Re: Shipit...

Anyone else prefer BeOS's color scheme to chocolate? Everyone says
that yellow is too bright and that it will stress you out but maybe I
like it for that reason...
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Extensible, powerful frameworks.

Annoying; linux is being XML'ized. I heard recently that something
like 70% of network traffic is going to be XML based in a few years.
What the hell is wrong with plaintext? Seems like traffic would be 70%
faster if we got rid of all the silly tags.
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Point of order (was: Re: Shipit...)

Point of order.

gmail.com is a webmail service that, as far as I can
tell, does not apply a User-Agent header to show the
browser being used.  So all From: .*gmail.com posts
have to be filtered out.

I have redone the rules for the list so please let
me know if you have any trouble posting using a
legit client.

--

-- 
Don Marti
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
dmarti <at> zgp.org
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Point of order (was: Re: Shipit...)

<quote who="Don Marti">

> Point of order.
> 
> gmail.com is a webmail service that, as far as I can tell, does not apply
> a User-Agent header to show the browser being used.  So all From:
> .*gmail.com posts have to be filtered out.

That said, gmail itself is the email client, and it is proprietary software.

- Jeff

--

-- 
linux.conf.au 2005: Canberra, Australia                http://linux.conf.au/

            o/~ we all live in a yellow subroutine o/~ - auspex
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Extensible, powerful frameworks.

begin  Chuck Vose  quotation:
> Annoying; linux is being XML'ized. I heard recently that something
> like 70% of network traffic is going to be XML based in a few years.
> What the hell is wrong with plaintext? Seems like traffic would be
> 70% faster if we got rid of all the silly tags.

	I dunno, the ability to do nested structures is useful.  Sure,
you could stick to hand-hacked SMTP-style protocols in the raw.  Isn't
it better to re-use the code for the structuring of data at the
presentation layer?

	XML is UTF-8, which is the new ASCII.  How is that not
plaintext?

--

-- 
"Man, if everything were object-oriented then rsync           Nick Moffitt
could do this already. Of course, if everything were    nick <at> teh.entar.net
object-oriented I'd have a bushy moustache and be
wearing flares, which would suck." -- Sean Neakums
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Point of order

In the immortal words of Jeff Waugh <jdub <at> perkypants.org>:
> <quote who="Don Marti">
> 
> > Point of order.
> > 
> > gmail.com is a webmail service that, as far as I can tell, does not apply
> > a User-Agent header to show the browser being used.  So all From:
> > .*gmail.com posts have to be filtered out.
> 
> That said, gmail itself is the email client, and it is proprietary software.

  Remember how cool we all thought Google was when they were running
  Google Linux Servers using bare motherboards on exposed trays?

  http://blog.topix.net/archives/000016.html

  Google has done a lot with Free / Open Source software over the years,
  but that seems to have been motivated more by keeping overheads low
  than by scruples. After all, they run Orkut on Windows with ASP.NET:

  http://www.forret.com/projects/analyze/?url=http://www.orkut.com/PwdForgot.aspx

  and of course Gmail's web interface is proprietary (although someone
  could use Free Software, like Mozilla Thunderbird, to POP their Gmail
  account -- where do you draw the line in that case, Don?)

  What's even more interesting to me is the way that Google has racked
  up so many "punk points" from their early days, and from opening up
  their APIs and whatnot, that people seem to be falling all over
  themselves to give Google the kind of demographic information that

Re: Re: Point of order

On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 11:55:13PM -0500, Modus Operandi wrote:
>   What's even more interesting to me is the way that Google has racked
>   up so many "punk points" from their early days, and from opening up
>   their APIs and whatnot, that people seem to be falling all over
>   themselves to give Google the kind of demographic information that
>   you'd usually try very hard to keep away from a huge tech company.
>   Even people who are reasonably intelligent, tech-savvy, and clueful
>   about their privacy in the digital domain seem to trust Google to an
>   astonishing degree. "I don't mind if they build up a database of key
>   words in my emails and use it to target me for advertising -- at least
>   their advertising is discreet and tasteful!"

You're just mad nobody sent you any Gmail invites.

--

-- 
Brian Hicks               <mailto:hick0142 <at> umn.edu>
   <http://zork.net/~octal> <ham:KC0OIH> <PGP:0xADDD1F16>

_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Re: Point of order

begin  Modus Operandi quotation of Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 11:55:13PM -0500:

>   and of course Gmail's web interface is proprietary (although someone
>   could use Free Software, like Mozilla Thunderbird, to POP their Gmail
>   account -- where do you draw the line in that case, Don?)

Jeff is right.  Gmail itself is a proprietary web
app that taints the whole enchilada.

--

-- 
Don Marti
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
dmarti <at> zgp.org
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Re: Point of order

Don Marti wrote:

>begin  Modus Operandi quotation of Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 11:55:13PM -0500:
>
>  
>
>>  and of course Gmail's web interface is proprietary (although someone
>>  could use Free Software, like Mozilla Thunderbird, to POP their Gmail
>>  account -- where do you draw the line in that case, Don?)
>>    
>>
>
>Jeff is right.  Gmail itself is a proprietary web
>app that taints the whole enchilada.
>  
>
I seem to be missing the earlier part of this discussion: to clarify - 
is Elitists filtering non-OSS MUAs?

Mike
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

Re: Re: Point of order

On 01-Dec-2004, Mike MacCana wrote:
> I seem to be missing the earlier part of this discussion: to clarify -
> is Elitists filtering non-OSS MUAs?

No idea about that Open Sound System you keep talking about, but the
list policy is pretty clear on its Free Software policy:

    <http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists>

--

-- 
 \          "When I get real bored, I like to drive downtown and get a |
  `\         great parking spot, then sit in my car and count how many |
_o__)                 people ask me if I'm leaving."  -- Steven Wright |
Ben Finney <ben <at> benfinney.id.au>

_______________________________________________
linux-elitists 
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists