From: "Russell Coker" <russell(a)coker.com.au>
> Also it's interesting to note how many "Christians" expect Muslims who
> live in
> countries such as the US and Australia to disclaim any connection with
> terrorists from the middle-east. But you never see Christians disclaiming
> actions of the FRC. It's rare to even see Christians even denouncing the
Because it is silly.
To ask someone to "denounce" someone elses act is complete nonsense if you
talk about large groups which have millions and billions of members. You
are not "closely associated" with any particular member or a small
fraction you may nothing to do with at all.
E.g. the IS has a few ten thousands or so. It you are lucky it is 0.1 % of
the Muslim population world wide.
BTW: You may interested how many percent of the world-wide sales of
weaponry end up in the hand of these. That may give you a bit interesting
insight about who is behind what.
But apologies for sidetracking.
Also people leaving a country and situation are lucky to leave it all
behind. E.g. I cannot be bothered to figure out who was spying on me for
the Stasi. (A friend asked for his file. It just made him angry.)
It is just annoying if the "new situation" claims to be so much superior
and has in fact so many dark secrets as well.
Just look at the reaction when Bruce Springsteen and David Grohl were
singing John Fogerty's (CCR) "Fortunate Son" last night. Fogerty was a
drafted soldier in Vietnam..
But it is easier to drone about the man who were fighting for our freedom.
E.g. in Gallipoli which is a thousand miles away from British soil and
half the Earth from Australia.
Unfortunately the majority is still attracted to mindless droning. That's
why most politicians are using slogans instead of arguments.
So to speak: These days I can (still?) voice my dissent openly. But it
does not change a lot.
And this mail was much too long in an age were the average attention span
is 140 characters;-)
“Yeah, some folks inherit star spangled eyes
They send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask them, “How much should we give?”
They only answer, more, more, more.
“It ain’t me, it ain’t me,
I ain’t no Senator’s son.
It ain’t me, it ain’t me,
I ain’t no fortunate one.”
John Fogerty (CCR) 1969
> I assume you're referring to Westboro Baptist "Church". I don't know what
> > you are referring to in "FRC".
> Never heard of them
> > If so, WBC are crackpots and I don't agree with ANYTHING they say or do.
> > They may refer to themselves as "Christians" but they are not, because
> > do not follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. They are not followers of
> > Christ, ergo not Christians.
> That's what the WBC say about all other Christians... ;)
> Citation please. Goes to show what crackpots they are.
From: "Andrew McGlashan" <andrew.mcglashan(a)affinityvision.com.au>
> On 10/11/2014 5:30 PM, Chris Samuel wrote:
>> # We discussed kfreebsd at length, but are not satisfied that a
>> # release with Jessie will be of sufficient quality. We are dropping
>> # it as an official release architecture, though we do hope that the
>> # porters will be able to make a simultaneous unofficial release.
>> So there we go.
> Wow, so the "Lennart Poettering Linux" is the future then, with BTRFS too.
> So sorry about the way things have turned out. Looks like FreeBSD
> direct will be the way forward for so many now.
Maybe a "saner" way anyway. pkgng has caught up with other package system
and is not the pain it was. I do not see good reasons to run a Debian
ecosystem on top of a FreeBSD kernel.
With the "heart" of the distributions (and systemd is more than init and
we do not even now what it is) under a control of a small team which is
more or less run by Red Hat, Linux distributions will be as open as.. say
Anyway, Open Source and GPL is "twisted" quite often in the Linux
environment anyway. E.g. look at the Android phones and tablets.
The spirit of the GPL was violated so countless times that it is probably
not really working as we hoped ca. 20 years ago.
So I do not see BSD licensing as a real problem.
On Fri, November 7, 2014 9:06 pm, Michael Scott wrote:
> If you are a biblical Christian, it is quite clear what Christians
> believe about same sex relationships and about marriage.
Like I said, you are thoroughly entitled to your religious beliefs. Just
don't impose them on other people. Don't believe in same-sex marriage?
Fine, don't have one.
> There are Baptists and there are "Baptists".
Secular Baptism is very much a result of the persecution that Baptists
suffered under the Christian governments not of their denomination.
> To tell me that "as a Christian" is not a legitimate claim is to
> misunderstand what a Christian is. What is a "secular Christian"? A
> Christian is one who believes and trusts in Jesus Christ. A "secular
> Christian" just doesn't make sense.
Of course it does, and that is why the overwhelming majority of Christians
are secularists as well. A secular position is not an anti-religious one.
It stands for the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion. It's
about civil administrations taking a position of religious agnosticism;
providing neither opposition nor benefit to religious institutions and
treating them the same as any other group.
It simple means that recognition that secular governance on Earth is based
on evidence available to all, and is thus different to the eternal
governance of the heavens.
> Do we have to get into this argument again, just because Russell chooses
> to bring it up again?
I'm choosing to bring it up as well, as are you apparently.
Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GradCertTerAdEd (Murdoch), GradCertPM, MBA (Tech
mobile: 0432 255 208
RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines
From: "Slav Pidgorny(GPM)" <slav.pidgorny(a)anz.com>
>> On Behalf Of Peter Ross
>> Of course, everything about the NSA is overblown. I just wonder why
>> Assange and Snowden are not living peacefully at home.
> I admit that mental jump from NSA to Snowden and Assange is not as long as
> that from systemd to NSA. Yet I was still wondering about systemd: are you
> suggesting it's created as a back door to your system?
> And I don't like looking for hidden motives. That applies to Assange,
> Snowden and systemd equally.
"Hidden" is a lot these days.
We just passed some "security laws" which prevents journalists from
reporting about the ASIO. They could pay with 10 years of prison for
reporting "on special missions" even if they do not know that it is one.
The minister responsible for the laws even tells us it has nothing to do
The AFP threatens with more raids like the one in September (800 policemen
and one person charged) it's like the Commis under the bed, just the
Muslims these days.
We cannot afford health care or education but a war.. well, isn't it nice
to have another one? It did not work 1991, it did not work 2002 and there
is no evidence that it works this time. But it makes money, a lot.
50 years ago the Americans bombed the Vietnamese back into stone age,
these days we do it in the Middle East.
Don't talk, don't report.
The refugees are an ugly side effect. Just hide them. Let them go mad or
commit suicide. All good. We have the camps without the gas chambers.
Nature and time kills too, we do not have to do that. We are civilized.
It's all very human, just as Theresienstadt.
Or send them back for more torture as we do it with refugees from
Don't talk, don't report.
In a meanwhile spy agencies are completely uncontrolled and infiltrated
every piece of IT infrastructure.
The spying on _all_ citizens is outperforming the East German Stasi by miles.
And don't wonder why we love the cloud and put everything on servers but
do not encrypt. Even if we could.
And the most respectable community based GNU/Linux distribution gets
hijacked by a team from a company so the foundation of the system comes
completely under the control of a monoculture so you cannot escape it.
Written by people who practically do not care about anything which is
valued by the Linux/Unix community for nearly 50 years.
Trustworthy like second hand car dealers.
Nothing to report, all good..
Until now I have not needed many "hidden" motifs. "Widely ignored"
describes it better.
From: "Slav Pidgorny(GPM)" <slav.pidgorny(a)anz.com>
>> On Behalf Of Peter Ross
>> The NSA will love it.
What would be your dream setup?
I dream of a ARM-based netbook with exceptionally good battery life, an
E-ink display, and fully open and non-proprietary hardware. I've put off
upgrading for years since this seems such an obvious thing for the market
to produce, but the market is fascinated with locked-down tablets instead.
A bit sidestepping, maybe.
But after few years of tablets ands smartphones I really find it
astonishing that we are dealing with such weak devices, security- and
privacy-wise, full of proprietary hardware and software.
I have a hard time to think all developers are idiots and we do not know
better how to write software.
A feature grabbing octopus like the systemd is the opposite of considerate.
To put that in the heart of every Linux distribution is deliberate.
Of course, everything about the NSA is overblown. I just wonder why
Assange and Snowden are not living peacefully at home.
On Fri, 30.05.14 04:32, Michael Biebl (mbiebl at gmail.com) wrote:
> 2014-05-30 4:26 GMT+02:00 Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>:
> > You update systemd but you don't update the kernel? How does that make
> > any sense?
> There might be very valid reasons why you need to stick with the old
> kernel. As said, one example could be that the new one simply doesn't
> boot. Requiring lock-step upgrades makes the system less
> So where possible this should be avoided.
To make this clear, we expect that systemd and kernels are updated in
lockstep. We explicitly do not support really old kernels with really
new systemd. So far we had the focus to support up to 2y old kernels
(which means 3.4 right now), but even that should be taken with a grain
of salt, as we already made clear that soon after kdbus is merged into
the kernel we'll probably make a hard requirement on it from the systemd
I am tempted to say that we should merge the firmware loader removal
patch at the same time as the kdbus requirement is made. As that would
be a clean cut anyway...
Also note that at that point we intend to move udev onto kdbus as
transport, and get rid of the userspace-to-userspace netlink-based
tranport udev used so far. Unless the systemd-haters prepare another
kdbus userspace until then this will effectively also mean that we will
not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at that
point. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call.
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
According to that logic, Linux is Linux+udev+kdbus+systemd ..
In tone it is pure bullying. "I have taken udev and it will not work
without systemd and I don't care about anything else".
I don't think it fits in a GNU/Linux community project like Debian. It is
not collaborative at all.
It is good for a company like Red Hat to have "our ecosystem everywhere"
but not for the rest.
Lock-step is good for attackers. If I update X I better update Y and
update Z too. oh, I don't know. Maybe don't update. And I do not need Z's
functionality but I better do it all..
It is not good for embedded systems if the dependencies are many, become
circular and hard to understand.
The NSA will love it.
Linux will work as long as you use it the way Poettering and Red Hat wants
you to use it.
Well, I have as much interest in it as using Windows or Mac OS X;-)
BTW: People are mangling init(8) and sysV init in the discussion. You can
run init and then comes inittab, rc.conf, /etc/rc to change between run
levels and than /etc/init.d/*.
You can change all that and it does not hurt a bit;-)
From: "Arjen Lentz" <arjen(a)lentz.com.au>
>>On Fri, 7 Nov 2014, "Pidgorny, Slav(GPM)" <slav.pidgorny(a)anz.com>
>>> I don't think that increasing taxes on
>>> the better off indefinitely is going
>>> to work in the long run.
For most of the second half of the last century taxes "on the better off"
We have a real problem that the biggest companies are not contributing at
> In Finland, anything up to university is free. While that may seem
> expensive, It's proven to be a worthwhile investment in the people of the
> country. So spending more money on the right thing can be good.
It's the same in Germany. And they are talking about spending more on
Back to the GST: Underneath seems to be an imbalance between Federation
The states have, more or less, live on what the Federal government offers
on money. But the responsibility is shifting from time to time.
Obviously the current lot is not interested in investment in education and
health etc. so it "delegates" it to the states.
What can you do if you want to run hospitals and schools and unis - and do
not have more income?
The GST is the only significant factor which could help.
The other is more fees.
Or a government which is interested in appropriate funding. Keep it in
mind when you vote.
Slav, as a simple example. Imagine you have a "good income" according to
Australian standards. You have a good job in IT and your wife works, maybe
$150 000 together. That brings you into the top 10% of the households
ranked by income.
You get a 2% tax deduction which gives you $3000 more net income.
Your two kids will start uni both in two or three years. It gets
deregulated and will cost $10,000 more. Each child, each year.
Now, imagine to be on a $60,000 income. The decrease in tax gives you
$1200. The uni fees are the same.
Maybe skip uni then. Face it, your children cannot afford it on $60,000
Then, imagine you are the prime minister. Your child gets a $60,000
stipendium which is unusual and nowhere declared. The person who
discovered it is in court and facing 2 years jail.
> To be perfectly honest, and I think that others would agree, you've been
> less than clear on the matter.
> To be perfectly honest, it's what I said right from the start, then you
brought up other issues to muddy the waters, to help make your point. I
have typed "SUPPORT" in CAPS a number of times to emphasise it.
It's good to know that you support the legal establishment of same-sex
> Please don't put words in my mouth. I do not support same sex marriage,
whichever way you want to phrase it. Legal rights of same sex couples is a
> Have a nice day,
> Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GradCertTerAdEd (Murdoch), GradCertPM, MBA (Tech
> Mngmnt) (Chifley)
> mobile: 0432 255 208
> RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines
> luv-talk mailing list