GNOME/Freedesktop Incompetent Assholes

[Farley Flud]

Note: This post is for GNU/Linux experts only. If you are just another
distro lackey then, please, fuck off.

Today, I invoked the Pan newsreader. It would not fucking scroll
with the mouse wheel. What the friggin' fuck?

Also, some other GUI programs would not scroll.

I've had this problem before, and, sure enough, it was libinput,
a product of GNOME/Freedesktop that was the fault.

Once again, those incompetent assholes changed their device numbers:

xinput list-props 8
...
libinput Send Events Modes Available (270): 1, 0
libinput Send Events Mode Enabled (271): 0, 0
libinput Send Events Mode Enabled Default (272): 0, 0
...

They changed the "Send Events Mode Enabled" from 269 to 271.

What the fuck for? Only those incompetent assholes will know.

In my X/FVWM3 boot I have to change it to:

xinput --set-prop 8 271 1 0

Why no fucking advanced notice? Only those incompetent assholes will know.

GNOME/Freedesktop are the scourge of GNU/Linux. Those bastards are
just as bad as SYSTEMD -- and that's bad!

But the stupified distro lackey won't even bat an eye. These useless
creeps will just use their Ubuntu/Mint/Whatever without an inkling
into the degeneration wrought by these incompetent assholes.




--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

[Joel]

Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:

>This post is for GNU/Linux experts only. If you are just another
>distro lackey then, please, fuck off.


"Distro lackeys" are just trying to get the most out of a modern
machine, dummy. LFS/Gentoo don't really offer that, unless one takes
some initiative to assemble it. You have failed, miserably, to do
anything approaching that.

--
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.

[vallor]

On Mon, 07 Oct 2024 21:56:48 +0000, Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote in
<pan$bad8$b677bed3$aca0e5e2$***@linux.rocks>:

> xinput --set-prop 8 271 1 0

As I wrote elsewhere: you're doing it wrong.

$ cat game_kbd.sh
#!/bin/bash

xinput set-prop 'ASUF1204:00 2808:0104 Touchpad' \
'libinput Disable While Typing Enabled' 0
exit $?

Rather than using the numbers, use the string
constants -- they are less likely to change.

--
-v ASUS TUF Dash F15 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3060 Mobile
OS: Linux 5.15.0-122-lowlatency Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 15.9G
"Who is "General Failure" and why is he reading my disk?"

[candycanearter07]

vallor <***@cultnix.org> wrote at 03:01 this Tuesday (GMT):
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2024 21:56:48 +0000, Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote in
><pan$bad8$b677bed3$aca0e5e2$***@linux.rocks>:
>
>> xinput --set-prop 8 271 1 0
>
> As I wrote elsewhere: you're doing it wrong.
>
> $ cat game_kbd.sh
> #!/bin/bash
>
> xinput set-prop 'ASUF1204:00 2808:0104 Touchpad' \
> 'libinput Disable While Typing Enabled' 0
> exit $?
>
> Rather than using the numbers, use the string
> constants -- they are less likely to change.


Good to know, thanks. If only the monitor id's would stop changing..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[tom]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 19:40:04 -0000 (UTC)
candycanearter07 <***@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

> Good to know, thanks. If only the monitor id's would stop changing..
I've been switching to FreeBSD for most of my computers (laptop and
servers) because of the systemd assumption debacle and updates bring
frivolous changes for the sake of change that break things.

If these sorts of things upset you that much (which is reasonable);
perhaps consider stop using software that has too much redhat
influence. Gnome stuff being funded by redhat, not just systemd. If you
follow the money on a lot of the stuff that has been plaguing the Linux
ecosystem these last couple of years you'll find in a lot of cases it
pointing back to redhat.

Part of the problem (and feature) of the Linux ecosystem is that every
system component is made by a completely different person/team/company
with different, often conflicting design goals.

You can get away from the FreeDesktop stuff by stop using desktop
environments and learn how to configure a compact window manager that
doesn't rely on FreeDesktop stuff. Things like suckless's DWM is fairly
capable and written in less then 2000 lines of C. You can modify it
yourself to add keybindings for things like media buttons and whatnot
without relying on freedesktop.

Bottom line is, you can get X11/*nix from places other then Linux
nowadays.

[Farley Flud]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 18:54:41 -0500, tom wrote:

>
> I've been switching to FreeBSD for most of my computers (laptop and
> servers) because of the systemd assumption debacle and updates bring
> frivolous changes for the sake of change that break things.
>

I have been considering that move as well, but I have so much invested
in GNU/Linux already (I have essentially created my own distro) that
it may not be the best option at the moment.

But if the dominance of GNU/Linux by a few parties continues to
grow then I will certainly adopt FreeBSD.

The best that could happen would be for GNU to complete its own
HURD OS, but that dream is a long way off.

>
> If these sorts of things upset you that much (which is reasonable);
> perhaps consider stop using software that has too much redhat
> influence.
>

I don't use GNOME but rather only a simple window manager, FVWM3.

The problem here is that libinput, a product of GNOME/Freedesktop/
RedHat, has become the default input driver for X. There is no
way for anyone to avoid it.

It all can be traced back to static device nodes, which are indisputably
the most efficient way to configure a personal workstation.

RedHat wanted to eliminate static nodes because they are a big headache
for distro builders who needed to include thousands of nodes even though
only a handful were actually used on a particular system. They decided
to implement dynamic nodes that are created during boot. Eventually
this "evolved" over time into systemd and now libinput.



>
> Part of the problem (and feature) of the Linux ecosystem is that every
> system component is made by a completely different person/team/company
> with different, often conflicting design goals.
>

Yes, it is a feature, and a good one at that.

But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering, see it as a serious problem
for them because such fragmentation will deter developers and thus
reduce potential profits. They are pushing to make GNU/Linux more
centralized and to eliminate choice. This is the entire raison d'etre
for systemd and libinput.


>
> You can get away from the FreeDesktop stuff by stop using desktop
> environments and learn how to configure a compact window manager that
> doesn't rely on FreeDesktop stuff.
>

As I indicated above, it is now quite impossible to avoid GNOME/Freedesktop
stuff.

The problem will even get worse in the future. Many alternative window
managers, such as FVWM3, will only operate with X. But RedHat, and all
their distro lackeys, are strongly pushing Wayland, and furthermore,
the major graphical toolkits, like GTK+, are strongly considering ending
their support for X. This means that dozens of very useful and attractive
window managers will suddenly become totally obsolete.

When I first began using GNU/Linux I was tremendously elated over what
I believed was a truly free (as in freedom) OS that would persist forever.
But now I can only hope to convey my distress over what is clearly a
degeneration of this freedom.



--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

[Rich]

In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,

You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering

Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
engineer working for Microsoft ...

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Rich wrote this post; take it under advisement:

> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>
> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>
> Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
> engineer working for Microsoft ...

!!!!

Shades of Miguel de Icaza!

And in 2017, Poettering received the Pwnie Award for Lamest Vendor Response
to vulnerabilities reported in systemd.

Still, I appreciate systemd for the speed of booting.

--
"Don't talk to me about disclaimers! I invented disclaimers!"
-- The Censored Hacker

[Marc Haber]

Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>
>You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>
> Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
> engineer working for Microsoft ...

Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
a good thing. There are companies that deserve lots of more hate than
MS does.

Greetings
Marc
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402

[rbowman]

On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 11:08:36 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>
>>You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>
>> Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>> engineer working for Microsoft ...
>
> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that a
> good thing. There are companies that deserve lots of more hate than MS
> does.

Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact. Often
replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/10/2024 14:54, rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 11:08:36 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>
>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>
>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>
>>> Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>> engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>
>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that a
>> good thing. There are companies that deserve lots of more hate than MS
>> does.
>
> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact. Often
> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>

I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer. When was
the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving like
Ballmer did? :-P

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[rbowman]

On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:10:04 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:


>> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact. Often
>> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>>
>>
> I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer. When was
> the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving like
> Ballmer did? :-P

I think we agree but I phrased my remark badly. Nadella is like having an
adult running the company. I'm impressed that he managed to turn the
corporate culture around. Many times the 'new broom' has little effect.

I don't know how much of that is from Nadella's personal background.
Indian business leaders seem to have a more collaborative, longer term
outlook than happens in the US. Ratan Tata was a good example.

I'm skeptical about their AI efforts but at this point I think it's
something they have to do to stay in the game. I do hope the ARM
experiment works out better than the previous attempt.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/10/2024 18:13, rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:10:04 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>
>>> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact. Often
>>> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>>>
>>>
>> I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer. When was
>> the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving like
>> Ballmer did? :-P
>
> I think we agree but I phrased my remark badly. Nadella is like having an
> adult running the company. I'm impressed that he managed to turn the
> corporate culture around. Many times the 'new broom' has little effect.
>
> I don't know how much of that is from Nadella's personal background.
> Indian business leaders seem to have a more collaborative, longer term
> outlook than happens in the US. Ratan Tata was a good example.
>
> I'm skeptical about their AI efforts but at this point I think it's
> something they have to do to stay in the game. I do hope the ARM
> experiment works out better than the previous attempt.

You opened the door for the relatedness so I had to take it. But yes,
from a company corporate perspective I'd agree. But I don't trust
Microsoft at all regardless because to me it's all about stealing our
data and spying on us with what we do. And Nadella will do what makes
the company money. So if they have to screw over their customers to make
it so be it. "everyone" (using that loosely) uses Windows so they can do
a lot of things to their customers and get away with it because they
know their customers can't get away from Windows and Microsoft products.
So unfortunately the company's output itself hasn't changed much.

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> On 10/10/2024 18:13, rbowman wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:10:04 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact. Often
>>>> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer. When was
>>> the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving like
>>> Ballmer did? :-P
>>
>> I think we agree but I phrased my remark badly. Nadella is like having an
>> adult running the company. I'm impressed that he managed to turn the
>> corporate culture around. Many times the 'new broom' has little effect.
>>
>> I don't know how much of that is from Nadella's personal background.
>> Indian business leaders seem to have a more collaborative, longer term
>> outlook than happens in the US. Ratan Tata was a good example.
>>
>> I'm skeptical about their AI efforts but at this point I think it's
>> something they have to do to stay in the game. I do hope the ARM
>> experiment works out better than the previous attempt.
>
> You opened the door for the relatedness so I had to take it. But yes, from a
> company corporate perspective I'd agree. But I don't trust Microsoft at all
> regardless because to me it's all about stealing our data and spying on us
> with what we do. And Nadella will do what makes the company money. So if they
> have to screw over their customers to make it so be it. "everyone" (using
> that loosely) uses Windows so they can do a lot of things to their customers
> and get away with it because they know their customers can't get away from
> Windows and Microsoft products. So unfortunately the company's output itself
> hasn't changed much.
>

That reminds me... today some license term changes from linkedin landed in
my inbox, and apparently all your thoughts, texts and data will now be
used for linkedin business development, and I assume, AI training.

But don't worry... linkedin (Microsoft) has _proactively_ added an
_opt-out_ button, because obviously adding an opt-in would be way too
reactive. ;)

Fortunately at least this practice is illegal in the EU, so there they
cannot do this.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/12/2024 16:57, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>> On 10/10/2024 18:13, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:10:04 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact.
>>>>> Often
>>>>> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer. When was
>>>> the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving like
>>>> Ballmer did? :-P
>>>
>>> I think we agree but I phrased my remark badly. Nadella is like
>>> having an
>>> adult running the company. I'm impressed that he managed to turn the
>>> corporate culture around. Many times the 'new broom' has little effect.
>>>
>>> I don't know how much of that is from Nadella's personal background.
>>> Indian business leaders seem to have a more collaborative, longer term
>>> outlook than happens in the US. Ratan Tata was a good example.
>>>
>>> I'm skeptical about their AI efforts but at this point I think it's
>>> something they have to do to stay in the game. I do hope the ARM
>>> experiment works out better than the previous attempt.
>>
>> You opened the door for the relatedness so I had to take it. But yes,
>> from a company corporate perspective I'd agree. But I don't trust
>> Microsoft at all regardless because to me it's all about stealing our
>> data and spying on us with what we do. And Nadella will do what makes
>> the company money. So if they have to screw over their customers to
>> make it so be it. "everyone" (using that loosely) uses Windows so they
>> can do a lot of things to their customers and get away with it because
>> they know their customers can't get away from Windows and Microsoft
>> products. So unfortunately the company's output itself hasn't changed
>> much.
>>
>
> That reminds me... today some license term changes from linkedin landed
> in my inbox, and apparently all your thoughts, texts and data will now
> be used for linkedin business development, and I assume, AI training.
>
> But don't worry... linkedin (Microsoft) has _proactively_ added an _opt-
> out_ button, because obviously adding an opt-in would be way too
> reactive. ;)
>
> Fortunately at least this practice is illegal in the EU, so there they
> cannot do this.

Heh, and opt-out button... This will probably come off conspiratorial
but... I wouldn't trust that the opt-out button would actually opt you
out of anything. Since you will never be able to see exactly what
Microsoft puts into the training set, you'd have no way to prove or
validate that it actually opted you out.

I don't mean any disrespect in this next part, but it's just my
thoughts. Yes, EU has laws about it, but here's the thing, first, EU
would have to prove Microsoft was violating the law, (which Microsoft
can easily cover up if they wanted to) and second, with a company as
powerful and profitable as Microsoft is, the fines the EU would impose
would be a speeding ticket to Microsoft at the end of the day. And if
Microsoft threatened the EU to pull it's products from the EU, the EU
would likely back down because, (and you can tell me if I'm wrong here)
the EU is probably runs Microsoft software in most of it's
infrastructures, and likely their government as well. It would cost the
EU a ton of money and resources to move away from Microsoft if that were
to happen and it's more likely the EU would just back away instead of
switching to GNU/Linux or something else due to that cost of deployment,
training, resources, etc. It's not like Facebook or X where it would not
cause a major disruption like Microsoft would. Microsoft tends to be
foundational. Facebook and X is just a consumer service in the grand
scheme of things.

(I am making certain assumptions about the EU and Microsoft software. If
I'm wrong, then fair enough. But in the US most of our infrastructure
and government need Windows to function so I just assume the EU is
similar in that regard).

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> On 10/12/2024 16:57, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/10/2024 18:13, rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:10:04 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact. Often
>>>>>> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer. When was
>>>>> the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving like
>>>>> Ballmer did? :-P
>>>>
>>>> I think we agree but I phrased my remark badly. Nadella is like having an
>>>> adult running the company. I'm impressed that he managed to turn the
>>>> corporate culture around. Many times the 'new broom' has little effect.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know how much of that is from Nadella's personal background.
>>>> Indian business leaders seem to have a more collaborative, longer term
>>>> outlook than happens in the US. Ratan Tata was a good example.
>>>>
>>>> I'm skeptical about their AI efforts but at this point I think it's
>>>> something they have to do to stay in the game. I do hope the ARM
>>>> experiment works out better than the previous attempt.
>>>
>>> You opened the door for the relatedness so I had to take it. But yes, from
>>> a company corporate perspective I'd agree. But I don't trust Microsoft at
>>> all regardless because to me it's all about stealing our data and spying
>>> on us with what we do. And Nadella will do what makes the company money.
>>> So if they have to screw over their customers to make it so be it.
>>> "everyone" (using that loosely) uses Windows so they can do a lot of
>>> things to their customers and get away with it because they know their
>>> customers can't get away from Windows and Microsoft products. So
>>> unfortunately the company's output itself hasn't changed much.
>>>
>>
>> That reminds me... today some license term changes from linkedin landed in
>> my inbox, and apparently all your thoughts, texts and data will now be used
>> for linkedin business development, and I assume, AI training.
>>
>> But don't worry... linkedin (Microsoft) has _proactively_ added an _opt-
>> out_ button, because obviously adding an opt-in would be way too reactive.
>> ;)
>>
>> Fortunately at least this practice is illegal in the EU, so there they
>> cannot do this.
>
> Heh, and opt-out button... This will probably come off conspiratorial but...
> I wouldn't trust that the opt-out button would actually opt you out of
> anything. Since you will never be able to see exactly what Microsoft puts
> into the training set, you'd have no way to prove or validate that it
> actually opted you out.
>
> I don't mean any disrespect in this next part, but it's just my thoughts.
> Yes, EU has laws about it, but here's the thing, first, EU would have to
> prove Microsoft was violating the law, (which Microsoft can easily cover up
> if they wanted to) and second, with a company as powerful and profitable as
> Microsoft is, the fines the EU would impose would be a speeding ticket to
> Microsoft at the end of the day. And if Microsoft threatened the EU to pull
> it's products from the EU, the EU would likely back down because, (and you
> can tell me if I'm wrong here) the EU is probably runs Microsoft software in
> most of it's infrastructures, and likely their government as well. It would
> cost the EU a ton of money and resources to move away from Microsoft if that
> were to happen and it's more likely the EU would just back away instead of
> switching to GNU/Linux or something else due to that cost of deployment,
> training, resources, etc. It's not like Facebook or X where it would not
> cause a major disruption like Microsoft would. Microsoft tends to be
> foundational. Facebook and X is just a consumer service in the grand scheme
> of things.
>
> (I am making certain assumptions about the EU and Microsoft software. If I'm
> wrong, then fair enough. But in the US most of our infrastructure and
> government need Windows to function so I just assume the EU is similar in
> that regard).
>

You could be right, but the speeding ticket issue I think has partly been
addressed. The fines for breaking the law is 4%-10% of global revenue.
That is not speeding ticket level fines.

In terms of how much MS there is in the infra, you are 100% right. There
are small initiatives here and there, for instance, MÃŒnchen switched to
libreoffice, but usually what happens, is that Microsoft bribes the
politicians with promises of an R&D center employing X 100 or 1000 people
if they change back, and of course they do, since they are politicians and
not open source enthusiasts.

Finally, in terms of proof, it is very common in the EU to be guilty until
proven innocent. But don't underestimate whistle blowers who can leak
information. I would imagine that the possibility of getting monetary
rewards for leaks either exists already, or will be implemented, and that
would also help motivating people to leak information about their
employers breaking the law.

There is of course a down side to all of this, and that is that the EU is
regulating it's tech sector out of existence, so all skilled
technologists, in time, will become employed by non-EU companies, since
there will be no point in starting a tech company in europe, only to be at
risk of high fines for the slightest mistake.

In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from the
rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There will of
course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all innovation will
leave the EU if its current socialist and pro-regulation agenda continues
for long.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/13/2024 05:56, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>> On 10/12/2024 16:57, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/10/2024 18:13, rbowman wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:10:04 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Replacing Ballmer with Nadella seems to have had quite an impact.
>>>>>>> Often
>>>>>>> replacing a CEO is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd disagree. I think Nadella is more like Gates then Ballmer.
>>>>>> When was
>>>>>> the last time you saw Nadella run on the stage chanting and raving
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> Ballmer did? :-P
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we agree but I phrased my remark badly. Nadella is like
>>>>> having an
>>>>> adult running the company. I'm impressed that he managed to turn the
>>>>> corporate culture around. Many times the 'new broom' has little
>>>>> effect.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know how much of that is from Nadella's personal background.
>>>>> Indian business leaders seem to have a more collaborative, longer term
>>>>> outlook than happens in the US. Ratan Tata was a good example.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm skeptical about their AI efforts but at this point I think it's
>>>>> something they have to do to stay in the game. I do hope the ARM
>>>>> experiment works out better than the previous attempt.
>>>>
>>>> You opened the door for the relatedness so I had to take it. But
>>>> yes, from a company corporate perspective I'd agree. But I don't
>>>> trust Microsoft at all regardless because to me it's all about
>>>> stealing our data and spying on us with what we do. And Nadella will
>>>> do what makes the company money. So if they have to screw over their
>>>> customers to make it so be it. "everyone" (using that loosely) uses
>>>> Windows so they can do a lot of things to their customers and get
>>>> away with it because they know their customers can't get away from
>>>> Windows and Microsoft products. So unfortunately the company's
>>>> output itself hasn't changed much.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That reminds me... today some license term changes from linkedin
>>> landed in my inbox, and apparently all your thoughts, texts and data
>>> will now be used for linkedin business development, and I assume, AI
>>> training.
>>>
>>> But don't worry... linkedin (Microsoft) has _proactively_ added an
>>> _opt- out_ button, because obviously adding an opt-in would be way
>>> too reactive. ;)
>>>
>>> Fortunately at least this practice is illegal in the EU, so there
>>> they cannot do this.
>>
>> Heh, and opt-out button... This will probably come off conspiratorial
>> but... I wouldn't trust that the opt-out button would actually opt you
>> out of anything. Since you will never be able to see exactly what
>> Microsoft puts into the training set, you'd have no way to prove or
>> validate that it actually opted you out.
>>
>> I don't mean any disrespect in this next part, but it's just my
>> thoughts. Yes, EU has laws about it, but here's the thing, first, EU
>> would have to prove Microsoft was violating the law, (which Microsoft
>> can easily cover up if they wanted to) and second, with a company as
>> powerful and profitable as Microsoft is, the fines the EU would impose
>> would be a speeding ticket to Microsoft at the end of the day. And if
>> Microsoft threatened the EU to pull it's products from the EU, the EU
>> would likely back down because, (and you can tell me if I'm wrong
>> here) the EU is probably runs Microsoft software in most of it's
>> infrastructures, and likely their government as well. It would cost
>> the EU a ton of money and resources to move away from Microsoft if
>> that were to happen and it's more likely the EU would just back away
>> instead of switching to GNU/Linux or something else due to that cost
>> of deployment, training, resources, etc. It's not like Facebook or X
>> where it would not cause a major disruption like Microsoft would.
>> Microsoft tends to be foundational. Facebook and X is just a consumer
>> service in the grand scheme of things.
>>
>> (I am making certain assumptions about the EU and Microsoft software.
>> If I'm wrong, then fair enough. But in the US most of our
>> infrastructure and government need Windows to function so I just
>> assume the EU is similar in that regard).
>>
>
> You could be right, but the speeding ticket issue I think has partly
> been addressed. The fines for breaking the law is 4%-10% of global
> revenue. That is not speeding ticket level fines.

Fair, that would be a pretty big amount.

>
> In terms of how much MS there is in the infra, you are 100% right. There
> are small initiatives here and there, for instance, München switched to
> libreoffice, but usually what happens, is that Microsoft bribes the
> politicians with promises of an R&D center employing X 100 or 1000
> people if they change back, and of course they do, since they are
> politicians and not open source enthusiasts.
>

Yeah I mean, MS would never "allow" it to happen. Until politicians are
willing to lose money, MS will continue to feed governments money to
keep them solidly on MS products. Which again, is where I can say that
any 'speeding ticket' case that would be against MS will be quickly
dismissed.

> Finally, in terms of proof, it is very common in the EU to be guilty
> until proven innocent. But don't underestimate whistle blowers who can
> leak information. I would imagine that the possibility of getting
> monetary rewards for leaks either exists already, or will be
> implemented, and that would also help motivating people to leak
> information about their employers breaking the law.
>

The issue with the 'guilty until proven innocent' is that it's much
easier to fabricate false data to 'prove' innocence. It's much harder to
fabricate evidence to fight against proof of guilt, which is why I
always felt that an 'innocent until proven guilty' approach is more
anti-corporate then 'guilty until proven innocent' is. So the EU's
system of law in this regard makes it much easier for
guilty-corporations to get away with breaking the law then in the US
where 'innocent until proven guilty' is harder to forge and get away
with. (Although neither option dismisses the fact that MS will just pay
someone off)

> There is of course a down side to all of this, and that is that the EU
> is regulating it's tech sector out of existence, so all skilled
> technologists, in time, will become employed by non-EU companies, since
> there will be no point in starting a tech company in europe, only to be
> at risk of high fines for the slightest mistake.
>

In my opinion we are starting to see that transition here in the US as
well. They are starting with the large corporations (which I think they
already have taken over) but will eventually move to the medium/small
businesses over time. I hope it doesn't happen because then it's just
evil running all of us. But we'll have to see over then next couple
elections what happens.

> In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from the
> rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There will of
> course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all innovation will
> leave the EU if its current socialist and pro-regulation agenda
> continues for long.

I fear this is coming to the US as well. "We the people" need to vote
out the politicians that are supporting this cause. But the issue is the
younger generations seem to want this to happen. Sadly I don't think
they realize how bad this is going to be for us over here but they won't
realize it until it's too late I'm afraid.

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

>>
>> In terms of how much MS there is in the infra, you are 100% right. There
>> are small initiatives here and there, for instance, MÃŒnchen switched to
>> libreoffice, but usually what happens, is that Microsoft bribes the
>> politicians with promises of an R&D center employing X 100 or 1000 people
>> if they change back, and of course they do, since they are politicians and
>> not open source enthusiasts.
>>
>
> Yeah I mean, MS would never "allow" it to happen. Until politicians are
> willing to lose money, MS will continue to feed governments money to keep
> them solidly on MS products. Which again, is where I can say that any
> 'speeding ticket' case that would be against MS will be quickly dismissed.

I think france judged that MS has to unbundle teams from Office, and in
france it is illegal for them to give away their software since it risks
outcompeting the local competition. But I have not checked this, so
caveat emptor.

>> There is of course a down side to all of this, and that is that the EU is
>> regulating it's tech sector out of existence, so all skilled technologists,
>> in time, will become employed by non-EU companies, since there will be no
>> point in starting a tech company in europe, only to be at risk of high
>> fines for the slightest mistake.
>>
>
> In my opinion we are starting to see that transition here in the US as well.
> They are starting with the large corporations (which I think they already
> have taken over) but will eventually move to the medium/small businesses over
> time. I hope it doesn't happen because then it's just evil running all of us.
> But we'll have to see over then next couple elections what happens.

Really?! This was news to me. Usually I read in european pro-business
papers, that in the US all is well, and the EU is flushed down the
drain, so it was very interesting to hear. On the other hand, lawfare
and regulatory capture is a US national sport, so perhaps the driving
force behind that are the big corporations in order to stop any
competition from developing.

I wonder where the next wave of tech startups will come from? Perhaps
Milei will manage to drain the swamp in Argentina, and Argentina will
become the innovation power house of the planet? Talk about something
unexpected, if that were to happen!

>> In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from the
>> rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There will of
>> course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all innovation will
>> leave the EU if its current socialist and pro-regulation agenda continues
>> for long.
>
> I fear this is coming to the US as well. "We the people" need to vote out the
> politicians that are supporting this cause. But the issue is the younger
> generations seem to want this to happen. Sadly I don't think they realize how
> bad this is going to be for us over here but they won't realize it until it's
> too late I'm afraid.

Sad to hear it. And is it still the case that neither US party has any
intention of actually lowering the debt of the country? If not, I would
imagine that it eventually will reach a level at which the credit rating
agencies cannot ignore it any longer, and that day will certainly send
shock waves throughout the global economy! =/

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/13/2024 16:34, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>>>
>>> In terms of how much MS there is in the infra, you are 100% right.
>>> There are small initiatives here and there, for instance, München
>>> switched to libreoffice, but usually what happens, is that Microsoft
>>> bribes the politicians with promises of an R&D center employing X 100
>>> or 1000 people if they change back, and of course they do, since they
>>> are politicians and not open source enthusiasts.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah I mean, MS would never "allow" it to happen. Until politicians
>> are willing to lose money, MS will continue to feed governments money
>> to keep them solidly on MS products. Which again, is where I can say
>> that any 'speeding ticket' case that would be against MS will be
>> quickly dismissed.
>
> I think france judged that MS has to unbundle teams from Office, and in
> france it is illegal for them to give away their software since it risks
> outcompeting the local competition. But I have not checked this, so
> caveat emptor.
>

I haven't done a lot of looking into this, but I have heard the same. I
seriously doubt Microsoft will actually comply with this though. Teams
and Office are their bread and butter and if they were to do it, it
would be at a higher price tag more likely. Either Microsoft will pay
France off at some point or they will threaten to pull out of France. If
France uses Office and Teams in important sectors they will likely cave.
It'll be interesting to look into this over the next 6 months and see
what happens.

>>> There is of course a down side to all of this, and that is that the
>>> EU is regulating it's tech sector out of existence, so all skilled
>>> technologists, in time, will become employed by non-EU companies,
>>> since there will be no point in starting a tech company in europe,
>>> only to be at risk of high fines for the slightest mistake.
>>>
>>
>> In my opinion we are starting to see that transition here in the US as
>> well. They are starting with the large corporations (which I think
>> they already have taken over) but will eventually move to the medium/
>> small businesses over time. I hope it doesn't happen because then it's
>> just evil running all of us. But we'll have to see over then next
>> couple elections what happens.
>
> Really?! This was news to me. Usually I read in european pro-business
> papers, that in the US all is well, and the EU is flushed down the
> drain, so it was very interesting to hear. On the other hand, lawfare
> and regulatory capture is a US national sport, so perhaps the driving
> force behind that are the big corporations in order to stop any
> competition from developing.
>

Heh, The government controls the news and most of the media here.
(specifically the democratic party). Facebook, Google, and Microsoft all
do the Government's bidding and the only reason why Twitter stopped
being a Government puppet is because Elon purchased it and kicked the
Government out (government has been going after Elon ever since). I
should note that our Government power is in Democrat hands right now.
Democrats will deny this is happening but you can do the research and
look into things beyond the surface and you can find the truth of it.
This election between Kamala and Trump will decide the fate of the US.
If Kamala wins the Government will shift to either a Nationalist
Socialist country or a Communist Socialist country depending on certain
other factors. If Trump wins we will remain a Republic Capitalist
country. Despite what the media says, word on the ground is Trump is
winning hearts and minds and personally I think that's good for our
country. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks. (Our elections
are Nov 5th)

> I wonder where the next wave of tech startups will come from? Perhaps
> Milei will manage to drain the swamp in Argentina, and Argentina will
> become the innovation power house of the planet? Talk about something
> unexpected, if that were to happen!
>
>>> In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from
>>> the rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There
>>> will of course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all
>>> innovation will leave the EU if its current socialist and pro-
>>> regulation agenda continues for long.
>>
>> I fear this is coming to the US as well. "We the people" need to vote
>> out the politicians that are supporting this cause. But the issue is
>> the younger generations seem to want this to happen. Sadly I don't
>> think they realize how bad this is going to be for us over here but
>> they won't realize it until it's too late I'm afraid.
>
> Sad to hear it. And is it still the case that neither US party has any
> intention of actually lowering the debt of the country? If not, I would
> imagine that it eventually will reach a level at which the credit rating
> agencies cannot ignore it any longer, and that day will certainly send
> shock waves throughout the global economy! =/

Despite what the media says Trump is our better bet in this regard. The
issue is, because of democrat spending over the last 2 decades (they
have held office 12 out of the 20 years) it would take at least 2-3
republican presidential terms to stop the bleed and break even. probably
another 2 terms to start lowering the debt. There is just so much waste
happening that the best Trump can do in 4 years (assuming he gets into
the office again, fingers crossed) is slow down the spending. It will
take another republican president 2 more terms (8 years) to get all the
rest of the waste out of our government budget to get to 0/0 each year.
It would also cost us a lot of social services that go to people who
really don't need them. Don't get my wrong, there are legitimate cases
and I believe we should take care of our people but in my opinion, we
spend 30% of those services on people who actually need it and 70% on
people who don't. I mean, I could get on social services right now if I
wanted to and get $660 a month for free and continue working my job. And
there is absolutely nothing wrong with me (and I do very well for myself
financially so if someone like me can get $660 a month you know money is
being wasted). If we get rid of that 70% junk spending then we'd
probably cut a large portion of our spending down.

Sorry, got off topic there..

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[Lars Poulsen]

On 2024-10-13, Phillip Frabott <***@fulltermprivacy.com> wrote:
> Heh, The government controls the news and most of the media here.
> (specifically the democratic party). Facebook, Google, and Microsoft all
> do the Government's bidding and the only reason why Twitter stopped
> being a Government puppet is because Elon purchased it and kicked the
> Government out (government has been going after Elon ever since). I
> should note that our Government power is in Democrat hands right now.
> Democrats will deny this is happening but you can do the research and
> look into things beyond the surface and you can find the truth of it.
> This election between Kamala and Trump will decide the fate of the US.
> If Kamala wins the Government will shift to either a Nationalist
> Socialist country or a Communist Socialist country depending on certain
> other factors. If Trump wins we will remain a Republic Capitalist
> country. Despite what the media says, word on the ground is Trump is
> winning hearts and minds and personally I think that's good for our
> country. We'll see what happens in the next few weeks. (Our elections
> are Nov 5th)

The only borderline Nazi team in this election is the Trumpist party,
which has all but promised that if they win, they are going to prosecuter
their opponents, and "if you elect me, you will never have to vote
again", where as Kamala Harris a[ppears to be a typical center-right
Democrat.

> Despite what the media says Trump is our better bet in this regard. The
> issue is, because of democrat spending over the last 2 decades (they
> have held office 12 out of the 20 years) it would take at least 2-3
> republican presidential terms to stop the bleed and break even. probably
> another 2 terms to start lowering the debt. There is just so much waste
> happening that the best Trump can do in 4 years (assuming he gets into
> the office again, fingers crossed) is slow down the spending. It will
> take another republican president 2 more terms (8 years) to get all the
> rest of the waste out of our government budget to get to 0/0 each year.

The fact is that for decades, the Republican administrations have run up
the deficits, while Democrats have reduced them.

> Sorry, got off topic there..

Not just off-topic, but fact-free or worse.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/13/2024 19:47, Lars Poulsen wrote:

> The fact is that for decades, the Republican administrations have run up
> the deficits, while Democrats have reduced them.
>

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/#us-deficit-by-year

^^ I would like to point out, .GOV. It's an official government web site.

Debt totals

$1.99T - W Bush 8 years (2001-2008)
$7.29T - Obama 8 years (2009-2016)
$5.56T - Trump 4 years (2017-2020)
$5.85T - Biden 3 Years (2021-2023) [Does not include 2024 spending]

Party Debt from 2001-2023

$7.55T - Republican Presidents
$13.15T - Democrat Presidents

BTW, it saddens me that you can't find this information on your own.

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> On 10/13/2024 19:47, Lars Poulsen wrote:
>
>> The fact is that for decades, the Republican administrations have run up
>> the deficits, while Democrats have reduced them.
>>
>
> https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/#us-deficit-by-year
>
> ^^ I would like to point out, .GOV. It's an official government web site.
>
> Debt totals
>
> $1.99T - W Bush 8 years (2001-2008)
> $7.29T - Obama 8 years (2009-2016)
> $5.56T - Trump 4 years (2017-2020)
> $5.85T - Biden 3 Years (2021-2023) [Does not include 2024 spending]
>
> Party Debt from 2001-2023
>
> $7.55T - Republican Presidents
> $13.15T - Democrat Presidents
>
> BTW, it saddens me that you can't find this information on your own.
>
>

Yep, looks like Lars was actually the one with the wrong facts. On the
other hand, I suspect some danish influence, and given that, a leaning
towards the (socialist) democrats is only natural.

I think the party that has elevated lawfare to new heights is in fact the
Democrats, so if I could vote, it would be Trump all the way.

The democrats are insane.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 10:45, D wrote:
> Yep, looks like Lars was actually the one with the wrong facts. On the
> other hand, I suspect some danish influence, and given that, a leaning
> towards the (socialist) democrats is only natural.
>
> I think the party that has elevated lawfare to new heights is in fact
> the Democrats, so if I could vote, it would be Trump all the way.
>
> The democrats are insane.

The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
globally by becoming isolationist.

I am a natural centre right person. But the Donald has gone too far and
cost thousands of Ukrainian lives already by reneging on the terms of
the USAs relationship with Ukraine.

Ukraine is not 'Europe's problem'

Russia is a global problem alonng with Iran, North Korea China and all
the other totalitarian post communist or islamfascist states.

Making Russia great again is Putins dream, but if he destroys teh USAs
export marlet, its the USAs problem.

Right now its the Ukraine and the Israelis at the thin end of the wedge,
but it will in the end be ordinary americans, and the longer you let
these dictators get away with it the harder they become to stop.

First they came for the Ukrainians
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Ukrainian
Then they came for the Israelis
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for the Europeans
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a European
Then they came for the Africans
And I did not speak out
Because I was not an African
Then they came for America
And there was no one left
To speak out for us...


--
"Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have
forgotten your aim."

George Santayana

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/10/2024 10:45, D wrote:
>> Yep, looks like Lars was actually the one with the wrong facts. On the
>> other hand, I suspect some danish influence, and given that, a leaning
>> towards the (socialist) democrats is only natural.
>>
>> I think the party that has elevated lawfare to new heights is in fact the
>> Democrats, so if I could vote, it would be Trump all the way.
>>
>> The democrats are insane.
>
> The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
> globally by becoming isolationist.
>
> I am a natural centre right person. But the Donald has gone too far and cost
> thousands of Ukrainian lives already by reneging on the terms of the USAs
> relationship with Ukraine.
>
> Ukraine is not 'Europe's problem'
>
> Russia is a global problem alonng with Iran, North Korea China and all the
> other totalitarian post communist or islamfascist states.
>
> Making Russia great again is Putins dream, but if he destroys teh USAs export
> marlet, its the USAs problem.
>
> Right now its the Ukraine and the Israelis at the thin end of the wedge, but
> it will in the end be ordinary americans, and the longer you let these
> dictators get away with it the harder they become to stop.
>
> First they came for the Ukrainians
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a Ukrainian
> Then they came for the Israelis
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a Jew
> Then they came for the Europeans
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a European
> Then they came for the Africans
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not an African
> Then they came for America
> And there was no one left
> To speak out for us...
>

I think it is important to make a difference between what Trump says (in
order to get conservative votes) and what Trump does.

Trump is smart, and he of course knows that without the EU, the US stands
alone against the world. He will of course help the EU, but most likely
with far less money, and way more effectively.

That will push the EU to become more militarily integrated, which will in
turn make the world safer and more stable.

If the EU, like today, continues to suck on the US military teat, the EU
will never develop and become a liability instead of an asset.

The road forward is pretty clear and pretty easy. Russia will lose, his
oligarchs will kill him, in his place, they will select someone more
pro-west, so they can enjoy their playgrounds and yachts again, and then
we'll continue towards prospery together with a more western oriented
russia.

Another option, if they insist on the crazy path, is to defang them, and
split russia into the west, and countless little durka-durka-stans,
without weapons and resources. Those will be left to rot, and the western
half will join europe and open for business.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 13:47, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 14/10/2024 10:45, D wrote:
>>> Yep, looks like Lars was actually the one with the wrong facts. On
>>> the other hand, I suspect some danish influence, and given that, a
>>> leaning towards the (socialist) democrats is only natural.
>>>
>>> I think the party that has elevated lawfare to new heights is in fact
>>> the Democrats, so if I could vote, it would be Trump all the way.
>>>
>>> The democrats are insane.
>>
>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>
>> I am a natural  centre right person. But the Donald has gone too far
>> and cost thousands of Ukrainian lives already by reneging on the terms
>> of the USAs relationship with Ukraine.
>>
>> Ukraine is not 'Europe's problem'
>>
>> Russia is a global problem alonng with Iran, North Korea China and all
>> the other totalitarian post communist or islamfascist  states.
>>
>> Making Russia great again is Putins dream, but if he destroys teh USAs
>> export marlet, its the USAs problem.
>>
>> Right now its the Ukraine and the Israelis at the thin end of the
>> wedge, but it will in the end be ordinary americans, and the longer
>> you let these dictators get away with it the harder they become to stop.
>>
>> First they came for the Ukrainians
>> And I did not speak out
>> Because I was not a Ukrainian
>> Then they came for the Israelis
>> And I did not speak out
>> Because I was not a Jew
>> Then they came for the Europeans
>> And I did not speak out
>> Because I was not a European
>> Then they came for the Africans
>> And I did not speak out
>> Because I was not an African
>> Then they came for America
>> And there was no one left
>> To speak out for us...
>>
>
> I think it is important to make a difference between what Trump says (in
> order to get conservative votes) and what Trump does.
>
> Trump is smart, and he of course knows that without the EU, the US
> stands alone against the world. He will of course help the EU, but most
> likely with far less money, and way more effectively.
>
He almost caused Ukraine to lose by holding up the budget.

What Trump does will be as far as Europe is concerned, is to let Russia
occupy Ukraine forever.

> That will push the EU to become more militarily integrated, which will
> in turn make the world safer and more stable.
>
The EU has no army navy or air force (thank god, as they are about as
trustworthy and ambitious as Putin)

The nations of Europe and beyond belong to at most NATO, and Donald
lied about that.



> If the EU, like today, continues to suck on the US military teat, the EU
> will never develop and become a liability instead of an asset.
>
The EU is not yet a military power.


> The road forward is pretty clear and pretty easy. Russia will lose, his
> oligarchs will kill him, in his place, they will select someone more
> pro-west, so they can enjoy their playgrounds and yachts again, and then
> we'll continue towards prospery together with a more western oriented
> russia.
>
Well yes, but witholding military aid from Ukraine is not the way to
achieve that.

> Another option, if they insist on the crazy path, is to defang them, and
> split russia into the west, and countless little durka-durka-stans,
> without weapons and resources. Those will be left to rot, and the
> western half will join europe and open for business.

That may well happen too, but that is not what Trump has stated he
wants, nor its it what MAGA has acted to promote.

The USA had a deal with Ukraine and it has a deal with NATO.
If it turns it back on either or both, its status as the protector of
the free world disintegrates, and No European nation will support it
when China comes knocking


--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>> I think it is important to make a difference between what Trump says (in
>> order to get conservative votes) and what Trump does.
>>
>> Trump is smart, and he of course knows that without the EU, the US stands
>> alone against the world. He will of course help the EU, but most likely
>> with far less money, and way more effectively.
>>
> He almost caused Ukraine to lose by holding up the budget.

Incorrect. They are still doing well, and it US would have backed down,
the EU would have ramped up.

> What Trump does will be as far as Europe is concerned, is to let Russia
> occupy Ukraine forever.

Incorrect. Trump is pro-business, and will help EU against Russia. Don't
buy the democratic rhetoric. What Trump will _not_ do however, is to
throw billions upon billions into a black hole. That is smart, and will
benefit americans, and also, as I have explained, europeans, in the long
term.

>> That will push the EU to become more militarily integrated, which will in
>> turn make the world safer and more stable.
>>
> The EU has no army navy or air force (thank god, as they are about as
> trustworthy and ambitious as Putin)

The EU has plenty. You can add up the military capacity of each
individual country. This is the integration you will see if/when the US
ramps down.

The EU economy is also about 15x larger than russias, and the population
is about 3x. If there's a full war, Russia will lose to badly, it will
embarass them for generations to come.

Putin knows that. That is why he is yelling and screaming, and doing the
minimum maximum he can out of fear of provoking europe to take action
against him.

> The nations of Europe and beyond belong to at most NATO, and Donald lied
> about that.

I don't know what you are talking about. Donald did however, without
being president or having any official power, make the europeans step up
with the funding to Nato. That shows how brilliant he is, and that you
should look at what Trump does or achieves, _not_ what he says. His
words are tools to create action, they are not the purpose in and of
themselves.

>
>
>> If the EU, like today, continues to suck on the US military teat, the EU
>> will never develop and become a liability instead of an asset.
>>
> The EU is not yet a military power.

It is. See above.

>> The road forward is pretty clear and pretty easy. Russia will lose, his
>> oligarchs will kill him, in his place, they will select someone more
>> pro-west, so they can enjoy their playgrounds and yachts again, and then
>> we'll continue towards prospery together with a more western oriented
>> russia.
>>
> Well yes, but witholding military aid from Ukraine is not the way to achieve
> that.

It is. Let europe and ukraine handle that.

>> Another option, if they insist on the crazy path, is to defang them, and
>> split russia into the west, and countless little durka-durka-stans, without
>> weapons and resources. Those will be left to rot, and the western half will
>> join europe and open for business.
>
> That may well happen too, but that is not what Trump has stated he wants, nor
> its it what MAGA has acted to promote.

What Trump is irrelevant, what he does is relevant.

> The USA had a deal with Ukraine and it has a deal with NATO.
> If it turns it back on either or both, its status as the protector of the
> free world disintegrates, and No European nation will support it when China
> comes knocking

Incorrect. The US does not have any obligations to play world police.
Trump, playing this the way he does, will stimulate EU to grow and
develop into a second world police. Then there will be two, instead of
today, only one, which is the US. Time for EU to pay its fair share and
stop free riding on the US. This is only elementary logic and common
sense.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 21:56:08 +0200, D wrote:

> The EU has plenty. You can add up the military capacity of each
> individual country. This is the integration you will see if/when the US
> ramps down.

There is nothing in the Copenhagen criteria about having an effective
military.

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing-european-union.php

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?
country1=italy&country2=france

The comparison of Italy and France lists the factors they apparently
consider for their power index. It's an interesting algorithm when Italy
comes out the top dog. They haven't been much of a military success story
since the fall of Rome.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 20:56, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>> I think it is important to make a difference between what Trump says
>>> (in order to get conservative votes) and what Trump does.
>>>
>>> Trump is smart, and he of course knows that without the EU, the US
>>> stands alone against the world. He will of course help the EU, but
>>> most likely with far less money, and way more effectively.
>>>
>> He almost caused Ukraine to lose by holding up the budget.
>
> Incorrect. They are still doing well, and it US would have backed down,
> the EU would have ramped up.

What with? It has no exonomy?
Its just a parasitic bureaucracy.
It does notr set Eripean natins foreign policy. It juts pretends thaqt
it does.


>
>> What Trump  does will be as far as Europe is concerned, is to let
>> Russia occupy Ukraine forever.
>
> Incorrect. Trump is pro-business, and will help EU against Russia. Don't
> buy the democratic rhetoric. What Trump will _not_ do however, is to
> throw billions upon billions into a black hole. That is smart, and will
> benefit americans, and also, as I have explained, europeans, in the long
> term.
>

*shakes head sadly*

He is so business that when Putin lent him....well it was more than
Hunter Biden anyway...

He is so business that he wants to forgoe the opportunity to actually
get billions in debt for defunct obsolescent hardware, he would rather
write it off than sell it to Ukraine?

Wake up! ALL of your politicians are working for someone. That's how
they got there.

>>> That will push the EU to become more militarily integrated, which
>>> will in turn make the world safer and more stable.
>>>
>> The EU has no army navy or air force (thank god, as they are about as
>> trustworthy and ambitious as Putin)
>
> The EU has plenty. You can add up the military capacity of each
> individual country. This is the integration you will see if/when the US
> ramps down.
>
Dont be silly. No European nation wants to put its military under EU
control.
That's why they are in NATO.

> The EU economy is also about 15x larger than russias, and the population
> is about 3x. If there's a full war, Russia will lose to badly, it will
> embarass them for generations to come.
>

The EU HAS NO ECONOMY. It is not the United states of Europe. It is
nearer the United socialist Soviet republic of Europe. A remote entity
trying to recreate the USSR by having a series of puppet states.


> Putin knows that. That is why he is yelling and screaming, and doing the
> minimum maximum he can out of fear of provoking europe to take action
> against him.
>

Europe is a continent. It can't take action.
The EU is a bureaucracy it has nothing to take action with

Only the sovereign nations of Europe can take action, and they are. FAR
more than the USA

Denmark and Estonia have contributed the most. Per capita. But they are
small countries.

The USA ranks 17th in net contributions per citizen. A miserly contribution.
Even Belgium has done better,

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/


>> The nations of Europe and beyond belong to at most NATO, and Donald
>> lied about that.
>
> I don't know what you are talking about. Donald did however, without
> being president or having any official power, make the europeans step up
> with the funding to Nato. That shows how brilliant he is, and that you
> should look at what Trump does or achieves, _not_ what he says. His
> words are tools to create action, they are not the purpose in and of
> themselves.
>
Oh FFFS. I cant deal with another cult member tonight.

Donald is not some superman. He is just another egotistical little shit
with his eye on the main chance. In the end no better than Obama.

>>
>>
>>> If the EU, like today, continues to suck on the US military teat, the
>>> EU will never develop and become a liability instead of an asset.
>>>
>> The EU is not yet a military power.
>
> It is. See above.
>
It is not

"The European army or EU army are terms for a hypothetical army of the
European Union which would supersede the Common Security and Defence
Policy and would go beyond the proposed European Defence Union.
Currently, there is no such army, and defence is a matter for the member
states. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army

>>> The road forward is pretty clear and pretty easy. Russia will lose,
>>> his oligarchs will kill him, in his place, they will select someone
>>> more pro-west, so they can enjoy their playgrounds and yachts again,
>>> and then we'll continue towards prospery together with a more western
>>> oriented russia.
>>>
>> Well yes, but witholding military aid from Ukraine is not the way to
>> achieve that.
>
> It is. Let europe and ukraine handle that.
>

Europe dioesnt exist as a country. They are already pulling way above
their weight.

>>> Another option, if they insist on the crazy path, is to defang them,
>>> and split russia into the west, and countless little
>>> durka-durka-stans, without weapons and resources. Those will be left
>>> to rot, and the western half will join europe and open for business.
>>
>> That may well happen too, but that is not what Trump has stated he
>> wants, nor its it what MAGA has acted to promote.
>
> What Trump is irrelevant, what he does is relevant.

Exatcly. He nearly allowed Russia to win by stalling arms that had
already been promised, a dirty political truck worthy of a democrat.

Leaving Ukraine in the shit.

>
>> The USA had a deal with Ukraine and it has a deal with NATO.
>> If it turns it back on either or both, its status as the protector of
>> the free world disintegrates, and  No European nation will support it
>> when China comes knocking
>
> Incorrect. The US does not have any obligations to play world police.

I never said that it did.
But that is it status, deserved or not,


> Trump, playing this the way he does, will stimulate EU to grow and
> develop into a second world police. Then there will be two, instead of
> today, only one, which is the US. Time for EU to pay its fair share and
> stop free riding on the US. This is only elementary logic and common
> sense.


Christ on a bike. The EU are the second biggest threat to world peace
after the Russin/Ianian NORK axis.

That last thing you want is a military power run by a bunch of communist
and ex communist apparatchiks.

You are woefully ill informed.


--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

[D]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>>>> with far less money, and way more effectively.
>>>>
>>> He almost caused Ukraine to lose by holding up the budget.
>>
>> Incorrect. They are still doing well, and it US would have backed down,
>> the EU would have ramped up.
>
> What with? It has no exonomy?
> Its just a parasitic bureaucracy.
> It does notr set Eripean natins foreign policy. It juts pretends thaqt it
> does.

The european economy is $26.64 trillion (PPP). This is proven.

>
>>
>>> What Trump  does will be as far as Europe is concerned, is to let Russia
>>> occupy Ukraine forever.
>>
>> Incorrect. Trump is pro-business, and will help EU against Russia. Don't
>> buy the democratic rhetoric. What Trump will _not_ do however, is to
>> throw billions upon billions into a black hole. That is smart, and will
>> benefit americans, and also, as I have explained, europeans, in the long
>> term.
>>
>
> *shakes head sadly*
>
> He is so business that when Putin lent him....well it was more than Hunter
> Biden anyway...

Exactly. The democrats are the true evil.

> He is so business that he wants to forgoe the opportunity to actually get
> billions in debt for defunct obsolescent hardware, he would rather write it
> off than sell it to Ukraine?
>
> Wake up! ALL of your politicians are working for someone. That's how they got
> there.

Irrelevant. We look at actions.

>>>> That will push the EU to become more militarily integrated, which will in
>>>> turn make the world safer and more stable.
>>>>
>>> The EU has no army navy or air force (thank god, as they are about as
>>> trustworthy and ambitious as Putin)
>>
>> The EU has plenty. You can add up the military capacity of each
>> individual country. This is the integration you will see if/when the US
>> ramps down.
>>
> Dont be silly. No European nation wants to put its military under EU control.
> That's why they are in NATO.

Europes countries can coordinate without the central EU, proven by joint Nato
military exercises, and joint exercises done outside of Nato, like
between sweden and finland.

You seem to know very little of europe and how europe works. Are you
based in the US?

>> The EU economy is also about 15x larger than russias, and the population
>> is about 3x. If there's a full war, Russia will lose to badly, it will
>> embarass them for generations to come.
>>
>
> The EU HAS NO ECONOMY. It is not the United states of Europe. It is nearer
> the United socialist Soviet republic of Europe. A remote entity trying to
> recreate the USSR by having a series of puppet states.

$26.64 trillion (PPP)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union .

Proven.

>
>> Putin knows that. That is why he is yelling and screaming, and doing the
>> minimum maximum he can out of fear of provoking europe to take action
>> against him.
>>
>
> Europe is a continent. It can't take action.
> The EU is a bureaucracy it has nothing to take action with

Europe has countries which can take action. I will not write every
single individual country in every single post due to your uncharitable
nit picking.

I do not think you are so stupid as to not be able to understand my
point with me having to write each country individually?

> Only the sovereign nations of Europe can take action, and they are. FAR more
> than the USA

Thank you. Proven.

> Denmark and Estonia have contributed the most. Per capita. But they are small
> countries.

See above. Europe has a common market.

> The USA ranks 17th in net contributions per citizen. A miserly contribution.
> Even Belgium has done better,
>
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/

Irrelevant.

>
>>> The nations of Europe and beyond belong to at most NATO, and Donald lied
>>> about that.
>>
>> I don't know what you are talking about. Donald did however, without
>> being president or having any official power, make the europeans step up
>> with the funding to Nato. That shows how brilliant he is, and that you
>> should look at what Trump does or achieves, _not_ what he says. His
>> words are tools to create action, they are not the purpose in and of
>> themselves.
>>
> Oh FFFS. I cant deal with another cult member tonight.
>
> Donald is not some superman. He is just another egotistical little shit with
> his eye on the main chance. In the end no better than Obama.

Do you have Trump Derangement Syndrome? I think it is stopping you from
perceiving the world correctly.

>>>
>>>
>>>> If the EU, like today, continues to suck on the US military teat, the EU
>>>> will never develop and become a liability instead of an asset.
>>>>
>>> The EU is not yet a military power.
>>
>> It is. See above.
>>
> It is not

It is. See above. Read carefully and repent.

> "The European army or EU army are terms for a hypothetical army of the
> European Union which would supersede the Common Security and Defence Policy
> and would go beyond the proposed European Defence Union. Currently, there is
> no such army, and defence is a matter for the member states. "
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army

Irrelevant.

>>>> The road forward is pretty clear and pretty easy. Russia will lose, his
>>>> oligarchs will kill him, in his place, they will select someone more
>>>> pro-west, so they can enjoy their playgrounds and yachts again, and then
>>>> we'll continue towards prospery together with a more western oriented
>>>> russia.
>>>>
>>> Well yes, but witholding military aid from Ukraine is not the way to
>>> achieve that.
>>
>> It is. Let europe and ukraine handle that.
>>
>
> Europe dioesnt exist as a country. They are already pulling way above their
> weight.

Irrelevant see above.

>>>> Another option, if they insist on the crazy path, is to defang them, and
>>>> split russia into the west, and countless little durka-durka-stans,
>>>> without weapons and resources. Those will be left to rot, and the western
>>>> half will join europe and open for business.
>>>
>>> That may well happen too, but that is not what Trump has stated he wants,
>>> nor its it what MAGA has acted to promote.
>>
>> What Trump is irrelevant, what he does is relevant.
>
> Exatcly. He nearly allowed Russia to win by stalling arms that had already
> been promised, a dirty political truck worthy of a democrat.
>
> Leaving Ukraine in the shit.

No, he is training europe to grow up and take responsibility. That is
actually brilliant.

>>
>>> The USA had a deal with Ukraine and it has a deal with NATO.
>>> If it turns it back on either or both, its status as the protector of the
>>> free world disintegrates, and  No European nation will support it when
>>> China comes knocking
>>
>> Incorrect. The US does not have any obligations to play world police.
>
> I never said that it did.
> But that is it status, deserved or not,

Nope. Trump has corrected it, and will correct even more when he wins.

>
>> Trump, playing this the way he does, will stimulate EU to grow and
>> develop into a second world police. Then there will be two, instead of
>> today, only one, which is the US. Time for EU to pay its fair share and
>> stop free riding on the US. This is only elementary logic and common
>> sense.
>
>
> Christ on a bike. The EU are the second biggest threat to world peace after
> the Russin/Ianian NORK axis.

Incorrect.

> That last thing you want is a military power run by a bunch of communist and
> ex communist apparatchiks.
>
> You are woefully ill informed.

You are ill informed and it has been proven.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 15/10/2024 09:19, D wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>>>> with far less money, and way more effectively.
>>>>>
>>>> He almost caused Ukraine to lose by holding up the budget.
>>>
>>> Incorrect. They are still doing well, and it US would have backed down,
>>> the EU would have ramped up.
>>
>> What with? It has no exonomy?
>> Its just a parasitic bureaucracy.
>> It does notr set Eripean natins foreign policy. It juts pretends thaqt
>> it does.
>
> The european economy is $26.64 trillion (PPP). This is proven.
>

No, that is the sum of the econimies of thge natuions tha inhabit o the
continent of Europe. One of which is Russsia
It us not e economy of the EU.

> Exactly. The democrats are the true evil.

No. The true evil is greed, lust for power and fear of loss of privilege.
If you think Liberal versus Republican is evil versus good, you are
already a controlled useful idiot

All your politicians are belong to us.



>> Wake up! ALL of your politicians are working for someone. That's how
>> they got there.
>
> Irrelevant. We look at actions.

No, it is clear you do not. Even if you think you do. Mike Johnson
absolutely vilolated every norm of honorable and decent behaviors and
cost thousands of lives by the disgraceful actions he took, that Trump
supported.


>> Dont be silly. No European nation wants to put its military under EU
>> control.
>> That's why they are in NATO.
>
> Europes countries can coordinate without the central EU, proven by joint
> Nato
> military exercises, and joint exercises done outside of Nato, like
> between sweden and finland.
>
Exactly my point. EU doesnt have a military, and its members don't want
it to.
EU is compulsory, NATO is voluntary.


> You seem to know very little of europe and how europe works. Are you
> based in the US?
>

That was my question to you.

>>> The EU economy is also about 15x larger than russias, and the population
>>> is about 3x. If there's a full war, Russia will lose to badly, it will
>>> embarass them for generations to come.
>>>
>>
>> The EU HAS NO ECONOMY. It is not the United states of Europe. It is
>> nearer the United socialist Soviet republic of Europe. A remote entity
>> trying to recreate the USSR by having a series of puppet states.
>
> $26.64 trillion (PPP)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union .
>
> Proven.
>

From that refeernce The 'economy of the European Union' is the joint
economy of the member states of the European Union¨


I.e. it doesnt belong to the Union. And the Union has little effect on
how it is generated.

Youu seem to have no understanbding of European politics

>>
>>> Putin knows that. That is why he is yelling and screaming, and doing the
>>> minimum maximum he can out of fear of provoking europe to take action
>>> against him.
>>>
>>
>> Europe is a continent. It can't take action.
>> The EU is a bureaucracy it has nothing to take action with
>
> Europe has countries which can take action. I will not write every
> single individual country in every single post due to your uncharitable
> nit picking.
>
But it makes a huge difference. Fir example Hungary. Slovenia and
almost Germany have decided to limit Ukrainian support. Other counytries
who know Vlad, like Poland and Estonia, have thrown huge resources into
the pot.

The EU itself has done the square root of fuck all. A bit of
humanitarian aid.

What the EU did manage to do was co-ordinate and prepare a set of
sanctions that are slow but effective.


> I do not think you are so stupid as to not be able to understand my
> point with me having to write each country individually?
>
Because there *is* no point without mentioning each country individually.

The Czechs organised world wide black/grey market purchase of artillery
shells from unnamed sources using money donated by various other
countries, to save the day when Mike Johnson fucked Ukraine at Russias
behest by blocking the support of the whole of the USA.

Viktor Orban in Hungary has tried the same, but the EU is not the USA
(although it would love to be) it doesn't represent the people of
Europe, They have national governments. It doesn't control the defence
of Europe, Individual nations in, or out of NATO or the EU, do that
themselves . It doesn't even control the economies of Europe, although
it tries to.

It doesn't even have a single currency, though it wants to.



>> Only the sovereign nations of Europe can take action, and they are.
>> FAR more than the USA
>
> Thank you. Proven.
>
>> Denmark and Estonia have contributed the most. Per capita. But they
>> are small countries.
>
> See above. Europe has a common market.
>
>> The USA ranks 17th in net contributions per citizen. A miserly
>> contribution.
>> Even Belgium has done better,
>>
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
>
> Irrelevant.

Nto in te slightest.

Europe is contributing far far more per person to this war than the
miserly USA is.


>> Donald is not some superman. He is just another egotistical little
>> shit with his eye on the main chance. In the end no better than Obama.
>
> Do you have Trump Derangement Syndrome? I think it is stopping you from
> perceiving the world correctly.
>

Better put yiur shades on an not stand behind him when he driops his pants


>
> It is. See above. Read carefully and repent.

All your examples show exactlyt why the EU is not a nation or a
miultray power as you seem to think it is.


>
>> "The European army or EU army are terms for a hypothetical army of the
>> European Union which would supersede the Common Security and Defence
>> Policy and would go beyond the proposed European Defence Union.
>> Currently, there is no such army, and defence is a matter for the
>> member states. "
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army
>
> Irrelevant.

Totally relevant


>> Europe dioesnt exist as a country. They are already pulling way above
>> their weight.
>
> Irrelevant see above.

Realebant


>> Leaving Ukraine in the shit.
>
> No, he is training europe to grow up and take responsibility. That is
> actually brilliant.
>

It us Europe who is taking responsibility and the Donald who is
deliberately absolving himself of it preferring to simply parraot
Russian propagandas (as you are)



>> You are woefully ill informed.
>
> You are ill informed and it has been proven.


Nope, It is clear you are either trolling, a trump supporter who has
replaced reason with religious faith, or in Putins pocket

You don't understand the politics of Russia, or of Ukraine, or of Europe
or of the EU, how any of their economies are run, how their military are
organised or who ultimately controls it.

In fact you don't even seem to understand the politics of the USA.
Except in a very childlike and unsophisticated way.

Hint. The guys in the white hats are the baddies too, sometimes.





--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

[D]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 15/10/2024 09:19, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>>>>> with far less money, and way more effectively.
>>>>>>
>>>>> He almost caused Ukraine to lose by holding up the budget.
>>>>
>>>> Incorrect. They are still doing well, and it US would have backed down,
>>>> the EU would have ramped up.
>>>
>>> What with? It has no exonomy?
>>> Its just a parasitic bureaucracy.
>>> It does notr set Eripean natins foreign policy. It juts pretends thaqt it
>>> does.
>>
>> The european economy is $26.64 trillion (PPP). This is proven.
>>
>
> No, that is the sum of the econimies of thge natuions tha inhabit o the
> continent of Europe. One of which is Russsia
> It us not e economy of the EU.

Read _carefully_, for your benefit I said _european_ not the EU. So your
argument is irrelevant.

>> Exactly. The democrats are the true evil.
>
> No. The true evil is greed, lust for power and fear of loss of privilege.
> If you think Liberal versus Republican is evil versus good, you are already a
> controlled useful idiot
>
> All your politicians are belong to us.

Incorrect. In the US, in this election, democrat = bad, republican = good.
This is scientifically proven.


>
>
>>> Wake up! ALL of your politicians are working for someone. That's how they
>>> got there.
>>
>> Irrelevant. We look at actions.
>
> No, it is clear you do not. Even if you think you do. Mike Johnson
> absolutely vilolated every norm of honorable and decent behaviors and cost
> thousands of lives by the disgraceful actions he took, that Trump supported.

I'm talking about Trump, not Mike Johnson, irrelevant.

>
>>> Dont be silly. No European nation wants to put its military under EU
>>> control.
>>> That's why they are in NATO.
>>
>> Europes countries can coordinate without the central EU, proven by joint
>> Nato
>> military exercises, and joint exercises done outside of Nato, like
>> between sweden and finland.
>>
> Exactly my point. EU doesnt have a military, and its members don't want it
> to.
> EU is compulsory, NATO is voluntary.

Europes countries can coordinate without the central EU, proven by
joint Nato
military exercises, and joint exercises done outside of Nato, like
between sweden and finland.


>
>> You seem to know very little of europe and how europe works. Are you
>> based in the US?
>>
>
> That was my question to you.

Exactly.

>>>> The EU economy is also about 15x larger than russias, and the population
>>>> is about 3x. If there's a full war, Russia will lose to badly, it will
>>>> embarass them for generations to come.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The EU HAS NO ECONOMY. It is not the United states of Europe. It is nearer
>>> the United socialist Soviet republic of Europe. A remote entity trying to
>>> recreate the USSR by having a series of puppet states.
>>
>> $26.64 trillion (PPP)
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union .
>>
>> Proven.
>>
>
> From that refeernce The 'economy of the European Union' is the joint economy
> of the member states of the European Unionš
>
> I.e. it doesnt belong to the Union. And the Union has little effect on how
> it is generated.
>
> Youu seem to have no understanbding of European politics

European, read above. Point proven and won.

>>>
>>>> Putin knows that. That is why he is yelling and screaming, and doing the
>>>> minimum maximum he can out of fear of provoking europe to take action
>>>> against him.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Europe is a continent. It can't take action.
>>> The EU is a bureaucracy it has nothing to take action with
>>
>> Europe has countries which can take action. I will not write every
>> single individual country in every single post due to your uncharitable
>> nit picking.
>>
> But it makes a huge difference. Fir example Hungary. Slovenia and almost
> Germany have decided to limit Ukrainian support. Other counytries who know
> Vlad, like Poland and Estonia, have thrown huge resources into the pot.

My point still stands. You're refuted.

> The EU itself has done the square root of fuck all. A bit of humanitarian
> aid.

We moved on. Leave it.

> What the EU did manage to do was co-ordinate and prepare a set of sanctions
> that are slow but effective.

One step, and also, they are slow due to the US. If US stops, EU ramps up.

>
>> I do not think you are so stupid as to not be able to understand my
>> point with me having to write each country individually?
>>
> Because there *is* no point without mentioning each country individually.

Of course there is. Learn reading, then we discuss.

> The Czechs organised world wide black/grey market purchase of artillery
> shells from unnamed sources using money donated by various other countries,
> to save the day when Mike Johnson fucked Ukraine at Russias behest by
> blocking the support of the whole of the USA.

Irrelevant to discussion.

> Viktor Orban in Hungary has tried the same, but the EU is not the USA
> (although it would love to be) it doesn't represent the people of Europe,
> They have national governments. It doesn't control the defence of Europe,
> Individual nations in, or out of NATO or the EU, do that themselves . It
> doesn't even control the economies of Europe, although it tries to.
>
> It doesn't even have a single currency, though it wants to.

See original point. Europe is already cooperating and coordinating
militaryly. Within and outside Nato.

>
>
>>> Only the sovereign nations of Europe can take action, and they are. FAR
>>> more than the USA
>>
>> Thank you. Proven.
>>
>>> Denmark and Estonia have contributed the most. Per capita. But they are
>>> small countries.
>>
>> See above. Europe has a common market.
>>
>>> The USA ranks 17th in net contributions per citizen. A miserly
>>> contribution.
>>> Even Belgium has done better,
>>>
>>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
>>
>> Irrelevant.
>
> Nto in te slightest.
>
> Europe is contributing far far more per person to this war than the miserly
> USA is.

Irrelevant. It's europes problem, not USA.

>
>>> Donald is not some superman. He is just another egotistical little shit
>>> with his eye on the main chance. In the end no better than Obama.
>>
>> Do you have Trump Derangement Syndrome? I think it is stopping you from
>> perceiving the world correctly.
>>
>
> Better put yiur shades on an not stand behind him when he driops his pants

Irrelevant.

>
>>
>> It is. See above. Read carefully and repent.
>
> All your examples show exactlyt why the EU is not a nation or a miultray
> power as you seem to think it is.

Read above. Learn to read.

>
>>
>>> "The European army or EU army are terms for a hypothetical army of the
>>> European Union which would supersede the Common Security and Defence
>>> Policy and would go beyond the proposed European Defence Union. Currently,
>>> there is no such army, and defence is a matter for the member states. "
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army
>>
>> Irrelevant.
>
> Totally relevant
Irrelevant.


>
>>> Europe dioesnt exist as a country. They are already pulling way above
>>> their weight.
>>
>> Irrelevant see above.
>
> Realebant
Irrelevant.
>
>
>>> Leaving Ukraine in the shit.
>>
>> No, he is training europe to grow up and take responsibility. That is
>> actually brilliant.
>>
>
> It us Europe who is taking responsibility and the Donald who is deliberately
> absolving himself of it preferring to simply parraot Russian propagandas (as
> you are)

Nope, US has no obligation, so no absolving necessary. Your logic is
flawed.

>
>
>>> You are woefully ill informed.
>>
>> You are ill informed and it has been proven.
>
>
> Nope, It is clear you are either trolling, a trump supporter who has replaced
> reason with religious faith, or in Putins pocket

Nope. Likewise.

> You don't understand the politics of Russia, or of Ukraine, or of Europe or
> of the EU, how any of their economies are run, how their military are
> organised or who ultimately controls it.

I understand it better than you. You seem to be coming from the socialist
left, which would actually explain your lack of thinking and reading
skills.

> In fact you don't even seem to understand the politics of the USA. Except in
> a very childlike and unsophisticated way.

Incorrect. You seem to understand it in a socialist way.

> Hint. The guys in the white hats are the baddies too, sometimes.

Meaningless.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
> globally by becoming isolationist.

It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
destructive third world states.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/14/2024 09:55, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>
> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
> destructive third world states.

Israel doesn't really need our help because they kick ass anyways, and
the Ukraine Protection deal was revoked during Obama's presidency (Which
again, the democrats wanted and now they are crying about it).

The US needs to do what every other country does, only get involved when
it is in our best interests. If it helps us to help the EU or some other
nation I'll all for it, but helping for the sake of helping with no real
world benefit to the US needs to stop.

So I'm right there with you.

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 18:13, Phillip Frabott wrote:
> On 10/14/2024 09:55, rbowman wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>
>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>> destructive third world states.
>
> Israel doesn't really need our help because they kick ass anyways, and
> the Ukraine Protection deal was revoked during Obama's presidency (Which
> again, the democrats wanted and now they are crying about it).
>
> The US needs to do what every other country does, only get involved when
> it is in our best interests. If it helps us to help the EU or some other
> nation

The EU is not a nation. It is an overweight and pompous bureaucracy with
no army, no navy, no air force, and no economy

If it disappeared tomorrow EEuropoe would be a better place

I'll all for it, but helping for the sake of helping with no real
> world benefit to the US needs to stop.
>
It is absolutely for your benefit

You have to be gullible to think that it isn't

--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 14:55, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>
> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
> destructive third world states.
They are not self destructive.
USA is already under attack from the modern 'axis of evil' . Jealous of
its power and wealth every single Russian Kleptocrat or Islamic theocrat
hates and fears America, and are *actively * seeking its destruction.
How many 'movements' and 'woke memes originate in Moscow or Tehran?

If you want to elect the 'Manchurian candidate' don't expect me to
sympathise when the rest of the world turns its back on the USA.
That doesn't mean I support the wimpy wet Kamala. It's just that she
represents slightly less direct threat to the USA and the nations of
Europe, Canada, Australia, who didn't hold back when Japan fucked you over.
It's clear Trump owes Mr Putin something. And its payback time. I don't
want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.


--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/10/2024 14:55, rbowman wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>
>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>> destructive third world states.
> They are not self destructive.
> USA is already under attack from the modern 'axis of evil' . Jealous of its
> power and wealth every single Russian Kleptocrat or Islamic theocrat hates
> and fears America, and are *actively * seeking its destruction. How many
> 'movements' and 'woke memes originate in Moscow or Tehran?
>
> If you want to elect the 'Manchurian candidate' don't expect me to sympathise
> when the rest of the world turns its back on the USA.
> That doesn't mean I support the wimpy wet Kamala. It's just that she
> represents slightly less direct threat to the USA and the nations of Europe,
> Canada, Australia, who didn't hold back when Japan fucked you over.
> It's clear Trump owes Mr Putin something. And its payback time. I don't want
> Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>

They have wanted that the past 50 years, and have not achieved anything.
That testifies to the incompetence and weakness of the enemy, and the
brilliance of the US, _despite_ the democrat party.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 20:57, D wrote:
> They have wanted that the past 50 years, and have not achieved anything.
> That testifies to the incompetence and weakness of the enemy, and the
> brilliance of the US, _despite_ the democrat party.

You poor sucker. You have no idea.



--
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

[D]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/10/2024 20:57, D wrote:
>> They have wanted that the past 50 years, and have not achieved anything.
>> That testifies to the incompetence and weakness of the enemy, and the
>> brilliance of the US, _despite_ the democrat party.
>
> You poor sucker. You have no idea.
>

Incorrect. Actually I know this better than you.

[rbowman]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I don't
> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.

Better Putin than Soros.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 22:29, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> I don't
>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>
> Better Putin than Soros.

Phew. That you could say that is the most frightening thing I have heard.


--
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

[rbowman]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:12:41 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/10/2024 22:29, rbowman wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> I don't
>>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>>
>> Better Putin than Soros.
>
> Phew. That you could say that is the most frightening thing I have
> heard.

"Be afraid. Be very afraid."

Wednesday Adams

"We are forces of chaos and anarchy
Everything they say we are, we are
And we are very proud of ourselves"

Kantner and Balin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxA3Q96a8XE

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> I don't
>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>
> Better Putin than Soros.
>

I have compared them both scientifically, and it is actualyl proven that
Soros society would be a nicer one, than Putins. If you step away from the
main cities in russia, the people in the country side live under
close to medieval living conditions that would make all americans revolt.

That's what you get with a kleptocracy and an authoritarian system built
to exploit the people and enrich its leaders.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 15/10/2024 09:09, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>>  I don't
>>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>>
>> Better Putin than Soros.
>>
>
> I have compared them both scientifically, and it is actualyl proven that
> Soros society would be a nicer one, than Putins. If you step away from
> the main cities in russia, the people in the country side live under
> close to medieval living conditions that would make all americans revolt.
>
> That's what you get with a kleptocracy and an authoritarian system built
> to exploit the people and enrich its leaders.

Phew. I thought for a moment I was going mad.

Exactly. I think there is a tendency - an understandable tendency, for
people living cushioned in the richest society in the world, and not
needing to be really aware in any way in their daily lives about
anything beyond its shores - to think that because they have identified
deep flaws in their own government, that some one else's would in fact
be better.

Let me tell you there is no such things as a corruption free government
anywhere in the world, and the aim of most government is to be as
corrupt and undemocratic as possible, because politicians are not
saints, and anyone who thinks they are needs urgent medical attention.

I have expressed this many times as:

"All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood."

So the Liberals pretend to be the good guys on the moral high ground, to
get the votes that enable them to satisfy the demands of the people with
deep pockets like the globalist corporates.

Whilst the Donald pretends to be the redneck dude with the
traditional values of bottom slapping and pussy grabbing individualism,
in order that *he* can get into power and get paid off by the FSB leper
funds from Moscow.

So its not he redneck shit that I object to. Far from it. Lotta redneck
in me. It's the FSB

I loathe the liberal moral snobbery and the wokery and Marxism inherent
in it, but having Putin run your country instead is not the solution.

Its not a question of getting corrupt assholes out of politics, That is
impossible. The point about a democracy is that you can get rid of a
Biden, Or Trump, Or Obama.

The point about Putin, is that he gets rid of you. Think Al Capone
heading up the white house.



--
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

[D]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 15/10/2024 09:09, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>>  I don't
>>>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>>>
>>> Better Putin than Soros.
>>>
>>
>> I have compared them both scientifically, and it is actualyl proven that
>> Soros society would be a nicer one, than Putins. If you step away from the
>> main cities in russia, the people in the country side live under close to
>> medieval living conditions that would make all americans revolt.
>>
>> That's what you get with a kleptocracy and an authoritarian system built to
>> exploit the people and enrich its leaders.
>
> Phew. I thought for a moment I was going mad.
>
> Exactly. I think there is a tendency - an understandable tendency, for people
> living cushioned in the richest society in the world, and not needing to be
> really aware in any way in their daily lives about anything beyond its shores
> - to think that because they have identified deep flaws in their own
> government, that some one else's would in fact be better.
>
> Let me tell you there is no such things as a corruption free government
> anywhere in the world, and the aim of most government is to be as corrupt and
> undemocratic as possible, because politicians are not saints, and anyone who
> thinks they are needs urgent medical attention.
>
> I have expressed this many times as:
>
> "All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that all
> government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is fully
> understood."
>
> So the Liberals pretend to be the good guys on the moral high ground, to get
> the votes that enable them to satisfy the demands of the people with deep
> pockets like the globalist corporates.
>
> Whilst the Donald pretends to be the redneck dude with the traditional
> values of bottom slapping and pussy grabbing individualism, in order that
> *he* can get into power and get paid off by the FSB leper funds from
> Moscow.
>
> So its not he redneck shit that I object to. Far from it. Lotta redneck in
> me. It's the FSB
>
> I loathe the liberal moral snobbery and the wokery and Marxism inherent in
> it, but having Putin run your country instead is not the solution.
>
> Its not a question of getting corrupt assholes out of politics, That is
> impossible. The point about a democracy is that you can get rid of a Biden,
> Or Trump, Or Obama.
>
> The point about Putin, is that he gets rid of you. Think Al Capone heading up
> the white house.
>

This is the truth. Soros is preferable to Putin. With Putin, society is
reduced to a medieval fiefdom with serfs, nobility and Tsar. Serfs will be
trampled upon and killed when expedient.

[rbowman]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 22:24:22 +0200, D wrote:


> This is the truth. Soros is preferable to Putin. With Putin, society is
> reduced to a medieval fiefdom with serfs, nobility and Tsar. Serfs will
> be trampled upon and killed when expedient.

And what will a Soros backed society be? Thralls will be thralls. In
modern society they aren't owned. It was recognized it is more economic to
let the thralls provide their own sustenance rather than having to provide
for them., You left out the karls, or freemen, They were the craftsmen,
merchants, and other necessary functionaries. Then there were the jarls
and the king.

That echoes the Laws of Manu that help Indian society together for
centuries. They did have a finer distinction between the brahmins and the
kshatriya, warriors and administrators.

That's the reality, dress it up with 'equality' and other phantoms as you
will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D77dbv-xNfE

"And you think you're so clever, classless, and free
But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see"

John Lennon

[D]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 22:24:22 +0200, D wrote:
>
>
>> This is the truth. Soros is preferable to Putin. With Putin, society is
>> reduced to a medieval fiefdom with serfs, nobility and Tsar. Serfs will
>> be trampled upon and killed when expedient.
>
> And what will a Soros backed society be? Thralls will be thralls. In
> modern society they aren't owned. It was recognized it is more economic to
> let the thralls provide their own sustenance rather than having to provide
> for them., You left out the karls, or freemen, They were the craftsmen,
> merchants, and other necessary functionaries. Then there were the jarls
> and the king.
>
> That echoes the Laws of Manu that help Indian society together for
> centuries. They did have a finer distinction between the brahmins and the
> kshatriya, warriors and administrators.
>
> That's the reality, dress it up with 'equality' and other phantoms as you
> will.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D77dbv-xNfE
>
> "And you think you're so clever, classless, and free
> But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see"
>
> John Lennon
>
>

Well, in all fairness, I said better with Soros than Putin, but I agree
that it won't be a utopia. ;)

[Chris Ahlstrom]

D wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> <snip>
>
> Well, in all fairness, I said better with Soros than Putin, but I agree
> that it won't be a utopia. ;)

The only Utopia is sitting in front of a Linux box writing code. :-)

My mother was always telling me this:

--
Wake up and smell the coffee.
-- Ann Landers

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 16/10/2024 12:34, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> D wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Well, in all fairness, I said better with Soros than Putin, but I agree
>> that it won't be a utopia. ;)
>
> The only Utopia is sitting in front of a Linux box writing code. :-)
>
> My mother was always telling me this:
>
All rhetoric and ideology aside. the question is 'which one needs you more'

It is clear that Putin likes money and power and hates people .
Soros? I dunno. I dont think he actively hates people. He just doesnt
care very much.

--
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

Mark Twain

[Pancho]

On 10/15/24 09:09, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>>  I don't
>>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>>
>> Better Putin than Soros.
>>
>
> I have compared them both scientifically, and it is actualyl proven that
> Soros society would be a nicer one, than Putins. If you step away from
> the main cities in russia, the people in the country side live under
> close to medieval living conditions that would make all americans revolt.
>

That is an unfair comparison. Putin inherited a country on the brink of
collapse. He stabilised it and produced reasonable growth. Many of his
problems have been caused by external pressures, which do not exist for
the US. Not least of which is USA enforced sanctions.

Experience in Africa show us that trying to impose liberal democracy on
countries, without the social framework to handle it, can be
catastrophic. Yes, Putin is a tyrant, but I suspect, currently, Russia
needs a tyrant.

> That's what you get with a kleptocracy and an authoritarian system built
> to exploit the people and enrich its leaders.

You'll have to spell out if you are talking about the USA or Russia.
Today I was reading about Cryptocurrency billionaires trying to
manipulate the US democratic process to remove a senator seeking to
regulate them.

FWIW, I don't understand why Soros is presented as an arch villain.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 15/10/2024 13:06, Pancho wrote:
> On 10/15/24 09:09, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:39:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>>  I don't
>>>> want Putin running the USA like it was Chechnya.
>>>
>>> Better Putin than Soros.
>>>
>>
>> I have compared them both scientifically, and it is actualyl proven
>> that Soros society would be a nicer one, than Putins. If you step away
>> from the main cities in russia, the people in the country side live
>> under close to medieval living conditions that would make all
>> americans revolt.
>>
>
> That is an unfair comparison. Putin inherited a country on the brink of
> collapse. He stabilised it and produced reasonable growth. Many of his
> problems have been caused by external pressures, which do not exist for
> the US. Not least of which is USA enforced sanctions.
>
> Experience in Africa show us that trying to impose liberal democracy on
> countries, without the social framework to handle it, can be
> catastrophic. Yes, Putin is a tyrant, but I suspect, currently, Russia
> needs a tyrant.
>
>> That's what you get with a kleptocracy and an authoritarian system
>> built to exploit the people and enrich its leaders.
>
> You'll have to spell out if you are talking about the USA or Russia.

Russia.
The USA is more an oligarchy.

The sad thing about Russia is that its never been anything else, and its
people would not know what to do if it wasnt.
It has always been a collection of utterly poor serfs, a few
intellectual and affluent middle class and an oppressive centralised
power structure on top.

At the breakdown of communism, party Apparatchiks realised that if they
could grab control of the greatest source of income - oil and gas - they
would be sitting on an income stream large enough to pay for the FSB to
stop anyone stopping them. They didnt need an educated middle class to
do this beyond a bit of service to the kleptocracy and keeping the oil
and gash gushing, and the absolutely didn't need the peasants.
And they didn't need to pay much attention to manufacturing when they
could afford to import everything.

And so that being what was possible, that was what they did Russia is a
typical third world oil country, with all the power and money in very
few hands and the population oppressed in classical Marxist terms by
capitalists. Except they never put any capital up. They stole it.

That's what we call them a kleptocracy, The Russian state is comprised
of thieves, and its run as a Mafia.


> Today I was reading about Cryptocurrency billionaires trying to
> manipulate the US democratic process to remove a senator seeking to
> regulate them.
>
> FWIW, I don't understand why Soros is presented as an arch villain.
>
Well really because he uses his power to do what's good for Soros, and
in the process has done damage elsewhere.

I don't like that, but I like Putin a whole lot less. The USA hasn't
ever really been run by true dictators and fascists so you don't have
the direct experience of them. South America has of course a long
tradition of such. Cf Venezuela and Chavez.


Here in Europe we have always had them and the democracy we gifted you
was our ultimate prophylactic against them. In the beginning they were
Feudal overlords, then they were arrogant kings, then they became power
mad dictators like
Napoleon...Franco...Mussolini...Hitler...Stalin...Ceaușescu...and today
they are the bureaucrats of the FSB in Russia and the EU in Western
Europe, except that Western Europe has vestiges of democracy left.


Rich and powerful men are rich and powerful because it is important to
them and thats why they get to be rich and powerful, and then they get
worried someone will steal it and the next thing is they are playing
with politics. And using a bit of the riches to but all the
politicians, They don't care which party wins as long as enough of its
top puppets are their puppets in their pockets.

In the case of Russia your summary of and comparison with African
nations is indeed cogent. There is no point in trying to 'regime change'
Russia because the next regime will be the same as this one.

What is pragmatic is to destroy them militarily and as a world power,
and let the Russians themselves decide what to do next.

As we have done with North Korea. Its a pimple we need not burst,
because ultimately its an entirely self contained shithole that doesn't
impact anywhere else and it serves as an example of what happens when
you let leaders become divine beings and give them godlike powers.

Where you make a mistake is to buy into the crap about any of Russia
problems being the USAs fault, except that in 1944 you should have
listened to Churchill and let the Russians get slaughtered by Germany
before defeating Germany.

No Eastern Bloc. No Cold War.

No one has exerted any pressure on Russia whatsoever. No one wants
Russia, only its oil and gas. And the deal was that Russia got paid
handsomely for those with the West turning a blind eye as to how the
kleptocrats murdered their own citizens.

But Russia has always interfered in the West. And pushed the limits. And
never played nice. And Putin invaded Ukraine on a pretext.

He crossed the red line. And unlike his red line, ours are a bit more
actively enforced.



--
“People believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,
and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.
Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, one’s
agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of
one’s suitability to be taken seriously.”

Paul Krugman

[Richard Kettlewell]

The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> writes:
> As we have done with North Korea. Its a pimple we need not burst,
> because ultimately its an entirely self contained shithole that
> doesn't impact anywhere else and it serves as an example of what
> happens when you let leaders become divine beings and give them
> godlike powers.

North Korea does impact the rest of the world - it’s behind a lot of
hacking campaigns, which we pay for in various ways (ransoms, theft,
post-attack cleanup, etc). It’s how they stay afloat. However, as you
say, letting that continue is much cheaper than military intervention.

In contrast sending old NATO kit to Ukraine is practically free l-)

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 15/10/2024 18:17, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> As we have done with North Korea. Its a pimple we need not burst,
>> because ultimately its an entirely self contained shithole that
>> doesn't impact anywhere else and it serves as an example of what
>> happens when you let leaders become divine beings and give them
>> godlike powers.
>
> North Korea does impact the rest of the world - it’s behind a lot of
> hacking campaigns, which we pay for in various ways (ransoms, theft,
> post-attack cleanup, etc).

Indeed. Id forgotten that. I get more issues from China, India and Russia...

It’s how they stay afloat. However, as you
> say, letting that continue is much cheaper than military intervention.
>
> In contrast sending old NATO kit to Ukraine is practically free l-)
>

It is, but the aim of the pro Russian trolls is to generate emotion, not
reason.


--
There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent
renewable energy.

[rbowman]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:06:48 +0100, Pancho wrote:

> FWIW, I don't understand why Soros is presented as an arch villain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday

Yes, I realize Soros did nothing illegal and it was only a smart business
move. However that doesn't change my opinion of curerncy traders being
lower than pond scum. Soros went on to finance NGOs and PAC that support
positions that I do not agree with. Again, opinions are like assholes but
my opinion of Soros is rather low.

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> The problem is that the altenative - the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>
> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
> destructive third world states.
>

This is the truth!

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 20:48, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>
>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>> destructive third world states.
>>
>
> This is the truth!

It is also extremely short sighted.
And the USA is not part of Putin's Empire - yet.
How *much* does the Orange Jesus owe Mr Vlad?

More, or less, than Barack Obama?



--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

[D]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 14/10/2024 20:48, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>>
>>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
>>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>>> destructive third world states.
>>>
>>
>> This is the truth!
>
> It is also extremely short sighted.
> And the USA is not part of Putin's Empire - yet.
> How *much* does the Orange Jesus owe Mr Vlad?
>
> More, or less, than Barack Obama?
>

Proof please. Then we talk.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 15/10/2024 09:10, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 14/10/2024 20:48, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>>>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>>>
>>>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the
>>>> Ukraine or
>>>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>>>> destructive third world states.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is the truth!
>>
>> It is also extremely short sighted.
>> And the USA is not part of Putin's Empire - yet.
>> How *much* does the Orange Jesus owe Mr Vlad?
>>
>> More, or less, than Barack Obama?
>>
>
> Proof please. Then we talk.

Er. a question doesn't have a 'proof'

Why would Putin and his FSB chums *not* funnel funds/blackmail/otherwise
compromise/ to affect, support or purchase politicians in other nations
in order to shape their political processes to suit Russian needs?

The CIA does *exactly* that. I am sure MI5 does. I would be upset if
they did not.

We saw as blatant and disgraceful an attempt by the Speaker of your
House to utterly disrupt the USAs political process in favour of Russia
as we did in OUR house to favour the European Union.

Why this naive need to believe that you have finally found the One True
Incorruptible politician who is really on your side?

Bless!

We have a government website called 'they work for you'

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/

Do they work for us? Do they fuck!

In terms of what motivates a politician, the *last* people they are
working for is you.

Only very rarely does someone with some idea of what 'national interest'
*really* means turn up, and they are regarded by their fellow
politicians as extremely dangerous people.

Whatever else he may be, Trump is certainly beholden to Putin. So too
via Hunter, may have been Joe Biden.

I think I read somewhere that the *majority* of politicians in the main
German political party had all been to Russia on expense paid trips, and
no doubt entertained by athletic 'Natashas' in the absence of their
stolid German wives...

This is how the world works.

Democracy us about sacking the worst before they can do as much damage
to your country as Putin has done to Russia.

--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

[D]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 15/10/2024 09:10, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/10/2024 20:48, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the USA
>>>>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>>>>
>>>>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the Ukraine or
>>>>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>>>>> destructive third world states.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is the truth!
>>>
>>> It is also extremely short sighted.
>>> And the USA is not part of Putin's Empire - yet.
>>> How *much* does the Orange Jesus owe Mr Vlad?
>>>
>>> More, or less, than Barack Obama?
>>>
>>
>> Proof please. Then we talk.
>
> Er. a question doesn't have a 'proof'
>
> Why would Putin and his FSB chums *not* funnel funds/blackmail/otherwise
> compromise/ to affect, support or purchase politicians in other nations in
> order to shape their political processes to suit Russian needs?
>
> The CIA does *exactly* that. I am sure MI5 does. I would be upset if they did
> not.
>
> We saw as blatant and disgraceful an attempt by the Speaker of your House to
> utterly disrupt the USAs political process in favour of Russia as we did in
> OUR house to favour the European Union.
>
> Why this naive need to believe that you have finally found the One True
> Incorruptible politician who is really on your side?
>
> Bless!
>
> We have a government website called 'they work for you'
>
> https://www.theyworkforyou.com/
>
> Do they work for us? Do they fuck!
>
> In terms of what motivates a politician, the *last* people they are working
> for is you.
>
> Only very rarely does someone with some idea of what 'national interest'
> *really* means turn up, and they are regarded by their fellow politicians as
> extremely dangerous people.
>
> Whatever else he may be, Trump is certainly beholden to Putin. So too via
> Hunter, may have been Joe Biden.
>
> I think I read somewhere that the *majority* of politicians in the main
> German political party had all been to Russia on expense paid trips, and no
> doubt entertained by athletic 'Natashas' in the absence of their stolid
> German wives...
>
> This is how the world works.
>
> Democracy us about sacking the worst before they can do as much damage to
> your country as Putin has done to Russia.
>

No proof, no talk.

[[e-mail]]

On 10/15/24 7:46 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/10/2024 09:10, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/10/2024 20:48, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:46:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is that the altenative -  the Doonald, will weaken the
>>>>>> USA
>>>>>> globally by becoming isolationist.
>>>>>
>>>>> It won't happen but I consider that a plus point. Neither the
>>>>> Ukraine or
>>>>> Israel are US states, let alone Haiti, Somalia, and other seflf
>>>>> destructive third world states.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is the truth!
>>>
>>> It is also extremely short sighted.
>>> And the USA is not part of Putin's Empire - yet.
>>> How *much* does the Orange Jesus owe Mr Vlad?
>>>
>>> More, or less, than Barack Obama?
>>>
>>
>> Proof please. Then we talk.
>
> Er. a question doesn't have a 'proof'
>
> Why would Putin and his FSB chums *not* funnel funds/blackmail/otherwise
> compromise/  to affect, support or purchase politicians in other nations
> in order to shape their political processes to suit Russian needs?
>
> The CIA does *exactly* that. I am sure MI5 does. I would be upset if
> they did not.
>
> We saw as blatant and disgraceful an attempt by the Speaker of your
> House to utterly disrupt the USAs political process in favour of Russia
> as we did in OUR house to favour the European Union.
>
> Why this naive need to believe that you have finally found the One True
> Incorruptible politician who is really on your side?
>
> Bless!
>
> We have a government website called 'they work for you'
>
> https://www.theyworkforyou.com/
>
> Do they work for us? Do they fuck!
>
> In terms of what motivates a politician, the *last* people they are
> working for is you.
>
> Only very rarely does someone with some idea of what 'national interest'
> *really* means turn up, and they are regarded by their fellow
> politicians as extremely dangerous people.
>
> Whatever else he may be, Trump is certainly beholden to Putin. So too
> via Hunter, may have been Joe Biden.
>
> I think I read somewhere that the *majority* of politicians in the main
> German political party had all been to Russia on expense paid trips, and
> no doubt entertained by athletic 'Natashas' in the absence of their
> stolid German wives...
>
> This is how the world works.
>
> Democracy us about sacking the worst before they can do as much damage
> to your country as Putin has done to Russia.


"Democracy" is about "suspension of belief" ... you
PRETEND your 'leaders' are great because you had a
largely-pretend role in selecting them. :-)

Machiavelli still scores 100% ...

[Lars Poulsen]

On 2024-10-14, Phillip Frabott <***@fulltermprivacy.com> wrote:
> On 10/13/2024 19:47, Lars Poulsen wrote:
>
>> The fact is that for decades, the Republican administrations have run up
>> the deficits, while Democrats have reduced them.
>>
>
> https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/#us-deficit-by-year
>
> ^^ I would like to point out, .GOV. It's an official government web site.
>
> Debt totals
>
> $1.99T - W Bush 8 years (2001-2008)
> $7.29T - Obama 8 years (2009-2016)
> $5.56T - Trump 4 years (2017-2020)
> $5.85T - Biden 3 Years (2021-2023) [Does not include 2024 spending]
>
> Party Debt from 2001-2023
>
> $7.55T - Republican Presidents
> $13.15T - Democrat Presidents
>
> BTW, it saddens me that you can't find this information on your own.

I did not say that Democratic administrations had reduced the debt, I
said they had reduced the deficit, while Republican adminsistrations
tend to increase the deficit (which is the derivative of the debt).

Republicans make a lot of noise about debt and deficits, but are
unwilling to collect the taxes needed to finance the expenses that they
want to maintain.

This will be my last comment on the subject.

- Lars Poulsen

--
Born a Happy Dane, became a citizen in 2016 in order to vote.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/10/2024 00:47, Lars Poulsen wrote:
> The only borderline Nazi team in this election is the Trumpist party,
> which has all but promised that if they win, they are going to prosecuter
> their opponents, and "if you elect me, you will never have to vote
> again", where as Kamala Harris a[ppears to be a typical center-right
> Democrat.

Sadly, I fear that what is happening everywhere in the West has happened
in the USA.
The two 'parties' are to use Galloway's inimitable analogy 'two cheeks
of the same arse'

The issues, the agendas, are all predecided. And sadly the agendas are
all Left wing woke moralistic issues.

Full of oughts and shoulds (or should nots) , Not a single cost benefit
calculation in any of them.

Policies based on flimsy ideologies rammed home with wall to wall
propaganda.

Trump is just a fast tracked totalitarian kleptocrat, whereas the
democrats are cooking democracy more slowly. Building their nice little
cosy oligarchy of rich men and rich corporate slave owners,

None of them give a tuppeny fuck for the ordinary joe. Mechanisation
means you don't need him any more.

I hope trump loses because he will gift Ukraine to Putin if he does not,
and Putin will spend the next 5 years working out how to get back the
Baltic countries, and they don't deserve that.

We are actually in the middle of a global struggle for dominance of
world orders.

Basically which bunch of cunts are going to ensalve us, bleed us dry and
tell us what to think .

None of them are to be trusted. They are in collusion anyway.

--
He who follows the herd will only see assholes

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

>> france it is illegal for them to give away their software since it risks
>> outcompeting the local competition. But I have not checked this, so
>> caveat emptor.
>>
>
> I haven't done a lot of looking into this, but I have heard the same. I
> seriously doubt Microsoft will actually comply with this though. Teams and
> Office are their bread and butter and if they were to do it, it would be at a
> higher price tag more likely. Either Microsoft will pay France off at some
> point or they will threaten to pull out of France. If France uses Office and
> Teams in important sectors they will likely cave. It'll be interesting to
> look into this over the next 6 months and see what happens.

I think this has existed for quite a while, and nothing has happened, so
I think that probably you are right here. The law exists, ready to be
used, but they realize they cannot push too hard.

>>>> There is of course a down side to all of this, and that is that the EU is
>>>> regulating it's tech sector out of existence, so all skilled
>>>> technologists, in time, will become employed by non-EU companies, since
>>>> there will be no point in starting a tech company in europe, only to be
>>>> at risk of high fines for the slightest mistake.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In my opinion we are starting to see that transition here in the US as
>>> well. They are starting with the large corporations (which I think they
>>> already have taken over) but will eventually move to the medium/ small
>>> businesses over time. I hope it doesn't happen because then it's just evil
>>> running all of us. But we'll have to see over then next couple elections
>>> what happens.
>>
>> Really?! This was news to me. Usually I read in european pro-business
>> papers, that in the US all is well, and the EU is flushed down the
>> drain, so it was very interesting to hear. On the other hand, lawfare
>> and regulatory capture is a US national sport, so perhaps the driving
>> force behind that are the big corporations in order to stop any
>> competition from developing.
>>
>
> Heh, The government controls the news and most of the media here.
> (specifically the democratic party). Facebook, Google, and Microsoft all do
> the Government's bidding and the only reason why Twitter stopped being a
> Government puppet is because Elon purchased it and kicked the Government out
> (government has been going after Elon ever since). I should note that our
> Government power is in Democrat hands right now. Democrats will deny this is
> happening but you can do the research and look into things beyond the surface
> and you can find the truth of it. This election between Kamala and Trump will
> decide the fate of the US. If Kamala wins the Government will shift to either
> a Nationalist Socialist country or a Communist Socialist country depending on
> certain other factors. If Trump wins we will remain a Republic Capitalist
> country. Despite what the media says, word on the ground is Trump is winning
> hearts and minds and personally I think that's good for our country. We'll
> see what happens in the next few weeks. (Our elections are Nov 5th)

I agree with you analysis. Also note that Trump winning will be the
absoultely best outcome for europe in the long term. If the (social)
democrats win, they will continue to pay for europes security problems
and wars, so europe will never learn to take responsibility for its own
security and neighboring crazy countries. If Trump wins, a clear message
will be sent that its time for europe to shape up, since the US will no
longer pay for everything.

Contrary to popular belief, that will actually create a safer and more
stable world, than the EU constantly leaning on the US.

>> I wonder where the next wave of tech startups will come from? Perhaps
>> Milei will manage to drain the swamp in Argentina, and Argentina will
>> become the innovation power house of the planet? Talk about something
>> unexpected, if that were to happen!
>>
>>>> In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from the
>>>> rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There will of
>>>> course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all innovation will
>>>> leave the EU if its current socialist and pro- regulation agenda
>>>> continues for long.
>>>
>>> I fear this is coming to the US as well. "We the people" need to vote out
>>> the politicians that are supporting this cause. But the issue is the
>>> younger generations seem to want this to happen. Sadly I don't think they
>>> realize how bad this is going to be for us over here but they won't
>>> realize it until it's too late I'm afraid.
>>
>> Sad to hear it. And is it still the case that neither US party has any
>> intention of actually lowering the debt of the country? If not, I would
>> imagine that it eventually will reach a level at which the credit rating
>> agencies cannot ignore it any longer, and that day will certainly send
>> shock waves throughout the global economy! =/
>
> Despite what the media says Trump is our better bet in this regard. The issue
> is, because of democrat spending over the last 2 decades (they have held
> office 12 out of the 20 years) it would take at least 2-3 republican
> presidential terms to stop the bleed and break even. probably another 2 terms
> to start lowering the debt. There is just so much waste happening that the
> best Trump can do in 4 years (assuming he gets into the office again, fingers
> crossed) is slow down the spending. It will take another republican president
> 2 more terms (8 years) to get all the rest of the waste out of our government
> budget to get to 0/0 each year. It would also cost us a lot of social
> services that go to people who really don't need them. Don't get my wrong,
> there are legitimate cases and I believe we should take care of our people
> but in my opinion, we spend 30% of those services on people who actually need
> it and 70% on people who don't. I mean, I could get on social services right
> now if I wanted to and get $660 a month for free and continue working my job.
> And there is absolutely nothing wrong with me (and I do very well for myself
> financially so if someone like me can get $660 a month you know money is
> being wasted). If we get rid of that 70% junk spending then we'd probably cut
> a large portion of our spending down.
>
> Sorry, got off topic there..

Very interesting! Usually you read in europe that all is doom and gloom
and that the US will collapse. I'm happy to hear that there is light in
the tunnel as long as the republicans win.

As for democrats winning, I really do fear for the future of the US. It
seems like they will completely obliterate the working classes and
consolidate wealth in the political class and their sycophants.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-10-13, D <***@example.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>>> In terms of how much MS there is in the infra, you are 100% right. There
>>> are small initiatives here and there, for instance, München switched to
>>> libreoffice, but usually what happens, is that Microsoft bribes the
>>> politicians with promises of an R&D center employing X 100 or 1000 people
>>> if they change back, and of course they do, since they are politicians and
>>> not open source enthusiasts.

Except, perhaps, for Venezuela. I haven't heard much news lately about
how their open-source mandate was going - is it still in effect?

>> Yeah I mean, MS would never "allow" it to happen. Until politicians are
>> willing to lose money, MS will continue to feed governments money to keep
>> them solidly on MS products. Which again, is where I can say that any
>> 'speeding ticket' case that would be against MS will be quickly dismissed.
>
> I think france judged that MS has to unbundle teams from Office, and in
> france it is illegal for them to give away their software since it risks
> outcompeting the local competition. But I have not checked this, so
> caveat emptor.

I once got my hands on a copy of Window XP N - the N stands for "No
Internet Explorer", which was a European mandate.

<snip>

>>> In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from the
>>> rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There will of
>>> course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all innovation will
>>> leave the EU if its current socialist and pro-regulation agenda continues
>>> for long.
>>
>> I fear this is coming to the US as well. "We the people" need to vote out
>> the politicians that are supporting this cause.

Who will they vote in? These days voting is like trying to decide
whether you want to be shot or stabbed.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
-- The Who

>> But the issue is the younger
>> generations seem to want this to happen. Sadly I don't think they realize
>> how bad this is going to be for us over here but they won't realize it
>> until it's too late I'm afraid.

It is sad - it's like watching drug addicts slip away.

> Sad to hear it. And is it still the case that neither US party has any
> intention of actually lowering the debt of the country? If not, I would
> imagine that it eventually will reach a level at which the credit rating
> agencies cannot ignore it any longer, and that day will certainly send
> shock waves throughout the global economy! =/

I wonder whether national debt is even seen the same way as personal
debt. It certainly doesn't seem that way. If we as individuals ran
our finances the way governments run theirs, we'd be thrown in jail.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2024-10-13, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>
>>>> In terms of how much MS there is in the infra, you are 100% right. There
>>>> are small initiatives here and there, for instance, MÃŒnchen switched to
>>>> libreoffice, but usually what happens, is that Microsoft bribes the
>>>> politicians with promises of an R&D center employing X 100 or 1000 people
>>>> if they change back, and of course they do, since they are politicians and
>>>> not open source enthusiasts.
>
> Except, perhaps, for Venezuela. I haven't heard much news lately about
> how their open-source mandate was going - is it still in effect?

Venezuela is by now a failed state run by criminals, so I think they
probably don't even follow their own rules.

>>> Yeah I mean, MS would never "allow" it to happen. Until politicians are
>>> willing to lose money, MS will continue to feed governments money to keep
>>> them solidly on MS products. Which again, is where I can say that any
>>> 'speeding ticket' case that would be against MS will be quickly dismissed.
>>
>> I think france judged that MS has to unbundle teams from Office, and in
>> france it is illegal for them to give away their software since it risks
>> outcompeting the local competition. But I have not checked this, so
>> caveat emptor.
>
> I once got my hands on a copy of Window XP N - the N stands for "No
> Internet Explorer", which was a European mandate.
>
> <snip>

Fascinating! Never seen such a thing in europe. On the other hand, I've
run linux 100% the past 2 decades and I only work with linux and the
associated eco-system so fortunately I do not get exposed to windows that
often.

My main source of filth is teams and chrome.

>>>> In my opinion, the EU will become a museum where rich tourists from the
>>>> rest of the world will go to experience food and culture. There will of
>>>> course be a tail of tech jobs in heavy industry, but all innovation will
>>>> leave the EU if its current socialist and pro-regulation agenda continues
>>>> for long.
>>>
>>> I fear this is coming to the US as well. "We the people" need to vote out
>>> the politicians that are supporting this cause.
>
> Who will they vote in? These days voting is like trying to decide
> whether you want to be shot or stabbed.
>
> Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
> -- The Who
>
>>> But the issue is the younger
>>> generations seem to want this to happen. Sadly I don't think they realize
>>> how bad this is going to be for us over here but they won't realize it
>>> until it's too late I'm afraid.
>
> It is sad - it's like watching drug addicts slip away.
>
>> Sad to hear it. And is it still the case that neither US party has any
>> intention of actually lowering the debt of the country? If not, I would
>> imagine that it eventually will reach a level at which the credit rating
>> agencies cannot ignore it any longer, and that day will certainly send
>> shock waves throughout the global economy! =/
>
> I wonder whether national debt is even seen the same way as personal
> debt. It certainly doesn't seem that way. If we as individuals ran
> our finances the way governments run theirs, we'd be thrown in jail.

This is the biggest mistake in monetary policy in our times. The economy
of the state should be run _exactly_ as the individual economy. If that
was the case, we'd have much more stable markets, and happier long term
prospects.

[Juancho]

On 2024-10-12, D <***@example.net> wrote:
>
> Fortunately at least this practice is illegal in the EU, so there they
> cannot do this.

That practice may be illegal in the EU, but that only means there they
cannot say that they are doing this.

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>
>>You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>
>> Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>> engineer working for Microsoft ...
>
> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
> a good thing.

I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[Marc Haber]

***@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
>I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).

So you're doing your own security? Or do you just not care about being
vulnerable?

Greetings
Marc
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402

[Computer Nerd Kev]

Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
> ***@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
>>I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>>little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>>a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>>can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>>Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>
> So you're doing your own security? Or do you just not care about being
> vulnerable?

I run a firewall that blocks inbound connections from the internet,
and I don't run JS-supporting web browsers on them so no random JS
hacking about at old browser vulnerabilities. If you wanted to take
that approach for an internet server then "doing your own security"
would be a more meaningful commitment, although the CIP supported
kernels are a good starting point.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[D]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2024, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>
>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>
>>> Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>> engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>
>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
>> a good thing.
>
> I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
> little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
> a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
> can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
> Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>

Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .

[rbowman]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:53:58 +0200, D wrote:

> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .

In fairness Microsoft follows the same path for things they do own.
Silverlight anyone?

[D]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:53:58 +0200, D wrote:
>
>> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .
>
> In fairness Microsoft follows the same path for things they do own.
> Silverlight anyone?
>

Touché!

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/11/2024 14:36, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:53:58 +0200, D wrote:
>
>> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .
>
> In fairness Microsoft follows the same path for things they do own.
> Silverlight anyone?
>

I always looked at Silverlight as a temporary technology until HTML5 was
implemented. Microsoft did say that Silverlight was always a limited run
technology when people started asking about where Silverlight would fit
into the HTML5 era. So I don't think it was as much EEE as it was, just
something to keep people busy until HTML5.

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/11/2024 04:53, D wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2024, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>
>> Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>>
>>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>>
>>>>   Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>>>   engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>>
>>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
>>> a good thing.
>>
>> I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>> little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>> a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>> can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>> Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>>
>
> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .

I bothers me how many Linux users want these large corps money in the
game. It's dangerous in my opinion because these companies don't have
their users best interests at heart at all. And for Microsoft it's all
EEE anyways so Microsoft's Money in Linux is very bad news. (yes, pun
intended for those who got it).

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> On 10/11/2024 04:53, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2024, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>
>>> Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>>>
>>>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>>>
>>>>>   Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>>>>   engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
>>>> a good thing.
>>>
>>> I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>>> little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>>> a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>>> can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>>> Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>>>
>>
>> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .
>
> I bothers me how many Linux users want these large corps money in the game.
> It's dangerous in my opinion because these companies don't have their users
> best interests at heart at all. And for Microsoft it's all EEE anyways so
> Microsoft's Money in Linux is very bad news. (yes, pun intended for those who
> got it).

I agree completely. That's why linux is becoming less good and more
political. I've had dealings with the linux foundation, and it was all
corporate CV stuffing and corporate bullsh*t.

But, another factor I think, is the age and size of the project. It is
ossifying. Innovation is slowing down.

I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or if
there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate something new,
that will take off with lightning speed?

[rbowman]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 22:55:37 +0200, D wrote:

> I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or if
> there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate something new,
> that will take off with lightning speed?

https://thenewstack.io/open-source-needs-younger-maintainers-how-can-it-
get-them/

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the next big bang for operating
systems. For that matter Linux and *BSD have been more like a 50 year slow
burn than any sort of bang if you consider Unix to be the progenitor.

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 22:55:37 +0200, D wrote:
>
>> I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or if
>> there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate something new,
>> that will take off with lightning speed?
>
> https://thenewstack.io/open-source-needs-younger-maintainers-how-can-it-
> get-them/
>
> I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the next big bang for operating
> systems. For that matter Linux and *BSD have been more like a 50 year slow
> burn than any sort of bang if you consider Unix to be the progenitor.
>

I would argue linux was a big bang. As for open source maintainers, this
is good! There is of course no responsibility, and I think perhaps
companies will learn what they are basing their products on, in case a
maintainer disappears.

If there's a need, a way will be found.

But looking at the developers I meet today, the vast majority are
javascript and python ninjas.

The ones I know who do C, rust and are generally brilliant are:

1. Few.
2. Older.

I agree that if that is part of a trend, many open source projects will
slowly die over the years, and as you say, the chance of a new OS from
scratch is perhaps also lower.

But there is this Ladybug browser, with the associated OS, can that be
something?

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 13/10/2024 10:50, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 22:55:37 +0200, D wrote:
>>
>>> I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or if
>>> there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate something new,
>>> that will take off with lightning speed?
>>
>> https://thenewstack.io/open-source-needs-younger-maintainers-how-can-it-
>> get-them/
>>
>> I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the next big bang for operating
>> systems. For that matter Linux and *BSD have been more like a 50 year
>> slow
>> burn than any sort of bang if you consider Unix to be the progenitor.
>>
>
> I would argue linux was a big bang.

I wouldn't. We'd been using Unix for years for bigger iron than a single
user PC. It was pretty well organised in every area except its
commercial existence.
Too much Lawfare.

As soon as a Lawfare free Linux and BSD came out, people who had used
Unix grabbed it an carried on the worlds Big Iron fed up with being sued
decided that not owning Linux was a fair price to pay for no one else
owning it either.

As for open source maintainers, this
> is good! There is of course no responsibility, and I think perhaps
> companies will learn what they are basing their products on, in case a
> maintainer disappears.
>
> If there's a need, a way will be found.
>
> But looking at the developers I meet today, the vast majority are
> javascript and python ninjas.

Java as well, but plenty of C++ ers around.

>
> The ones I know who do C, rust and are generally brilliant are:
>
> 1. Few.
> 2. Older.
>
> I agree that if that is part of a trend, many open source projects will
> slowly die over the years, and as you say, the chance of a new OS from
> scratch is perhaps also lower.
>
Writing a new limited scope OS is not that hard (at least for younger
programmers) on something like a Pi Pico or Arduino.

The problem with linux is that it comes with all options available, and
being able to run 10,000 users or web sessions is not relevant to a PI
Zero running a domestic heating controller.

Most people accept this and throw in enough RAM to run the standard
kernel and dont try to modify it in anyway. The game is not worth the
candle.

I have a domestic heating contraller with a potential performance equal
to a VAX 11/70? so what?
It only cost $20



> But there is this Ladybug browser, with the associated OS, can that be
> something?

--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

[rbowman]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 13:04:00 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I wouldn't. We'd been using Unix for years for bigger iron than a single
> user PC. It was pretty well organised in every area except its
> commercial existence.
> Too much Lawfare.

Unix had a rocky history going back the the Bell anti-trust suit and it
didn't get better as time went on. At least in the Boston area a lot of
PDP-11s were running Unix systems of dubious ancestry.

[Harold Stevens]

In <***@mid.individual.net> rbowman:

> Unix had a rocky history going back the the Bell anti-trust suit and it
> didn't get better as time went on


It lingered until at least 2021 in the canker SCO+Dog Vs. World:

Timeline of SCO–Linux disputes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes

Why Novell sold Unix rights to SCO--insider's story
https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-novell-sold-unix-rights-to-sco-insiders-story/

--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at att, dotted with net. * DO NOT SPAM IT. *
I toss GoogleGroup (http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/).

[rbowman]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 11:50:39 +0200, D wrote:

> But there is this Ladybug browser, with the associated OS, can that be
> something?

It's more viable than TempleOS or some of the others.

https://wiki.osdev.org/Notable_Projects

A new OS has to be better than the existing alternatives, not only
different. It also needs to inspire the confidence that it will be around
for longer than a mayfly. A small scale example is Mbed OS.

https://os.mbed.com/blog/entry/Important-Update-on-Mbed/

https://blog.arduino.cc/2019/07/31/why-we-chose-to-build-the-arduino-
nano-33-ble-core-on-mbed-os/

The second link is why Arduino chose Mbed for the Nano 33 BLE Sense. It
made perfect sense in 2019. Arduino wasn't the only one to use Mbed. Now
they are scrambling to move to Zephyr OS.

https://blog.arduino.cc/2024/07/24/the-end-of-mbed-marks-a-new-beginning-
for-arduino/

Compared to a general purpose OS like Linux or BSD, an embedded RTOS is
samll potatoes but for something like Firefox for example to develop for a
new OS there has to be the confidence it isn't going to die. That applies
to many projects other than OSs where you're dependent on a third party.

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 11:50:39 +0200, D wrote:
>
>> But there is this Ladybug browser, with the associated OS, can that be
>> something?
>
> It's more viable than TempleOS or some of the others.
>
> https://wiki.osdev.org/Notable_Projects
>
> A new OS has to be better than the existing alternatives, not only
> different. It also needs to inspire the confidence that it will be around
> for longer than a mayfly. A small scale example is Mbed OS.
>
> https://os.mbed.com/blog/entry/Important-Update-on-Mbed/
>
> https://blog.arduino.cc/2019/07/31/why-we-chose-to-build-the-arduino-
> nano-33-ble-core-on-mbed-os/
>
> The second link is why Arduino chose Mbed for the Nano 33 BLE Sense. It
> made perfect sense in 2019. Arduino wasn't the only one to use Mbed. Now
> they are scrambling to move to Zephyr OS.
>
> https://blog.arduino.cc/2024/07/24/the-end-of-mbed-marks-a-new-beginning-
> for-arduino/
>
> Compared to a general purpose OS like Linux or BSD, an embedded RTOS is
> samll potatoes but for something like Firefox for example to develop for a
> new OS there has to be the confidence it isn't going to die. That applies
> to many projects other than OSs where you're dependent on a third party.

Those are all good points.

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/12/2024 16:55, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>> On 10/11/2024 04:53, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2024, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>
>>>> Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>>>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>>>>>   engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
>>>>> a good thing.
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>>>> little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>>>> a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>>>> can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>>>> Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .
>>
>> I bothers me how many Linux users want these large corps money in the
>> game. It's dangerous in my opinion because these companies don't have
>> their users best interests at heart at all. And for Microsoft it's all
>> EEE anyways so Microsoft's Money in Linux is very bad news. (yes, pun
>> intended for those who got it).
>
> I agree completely. That's why linux is becoming less good and more
> political. I've had dealings with the linux foundation, and it was all
> corporate CV stuffing and corporate bullsh*t.
>
> But, another factor I think, is the age and size of the project. It is
> ossifying. Innovation is slowing down.
>
> I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or if
> there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate something new,
> that will take off with lightning speed?

Forgive me, I'm going to make the assumption that when you say Linux,
you are referring to GNU/Linux (Linux just being the kernel).

I think the innovation is slowing down because GNU/Linux has finally
caught up to where other operating systems are today. The same could be
said about Windows or MacOS. They really aren't innovating with any
speed either. My biggest thing is that I hope with us at a point now
where we have technological parity with the other OSes, we can start to
see projects finish the 'last mile' of development. Most of the
FOSS/OSS/Freedom Software out there is 80% and they just stop developing
as "good enough". Which it is, but that extra 20% polish would really
create a top notch system that can truly rival and even overthrow the
other operating systems. We should try to shift our focus on building
the software to 100% but finishing that polish needed for most packages
out there.

(If you were referring to only the Linux kernel my statement still
applies, just leave the GNU bits of my statement out of it).

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

> On 10/12/2024 16:55, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/11/2024 04:53, D wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2024, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>>>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>>>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>>>>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>>>>>>   engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider that
>>>>>> a good thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>>>>> little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>>>>> a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>>>>> can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>>>>> Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .
>>>
>>> I bothers me how many Linux users want these large corps money in the
>>> game. It's dangerous in my opinion because these companies don't have
>>> their users best interests at heart at all. And for Microsoft it's all EEE
>>> anyways so Microsoft's Money in Linux is very bad news. (yes, pun intended
>>> for those who got it).
>>
>> I agree completely. That's why linux is becoming less good and more
>> political. I've had dealings with the linux foundation, and it was all
>> corporate CV stuffing and corporate bullsh*t.
>>
>> But, another factor I think, is the age and size of the project. It is
>> ossifying. Innovation is slowing down.
>>
>> I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or if
>> there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate something new,
>> that will take off with lightning speed?
>
> Forgive me, I'm going to make the assumption that when you say Linux, you are
> referring to GNU/Linux (Linux just being the kernel).
>
> I think the innovation is slowing down because GNU/Linux has finally caught
> up to where other operating systems are today. The same could be said about
> Windows or MacOS. They really aren't innovating with any speed either. My
> biggest thing is that I hope with us at a point now where we have
> technological parity with the other OSes, we can start to see projects finish
> the 'last mile' of development. Most of the FOSS/OSS/Freedom Software out
> there is 80% and they just stop developing as "good enough". Which it is, but
> that extra 20% polish would really create a top notch system that can truly
> rival and even overthrow the other operating systems. We should try to shift
> our focus on building the software to 100% but finishing that polish needed
> for most packages out there.
>
> (If you were referring to only the Linux kernel my statement still applies,
> just leave the GNU bits of my statement out of it).
>

That's a good point. Maybe the OS-level is so mature, that not much
remains to be added.

In terms of desktop, my retired father has happily used linux for 10+
years so I'd argue that given an honest look, the linux desktop is
actually far better than any commercial alternatives.

But, being the tech-optimist that I am, that raises the question, will
there be another paradigm shift in OS:s? If so, what could it be?

I think a Gibsonian cyberspace is probably not the future.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 13/10/2024 10:59, D wrote:
> In terms of desktop, my retired father has happily used linux for 10+
> years so I'd argue that given an honest look, the linux desktop is
> actually far better than any commercial alternatives.
>
Oh I think so.


> But, being the tech-optimist that I am, that raises the question, will
> there be another paradigm shift in OS:s? If so, what could it be?
>
I think the whole concept of an operating system is rather dated.

I mean once upon a time A Computer was a room full of grey cabinets,
whizzing tapes and blinken lights.

Not even powerful enough to HAVE an operating system

Today that's a $2 chip...on a $5 board.

> I think a Gibsonian cyberspace is probably not the future.

I am actually not so sure. The virtual reality gamers are developing
tools and driving 3D graphics to unheard of heights (or depths).
Chuck a bit of AI in that and you can have very smart games indeed. Or
weapons
Smart tech with explosives strapped to its back is everyone's favourite
suicide bomber if your population is not oversupplied with gullible idiots.

Imagine a fleet of little metal spiders, equipped with atmospheric
analysis of DNA, solar cells, and a poison barb, designed to randomly
wander around out of sight until they encounter Vladimir Putin (Or
Donald Trump) whereupon they inject the Ricin, broadcast a farewell
message, and self destruct

Crikey, the take up would be immense. Who *wouldn't* want some?

It would be like Witchcraft.

And if they ran a very cutdown version of Linux, why not?

If its technically possible and someone wants it someone will do it.

At the moment Ukraine is would leader in remote killing, and its getting
better. Some form of AI autonomy that lets it carry on without talking
to base is absolutely on the cards.

*If its technically possible, and someone wants it, someone will do it*.


--
"It was a lot more fun being 20 in the 70's that it is being 70 in the 20's"
Joew Walsh

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2024-10-13, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Smart tech with explosives strapped to its back is everyone's favourite
> suicide bomber if your population is not oversupplied with gullible idiots.

I don't see that supply running out anytime soon, on either side
of the fence. And politicians of all stripes are doing their best
to preserve that supply.

Still, your tech fantasies are rather interesting. I had a somewhat
more modest version of a cockroach-sized device that creeps into
meeting rooms, records incriminating evidence, and broadcasts it.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2024-10-13, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Smart tech with explosives strapped to its back is everyone's favourite
>> suicide bomber if your population is not oversupplied with gullible idiots.
>
> I don't see that supply running out anytime soon, on either side
> of the fence. And politicians of all stripes are doing their best
> to preserve that supply.
>
> Still, your tech fantasies are rather interesting. I had a somewhat
> more modest version of a cockroach-sized device that creeps into
> meeting rooms, records incriminating evidence, and broadcasts it.
>

Cockroach? Think flea-sized! Or even better... nano-dots! ;)

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 13/10/2024 19:27, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-10-13, The Natural Philosopher <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Smart tech with explosives strapped to its back is everyone's favourite
>> suicide bomber if your population is not oversupplied with gullible idiots.
>
> I don't see that supply running out anytime soon, on either side
> of the fence. And politicians of all stripes are doing their best
> to preserve that supply.
>
> Still, your tech fantasies are rather interesting. I had a somewhat
> more modest version of a cockroach-sized device that creeps into
> meeting rooms, records incriminating evidence, and broadcasts it.
>

I don't know whether you keep up with that the Ukrainians are
*allegedly* developing, but its bleeding edge stuff built out of cheap
chips and smart code.

When the war is over they will have some companies and technologies
worth billions

I means not hand wavey vaporware, but stuff that actually works. ...


--
"Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have
forgotten your aim."

George Santayana

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/13/2024 05:59, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>> On 10/12/2024 16:55, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/11/2024 04:53, D wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2024, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Marc Haber <mh+***@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>>>>> Rich <***@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc Farley Flud <***@linux.rocks> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> But RedHat, and its lackey Poettering,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You should note that the lackey Poettering is now employed by his
>>>>>>>> original handler when he was employed by RedHat: Microsoft.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennart_Poettering
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   Lennart Poettering (born 15 October 1980) is a German software
>>>>>>>>   engineer working for Microsoft ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Microsoft is putting an awful lot of money into Linux. I consider
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> a good thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would prefer a free OS funded by lots of organisations putting a
>>>>>> little money in, rather than relying on a few companies that invest
>>>>>> a lot and whose individual opinions therefore matter. But beggers
>>>>>> can't be choosers (although I can still choose old versions of
>>>>>> Linux, like I'm using now, for some things).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft funding something they don't own, usually boils down to:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish .
>>>>
>>>> I bothers me how many Linux users want these large corps money in
>>>> the game. It's dangerous in my opinion because these companies don't
>>>> have their users best interests at heart at all. And for Microsoft
>>>> it's all EEE anyways so Microsoft's Money in Linux is very bad news.
>>>> (yes, pun intended for those who got it).
>>>
>>> I agree completely. That's why linux is becoming less good and more
>>> political. I've had dealings with the linux foundation, and it was
>>> all corporate CV stuffing and corporate bullsh*t.
>>>
>>> But, another factor I think, is the age and size of the project. It
>>> is ossifying. Innovation is slowing down.
>>>
>>> I often wonder if the community oriented people will turn to BSD, or
>>> if there will be a new kind of "big bang" that will generate
>>> something new, that will take off with lightning speed?
>>
>> Forgive me, I'm going to make the assumption that when you say Linux,
>> you are referring to GNU/Linux (Linux just being the kernel).
>>
>> I think the innovation is slowing down because GNU/Linux has finally
>> caught up to where other operating systems are today. The same could
>> be said about Windows or MacOS. They really aren't innovating with any
>> speed either. My biggest thing is that I hope with us at a point now
>> where we have technological parity with the other OSes, we can start
>> to see projects finish the 'last mile' of development. Most of the
>> FOSS/OSS/Freedom Software out there is 80% and they just stop
>> developing as "good enough". Which it is, but that extra 20% polish
>> would really create a top notch system that can truly rival and even
>> overthrow the other operating systems. We should try to shift our
>> focus on building the software to 100% but finishing that polish
>> needed for most packages out there.
>>
>> (If you were referring to only the Linux kernel my statement still
>> applies, just leave the GNU bits of my statement out of it).
>>
>
> That's a good point. Maybe the OS-level is so mature, that not much
> remains to be added.
>
> In terms of desktop, my retired father has happily used linux for 10+
> years so I'd argue that given an honest look, the linux desktop is
> actually far better than any commercial alternatives.
>
> But, being the tech-optimist that I am, that raises the question, will
> there be another paradigm shift in OS:s? If so, what could it be?
>

I would think this would only happen/be necessary if/when a
technological change in hardware happens that would cause more
capability beyond the standard scope of what we have now. Remember, the
OS is just an interface between the hardware below it and the software
on top of it. It doesn't (and shouldn't) do much more then that. It's
just an interface and mediator to share 1 piece of hardware with
multiple pieces of software at the same time. So when you think about
it, the real question is, what hardware paradigm shift will happen that
will need the OS to be changed significantly.

> I think a Gibsonian cyberspace is probably not the future.

If that happens, we'll all just hack the Gibson. The police will be on
us in like, 10 minutes. And if we all do it together we can do it in 5
minutes, Lord Nikon will safe all our a**es. Lets go shopping!

--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[D]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:

>> That's a good point. Maybe the OS-level is so mature, that not much remains
>> to be added.
>>
>> In terms of desktop, my retired father has happily used linux for 10+ years
>> so I'd argue that given an honest look, the linux desktop is actually far
>> better than any commercial alternatives.
>>
>> But, being the tech-optimist that I am, that raises the question, will
>> there be another paradigm shift in OS:s? If so, what could it be?
>>
>
> I would think this would only happen/be necessary if/when a technological
> change in hardware happens that would cause more capability beyond the
> standard scope of what we have now. Remember, the OS is just an interface
> between the hardware below it and the software on top of it. It doesn't (and
> shouldn't) do much more then that. It's just an interface and mediator to
> share 1 piece of hardware with multiple pieces of software at the same time.
> So when you think about it, the real question is, what hardware paradigm
> shift will happen that will need the OS to be changed significantly.

The only thing I can think of that would be radically different would be
quantum computers. Maybe it will work in 20-30 years or so, and perhaps
that will bring with it changes?

On the other hand, another perspective on a computer interfaces is that
I formulate things I want to do, and enter those formulations through an
input device, and read the putput from an output device.

The physical world hasn't changed much, and the GUI does seem to do the
job quite well, I mean, with a terminal and a GUI, I do not feel
constrained in any way.

On the other hand, that's why they call it a paradigm shift, since I am
probably not even aware of the next paradigm, so maybe I am contrained
after all, I just do not know it. ;)

>> I think a Gibsonian cyberspace is probably not the future.
>
> If that happens, we'll all just hack the Gibson. The police will be on us in
> like, 10 minutes. And if we all do it together we can do it in 5 minutes,
> Lord Nikon will safe all our a**es. Lets go shopping!

True! ;)

[Phillip Frabott]

On 10/13/2024 16:37, D wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2024, Phillip Frabott wrote:
>
>>> That's a good point. Maybe the OS-level is so mature, that not much
>>> remains to be added.
>>>
>>> In terms of desktop, my retired father has happily used linux for 10+
>>> years so I'd argue that given an honest look, the linux desktop is
>>> actually far better than any commercial alternatives.
>>>
>>> But, being the tech-optimist that I am, that raises the question,
>>> will there be another paradigm shift in OS:s? If so, what could it be?
>>>
>>
>> I would think this would only happen/be necessary if/when a
>> technological change in hardware happens that would cause more
>> capability beyond the standard scope of what we have now. Remember,
>> the OS is just an interface between the hardware below it and the
>> software on top of it. It doesn't (and shouldn't) do much more then
>> that. It's just an interface and mediator to share 1 piece of hardware
>> with multiple pieces of software at the same time. So when you think
>> about it, the real question is, what hardware paradigm shift will
>> happen that will need the OS to be changed significantly.
>
> The only thing I can think of that would be radically different would be
> quantum computers. Maybe it will work in 20-30 years or so, and perhaps
> that will bring with it changes?

It would honestly depend on how different the processing of input and
output is from the hardware-level kernel exposure. Meaning, what
interfaces does the kernel need to interface with a quantum processor
and is it significant enough to warrant an incompatible change with
existing kernels. Because software input/output wouldn't really change
between the kernel/OS and the application. The data is just different
but the method to get the data to the kernel for processing is likely
not to change much (but I could be wrong). I mean if you go into the
current kernel you will still find implementation to use internet-based
applications over a ham (amateur) radio interface. I mean you can
literally run a radio-only telnet/SSH server over radio transmission
without any internet connectivity at all. But because the input/output
between the kernel and the application is the same regardless of if it's
over amateur radio or Ethernet, there is not enough to warrant a
paradigm shift. So it all will just depend on exactly how interfacing
with a quantum computer would work. It'll be an interesting subject
that's for sure. I'll probably be too old by then to really figure it
out though. heh.

>
> On the other hand, another perspective on a computer interfaces is that
> I formulate things I want to do, and enter those formulations through an
> input device, and read the putput from an output device.
>
> The physical world hasn't changed much, and the GUI does seem to do the
> job quite well, I mean, with a terminal and a GUI, I do not feel
> constrained in any way.
>
> On the other hand, that's why they call it a paradigm shift, since I am
> probably not even aware of the next paradigm, so maybe I am contrained
> after all, I just do not know it. ;)
>
>>> I think a Gibsonian cyberspace is probably not the future.
>>
>> If that happens, we'll all just hack the Gibson. The police will be on
>> us in like, 10 minutes. And if we all do it together we can do it in 5
>> minutes, Lord Nikon will safe all our a**es. Lets go shopping!
>
> True! ;)
>


--
Phillip Frabott
----------
- Adam: Is a void really a void if it returns?
- Jack: No, it's just nullspace at that point.
----------

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 13/10/2024 01:56, Phillip Frabott wrote:
> I think the innovation is slowing down because GNU/Linux has finally
> caught up to where other operating systems are today. The same could be
> said about Windows or MacOS. They really aren't innovating with any
> speed either. My biggest thing is that I hope with us at a point now
> where we have technological parity with the other OSes, we can start to
> see projects finish the 'last mile' of development. Most of the
> FOSS/OSS/Freedom Software out there is 80% and they just stop developing
> as "good enough". Which it is, but that extra 20% polish would really
> create a top notch system that can truly rival and even overthrow the
> other operating systems. We should try to shift our focus on building
> the software to 100% but finishing that polish needed for most packages
> out there.

Yep. For all traditional applications Linux is now Good Enough and I am
FAR more interested on having applications that run on it, in my
personal linux space.

I've got a linux that is yonks old still running a public webserver.
My car is 17 years old too., It runs OK



--
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

Mark Twain

[Farley Flud]

On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 10:13:13 -0400, Phillip Frabott wrote:

>
> One of the downsides of the FSF movement and GPL was the unintentional
> directive that pure freedom would cause, the freedom to control others
> and the freedom to push/force software. The FSF may not have intended
> that to be the thing, but it's a freedom given under the 4 pillars.
> That's why I have been vocal that the FSF needs to change some things,
> but their ego and arrogance stops them from doing so. Sadly, I think the
> FSF will not be around in the next 2 decades. Time will tell (and it
> will be a shame if I'm right) but there is too many loopholes that allow
> these large companies to take over. What used to protect users, now
> protects businesses. But that's just my take.
>

The Linux distros are also very much to blame as the majority will follow
the trends without question.

Only Gentoo offers true choice, as does the long-running Linux From
Scratch.

But it is not enough to just whine on Usenet. One must get actively involved
in the FSF and other FOSS projects and attempt to enforce the freedom
concept.

I must admit that I am guilty in not taking this active approach.

However, from what I have experienced, taking a stand against the loss
of freedom is likely to be a very uphill battle.


--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

[candycanearter07]

tom <***@invalid.tld> wrote at 23:54 this Tuesday (GMT):
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 19:40:04 -0000 (UTC)
> candycanearter07 <***@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
> wrote:
>
>> Good to know, thanks. If only the monitor id's would stop changing..
> I've been switching to FreeBSD for most of my computers (laptop and
> servers) because of the systemd assumption debacle and updates bring
> frivolous changes for the sake of change that break things.
>
> If these sorts of things upset you that much (which is reasonable);
> perhaps consider stop using software that has too much redhat
> influence. Gnome stuff being funded by redhat, not just systemd. If you
> follow the money on a lot of the stuff that has been plaguing the Linux
> ecosystem these last couple of years you'll find in a lot of cases it
> pointing back to redhat.
>
> Part of the problem (and feature) of the Linux ecosystem is that every
> system component is made by a completely different person/team/company
> with different, often conflicting design goals.
>
> You can get away from the FreeDesktop stuff by stop using desktop
> environments and learn how to configure a compact window manager that
> doesn't rely on FreeDesktop stuff. Things like suckless's DWM is fairly
> capable and written in less then 2000 lines of C. You can modify it
> yourself to add keybindings for things like media buttons and whatnot
> without relying on freedesktop.
>
> Bottom line is, you can get X11/*nix from places other then Linux
> nowadays.


I don't think its a FreeDesktop issue. Xrandr keeps reporting slightly
different names for my monitors and it breaks my scripts.
Like, it keeps switching between eDP-1 and eDP1 (without a dash)
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[Chris Ahlstrom]

candycanearter07 wrote this post; take it under advisement:

> <brevsnip>
>
> I don't think its a FreeDesktop issue. Xrandr keeps reporting slightly
> different names for my monitors and it breaks my scripts.
> Like, it keeps switching between eDP-1 and eDP1 (without a dash)

That is odd! I've never experienced that. I hope you can track that down.

--
interlard - vt., to intersperse; diversify
-- Webster's New World Dictionary Of The American Language

[candycanearter07]

Chris Ahlstrom <***@teleworm.us> wrote at 20:27 this Wednesday (GMT):
> candycanearter07 wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>
>> <brevsnip>
>>
>> I don't think its a FreeDesktop issue. Xrandr keeps reporting slightly
>> different names for my monitors and it breaks my scripts.
>> Like, it keeps switching between eDP-1 and eDP1 (without a dash)
>
> That is odd! I've never experienced that. I hope you can track that down.


Hopefully. On the other hand, I'm not using those xrandr scripts for a
while, so it's not a pressing issue.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom