waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
In article <11810@vice.ICO.TEK.COM> bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes: >From: bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) >Subject: Re: free moral agency >Date: 14 Apr 93 21:41:31 GMT >In article <healta.133.734810202@saturn.wwc.edu> healta@saturn.wwc.edu (TAMMY R HEALY) writes: >>> >>In the Old testement, Satan is RARELY mentioned, if at all.  > > >  Huh?  Doesn't the SDA Bible contain the book of Job? > >>This is why there is suffering in the world, we are caught inthe crossfire.  >>and sometimes, innocents as well as teh guilty get hurt. >>That's my opinion and I hope I cleared up a few things. >> > >  Seems like your omnipotent and omniscient god has "got some >  'splainin' to do" then.  Or did he just create Satan for shits and >  giggles? > >/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\  > >Bob Beauchaine bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM  > >They said that Queens could stay, they blew the Bronx away, >and sank Manhattan out at sea. > >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I didn't say it NEVER mentioned Satan, I said it RARELY, if at all.  Please  excuse me for my lack of perfect memory or omnipotence.
In article <1993Apr25.031703.5230@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice) writes: >The intent of my post (as I remember it) was to show that you cannot >argue against any religion (or ideology, for that matter) by the actions >of those who claim to be its followers.  You have to look at the >teachings of the religion (or the principles of the ideology) _itself_. >There is no getting around this. > >So to argue against Islam, you have to go to the Qur'an.  Bringing up >Khomeini (or anyone else) is relevant to discussing Khomeini, but not >_necessarily_ relevant to discussing Islam _as a religion_.  Sorry, Fred, but for the purposes under discussion here, I must disagree.  Your point is true only in the sense that one cannot argue against communism by reference to the Chinese or Soviet empires, since those did not represent *true* communism.  In judging the practical consequences of Islam as a force to contend with in the world today, it is precisely the Khomeini's of the world, the Rushdie-fatwa supporters, and perhaps more importantly, the reaction of the world Muslim community to those extremists, that we must look to.  Perhaps unfortunately from your perspective, most people are not concerned with whether Islam is the right religion for them, or whether the Qur'an could be used as a guidebook for a hypothetical utopia, but how Islam affects the world around them, or what their lives might be like if Islam gains in influence.  When I consider such possibilities, it is with not inconsiderable fear.
In article <1993Apr15.212943.15118@bnr.ca> (Rashid) writes: [deletions] > >The fatwa was levelled at the person of Rushdie - any actions of >Rushdie that feed the situation contribute to the legitimization of >the ruling. The book remains in circulation not by some independant >will of its own but by the will of the author and the publishers. The fatwa >against the person of Rushdie encompasses his actions as well. The >crime was certainly a crime in progress (at many levels) and was being >played out (and played up) in the the full view of the media. > >P.S. I'm not sure about this but I think the charge of "shatim" also >applies to Rushdie and may be encompassed under the umbrella >of the "fasad" ruling.  If this is grounded firmly in Islam, as you claim, then you have just exposed Islam as the grounds for terrorism, plain and simple.  Whether you like it or not, whether Rushdie acted like a total jerk or not, there is no acceptable civilized basis for putting someone in fear of their life for words.  It simply does not matter whether his underlying motive was to find the worst possible way he could to insult Muslims and their beliefs, got that? You do not threaten the life of someone for words - when you do, you quite simply admit the backruptcy of your position.  If you support threatening the life of someone for words, you are not yet civilized.  This is exactly where I, and many of the people I know, have to depart from respecting the religions of others.  When those beliefs allow and encourage (by interpretation) the killing of non-physical opposition.  You, or I or anyone, are more than privledged to believe that someone, whether it be Rushdie or Bush or Hussien or whover, is beyond the pale of civilized society and you can condemn his/her soul, refuse to allow any members of your association to interact with him/her, _peacably_ demonstrate to try to convince others to disassociate themselves from the "miscreants", or whatever, short of physical force.  But once you physically threaten, or support physical threats, you get much closer to your earlier comparison of rape - with YOU as the rapist who whines "She asked for it, look how she was dressed".  Blaming the victim when you are unable to be civilized doesn't fly.  Dew
>>>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 1993 02:51:29 GMT, healta@saturn.wwc.edu (Tammy R Healy) said: TRH> I hope you're not going to flame him.  Please give him the same coutesy you' TRH> ve given me.  But you have been courteous and therefore received courtesy in return.  This person instead has posted one of the worst arguments I have ever seen made from the pro-Christian people.  I've known several Jesuits who would laugh in his face if he presented such an argument to them.  Let's ignore the fact that it's not a true trilemma for the moment (nice word Maddi, original or is it a real word?) and concentrate on the liar, lunatic part.  The argument claims that no one would follow a liar, let alone thousands of people.  Look at L. Ron Hubbard.  Now, he was probably not all there, but I think he was mostly a liar and a con-artist.  But look at how many thousands of people follow Dianetics and Scientology.  I think the  Baker's and Swaggert along with several other televangelists lie all the time, but look at the number of follower they have.  As for lunatics, the best example is Hitler.  He was obviously insane, his advisors certainly thought so.  Yet he had a whole country entralled and came close to ruling all of Europe.  How many Germans gave their lives for him?  To this day he has his followers.  I'm just amazed that people still try to use this argument.  It's just so obviously *wrong*.
In article <1993Apr19.231641.21652@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice) writes:  >The positive aspect of this verse noted by Dr. Maurice Bucaille is that >while geocentrism was the commonly accepted notion at the time (and for >a long time afterwards), there is no notion of geocentrism in this verse >(or anywhere in the Qur'an).  	There is no notion of heliocentric, or even galacticentric either.    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang) writes:  >>Well, I have typed in the OED definitions.  As you will note upon reading >>them, a punishment, being an inanimate object, is incapable of "showing >>mercy."  So, you can not say that a merciless punishment is a cruel one. >Sorry, you must have missed the stuff in parens when you read the >definition (where transf. = transferred sense and fig. = >figurative,-ly). "Things" can be cruel. Samples of text from the first >definition include, "Because I would not see thy cruell nailes Plucke >out his poore old eyes," and "The puniness of man in the centre of a >cruel and frowning universe."  Sure nails can be cruel.  I'd imagine nails in your eyes would be *very* painful.  But, this does not imply that a painless death is cruel, which is what you are supposed to be trying to show.
In article <1993Apr21.162512.217@uvm.edu> djohnson@moose.uvm.edu writes:     Is it possible through either pin configuration or through software    programming to change the IP numbers on an ethernet card?  The Ethernet card doesn't use the IP number (32-bits, usually #.#.#.#); it uses the Ethernet address (48-bits, usually #:#:#:#:#:#). I have never run across an Ethernet controller that cannot be programmed to use an address that is not assigned to it. DECNET requires this feature.  However, that said, there is no reason to ever change the Ethernet address.  They are globally unique, the first three bytes being assigned to the manufacturer by the IEEE, and the last three by the manufacturer.
I need to know the jumper settings for master and/or slave operation on a Maxtor 7080AT (80MB IDE) hard disk.  Thanks in advance.
Article #61175 (61302 is last): >Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware From: qwerty@tunisia.ssc.gov (Kris Schludermann) Subject: HELP:IDE Drive installation problems Date: Thu Apr 22 12:11:58 1993  I'm having trouble with installing a second IDE drive on a Promise IDE caching controller. The first drive is a conner 3204 and works fine. The second drive is a conner 30174, it is currently unjumpered  to be the slave drive. The problem is the slave drive is recognized but is reported back as having no free space. Disabling cache has made no effect. What else should I check for?  krispy End of File, Press RETURN to quit  Krispy, Lets start with what Promise controller that you have. Ther are only about 4 or 6 of them made. The one that I have the DC-99m needs nothing done but install it as stated. As to the 2th. hd you do know about running FDISK on it and partisitions and then formatting it after your finished with the fdisk operation right!....Sam
hi folks i have 2 hd first is an seagate 130mb the second a cdc 340mb (with a future domain no ram) i'd like to change my 2 controller ide & scsi and buy a new one with ram (at least 1mb) that could controll  all of them any companies? how many $? and is it possible via hw or via sw select how divide the ram cache for 2 hd? (for example using dos that is  about all on one hd i'd like to reserve ram cache just to it)
Hiya all, 	 	I realise this has little to do with pc's but it does have a lot to do 	with hardware....  	So, has nay of you heard of a computer called the Connection Machine. 	If so, could you e-mail me any and all info you have, 	eg- references, ideas etc.  	All help is appreciated.    	Caviar Dreams 	L.Cause
In article <C5usq4.Mpr@wybbs.mi.org> ken@wybbs.mi.org  writes:  >I'm not sure the modem would work ok in a basic system, but it clearly does >not work in a multi port system like mine. Since my time is worth more  >than the aggravation or the cost of the modem, I gave it to a local >charitable organization (with a description of my problem) and ordered >a Practical Peripherals 14.4MT from PC Connection.  >For $30 more, I have a solid external modem built by a company I know  >will support their users and sold by a company (based on personal >experience) will treat me right if there is a problem. I should have >known better...  But, but, but... How does buying an external modem solve the problem of wanting more than 2 serial devices at once?  And since the PC only supports two, why are you blaming a modem vendor for the problem?  I don't see how your experience could have been different with any internal modem.
In article <1993Apr22.002231.13716@julian.uwo.ca> rmitch@irus.rri.uwo.ca (Ross Mitchell) writes: >I have a choice now between basically the above system but with a >486DX2-66 with ISA and VLB,  or,   a 486DX-50 with EISA and no VLB (and thus >the non-local bus version of the ATI card).  Which is better, keeping in mind >that I'm primarily interested in the last two tasks?    The April 13 issue of PC Magazine published benchmarks for the ATI UltraPro running on both VLB and EISA:  	800x600,16	800x600,256	1024x768,16	1024x768,256
In article <1993Apr15.235509.29818@julian.uwo.ca> wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes: > > I won't argue that the SCSI standard makes for a good, well implimented > data highway, but I still want to know why it intrinsically better > (than IDE, on an ISA bus) when it comes to multi-tasking OS's when > managing data from a single SCSI hard drive.  I have been following this thread and figured I'd throw in my two cents...  The Amiga Zorro II bus is comparable with the ISA bus (7.16 vs 8.33 MHZ). The Amiga has had a pre-emptative multi-tasking  OS since '85 and can operate with 1 MB RAM!  SCSI is used almost exclusively on these systems.  A SCSI controller that transfers data by DMA allows the cpu to request data from the hard drive and continue working while the controller gets the data and moves it to memory.  A controller that allows reselection can operate even better with multiple devices.  This is espically true with SCSI tape units.  For example, when rewinding or formatting a tape, the command is issued to the controller and the bus is released to allow access to other devices on the bus.  This greatly increases productivity or, at least, do something else while backing up your hard drive :-).  Which happens to be what I am doing while reading this group.  Its a long story, but I still use IDE on my 486 except for the CDROM which, thanks to SCSI, I can move between both machines.  If, and when, SCSI is better standardized and supported on the ibm-clone machines, I plan to completely get rid of IDE. --   Wayne Summer        //        AMIGA - Simply the Best.   Palm Bay, FL. US  \X/        wayne@amtower.spacecoast.org
simon@moscow.uidaho.edu (Mike Simon) writes:  >In article <1qhvunINNhau@emory.mathcs.emory.edu>, splee@pd.org (Seng-Poh Lee, Speedy) writes: >|> I have an old 3Com ethernet card (PC AT Bus) that came out of a Apollo >|> workstation. I'm trying to identify it in order to use it on a PC. >|>  >|> The Assembly number is 4008-00 REV 2 and it is a 16 bit card, circa >|> 1985.  It has an AUI port as well as a BNC coax connection.  It has >|> selectable address for the BIOS, IO, DMA, and IRQ locations via berg >|> jumpers.  It also appears to have a Intel 80186 processor on board, >|> presumably for buffering.  >|>  >|> The ethernet chip appears to be an Intel 82586, a 48 pin DIP package. Is >|> this chip an equivalent to the 8390 used in some cards? There is also >|> a 68 pin PLCC chip, called a LINK+  I got two very similar sounding boards for dirt cheap, too. Their Assy numbers were not 4000-series, but your description fits otherwise. They are 3Com 3C505's aka Etherlink Plus cards. Check out ftp.3com.com, there are drivers and diagnostic programs for just about any and all 3Com cards. I concluded that my card was the 505 after I ran their diagnostic program for 3C505 succesfully ("..passes with flying colours") :)  Anybody know of packet drivers for these cards under OS/2..?
I am looking at buying some Companion brand VLB/ISA/EISA motherboards with HINT chipsets.  Has anybody had any experience with this board (good or bad)? Any information would be helpful!  thanks
In article <RICHK.93Apr15075248@gozer.grebyn.com> richk@grebyn.com (Richard Krehbiel) writes: >>     Can anyone explain in fairly simple terms why, if I get OS/2, I might  >>   need an SCSI controler rather than an IDE.  Will performance suffer that >>   much?  For a 200MB or so drive?  If I don't have a tape drive or CD-ROM? >>   Any help would be appreciated.  >So, when you've got multi-tasking, you want to increase performance by >increasing the amount of overlapping you do. > >One way is with DMA or bus mastering.  Either of these make it >possible for I/O devices to move their data into and out of memory >without interrupting the CPU.  The alternative is for the CPU to move >the data.  There are several SCSI interface cards that allow DMA and >bus mastering.  ^^^^^^^^^^^^ How do you do bus-mastering on the ISA bus?  >IDE, however, is defined by the standard AT interface >created for the IBM PC AT, which requires the CPU to move all the data >bytes, with no DMA.  If we're talking ISA (AT) bus here, then you can only have 1 DMA channel active at any one time, presumably transferring data from a single device. So even though you can have at least 7 devices on a SCSI bus, explain how all 7 of those devices can to DMA transfers through a single SCSI card to the ISA-AT bus at the same time.  Also, I'm still trying to track down a copy of IBM's AT reference book, but from their PC technical manual (page 2-93):
I'm considering the purchase of a 486DX-33 VLB system to run linux. The system has an ASUS-brand motherboard.  Anyone have any comments on ASUS motherboards?  Thanks,
In article <1434@netxcom.netx.com> pdressne@netxcom.netx.com (Peter Dressner) writes: >I have a Gateway with a 3.5 floppy. The drive only reads files it >wrote to the floppy. Floppies that have been formatted and  >contain files from other machines are unreadable. Also, 3.5 floppies >that were written by this defective floppy drive a long time ago are >also unreadable. > >This sounds like a head alignment problem. How does one go about >fixing it? Are there alignment screws that you can adjust? > >Thanks in advance for your responses. > >Peter  A friend of mine had the same problem, it turned out that his floppy was set up as a 5 1/4 1.2Mb drive instead of 3.5 1.44Mb.....  might help...   Matt.  --
I'm posting this for a friend that runs a BBS. I'm not sure if its under DOS or Windows.  He is interested in a board that has 16 ports on it. In another post, someone suggeted a DigiBoard, but didn't have too much info on it.  Could someone give me information on any boards that they know of with the before mentioned configuration. Models. Specifications. Prices.  Manufacturers.  Thanks,  Rob  --
(larryhow@austin.ibm.com) wrote: :  : What are the current products available to upgrade the resolution? : Which ones support postscript? :  : Any experiences with them, either good or bad? :  : Is the quality difference really noticable? :  : I'm planning on producing camera ready copy of homes.  Will the higher : resolution be noticed for these? :  If you are talking about laser jet 4 then I believe it has to be postscript. I don't see any advantage to using PCL when you have a peice of hardware plugged into the LJ4 that is doing the work and it can support any language that is suited for the job.  Besides I don't think PCL is even capable of handling 1200 dpi specifications.  I only have experience with the Laser Master Winjet 1200 which brings the LJ4 up to 1200 dpi and it uses postscript. It also has a fast print mode which is not postscript, and it is at a lower resolution (600dpi I think), but it is FAST!!!!  This particular product uses your host processor to process the postscript, so even with a decent PC you know it's going to be slow i.e. slow compared to a high-end workstation processed PS.  The quality difference is very noticable and is almost worth the wait (for the PS processing) - I'm rather impatient.  We were using it for B&W camera images (RS-170).  The gray scale image was accepted by MS Word and handed to the Winjet PS printer driver which converts the image into postscript and then hands it off to the Winjets postscript processor.  The postscript is rendered into RAM (lots of it) and when it is done it shoots it directly to the printer.  The PS processor can also accept PS files created from other sources including DOS applications, but Windows has to be running at the time of printing.  The PS processor is responsible for the halftoning and I'd say it does a pretty good job.  Our camera images came out very good in my opinion.  (not as good as Laser Master's demo though).  I don't know how many other similar products are out there but I would be surprised if there are several.
Holly       KS (cs3sd3ae@maccs.mcmaster.ca) wrote: > My Western Digital also has three sets of pins on the back. I am using it with > another hard drive as well and the settings for the jumpers were written right  > on the circuit board of the WD drive......MA SL ??  The ??-jumper is used, if the other drive a conner cp3xxx.   no jumper set: drive is alone MA: drive is master SL: drive is slave  Michael
They don't have a conflict because technically LPT1: does not use IRQ7!.      The Parallel printer processor (the actual number escapes me) contains a printer control register which enables the chip to transmit an interrupt to the interrupt controller as IRQ7, then onto the main processor as Int 0x0F. By default the parallel printer processor does not enable it's interrupt line therefore no Int 0x0F's will be sourced from the printer controller chip, thus enabling other devices to use the actual IRQ7.       Note, this applies to COM ports also which by default do not route interrupts to the system bus, although COM's software usually enable this feature as it make monitoring COM port activity easier than polling the serial UART, thus probably getting the sound card slighty confused!.
H E L P !  I have  a problem in which I'm getting increasing frustrated every day...  Some background about my PC:  - American Megatrend BIOS (clone 386 SX) with 32M of RAM - config.sys file:  	device=c:\dos\himem.sys 	dos=high,umb 	device=c:\windows\emm386.exe noems 	files=30 	buffers=30 	stack=9,256  - autoexec.bat file is using smartdrv.exe +c - CMOS set up is running 0 wait state on read and write cache ram.  The problem: APPLICATION ERROR from WIN31  I started off with a newly installed WIN31 and then installed EXCEL. Run excel, no problem. A permanent swap file of size 18K was in place for windows.  Ok, I then proceed to install Norton Desktop for Windows version 2.0. No problem with the installation. I also allow NDW to alter my autoexec.bat(with the nav running on c:). The problem came when I try to (bring up excel or if excel is running and right in the middle of it - like click a selection with the mouse) from the desktop. First of all, I always get the application error screen followed by another application error screen with various different messages. The following are some of them:  - Stack fault, by TC1024.DRV at address 0001:XXXX where XXXX is some   number. (TC1024.DRV is the VGA driver provided by the manufacture) - General protection fault, by ndw.exe at the same address - Segment load failure, by ndw.exe at same address  Some how, the address flagged was always 0001:something. What is address 0001:XXXX means?   I have absolutely on idea what this mean. I tried commented out the TSR programs from autoexec.bat, no help.  Is it something to do with the emm386 setup which is not telling WIN31 what it suppose to know. Looks like the application is crossing memory boundary when it is being loaded or while it is running.  Please reply if you have any idea or suggestion. I'm willing to try anything.
I recently decided to try using emm386.exe for a memory manager and when I tried to print to my printer in lpt1 from word55 I wouldn't work.  It would send the linefeeds for the top margin and then the printer READY light would go off and stop working.  I disabled emm386.exe and the problem went away. I would like to continue using emm386.exe if possible.  I would greatly     appreciate any comments or suggestions!!  please send them to arthur@u.washingt,
Okay, here is my configuration:  80486-33 Gateway 433C Micronics ISA 12MB RAM  WD212MB IDE HD ( drive C: ) ST3144A 125MB IDE HD ( drive D: ) Adaptec SCSI 1542B controller, with SCSI BIOS enabled Seagate ST296N 80MB SCSI drive  Alrighty, when I boot up I get the Adaptec BIOS message, but it says something like:  "Drive C: installed" "Drive D: installed" "ADaptec SCSI BIOS not installed!"  And I can't get to the Seagate drive.  I go into PhoenixBIOS setup, remove the entry for drive D:, and BOOM, I can access the Seagate.  Is there a way to get two IDE drives and the Seagate at the same time?  I have ASPI4DOS.SYS, but it just hangs the system.
--  Gosh..I think I just installed a virus..It was called MS DOS6... Don't copy that floppy..BURN IT...I just love Windows...CRASH...