Slashdot Mirror

as always.. , Please use the mirrors, Check the change log.

err..wait wrong...thr....n/m

OpenZaurus, a completely open source

Open source, eh? Do you happen to know what license it's under, then?

Their website doesn't mention anything about that.

Since it's apparently based on Linux, I'd expect it to be under the GPL (at least in part). But that obviously isn't the case. Look at the Openzaurus download page. There are links to 20 different binary packages, but no links to source code. According to the GPL, you must put source links in the same place as binary ones.

Downloading an unpacking those binaries won't reveal any licensing information, nor "an offer good for three years to supply source to any third party".

Searching around on the Openzaurus site for source code, I find an intriguing FAQ entry which claims that Openzaurus code is GPL, and another which explains a way to get the source. Or rather... a way to get some source code. Actually... patches against other, 3rd party distributions. Which if you had those distributions, you might be able to assemble into the Openzaurus source code... The code to some version of Openzaurus, not necessarily the same code that built the binaries you have.

All of that is completely against the GPL.

You can't give out patches- it must be the whole source.
The source code and binaries you provide must correspond exactly (same revision).

Why do you think real hackers don't post all their stuff in public places or swap files on P2P?

What, you mean like kernel.org and redhat9.torrent?

As far as upgrading to 2.5 goes, I can't point you to any hard and fast guide, but I can give a few pointers and gotchas I've run across. First is that you're going to need a new modutils. The old one has died, a memorial service is planned. As far as any truly hard and fast rules go, I can't give many. Lowlatency is very nice on the desktop, acl support is now in the stock kernel, as is greater security options in general. The moving around of options got me too; my first attempt at building a kernel resulted in me building unix socket support as a module, which was bad, but was repairable. Also, encrypted loopback filesystems don't currently work, so if you need them, stick with 2.4. All in all, though, 2.5 kicks the llama's ass with much enthusiasm, and I'm looking forward to 2.6, as it looks to provide awesome performance and some great features that are hard to find in other OS's offerings.

Oh that's easy, it's somewhere in here

Nice troll, but sco.o is used for bluetooth. Just grep the 2.4.21 changelog and see for yourself.

I would love to hear people who used to work for Novell weigh in on the timeline. I know that Linux had SMP on certain limited motherboards VERY early on and as early as v0.27, 05 may 1998 [tldp.org], the new motherboards were being added to the already growing list of Linux SMP platforms....

It looks to me as if SMP was introduced to Linux in kernel version 1.3.26 (13 Sep 1995). The patch is here.

That's technically incorrect. There was an original linux "license" that Linus ditched for the GPL right around version 0.12. It forbade redistribution for a profit, which among other things basically prevented CD vendors from redistributing Linux.

See the RELNOTES-0.01 and RELNOTES-0.12 files under here

The Linux kernel sources in the NSA SELinux distribution are based upon those found at www.kernel.org.

gentoo..

failing that try here

I run mandrake with a 2.5 kernel.

The real question is if governement agencies should be allowed to use expensive licensed software for which there is a viable alternative in the OS/FS community (read without paying required license fees). I think we have since long passed the time that we should believe that e.g running GNU/Linux in combination with OOo is at least as expensive as well know commercial products and can dismiss these statements as FUD.

I for one think they should not buy those products, though it is not any better where I live. In those cases, they are not only throwing our hardly earned (and often reluctantly paid) tax money out the window, which could be used for far better alternatives, they are also increasing the power of a monopolist, a self fulfulling prophecy.

I think this is the strength of the Australian proposal and the ISC tries to oppose (instead of using the money 'equally' (?) for the own population, it would now go to a few companies, from which a lot of them are foreign (not Australian).

The WV settlement is fair enough to the state (their attorney's fees are covered, and they get several million in free products from Microsoft and other companies, though the article didn't say from whom).

The sad irony, though, is that WV can already get free OSes, office software, and other products, even without the settlement. Because of that, this is an even huger win for Microsoft, and an unfortunate result for high school kids in WV who will continue to graduate while under the thumb of Bill.

Check out ntop for the per ip bandwidth utilization. Not exactly what you wanted, but it might do the job.

As for the bar on kernel.org, just click on it for the source. Dang kernel.org has been slower than balls for me lately.

Which leads me to belive even if we had just 1 unique enough comment/piece of code we could figure out who the hell did what. There are plenty of archives out there that have every kernel version back to the linux dawn of time. Could find it within log(n) steps too. Most of them have changelogs and usually say who did what and when. But so far the 'evidence' has been rather scanty as you say. Also the nda they want to see the code is stupid you would never get to do any linux type thing again. For fear of being the one who puts something in. We can also look at other open source projects of the time and see what sorts of things they were doing. Maybe it wasnt even linux at all maybe it was inherited from some other project?

small colection of kernel source

According to SCO, their code can be found here

So why did Marcelo say he was planning 2.4.22 in a few weeks?

Maybe because he think the last release took too long time. I guess a lot has been happening between 2.4.20 and 2.4.21. A lot of changes followed by a lot of small patches to fix what was broken does take time to setle down. Maybe he doesn't want as much to be going on before the next release. It could mean that some things will just have to wait till 2.4.23. But if you really want to know what has been going on between 2.4.20 and 2.4.21, you can just read the Changelog.

I think it was a typo anyways, since there is no 2.4.20-rc7.

This kernel release includes support for the Palm Tungsten T. Finally, I can wipe my Windows partition. WOOHOO!

On another note, kernel.org does seem to be slashdotted.

ftp.us.kernel.org is a DNS round-robin for 27 hosts, some with multiple OC3's. Try slashdotting *that*!

http://www.de.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/Cha ngeLog-2.4.21

for example.

ftp needs much more time and authentication stuff for login, commandos and so forth.

fr

jp

and so on...

http://www.de.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/Cha ngeLog-2.4.21

for example.

ftp needs much more time and authentication stuff for login, commandos and so forth.

fr

jp

and so on...

http://www.de.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/Cha ngeLog-2.4.21

for example.

ftp needs much more time and authentication stuff for login, commandos and so forth.

fr

jp

and so on...

Yeah, because Linux doesnt have any bugs .

Not entirely accurate. Sure, they'll remove it from the current version, but there's a shitload of archives of those versions that have already been "sold" to the general public.

They can always say that the old stuff is the key, but what they really want to do is more evil than most people have seen: by forcing people to leave the code in, when the case is over in two years they can claim damages up to the time the case is decided rather than now, when we can remove it.

They're keeping it a secret to increase damages. It'll take a second lawsuit to undo those damages and prove this is what they were up to, but by then they'll have taken the money and declared bankruptcy and be unable to pay it back, so it won't matter.

SCO is a SCam.

Cool. That's great to hear. If the paper was produced for hire, then it should be held to a higher standard of perfection. So perhaps his inaccurate statements regarding the capabilities of Unixware should have been better researched.

However, (you knew it was coming), I would have to suggest that the "Get it perfect before releasing it" paradigm is not as effective as the "release early, release often" one [evidence]. I didn't catch his SCO rebuttal until it had been "in the wild" for some time, but from what little I know of the flaws that were fixed, it sounds like the real fault would be if he didn't mark the first released draft as ".9 RC5" and welcome comments. If he didn't do such a thing and he's making large sums of money on this, then I can be dissappointed with his thoroughness.

If he did, then it would seem like behavior extremely consistent with the "Bazaar" methodologies he's well known to espouse. In fact, adhereing to the "Cathedral" model in this development and thereby denying the value of peer review would have seemed a bit ironic. Whether he did or didn't mark the paper Beta, he did respond to community input and alter to suit.

in only 80 lines of code?

According to find, grep and wc, a Mandrake 2.4.21-pre kernel (not including the Documentation/ tree) comes to 4.37 million non-blank lines. According to The SCO Group's lawyers, two thousandths of a percent of the Linux kernel was contributed by them. Gee, that was worthwhile. And considerably less than their own website claims.

Of course, they didn't nominate the file containing the 80 lines, it might well be net/tcp_ecn.h or better yet lines 3-24 of math-emu/single.h (-:

in only 80 lines of code?

According to find, grep and wc, a Mandrake 2.4.21-pre kernel (not including the Documentation/ tree) comes to 4.37 million non-blank lines. According to The SCO Group's lawyers, two thousandths of a percent of the Linux kernel was contributed by them. Gee, that was worthwhile. And considerably less than their own website claims.

Of course, they didn't nominate the file containing the 80 lines, it might well be net/tcp_ecn.h or better yet lines 3-24 of math-emu/single.h (-:

Get it before SCO does! Linux is open source, if SCO wasn't after the money, it would of sent patches by now!

dd if=image of=/dev/hdX

Server administrators who are afraid of becoming infected again by another, similar worm should install this patch immediately.

Seriously, though - just how many of these things have to happen before people start considering that Windows is less-than perfect?

I am a network engineer at SCO.
I was browsing through our smb shares to make sure nobody was downloading illegal files.
Lo and behold, I found a package called linux-2.4.20.tar.bz2

I noticed that you linux users are mirroring that same exact file on some website.

If you do not immediately remove this file, and any copies of the extracted contents of this file, we shall be contacting you through our team of recently graduated lawyers.

Have a nice day.

-r

For the usual "feature" patches ("This patch adds pretty shiny things to the edge of your window"...), you're absolutely right: making any kind of large-scale change (like putting a new patch on 1000 machines) is a big deal. Even if it's all automated via network management tools, you'll need to test, prepare and then support it. Do you really need that little tweak added?

However, with security patches usually you have no choice. The only decision for some security patches is how long do you wait before deploying it. Don't wanna be the first ones to put a bad patch on now, do we?

That's a tough one. Deploying a patch seems like a big hassle, especially when you need to test it thoroughly and have a fallback option if it fails. Big hassle, that is, up until it's too late and you have to clear out a few dozen CodeRed or Nimda infected machines! Like insurance: seems too expensive, right up until you actually need it...

Of course, they don't seem to mention the alternative, of not needing to patch ;-) As Bernstein says, reliability means never having to say "sorry" - and never having to patch, either!

It was an Intel ad, in case you're interested - they're running this Centrino thing just about anywhere it's physically possible to place an ad. Copenhagen Airport had them all over the place, and an exhibit with sexy notebooks (some of which now have Kernel.org as homepage :)

Have fun!

Gnutella
Bit Torrent
Freenet
Reiserfs
Linux Kernel
Open SSH
Encrypted Filesystems
GnuPG

At least in my opinion p2p and crypto are the edges in coding right now. Both can be hugely successful if you succeed in writing them properly. They can also be a huge failure if done improperly. Personally, I'm amazed that there aren't more p2p worms/remote exploits out there. Every now and then there are a few breaks in crypto from a weird angle, but in general they have been very successful as well.

SAVE THEIR SERVERS: Ok, I've never written a tutorial of any kind in my life... so if this is posted anywhere, you can edit it (to a point ... keep the main writing.. but adding photo's, etc are fine by me, just give me a lil credit) And with that said .. I'll start...

This tutorial will explain how to go about mounting your Xbox HD's game save partition under Linux on a PC, in order to get habibi_xbox's 007:Agent Under Fire game save along with raincoat and your bios of choice onto the Xbox's HD, eliminating the need for a Mega-X-Key!

What you'll need:

Xbox
PC running Linux (distro of choice)
Linux kernel 2.4.20 source ( http://www.kernel.org )
"Kernel" folder from xbox-linux's CVS ( http://xbox-linux.sf.net)
007: Agent Under Fire retail DVD
Soldering Iron + Solder (and torx screw drivers)

*Warning... i installed a fresh copy of Slackware Linux on an old PC just to do this, following this tutorial can cripple your linux system if you don't revert back to your old kernel... or compile a new one... unless you know what your doing*

1st things 1st! Now you must open up your Xbox *which I don't think I need to explain how to do*, take out the motherboard, and solder the 2x2 jumpers (one's on top, ones on the bottom of the mobo) pictures: http://www.xbox-scene.com/articles/tsop.php . Now put everything back together, but leave the case top off, and keep the Xbox near your pc!

Now, download the Linux 2.4.20 kernel source from http://www.kernel.org *look in the archives!*, move the tar.gz or tar.bz2 file to /usr/src and extract. This should leave you with a folder named "linux-2.4.20". Next, get the "Kernel" folder from the Xbox-Linux team's CVS *sourceforge tells you how to get on their CVS server... just user kernel as the module name*. After doing so, move the contents of the "kernel" folder to the "linux-2.4.20" folder.

Go into the linux-2.4.20 folder and read the README.xbox file! Follow it's instructions to the point right before compiling the kernel! Next, run "make xconfig" or "make menuconfig" in console while in the folder. Configure the kernel as you normally would *I assume you have some knowledge about Linux*, remove USB support, and turn off all Xbox specific functions... Make sure to leave FatX support in though! When done, run *without quotes* "make dep ; make modules ; make bzImage ; make modules ; make modules_install ; make install" This will automatically do everything needed. Next, shutdown, and use the Xbox HD swap trick to unlock your Xbox's HD and connect it to your PC (Turn on your pc, wait for it to boot RIGHT BEFORE it gets to your Linux boot loader screen press the Pause / Break button. Turn on Xbox, wait for it to boot to the dash, unplug IDE cable from Xbox, connect an IDE cable from your PC into the Xbox's HD and press any key. Your pc should boot as normal, into Linux... except now it see's your Xbox's HD!

*NOW, BACK UP YOUR XBOX HD! MAKE AN IMAGE FILE OF THE HD!!! I don't know the command do to so under linux, but I used HDD Driver under windows to do it ... but seriously, if something goes wrong here, you can be left with a bunk HD if you don't have a backup!*

Now, make a new folder in /mnt (I used /mnt/xbox myself). Now, look in the /dev folder, you should see "hda50 hda51 hda52 hda53, etc..." *it may not be hda, it could be hdb, hdc, or hdd...*. After seeing what block device it is, type this command into console"
mount -t fatx /dev/hda50 /mnt/xbox" ... if it works, you will see no error message. Go into the folder in which you mounted the partition to, and guess what! You should see TDATA and UDATA folders!

SAVE THEIR SERVERS: Ok, I've never written a tutorial of any kind in my life... so if this is posted anywhere, you can edit it (to a point ... keep the main writing.. but adding photo's, etc are fine by me, just give me a lil credit) And with that said .. I'll start...

This tutorial will explain how to go about mounting your Xbox HD's game save partition under Linux on a PC, in order to get habibi_xbox's 007:Agent Under Fire game save along with raincoat and your bios of choice onto the Xbox's HD, eliminating the need for a Mega-X-Key!

What you'll need:

Xbox
PC running Linux (distro of choice)
Linux kernel 2.4.20 source ( http://www.kernel.org )
"Kernel" folder from xbox-linux's CVS ( http://xbox-linux.sf.net)
007: Agent Under Fire retail DVD
Soldering Iron + Solder (and torx screw drivers)

*Warning... i installed a fresh copy of Slackware Linux on an old PC just to do this, following this tutorial can cripple your linux system if you don't revert back to your old kernel... or compile a new one... unless you know what your doing*

1st things 1st! Now you must open up your Xbox *which I don't think I need to explain how to do*, take out the motherboard, and solder the 2x2 jumpers (one's on top, ones on the bottom of the mobo) pictures: http://www.xbox-scene.com/articles/tsop.php . Now put everything back together, but leave the case top off, and keep the Xbox near your pc!

Now, download the Linux 2.4.20 kernel source from http://www.kernel.org *look in the archives!*, move the tar.gz or tar.bz2 file to /usr/src and extract. This should leave you with a folder named "linux-2.4.20". Next, get the "Kernel" folder from the Xbox-Linux team's CVS *sourceforge tells you how to get on their CVS server... just user kernel as the module name*. After doing so, move the contents of the "kernel" folder to the "linux-2.4.20" folder.

Go into the linux-2.4.20 folder and read the README.xbox file! Follow it's instructions to the point right before compiling the kernel! Next, run "make xconfig" or "make menuconfig" in console while in the folder. Configure the kernel as you normally would *I assume you have some knowledge about Linux*, remove USB support, and turn off all Xbox specific functions... Make sure to leave FatX support in though! When done, run *without quotes* "make dep ; make modules ; make bzImage ; make modules ; make modules_install ; make install" This will automatically do everything needed. Next, shutdown, and use the Xbox HD swap trick to unlock your Xbox's HD and connect it to your PC (Turn on your pc, wait for it to boot RIGHT BEFORE it gets to your Linux boot loader screen press the Pause / Break button. Turn on Xbox, wait for it to boot to the dash, unplug IDE cable from Xbox, connect an IDE cable from your PC into the Xbox's HD and press any key. Your pc should boot as normal, into Linux... except now it see's your Xbox's HD!

*NOW, BACK UP YOUR XBOX HD! MAKE AN IMAGE FILE OF THE HD!!! I don't know the command do to so under linux, but I used HDD Driver under windows to do it ... but seriously, if something goes wrong here, you can be left with a bunk HD if you don't have a backup!*

Now, make a new folder in /mnt (I used /mnt/xbox myself). Now, look in the /dev folder, you should see "hda50 hda51 hda52 hda53, etc..." *it may not be hda, it could be hdb, hdc, or hdd...*. After seeing what block device it is, type this command into console"
mount -t fatx /dev/hda50 /mnt/xbox" ... if it works, you will see no error message. Go into the folder in which you mounted the partition to, and guess what! You should see TDATA and UDATA folders!

You could try this page, and if they move it the steps are:

- amd.com
- Technical Resources link at top
- Technical Documentation at top left
- AMD Athlon(tm) XP Tech Docs

System makers can brand executables, but it is more common for them to use oeminfo.ini. If the General tab under system properties doesn't have a "Computer:" heading and does have a "Manufactured and Supported by:" heading, manufacturers logo or Support Information button, then your system has been branded by the OEM. If you have an oem system then it is about 99% certain that when it was branded, the cpu model ( 1700+ ) was created during.

So, which company made your computer system? I don't have to ask if you built it yourself. We wouldn't be having this discussion if you had.

Some well respected software that won't/can't tell you your sold-as-speed, Sandra 2003, wcpuid, CPU-Z and the Linux kernel.

I have built thousands of systems from scratch and generally know what I am speaking about, but have been wrong before and will be wrong again. I have kept a civil tongue while you made snide remarks like "What's your next brilliant theory?". I have provided detailed information, you quoted WinXP as an unquestionable resource. Check the Forums at overclockers.com, one of the many places on the web to get good info and meet strange new people. BTW, with watercooling, my AthlonXP 1700+ DLT3C (1.5v) chip will run 2.55GHz and pass the prime95 torture test.

Have a great Palm Sunday.

.90 has been a long time in coming, but the wait was well worth it. I continue to be astounded by what mplayer and mencoder are capable of, and I shudder to think of what my Linux movie watching experience would be like without them. I hate to sound like a cheer leader, but I just don't think enough can be said about the fine work that A'rpi and Co. have produced over the years. In addition to our beloved kernel, it's always nice to have examples of open source software that so readily stomps into irrelevance its closed source competition. Good luck to A'rpi in whatever the future holds, and a thousand thanks for your contributions to the community.

from the Kernel prepatch doc.

Prepatches may be poorly tested, and may in fact not work at all.

I don't think i could be a very good idea to realease something to the market based on something like this. If u r a particular user, with a particular need, and take the risk to try it out and get it to work is perfect, but think of how many people who get MDK to try out linux could get this one and run into problem, probably they will not like that at all and just stick to their old OS.

Guess that's why I like deb :)

I dunno if anybody else noticed that on the presnetation it states:

Kernel 2.4.21

but kernel.org has the latest stable version 2.4.20

Is this just a typo or they have released a "stable" release using an untested kernel???

With no PR build-up, and no listing of new features on RedHat's website (can anyone else find any, because I certainly can't!) this release certainly looks like a bad joke, and if it's not an April Fools then it makes Red Hat look like a bad joke.

I'm using 8.0 now, and RH's games with registration and update-systems combined with their ridiculous "BlueCurve" rebranding (I'm sorry, but it just takes RH even farther away from any sort of standard, and forces it's users to go to RH for software updates), combine to make Red Hat look un-professional. Why should I buy any of their software, if they're just going to come out with a new major version months later and leave me in the dust?

I mean really, what warrents this? Is there a brand new Kernel major version that I've somehow missed hearing about? Does RH have the inside on a new blazingly fast XFree86? If this is serious it's a ridiculous marketing game, and if it's a joke it's wholly unprofessional!

As soon as I've time it's back to the source and on to Gentoo for me!

was that so hard?

Linux was first developed for 32-bit x86-based PCs (386 or higher). These days it also runs on (at least) the Compaq Alpha AXP, Sun SPARC and UltraSPARC, Motorola 68000, PowerPC, PowerPC64, ARM, Hitachi SuperH, IBM S/390, MIPS, HP PA-RISC, Intel IA-64, DEC VAX, AMD x86-64 and CRIS architectures.

I dont belive you're being fair. FSF was there a long time before Linux (and I mean the kernel) come out. I wouldn't call their work "contributions to the Linux movement".

And about "renaming Linux" (to GNU/Linux)... you should distinguish the kernel, that is Linux, from the whole OS, which is usually called Linux but some feel that it would be better called GNU/Linux.

Remember that Linus started Linux because he wanted to run GNU software in a x86 without having to pay for a non-free OS/kernel. As Linus himself said in the famous Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate:

If the GNU kernel had been ready last spring, I'd not have bothered to even start my project: the fact is that it wasn't and still isn't. Linux wins heavily on points of being available now.

As far as I can tell, Red Hat does not have "files in the wrong place" any more than any other Linux distro - instructions for a lot of things intended for other distros are still very useful guidance for RH users like myself.

The packaging system may not automatically resolve dependencies, but it's bloody good as it is. I download an RPM, and use 'rpm -ivh' and I'm up and running 99.9% of the time. If I need some other RPMs, it'll tell me. If I need to su to root to install, it'll tell me. If it can't or shouldn't uninstall a package it'll tell me. Plus I can override it's warnings if I like.

If by stock kernel you mean the kernel that comes with the OS, then you are completely and utterly incorrect. If the kernel didn't work then why the heck would they ship this system? You can even download 'pure' kernels from if you like. No one's stopping you, but the stock kernel is perfectly fine and recompilable as is!

And I'm not paying massive amounts of "$$$$$" for Red Hat either. RH 8.0 cost me only £35 (about $55), which is a whole heck of a lot cheaper than Windows 2000/XP. Heck, if you like, you can download the entire thing for very little or nothing.

Mon is what I use. It is very extensible, but also is fairly good out of the box. I monitor ~90 servers (many in remote data centers) with no problems. I write all sorts of monitors that are run on the remote servers via ssh. It is open source, and free.

Nagios seems to be good as well, although I haven't used it myself.

Writing a back door is just more coding. Code for a while and see how much extraneous crap you write just for kicks.

Here's how I'd suggest approaching the problem. Look into the platform MIBs. Find out what you can query values for. You should at least be able to get some binary type "fan working", "power supply working", etc. type stuff. Then get yourself an easily extensible monitoring system. Frankly, BigBrother is anitquated and a pia to manage. Other recommendations made here are reasonable, but I'd suggest mon. It's not a monitoring system per se. It is a scheduling framework with concepts of monitor and alert built-in. Many monitors and alerts are availble, but best of all it's really easy to write your own. For such things (for most things), I like perl.

SuperRescue, a Red Hat-based boot-from-cd distro, sounds like what you want. I use it for troubleshooting and whatnot all the time. *Anyone* who considers themselves a techie should have one of these CDs burned somewhere, as it's a tremendously useful tool.

Linux spends almost no money in R&D and Sun spends like 2 billion. Stop ripping their shit off and come up with your own stuff or Unix will die.

Sorry, but ... what the fuck? So free Unix-alikes are "ripping shit off" of Sun, now? I guess the fact that real talent contributes code to Linux doesn't excuse the fact that Linux is based around the "everything is a file" concept. So reading information in public Usenix papers is ripping off of Sun? Please. For example, the anticipatory i/o scheduler seems to be based on information that's been freely published. Not information hidden away under proprietary NDAs. Futexes and the O(1) scheduler are other examples of information that wasn't ripped-off shit. (I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure about this.)

If Sun is spending two billion dollars in R&D and the linux people aren't, why hasn't Solaris managed to totally blow Linux out of the water? Oh wait, it does. On big (as in many processors) systems. It doesn't do as well on commodity hardware, but everybody knows Linux just doesn't scale well to 64-node machines these days. (People are working on it, but we're not there yet.) Even in the days of secure, portable, light reimplementations with wide hardware support, propietary Unix still has its niches. Besides, part of the appeal of Sun is a "total-package" deal - kind of like Apple.

Look, I appreciate that you might actually care about this, but if you don't give examples of what you're talking about you're going to look like you're talking out of your ass. Even on Slashdot. :3