From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Xah Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: emacs-w3m question Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 13:33:55 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <87vdvdu4mp.fsf@literaturlatenight.de> <74160b46-e541-436a-a776-c8bd53d6cd55@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <1f28a20e-0c9f-4478-a85c-27ae40ed7fc9@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com> <4d476218-bd76-4d41-8a12-1428dfba9e9b@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com> <7b5a888e-d50f-4061-8854-9832b9330411@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1226242885 26221 80.91.229.12 (9 Nov 2008 15:01:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2008 15:01:25 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 09 16:02:27 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KzBo0-0003da-8b for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:02:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50036 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KzBms-0002K0-I0 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:01:14 -0500 Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs Original-Lines: 185 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.6.185.159 Original-X-Trace: posting.google.com 1226180035 14661 127.0.0.1 (8 Nov 2008 21:33:55 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 21:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.6.185.159; posting-account=bRPKjQoAAACxZsR8_VPXCX27T2YcsyMA User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_4_11; en) AppleWebKit/525.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Safari/525.22, gzip(gfe), gzip(gfe) Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:164250 comp.emacs:97333 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:00:54 -0500 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:59590 Archived-At: On Nov 8, 10:57 am, Rupert Swarbrick wrote: > >> For example, in other part your post, you said something idiotic about > >> the use of Shift key, then Rupert Swarbrick put in 60 words post that > >> effectively says ???yeah, i still use emacs thru telnet too!!!??? Can = you > >> imagine, soon other tech geeker will chime in and insist emacs is > >> still used thru telnet? and soon more tech geeker will insist that > >> Emacs is not technically a Microsoft Word? > > > :-) What I said was, I think, true. People do use Emacs over comms > > lines. Emacs developers actively resist the "tyranny of the majority". > > Oh sorry Xah, you're in a killfile so I've only just noticed I got a > mention. But, yeah, I think it's pretty amazing that emacs is usable > over ssh (no, I don't allow telnet logins to my laptop). Before there's > a tirade about ancient lispniks who are out of touch with the real > world, I'll point out that I'm an undergrad. the point was not about whether emacs is still used with telnet. The point was, that often it is the case in debates of tech geekers, they don't see the whole picture of argument but like to pick bones. Then later readers read the pone-picking message and feel obliged to post to concur, oblivious of what the debate was about. In our case, it is this Alan guy, who read my article: Why Emacs's Keyboard Shortcuts Are Painful http://xahlee.org/emacs/emacs_kb_shortcuts_pain.html on the section =E2=80=9CNo Employment of the Shift Key=E2=80=9D, and all th= is moron can say is that emacs is still used thru telnet. > Anyway, what other editors except v** and emacs would allow you to do > something like that? do you mean the ability to edit files remotely? BBEdit, somewhat the standard (most popular) editor on the Mac throughout the 1990s, and today possibly still top 5 among Mac, can edit files remotely. In fact, i think majority (if not all), major editors/IDEs today can do that. (for some survey of text editor popularity, and the importance of such study, see: Text Editors Popularity http://xahlee.org/emacs/text_editor_trends.html ) also note, the use of telnet/ssh is gradually waning. (in comparison to, 10 years ago when half of my time in a day job is using emacs thru telnet/ssh) They are replaced by various ways to get files across the net. For example, there are Apple and Microsoft software that allows you to have remote desktops. Then there's various methods of tunneling. And there are various remote file systems getting more and more robust besides NFS and Samba, then there's rsync, unison, and various other sync software from Apple and Microsoft ... See for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_desktop_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_Desktop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbuktu_(software) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Filing_Protocol (you can also read about rsync, unison, samba, NFS, the follow the various links to learn about a whole lot more software and protocols on these areas ) Now, think about this: all these applications that work remotely, their Shift key shortcuts should be broken! Wow! The Emacs way of thinking! telnet itself, one of unix shit, is one of the mothefucking worst design by itself. This has been criticized like some 20 years ago when unix is considered the cool kid on the block. some unix moron is going to mention X-Windows here. They should read: The X-Windows Disaster http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/_/The_X-Windows_Disaster.html > I'm not > entirely sure what you mean about emacs being like MS Word. That is for Alan, so that, we can begin to have hundreds of posts about how emacs is not Microsoft Word and therefore whatever was his point is wrong. it's easy. Whenever someone suggest something about emacs, doesn't matter how well thought, how superior, or what is the nature of it, all you have to do is to mention that emacs is not Microsoft Word, and do it in a insistent way with some argumentation, then you'll have hundreds of posts to support you. i've seen quite a few absolute morons in comp.emacs and gnu.emacs.help in the past 3 years since i began to participate frequently. I'd say Alan is the top 5 among the idiots. You may not be aware, he sincerely believes that we should stick to ascii, as opposed to unicode. is he a good guy? i'd say so. Among tech geeking morons, some are mean, hateful. These i truely despise. They are the scumbags of society. But Alan is cool in this respect. He's like, the Forrest Gump. Y'know? The movie that suggests that we'll all be millionaires and the world will be a better place as long as we have good intentions, regardless whether we are idiots. -------------- O, you mentioned kill file. Please read: http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/kill_file_harmful.html plain text version follows: -------------------- Killfile Considered Harmful Xah Lee, 2000-02-26 In newsgroups, killfile is a playful word meaning that the poster has placed someone in a blacklist of authors, where their postings will be automatically hidden from view in their newsreader. Such functionality of newsreaders originated in unix. In the early 90s or before, it used to be referred to as =E2=80=9Csending someone into /dev/null=E2=80=9D, beca= use =E2=80=9C/dev/ null=E2=80=9D can be used as a way for deleting email program outputs. The killfile behavior, is simply put: =E2=80=9Csweep-under-the-rug=E2=80=9D= , =E2=80=9Cbury- head-in-sand=E2=80=9D kind of behavior. Imagine that in a gathering where i= f everyone totally ignores other's voices except their own kind, then what cacophony would result? Similarly, if we ignore the problem of crime by simply using larger locks for our own doors, what consequence would result? We are all human beings. Our surroundings are our organs and affects us dearly. In newsgroups, inevitably there will be certain individuals with foul breath at times. Killfile mechanism is a very good feature to battle such annoyances. This is not a reason for falling for the convenience of blocking your ears from dissenting voices or the nonconformists. The worst thing i hate about it, is the broadcasting of someone being killfiled. Oftentimes the sole content of a message is =E2=80=9CYou've been killfiled=E2=80=9D. WHAT GOOD DOES IT DO TO THE COMMUNITY BY SUCH ANNOUNCEMENT? Is it a warning system for fellow readers to prepare to follow suit? Or is it a stupid self-righteous act? In the course of a unpleasant encountering, the killfilers feel the other party being unworthy of further response but they don't want to be seen as chickening out so they had to announce it as if saying: =E2=80=9CHello worl= d: you don't see a returning 'fuck you' from me because _I_ am _smarter_ and took a step ahead of my antagonist and covered my ears, not because he is correct or anything like that.=E2=80=9D. Pride is a human nature, but unqualified conceit is despicable. A second motivation for announcing killfile is more explicitly juvenile. Killfile has several variant names: =E2=80=9CYou've been killfiled.=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cplonk=E2=80=9D (sound of falling object), =E2= =80=9CI've send you to /dev/ null=E2=80=9D (unixism), and creativity does not seems to cease there, e.g.= in comp.lang.lisp: (plonk 'xah) or signatures that reads =E2=80=9Cin /dev/null= , they can't hear you scream.=E2=80=9D The reason of these playful variations is precisely literary folly. The utterer delights in its use since most are wanting of genuine literary artistry. This adds to the fashion of killfile and its broadcasting. Killfile behavior and broadcasting have another curious trait: No burden of commitment. One cannot really tell if the person really did the killfile. The decision to make a killfile cry in public does not carry any weight of responsibility as compared to making a claim, stating a =E2=80=9Cfact=E2=80=9D, or expressing a opinion. It is simply a v= ariation of =E2=80=9Cfuck you=E2=80=9D. This too, contributed to its uncontrolled popul= arity. Xah =E2=88=91 http://xahlee.org/ =E2=98=84