Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #680832 > unrolled thread
| Started by | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-19 20:03 -0500 |
| Last post | 2024-12-25 16:19 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 255 — 29 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
The problem with not owning the software CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 20:03 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 16:52 +0800
Re: The problem with not owning the software CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-21 07:26 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 23:15 +0800
Re: The problem with not owning the software ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-12-23 23:24 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 11:48 +0800
Re: The problem with not owning the software ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-12-25 06:54 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-25 20:39 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 22:23 +0800
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-28 07:04 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-12-28 16:53 +0800
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-28 19:34 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-28 15:07 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-28 15:12 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-28 17:11 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-28 17:17 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 13:16 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 14:24 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 15:39 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 16:06 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 17:10 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 17:39 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 18:58 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 19:10 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 19:21 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-29 22:55 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 18:02 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-12-29 18:35 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 19:51 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-12-29 20:00 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2024-12-29 22:34 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-30 03:48 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 19:55 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-12-29 20:15 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 21:49 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Jack Sovalot <hee-cawkforme@jack.sovalot> - 2024-12-30 04:06 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 08:31 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-30 19:12 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 00:53 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 21:06 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-31 11:01 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 19:00 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-31 19:52 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-01 01:46 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 20:52 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-01 17:02 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2025-01-18 11:54 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 18:46 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-30 04:51 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 09:34 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 00:53 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:42 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 21:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:44 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 21:05 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-29 23:14 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-30 03:57 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:25 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 10:09 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 00:32 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-12-29 01:43 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-28 20:52 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 07:05 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 06:58 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-29 21:17 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-29 20:41 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-29 23:31 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-30 10:56 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-31 03:24 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-31 13:50 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-12-31 13:18 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-31 19:14 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-01 07:44 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 00:22 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 12:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 19:36 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 02:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Farley Flud <fflud@gnu.rocks> - 2024-12-31 19:25 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-04 11:46 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-31 20:27 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 21:16 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-29 22:57 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 18:50 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-30 02:30 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-30 04:55 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-30 07:05 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 01:00 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 16:15 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-29 16:39 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 21:00 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 19:08 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2024-12-29 22:30 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-30 07:00 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-30 12:53 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-30 04:52 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-30 13:01 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 00:56 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:25 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 00:57 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 16:45 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-01 19:31 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-01 14:50 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-01 22:03 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 00:41 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-02 00:33 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-02 00:15 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 05:33 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 12:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 22:03 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 02:32 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-04 04:50 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 08:52 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:42 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 01:05 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:59 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-04 10:01 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-04 10:29 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-04 10:38 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-04 11:45 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-04 12:00 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-01-04 18:01 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-04 13:59 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-01-04 20:45 +0000
The Desktop Environment (was: Re: The problem with not owning the software) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-01-05 03:05 +0000
Re: The Desktop Environment (was: Re: The problem with not owning the software) pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-01-05 17:28 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-04 20:25 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-01-04 15:58 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-04 11:23 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 21:13 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-01-04 21:50 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:39 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 00:59 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-01-05 01:52 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 03:04 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 16:07 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 00:22 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-06 08:23 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 22:47 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-07 00:12 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-07 02:10 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-07 02:31 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-07 14:12 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 02:26 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-08 13:28 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-08 21:28 +0000
[OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-01-05 01:50 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 03:01 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-01-05 03:25 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 06:47 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-05 08:20 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-08 12:21 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-01-08 14:10 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-04 21:18 -0500
[OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-01-05 02:34 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-04 22:08 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-01-04 22:34 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-05 07:19 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-01-05 10:39 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2025-01-05 03:39 +0000
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-05 08:13 -0500
Re: [OT] Re: The problem with not owning the software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-01-05 08:52 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 16:32 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:53 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-28 21:26 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 06:38 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 07:17 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2024-12-29 13:19 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 08:48 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-29 08:02 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 09:08 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:32 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:46 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-29 20:56 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-29 17:03 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 23:32 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-05 11:05 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-05 13:29 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-01-05 13:53 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-05 15:08 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-06 10:17 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-06 10:28 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-06 11:26 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-06 12:34 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-01-06 12:40 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-06 14:23 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-06 16:27 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 13:21 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-29 07:41 -0700
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-30 19:05 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 20:50 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 12:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 22:05 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-03 09:09 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-03 20:33 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-01-03 21:00 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-03 23:28 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-04 21:17 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:57 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2025-01-04 22:25 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 02:19 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-04 04:49 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 01:10 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:52 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 15:55 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 00:20 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-06 08:11 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-06 16:16 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 22:46 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-01-11 11:36 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 23:20 -0600
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-30 18:58 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 00:59 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-31 02:18 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-31 08:41 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-12-31 13:08 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-31 13:54 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-31 19:26 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-01 07:43 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-04 10:32 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 00:37 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2025-01-04 19:43 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:47 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-31 18:58 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-31 19:25 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-31 19:32 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-01 01:43 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 11:53 +0800
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-30 10:08 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-12-31 20:32 +0100
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-31 21:34 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 16:47 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-01 19:29 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-02 12:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-02 21:59 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-02 18:01 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 11:26 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2025-01-03 08:55 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 14:33 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-01-04 19:32 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:46 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-05 15:46 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-06 00:17 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-06 14:57 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-01-05 02:47 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 02:14 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 02:09 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-30 19:02 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2024-12-31 10:10 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-31 08:50 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-31 12:09 -0500
Re: The problem with not owning the software Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-01-04 10:31 +0000
Re: The problem with not owning the software bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-12-25 16:19 -0500
Page 3 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 13 Next page →
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 11:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vl14ft$2a7g9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681821 |
On Mon, 12/30/2024 9:06 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > On 2024-12-30 19:53, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> On Mon, 30 Dec 2024 19:12:32 -0500, Paul wrote: >> >>> https://www.ghacks.net/2022/06/27/bypass-windows-11-microsoft-account-requirement-and-deny-privacy-questions-during-setup-with-rufus/ >>> >>> "Remove requirement for Secure Boot and TPM 2.0" >> >> This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth >> nothing. > > And there is no reason to believe that circumventing both Secure Boot and TPM will lead to a Windows installation which will respect your decision not to use either feature. Any update you are forced to install might suddenly lock you out of the system. Microsoft confirmed quite recently that despite news that they were easing the TPM requirement, they're not actually planning on doing so. <https://windowsforum.com/threads/windows-11-installation-no-easing-of-hardware-requirements-confirmed.347806/> > > The message here is clear: if you like AMD but don't want fTPM stuttering, your best choice is Linux. > You are aware of course, that inconveniencing large numbers of customers, or even the hint of damage to user data (accessibility), leads to class action lawsuits. People even resorted to small claims courts, to get even with Microsoft. The people in the windows group, do not worry too much about the poorly handled messaging. If they release four P.R. messages, and the message in each one is different, you're free to latch onto one of them and run with it. For the time being, Rufus works. Why does Rufus continue to work ? Do you see the message yet ? The two faces of Microsoft. Microsoft *have* been quietly closing doors behind the scenes. The activity aligns with the directive to "do security". For example, some easy ways of "becoming administrator", so you can recover from deleting administrator by accident, have been removed. In addition, psexec no longer works, and another piece of code that could make you TrustedInstaller, similarly no longer works. these are baby steps, but they're also a "message" to customers at large. Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 19:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl1f0g$2c01d$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681884 |
On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 11:01:01 -0500, Paul wrote: > People even resorted to small claims courts, to get even with Microsoft. How successful has that been? Particularly when Microsoft makes it clear it doesn’t accept responsibility for bugs in the software.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 19:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl1lhu.f1g.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #681809 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On Mon, 30 Dec 2024 19:12:32 -0500, Paul wrote: > > > https://www.ghacks.net/2022/06/27/bypass-windows-11-microsoft-account-requirement-and-deny-privacy-questions-during-setup-with-rufus/ > > > > "Remove requirement for Secure Boot and TPM 2.0" > > This is why they say, Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth > nothing. Well, Windows 11 requirements for Secure Boot, TPM 2.0 and some other hardware requirements are quite artificial and mainly intended to sell more machines. Very few people are disputing that. But that doesn't mean it takes time, it takes money *or* - if you don't want to spend the money - it does take time, *if* you're willing to fight windmills. Face it, there never have been such kind of artificial roadblocks, ever from NT via 2000, XP, Vista, 7 and 8[.1] all the way up to 10. That spans some 32 years. Not bad, I would say. Yes, in that timeframe there have also been higher hardware requirements for newer versions, but they were functional (mostly space and speed), not artificial. FYI, please don't try to start a Windows versus Linux dispute with me. I started with Unix/UNIX systems when both memory sizes were expressed in KB and disk sizes were expressed in (a few) MB. And I started with computers which had (core) memory sizes of 8-64KB and disks (if any) of a few hundred KB.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-01 01:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl26pc$2fs1q$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681917 |
On 31 Dec 2024 19:52:24 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: > Face it, there never have been such kind of artificial roadblocks, > ever from NT via 2000, XP, Vista, 7 and 8[.1] all the way up to 10. That > spans some 32 years. Not bad, I would say. Microsoft had enough trouble with natural roadblocks just from its own brain-dead design decisions, it didn’t need very many artificial ones. But of course it had those, too: like the limit on the number of simultaneous network shares that could be served up, which was higher in the “Pro” version of Windows but not really lifted until you paid lots extra for “Server”. > FYI, please don't try to start a Windows versus Linux dispute with me. > I started with Unix/UNIX systems when both memory sizes were expressed > in KB and disk sizes were expressed in (a few) MB. I’m sure you did. And I started with OSes that made Unix look big and bulky.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 20:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <F7IcP.24116$DPp5.16140@fx01.iad> |
| In reply to | #681804 |
On 2024-12-30 19:12, Paul wrote: > On Mon, 12/30/2024 8:31 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: >> On 2024-12-29 21:49, Joel wrote: >>> sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> wrote: >>> >>>>>> "Precious hardware" >>>>>> >>>>>> That's funny >>>>> >>>>> It's my baby, yes, I have an emotional attachment to my computer, I >>>>> assembled it. M$ crapware, other than such for Linux, can step off. >>>> >>>> Fine, you obviously have some emotional issues. I don't really give a >>>> shit what you call or how you feel attached to your computer. Have at >>>> it weirdo. I'm still laffing at you. >>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> I Stand With Israel! >>>>> >>>>> "That's funny." >>>> >>>> Now that you Linux guys have completely taken a shit on the win11 group, >>>> you're now stooping to commenting on sig files. I manage to only use 4 >>>> words to get my point across. You on the other hand have written a >>>> short essay for yours. Kinda fits your character. >>>> >>>> FWIW, I got no problem with the way the normal people talk about Linux >>>> here. One of our favorites in this group regularly uses it for things >>>> and shares his experiences. He even manages to point out the flaws and >>>> problems with the various microsoft operating systems. Everybody >>>> appreciates the education a handful of people in these groups give us. >>>> >>>> What they don't do is rave on an on about how horrible microsoft is at >>>> every chance they get and advocate Linux above all else in a fucking >>>> windows newsgroup. We're here to learn about Windows 11 and if Linux >>>> can be of use in sorting things out great. But you can take your Linux >>>> pom poms and wear yourself out in your advocacy group. It's just >>>> getting a little old around here IMO. Other than that....Fuck Off! >>> >>> >>> "You obviously have some emotional issues." >> >> Ignore him. Looking back, I had an emotional attachment to the Powerbook G4 I used in the early 2000s and still remember my MSI GT72 very fondly. >> >> Meanwhile, he wants to learn about Windows 11. Good for him. The rest of us want to be educated on why a majority of AMD-powered computers in the wild will be forced to suffer fTPM stuttering even three years after the problem surfaced because Microsoft won't ease up on the TPM requirement and manufacturers don't want to deploy an update for the machines they've sold. >> > > We wave "Hi" from the Windows group :-) > > https://www.ghacks.net/2022/06/27/bypass-windows-11-microsoft-account-requirement-and-deny-privacy-questions-during-setup-with-rufus/ > > "Remove requirement for Secure Boot and TPM 2.0" > > Happy motoring! It's great that such a solution is available, but I'm afraid that won't fix the fTPM stuttering problem because it happens even when secure boot and TPM aren't used by Windows. Unless you can disable fTPM in general from the BIOS, you're still going to suffer from periodic stutters. -- Andrzej (Andre) Matuch Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41 KDE supporting member
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-01 17:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vl4e2b$2v5l3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681816 |
On Mon, 12/30/2024 8:52 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > On 2024-12-30 19:12, Paul wrote: >> On Mon, 12/30/2024 8:31 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote: >>> On 2024-12-29 21:49, Joel wrote: >>>> sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> "Precious hardware" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's funny >>>>>> >>>>>> It's my baby, yes, I have an emotional attachment to my computer, I >>>>>> assembled it. M$ crapware, other than such for Linux, can step off. >>>>> >>>>> Fine, you obviously have some emotional issues. I don't really give a >>>>> shit what you call or how you feel attached to your computer. Have at >>>>> it weirdo. I'm still laffing at you. >>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> I Stand With Israel! >>>>>> >>>>>> "That's funny." >>>>> >>>>> Now that you Linux guys have completely taken a shit on the win11 group, >>>>> you're now stooping to commenting on sig files. I manage to only use 4 >>>>> words to get my point across. You on the other hand have written a >>>>> short essay for yours. Kinda fits your character. >>>>> >>>>> FWIW, I got no problem with the way the normal people talk about Linux >>>>> here. One of our favorites in this group regularly uses it for things >>>>> and shares his experiences. He even manages to point out the flaws and >>>>> problems with the various microsoft operating systems. Everybody >>>>> appreciates the education a handful of people in these groups give us. >>>>> >>>>> What they don't do is rave on an on about how horrible microsoft is at >>>>> every chance they get and advocate Linux above all else in a fucking >>>>> windows newsgroup. We're here to learn about Windows 11 and if Linux >>>>> can be of use in sorting things out great. But you can take your Linux >>>>> pom poms and wear yourself out in your advocacy group. It's just >>>>> getting a little old around here IMO. Other than that....Fuck Off! >>>> >>>> >>>> "You obviously have some emotional issues." >>> >>> Ignore him. Looking back, I had an emotional attachment to the Powerbook G4 I used in the early 2000s and still remember my MSI GT72 very fondly. >>> >>> Meanwhile, he wants to learn about Windows 11. Good for him. The rest of us want to be educated on why a majority of AMD-powered computers in the wild will be forced to suffer fTPM stuttering even three years after the problem surfaced because Microsoft won't ease up on the TPM requirement and manufacturers don't want to deploy an update for the machines they've sold. >>> >> >> We wave "Hi" from the Windows group :-) >> >> https://www.ghacks.net/2022/06/27/bypass-windows-11-microsoft-account-requirement-and-deny-privacy-questions-during-setup-with-rufus/ >> >> "Remove requirement for Secure Boot and TPM 2.0" >> >> Happy motoring! > > It's great that such a solution is available, but I'm afraid that won't fix the fTPM stuttering problem because it happens even when secure boot and TPM aren't used by Windows. Unless you can disable fTPM in general from the BIOS, you're still going to suffer from periodic stutters. > You can. My Asus board has a disable. It also has BIOS support for a TPM header, even though the motherboard has no TPM header. The BIOS is generic and they do one version of BIOS and it runs on six of their motherboards of the same generation. I was pissed, when I discovered the damn board didn't have a header. Who would have thought they would delete such a thing. Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-18 11:54 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <vmgps1$tr2l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681670 |
On 12/29/2024 6:55 PM, Joel wrote: >>> I feel comfortable running on my precious hardware. >> "Precious hardware" >> >> That's funny > > It's my baby, yes, I have an emotional attachment to my computer, I > assembled it. I think I understand this now, still funny. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wBkKED42oo> -- I Stand With Israel!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 18:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vksn1j$12a03$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681652 |
On 12/29/24 5:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 13:16:57 -0500, -hh wrote: > >> If I optionally choose to add photo editing, a new license for Adobe >> Photoshop Elements is currently $70 for 3 years, which is ~$2/month. > > And you have to keep paying for the rest of your life just to retain > control over your own work. That's only true if no non-Adobe apps can open Adobe's .psd file format and you've also not bothered to save works as other-than-psd's. Presently, that's false on just the first part alone without the second, as I'm aware of at least four (4) non-Adobe Apps which open .psd files, namely GIMP, Darktable, Luminar, and MacOS's Preview. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 04:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vkt8t9$1fes1$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681655 |
On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 18:46:59 -0500, -hh wrote: > On 12/29/24 5:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 13:16:57 -0500, -hh wrote: >> >>> If I optionally choose to add photo editing, a new license for Adobe >>> Photoshop Elements is currently $70 for 3 years, which is ~$2/month. >> >> And you have to keep paying for the rest of your life just to retain >> control over your own work. > > That's only true if no non-Adobe apps can open Adobe's .psd file > format ... And assuming that Adobe doesn’t keep making tweaks to its proprietary format precisely to sabotage other apps’ ability to open the files correctly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 09:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <UbycP.110141$Uup4.79357@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #681695 |
On 2024-12-29 23:51, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 18:46:59 -0500, -hh wrote: > >> On 12/29/24 5:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 13:16:57 -0500, -hh wrote: >>> >>>> If I optionally choose to add photo editing, a new license for Adobe >>>> Photoshop Elements is currently $70 for 3 years, which is ~$2/month. >>> >>> And you have to keep paying for the rest of your life just to retain >>> control over your own work. >> >> That's only true if no non-Adobe apps can open Adobe's .psd file >> format ... > > And assuming that Adobe doesn’t keep making tweaks to its proprietary > format precisely to sabotage other apps’ ability to open the files > correctly. And nobody can deny that this issue remains as much of a problem in 2024 as it was in the late 90s. Corporations don't see a profit in supporting open standards so they will allow their software to read them, but will save in their own proprietary formats. -- Andrzej (Andre) Matuch Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41 KDE supporting member
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 00:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltbksnFrgqvU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #681505 |
On Sat, 28 Dec 2024 17:11:52 -0500, Andrzej Matuch wrote: > I was telling my wife the exact same thing. We're not doing much more > than we were in 2008, yet a 2008 machine would be incapable of handling > today's software (unless it's running Linux). At some point, people need > to wake up and realize that the exponential increase in speed isn't > offering any real benefit to users who are doing anything other than > video editing or gaming. Yes and no. VS Code or Vim patiently waits for many more cycles while I figure out what I'm trying to do. Otoh I can do things with Python that wouldn't have been possible 25 years ago. The user doesn't have a clue if the back end is FastAPI or FastCGI using compiled C. I recall when Java was young, lithe, and slender. Then Swing came along and it turned into a hog. The answer was 'you need a faster machine.' As far as the user is concerned there is no difference but the speed increases enabled technologies that (supposedly) made development faster. There is a similar effect with microcontrollers. A 8048 was extremely limited and you usually wound up using assembler. The Atmel chip in the classic Arduinos is luxurious and you can work in C/C++. However there still are memory limits. The Arm based chips are faster and have more flash so for many applications you can use MicroPython or CircuitPython unless you need very fine control of the chip. If you want to do your Christmas lights with neopixels, Python is a lot easier than fiddling around with the C SDK. Is that progress? Beat's me. I was at a museum that had a display of the development of household labor saving devices. It noted that when housewives received all these new time savers they tended to find new things to spend the saved time on. Filling your house with Victorian kitsch didn't advance civilization.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 19:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6771a630$0$3620720$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #681538 |
On 29 Dec 2024 00:53:43 GMT, rbowman wrote: [snip] > There is a similar effect with microcontrollers. A 8048 was extremely > limited and you usually wound up using assembler. The Atmel chip in the > classic Arduinos is luxurious and you can work in C/C++. However there > still are memory limits. I programmed an Arduino to control my Christmas lights. I enjoyed fitting the Morse code translation table into as little memory as possible (only 96 bytes). The table needed only 96 entries because I masked off bit 7 and considered there to be no Morse equivalent for characters below 0x20. Since Morse code is variable-length, a table entry needs 2 parts: code (maximum 6 bits) and count (3 bits). I managed to get both in a single byte. [snip] -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -- Blaise Pascal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 21:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltds42F7nkqU8@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #681617 |
On 29 Dec 2024 19:42:40 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote: > I programmed an Arduino to control my Christmas lights. I enjoyed > fitting the Morse code translation table into as little memory as > possible (only 96 bytes). I wasn't that ambitious. At one time I was good enough with Morse to pass the Advanced code test. Use it or lose it as they say. The neopixels are fun since you can randomly assign RGB values and get strange effects.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 19:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <6771a693$0$3620713$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> |
| In reply to | #681538 |
On 29 Dec 2024 00:53:43 GMT, rbowman wrote: [snip] > Is that progress? Beat's me. I was at a museum that had a display of the > development of household labor saving devices. It noted that when > housewives received all these new time savers they tended to find new > things to spend the saved time on. Including ridiculous standards for "clean". > Filling your house with Victorian > kitsch didn't advance civilization. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -- Blaise Pascal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 21:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltdrtlF7nkqU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #681618 |
On 29 Dec 2024 19:44:19 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote: > On 29 Dec 2024 00:53:43 GMT, rbowman wrote: > > [snip] > >> Is that progress? Beat's me. I was at a museum that had a display of >> the development of household labor saving devices. It noted that when >> housewives received all these new time savers they tended to find new >> things to spend the saved time on. > > Including ridiculous standards for "clean". The need to instantly refrigerate everything is the one that gets me. For one reason or the other I've had periods without a refrigerator. A dozen eggs sitting on the counter won't hatch or go bad for a week or two.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 23:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o7u84lxovk.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #681632 |
On 2024-12-29 22:05, rbowman wrote: > On 29 Dec 2024 19:44:19 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote: > >> On 29 Dec 2024 00:53:43 GMT, rbowman wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>> Is that progress? Beat's me. I was at a museum that had a display of >>> the development of household labor saving devices. It noted that when >>> housewives received all these new time savers they tended to find new >>> things to spend the saved time on. >> >> Including ridiculous standards for "clean". > > The need to instantly refrigerate everything is the one that gets me. For > one reason or the other I've had periods without a refrigerator. A dozen > eggs sitting on the counter won't hatch or go bad for a week or two. If you wash the eggs you have to refrigerate them; otherwise, ambient temperature is just fine (for a shorter time than refrigerated, of course). -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 03:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltek16Fbva0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #681647 |
On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 23:14:48 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2024-12-29 22:05, rbowman wrote: >> On 29 Dec 2024 19:44:19 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote: >> >>> On 29 Dec 2024 00:53:43 GMT, rbowman wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> Is that progress? Beat's me. I was at a museum that had a display of >>>> the development of household labor saving devices. It noted that when >>>> housewives received all these new time savers they tended to find new >>>> things to spend the saved time on. >>> >>> Including ridiculous standards for "clean". >> >> The need to instantly refrigerate everything is the one that gets me. >> For one reason or the other I've had periods without a refrigerator. A >> dozen eggs sitting on the counter won't hatch or go bad for a week or >> two. > > If you wash the eggs you have to refrigerate them; otherwise, ambient > temperature is just fine (for a shorter time than refrigerated, of > course). afaik, all commercial eggs in the US are washed during the grading process. I haven't had a problem although I do refrigerate them when home.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 08:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vktlcs$1i26p$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681632 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > On 29 Dec 2024 19:44:19 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote: > >> On 29 Dec 2024 00:53:43 GMT, rbowman wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>> Is that progress? Beat's me. I was at a museum that had a display of >>> the development of household labor saving devices. It noted that when >>> housewives received all these new time savers they tended to find new >>> things to spend the saved time on. >> >> Including ridiculous standards for "clean". > > The need to instantly refrigerate everything is the one that gets me. For > one reason or the other I've had periods without a refrigerator. A dozen > eggs sitting on the counter won't hatch or go bad for a week or two. Depends on the ambient temperature. Which is the benefit of refrigeration; lifetime of food is more predictable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vktlcr$1i26p$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #681505 |
Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote: > On 2024-12-28 15:12, Joel wrote: >> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote: >>> On 2024-12-28 14:34, rbowman wrote: >>>> >>>> You do realize there is a whole world outside of Office? >>> >>> Yeah, it sometimes pains me that it is brought up as often as it is as >>> some sort of must-have piece of software. It suggests that people don't >>> do much other than open up Word and Excel. >> >> >> Yes, they get these people to buy a laptop every three years, to keep >> up with M$'s grotesque OS's bloat, so that they can have their pretty >> Office apps. It's unbelievable. The value I'm getting from my >> computer is beyond what they could know. > > I was telling my wife the exact same thing. We're not doing much more > than we were in 2008, yet a 2008 machine would be incapable of handling > today's software (unless it's running Linux). At some point, people need > to wake up and realize that the exponential increase in speed isn't > offering any real benefit to users who are doing anything other than > video editing or gaming. In a domestic setting, that's true. Much less so professionally. A 2008 machine wouldn't be able to run Teams, for example. Or manage the majority of creative, technical or scientific tasks we take for granted nowadays.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 10:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <2JycP.183256$DYF8.27242@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #681704 |
On 2024-12-30 03:24, Chris wrote: > Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote: >> On 2024-12-28 15:12, Joel wrote: >>> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote: >>>> On 2024-12-28 14:34, rbowman wrote: >>>>> >>>>> You do realize there is a whole world outside of Office? >>>> >>>> Yeah, it sometimes pains me that it is brought up as often as it is as >>>> some sort of must-have piece of software. It suggests that people don't >>>> do much other than open up Word and Excel. >>> >>> >>> Yes, they get these people to buy a laptop every three years, to keep >>> up with M$'s grotesque OS's bloat, so that they can have their pretty >>> Office apps. It's unbelievable. The value I'm getting from my >>> computer is beyond what they could know. >> >> I was telling my wife the exact same thing. We're not doing much more >> than we were in 2008, yet a 2008 machine would be incapable of handling >> today's software (unless it's running Linux). At some point, people need >> to wake up and realize that the exponential increase in speed isn't >> offering any real benefit to users who are doing anything other than >> video editing or gaming. > > In a domestic setting, that's true. Much less so professionally. A 2008 > machine wouldn't be able to run Teams, for example. Or manage the majority > of creative, technical or scientific tasks we take for granted nowadays. A 2008 machine won't be able to run Teams, but that's not the fault of the hardware as much as the bloated nature of Microsoft's software itself. For what it's worth, my wife's 2015 Intel Core M couldn't run Teams either. -- Andrzej (Andre) Matuch Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41 KDE supporting member
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web