Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
On 14 Oct 2005 19:01:42 -0700, "Xah Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Xah Lee, I went through some of your web site, because of time couldn't examine (but a few) code guides. Read all you philosophy pages though, even about languages I didn't know. I took a course in my Mechanical Engineering study days, an elective, based on assembly lang with a hex input keypad, no saves had to be right the first time. Before that, I did several fortran programs and an array of HP (Hewlet Packard, reverse polish) scientific programs. This was my senior year and I failed that class. The instructor was obnoxious and that class (credits) prevented me from getting my degree (by 3 credits). Now acording to Pavlofs dog theory I should not have wanted to persue any of these assembly codes in the future. As it turns out, I threatend the dean with a suit, no extended symester, got out with a 3.4 gpa, got a z80a machine, wrote a dissasembler within 6 months, wrote a commercial program in assembly 6 months later, wrote a spreadsheet program 6 months later. From there I wrote a program called Action Memo, a few years later (1985) that is something called "Act" now, licensed by Lotus and Microsoft. Stolen from me in an Ashton Tate/PC World contest which I only placed 2nd. I won a software bundle, imagin that. But concept and sourse was all they needed. Now I'm scratchin out a living having worked for Quaterdeck, Microsft, McAfee, Symantec. I applied Perl just over a year ago, the latest, after drivers, large scale apps, gui, com, java. I've written over 14 million lines of code in 20 years and when I write in performance mode I rember back to the days when I wrote TSR's because I don't think in terms of macro or Perl. I know what the assembly is and man.. that never changes. I'm very afraid of how "hype" affects new, young programmers. Larry Wall didn't do so much with Perl, I could have done it in my sleep. I may do something better, you never know man!! >Microsoft Hatred, FAQ > >Xah Lee, 20020518 > >Question: U.S. Judges are not morons, and quite a few others are >not morons. They find MS guilty, so it must be true. > >Answer: so did the German population thought Jews are morons by >heritage, to the point that Jews should be exterminated from earth. >Apparently, the entire German population cannot be morons, they must be >right. > >Judge for yourself, is a principle i abide by. And when you judge, it >is better to put some effort into it. > >How much you invest in this endearvor depends on how important the >issue is to you. If you are like most people, for which the issue of >Microsoft have remote effect on your personal well-being, then you can >go out and buy a case of beer on one hand and pizza on the other, and >rap with your online confabulation buddies about how evil is MS. If you >are an author writing a book on this, then obviously its different >because your reputation and ultimately daily bread depend on what you >put down. If you are a MS competitor such as Apple or Sun, then >obviously you will see to it with as much money as you can cough out >that MS is guilty by all measures and gets put out of business. If you >are a government employee such as a judge, of course it is your >interest to please your boss, with your best accessment of the air. > >When i judge things, i like to imagine things being serious, as if my >wife is a wager, my daughter is at stake, that any small factual error >or mis-judgement or misleading perspective will cause unimaginable >things to happen. Then, my opinions becomes better ones. > >Q: Microsoft's Operating System is used over 90% of PCs. If that's >not monopoly, i don't know what is. > >A: Now suppose there is a very ethical company E, whose products have >the best performance/price ratio, and making all the competitors >looking so majorly stupid and ultimately won over 90% of the market as >decided by consumers. Is E now a monopoly? Apparently, beer drinkers >and pizza eaters needs to study a bit on the word monopoly, from the >perspectives of language to history to law. If they have some extra >time, they can sharpen views from philosophy & logic contexts as well. > >Q: What about all the people in the corporate environments who are >forced to use MS products and aren't allowed the option/choice to use >Mac/Linux/UNIX? > >A: Kick your boss's ass, or, choose to work for a company who have >decisions that you liked. > >Q: What about MS buying out all competitors? > >A: Microsoft offered me $1 grand for saying good things about them. >They didn't put a gunpoint on my head. I CHOOSE to take the bribe. >Likewise, sold companies can and have decided what's best for them. >It's nothing like under gunpoint. > >Q: Microsoft forced computer makers to not install competitor's >applications or OSes. > >A: It is free country. Don't like MS this or that? Fuck MS and talk to >the Solaris or BeOS or AIX or HP-UX or Apple or OS/2 or Amiga or NeXT >or the Linuxes with thei
Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
On 14 Oct 2005 19:01:42 -0700, "Xah Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think this guy should run for President. Anybody says M$oft is trying to screw the little guy is "alright" in my book. >Microsoft Hatred, FAQ > >Xah Lee, 20020518 > >Question: U.S. Judges are not morons, and quite a few others are >not morons. They find MS guilty, so it must be true. > >Answer: so did the German population thought Jews are morons by >heritage, to the point that Jews should be exterminated from earth. >Apparently, the entire German population cannot be morons, they must be >right. > >Judge for yourself, is a principle i abide by. And when you judge, it >is better to put some effort into it. > >How much you invest in this endearvor depends on how important the >issue is to you. If you are like most people, for which the issue of >Microsoft have remote effect on your personal well-being, then you can >go out and buy a case of beer on one hand and pizza on the other, and >rap with your online confabulation buddies about how evil is MS. If you >are an author writing a book on this, then obviously its different >because your reputation and ultimately daily bread depend on what you >put down. If you are a MS competitor such as Apple or Sun, then >obviously you will see to it with as much money as you can cough out >that MS is guilty by all measures and gets put out of business. If you >are a government employee such as a judge, of course it is your >interest to please your boss, with your best accessment of the air. > >When i judge things, i like to imagine things being serious, as if my >wife is a wager, my daughter is at stake, that any small factual error >or mis-judgement or misleading perspective will cause unimaginable >things to happen. Then, my opinions becomes better ones. > >Q: Microsoft's Operating System is used over 90% of PCs. If that's >not monopoly, i don't know what is. > >A: Now suppose there is a very ethical company E, whose products have >the best performance/price ratio, and making all the competitors >looking so majorly stupid and ultimately won over 90% of the market as >decided by consumers. Is E now a monopoly? Apparently, beer drinkers >and pizza eaters needs to study a bit on the word monopoly, from the >perspectives of language to history to law. If they have some extra >time, they can sharpen views from philosophy & logic contexts as well. > >Q: What about all the people in the corporate environments who are >forced to use MS products and aren't allowed the option/choice to use >Mac/Linux/UNIX? > >A: Kick your boss's ass, or, choose to work for a company who have >decisions that you liked. > >Q: What about MS buying out all competitors? > >A: Microsoft offered me $1 grand for saying good things about them. >They didn't put a gunpoint on my head. I CHOOSE to take the bribe. >Likewise, sold companies can and have decided what's best for them. >It's nothing like under gunpoint. > >Q: Microsoft forced computer makers to not install competitor's >applications or OSes. > >A: It is free country. Don't like MS this or that? Fuck MS and talk to >the Solaris or BeOS or AIX or HP-UX or Apple or OS/2 or Amiga or NeXT >or the Linuxes with their free yet fantastically easy-to-use and >network-spamming X-Windows. Bad business prospects? Then grab the >opportunity and become an entrepreneur and market your own beats-all >OS. Too difficult? Let's sue Microsoft! > >Q: Microsoft distributed their Internet Explorer web browser free, >using their monopoly power to put Netscape out of business. > >A: entirely inane coding monkeys listen: It takes huge investment to >give away a quality software free. Netscape can give away Operating >Systems free to put MS out of business too. Nobody is stopping Sun >Microsystem from giving Java free, or BeOS a browser free, or Apple to >bundle QuickTime deeply with their OS free. > >Not to mention that Netscape is worse than IE in just about every >version till they become the OpenSource mozilla shit and eventually >bought out by AOL and still shit. > > Netscape struggles, announced open browser source code in 1998-01, >industry shock >http://wp.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease558.html > > Netscape browser code released in 1998-03. Mozilla FAQ. >http://mozilla.org/docs/mozilla-faq.html > > AOL buys Netscape in 1998-11 for 4.2 billion. >http://news.com.com/2100-1023-218360.html?legacy=cnet > > Jamie Zawinski, resignation and postmortem, 1999-04 >http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nomo.html > > suck.com, Greg Knauss & Terry Colon, 2000-04, Netscape 6 mockery >http://www.suck.com/daily/2000/04/10/ >http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/_/24,greg_knauss_netscape.zip > > Xah Lee, Netscape Crap >http://xahlee.org/Writ_dir/macos-talk/58.txt > >Q: Microsoft implemented extra things to standard protocols in >their OS so that other OS makers cannot be compatible with their OS >while their OS can be compatible with all. They used this Embrace & >Extend to lock out
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Responsible Software Licensing
On 16 Dec 2005 16:52:43 -0800, "Xah Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Responsible Software Licensing > >Xah Lee, 200307 > >Software is a interesting invention. Software has this interesting Soft, like your head >property, that it can be duplicated without cost, as if like copying it costs to dup, dup >money. Never in history are goods duplicable without cost. But with the wrong, you can dup your bullshit evrywhere for free >invention of computer, the ephemeral non-physical programs break that you don't know what a computer is >precept. In digital form, programs and music and books all become goods i bid a gigabuck for that gigabyte >in essentially infinite quantity. in a for() loop maybe > >All is good except, bads in digital form can also multiply equally, get a calculator, bad is negative and subtracts, not multiply >just as goods. Well known examples are computer viruses and email virus and email or virus in email? >spams. Unknown to the throng of unix morons are software bads. In a "software bads" is like asian bads, dumber than dog shit >unix moron's mind, the predominant quip among hackers is where is whats on the morons mind anyway Zah? >your code?, singnifying the mentality that a hacker's prestige is when is mentality signified, do a cat scan do any good? >judged on how much code he has contributed to the community. Therefore, per line or content? if the dude is dumb does his software get demoted >every fucking studs and happy-go-lucky morons put their homework on the right, the 9 inch dicked moron with the genious iq, and very tall.. >net, with a big stamp of FREE, and quite proud of their free... suck my 9 inch dick, and quite proud >contributions to the world. These digital bads, including well, a big dick is a gods gift to women (or did u mean digitial dick) >irresponsible programs, protocols, and languages, spread like viruses every program i ever met was irresponsible and never wore condoms (i never fucked with them so "i" don't know) >until they obtained the touting right of being the STANDARD or MOST yup, down south we call them the "John Henry", definetly the standard >POPULAR in industry, as if indicating superior quality. Examplary are nah, superior "dick size" doesen't mean mind >C, Perl, RFC, X-Windows, Apache, MySQL, Pretty Home Page (and almost oh, u name dropper your so intelligent >anything out of unix). The harm of a virus is temporal. The harm of a "virus" is a physical ailment, not a mind doodoo >irresponsible software (especially with unscrupulous promotion) is the i never knew a responsible software, can u name one? they don't talk to me, maybe cause i just curse them out.. hahahaaa >creation of a entire generation of bad thinking and monkey coders. The i think you mean monkey jakkingoff, which usually leads to bad thinking, i mean really man step away from the gun and put your hands in the air... >scale can be compared as to putting a bullet in a person brain, versus you mean surgically, i never saw one "put" in there. anybody seen this happen? >creating a creed with the Holocaust aftermath. omg, bring the jews into into it. > >Distribution of software is easily like pollution. I thought of a law so shit flows downhill eh... >that would ban the distribution of software bads, or like charging for keep the software bads to yourself (whatever that is) >garbage collection in modern societies. The problem is the difficulty nothin wrong with garbage, its a 3 billion dolla industry >of deciding what is good and what is bad. Like in so many things, i can we leave good/bad up got god, or at least anybody with a brain? >think the ultimate help is for people to be aware; so-called education; i think toilet paper helps alot better, edu is a mind fuk divorced from reality ... like u >I believe, if people are made aware of the situation i spoke of, then awareness comes when you "find" your navel >irresponsible software will decrease, regardless any individual's >opinion. i never knew a "mind" software that considered itself irresponsible > >The most important measure to counter the tremendous harm that is the epa >irresponsible software has done to the industry is to begin with can't we all agree "software" is not people ... >responsible licenses, such that the producer of a software will be can't we all agree licenses were made for marriages and dog tags .. >liable for damage incurred thru their software. As we know, today's your software killed my country, i want 1 trillion in damages >software license comes with a disclaimer that essentially says the i wish marriage license did >software is sold as is and the producer is not responsible for any software is sold. i think you should be instead, we know what u can do >damage, nor guaranteeing the functionality of the software. It is this, software functions as it was programmed, not as your conception of its use ... you should find out what "it" doess first >that ferments all sorts of sloppitudes and fads and myth
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Responsible Software Licensing
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:55:10 +0100, Gunnar Hjalmarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >robic0 wrote: >> Xah Lee wrote: >>> >>> >> >> > >So, at last they found one another. :( Thanks for the coaching Gunnar !!! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Responsible Software Licensing
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:27:58 +, Mark Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >robic0 wrote: > >> Xah, please admit to me that your under the influence of >> physocopic drugs! > >He could be schizophrenic. > >Seekers of all things wierd on the internet can do no better than Gene >Ray's Timecube: >http://www.timecube.com/ > >His outpourings are so well known that he even gets a mention in the >wikipedia: >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Ray > >And once you've fully absorbed the fact that "You are educated as a >stupid android slave to the evil Word Animal Singularity Brotherhood", >why not play the game of the theory over at: >http://atrocities.primaryerror.net/timecube.html what would Einstien do? take a trip on a beam of light -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Responsible Software Licensing
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 11:47:29 +0100, "Martin P. Hellwig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Xah Lee wrote: > >Nice rant, btw in most EU countries the software creator can not >withdraw the responsibility of his/her/it creation, regardless of what >the disclaimer says. Pretty big damned statement there boy! As about a coverall generalization for all faults if I ever heard! > The law is the leading authority and not some >Disclaimer/EULA, that's why most US EULA's are unauthoritative in the EU. If the software opens a file and is in the middle of writing to it, then the user dumps the power to the machine and ends up having to reformat, thereby losing all his data, at what point does the liability stop? And how is fault proven or dished out? Does the law specifically state "repeatability" in its language? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Responsible Software Licensing
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 10:05:59 GMT, Roedy Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:42:52 -0800, robic0 wrote, quoted or indirectly >quoted someone who said : > >>If the software opens a file and is in the middle of writing to it, >>then the user dumps the power to the machine and ends up having to >>reformat, thereby losing all his data, at what point does the >>liability stop? And how is fault proven or dished out? Does the >>law specifically state "repeatability" in its language? > >It would expect it to work much the way a car works. If you have an >accident, that is your fault. If the fuel pump is badly designed so it >catches fire, that in the manufacturers fault. You'ld have to prove the fuel pump caused your accident wouldn't you? I'm reversed when it comes to engineering. I always assume defects when buss loads of people are killed. If software ever guards lives that isin't certified then its a manufacturing defect. That is imbedded software though. Not the for public consumption. I know that fly-by-wire military software has 100 levels of precaution. Hey but its a 7 million dollar plane and a 700 billion dollar budget. The written requirements for a single design is a book 5 inches thick. Ever see that for Joe bullshit software designer? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: the bug-reporting attitude
On 2 Jan 2006 13:16:26 -0800, "Xah Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The Bug-Reporting Attitude > >Xah Lee, 2005-02, 2006-01 > >People, > >There is a common behavior among people in software geek forums, that >whenever a software is crashing or behaving badly, they respond by >go file a bug report as if it is the duty of software consumers. > "software" found 3 x >When a software is ostensibly incorrect, and if it is likely in >connection to egregious irresponsibility as most software companies are >thru their irresponsible licensing, the thing one should not do is to >fawn up to their ass as in filing a bug report, and that is also the >least effective in correcting the software. > "software" 3x ... "companies" 1 x >The common attitude of bug-reporting is one reason that contributed to >the tremendous egregious irresponsible fuckups in computer software >industry that each of us have to endure daily all the time. (e.g. >software A clashed, software B can't do this, C can't do that, D i >don't know how to use, E download location broken, F i need to join >discussion group to find a work-around, G is all pretty and >dysfunctional... ) > "software industry" found 1 x >When a software is ostensibly incorrect and when the organization >behind it is irresponsible with its licensing, the most effective and >moral attitude is to do legal harm to the legal entity. This one can do >by filing a law suit or spreading the fact. Filing a law suit is >appropriate in severe and serious cases, and provided you have such >devotion to the cause. For most cases, we should just spread the fact. >When the organization sees facts flying about its incompetence or >irresponsibility, it will immediately mend the problem source, or cease >to exist. > "software"(1x)..."organization"(2x) >Another harm sprang from the fucking bug-reporting attitude rampant >among IT morons is the multiplication of pop-ups that bug users for >bug-reporting, complete with their privacy legalese infomercial >intrusion. > >2006-01 Addendum > Since I work for a software industry, company, organization, I thought I'd offer my 2 cents here. The software industry/company/organization are run by snake-oil salesmen/marketing who discard the programmers as fast as they do bug reports. Given that, who do you think "cuts" out the problem parameters for the programmer? Think its a master problem solver programmer/manager who is not influenced by marketing? Got a bright programmer who looks at the condition then at the parameters for the fixes to implement who see's the fallicy of the fix parameters. Why yes, yes you do. Well why doesen't he jump up and down in the organization then? Because his job hangs by a thread, with seasonal layoffs and outsoursing, lessening pay/benifits, contract status, etc... Contrary to popular belief the fixer has to research his part of the code, and is forced to know more than what he is being tasked to do. The falicy is that he has control of it, he see's the big picture fopa's but can't do a thing about it. So you see, when you say "software" so many times, you imply the programmer is at fault. For simple bugs that may be true, however in the face of induced snake oil marketing induced CONCEPTUAL ERRORS, well brother, what have I got to do to just get my next paycheck? Imagine that software designed by snake-oil salesmaen/marketing, comercial ad agencies, conceptual designers without proof-of-concept. In todays world, the word "software" is a mis-nomer. Its not software anymore, its a concept of some dude on ACID !!! Any questions? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
