http://divajutta.com/doctormo/ubunchu/c.html

Just when you thought the creepy Linux "community" couldn't get any
creepier.

On Sun, 5 May 2024 11:46:32 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
<6637a9d6$0$2422110$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> http://divajutta.com/doctormo/ubunchu/c.html
>
>
> Just when you thought the creepy Linux "community" couldn't get any
> creepier.

That's a semi-sketchy looking link.

What does it point to, if you don't mind me asking?

--
-v

On 5/5/2024 1:02 PM, vallor wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2024 11:46:32 -0400, DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in
> <6637a9d6$0$2422110$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
>> http://divajutta.com/doctormo/ubunchu/c.html
>>
>>
>> Just when you thought the creepy Linux "community" couldn't get any
>> creepier.
>
> That's a semi-sketchy looking link.
>
> What does it point to, if you don't mind me asking?

Click it and find out, oh paranoid one.

On Sun, 5 May 2024 17:02:45 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:

> What does it point to, if you don't mind me asking?

Some Dimdows thing.

On 5/7/2024 3:46 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2024 17:02:45 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
>
>> What does it point to, if you don't mind me asking?
>
> Some Dimdows thing.

Liar.

On Tue, 7 May 2024 11:25:26 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/7/2024 3:46 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 5 May 2024 17:02:45 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
>>
>>> What does it point to, if you don't mind me asking?
>>
>> Some Dimdows thing.
>
> Liar.

With your past record?

Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on Linux
users. They only work on Dimdows.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on Linux
>users. They only work on Dimdows.

That's why M$ created S mode. ;)

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 5/7/2024 6:09 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2024 11:25:26 -0400, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/2024 3:46 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 5 May 2024 17:02:45 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
>>>
>>>> What does it point to, if you don't mind me asking?
>>>
>>> Some Dimdows thing.
>>
>> Liar.
>
> With your past record?

lie

> Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on Linux
> users.

never did that, liar

Also: 'it's no point'? Stay in school.

> They only work on Dimdows.

You and vallor sure are scared of that site.

The whole Linux 'community' should be.

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 22:17 this Tuesday (GMT):
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on Linux
>>users. They only work on Dimdows.
>
>
> That's why M$ created S mode. ;)

I thought S mode was trying to tap into the chromebook market.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:
>Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 22:17 this Tuesday (GMT):
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on Linux
>>>users. They only work on Dimdows.
>>
>> That's why M$ created S mode. ;)
>
>I thought S mode was trying to tap into the chromebook market.

I was joking, using their S mode is trading liberty for safety, not an
option for any kind of serious user. It probably would be a difficult
environment for malware to take hold in, though.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 18:38 this Wednesday (GMT):
> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
> wrote:
>>Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 22:17 this Tuesday (GMT):
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on Linux
>>>>users. They only work on Dimdows.
>>>
>>> That's why M$ created S mode. ;)
>>
>>I thought S mode was trying to tap into the chromebook market.
>
>
> I was joking, using their S mode is trading liberty for safety, not an
> option for any kind of serious user. It probably would be a difficult
> environment for malware to take hold in, though.

I'm sure they could. Look at Apple, for instance.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Thu, 09 May 2024 15:20:11 +0000, candycanearter07 wrote:

> Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 18:38 this Wednesday (GMT):
>> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
>> wrote:
>>>Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 22:17 this Tuesday (GMT):
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Here’s another tip: it’s no point trying to inflict your viruses on
>>>>>Linux users. They only work on Dimdows.
>>>>
>>>> That's why M$ created S mode. ;)
>>>
>>>I thought S mode was trying to tap into the chromebook market.
>>
>>
>> I was joking, using their S mode is trading liberty for safety, not an
>> option for any kind of serious user. It probably would be a difficult
>> environment for malware to take hold in, though.
>
>
> I'm sure they could. Look at Apple, for instance.

I guess I missed a conversation about Windows S. Windows S was a great
idea for many reasons such as 1) security (since only verified software
from the Store could be installed), 2) battery life (since the apps
available in the store at the time were developed to be lightweight) and
3) cost (since the lightweight software could be run on more modest
hardware). The problem is that no software of worth was or is available in
the Windows Store. Microsoft did a poor job of enticing developers to
program for the new, "modern" format when the traditional one worked. It
didn't matter to them that their software would be available to a greater
amount of customers.

On 5/9/2024 11:51 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> The problem is that no software of worth was or is available in
> the Windows Store.

There's a lot of good stuff in the MS Store now:

database GUIs
a bunch of Python versions
IDEs and development tools (eg Visual Studio)
big games like Fallout and Horizon (driving)
20+ WSL distros
text/photo/video/pdf editors
etc

They even sell the Walking Tall trilogy from the '70s.

On Thu, 9 May 2024 12:23:00 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 5/9/2024 11:51 AM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> The problem is that no software of worth was or is available in the
>> Windows Store.
>
>
>
> There's a lot of good stuff in the MS Store now:
>
> database GUIs a bunch of Python versions IDEs and development tools (eg
> Visual Studio)
> big games like Fallout and Horizon (driving)
> 20+ WSL distros text/photo/video/pdf editors etc
>
> They even sell the Walking Tall trilogy from the '70s.

I was surprised by the number of Python versions. I've always grabbed the
installer from Python.org and I do the same thing for most things I
install out of force of habit. The MS Store isn't the first source I think
of, again out of habit since it wasn't very useful in its early days.

Now I'm not going to say that MS followed the Linux pattern of curated
sources for installs but... Yeah, I realize it probably was more Apple
and Google jealously.

On 10 May 2024 12:09:35 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> For me, winget is where it's at (command-line, similar to apt).

Yes, Microsoft’s tragic attempt to create something that is supposed to
look like a “package installer”, only it doesn’t quite work that way.

<https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli/discussions/933>

Doesn’t work on the trainwreck that is Windows-on-ARM. Doesn’t
interoperate with Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... what else is new
this week?

On Sat, 11 May 2024 00:31:37 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 10 May 2024 12:09:35 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> For me, winget is where it's at (command-line, similar to apt).
>
> Yes, Microsoft’s tragic attempt to create something that is supposed to
> look like a “package installer”, only it doesn’t quite work that way.
>
> <https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli/discussions/933>
>
> Doesn’t work on the trainwreck that is Windows-on-ARM. Doesn’t
> interoperate with Nuget, Chocolatey, Scoop, Ninite ... what else is new
> this week?

Well, I still prefer using it than downloading everything I need by
venturing onto the web with a fresh install. At least through winget, I
can get something up and running without risking going onto a website
other than the one which truly hosts the software I'm looking for.

When I first installed Linux in the mid to late 90s, I had no idea a
command-line package manager even existed. I used to just use Synpatic for
everything (which is pretty awful). I only discovered the command line
installation utility because I eventually wanted to turn some Pentium 60
laptop I inherited from my brother into something useful. It didn't have a
CD-ROM drive and I didn't want to buy one, so I opted to just use its
floppy disk drive to install Debian. I then turned that thing into a
server I could connect to from work, where Internet connectivity was
limited but Telnet worked fine, to use a command-line ICQ utility which
would allow me to talk to my friends. That was actually when I fell in
love with Linux. I was ready to make it my exclusive operating system, but
it always managed to fall short _somewhere_.

This is actually the first computer on which it runs reliably. Had I known
that I would eventually find success with it, I wouldn't have invested so
much money into the movies I bought. I could very easily sacrifice playing
some AAA games to use Linux, but I need access to those movies since I use
them with my students.

On 11 May 2024 00:54:08 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> ... but I need access to those movies since I use them with my students.

Note that retail-purchased movies don’t allow public screenings.

On Sat, 11 May 2024 03:18:11 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 11 May 2024 00:54:08 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> ... but I need access to those movies since I use them with my
>> students.
>
> Note that retail-purchased movies don’t allow public screenings.

The laws are different for teachers. In fact, I have access to a gigantic
database of movies on the web, legally, since the movie studios turn a
blind eye for our lne of work.

On 11 May 2024 11:37:52 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> ... legally, since the movie studios turn a blind eye for our lne of
> work.

That’s a contradiction in terms, since “blind eye” means they could
prosecute you for copyright infringement, they just choose not to. That
means you are not “legally” doing what you’re doing.

They could change their mind tomorrow.

On Sun, 12 May 2024 00:42:02 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 11 May 2024 11:37:52 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> ... legally, since the movie studios turn a blind eye for our lne of
>> work.
>
> That’s a contradiction in terms, since “blind eye” means they could
> prosecute you for copyright infringement, they just choose not to. That
> means you are not “legally” doing what you’re doing.
>
> They could change their mind tomorrow.

By blind eye, I mean that one of the teachers I work with actually
consulted with an RCMP officer to find out whether she could use
copyrighted movies in class with her students. In her case, she was free
to show pirated movies. All of the movies I use are legally obtained.

On 12 May 2024 01:22:18 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> By blind eye, I mean that one of the teachers I work with actually
> consulted with an RCMP officer to find out whether she could use
> copyrighted movies in class with her students.

Ah, see, you don’t understand what you are saying. Everything is
“copyrighted”--unless the copyright has expired, then it’s in the “public
domain”.

For example, “Big Buck Bunny”
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqz-KE-bpKQ> is copyrighted, but it is
available (along with all the original assets) under a Free Creative
Commons licence.

> In her case, she was free to show pirated movies.

Nobody is “free to show pirated movies”, unless they are sure they won’t
be caught. “Pirated” means “violating copyright”.

Le 12-05-2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> a écrit :
> On 12 May 2024 01:22:18 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
> Everything is
> “copyrighted”--unless the copyright has expired, then it’s in the “public
> domain”.

It depends on the countries and it's difficult for international law.
It's the case in France, that's why I put the texts I write under the
WTFPL copyright. Because if I didn't chose a licence, it would be a
proprietary licence by default. From what I understand, it's not the
case in China.

>> In her case, she was free to show pirated movies.
>
> Nobody is “free to show pirated movies”, unless they are sure they won’t
> be caught. “Pirated” means “violating copyright”.

Yes, his sentence is surprising.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On Sun, 12 May 2024 07:47:17 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 12 May 2024 01:22:18 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> By blind eye, I mean that one of the teachers I work with actually
>> consulted with an RCMP officer to find out whether she could use
>> copyrighted movies in class with her students.
>
> Ah, see, you don’t understand what you are saying. Everything is
> “copyrighted”--unless the copyright has expired, then it’s in the
> “public domain”.
>
> For example, “Big Buck Bunny”
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqz-KE-bpKQ> is copyrighted, but it is
> available (along with all the original assets) under a Free Creative
> Commons licence.
>
>> In her case, she was free to show pirated movies.
>
> Nobody is “free to show pirated movies”, unless they are sure they won’t
> be caught. “Pirated” means “violating copyright”.

I'm aware. I'm saying that enforcement of copyrights is different in
Canada.