KCLUG

1 participants
3235 discussions

[OT]Not for Profit Question
by Paul Taylor 27 Jan '05

27 Jan '05

Anyone know of a not-for-profit entity in Kansas City metro or surrounding area that might be interested in website and/or networking done for them? I've got a capstone project at Rockhurst that requires I help a non-profit upgrade/install for free and document the project thoroughly. Any suggestions would be welcome. You can e-mail me directly. Regards, Paul

2 1

RE: Open Source Values
by Brian Densmore 27 Jan '05

27 Jan '05

-----Original Message----- From: Garrett Goebel > Brian Densmore wrote: >> >> Open source is about freedom, but not all government >> regulation is bad. > Freedom "to" or freedom "from"? Yes. Both. > That's a kind of empty statement. Thanks, I needed to empty anyway. >> I like knowing that not any Joe >> Schmoe can get a license to practice medicine, > In Kansas, a chiropractor can do a physical. But you have to be licensed as a chiropractor. You can't just print off a certificate and be a chiropractor. >> or that vehicles have to meet a minimum standard of >> to be considered road worthy > Have you been outside lately? Cars only have to have _once_ been considered road worthy. Frequently. True, but at least I know that new cars aren't being built out of termite infested wood painted to look like metal. The kind of control it would take to ensure that all vehicles are always road-worthy is much too encroachment for me to want. Please refer to my original response that *not ALL gov't regulation is bad*) I never said "Ooooh, I love gov't regulation. Please give me more! >> or that daycare facilities need to check for criminal >> records before hiring. I like the idea of my children >> being cared for by people who haven't been convicted >> of being a pedophile. Call me crazy. > Do they really? Can you cite the statute? How effective has it been? Yes, they do. Criminal background checks are required of all licensed daycare in MO. No I can't cite it (well I could but I'm too lazy to go to the web and look it up). I don't know how effective it is. It's not of course going to catch those that have been smart enough to not get caught, but it's certainly better than nothing. If you can't see this then I pity you, as there are a lot of sick people out there and anything that can help to reduce the risk is in my book a *good thing*. >> The problem is some times there's too much and other times >> there's not enough. >No. The problem is that sometimes it is coercive and sometimes it isn't. Whatever. > People love to talk about how the FDA protects us from bad drugs. Not me. >> I also like knowing that not just any Joe Shmoe can contribute >> to the official Linux kernel. There are regulations in place to >> prevent that. > Huh? I assume by official, you're talking about Linus' kernel and not the NSA's. Anybody _can_ > contribute to Linus' kernel. There aren't regulations in place to prevent that Yes. Ok, let's see you upload a patch to the linux archives. What you can't it has to be approved by Linus or one of his people? What you have to certify to them that you are free to contribute the code? Oh, they want a letter from your company, on company letterhead stating that? Ok, whatever. Have it your way there are no restrictions on submitting patches and code to the Linux kernel... in your little fantasy filled world. >> I like the idea that any Joe Schmoe has the freedom to qualify >> under the existing fair regulations to be able to contribute to >> the Linux kernel. Freedom is great but without some form of >> control there is chaos and chaos is not always a good thing. > I hate it when people use the word fair. I can see you have issues.

2 1

Re: Live CD for Windows Users
by bkelsay＠comcast.net 27 Jan '05

27 Jan '05

ftp://ftp.cise.ufl.edu/pub/mirrors/mepis/released/SimplyMEPIS-2004.06.iso That should do it. > On Wednesday 26 January 2005 01:28 pm, Brian Kelsay wrote: > > > http://www.mepis.org/book/view/1462 > > I forgot to put this link in here. This shows all the mirrors. > > Thanks. Which of the eighteen files in the mirrors is the live CD? Do I want > cd1 or cd2? > _______________________________________________ > Kclug mailing list > Kclug(a)kclug.org > http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

1 0

Re: Live CD for Windows Users
by Brian Kelsay 27 Jan '05

27 Jan '05

http://www.mepis.org/book/view/1462 I forgot to put this link in here. This shows all the mirrors. YMMV on the speed of the download, but there isn't a big drain right now because it's been out for a month. Brian Kelsay >>> "Brian Kelsay" <> 01/26/05 11:34AM >>> Here's one. http://www.mrbass.org/linux/mepis/ Get the Simply Mepis. It's all you need. The old 2 disk set had server stuff and you don't need that for your dad. After you have it installed you can "apt-get update" and "apt-get install <packagename>" for anything you don't have yet.

2 1

contributing to the Linux kernel
by Bailey, Michael L [NTK] 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

Messieurs Goebel and Densmore disputed thusly >> Huh? I assume by official, you're talking about Linus' kernel and not the >>NSA's. Anybody _can_ contribute to Linus' kernel. There aren't >>regulations in place to prevent that >Yes. Ok, let's see you upload a patch to the linux archives. What you can't >it has to be approved by Linus or one of his people? Isn't it true that I could take the kernel, add my code (which would really mess it up) without anyone's approval, and distribute it or whatever providing I met the provisions of the GPL? But I couldn't represent it as Linus's kernel in that case. Interesting discussion, though. Distinction between custom and authority: what we really need is cultural customs promoting quality. What we get when we rely on government, whose difference from private enterprise is its purported monopoly on the use of force, is the application of force to what can't be forced: innovation, caring, responsibility. These things bubble up despite government. State power is great at applying the stick (if you want to kill a lot of people, government's your best bet) but tends to apply the carrot unfairly due to the fact that the carrot's stolen in the first place, and crowds of interested parties who all have to be paid stand between it and the intended recipients. Hard-core libertarian thinking would even leave the use of force up to private parties (thesis being that rather than keeping violence down, restricting its use to the government actually increases it.) I prefer to try to build a cultural custom of respect for the government we have - as the adage goes, it's the one I deserve - without expecting it to be reasonable by my standards. It has its own inner logic, and it's bigger than I am. Now I'm going to back to my revision of the kernel...

1 0

RE: Open Source Values
by Garrett Goebel 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

Jason Clinton wrote: > The text we used is called _Power_and_Choice_ by W. Phillips > Shively and can be had for under $20 off the internet. Thank you. I'll check it out and perhaps add it to my wish list. > "Any act of politics may be viewed from either of two > perspectives, either as a cooperative search for an answer > to common problems or as an act by which some members of a > group impose their will on other members of the group. It > is important to remember that generally both viewpoints are > valid." A good point, and the point I was trying to make. I think of OSS as the common search without the coercion. Jason Clinton wrote: > Based on all the benefits that organized forms of government > have brought to the human race over the past 30,000 years, > I would have to conclude that coercion or at least the threat > of coercion has had a net-positive effect. But you just said... > Several centuries ago, most people were almost unaware of the > state in which they lived; they noticed it only if the king's > soldiers marched through their fields. At that time, many > large geographic areas could hardly be said to have been > organized as states at all. So you can hardly credit the nation state for 30,000 years of progress, when it only arrived on the scene in the last 300. As technology provided for longer healthier lives and provide an impetus to create large cities with significant population densities... government became more significant. But government does not imply that all such city states were centralized and coercive. Colonial America is a nice example. Here's a book on my reading wish list which you might want to take a look at: Conceived in Liberty http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0945466269/ It is a history of colonial American from the 1600-1800's which shows that our societies political heritage has been quite the opposite of the coercive centralized political state. > Quite frankly, your comments make me conclude you're either > an extremist libertarian or an anarchist -- neither of which > are healthy political persuasions. People called Jefferson an anarchist. I don't think I'm either. You have to put it all in context. There are ideals and practicalities. I think government should be as decentralized as is feasible. I just happen to think we're a long way from what's feasible. -- Garrett Goebel IS Development Specialist ScriptPro Direct: 913.403.5261 5828 Reeds Road Main: 913.384.1008 Mission, KS 66202 Fax: 913.384.2180 www.scriptpro.com garrett at scriptpro dot com

1 0

OT: Win98 rumors
by Jonathan Hutchins 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

There are rumors floating on the Hampshire (UK) LUG list that many of the recent patches for Win98/ME are destabilizing. They have been ported from XP patches without adequate checking - and there are a LOT of different combinations of patches possible between the original relase of 98, OEM2E, and ME. Some people are suggesting that Microsoft is deliberately sabotaging this platform because they want to get it off their backs and migrate people to XP. Microsoft would never do something like that, would they?

2 1

RE: Open Source Values
by Garrett Goebel 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

Brian Densmore wrote: > Garrett Goebel wrote: >> Brian Densmore wrote: >>> >>> Open source is about freedom, but not all government regulation is >>> bad. >> Freedom "to" or freedom "from"? >Yes. Both. I must strongly disagree. OSS enables people to do things. Regulation protects you from things. So when you are talking about OSS you are talking about a different kind of freedom than that provided by regulations. >>> I like knowing that not any Joe >>> Schmoe can get a license to practice medicine, >> In Kansas, a chiropractor can do a physical. >But you have to be licensed as a chiropractor. So what? A licensed chiropractor is in no way qualified to do a physical! >Please refer to my original response that *not ALL gov't >regulation is bad*) I never said "Ooooh, I love gov't >regulation. Please give me more! ok. >>> or that daycare facilities need to check for criminal records >>> before hiring. I like the idea of my children being cared for >>> by people who haven't been convicted of being a pedophile. Call >>> me crazy. >> Do they really? Can you cite the statute? How effective has it been? >Yes, they do. Criminal background checks are required of all licensed >daycare in MO. >No I can't cite it (well I could but I'm too lazy to go to the web and >look it up). >I don't know how effective it is. It's not of course going to catch > those that have been smart enough to not get caught, but it's > certainly better than nothing. If you can't see this then I pity you, > as there are a lot of sick people out there and anything that can help > to reduce the risk is in my book a *good thing*. I'm not in need of any pity at this moment. But thanks for the offer. When I am, I'll let you know ;) The whole "anything that can help" line of reasoning is a load of bunk. There are huge costs associated with governmental regulations. Regulations have tendency to grow and protect the established players and status quo instead of the people they were meant to protect. The statute happens to be: Licensing Rules for Group Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers, 19 CSR 30-62.102 Personnel, 1-L. And from a quick scan, I'm not sure that a pedophile from KC, KS with a criminal record would show up in a review from the Missouri State Highway Patrol... Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. But, I can't find a review of its efficacy. I don't argue that it is a good and prudent practice to check people's backgrounds. It's bad practice not to. I question the cost and effectiveness of government mandated compliance. Government regulations are slow to change, rarely are written by reputable experts in the problem domain, and often bog down in irrelevant minutia. There are at least 80 forms for Missouri Child Care Centers alone. Centers probably have to keep at least one full time employee on hand just to file the paperwork. And where's the accountability? If a state certified a child care facility does something very bad, does the state's reputation suffer? Does it respond and change quickly and effectively to meet consumers demands? I trust word of mouth reputation more than a government license. Do you know how hard colleges work to place well in the U.S. News and World Reports yearly rankings? How damn Consumer Reports, Underwriters Lab's, or a 20/20 review can be? If only there was less government mandating and more voluntary independent oversight... >>> The problem is some times there's too much and other times there's >>> not enough. >>No. The problem is that sometimes it is coercive and sometimes it isn't. >Whatever. I'm fine with that. I respect your right to have an opinion and wounded backlash sarcasm. I don't however have to agree that you or anyone else has a right to coerce me into compliance with your opinions. Regulation == force of law == coercion. I don't mind at all if there is a pile of government specified best practices from here to the moon. It's the coercion of involuntary compliance that I take issue with. Centralized government is not the place to be solve every problem. It actually prevents better solutions from coming along... >>> I also like knowing that not just any Joe Shmoe can contribute to the >>> official Linux kernel. There are regulations in place to prevent >>> that. >> Huh? I assume by official, you're talking about Linus' kernel and not >> the NSA's. Anybody _can_ contribute to Linus' kernel. There aren't >> regulations in place to prevent that >Yes. Ok, let's see you upload a patch to the linux archives. What you >can't it has to be approved by Linus or one of his people? What you >have to certify to them that you are free to contribute the code? Oh, >they want a letter from your company, on company letterhead stating >that? Ok, whatever. Have it your way there are no restrictions on > submitting patches and code to the Linux kernel... >in your little fantasy filled world. Calling that a regulation is a bit of a stretch. Linus' process does not have the force of law. You're conflating the ideas of "force of law to control conduct" and "protect your legal ass". What you're referring to is: http://www.osdl.org/newsroom/press_releases/2004/2004_05_24_dco.html And as I said, but you clipped out: > There are self-governing processes in place to prevent people > submitting code encumbered by coercive licenses and patents. It's still an opt-in, that is no different than the kernel's GPL licensing terms to share and share alike. It's just another legal i that we have to dot because under intellectual property right law you are guilty until proven innocent. I've contributed to the linux kernel in the past, and time and ability permitting someday I'd like to contribute again. It was Linux more than anything that inspired me to revisit the roots of my interests in computers and make a profession of it. I've never contributed code to the kernel, but I have reported bugs and followed through on requests for information. Albeit, that was 10+ years ago when I had the free time to tinker with projects beyond my ability. I've contributed code and documentation to many projects and cross references to pertinent information between them. In only one case have I been asked to provide legal documentation. And in that case, nothing ever came of the project. >>> I like the idea that any Joe Schmoe has the freedom to qualify under >>> the existing fair regulations to be able to contribute to the Linux >>> kernel. Freedom is great but without some form of control there is >>> chaos and chaos is not always a good thing. >> I hate it when people use the word fair. >I can see you have issues. Yes. This is one of them. How is it "fair" that existing "regulations" require a Developer's Certificate of Ownership to prove that code submissions are unencumbered by coercive licenses and patents? How is it "fair" that Linux kernel developers have to prove their innocence in a society that claims you are innocent until proven guilty? Nobody wanted that DCO. Its a purely defensive measure forced on them because of SCO and the messed up legal system we have that allows companies like SCO to bully us all for protection money over ideas. -- Garrett Goebel IS Development Specialist ScriptPro Direct: 913.403.5261 5828 Reeds Road Main: 913.384.1008 Mission, KS 66202 Fax: 913.384.2180 www.scriptpro.com garrett at scriptpro dot com

1 0

RE: Open Source Values
by Garrett Goebel 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

Brian Densmore wrote: > > Open source is about freedom, but not all government > regulation is bad. Freedom "to" or freedom "from"? That's a kind of empty statement. I for one think government regulations limiting government regulations are a good thing ;) The government which governs best governs least, and all that. But what's government? What we're really talking about is the centralization of coercive power. Parents govern their children. A handful of Rockefellers govern international monetary policy. Where should the control lie? IMHO, coercive power should be as decentralized as is feasible. > I like knowing that not any Joe > Schmoe can get a license to practice medicine, In Kansas, a chiropractor can do a physical. Not to knock chiropractors, but they aren't general physicians. They are going to miss things a MD or DO would catch. Yet English physicians who have hands down better clinical skills than your average American MD or DO can not do a physical in Kansas. Why not let the consumers and the doctor's employer decide which accreditations are viable? Why is the big stick of national government necessary here? > or that vehicles have to meet a minimum standard of > to be considered road worthy Have you been outside lately? Cars only have to have _once_ been considered road worthy. And look at the barrier to entry in the automotive market. There aren't any "new" players. Just slow and steady consolidation heading toward stagnation... Look what's happened to the aerospace industry. How many American manufacturers of planes are left? I wonder whether Scaled Composites and Armadillo Aerospace will be beaten into regulatory submission if they refuse to sell out to the established players? > or that daycare facilities need to check for criminal > records before hiring. I like the idea of my children > being cared for by people who haven't been convicted > of being a pedophile. Call me crazy. Do they really? Can you cite the statute? How effective has it been? > The problem is some times there's too much and other times > there's not enough. No. The problem is that sometimes it is coercive and sometimes it isn't. People love to talk about how the FDA protects us from bad drugs. Ask them to show you some measurable proof and they'll grow quite. How does the body count add up? How many lives are saved versus lives lost? Go look for the answers and you'll find quite a different story: http://www.fdareview.org/harm.shtml. Did you know that most hospital patients are given drugs that aren't even FDA approved for their proscribe use? What are the detrimental effects of the FDA? How about the excessive costs required to get drugs through the process? So much for the yearly updates to vaccines for children and the elderly. And you can also count out drugs for people suffering from rare diseases. The return on investment doesn't match the cost. What about the time it takes to work the process? Prior to 1962 it took around 7 months from the filing of an IND to approval. In the 80's and 90's it took 8 years on average. Recently it has averaged around 7.3 years. How many people die waiting for the FDA to approve drugs? How many people suffer needlessly? > I also like knowing that not just any Joe Shmoe can contribute > to the official Linux kernel. There are regulations in place to > prevent that. Huh? I assume by official, you're talking about Linus' kernel and not the NSA's. Anybody _can_ contribute to Linus' kernel. There aren't regulations in place to prevent that. There are self-governing processes in place to prevent people submitting code encumbered by coercive licenses and patents. There's a big difference. You can always opt out of the process by forking the kernel. You can't opt to be seen by the visiting foreign doctor or drive an unlicensed and unregistered car you built yourself... > I like the idea that any Joe Schmoe has the freedom to qualify > under the existing fair regulations to be able to contribute to > the Linux kernel. Freedom is great but without some form of > control there is chaos and chaos is not always a good thing. I hate it when people use the word fair. It rarely means what it is supposed to mean. Is it fair for Microsoft to allow the "fair" use of patents by standards organizations? When fair means at a fair and equal cost? I.e. available to everyone except their chief competitor in standards compliant infrastructure building blocks... the OSS community? By control, what you're really saying is that one group of people know better than another, and that it is alright for them to force others to adhere to their standards. I think that is a dangerous statement. Especially when there's no telling which group of people you're standing with on each toss of the coin. Freedom is the flipside of coercion. And coercion is rarely a good thing. The only valid example I can think of, is to counteract the coercive efforts of others. There's a difference between a self-regulating OSS community and government. You opt-in to an OSS community. You can only opt-out of local, city, and state government by moving. It is a little harder to opt out of national regulations. -- Garrett Goebel IS Development Specialist ScriptPro Direct: 913.403.5261 5828 Reeds Road Main: 913.384.1008 Mission, KS 66202 Fax: 913.384.2180 www.scriptpro.com garrett at scriptpro dot com

2 1

RE: Live CD for Windows Users (must have WINE, default WINE configuration comparison question)
by bkelsay＠comcast.net 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

I checked and ProMepis has Wine on it. You can download it free at one of the sites listed here: http://www.mepis.org/book/view/1462 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Nicol > > > > so which ones have WINE installed and ready to go without a > > lot of configuring? > I'm fairly certain Linspire does. > You could check http://www.distrowatch.com to see others. >

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG