APPLEVISION Monitor,, No shell = No power

From: Raymond Moyers <rmoyers_at_nop.org>
Date: Tue May 7 01:48:45 2002

On Monday 06 May 2002 23:53, you wrote:
> > I don't see why one would want everything isolated from everything
> > else on the LAN, when the existence of the LAN is warranted by the
> > need for shared access. ON top of that, typing half a screenfull of text
> > just to make some file on some other machine accessible seems a mite
> > burdensome. Even under DOS it only takes a single half-line of text.

> mount -t smbfs //server/share -o username=doc /mnt/remote

Fubar:~# mount /mnt/jeanc
Fubar:~# df | grep jean
 //jean/c 1358560 597184 761376 44% /mnt/jeanc
Fubar:~# mount | grep jean
 //jean/c on /mnt/jeanc type smbfs (0)
Fubar:~# grep jean /etc/fstab
 //jean/c /mnt/jeanc smbfs noauto,username=xxxx,password=xxxx
 //jean/d /mnt/jeand smbfs noauto,username=xxxx,password=xxxx

and if in fstab its less than that

> Dick, I've seen you run that line of crap half-a-dozen times. Maybe
> in the Dark Ages it took "half a screenful of text just to make some
> file on some other machine accessible" It hasn't been true for a long
> damn time. The above command will mount a shared _Windows_ resource
> locally on a Linux box. That's iff you're too lazy to make it a
> 3-stroke alias, or an icon on your desktop. Actual Unix network
> resources are even simpler.

 He utterly didn't understand my example, i wasn't showing a program
 started off a remote disk, something Unix was doing as early and earlier
 than anything else. .. what system could graft the volumes of remote
 machines before Unix, was it the Xerox PARC altos where the founder of
 3com, i forget his name invented Ethernet, or at least its predecessor
 Bob .. um i forget, before then Unix used UUCP didn't it.

 Anyhow

 I was showing a one click remote start of a program started
 and executing on a remote CPU, and running seemless as if
 it was local. another thing Unix was among the first at for GUI
 applications, as X11's network transparency was a core design
 element, not something added later.

 This seems outside of his "winblows limited" frame of reality,
 so he just didn't understand.

> > Some people just like *NIX because it enables them to stroke their own
> > need for pseudo-sophistry.
>
> some people seem to parrot the same set of arguments over and over,
> without ever investigating their validity.

 It does seem like reflex don't it, and the funny part is that most of them
 are not outdated arguments that once where valid, but utterly false
 arguments never valid at any time.

 Cest la Vie, it seems like a cult of "big fish story" folklore
 that gets expanded and inflated and twisted from ignorant to
 ignorant and then parroted.

 Aint fair I suppose, most all of us that work in IT have to work
 with winblows, you cannot avoid it,,, where your contempt
 is based on hands on total understanding of that sh**ware.

 Where you are reduced to a janitor refixing the same crap
 over and overagain the same way the night mop has to
 clean the same floor over again, we know more about the
 system they are defending than the defenders.

 On the other hand everything they *know* about our system
 is wrong and their "winblows limited" thinking prevents them
 from understanding things for which they have no reference.

 Such as my example, I cannot see how that could be
 misinterpreted into running a program off a file server
 when it was clearly remote execution and local display.

 Old hat for us, but for the winblows limited, its like
 attempting to explain the 3rd dimension to a 2 dimensional
 being

 It is my assertion that Winblows dumbs down humanity
 the same way cultural Marxism in the schools is turning our
 kids into intellectual inferiors, where reason and logic is
 discarded for feelings. where learning about history
 involves brainwashing them into hatred of America.

 Hyperbole perhaps, ( about winblows ) but you cannot
 ignore that your approach to a problem is affected by the
 richness or limitations of the tools available to address it.

 Freeware Unix as it comes is the whole snap-on tool
 catalog on a disk.

 More than *he* needs comes the argument but that assumes
 that if you make power available that the person wont/cant
 learn to take atvantage of what is provided.

 I reject the idea that the new user needs to be "protected"
 from discovering how to wield power over his machine.

 A dumbed down system isn't doing them any favor, any
 more than socialist slavery has shown itself to release
 an individuals potential ( other than capacity for brutality
 and holocaust).

 Raymond
Received on Tue May 07 2002 - 01:48:45 BST