Slashdot Mirror

I'd like to see a distributed version of consumer reports.

www.deja.com

But organization helps, so for now, stick with consumer reports.
--

What does this article really offer new? It's been known from right the beginning that they run a Linux cluster. See here:

I find it more interesting that infact they use python .

Surprise, surprise! Linux also has support for 64-bit file offsets. You failed to quote this comment I made though: "I know that there are ways around this with some filesystems, but there is a speed penalty when you get away from native cpu data sizes for variables."

I have indeed run into this speed difference myself when I wrote some code recently to assist data recovery on large (20gig+) hard drives. I ended up with a much simpler (and faster) program by doing my own buffering and using only relative 32-bit lseeks and blockreads instead of the llseek 64bit offset functions. Since I wasn't trying to read a filesystem, but instead, rebuild data chains and recover information, 32bit-ness wasn't a problem aside from speed ( this process did involve *much* seeking. Granted, I didn't use FreeBSD, which may not have had a speed penalty ( and my speed differences could have been entirely caused by my crappy code ;o} ). Bottom line here is that for *my* application, 64bit-ness would have helped quite a bit in terms of getting the program written quickly and simply.

BTW, Linux 2.2.xx supports 64bit llseek, but has a 32bit vfs. The 2.3.99 series and more importantly the 2.4 release series has a 64bit llseek and 64bit vfs. Go here for a small, current discussion thread

so what immediately caught my eye about this story was the fact that you could peer ricochet modems. assuming this is the case, what's to stop me from putting a ricochet modem in (connected to) my firewall/gateway machine and connect another one to my laptop for local wireless access?

i haven't heard of doing this kind of this before. in some preliminary searching through the web i've found these articles of interest.

• on deja:

• a sample ppp-on script for ricochet.net service (which doesn't involve anything peer-to-peer)
• a whole interesting thread about doing exactly what i want without much detailed information (plus, the guy doin' it seems to not have his domain runnin' now).

• from ricochet:

• an explanation of how to do your ppp scripts through red hat (doesn't cover peer-to-peer).

• the basic linux ppp-howto (which might have all the info needed in it)

• ppp-howto

has anyone done this?

so what immediately caught my eye about this story was the fact that you could peer ricochet modems. assuming this is the case, what's to stop me from putting a ricochet modem in (connected to) my firewall/gateway machine and connect another one to my laptop for local wireless access?

i haven't heard of doing this kind of this before. in some preliminary searching through the web i've found these articles of interest.

• on deja:

• a sample ppp-on script for ricochet.net service (which doesn't involve anything peer-to-peer)
• a whole interesting thread about doing exactly what i want without much detailed information (plus, the guy doin' it seems to not have his domain runnin' now).

• from ricochet:

• an explanation of how to do your ppp scripts through red hat (doesn't cover peer-to-peer).

• the basic linux ppp-howto (which might have all the info needed in it)

• ppp-howto

has anyone done this?

Sites that I visit irregularly (dejanews, cinemark, etc.) seem to be less usable each time I visit, and the phenomenon seems to be directly linked to commercialization: the pot of gold (search link, local schedule, whatever) is crowded in among the ads, links to other sites they want you to visit, and the general clutter that comes from attempting to be a universal portal. Further, deep links directly to the pot of gold are increasingly impossible, since they don't want you to miss all the ads and stuff.

Indeed.

But for dejanews, there is a simple answer. Just try typing:

http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[]/

and you get through 90% of the crap. It is left as an exercise for the reader to discover other options you can tack onto that URL to customize your web experience even more. :-)

Well, good, they should! I see far too many people comporting themselves in a way that they may regret later. Does anyone use Usenet? Ever checked your posting history in Deja? Unless you set your x-noarchive header, everything you've said in a newsgroup is available. I envision data-mining companies forming profile databases just based on usenet posts alone, nevermind all the public messageboards that track your IPs.

It's targets include many younger children and younger consumers who have no idea their online movements are being tracked, and who certainly have the right to pursue individual cultural interests without worring that they're being watched

Ignorance is NO EXCUSE. And I'm sorry, in a perfect world everyone would have the right to do web stuff anonymously, but this just isn't the case. You have to watch your own ass. *snickers* "individual cultural interests", that's rich. "Mom, I'm gonna go steal some CDs from Tower Records, so I can induldge my cultural interests in the latest album, 's ok with you?"

As for whether Metallica has the right to persue users: sure they do! I mean, sure, it's a stupid PR move, but there's nothing patently wrong with persuing people who are ripping you off. They could certainly handle the situation in a more positive way, but that's their choice. To call it an "assault on freedom" is absurd. "Wahhh! I can't distribute pirated music anymore! Metallica is SO MEAN!"

Well.. the side of the Borg cube did have "Intel Inside" on it....

Then Intel's days are numbered.

The ones I've been involved with, ACLUG, which I helped found, and CTLUG, have a small "core" of two to four people very active in keeping the thing runing, organizing meetings, etc. I've never seen a LUG where there were elected officers, but that doesn't mean that you couldn't do it that way.

I think the whole open source mindset leads itself to groups like these. The Austin Perl Mongers run pretty much the same way as most LUGs I've seen. These people are more interested in learning and spreading the word than they are concerned about what the organization looks like.

Remember, the day when you found out about Intel PSN? It was devastating. I remember going to their newsgroups and publishing questions
-1 -, -2 -, -3 - maybe those were not very well articulated questions but, jeez, couldn't they try to answer?
The only responses from Intel rep's that me and other hundreds of people received was to move our questions away from Intel's newsgroup into other newsgroups.
They specifically did not like questions that mentioned overclocking their CPU's, even though they overclock their own CPU's all the time and sell them at higher prices (PII, PIII same core; Pentium 166 was an overclocked Pentium 150 - but only intel is allowed to do this.)

I am happy that AMD did not catch this desease of marking their processors with PINs, it would be a worse blow yet.

Now at least, I can go back the Intel's newsgroups and say: "told you so, suckers!"

Remember, the day when you found out about Intel PSN? It was devastating. I remember going to their newsgroups and publishing questions
-1 -, -2 -, -3 - maybe those were not very well articulated questions but, jeez, couldn't they try to answer?
The only responses from Intel rep's that me and other hundreds of people received was to move our questions away from Intel's newsgroup into other newsgroups.
They specifically did not like questions that mentioned overclocking their CPU's, even though they overclock their own CPU's all the time and sell them at higher prices (PII, PIII same core; Pentium 166 was an overclocked Pentium 150 - but only intel is allowed to do this.)

I am happy that AMD did not catch this desease of marking their processors with PINs, it would be a worse blow yet.

Now at least, I can go back the Intel's newsgroups and say: "told you so, suckers!"

Remember, the day when you found out about Intel PSN? It was devastating. I remember going to their newsgroups and publishing questions
-1 -, -2 -, -3 - maybe those were not very well articulated questions but, jeez, couldn't they try to answer?
The only responses from Intel rep's that me and other hundreds of people received was to move our questions away from Intel's newsgroup into other newsgroups.
They specifically did not like questions that mentioned overclocking their CPU's, even though they overclock their own CPU's all the time and sell them at higher prices (PII, PIII same core; Pentium 166 was an overclocked Pentium 150 - but only intel is allowed to do this.)

I am happy that AMD did not catch this desease of marking their processors with PINs, it would be a worse blow yet.

Now at least, I can go back the Intel's newsgroups and say: "told you so, suckers!"

Examine the basic scientific method as related to subjectivity and you will find the logical error that Rand makes. What we perceive and what is are only valid so far as current human thought and perception. Some things are just more solidly corroborated than others. Rand presents her objectivist philosophy with subjective thoughts like humans being "heroic beings".

In fact, I am so annoyed at running into so many Ayn Rand phreaks, that I am thinking of setting up a web site to compare many other ism philosophies and movements that say they promote thinking and intellectual evolution, such as environmentalism, punk, goth, freemason, ad infinitum idealogies as compared to objectivism.

wah wah wah.

why don't you just bookmark the powersearch page?
http://www.deja.com/home_ps.shtml
or if you want usenet, on the front page, up at the top, where it says "Looking for usenet?" there is a link. click on it. you're right. one click off the main page is "leafing through the site" and so you don't have to leaf through one link, here's the URL:

http://www.deja.com/usenet/

wah wah wah.

why don't you just bookmark the powersearch page?
http://www.deja.com/home_ps.shtml
or if you want usenet, on the front page, up at the top, where it says "Looking for usenet?" there is a link. click on it. you're right. one click off the main page is "leafing through the site" and so you don't have to leaf through one link, here's the URL:

http://www.deja.com/usenet/

Deja Power Search - Friendlier front-end to the Deja power search by Jeremy Nixon

First thing to note, comparison based on out-of-box. That means none of the add-ons are considered at all. Let me go through and comment each with add-ons included.

Full Email: They list "No" for the Palm. Multimail Pro provides it, so I consider that a Yes if I ever wanted to do email on a palm sized computer. Of course we're talking Pocket Outlook Express here. Considering the Deja poll on email clients has OE in the middle of the pack with the only two clients I recommend (PMMail and The Bat! topping the list chances are I'd look for third party email even if I were going to.

Web-Browsing: Well, considering the resolution (320x240) there aren't many sites that will come across looking decent in the first place. On a palm sized computer I prefer only snippits and text. IE, content instead of fluff. This is doubly true when you consider the bandwidth restrictions of wireless communications.

AvantGo: Was a pig on the Palm, most likely a pig on MS's stuff and, IMHO, not worth a damn. I get more use out of iSiloFree and their web convertor for a fraction of AvantGo's space.

Color: Hope the sun isn't out, right? :)

Memory: 16-32Mb given. This is MS, something tells me 24Mb of it would be needed just to store everything they want to shoehorn in there leaving 8Mb, what the Palm offers. :)

Speed: Up to 206Mhz compared to the Palm's 20Mhz. Of course, all the MS applications aren't coded as tight as Palm applications so they feel like it is 20Mhz. Honestly, I have a Palm IIIe that I have used Afterburner II to slow-down to save on battery life. I normally run at 13Mhz compared to the normal 16Mhz and it is fine. Most of the time the machine is idling anyway. Isn't like we've got RC5 going in the background.

Expansion Slot: Welll, ok, they got it there, maybe.

Sync: "Always ready to go with ActiveSync!" Like, ActiveX? ActiveDesktop? Uhm, I dunno about you but me, I'm fine with pushing a single button.

USB connection: Aaand? USB may be nice but I've not really worried over a sync before.

IrDA: No comment

Handwriting Recognition: OK, everyone who can't read their own handwriting please raise their hands. Grey raises his hand. I like Graffiti because it is easy. Microsoft really is going for the lazy people here. "No more buttons to press, don't have to learn an input system that 90% resembles what you write anyway!"

Voice Recording: Why? With 32Mb you can barely cram anything into that of any value. Besides, there are add-ons for the Palm that allow this.

On-Board Financial Software: Wow, Money for PocketPC included. Works with Microsoft Money 2000. I use Quicken 2000 and PocketQuicken on my Palm. Wow, imagine that.

Mapping Software: "Clarity of maps confined to low resolution screens." 160x160 compared to 320x240. Both of those, to me, are low resolution. Besides, those same low resolution screens work fine on specialized GPS devices for years now. I don't need the extra space for an effing animated streetsign (2nd cousin to the paperclip) to tell me to turn left now. One back-seat driver will be quite enough, thank you. Needless to say there are several applications for the Palm that provide this as well as several GPS modules for the Palm.

Play MP3s: "No need to carry an additional MP3 player". Pocket PC, 32Mb. Rio, IIRC, 96Mb. There is a reason why I don't want my Palm to do MP3s, the specialized device does it better.

Text reader: iSilo, Peanut Press, DOC format (dozens of readers there) TealDOC, etc, etc, etc

Animated Games: The whole reason I started writing this. First off, I hate the corpspeak "experience". "A wonderful web experience!" "A great gaming experience!" "That new Star Trek show furthers the TV experience!" Get over it, it isn't an experience, it is a game. Furthermore, I guess Zap 2000! doesn't count as an animated game. What comes standard with the Palm PC that is awesome? Solitaire and Minesweeper? Definintely have to look add-on here in both cases.

Disclaimer: this is a separate argument from the point that a CS degree isn't about using specific tools; I don't disagree with that argument, I just have another point to make.

In four years of doing (mostly) unofficial tech support work for my highschool, we went from a Novell 3.11 network with a 50-user license and DOS/Win3.1 workstations, switched to Windows95 on the workstations, upgraded the server to Novell 4 (and think it's at Novell 5 now), and are now running both Win98 and NT workstations alongside 95 and a few leftover DOS/Win3.1 based machines.

What's my point? Just because technology is obsolete doesn't mean it goes away. Aside from the "hey, look what Linux (or BSD) will do on my clunker-486-beige-box", in a real world of pseudo-heterogenous computing (we actually had a few BSD and Linux boxen at the school as well, so it really is heterogenous), you need to know yesterday's technology if you want to keep stuff going. I remember a teacher coming up to me last summer and asking for help with her laptop. It had died a few months previous, and I had to reinstall the OS. It was a 486 with 8MB RAM, so 95 was out of the question. I had to remember how to get Client32, Windows3.11, and Novell's TCP/IP stack working together. That was *fun*. Oh, and I had to use a VLM-based boot disk first so I could download the files I needed from the server.

I could also list some of the other crap I did (like getting Win95OSR2 to install on machines without CD-ROMs and without having to enter the auth key, thanks to the OSR2 FAQ for help with that one), kludging Netscape 4.0 under 95 to read user data from the network home directory, etc. The point? I've learned (a) how to deal with certain technologies (esp. Win3.1 and Win9x clients on a Novell net), (b) where to look for help with solutions (ie the Microsoft Knowledge Base and deja.com), and (c) how to work around inherent limitations in the software I was using. All of those skills have come in very handy since, working on various less-than-ideal networks and in less-than-ideal situations.

Ok, but that still doesn't explain why people don't type their query into Google or Altavista or even DejaNews before spewing it as an Ask Slashdot.

Or, for that matter, why the editors don't send the above sentence back to the submitter instead of posting the lame question.

UTFSE; Use The Freakin' Search Engines.

Travolta has been trying to get this movie made for about 10 years, because of his connection. At first, he wanted to play the role of the hero, Johnnie Goodbye Tyler, but now he's playing the villan, Terl.

According to the Internet Movie Database, Travolta was a producer on the movie.

The folks on alt.religion.scientology have been tracking Battlefield Earth for a while now and this Deja search appears to bring up links to the best bits. a.r.s is generally dominated by anti-Scientologists, 'cuz good Scientologists use special censorware that prevents them from reading that newsgroup (and a hell of a lot of the rest of the 'net) - most scientologists posting to it have either been assigned to do so or are growing sceptical and are likely to end up in trouble.

I used to spend time in a.r.s myself (enough so that I and my ISP are on the banned list), having been pulled in by the COS's forged cancel message of that newsgroup. I've found better things to do now, but just couldn't pass up the chance to spread the word a little further.

Please allow me to elucidate plainly upon my original point without the weighted "cult" rhetoric which bears an extremely negative connotation:

If you look further into various philosophies, manifesto's, movements, et al, you will find they most always bring one to question their current perceived reality. This applies across to pseudo-religion, cults, racist groups, some political movements, ad infinitum (e.g., environmentalism, punk rockers, liberalism, communism, nazism, freemasons, scientologists, *gasp* even some religions, et al etc etc). For example, if you go call up the local American communist party - do you think they will tell you that they didn't employ skepticism in shaping their idealogy? I thought not.

You have to make the distinction between that and the thoughts elucidated heretofore in the objectivist philosophy. You might then say: "Why do you feel so strongly about such things as political manifesto's? They are harmless.." Well, I have to admit - I too, had fell in a terrible ism pothole many years ago. I too had found that this had opened me up into a world of skeptical thinking. What I later found at the help of another is replacement dogma based on the seeds of that particular belief system presented.

And that is why I despise those wearing things such as objectivism, or environmentalism etc on their belt. Saying such things are harmless and only books flies in the face of those who are dedicated to these philosophies. Even in situations where the progenitors were revealed as complete frauds who managed to elucidate only one single, clear thought in their entire lives, people have still insisted on turning the happenstance into religions, cults, brotherhoods, movements, and so on. People will be people, no doubt.

Anyway, when glazing over the works of philosophers such as Russell, Godel, Nietzsche, Descartes, etc - do you see them concocting rigid belief systems? I thought not. Bertrand Russell even jokes as to how one would easily herd sheep with simple grains of truth. In Ayn Rand's case, she could barely conceal the fact that her books are really a manifesto. In contrast, Orwell actually wrote books based on the merit of his ideas alone - not some cultish ism manifesto philosophy.

Still, one asks what's wrong with the objectivist system. Well, as I said in my other post, it's mostly feel-good self-fulfilling blabble. Subjectivity seems to be lost in all this to "objective" selfishness. It's basically a simplistic look at the complex system we call human life. Black and whites are just so conveniently manipulative. If Ayn Rand really wanted you to think for yourself, she wouldn't have built such a rigid philosophy based on interesting grains of truth, but riddled with logical fallacies. "Objectivism"? Give me a break.

Note that my original response didn't say not to read Ayn Rand's books. It was only a warning to the possibly destructive thought systems she is trying to plant in the readers mind. Just take it with a grain of salt like one should take any other manifesto. Belief systems denying the intellectual evolution of the reader are for wussies :-).

"You will be able to have cable access on many platforms, Linux, Windows, even OS/2, you will not be required to use AOL's interface either"

For now, anyway. Cable is a monopoly and cable modem is cheaper and more widely available than DSL. Do you honestly think Time Warner won't eventually force its cable modem customers to use AOL? It's happening to Netscape's Netcenter users.

Where I live (Boston's Dorchester neighborhood), we actually have a choice of cable modem providers: RCN or RoadRunner. RoadRunner, a joint venture between Media One and Time Warner, is a much better provider (according to reviews on World Wide Wait, Epinions, and Deja.com), but I can't shake the feeling that RoadRunner will be absorbed by AOL in the not-too-distant future. So if I want high-speed internet access, I must deal with RCN's awful service, or wait for DSL to come to the inner city at comparable prices.

I don't think I'll be retiring my modem anytime soon.

I noted that the Minix license, as quoted, does not include the advertising clause. What part of this do you not understand?

I referred to the change notice posted by UC Berkeley because I couldn't find a copy of the full text of the earlier version of the BSD license. However, it is the same clause 3 which effects the advertising clause. You'll note (if you bother to follow the two thoughtfully provided links) that this clause three isn't present in the Minix license.

Minix was never issued under the prior version of the BSD license, so no, the change notice doesn't affect Minix. You appear to be confused on this point.

What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Scope out Kuro5hin

--

http://x27.deja.com/ [ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=607967341&fmt=text None of that mess, just text.

NB it does contain spoilers.

Try mental problems. One of these kids was on a mind-altering drug preceding the shooting, yet how often was this mentioned in relation to playing quake?

There's a wonderful post in *alt.games.quake2* of all places regarding this. I was fairly active in that newsgroup at the time and there was quite a bit of discussion on the topic ever since the shootings. (whole thread here. There's a post further on down describing in detail all of the side effects of the medication.)

Morality/values certainly played a role in this, but as long as we're pointing fingers let's not forget that mental health issues combined with drugs which may actually make ones problems *worse*. Of course being able to admit that we're finger-pointing is only the first steps toward actually dealing with the issues. Something tells me that society as a whole will be dealing with them for some time...


...5 years from now everyone will be running free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5.

Try mental problems. One of these kids was on a mind-altering drug preceding the shooting, yet how often was this mentioned in relation to playing quake?

There's a wonderful post in *alt.games.quake2* of all places regarding this. I was fairly active in that newsgroup at the time and there was quite a bit of discussion on the topic ever since the shootings. (whole thread here. There's a post further on down describing in detail all of the side effects of the medication.)

Morality/values certainly played a role in this, but as long as we're pointing fingers let's not forget that mental health issues combined with drugs which may actually make ones problems *worse*. Of course being able to admit that we're finger-pointing is only the first steps toward actually dealing with the issues. Something tells me that society as a whole will be dealing with them for some time...


...5 years from now everyone will be running free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5.

Demon weren't ordered to pay anything. They settled out of court, presumably because they realised they were going to lose. They settled for 15 Kpounds plus costs.

Demon have argued for common carrier status, but don't yet have it. I think the reason for this is that the Government don't understand the technical difficulties in monitoring the volume of traffic that passes though Demon's systems.

Note that common carrier is a technical term under UK law which does not mean what you think it does (I found this out because I posted to uk.net and uk.legal using this term: see this article for details). It's best not to use the term in discussions on UK law.

To link this comment in - I don't think FreeNet stand a cowboy's chance in a nuclear explosion of getting common carrier status.

Who cares? Freenet has gone as far as they can in terms of plausible deniability by encrypting the stuff on the servers, but in any case, Demon's problem was that they could not use the innocent dissemination defence because they did not remove the material when requested. If you're running a Freenet node in the UK, all you do is remove something when you're asked to. This will have a minimal effect on the rest of the Freenet, of course, but that's the problem of the person threatening to sue you.

A more interesting question is what happens when you remove something when you're asked to and then you end up caching it again. I suppose server owners might want the option not to cache data (or data and links, if you're Demon) for particular keys. That said, all that happens then is someone resubmits under another key.

On the one hand, it's fair enough that Apple graphics (perhaps nee NeXT) are Apple's, but there are rumblings that Apple wants to get "medieval" over this. There has been a "reaction of silence," as well as more vigorous reactions.

The distressing part, described in this article, is that it appears that access to the OPENSTEP API may not be as open as everyone would wish to believe. To wit,

This document sets forth the OpenStep application programming interface (API). You may down-load one copy of this specification as long as it is for purposes of study only. We look forward to licensing third parties to create original implementations of this API. No such license is granted or implied by the publication of this specification. If you would like information on obtaining such a license, please contact NeXT at OpenStep@NeXT.COM.

Of course, the most distressing part is this message purported to have come from Steve Jobs, where the salient bit reads: From: Steve Jobs Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:19 AM To: Lucas C. Wagner Subject: GNUstep Lucas, As you may know, Apple owns the Cocoa and OpenStep APIs, and will not feel great about others using its intellectual property without premission. Best, Steve

Open is as open does. If Apple winds up suing anyone over GNUstep, I'd say that tells you how committed they really are to "open source."

On the one hand, it's fair enough that Apple graphics (perhaps nee NeXT) are Apple's, but there are rumblings that Apple wants to get "medieval" over this. There has been a "reaction of silence," as well as more vigorous reactions.

The distressing part, described in this article, is that it appears that access to the OPENSTEP API may not be as open as everyone would wish to believe. To wit,

This document sets forth the OpenStep application programming interface (API). You may down-load one copy of this specification as long as it is for purposes of study only. We look forward to licensing third parties to create original implementations of this API. No such license is granted or implied by the publication of this specification. If you would like information on obtaining such a license, please contact NeXT at OpenStep@NeXT.COM.

Of course, the most distressing part is this message purported to have come from Steve Jobs, where the salient bit reads: From: Steve Jobs Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:19 AM To: Lucas C. Wagner Subject: GNUstep Lucas, As you may know, Apple owns the Cocoa and OpenStep APIs, and will not feel great about others using its intellectual property without premission. Best, Steve

Open is as open does. If Apple winds up suing anyone over GNUstep, I'd say that tells you how committed they really are to "open source."

On the one hand, it's fair enough that Apple graphics (perhaps nee NeXT) are Apple's, but there are rumblings that Apple wants to get "medieval" over this. There has been a "reaction of silence," as well as more vigorous reactions.

The distressing part, described in this article, is that it appears that access to the OPENSTEP API may not be as open as everyone would wish to believe. To wit,

This document sets forth the OpenStep application programming interface (API). You may down-load one copy of this specification as long as it is for purposes of study only. We look forward to licensing third parties to create original implementations of this API. No such license is granted or implied by the publication of this specification. If you would like information on obtaining such a license, please contact NeXT at OpenStep@NeXT.COM.

Of course, the most distressing part is this message purported to have come from Steve Jobs, where the salient bit reads: From: Steve Jobs Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:19 AM To: Lucas C. Wagner Subject: GNUstep Lucas, As you may know, Apple owns the Cocoa and OpenStep APIs, and will not feel great about others using its intellectual property without premission. Best, Steve

Open is as open does. If Apple winds up suing anyone over GNUstep, I'd say that tells you how committed they really are to "open source."

On the one hand, it's fair enough that Apple graphics (perhaps nee NeXT) are Apple's, but there are rumblings that Apple wants to get "medieval" over this. There has been a "reaction of silence," as well as more vigorous reactions.

The distressing part, described in this article, is that it appears that access to the OPENSTEP API may not be as open as everyone would wish to believe. To wit,

This document sets forth the OpenStep application programming interface (API). You may down-load one copy of this specification as long as it is for purposes of study only. We look forward to licensing third parties to create original implementations of this API. No such license is granted or implied by the publication of this specification. If you would like information on obtaining such a license, please contact NeXT at OpenStep@NeXT.COM.

Of course, the most distressing part is this message purported to have come from Steve Jobs, where the salient bit reads: From: Steve Jobs Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:19 AM To: Lucas C. Wagner Subject: GNUstep Lucas, As you may know, Apple owns the Cocoa and OpenStep APIs, and will not feel great about others using its intellectual property without premission. Best, Steve

Open is as open does. If Apple winds up suing anyone over GNUstep, I'd say that tells you how committed they really are to "open source."

I've been in th is discussion about Linux vs FreeBSD firewalls on comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc - basically I've been using FreeBSD for assorted network torture, and had been looking at how Linux does firewalls, and they're completely different.

The eventual conclusion was that the FreeBSD 'single chain' model was more powerful than the linux model (especially with the tee ports in 4.0), and that Linux has this killer hole in the masquerading stuff. But someone did point out that a lot of this was changing under 2.4.

Any news? Any sign of tee ports (a divert port that then drops its' output back into the firewall chain)?

Dave :)

Sorry that I aqm replying to my own post, but I didn't have this url last night. Here is a link to a discussion of the Rambus yield/cost factor.

All I'm looking for is a semi-personal form letter saying you've nuked the account afflicted. This is insanely eazy to implement, and can even be hooked up into an existing reporting database. Infact, I wrote one up in this Usenet post to news.admin.net-abuse.email for UUNet. Just this setup time works well with ISP's as big as AOL.

We can't tell you any specific details of any action we take against a member's account, because AOL's privacy policy guidelines prohibit this.

[humor] I don't care if you used a five-kiloton thermonuke missile to get a spammer off your system, or a three-kiloton. [/humor] All I ask is that the user who sent me the junk to my account has been delt with. Not "We'll deal with it." I'm looking for a "We've dealt with him. He will not be spamming from us again."

All I'm getting is a "We're looking into it." I've gotten too many "We're looking into it's" from ISPs. I've gotten too many bounce messages, too. I've already helped get Real Networks on the MAPS RBL for being unrepentant in sending me junk. XOOM's getting there now. I have 84 spams waiting for LARTS to be fired off again, 4 relays to nominate to the RSS, and 74 spams filtered out according to the RBL or RSS. I'm tempted to start doing a spam or four a day. I only delete spams when I see the user responsible removed or reeducated. I wouldn't be suprized if I get a third of the load cut down because it's all AOL origionating stuff.

I'm not saying that the job gets done. I just don't have any proof of it, and it shows on other servers.

---
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com." The purpose of that site was not known. -- MSNBC 10-26-1999 on MS crack

No prob. I just read up on the mitnick case to figure out what happened exactly. I haven't read about it in a while. It looks like you're right about the cell phone thing. He was convicted on that one it looks like, but I'm not sure if he got prison for it. He's been convicted several times for various things, but hasn't spent more than a couple years in jail altogether until this last time, and wasn't serving a sentence when he was accused of breaking into Shimomura's system. (although I think he may have been on probation)

It's obvious that he's no saint, but it's equally obvious that the prosecution completely disregarded his rights during the course of the case. They wouldn't reveal the evidence against him or the damage amounts among other things. They also wouldn't explain why he was so dangerous that he had to be put in solitary confinement until he waived his right to a preliminary hearing. There were other offenses against him as well. It's scary that they got away with this kind of stuff. The 6 corps that had been hacked later submitted letters declaring that the "losses suffered were not material or non-existant", but the prosecution never turned these letters over to Kevin's attorney. Meanwhile, the prosecution and the press were running stories about Kevin costing these corps billions.. later reduced to millions.

Here's a few links in case you're curious.

http://www.kevinmitnick.com/news-04269 9.html

http://www.kevinmitnick.com/news-05289 9.html

ht tp://x30.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=566653614&CONTEXT=9 48113995.419102759&hitnum=72

Try Deja.com, Usenet alt.cellular, alt.cellular.*
There are alot of people selling/repairing mobile phones discussing things in the alt.cellular.tech newsgroups(it's also a good place to ask questions)

I've been in the mobile phone R&D business for over 4 years now. I've learned that you can't just rely on the brand name of any one individual manufacturer to help you make a good choice. These are tricky devices to make and one model by one manufacturer may be Excellent while another really sucks.

There are also Software Recalls and Just plain bad hardware. Anytime cheaper phones are built the cost savings can come from economizing on various critical parts(like say in the RF area) that will cause the platform to underperform(ok just plain suck).

Whatever phone you buy here's a few things I feel are important.

---- Digital is a must, longer battery life
- Coverage may be an issue depending on the network tech. you choose(CDMA,TDMA,GSM,AMPS....)

---- RF Performance
- it it can't acquire the network and stay on it this handset is not for you.
- Some models perform much better in fringe coverage areas than others. so check out the coverage plans for the service provider you will sign up with.

---- Audio Quality
- hey its a phone. If we can't hear each other why are we talking.
---- Accessory availability
- Car Power Adapter
- Data Connectors - if you wish to use a Laptop or PDA with it(InfraRed or Serial)
- Headset/Carkit - I like the portable headsets. ("mic on a rope")

---- Nice display
- nice font size which is quickly read
- something readable in the dark

----- Good Keypad
- size - good for your fingers
- Tactile feedback - responds well to your touch
- layout - some of these suck when you try to use them for basic functions

------ Form factor/Manufacturing Quality
- if it doesn't feel good in your hand keep looking.
- Materials Quality, if if feels cheap it probably is and will break easily. It will be dropped.
- Balance, don't want it to feel like it will fall out of your hand when pressing keys(especially if using SMS or browser services)

Just a small list of things to look for when browsing peoples opinions.
BTW, Don't forget to check up on software updates for your handset. There will usually be one or two additional software releases once a particular model is put on the market.

• Computing Review
• Epinions
• Deja.com (see Consumer Electronics>>Communications>>Cell Phones)

Wouldn't deja.com be what you're looking for?

Try Deja

Better yet, try:

The Ultimate HOSTS file

I dunno about the IP address the original USENET poster put in there. I replaced it with 127.0.0.1 and run a "web server" on my own box that responds only to requests from localhost and returns a 1x1 transparent .GIF instead.

One addendum: I was surprised to see an ad one day, and also had to add ad-adex[0-9].flycast.com instead of just ad-adex3.flycast.com to the list.

Seriously, when was the last time you ever wanted to see "content" from any of these sites? Blackhole 'em all.

It should be quite entertaining to check out the audio archive of this the March 22 broadcast of the Art Bell show! ;-)

James Oberg is generally reliable so it is rather strange he would blow off so much of his bread-and-butter credibility as a major wire service's science reporter.

No I'm not, I'm postulating a continuation and expansion of the public-private partnerships that have given rise to businesses like Wakenhut. There is no conspiracy necessary to explain the emergence of such partnerships -- it is a direct result of contractual practices and the associated political incentives for porkbarrel. If you want to claim that everytime a smokefilled room's door closes and political deals are cut that is a "conspiracy", then I suppose you can call me a "conspiracy theorist".

Your idea that an existing noncriminalized employee would be reduced in status to a criminal so that his existing employer could exploit him is a paper tiger. I am unimpressed that you knocked it down. The classic job of "license plate manufacturing" wasn't supported by such transformations -- the source of workers were criminals and the "business" was the highly politically connected organization known as the government itself. Expand that to public-private partnerships and you can start to get some perspective.

I've seen other references like this one, but this is the first that I could find on Deja. The story always revolves around elisp that was rewritten to avoid to avoid an employers claim on the work.

But the Net Generation has something far more ominous to face:

With the US prison population growing at phenomenal rates and more of the US population incarcerated than any other leading democracy, privatization of incarceration is increasingly attractive both as a cost-containment measure, and as political porkbarrel. With privatization comes the incentive to work the prisoners to pay for the costs of their incarceration. This comes at a time when we see a major shift in emphasis on "knowledge" as the source of productivity. Therefore after we see prisoners working to pay for the costs of their incarceration, we will next see a natural transition to forms of incarceration that may, increasingly, seem less like incarceration and more like slavery.

This will provide an environment in which employers can make investments in training and then recover those investments.

What? This is utterly outrageous dystopian fantasy?

Think again teenage ubergeek.

There are plenty of incentives to put your sweet young ass permanently in the corrections system.

On the other hand, if it's moving faster than light, then it will move more in a space direction than the time direction, and will thus be spacelike.

Also, here is some more information. (The figures don't format properly so "View original Usenet format".)

The problems mentioned by Bill Joy in his interview point out how poorly informed he is. Anyone who has been in the computer industry as long as he has, should know enough to "read the manual(s)" before offering uninformed opinions. The problems regarding nanotechnology run amok have been discussed for many years in the sci.nanotech newsgroups as well as at conferences for the Foresight Institute's Senior Associates. The basic solutions involve making "safe" (e.g. reviewed, open source) designs available while at the same time developing defenses against nanotech run amok. The Extropy Institute's Mailing List Archives, for example, contains recent discussions about encouraging the availability of "almost anything" manufacturing boxes (similar to Star Trek "replicators"), while discouraging the availability of "everything" boxes.

Diamondoid or saphire based molecularly assembled nanobots used in medical applications will greatly exceed the capabilities in of "biobots" built on existing genetic machines (DNA, enzymes, bacteria, cells, etc.) because they are stronger, can pack the "code" more densely, and can have more complex programs than the rather "ad hoc" designs that nature has provided us with. Most of the first volume of Nanomedicine is devoted to determining exactly what the physical limits will be on power, communication, mobility, etc. Most of the applications will be discussed in Volumes II and III.

Joy may be right that the technology poses a threat to the "human species", but that begs the question of "Why would you want to run on obsolete hardware?". Anyone who understands even a little astronomy knows that galactic hazards doom biological human forms to death at some point. Only those humans who choose to upload have any hope of living the trillion or so years that seems quite feasible. So while the hopes for biochemical humans are rather dismal even with Nanomedicine, the long term prospects for humanity, based on what nanotechnology allows are quite good indeed.

As far as nanotechnology background material goes, the best (nontechnical) source is Engines of Creation. Other references can be found in Eric Drexler's CV.

An MS plugin for Netscape exists, if you're running Netscape on a system which is compatible with the plugin.

Actually, even Exchange Server has problems if not running on same server as IIS.

You need a distribution that uses glibc 2.1 which includes RedHat 6.0, Slackware 7.0 and the latest Debian (I think - not 100% sure).

The reasons for glibc2.0 not being supported are here.

Here is a working link to that message.