headers
Bill Eastman | 1 Sep 2002 01:05
Picon

Re: Coaster ma^W^WCD burner problem


Pyrrus wrote:
> I have a samsung cd-rw, dvd-r drive:
>         0,0,0     0) 'SAMSUNG ' 'COMBO SM-304B   ' 'BT03' Removable CD-ROM
> and have been having all sorts of problems with it (like the CDRW thing
> I posted to the list earlyer)  When it was in my friend's computer, we didn't
> have any CDRWs, so I don't know if that was always a problem, but it always

Was your friends computer using Linux too?  If so, the same distro as you?

> cdrecord dev=0,0,0 speed=1 -v  KNOPPIX_V3.1-28-08-2002-EN.iso
> and yes my drive appears when I do cdrecord -scanbus, yes I have the correct
> modules installed, yes I put the hdd=ide-scsi line in lilo.conf (and yes, I ran
> lilo), etc..
> the other odd thing is that it seems to work in dummy mode most of the time.
> (and btw, no I wasn't heavily loading down the system when I was using the
> cd burner)

I've never used an IDE CDRW

> 
> Any advice would be appreciated.

I have a SCSI Yamaha CDRW with an Iwill Ultrawide SCSI Adapter and it 
just works.

> 
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Bill Eastman | 1 Sep 2002 01:08
Picon

Re: Coaster ma^W^WCD burner problem


Pyrrus wrote:
> lilo), etc..
> the other odd thing is that it seems to work in dummy mode most of the time.
> (and btw, no I wasn't heavily loading down the system when I was using the
> cd burner)
> 
> Any advice would be appreciated.

Just got an idea...Is the hard drive the .iso is on on the same ide 
channel?  I'd suggest having it as master and having the hard disk you 
are burning from as the other master.

Are you going to the meeting Thursday?  I can burn you the latest 
KNOPPIX prior to the meeting and give it to you there.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bob Pendleton | 1 Sep 2002 02:15

Re: Venezuela shifts to open source


Kevin E. Ivey wrote:
> Joe Barr wrote:
> 
>> http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-08-30-011-26-NW-LL-PB
> 
> 
> Soooo, the bottom line is that lesser developed countries are taking 
> advantage of open source to purge all the unlicensed (mostly Micro$oft) 
> stuff they have now.
> 
> It makes them look more legitimate to the rest of the world and rids 
> them of crummy software as a side benefit...
> 
> I'll bet the U.S. has just as much per capita pirated software as some 
> of these "third world" countries.  We also have the marketing onslaught 
> and the zillions of MCSE retards among us.
> 
> Do you suppose there is a chance that we could influence the switch to 
> OSS in order to "look good" to the rest of the world?  Why not?  China 
> has already made the move...
> 
> /.02,
> 
> keVIn

Two things to remember:

1) Microsoft now donates a LOT of money to elected officials and 
political parties. As well as spending a LOT of money on lobbyist.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Kevin E. Ivey | 1 Sep 2002 02:39

Re: [OT] Why can't people spell?

Doc Shipley wrote:

>   I don't like it - disregard for proper spelling - because it's rude.
>   Anyone with more than rudimentary reading skills recognises groups of
> words by pattern, not letter by letter or word by word.  A misspelled
> word breaks the pattern, disrupts the flow, and slows the read
> considerably.  When a person who is obviously intelligent and well-
> educated refuses to slow down and correct his/her spelling, and *I* am
> forced to slow down and decipher it, there is a clear message there.
>   "My time and convenience is much more important than yours.  I can't
> be bothered with the guidelines of polite correspondence."
> 
> 	Doc

True, assuming the person knows the proper spelling in the first place.

With the all-out assault on the language, it is not surprising that a 
well-educated, intelligent person would use "alternative" spelling.

If it ain't in da book, it's bogus. <cringe>

keVIn
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Bob Pendleton | 1 Sep 2002 03:07

Re: [OT] Why can't people spell?


John E. Pearson wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Newton Hammet wrote:
> 
> 
>>"Kevin E. Ivey" wrote:
>>
>>>Joshua Pruitt wrote:
>>>
>>>>>(minus spellchecker)
>>>>
>>>>I am simply puzzled by this. In fact, generally, in life, I am puzzled
>>>>by this. WHY CAN'T PEOPLE SPELL?!
>>>
> 
> I dunno. I do know that there has been a movement amongst educators that
> holds that spellling is less important than creativity. A few years ago, I
> visited my niece's expensive private school and there were all these
> stories on display. Great stories, zillions of mispelled words. Me? I am
> certainly guilty of mixing up homophones.  I reckon that's in the wiring,
> and a spell checker won't help. As far as letter reversals go, I can't
> type the word "computer" without it coming out "copmuter". I think that's
> a wiring issue also. Lot's of other things happen like that when I type. I
> generally fix them unless I am really in a hurry but I bet some get by
> anyway. I don't know why you guys get so exorcised by this stuff.

There is now lots of good evidence that forcing attention to spelling at 
too early an age interferes with peoples ability to learn to read and 
write. Since most people don't have the mental ability needed to spell 
correctly until they are much older than was traditionally believed.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Bob Pendleton | 1 Sep 2002 03:17

Re: Proposed revision to the GPL


Dub Dublin wrote:

> 
> When you look at things through that lens, you must come to the 
> conclusion that the *primary* purpose of the GPL cannot be freedom, but 
> must instead be preventing viable commercial use of GPL'ed code.
> 
> Dub

Counter proof by example. All you have to do is look at all the 
commercial use of GPL software to see the problem with what you are 
saying. Look at all the companies making money offering services based 
on Linux/Apache/Tomcat and so on. That is commercial use. Some other 
commercial uses are barred, but only one what would make unfair use of 
the software. Unfair from the authors point of view.

I think you are only looking at it from the point of view of the person 
who wants to build a commercial program on top GPLed code, not from the 
point of view of people writing the code in the first place. And, I 
really don't think you understand the deep seated need to feel like you 
are contributing to the general good that is so strong in so many people.

		Bob Pendleton

> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: alg-unsubscribe@...
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Doc Shipley | 1 Sep 2002 03:17

Re: [OT] Why can't people spell?

On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Kevin E. Ivey wrote:

> Doc Shipley wrote:
>
> >   I don't like it - disregard for proper spelling - because it's rude.
> >   Anyone with more than rudimentary reading skills recognises groups of
> > words by pattern, not letter by letter or word by word.  A misspelled
> > word breaks the pattern, disrupts the flow, and slows the read
> > considerably.  When a person who is obviously intelligent and well-
> > educated refuses to slow down and correct his/her spelling, and *I* am
> > forced to slow down and decipher it, there is a clear message there.
> >   "My time and convenience is much more important than yours.  I can't
> > be bothered with the guidelines of polite correspondence."
> >
> > 	Doc
>
> True, assuming the person knows the proper spelling in the first place.

  Assuming that anyone with whom I correspond has access to either an
electronic or a hard-copy spell-checker.

> With the all-out assault on the language, it is not surprising that a
> well-educated, intelligent person would use "alternative" spelling.

  I don't mind "alternative" choices.  Tex's use of "Amerika" for
example.  I understand that, and its intent, whether I espouse that
mindset or not.
  I'm talking about never proofing your posts, and claiming that proper
spelling is a conceit, or optional.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
John E. Pearson | 1 Sep 2002 03:21
Favicon

Re: [OT] Why can't people spell?

So spelling "fish" "ghoti" would break the flow?

On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Doc Shipley wrote:

> On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Kevin E. Ivey wrote:
> 
> > Doc Shipley wrote:
> >
> > >   I don't like it - disregard for proper spelling - because it's rude.
> > >   Anyone with more than rudimentary reading skills recognises groups of
> > > words by pattern, not letter by letter or word by word.  A misspelled
> > > word breaks the pattern, disrupts the flow, and slows the read
> > > considerably.  When a person who is obviously intelligent and well-
> > > educated refuses to slow down and correct his/her spelling, and *I* am
> > > forced to slow down and decipher it, there is a clear message there.
> > >   "My time and convenience is much more important than yours.  I can't
> > > be bothered with the guidelines of polite correspondence."
> > >
> > > 	Doc
> >
> > True, assuming the person knows the proper spelling in the first place.
> 
>   Assuming that anyone with whom I correspond has access to either an
> electronic or a hard-copy spell-checker.
> 
> > With the all-out assault on the language, it is not surprising that a
> > well-educated, intelligent person would use "alternative" spelling.
> 
>   I don't mind "alternative" choices.  Tex's use of "Amerika" for
> example.  I understand that, and its intent, whether I espouse that
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Doc Shipley | 1 Sep 2002 03:51

Re: [OT] Why can't people spell?

On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, John E. Pearson wrote:

> So spelling "fish" "ghoti" would break the flow?

  In _The American Way of Spelling_, Richard L. Venezky writes:

<quote>
  Ghoti can be pronounced fish no more than bulls can fly or crocodiles
sing. Yes, <gh> can only be pronounced /g/ as in ghost, gherkin, and
ghoul. The letter <o> in women is pronounced as in tip, but women is the
only word in the English language in which this correspondence between
spelling and sound occurs--a singularity from which no other words take
their cues for pronunciation. And <ti> can sound like in ship only in
endings such as <tion> and <tient>. At the end of a word, <ti> cannot be
pronounced like fish. (And similarly for <t>.)
<end quote>

  So, yeah.  "ghoti" was a tongue-in-cheek example (if I remember right,
it was coined by George Bernard Shaw) of the tortuous spelling and
pronunciation of English.  I didn't claim proper spelling was easy or
even consistent.  I still claim that it is a reasonable expectation.

	Doc
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Kevin E. Ivey | 1 Sep 2002 04:13

Re: [OT] Why can't people spell?

Bob Pendleton wrote:
> 
> There is now lots of good evidence that forcing attention to spelling at 
> too early an age interferes with peoples ability to learn to read and 
> write. Since most people don't have the mental ability needed to spell 
> correctly until they are much older than was traditionally believed.
> 
> Why do they care so much? People like to brag. They have to brag about 
> something they are actually good at and that they think has  value. If 
> you went to school and were good at spelling and grammar at a young age 
> you probably got a lot of positive feedback so you would think it was a 
> valuable skill. Just like the kids who were good at math got positive 
> feedback for that and the folks who were good a shooting baskets got a 
> lot of positive feedback for that. So, they like to make a big deal 
> about it because they are proud of the fact they can do it and think 
> that we should all value their skill because their grade school teacher 
> told them they were so good for being able to do it.

Rationalizing a lack of adherence to standards and showing contempt for 
success are two of the reasons "modern" people accept mediocrity.

It is either correctly spelled and punctuated or it is not.

> Now, since the rest of us really don't care, can you please drop this?
> 
>         Bob Pendleton

I'm done...

keVIn
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane