Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #73031 > unrolled thread
| Started by | John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-09-02 15:43 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-09-08 01:50 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 290 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> - 2025-09-02 15:43 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-02 19:35 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 04:42 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 09:42 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 04:44 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-09-03 11:32 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 13:09 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 08:16 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 13:26 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 08:51 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 17:20 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 20:07 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 19:54 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-04 09:28 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-05 04:56 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-05 08:57 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-05 08:23 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-05 04:36 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-05 11:59 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-06 12:49 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-06 13:51 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-06 22:40 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-07 08:35 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 13:02 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-07 15:57 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-07 21:30 +0000
PCI cards and cables "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-08 22:55 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 04:15 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 19:43 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-04 09:23 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 19:35 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-06 07:10 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-06 07:53 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-06 10:14 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-06 09:27 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-06 14:46 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-06 13:02 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-06 19:42 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-06 20:37 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 00:54 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-07 07:15 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-09 03:14 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 01:54 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-09 19:14 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-09 14:48 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-09 22:44 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 20:52 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 08:13 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-10 08:55 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 01:27 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-10 03:33 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 07:55 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-10 11:15 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-10 10:57 +0000
UFO [Was: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered] "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-10 13:25 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-10 23:47 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-10 21:07 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 20:50 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 07:59 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-10 09:35 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 01:04 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 21:09 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 07:41 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-10 08:50 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-10 03:23 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 07:46 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-10 09:39 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-10 08:44 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-10 19:43 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-10 18:35 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-10 22:04 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-11 02:13 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-10 22:44 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-11 04:09 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-11 00:42 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-11 11:02 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-11 10:59 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-11 22:27 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 04:32 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-12 07:32 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 07:21 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-12 08:29 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 21:11 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-13 08:09 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-13 22:02 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-12 02:42 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-11 23:41 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-12 07:28 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-12 06:46 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 07:18 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-11 00:18 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-10 21:34 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-11 11:04 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-11 23:46 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-09-11 13:07 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-11 11:04 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-11 10:25 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 04:00 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-12 00:38 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-11 22:26 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-12 02:35 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-12 08:32 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-12 07:41 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-12 06:22 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-12 15:26 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-12 21:23 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-09-13 13:06 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-13 17:24 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-13 22:01 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-12 06:10 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 21:01 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-13 00:20 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-13 08:08 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-10 09:34 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-10 09:33 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2025-09-07 15:13 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-07 16:48 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-07 21:33 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-06 22:31 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 03:39 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 00:14 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-06 12:50 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-06 12:39 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-06 14:48 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-06 14:12 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 00:13 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-06 22:32 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 03:41 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-07 11:10 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 05:39 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-07 11:01 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 06:30 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 13:08 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 10:54 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 20:11 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 19:27 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-09-03 11:32 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Jason H <jason_hindle@yahoo.com> - 2025-09-02 18:58 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-02 20:38 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 09:06 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 03:20 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 10:51 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 05:15 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 10:52 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-03 11:59 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 11:53 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 13:10 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-03 13:36 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-05 04:51 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 06:33 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 12:03 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 13:08 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-03 13:37 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 13:15 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-03 15:16 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 17:21 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-04 09:44 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-04 09:30 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-04 17:24 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-03 21:23 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-06 07:14 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-06 09:08 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-06 08:54 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-06 13:53 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-06 14:19 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-07 04:45 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-06 19:57 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-08 05:41 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-07 03:39 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 04:43 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 13:13 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 07:29 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 13:40 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-07 19:53 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-07 09:44 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-08 05:46 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-08 04:22 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-09 05:26 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 03:32 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-08 08:54 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-09 05:35 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-09 11:15 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 07:06 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-09 16:37 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 16:37 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-09 21:46 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-09-12 17:30 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-12 10:05 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-13 06:40 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-12 20:59 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-13 00:18 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-13 05:21 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-13 18:12 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-13 06:51 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-13 07:33 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-13 06:32 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-13 05:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-13 12:13 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-09-14 08:48 +1000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-13 21:27 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-06 23:34 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-06 10:48 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-06 12:45 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-06 13:54 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-06 14:50 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-06 20:37 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 01:10 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-08 08:11 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-09 03:14 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 04:14 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-09 11:12 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-09 14:22 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-09 16:40 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-10 03:23 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-09 19:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-09 08:32 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-06 22:56 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 00:14 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-07 04:48 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-07 03:18 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 04:56 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-09-10 19:10 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-10 12:16 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-10 15:55 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-07 10:57 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 06:47 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-07 13:53 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-08 23:00 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-09 11:11 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-09-09 03:14 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-09 04:15 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-09 19:21 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-09-13 12:57 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-07 13:26 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-06 22:35 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-07 04:51 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-07 03:38 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 04:54 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 03:44 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 12:43 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 12:10 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 14:08 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-03 09:57 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 18:16 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-04 09:45 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 08:02 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John McCue <jmclnx@gmail.com.invalid> - 2025-09-04 15:40 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-04 08:59 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-04 18:30 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-05 04:05 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-05 12:00 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-05 11:33 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-05 14:47 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-05 19:33 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Anthk NM <anthk@openbsd.home> - 2025-09-15 20:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-09-05 08:15 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Anthk NM <anthk@openbsd.home> - 2025-09-15 20:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Anthk NM <anthk@openbsd.home> - 2025-09-15 20:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-15 17:10 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 10:22 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 12:47 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-09-04 11:09 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-04 16:20 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered John McCue <jmclnx@gmail.com.invalid> - 2025-09-05 14:05 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-09-05 15:03 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-06 12:46 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-06 22:37 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-07 03:46 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Anthk NM <anthk@openbsd.home> - 2025-09-15 20:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-09-03 11:01 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-02 20:51 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-03 00:08 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 04:37 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 09:17 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-03 10:36 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-03 06:27 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 19:18 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-03 12:28 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-09-03 19:05 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-09-03 08:45 -0700
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-09-04 06:55 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-04 07:08 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-05 11:18 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-05 11:42 +0100
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-05 23:23 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-09-05 06:47 -0400
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Anthk NM <anthk@openbsd.home> - 2025-09-15 20:17 +0000
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-06 07:05 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Øyvind Røtvold <orotvold@gmail.com> - 2025-09-06 09:01 +0200
Re: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-09-08 01:50 +0000
Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-07 07:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mi4po7F292bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73614 |
On Sun, 7 Sep 2025 00:54:32 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Yep - too far either way and you get the same experience. At best you > get a choice of the gun to the left side of your head or the right. "Clowns to the left of me Jokers to the right Here I am Stuck in the middle with you." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAIsqvTh7g I've always been comfortable in the dark hole between the ends of the horseshoe.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 03:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mYMvQ.733617$jMMa.688036@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #73621 |
On 2025-09-07, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2025 00:54:32 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>
>> Yep - too far either way and you get the same experience. At best you
>> get a choice of the gun to the left side of your head or the right.
>
> "Clowns to the left of me
> Jokers to the right
> Here I am
> Stuck in the middle with you."
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAIsqvTh7g
Seen in a pub in Ireland in 2017, over an outline of the Emerald Isle:
Trump to the left of me
Brexit to the right
Eire I am
Stuck in the middle with EU
> I've always been comfortable in the dark hole between the ends of the
> horseshoe.
Heh. Trump has Truth Social, the Soviets had Pravda.
The more people claim a monopoly on Truth, the more false it gets.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 01:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <EMScnRzGxZycXCL1nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #73742 |
On 9/8/25 11:14 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-09-07, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, 7 Sep 2025 00:54:32 -0400, c186282 wrote: >> >>> Yep - too far either way and you get the same experience. At best you >>> get a choice of the gun to the left side of your head or the right. >> >> "Clowns to the left of me >> Jokers to the right >> Here I am >> Stuck in the middle with you." >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAIsqvTh7g > > Seen in a pub in Ireland in 2017, over an outline of the Emerald Isle: > > Trump to the left of me > Brexit to the right > Eire I am > Stuck in the middle with EU > >> I've always been comfortable in the dark hole between the ends of the >> horseshoe. > > Heh. Trump has Truth Social, the Soviets had Pravda. > The more people claim a monopoly on Truth, the more false it gets. "Official Truth" has always been a bad thing. But "MSM Truth" got even WORSE, far MORE partisan. So now we're just "stuck". Or maybe another word with a "k" near the end. Heh, heh ... remember when Century 21 was supposed to be a world of reason truth and enlightenment ? :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 19:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mibcl6F5krvU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73745 |
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 01:54:17 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Heh, heh ... remember when Century 21 was supposed to be a world of > reason truth and enlightenment ? I thought that was the 17th century. It didn't work then and it isn't working now. The basic premise, that humans are rational, is incorrect.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 14:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <109q7c7$18kv3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #73779 |
On 9/9/25 12:14, rbowman wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 01:54:17 -0400, c186282 wrote: > > >> Heh, heh ... remember when Century 21 was supposed to be a world of >> reason truth and enlightenment ? > > I thought that was the 17th century. It didn't work then and it isn't > working now. The basic premise, that humans are rational, is incorrect. Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no matter how strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better than the 20th Century, but I never imagined it could be as bad as it seems to be. bliss - on the other hand lots of cheap computers...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 22:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <109qal1$19buj$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #73788 |
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 14:48:55 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no > matter how strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. That’s one way of rationalizing human behaviour, I suppose ... > I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better > than the 20th Century ... Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 20:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <cOucnanVQcV1Vl31nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #73790 |
On 9/9/25 6:44 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 14:48:55 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > >> Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no >> matter how strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. > > That’s one way of rationalizing human behaviour, I suppose ... > >> I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better >> than the 20th Century ... > > Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? ;) The hippie-dippies were all SURE we'd be all turned on and tuned in and super mellow by Y2K. Instead we got flaming skyscrapers plunging to the ground .....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 08:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <micqa6FcobiU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73794 |
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 20:52:56 -0400, c186282 wrote: > On 9/9/25 6:44 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 14:48:55 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: >> >>> Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no >>> matter how strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. >> >> That’s one way of rationalizing human behaviour, I suppose ... >> >>> I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better than >>> the 20th Century ... >> >> Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? > > The hippie-dippies were all SURE we'd be all turned on and tuned in > and super mellow by Y2K. Instead we got flaming skyscrapers plunging > to the ground ..... One of the college events I attended was Leary recommending tuning in, turning on, and dropping out. https://www.celticguitarmusic.com/leary.htm The first minute or so of the mp3 is worth listening to for nostalgia. Byron Evans explains it's the duty of a university to present all points of view for examination even if they are controversial. Universities seem to have forgotten that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 08:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <109s71e$1scq2$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #73811 |
On 9/10/25 01:13, rbowman wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 20:52:56 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> On 9/9/25 6:44 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 14:48:55 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote: >>> >>>> Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no >>>> matter how strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. >>> >>> That’s one way of rationalizing human behaviour, I suppose ... >>> >>>> I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better than >>>> the 20th Century ... >>> >>> Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? >> >> The hippie-dippies were all SURE we'd be all turned on and tuned in >> and super mellow by Y2K. Instead we got flaming skyscrapers plunging >> to the ground ..... > > One of the college events I attended was Leary recommending tuning in, > turning on, and dropping out. > > https://www.celticguitarmusic.com/leary.htm > > The first minute or so of the mp3 is worth listening to for nostalgia. > Byron Evans explains it's the duty of a university to present all points > of view for examination even if they are controversial. Universities seem > to have forgotten that. > Leary had lost his first wife to suicide just before he ventured into promoting psychedelics. I think he was attempting to escape his own depression. bliss.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 01:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mic2g8F96nqU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73790 |
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 22:44:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? Never heard of him. British TV series had about 0% penetration in the US market when I was a kid. PBS probably got a steep discount on Brit sitcoms like 'Fawlty Towers' and flogs them regularly. Perhaps it's something you have to be exposed to when you're young but I've never gotten most British humour except for Pratchett.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 03:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mic9rnF7usaU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73797 |
On 10 Sep 2025 01:27:36 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in <mic2g8F96nqU2@mid.individual.net>: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 22:44:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? > > Never heard of him. British TV series had about 0% penetration in the > US market when I was a kid. PBS probably got a steep discount on Brit > sitcoms like 'Fawlty Towers' and flogs them regularly. > > Perhaps it's something you have to be exposed to when you're young but > I've never gotten most British humour except for Pratchett. The Andersons, iirc, produced the series _UFO_, then later, _Space:1999_. The latter show aired in the U.S. I loved _Space:1999_ growing up, but man, was it hokie. -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.5 D: Mint 22.2 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.82.07 Mem: 258G "Junk: stuff we throw away. Stuff: junk we keep."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 07:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <micp72FcobiU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73804 |
On 10 Sep 2025 03:33:11 GMT, vallor wrote: > The Andersons, iirc, produced the series _UFO_, then later, > _Space:1999_. > > The latter show aired in the U.S. I loved _Space:1999_ growing up, > but man, was it hokie. 1975? I don't think I even had a TV at that time let alone watching it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 11:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <k6s7plxtfs.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #73804 |
On 2025-09-10 05:33, vallor wrote: > On 10 Sep 2025 01:27:36 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in > <mic2g8F96nqU2@mid.individual.net>: > >> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 22:44:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? >> >> Never heard of him. British TV series had about 0% penetration in the >> US market when I was a kid. PBS probably got a steep discount on Brit >> sitcoms like 'Fawlty Towers' and flogs them regularly. >> >> Perhaps it's something you have to be exposed to when you're young but >> I've never gotten most British humour except for Pratchett. > > The Andersons, iirc, produced the series _UFO_, then > later, _Space:1999_. Was it one in which the others had spacesuits filled with dark liquid? > > The latter show aired in the U.S. I loved _Space:1999_ growing up, > but man, was it hokie. > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 10:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mid3suFc8p2U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73821 |
On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:15:32 +0200, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote in <k6s7plxtfs.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>: > On 2025-09-10 05:33, vallor wrote: >> On 10 Sep 2025 01:27:36 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in >> <mic2g8F96nqU2@mid.individual.net>: >> >>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 22:44:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>>> Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy >>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? >>> >>> Never heard of him. British TV series had about 0% penetration in the >>> US market when I was a kid. PBS probably got a steep discount on Brit >>> sitcoms like 'Fawlty Towers' and flogs them regularly. >>> >>> Perhaps it's something you have to be exposed to when you're young but >>> I've never gotten most British humour except for Pratchett. >> >> The Andersons, iirc, produced the series _UFO_, then later, >> _Space:1999_. > > Was it one in which the others had spacesuits filled with dark liquid? I don't remember an episode like that, but we're talking about a show from 50 years ago. (I bought the DVD set, but haven't watched it yet...when I get a round tuit...) The episode I do remember was "Dragon's Domain", which scared the bejasus out of me as a youngster. Pretty gruesome for broadcast TV -- a monster eats people and spits out the smoldering corpses. >> The latter show aired in the U.S. I loved _Space:1999_ growing up, >> but man, was it hokie. >> -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.5 D: Mint 22.2 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.82.07 Mem: 258G "TV is chewing gum for the eyes."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 13:25 +0200 |
| Subject | UFO [Was: Linux 32 bit support days are numbered] |
| Message-ID | <tq38plx1b4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #73823 |
On 2025-09-10 12:57, vallor wrote: > On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:15:32 +0200, "Carlos E.R." > <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote in <k6s7plxtfs.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>: > >> On 2025-09-10 05:33, vallor wrote: >>> On 10 Sep 2025 01:27:36 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in >>> <mic2g8F96nqU2@mid.individual.net>: >>> >>>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 22:44:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>>> >>>>> Didn’t you? Never watched any shows by this guy >>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson> as a kid? >>>> >>>> Never heard of him. British TV series had about 0% penetration in the >>>> US market when I was a kid. PBS probably got a steep discount on Brit >>>> sitcoms like 'Fawlty Towers' and flogs them regularly. >>>> >>>> Perhaps it's something you have to be exposed to when you're young but >>>> I've never gotten most British humour except for Pratchett. >>> >>> The Andersons, iirc, produced the series _UFO_, then later, >>> _Space:1999_. >> >> Was it one in which the others had spacesuits filled with dark liquid? > > I don't remember an episode like that, but we're talking about a show > from 50 years ago. I remember an UFO serial, between 1970..80, in which Earth was silently fighting off an invasion. I remember one episode in which one of the earth characters (military?) was captured by the extraterrestrials, then recovered, and he was wearing a spacesuit filled with liquid. The terrestrials "opened" it up, I mean, took of his helmet, and the liquid poured off, and the character was coughing his head off and fighting. I asked chatgpt and it confirms: ChatGPT said: «It sounds like you're remembering the classic 1970 British sci-fi series UFO, created by Gerry and Sylvia Anderson. In this show, Earth is covertly battling an extraterrestrial invasion through the secret SHADO (Supreme Headquarters Alien Defence Organization) agency A Reddit user described the same vivid scene you mentioned: “Their faces are stained green by the hue of a green oxygenated liquid, which is believed to cushion their lungs against the extreme acceleration of interstellar flight; this liquid is contained in their helmets.” That matches your memory almost exactly—the underground (or “spacesuit”) helmets filled with liquid that spills out when damaged. So, yes, the show you're thinking of is UFO (aired 1970–1971), where SHADO fights an alien threat with these very striking visual details. Would you like help finding that specific episode, locating a streaming version, or learning more about the series?» > > (I bought the DVD set, but haven't watched it yet...when I get a round > tuit...) > > The episode I do remember was "Dragon's Domain", which scared the > bejasus out of me as a youngster. Pretty gruesome for broadcast > TV -- a monster eats people and spits out the smoldering corpses. Ow. > >>> The latter show aired in the U.S. I loved _Space:1999_ growing up, >>> but man, was it hokie. >>> > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 23:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <109t2lm$25qlc$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #73821 |
On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:15:32 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: > Was it one in which the others had spacesuits filled with dark liquid? That was “UFO”, the Andersons’ first live-action TV series (though not their first live-action production), made in 1969-1970. Wonderfully paranoid, with this ultra-secret military organization that has to protect Earth from alien attack while keeping its own existence a secret, supposedly to avoid panicking the populace. Also famous for the look of the costumes designed by Sylvia Anderson. Purple wigs on the women of Moonbase? Why? Well ... why not? ;) I remember growing up after watching that and looking forward to the arrival of the year 1980 ... and none of that came to pass ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 21:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <b02dnVrkxuRKvV_1nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #73863 |
On 9/10/25 7:47 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:15:32 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> Was it one in which the others had spacesuits filled with dark liquid? > > That was “UFO”, the Andersons’ first live-action TV series (though not > their first live-action production), made in 1969-1970. Wonderfully > paranoid, with this ultra-secret military organization that has to protect > Earth from alien attack while keeping its own existence a secret, > supposedly to avoid panicking the populace. MIB v0.1 Also note "The Invaders". > Also famous for the look of the costumes designed by Sylvia Anderson. > Purple wigs on the women of Moonbase? Why? Well ... why not? ;) > > I remember growing up after watching that and looking forward to the > arrival of the year 1980 ... and none of that came to pass ... I do remember the series. Would rather forget the orig "Battlestar" though. The later Olmos version however ... SOME of this old stuff can be found on YT or PlutoTV.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-09 20:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <cOucna7VQcXdVl31nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #73788 |
On 9/9/25 5:48 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote: > > > On 9/9/25 12:14, rbowman wrote: >> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 01:54:17 -0400, c186282 wrote: >> >> >>> Heh, heh ... remember when Century 21 was supposed to be a world of >>> reason truth and enlightenment ? >> >> I thought that was the 17th century. It didn't work then and it isn't >> working now. The basic premise, that humans are rational, is incorrect. > > Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no > matter how > strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. Be aware, if we make "AI"s smart enough to be "generally useful" they too will be able to rationalize around any "laws" we try to put in there. > I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better > than the > 20th Century, but I never imagined it could be as bad as it seems to be. This is the dawning of the Age Of Aquarius :-) Cable TV, then The Net ... SO easy to cultivate, expand, enrage, specialty audiences. Divide and conquer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 07:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <micpf8FcobiU6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #73793 |
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 20:50:07 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Be aware, if we make "AI"s smart enough to be "generally useful" they > too will be able to rationalize around any "laws" we try to put in > there. AI's certainly are mimicking humans. I read a couple of days ago that one of the problems they've discovered in training is an answer scores positive while 'I don't know' scores 0 so AI makes shit up rather than say IDK. Menschliches, allzumenschliches.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-10 09:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <109rd93$1ilji$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #73793 |
On 10/09/2025 01:50, c186282 wrote: > On 9/9/25 5:48 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote: >> >> >> On 9/9/25 12:14, rbowman wrote: >>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 01:54:17 -0400, c186282 wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Heh, heh ... remember when Century 21 was supposed to be a world of >>>> reason truth and enlightenment ? >>> >>> I thought that was the 17th century. It didn't work then and it isn't >>> working now. The basic premise, that humans are rational, is incorrect. >> >> Humans are rationalizing creatures i.e. whatever we want to do no >> matter how >> strange is easily rationalized by the human brain. > > Be aware, if we make "AI"s smart enough to be "generally > useful" they too will be able to rationalize around any > "laws" we try to put in there. > >> I never heard that the 21st Century was supposed to be any better >> than the >> 20th Century, but I never imagined it could be as bad as it seems to be. > > This is the dawning of the Age Of Aquarius :-) > > Cable TV, then The Net ... SO easy to cultivate, > expand, enrage, specialty audiences. Divide and > conquer. > Except the damn people keep finding new ways to avoid the propaganda -- "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them" Margaret Thatcher
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web