Re: Free UNIX for non-commerical use.

From: Anthony Mandic (rf_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 08/05/03 

Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 23:42:55 +1000

Dave Uhring wrote:

> > I think you mean the left side of the road.
>
> Well, there are a right side and a wrong side.

        Or a left side and a wrong side.

> > From what I've seen, every lane is the fast lane.
>
> Not at "rush hour".

        Unless you're on a bike!

> The service still must be funded in some manner. If the seats get filled
> the passenger fares will accomplish that, but there are few routes with
> sufficient ridership to be self maintaining. The taxpayers must account
> for the shortfall.

        Yes, that's the way it works out here. Except that a few country
        routes were closed over the years and replaced with buses. City
        routes seem to be doing OK.

> There are railroad accidents, too. But you are right about the truck
> drivers being under pressure. Very few of them have unions to enforce
> such things as service hours.

        So its left to government regulation?

> > Tell that to my luggage when I'm next at the airport!
>
> TWA never did find the last of my bags which they lost. At least the
> railroad found our cement hoppers.

        I had two incidents. United lost mine on the way to Boulder once.
        They eventually found them and made me pay to get them delivered
        (I didn't really have much choice). Another time, on the way back
        from Orlando, my bags got separated. Qantas delivered them for
        free the next day (and I didn't even fly with them).

> They claim a higher ridership but a week or two ago Amtrak asked the Feds
> for another billion in subsidy.

        So much for increased patronage.

> > Yes, I tried to convince Josh McKee of that some time ago. He
> > just wouldn't accept it.
>
> He shows a remarkable ability to ignore good advice. I don't see any of
> his nonsense now; killfiles are useful.

        He strikes me as just being a thinkhead. At least his big brother
        can deal with him if he needs to.

-am © 2003

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Multiple default routes on multihome host
    ... Please note that the variety of solutions presented recognize that your transition period is just that, a temporary situation, and that "multiple default routes" is not the solution. ... The argument that functionality "should not" be present because people "should not" run their networks that way carries no water -- particularly so when issues of wireless presence and ad-hoc networks blow the old assumptions out of the water. ... I know people want to be able to plug in a pair of itty bitty routers and just have their computers be smart enough to use the "best" one, but it's not clear the implementations they are pushing us towards -- Linux and Windows -- actually accomplish that. ...
    (freebsd-net)
  • Re: Multiple IPs on a single NIC -> Help!
    ... >Does anyone know how I can accomplish this? ... Routes, though with the network scheme you've displayed, assuming a ... mask, it makes absolutely no sense to even do this. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.networking)