Slashdot Mirror

Looking at the site in the http://www.oswd.org/">WaybackMachine it looks like I could have really used that site in the past. Apparently it was a collection of website designs with the HTML/CSS/JS posted. I love doing web-development (especially the back-end XML processing etc) but I'm not the most creative person out there so having a an entire collection of designs I could flip through all in one play wwould be handy for me to slap-together a oook of my own when I need to. I'm book marking that site just incase it comes back. Heres to hoping.

Being as I hadn't noticed it before, will anyone notice? I've been using open source software for web design for years, without OSWD.org..

If anyone is curious as to what WAS there, you can go to this address and see all the previous versions of it by entering it's URL:

Internet Archives

http://web.archive.org/web/20040813144851/http://w ww.jengajam.com/r/fat-woman-in-couch

You will have to stop your web 1.0, save to hard-disk, then apply the 1.0 -> 2.0 patch.

However, given the high system requirements, there may be an easier way: just bring the internet archive as up-to-date as possible, then quickly: apply the patch, delete web 1.0 and restore from backup. :)

Yahoo Toolbar invented all that toolbar business and I remember adding bookmarks dynamically to my Yahoo bookmarks in Netscape 4.78 (yes it's that old!)

Yahoo toolbar does _not_ interfere with the sites you visit (e.g. not "spyware") too.

I wonder after Opera decision to make browser free with support of making Google default search engine... Google pays to media to make every single re-invention of them news? Such conspiracy theories started to come my mind since I am kind of sick about every single browser of mine comes with Google search by default. I even asked a commercial browser vendor if they get paid for it, they said "no". Kinda strange after Opera decision.

Yahoo maps, 1998
http://web.archive.org/web/19980505210829/http://m aps.yahoo.com/

"somebody parked in the street or sitting in a neighboring building could hack into the network and steal your most confidential data," County Executive Andy Spano said in a statement.

That's all well and good, Andy but I run an open network and frankly, if somebody breaks into my network that's my problem. I don't need people like you to tell me what to do.

The draft proposal offered this week would compel all "commercial businesses" with an open wireless access point to have a "network gateway server" outfitted with a software or hardware firewall.

I recently convinced a company to share some of its unused DS3 with the community. Yeah, I put it in the DMZ but again, we don't need you to tell us how to design our network.

I've also worked on slfan who objective is to purposely build open networks that are easy to access. If these big-brother laws start to take off around the country you can say goodbye to freedom.

Sounds good but I remember playing with a deniable cryptography package called Rubberhose.

It looks like the original site has been gone for awhile but you can still find the source. It would appear that it does what you want.

Then when you "have" to hand over your passphrase you can. That passphrase will only grant them access to one encrypted portion. The other encrypted portion would have another password. You could have multiple encrypted portions thus making it harder for the people asking for your passphrase if they got all the data unencrypted...

Sounds good but I remember playing with a deniable cryptography package called Rubberhose.

It looks like the original site has been gone for awhile but you can still find the source. It would appear that it does what you want.

Then when you "have" to hand over your passphrase you can. That passphrase will only grant them access to one encrypted portion. The other encrypted portion would have another password. You could have multiple encrypted portions thus making it harder for the people asking for your passphrase if they got all the data unencrypted...

Amazon bought the domain from a previous owner. Check the Internet Archive, and you'll see a Matthew Turk, among others, who owned it previously. http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.mturk.com

ya, there are many many musicians out there who even let you record their live shows and distribute them over the internet. There's a really good site that has many of these bands. They also have alot of shareware/freeware.

ya, there are many many musicians out there who even let you record their live shows and distribute them over the internet. There's a really good site that has many of these bands. They also have alot of shareware/freeware.

ya, there are many many musicians out there who even let you record their live shows and distribute them over the internet. There's a really good site that has many of these bands. They also have alot of shareware/freeware.

are these

Well there was that joke about the SETI processing card [ 1 ] [ http://web.archive.org/web/20010413215232/http://w ww.krasnoconv.com/index.html [fn1] ], and now there is a company building the general purpose Physics card for games (I wonder what else it would work on?), so taking this to the next step, by having a card filled with FPGAs or the like isn't all that new of an idea.
Seeing someone make some money off of it would be.
[fn1] - Bug in the HTML Format posting ablility- /. doesn't like two http:/// in the herf=URL. Oh well...

Sure enough.

Archive.org's last record of live.com is from late last year

http://web.archive.org/web/20041126052107/http://w ww.live.com/

I knew I had heard of that domain - I was just on there the other day looking at rtsp support for VLC.

On November 26th, the website was this but now it appears to be here

Wonder how much this guy got paid by Microsoft for the domain.. good for him!

I knew I had heard of that domain - I was just on there the other day looking at rtsp support for VLC.

On November 26th, the website was this but now it appears to be here

Wonder how much this guy got paid by Microsoft for the domain.. good for him!

With a great domain like that, I was curious about its history.

According to the Wayback machine, the domain live.com was owned from 1998 to November 2004 by one Ross Finlayson. The archived pages say that the company (Live Networks) has in business since 1995.

Some time after November 2004, the Wayback archive for the main page ends ... but Ross registered live555.com quite a bit earlier (August 2004). (Negotiation time?) Could this mean that Microsoft has been cooking this for a year or more? If so, I would have expected more from the debut.

As an afterthought ... it's really too bad that transactions of this type aren't disclosed. We could all make better domain-name choices if we had the vaguest ballpark idea of what the "going rate" was. And I have a feeling that it's usually not the small guy who benefits from the non-disclosure.

With a great domain like that, I was curious about its history.

According to the Wayback machine, the domain live.com was owned from 1998 to November 2004 by one Ross Finlayson. The archived pages say that the company (Live Networks) has in business since 1995.

Some time after November 2004, the Wayback archive for the main page ends ... but Ross registered live555.com quite a bit earlier (August 2004). (Negotiation time?) Could this mean that Microsoft has been cooking this for a year or more? If so, I would have expected more from the debut.

As an afterthought ... it's really too bad that transactions of this type aren't disclosed. We could all make better domain-name choices if we had the vaguest ballpark idea of what the "going rate" was. And I have a feeling that it's usually not the small guy who benefits from the non-disclosure.

With a great domain like that, I was curious about its history.

According to the Wayback machine, the domain live.com was owned from 1998 to November 2004 by one Ross Finlayson. The archived pages say that the company (Live Networks) has in business since 1995.

Some time after November 2004, the Wayback archive for the main page ends ... but Ross registered live555.com quite a bit earlier (August 2004). (Negotiation time?) Could this mean that Microsoft has been cooking this for a year or more? If so, I would have expected more from the debut.

As an afterthought ... it's really too bad that transactions of this type aren't disclosed. We could all make better domain-name choices if we had the vaguest ballpark idea of what the "going rate" was. And I have a feeling that it's usually not the small guy who benefits from the non-disclosure.

I thought the exact same thing. I bet the shelled out quite a bit for it. According to the Internet Archive, live.com used to be a streaming media web site, looks to have been run by a single guy who was on top of things when domain name selling began:

http://web.archive.org/web/20041126052107/http://w ww.live.com/

I bet Live Networks, Inc. founder/CEO Ross Finlayson made out nicely. Oddly enough, the archive doesn't have any entries for live.com after Nov 26, 2004. Ironic..

I had this idea once that the only way I can make sure my important document withstands the test of time is to make multiple copies and distribute the copies across different locations (i.e. home, office, gf's house, etc). This is the same reason why I make multiple copies of an important document and post it in multiple locations over the internet.

Making a book available online is just about the same thing -- it only serves to preserve it, and what better way to do so other than making something like Google, with its many layers of protection against data corruption, its backup? It's the best thing to preserve your most treasured works other than spreading it via P2P.

How many times have I tried to open an old link, only to discover that it is already gone or most of the content has already changed? Well, good thing there's Google cache and the Wayback Machine as form of "backup".

CBC has put The National online since at least as far back as June 2003.

Broadband in Ireland has only started taking off within the past 3-2 years, before this you could get 512K connections but they were crazy expensive and you would have been VERY lucky to find a home with broadband.
Irelands main telco (Eircom) was still selling ISDN as "hi-speed internet access" uptill 2 years and broadband uptake is devastatingly low in Ireland as we are 2nd last in the EU for broadband penetration.

There are now 173,900 broadband connections in Ireland, so its far from high adoption.
Further info http://www.irelandoffline.org/

Regardless of all the above RTE still was offering streaming news back in 1999 and even further back then that...I can only confirm 1999 by using archive.org http://web.archive.org/web/19990429152727/http://w ww.rte.ie/news :)

Your Aibo wants man beef.

I took a scuba diving class from a diving shop that leases an abandoned missile silo from a farmer who owns it. The silo's been flooded, and they lead http://www.northwestdiver.com/features/2003/0120-1 .php">scuba trips there. Gene, the owner, told me that they lease the silo for some rediculously low amount, like $500 a year. I'd lease a missile silo for $500 a year.

some old movies already are public domain and available online: archive.org

to say... "yeah right".

Ipod porn actually prceeds the video ipod!

Here's some ipod porn

(NSFW - If your Boss has a fetish for watching consumer electronics getting busy!)

On a serious note - why would anyone with an iPod want porn on it? Just looking at the sleek, curvy lines of an iPod Nano seems to give most Nano owners an erection as it is....

1. It is not illegal to use mono or to develop mono.
2. C#/.net libraries are ECMA standards

However,

1. Microsoft has the right to charge a RAND (reasonable and non-descriminatory) fee at any time for the use of these standards.
2. They have never, ever, stated in any binding way that they would not do so in the future.
3. *any* fee, even minimal would result in the instant death of any OSS project dependent on those standards.
4. RAND can (and frequently does in the proprietary software world) mean several dollars per download! Or requiring build licenses for all developers producing binaries (every end user of gentoo for example!) that are in the hundreds of $ range. These are all reasonable and non-descriminatory in that context!

Miguel De Icasa and Ximian/Mono people *know* this full well but don't want to admit how dangerous mono adoption is for the gnome community. They cite a BS casual mailing list post from the head engineer of .net as their claim that MS will never sue.

See how much crap this is for yourself (from official Mono faq):

http://web.archive.org/web/20030609164123/http://m ailserver.di.unip

http://www.go-mono.com/faq.html#patents

Jim Miller's off hand email is the *only* assurance anyone has ever received that MS would never charge a RAND fee! If this were truly MS's commitment then they could release a statement or legally commit themselves to that! This email is not not not legally binding people! Until MS makes a legally binding agreement to never charge for use of these standards, it is not ok to use mono!

See also Seth Nickels' blog on this subject "Why Mono is currently an unnacceptable risk":

http://www.gnome.org/~seth/blog/2004/May

The two main arguments against what I'm saying are realy crap also:

1. Java is also proprietary:

Yes but Sun has licensed Java in such a way that they are legally prohibited from charging *any* royalties at all for existing releases of Java. We know with 100% certainty that Sun will never try and collect any RAND fee. Ever. The situation with Java is totally different for this reason. Even if Sun changed its mind or was purchased by a less generous company (like MS for example), existing releases of Java and alternative implementations based on existing released specs would always remain free as in beer. The no version of the .net ecma standards ever has been comparably free.

2. You are always infringing somewhere, worrying about this is wasting your time:

True, there is always a danger of unknowingly infringing. However, in this case mono is knowingly using patented software. If MS decided to collect or sue, mono and gnome would have absolutely zero defense! Furthermore, MS is well known for destroying threatening companies when it suits them to do so! They have done this many times in the past. Remeber how they *lost* an anti-trust lawsuit? It is because they are agressive, unscrupulous and incredibly rich and illegal monopoly that used its power to destroy competition. They can and will crush gnome if gnome threatens MS! Mono is the ultimate submarine. We build it, integrate it so gnome can't live without it, then they kill gnome by charging for builds. Bam. Gnome is dead on that day.

Take Away: Mono is cool but way too dangerous. Smart people and companies are staying away from it (which turns out to be *most* companies by the way. That is why Redhat and others are pushing Java as an alternative). People who back mono either have motive (ximian), are misinformed (most of the people on this forum), or just dumb (people who are really drooling over the potential of mono so they are ignoring the risk, probably ximian and some gnome developers again)

Microsoft's recent actio

I was hoping to get more of a The Serpent and the Rainbow breakdown of the drugs/herbs/poisons involved in the Haitian voodoo practices.

RTFA. The first few pages talk about the history and "science" behind zombies.

I found it to be well written, interesting, and humorous (the last portion, which talks about zombies in pop culture). And it even references the fact that you can download the original Night of the Living Dead for free from http://www.archive.org/!

Here is what google.com looked like in December of 1998. (God Bless the way back machine.) Are you claiming that you owned google.com prior to that?

Please answer me! Can you read this? Or are your eyes covered by your colon, because your head is up your a$$...

Nerd TV did a show on the archive org founder: Brewster Kahle.

He talked about doing storage on the cheap.

Here is a link to the system they are using in production.

This solution is GPL'ed. It also appears you can buy it as well.

They used to gloat about it pretty regularly. Have a look at:

http://web.archive.org/web/19961028114216/http://w ww.apache.org/

I guess they got tired of bragging.

Look at this..... http://www.archive.org/web/petabox.php

I called it retail price, but you can call it whatever you want. The sales people have a price list and it would be helpful to have that info available (in a non-binding/ballpark way) on their website when evaluating products. One of the benefits of the web is being able to do the research and evaluate products. Having to phone a sales person and wait 2 days for a reply, be forced onto a sales lead list, and finding out the product price was far outside your budget is very common with these products. It negates the benefit of the website!

The web is a dynamic medium, there is no reason they cannot update their prices (like other vendors do) regularly.

The original poster asked for a low cost commodity solution. Someone posted this 'falconstor' link. I went to their site looking for cost range and I see ' For more information about how FalconStor appliances are right for your business and for purchasing information, click here.

How is that using the web in a helpful way to prospective consumers?

And how come my accurate critic (sic) of using the web to evaluate products (which I do a lot) is considered a troll?

* The first 100TB Rack is operational in Amsterdam http://www.eu.archive.org/
* The second 80TB rack is operational in San Francisco
* Loaded with movies and music

My MP3 collection suddenly pales....

Make a phone call to those guyes http://www.archive.org/

there's no free lunch. everybody wants a lamborghini for the cost of an impala. good, fast or cheap -- pick two. nobody puts symmetrix/shark blah blah blah out of business with duct tape and bailing wire. Jesus. if you're all so bored, give up the keyboards and get real jobs. :)

anyhow, the heads over at archive.org spun out a company to develop storage systems closely matching the brief you just laid down. Check this out: Petabox

you can buy the nodes and their stuff is proven in the archive.org infrastructure. :) not free, but then again, not as ludicrously expensive as the EMC/Hitachi/IBM/NetApp alternatives.

The folks at the Internet Archive have already done the hard work of figuring out how to create a petabyte storage system using commodity hardware. The system works so well they started a company to sell PetaBoxes to others. Why reinvent the wheel?

The folks at the Internet Archive have already done the hard work of figuring out how to create a petabyte storage system using commodity hardware. The system works so well they started a company to sell PetaBoxes to others. Why reinvent the wheel?

archive.org made a petabox

http://www.archive.org/web/petabox.php

There is now a company that seems to make the same design:

http://www.capricorn-tech.com/products.html

I don't know what FS they use, but apprently it is redudent.

Check out the Internet Archive's Petabox. They have a 100 TB rack running in Europe right now.

Check out the Internet Archive's Petabox. They have a 100 TB rack running in Europe right now.

Howabout the PetaBox, used by the Internet Archive ?

What cover was that, pray tell? She hadn't been an operative for the five years previous to people finding out in the press that she worked for the CIA! There was no cover to blow!

Is it that she was married to Joe Wilson? He had it on his freakin bio in 2002!

Check this out from http://www.mideasti.org/html/bio-wilson.html">Inte rnet Wayback's version of the Middle East Institute website before it was pulled.

If the code really was released under GPL and the FreeDOS people used only GPL code, there was no such clause. The GPL has no such clause.

If the code was released under another license and re-released under the GPL by the author of the derived work, and the original license was incompatible with some term of the GPL, then the author of the derived work exceeded his rights in re-releasing it under the GPL.

What is the license they started with? All I've found is this:

http://web.archive.org/web/20021022095633/http://w ww.drdos.net/faq/license.txt

This doesn't seem to be compatible with the GPL. Source code distributed under this license could only be released under the GPL if the copyright holder did so.

It's covered in the very interesting documentary The Power Of Nightmares, though most of the documentary covers the imaginary fear of terrorism that is being used today to move the public in whatever direction is desired. The cold war was a real threat, but it was blown out of proportion, especially in the Regan years. It's mentioned in the documentary as it is in fact Donald Rumsfeld who deliberately misinterpreted inteligence in order to justify extending the cold war.

On the question of whether America "saved" us in the cold war; I'm not convinced. We didn't get "duck and cover". We never got the fear of communism drilled into us at a basic level at home and in school. The question is; were the Soviets invading Europe a credible threat? I don't think so, but in all honesty I'm glad we never had to find out. Personally, I thank the likes of Kennedy, who was just about the only one who kept a straight head during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Objectively, neither of the two superpowers wanted war, and that was probably most likely due to the M.A.D. aspect of the nukes. So, yes, it could be argued that the US kept the peace during the cold war.

I would not say that Europe did nothing. You had nukes in the UK pointing at Russia. The whole NATO thing. That also includes your missles in Turkey, which were ironically the precursor to the Cuban Missle Crisis. You had allies in all of NATO, as well as facilites, standardised armaments and lot's of other co-operation. Many NATO soldiers were stationed in Berlin for decades. Of course, as in every country your leaders have downplayed other countries roles in your successes, so it's not surprising that you probably believe that the cold war as simply USSR vs. USA.

Of course, none of that matters right now. Dice have no memory, and neither do most people and that includes politicians. As I've said repeatively, previous good deeds do not excuse future bad ones. The America of the past 40 years has genuinely been the enemy of democracy in many countries. Anywhere that the democratic choice was not a US-friendly capitalist government. Socialism != lack of freedom.

How about this Halloween you don't have RIOTS ??

Kudo's to Madison thought, I have a chance to park between Monona and Mendota everytime I go visit the folks. Downtown Wisconsin is actually a rather nice place to hang out with a lot of eateries, coffee shops, and "bars". Not to mention with UW Madison sitting in the heart of downtown as well, this network will see heavy useage.

http://www.archive.org/audio/etree.php

Not to mention that Thawte was based in South Africa long before Verisign bought them out. (archive.org from 6 years ago)