hard question. One that I hope to never have to answer.
We both disagree, but I do not think we are all that different. I think the best think about this is that the Iraqi's can now do the same thing without having to worry about a bullet to the head or the family members being raped and disappearing. Unfortunately, I am not only talking the female family members either.
While I respect your opinion, I reject your information as non factual on the basis of common sense. Mobile labs for hydrogen production? Why in Gods name would you waste money making a lab mobile (not to mention the logistics of it) to produce hydrogen when he already had plants doing that very thing.
As for the five shells, where do you draw the line when you classify WMDs? Ten? Twenty? Two hundred? I think one is too many. A weapon used to kill a large number of people in a disportionate amount to the weapons size (as opposed to a high explosive artillery round) or ANY weapon that is nucleur, biological or chemical based is a WMDs. I draw the line at definition while you seem to be drawing the line at numbers. I will accept that I misunderstood your reasoning. But I do not see misunderstanding your definition.
Have you served in the military? If you have, you would know that there is always something to complain about. Not enough pay, food sucks, no time off. That has always been one of the basic facts of military life since the beginning of organized military units. Readin history will inform you of that. It is even considered a god given rite in some branches.
As for no facts to support my assertion on Iraq having to do something with 9/11, documents were uncovered in the last four weeks that specify how and when monitary funds were given directly to Mohammad Atta (considered the leader on 9/11). These documents came from the head of Iraqi intelligence personal files that were uncovered recently.
I am not interested in a flamewar and will respect your opinion. You may have facts from some source in which I do not, but I try to base mine on eyewitness accounts from people I trust and documentation. That does not mean that perception is not a factor. So I will consider this as we agree to disagree and will respect your position.
fast-track US citizenship for foreign nationals joining the Army?
I believe that the actual wording was any foreign national that join the US military who are working toward their citizenship, and die on active duty will be awarded their citizenship postumiously. But I may be wrong, but I know of at least one service member who received their citizenship in this way. I do not, however see any resemblance to american jobs moving overseas to fast-tracking someone getting their citizenship.
Commander in Chief continues to be completely dishonest about the reasons for his wars. (Snip) 500+ Americans who have already died to protect us from WMDs that we now know simply don't exist.
I fully and whole-heartedly disagree with you. The facts are that WMDs have quote HAVE unquote been found in a hardened facility in central Iraq about six to seven months ago. It was blocked off by a shipping container. There were only five artillery shells but all of them had mustard gas inside them. Parts of aluminum tubes and their plans that are used to enrich Unranium were found in Bagdad approximately at the same time. Two semi tractor trailers that were used as a mobil biological or chemical weapons production were captured during the war. All this has been on the news but got received a byline of a passing interest story by the news media. The President did say that he suspected that we will not find large amounts of WMDs and that it will take a long time.
As for the reasons behind Afghanistan and Iraq, I have no doubt in my mind that Bin Laden is behind it (after all, he admitted it). I believe that Iraq had something to do with the attack on 9/11 but not fully responsible. I believe that help was given and condoned, but not fully supported by the regime in Iraq.
Interesting thing about Democrats and Republicans, Democrats tend to be more likely to have served in the military, and it seems Republicans are more likely to send in the military.
I would love to see the proof of this. In the twelve years of the military that I served, I found more people leaning toward the Republicans than the Democrats. The facts of the last 24 years is that the last Democrat in the Whitehouse deployed the military more than the last four prior Presidents (which included one Democrat and three Republicans "COMBINED"). Ask your Marine friend of the time that Clinton was in the Whitehouse. Ask him of the ultra low moral that was all through the military of that time.
I actually witnessed Clinton coming to do a visit to a military base during his time. The public affairs officers actually took buses to the PX and Commisary on base and ordered military members and family members on the bus to "atend" the rally. Everyone was ordered to cheer when he spoke. Otherwise you were threatened with judicial punishment.
Later, I saw the news cast of that "rally." I noticed during the rally that the camera positions were going to show. The newscast proved that I was correct. The camera position made about 75 people look like a couple of hundred. I used to be a camera man myself in college. I am sorry to say, but I had and still do not respect Clinton at all as a man, public figure or President. I firmly believe that he would lie through his teeth if asked what color the sky was.
I respect your opinions because that is exactly what I took an oath for when I joined the military. I swore to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Everyone has an opinion and we who hold the Constitution to be the highest law owe it to everyone to respect everyones opinion, even if we do not agree.
My personal belief is that Clinton did more to destroy the Constitution to protect himself than any other President of the US. While I distrust the Patriot Act and personally believe against it, I believe that Bush is trying to have the nations best interest in mind. He is by far, not perfect, and I do not agree with him always. But I do agree with the war and the volunteer military.
In fact, Rumsfeld authorized a larger Army by 16k (I believe) last week. The extra numbers will be still volunteers, not draftee's.
While I do not know the Marine who quit at 19 years rather than go to Iraq, I respect him as a fellow Marine, but I think the Marine Corps is better without someone who does not want to do their duty to the Nation and follow the orders of their superiors.
I am not talking blindly following, the Marine Corps teaches you to question and to get answers from your supperiors so that you know the reasons behind the decisions. I respect my fellow Marine's decision, but I do not agree with it. When you join the Marine Corps, there are no promises that you will not see combat, or even a war. In fact, the Marine Corps tells it truthfully. You will sweat, bleed and hurt so bad that you will puke, and that is only training. I've done it, I'm sure your friend has done it.
As for the draft board position, a Democrat has called for the draft in congress. The DOD would be negligent if they did not prepare for what could happen (by direction of Congress, Senate and Whitehouse). That does not mean that a draft will be created or accepted. It is prudance that you work toward what your boss's want before your asked.
That's two omelets, and the only cost the Pentagon should be caring about about is the 600+ american soldiers who have died and several thousand wounded who will never fight again. (Actually, they have another problem, people are fleeing the military, so they'll have to bring back the draft to maintain these sorts of troop levels, but that's another story.)
Jeez, I would like to know where you got your info becuase it is really wrong. In listening to you talk, anyone would think that the US military has a problem with desertion. That is absolutely false. In fact, since 9/11, more people have volunteered for the military. I spent twelve years in the military and I strongly oppose the draft for the reason that I don't want the ones who don't want to be there right next to me when bullets fly. My brother-in-law and nephew are still in the military and there is no problems with people leaving (or deserting as you imply).
Please, before you through this dribble out, make sure of your facts. Don't listen to the "unbiased news" either, because they are the worst one pushing this dribble.
I would not specifically, intentionally target a schoolbus, or a public restaurant. (I'm thinking of Palestinian suicide bombers, here.) Even if the society itself was whole-heartedly condoning the oppression, I just wouldn't do it.
While I agree with you about having morality level higher than some, I think your statement is still speculation. No one can truly say what they will do in certain situations unless actually faced by that situation. As you can see, I prefer to look at it as a realist. While I agree that targeting innocent bystanders as inexcusable, what would happen if one of those bystanders pulled out a pistol and started using it. One lesson in the military that they teach is that anyone can be a combatant at almost no notice.
In Vietnam, good guys became bad while fighting and watching their friends die next to them. While I hold all veterans in high regard, some have done some pretty horrible things. My point is that war or the simple act of killing a person will change everyone in someways that are not good.
In my time as a Marine and before that, a Police officer, I took the view that it is either them or me. In that situation, I would much rather have it them. But I have not been in that situation yet and I hope I never will.
Most of them are probably nix users and the public knows that.
Respectfully, I disagree. The General public do not know or care what operating system that they have on their machines. The only care they have is will it work and can they figure out how to use the simple programs and does it look cool.
While you point toward the OSS or Linux crowd, there is no proof what-so-ever of their involment. If the site was www.networksolutions.com or www.whocares.com, you would not be able to use your statement.
Respectfully, do not point fingers without more proof than what website is attacked.
The only thing all churches have in common is the belief that they hold exclusive right to the One Truth.
I disagree. There are a lot more common beliefs in different religions than just this. It is one of the common beliefs though.
The one thing I learned early and believe is that all religions say and do mainly the same thing, but in different ways. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic. But I think my eyes have seen the good in different religions and believe that all should be able to worship as they see fit. That does not give one the ability to prosecute the others because of their beliefs though.
To me, saying that the logo is anti-religious should get a healthy dose of reality. Just because the logo is a devil (small one at that) doesn't mean it is evil.
I like the logo and I think it should stay. What say you........
This document contains a lot of "our engineers think" and "it appears", and if that's all there is to SCO's evidence, IBM's lawyers will have a field day with it. The judge won't be amused.
I agree that the judge will not be amused. I am not versed in the legal aspects but I do not see how SCO is expecting to win a court case on such claims as "I think" and "it appears." "I thought" that Bill Clinton was...... and "it appeared" that....., well most of us know where that led.
I used to have a co-worker who was a lawyer, then retired out of the FBI. He could always be counted on to bring up the reality of the situation. Such as, the jury has full say on what is right and wrong. If the jury things that something was against the law, but does not believe that the defendant should go to prison, then he/she will be not be found guilty in some communities.
But I can not see any judge deciding for SCO on such transparent "thoughts and ideas." The basis of Law is clearer than that.
So if they truly do own errno.h, then why should they do anything about their title to it if its hurting their biggest competitor at the moment, linux?
It would seem to me that they would be in the best position to let SCO go after Linux. Think about how much M$ would gain.
1. Linux users would be mad and claim that SCO is being money hungry by attacking Linux since they could not prove that SCO is better. Thus, Linux users would start to hate a rival of M$ and never buy their products.
2. SCO would try and prove something that turns out to be false and loses credibility in the computer industry.
3. M$ can claim plausable deniability that they had nothing to do with the whole thing. But they can rake in the benefits by weakening both rivals by the fighting.
4. It gets M$ out of the fore front of the computer industry with their security lapses.
5. If both of your rivals are fighting over menial table scraps, then M$ can have the dinner (to include the cake).
I in NO way meant to say that Linux and SCO are fighting over the leftovers or refer to Linux/SCO users as table scraps. I meant only as a metaphor that if two rivals are fighting over peices of the industry, M$ can try and take the whole thing while the two are busy.
My point is, I see M$ as being in a win/win situation over this. I believe that SCO is wrong, and in some way, is tending to do M$'s bidding.
But I do believe that M$ will be around for approx. ten more years as an individual operating system. After that, I see them being a pirated form of BSD or Linux.
I agree with some that have posted here that the sysadmin is the most important person or thing that you could have when managing a computer system -- no matter what operating system.
But I respectfully disagree when you state that Microsoft can be a secure system. I challenge anyone to show one person that understands everything about the Microsoft kernel and how it works from the source code. I may be wrong, but I do not believe that anyone at MS can claim that dubious honor. When your kernel grows to be over 25 Mb in size, there is seriously something wrong.
I beleive that Open Source Software -- when properly managed can be more secure than a system that no one understands how it works because its source is closed or because of the sheer size of it.
I prefer to look at real world proof. How often do you read about Microsoft vulnerabilities. Granted, they get more press and Linux is just starting to make the mainstream press. But how many virus infections are possible for the Microsoft operating system? May be outdated but last I saw was over 50k individual virus infections possible. How many for Linux? 2 At least that I know of.
Simple mathematics tells me where to put my data. On a Linux box! Why? Because less chance of getting infected by a virus just by the sheer numbers.
Microsoft has always used FUD since the beginning. But I do not think that it will work this time.
Beleive what you want. Me, I vote and use Linux. I make my own mind up, I don't listen to marketers.
Web voting is a bad idea because now we have even more opportunity for wrong doing since the voting is not taking place in a secure environment.
I fully agree. In business, court rooms, and with any instance in which you have to prove what you did, what do they want to see - The paper trail. How can you provide the paper trail on electronic bits.
I am one of those that do not believe that M$ is up to the task and do not shop on the internet for that reason (There are diligent admin's out there, but how do you know where they are/are not and I do not trust M$ so called security one bit).
Take the last election in the US. It was a fiasco to say the least. How hard would it be for a person that is for the other party to "accidentally" move a storage device close to an electronic field so the information would be corrupt when the precinct was almost completely for the other party. There is way too much chance for the information to be messed with.
Ealier in the month there was a story of how a Chinese businessman hacked a U.S. Navy ship and used it as a spam relay. How hard would it be for a foriegn government to crack into the voting system and alter the course of American Politic's?
For me, give me the paper trail every time when I vote. In fact, start asking for a thumb print on every ballot. That should end the dead from voting in an election.
in reply to:
Just give me 20 aryan Waffen-SS men with real skills and discipline. Beats that stuff you scratched off the streets ("marines") anytime.
For Historical fact:
The last times that the Germans fought against the Marines was at the battle of Belleau Wood in WWI. The battle is still remembered today in the Marine Corps because that is where the Germans gave the US Marines the title "Teufen Huenden" or "Devil Dogs" (My appologies if I mispelled the german words).
So your discription of what Germans would do to US Marines are already proven. If you make posts like that without knowing what your talking about, you will always be proved to be nothing but a fool.
Unless some of us veterans did computers before in the military, which would lead me to say that nerd stuff is no longer nerdy. It finally has been found to be what it is - Intelligence.
Disclaimer: This is meant in NO WAY to denote that the millitary is intelligent. Sometimes they have the best deals on frontal labotomies.
At least I have the balls to post with my login, not hiding behind an anonymous login. Take the rubber that your father should have used and place it over the head until it cuts your airflow. Then this world will be a better place because now you can practice safe sex - dickhead!
Slashdot Mirror
When Mindspring was bought out by Earthlink, I had a sudden problem with dialing into my local POP. I could connect to another POP that was long distance, but not to the local one. When I called Earthlink for tech support, I got no support because of being on Linux _AND_ no return call for over two weeks when I was told that a "Linux Expert Manager" would call me within an hour. After the two weeks of no support, I called and complained to a manager and I was told that someone would call me right away. After a week of being Ignored, I received a email from the Tech Support Manager..... And I Quote, "As usual, linux users must solve their own problems. That is why I use windows. Have a nice day!"
I never signed on to Earthlink again and refuse to use any of their business services.
I know you most likely did not have anything remotely to do with that situation. Even if you did, I don't care because it was a couple of years ago.
But I will never forget the poor support that I received.
Well, if they are talking about cross platform support for games and applications, I guess everyone who owns an XBox better start putting money away for virus protection. Lets face it, Microsoft may push their new security conciousness, but the record shows that they are the main target of 99.99% of the virus attacks. If they start porting cross functionality to the XBox and other devices, watch out for the virus attacks that will come afterwards. I am not a fan of Microsoft if you have not guessed. It just does not make sense to me to place yourself and your information on a system that has over 50K individual virus infections that could attack it. Why doesn't everyone place their head on a chopping block and give someone an axe, because you are pretty much doing the same thing. Your only relying on metal collar (virus scan software) and possibly a block of wood with holes (firewall) to turn the blade from your neck. I am not trying to start a flame war, but I don't think putting yourself in that situation is very smart. Give me a system that works and does not have any or that many significant virus infections attacking.
I support the technology of today as an IT support professional. Technology has increased stress in my life tenfold over decreasing it for the following reasons.
1. My boss can call me on his and my cell phone any time of the day, no matter where I am. Constant communication with someone who has me working when I am on vacation, in meetings, school or even in the bathroom because he did not pay attention to when I showed him what to do and when to do it, definitly builds stress.
2. The constant times when I am on call for support because some user cannot connect to a web page and does not understand that the after hours support are for down systems only. So much for having some private time with my SO.
3. Trying to answer support phone calls of users who ("are too busy to read the directions" or "too important - do you know who I am?") expect you to know everything about any remotely electronic system that you have never seen before.
Don't get me wrong. I like working IT and I tolerate doing support. But for everytime that I can remotely connect to the server and make one change and fix the whole network (thus saving me from driving a couple of hours), there is ten that you just wish you could beat your head into the wall and get rid of the problem by throwing the system out the window.
I think I have a permenant flat spot on my head since Windows 3.0 came out. Yes, I supported windows since ver #1.1
I think I still have the diskettes, any taker's?
Made something of himself stealing or buying up the technology that he claims to have created.
Dos - Bought from CPM
Windows - Developed out of Work with IBM - OS/2 and stolen from Apple (who happened to steal it from someone else).
Excel - Bought from a company that I do not remember the name of
Powerpoint - ditto Word - ditto etc, etc, etc.
Bill Gates cannot even claim to believe that the mouse would be a usable product even. He stated back in the mid to late 80's that it would never be a usable product. Hmmmm..... the great innovator? The only thing he innovated was a good marketing monster.
I do not think he is the devil incarnate either, but I would love to see M$ broken up and him being penniless and destitute. Vindictive, yes..... in reality, it will not happen unless we get someone with some intestinal fortitude.
AC, I do not agree that it is being used to confuse. I think the most important thing that a computer user can use is common sense and intelligence. Unfortunately, neither tend to be used when a computer is only a user of a Microsoft product. I say that because this whole arguement was hashed out before about 1988 to 1990 time frame with the "DOS" system. There was IBM PC/DOS, DR DOS, MS DOS and a few others. MS tried to stop everyone from using DOS as a name. It did not get as far as this farce, but it was the same arguement.
Windows is a generic term in the computer field and in other industries. When you are talking about using windows on a computer, only the simpletons would jump to the conclusion that it is Microsoft.
I personnally use at home, Macintosh, Linux, MS Windows and OS/2. If I had more working computers, I would have Beos and a few others running. I do not care for Microsoft products as a whole. I certainly do not think that "Windows" is only Microsoft.
I'm sorry, but Microsoft does not designate that I cannot work on a computer using a windowing like operating system or open the windows in my house to get a breath of fresh air. Because what they are peddling stinks and it always has.
I never believed that hype. Did I believe that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. Yes, I did and still do. Do I think it a mountain of stuff? No. I believe that for as many road blocks that were put in the way of the U.N. inspectors from both sides, I think that they found a lot of the stuff and destroyed it. What they did not destroy, the Iraqi's destroyed when it became clear that the U.S. was going to not give up on seeing Iraq in compliance with the U.N. Resolutions.
Do I think there was a spin on the justification for war? Of course! There is always spin thrown in the State of the Union and any justification for almost everything. I may lean toward the Republicans, but I do not follow them blindly nor do I thing they have our best interests at heart. I think less of the Democrats (sorry to say because I used to vote the party line without question). Now I distrust most and hope for the best.
I choose to look at the justification for war as this. The U.N. set forth some resolutions that were agreed upon, and the Iraqi's stated that they would honor them. Did they? No. They were found in violation of them. I believed that the vote at the U.N. had more weight than they led everyone to believe. To me, the vote was either a validation of a world based government or a paper tiger. The U.N. did not stand up to Sadam and backup their own resolutions. It took the U.S. and some other countries to do that along with some backbone by the military branches to force Iraq to comply. To me, the U.N. has become a paper tiger and should no longer have a valid say in what goes on unless they change and start backing up their resolutions with some muscle. I certainly don't want the U.S. to be the worlds police force.
I say that with sorrow, because the U.N. could have been great. It was back in 1950 when they backed up their resolutions with troops that did not have "Rules" on when to shoot. The only bad thing about the U.N. is that no commitee ever won a war. It needs a leader to do that. I may not fully trust him, but Bush has taken a black eye and turned around and gave our enemies two in return. Clinton just stood their looking stupid when he got his black eyes, but the military and the state departments died then. What was done then? A few missiles and that was it. When given that choice, I stand for the U.S. and the simple fact that the enemies are starting to run. Not all will run, their will be more black eyes in the future (and privately, I do not expect to see the end of this war), but that does not make me believe that it is wrong.
I appologize if it sounds like rah, rah bull$hit! That was not my intention. I just believe that my life is important, but not as important as yours, your (and my brother) Marine friend or anyone elses that has an opinion.
You see, and I appologize for the long windedness of this, but I beleive that is what makes the Marines so powerful and deadly to our enemies. The simple willingness to sacrifice your life for the sake of others. Do I want to die? Hell No! But if dying means that you or others live, survive and the nation continues on, then Hell Yes! The simple fact that I would choose myself over someone else makes the difference.
I understand the choice that my brother Marine made, believe me. I once made it myself when I left the military. Do I have hard feelings, absolutely not! As I said before, it is about choice that this constitution was built on and I may not agree with you or others about the choice that you or they have made, but I still support the right to make that choice. And I will defend that choice with everything that I can. Will it include terrorism if it comes to that. Hard question. One that I hope to never have to answer.
We both disagree, but I do not think we are all that different. I think the best think about this is that the Iraqi's can now do the same thing without having to worry about a bullet to the head or the family members being raped and disappearing. Unfortunately, I am not only talking the female family members either.
As for the five shells, where do you draw the line when you classify WMDs? Ten? Twenty? Two hundred? I think one is too many. A weapon used to kill a large number of people in a disportionate amount to the weapons size (as opposed to a high explosive artillery round) or ANY weapon that is nucleur, biological or chemical based is a WMDs. I draw the line at definition while you seem to be drawing the line at numbers. I will accept that I misunderstood your reasoning. But I do not see misunderstanding your definition.
Have you served in the military? If you have, you would know that there is always something to complain about. Not enough pay, food sucks, no time off. That has always been one of the basic facts of military life since the beginning of organized military units. Readin history will inform you of that. It is even considered a god given rite in some branches.
As for no facts to support my assertion on Iraq having to do something with 9/11, documents were uncovered in the last four weeks that specify how and when monitary funds were given directly to Mohammad Atta (considered the leader on 9/11). These documents came from the head of Iraqi intelligence personal files that were uncovered recently.
I am not interested in a flamewar and will respect your opinion. You may have facts from some source in which I do not, but I try to base mine on eyewitness accounts from people I trust and documentation. That does not mean that perception is not a factor. So I will consider this as we agree to disagree and will respect your position.
I believe that the actual wording was any foreign national that join the US military who are working toward their citizenship, and die on active duty will be awarded their citizenship postumiously. But I may be wrong, but I know of at least one service member who received their citizenship in this way. I do not, however see any resemblance to american jobs moving overseas to fast-tracking someone getting their citizenship.
Commander in Chief continues to be completely dishonest about the reasons for his wars. (Snip) 500+ Americans who have already died to protect us from WMDs that we now know simply don't exist.
I fully and whole-heartedly disagree with you. The facts are that WMDs have quote HAVE unquote been found in a hardened facility in central Iraq about six to seven months ago. It was blocked off by a shipping container. There were only five artillery shells but all of them had mustard gas inside them. Parts of aluminum tubes and their plans that are used to enrich Unranium were found in Bagdad approximately at the same time. Two semi tractor trailers that were used as a mobil biological or chemical weapons production were captured during the war. All this has been on the news but got received a byline of a passing interest story by the news media. The President did say that he suspected that we will not find large amounts of WMDs and that it will take a long time.
As for the reasons behind Afghanistan and Iraq, I have no doubt in my mind that Bin Laden is behind it (after all, he admitted it). I believe that Iraq had something to do with the attack on 9/11 but not fully responsible. I believe that help was given and condoned, but not fully supported by the regime in Iraq.
Interesting thing about Democrats and Republicans, Democrats tend to be more likely to have served in the military, and it seems Republicans are more likely to send in the military.
I would love to see the proof of this. In the twelve years of the military that I served, I found more people leaning toward the Republicans than the Democrats. The facts of the last 24 years is that the last Democrat in the Whitehouse deployed the military more than the last four prior Presidents (which included one Democrat and three Republicans "COMBINED"). Ask your Marine friend of the time that Clinton was in the Whitehouse. Ask him of the ultra low moral that was all through the military of that time.
I actually witnessed Clinton coming to do a visit to a military base during his time. The public affairs officers actually took buses to the PX and Commisary on base and ordered military members and family members on the bus to "atend" the rally. Everyone was ordered to cheer when he spoke. Otherwise you were threatened with judicial punishment.
Later, I saw the news cast of that "rally." I noticed during the rally that the camera positions were going to show. The newscast proved that I was correct. The camera position made about 75 people look like a couple of hundred. I used to be a camera man myself in college. I am sorry to say, but I had and still do not respect Clinton at all as a man, public figure or President. I firmly believe that he would lie through his teeth if asked what color the sky was.
I respect your opinions because that is exactly what I took an oath for when I joined the military. I swore to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Everyone has an opinion and we who hold the Constitution to be the highest law owe it to everyone to respect everyones opinion, even if we do not agree.
My personal belief is that Clinton did more to destroy the Constitution to protect himself than any other President of the US. While I distrust the Patriot Act and personally believe against it, I believe that Bush is trying to have the nations best interest in mind. He is by far, not perfect, and I do not agree with him always. But I do agree with the war and the volunteer military.
While I do not know the Marine who quit at 19 years rather than go to Iraq, I respect him as a fellow Marine, but I think the Marine Corps is better without someone who does not want to do their duty to the Nation and follow the orders of their superiors.
I am not talking blindly following, the Marine Corps teaches you to question and to get answers from your supperiors so that you know the reasons behind the decisions. I respect my fellow Marine's decision, but I do not agree with it. When you join the Marine Corps, there are no promises that you will not see combat, or even a war. In fact, the Marine Corps tells it truthfully. You will sweat, bleed and hurt so bad that you will puke, and that is only training. I've done it, I'm sure your friend has done it.
As for the draft board position, a Democrat has called for the draft in congress. The DOD would be negligent if they did not prepare for what could happen (by direction of Congress, Senate and Whitehouse). That does not mean that a draft will be created or accepted. It is prudance that you work toward what your boss's want before your asked.
Jeez, I would like to know where you got your info becuase it is really wrong. In listening to you talk, anyone would think that the US military has a problem with desertion. That is absolutely false. In fact, since 9/11, more people have volunteered for the military. I spent twelve years in the military and I strongly oppose the draft for the reason that I don't want the ones who don't want to be there right next to me when bullets fly. My brother-in-law and nephew are still in the military and there is no problems with people leaving (or deserting as you imply).
Please, before you through this dribble out, make sure of your facts. Don't listen to the "unbiased news" either, because they are the worst one pushing this dribble.
While I agree with you about having morality level higher than some, I think your statement is still speculation. No one can truly say what they will do in certain situations unless actually faced by that situation. As you can see, I prefer to look at it as a realist. While I agree that targeting innocent bystanders as inexcusable, what would happen if one of those bystanders pulled out a pistol and started using it. One lesson in the military that they teach is that anyone can be a combatant at almost no notice.
In Vietnam, good guys became bad while fighting and watching their friends die next to them. While I hold all veterans in high regard, some have done some pretty horrible things. My point is that war or the simple act of killing a person will change everyone in someways that are not good.
In my time as a Marine and before that, a Police officer, I took the view that it is either them or me. In that situation, I would much rather have it them. But I have not been in that situation yet and I hope I never will.
Respectfully, I disagree. The General public do not know or care what operating system that they have on their machines. The only care they have is will it work and can they figure out how to use the simple programs and does it look cool.
While you point toward the OSS or Linux crowd, there is no proof what-so-ever of their involment. If the site was www.networksolutions.com or www.whocares.com, you would not be able to use your statement.
Respectfully, do not point fingers without more proof than what website is attacked.
I see your .02 cents and call!
How long has the domain naming system been around (approx. 30 years)? Sometimes I wonder what minimal IQ it takes to work there.
I disagree. There are a lot more common beliefs in different religions than just this. It is one of the common beliefs though.
The one thing I learned early and believe is that all religions say and do mainly the same thing, but in different ways. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic. But I think my eyes have seen the good in different religions and believe that all should be able to worship as they see fit. That does not give one the ability to prosecute the others because of their beliefs though.
To me, saying that the logo is anti-religious should get a healthy dose of reality. Just because the logo is a devil (small one at that) doesn't mean it is evil.
I like the logo and I think it should stay. What say you ........
I agree that the judge will not be amused. I am not versed in the legal aspects but I do not see how SCO is expecting to win a court case on such claims as "I think" and "it appears." "I thought" that Bill Clinton was ...... and "it appeared" that....., well most of us know where that led.
I used to have a co-worker who was a lawyer, then retired out of the FBI. He could always be counted on to bring up the reality of the situation. Such as, the jury has full say on what is right and wrong. If the jury things that something was against the law, but does not believe that the defendant should go to prison, then he/she will be not be found guilty in some communities.
But I can not see any judge deciding for SCO on such transparent "thoughts and ideas." The basis of Law is clearer than that.
It would seem to me that they would be in the best position to let SCO go after Linux. Think about how much M$ would gain.
1. Linux users would be mad and claim that SCO is being money hungry by attacking Linux since they could not prove that SCO is better. Thus, Linux users would start to hate a rival of M$ and never buy their products.
2. SCO would try and prove something that turns out to be false and loses credibility in the computer industry.
3. M$ can claim plausable deniability that they had nothing to do with the whole thing. But they can rake in the benefits by weakening both rivals by the fighting.
4. It gets M$ out of the fore front of the computer industry with their security lapses.
5. If both of your rivals are fighting over menial table scraps, then M$ can have the dinner (to include the cake).
I in NO way meant to say that Linux and SCO are fighting over the leftovers or refer to Linux/SCO users as table scraps. I meant only as a metaphor that if two rivals are fighting over peices of the industry, M$ can try and take the whole thing while the two are busy.
My point is, I see M$ as being in a win/win situation over this. I believe that SCO is wrong, and in some way, is tending to do M$'s bidding.
But I do believe that M$ will be around for approx. ten more years as an individual operating system. After that, I see them being a pirated form of BSD or Linux.
Just some thoughts and my 2cents worth.
But I respectfully disagree when you state that Microsoft can be a secure system. I challenge anyone to show one person that understands everything about the Microsoft kernel and how it works from the source code. I may be wrong, but I do not believe that anyone at MS can claim that dubious honor. When your kernel grows to be over 25 Mb in size, there is seriously something wrong.
I beleive that Open Source Software -- when properly managed can be more secure than a system that no one understands how it works because its source is closed or because of the sheer size of it.
I prefer to look at real world proof. How often do you read about Microsoft vulnerabilities. Granted, they get more press and Linux is just starting to make the mainstream press. But how many virus infections are possible for the Microsoft operating system? May be outdated but last I saw was over 50k individual virus infections possible. How many for Linux? 2 At least that I know of.
Simple mathematics tells me where to put my data. On a Linux box! Why? Because less chance of getting infected by a virus just by the sheer numbers.
Microsoft has always used FUD since the beginning. But I do not think that it will work this time.
Beleive what you want. Me, I vote and use Linux. I make my own mind up, I don't listen to marketers.
I fully agree. In business, court rooms, and with any instance in which you have to prove what you did, what do they want to see - The paper trail. How can you provide the paper trail on electronic bits.
I am one of those that do not believe that M$ is up to the task and do not shop on the internet for that reason (There are diligent admin's out there, but how do you know where they are/are not and I do not trust M$ so called security one bit).
Take the last election in the US. It was a fiasco to say the least. How hard would it be for a person that is for the other party to "accidentally" move a storage device close to an electronic field so the information would be corrupt when the precinct was almost completely for the other party. There is way too much chance for the information to be messed with.
Ealier in the month there was a story of how a Chinese businessman hacked a U.S. Navy ship and used it as a spam relay. How hard would it be for a foriegn government to crack into the voting system and alter the course of American Politic's?
For me, give me the paper trail every time when I vote. In fact, start asking for a thumb print on every ballot. That should end the dead from voting in an election.
in reply to: Just give me 20 aryan Waffen-SS men with real skills and discipline. Beats that stuff you scratched off the streets ("marines") anytime. For Historical fact: The last times that the Germans fought against the Marines was at the battle of Belleau Wood in WWI. The battle is still remembered today in the Marine Corps because that is where the Germans gave the US Marines the title "Teufen Huenden" or "Devil Dogs" (My appologies if I mispelled the german words). So your discription of what Germans would do to US Marines are already proven. If you make posts like that without knowing what your talking about, you will always be proved to be nothing but a fool.
Your brain is as non existant as your balls. I'm through with you. You have nothing worthwhile to add to a discussion. Go play with your dolls.
Yet, again. Keep hiding. If I have small balls, you must have none. Do the world a favor - don't reproduce. There are enough dickhead in China.
The destroyer that you are refering to was back in the 90's. They scrapped that operating system and now they look like they forgot that lesson.
Unless some of us veterans did computers before in the military, which would lead me to say that nerd stuff is no longer nerdy. It finally has been found to be what it is - Intelligence. Disclaimer: This is meant in NO WAY to denote that the millitary is intelligent. Sometimes they have the best deals on frontal labotomies.
At least I have the balls to post with my login, not hiding behind an anonymous login. Take the rubber that your father should have used and place it over the head until it cuts your airflow. Then this world will be a better place because now you can practice safe sex - dickhead!
Unlike you who can't find their package with a microscope. My crap has more substance than you.