- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Keith Wright

> From: "Charles R. Anderson" <cra(a)WPI.EDU> > > Yeah there is this one called Eliza...you should talk to it > sometime... You seem to be interested in Eliza. Would you like me to help you to should talk to it sometime...? -- Clippy

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Jeff Moyer

==> Regarding [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?; Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> adds: mailings02> Keller, Tim wrote: >> I generally find that linux irc channels fall into two categories. >> >> 1. Neophytes + Zealots (of windows and linux) duking it out online >> 2. Elitists discussing highly esoteric topics such as altering disk >> timing performance via hot kernel patches to /proc/kmem mailings02> 3. "Good morning" and "how's the weather?" :) 4. Newbie questions galore. -phro

April 6, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Keller, Tim wrote: > I generally find that linux irc channels fall into two categories. > > 1. Neophytes + Zealots (of windows and linux) duking it out online > 2. Elitists discussing highly esoteric topics such as altering disk timing > performance via hot kernel patches to /proc/kmem 3. "Good morning" and "how's the weather?" :) > I'll take category 2 any day, generally through lurking I'll learn > something. I'm mostly lurking trying to get a feel for the local community. So far, I get the feeling everyone's still hibernating from winter. Hopefully it'll pick up ... some. - Bob

April 6, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Keller, Tim

I generally find that linux irc channels fall into two categories. 1. Neophytes + Zealots (of windows and linux) duking it out online 2. Elitists discussing highly esoteric topics such as altering disk timing performance via hot kernel patches to /proc/kmem I'll take category 2 any day, generally through lurking I'll learn something. Tim. -----Original Message----- From: Bob George [mailto:mailings02@ttlexceeded.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 11:00 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere? Bill Smith wrote: > [...] I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. > i want to educate them to what is available to them, to show them > that "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier > might be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong > choice. For our poor little IRC channel, it was particularly bad. This kid had joined the LUG list, and offered to do all kinds of web development etc. with the hopes he'd get some free advertising for his "big business venture." No problem there, but he proceeded to rant on-list about wanting to use ASP etc., arguing against open-source content management tools as "boring." That carried over to the IRC channel, and he'd essentially scare off any potential Linux converts with his lousy attitude. > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's > "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he > gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" > instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... There was a great post a few years back (forgot which list) comparing web development using front page to the (original, good) Matrix movie precept. It got into the "warm, wet, comfortable goo" of FP, and how long and painful it was extricating himself and his code. Although it fit apple better in years previous, I think "Freedom From Choice" is what a lot of people want (with apologies to Devo). > If that > became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift > towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you > want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to > make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is > more true for Win* than for many others.) We'd best watch it, or they'll start mandating the equivalent of seatbelt and helmet laws for computers. I agree that users should be responsible, but I don't want the government dictating how "safe" software should be developed. I like the idea of an INFORMED user base. - Bob _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 6, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Bill Smith wrote: > [...] I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. > i want to educate them to what is available to them, to show them > that "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier > might be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong > choice. For our poor little IRC channel, it was particularly bad. This kid had joined the LUG list, and offered to do all kinds of web development etc. with the hopes he'd get some free advertising for his "big business venture." No problem there, but he proceeded to rant on-list about wanting to use ASP etc., arguing against open-source content management tools as "boring." That carried over to the IRC channel, and he'd essentially scare off any potential Linux converts with his lousy attitude. > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's > "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he > gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" > instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... There was a great post a few years back (forgot which list) comparing web development using front page to the (original, good) Matrix movie precept. It got into the "warm, wet, comfortable goo" of FP, and how long and painful it was extricating himself and his code. Although it fit apple better in years previous, I think "Freedom From Choice" is what a lot of people want (with apologies to Devo). > If that > became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift > towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you > want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to > make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is > more true for Win* than for many others.) We'd best watch it, or they'll start mandating the equivalent of seatbelt and helmet laws for computers. I agree that users should be responsible, but I don't want the government dictating how "safe" software should be developed. I like the idea of an INFORMED user base. - Bob

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by orbitz＠ezabel.com

Having tried to fix many peoples Windows XP installs I find XP very unmanagable. The guts (generally what I need to fix) is so hidden from the user in an attempt to keep up the facade of 'ease of use' it's a PITA to get around just to fix a screwy network connection. How many windows users don't even know what a directory is? I don't call that ease of use, merely keeping them ignorant. It's a sad state of computer use:) On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:51:56 -0400 Bill Smith <wsmith(a)chezsmith.com> wrote: > On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 08:43:57 -0400 > Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > > > Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was > > so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). > > I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. i want to > educate them to what is available to them, to show them that "easier" does not > necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier might be just that (easy), but it > sometimes means making the wrong choice. > > If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's "easy", > then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he gets. often, the > person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" instead of "ease to get > going without immediate worry"... If that became a major concern instead, I > think we would see a decided shift towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be > easy to USE, but if you want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and > effort involved to make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, > but it is more true for Win* than for many others.) > > > A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and > > occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. > > :) granted. can't argue that one. > > -- > > William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com > Fall River, MA >

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 08:43:57 -0400 Bob George <mailings02(a)ttlexceeded.com> wrote: > Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was > so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). I often find myself sighing at the "Windows is easier" crowd. i want to educate them to what is available to them, to show them that "easier" does not necessarily mean "best for the job". Easier might be just that (easy), but it sometimes means making the wrong choice. If a person wants to favor an operating system simply because it's "easy", then that person deserves all the resulting heartache s/he gets. often, the person looking for "easy" will think "ease of use" instead of "ease to get going without immediate worry"... If that became a major concern instead, I think we would see a decided shift towards unix variants. Sure, Win* might be easy to USE, but if you want it networked, there's a bit of know-how and effort involved to make it SECURE. (that could probably be said for any OS, but it is more true for Win* than for many others.) > A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and > occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. :) granted. can't argue that one. -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 6, 2004

Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bob George

Bill Smith wrote: > [...] <shrug> Chuck's right, though. I've popped in a couple times > since he told us about this channel, and there is next to no traffic > whatsoever. Apparently Chuck leaves his IRC client on to monitor > traffic levels there, 'cause he wasn't even talking with me when i > joined in. (no snide comments from the peanut gallery!! <g>) Hey, at least there's not some kid constantly griping that Windows was so much easier (what happened to the Phoenix LUG channel - now #plugaz). A lot of LUG channels are largely idle, but I tend to lurk and occasionally there are some gems worth waiting for. - Bob (bobstro)

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 18:40:13 -0400 "Charles R. Anderson" <cra(a)WPI.EDU> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 05:50:18PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > > Chuck, you sit on irc channels by yourself? Doesn't that kind of defeat > > the purpose? Or do you have bots to talk to? > > Yeah there is this one called Eliza...you should talk to it > sometime... ayuh... Eliza... she's been my best friend since high school... <sniffle> she's the only one that /truly/ understands... :D -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Bill Smith

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 17:50:18 -0400 Jeff Moyer <jmoyer(a)redhat.com> wrote: > cra> irc.freenode.net > > >> wlug > > cra> I discovered this about a year ago, and it was being (rarely) used by > cra> the Western Linux Users Group: > > cra> http://www.westernlug.org > ... > cra> There hasn't been any activity on the channel, and I have been its > cra> only joined member for many many months now. I say we start using it > > Chuck, you sit on irc channels by yourself? Doesn't that kind of defeat > the purpose? Or do you have bots to talk to? <shrug> Chuck's right, though. I've popped in a couple times since he told us about this channel, and there is next to no traffic whatsoever. Apparently Chuck leaves his IRC client on to monitor traffic levels there, 'cause he wasn't even talking with me when i joined in. (no snide comments from the peanut gallery!! <g>) -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA

April 6, 2004