Slashdot Mirror

"Classic DOOM and DSL Linux Desktop inside your Java-enabled browser! The latest JPC, the fast 100% Java x86 PC emulator, is now available with online demos and downloads. JPC is open source [...] Visit the website to try out some classic games and [...]"

Where it mentions playing DOOM and other DOS games, JPC is booting FreeDOS. So yes, this can run FreeDOS.

Here's a screenshot of FreeDOS in action on JPC, if you need one.

In fact, we've discussed the Java PC emulator on the FreeDOS web site since JPC was first released. We even link to it on our "About" page and "Links" page. It's a great way to introduce new users to the idea of running DOS, without asking them to install their own PC emulator, or even install FreeDOS at all.

Java PC has been released under the GNU GPL since May 2007, so to answer your question: source code is available. We mirrored an old copy of the source code from 2007, but looks like we haven't made further copies. But maybe it's enough to interest folks who don't want to wait for the JPC site to recover from its slashdotting today.

There are two standard academic journals where the specialized stuff in Environmental Economics is published: Land Economics and The Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. Carlin has published only a single article in Land Econ and none in JEEM during his entire career dating back to the mid-1960s. Furthermore, he only began publishing on the economics of global warming in 2007. Finally, anyone who is first rate coming out of a Ph.D. Econ program in MIT gets a Prof job at Berkeley, Harvard, Chicago, etc. The second raters get placements at Nebraska, Auburn, Oregon State, etc. It is only the dregs that end up as civil servants in places like the EPA. I would almost completely dismiss him except that I did notice that he had co-authored a couple of papers 15 years ago with Kip Viscusi who is certainly not a lightwieght in the field of risk assessment but who has also happily accepted money from Exxon for studying the economics of punitive damages resulting from the Exxon Valdez oil spill case.

Bottom line: Carlin is a 60 year-old fart who has done no significant research in his entire career and has a political viewpoint that is coloring what little work he has done.

A popular explanation of how it was done can be found here: http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdowd.com/msg10571.html

the status for the support of full Flash (with all actionscripts)

Gnash is getting extremely close to being a drop-in Free Software replacement for the Adobe Flash Player. In the linked videos, the ARM director of mobile computing was talking about how the ARM folks were working with Adobe to get Adobe Flash running on the ARM processors, but Gnash has already had ARM support for years. If they're demoing Ubuntu -- a Free Software OS -- on these machines, then why not use a Free Software program to play Flash programs on them? Why not invest their time and energy in the Free Software project?

Rob Savoye (lead dev for Gnash) wrote a bit on this topic on the gnash-dev mailing list:

Jason Guiditta wrote:
> Just saw this...article...bsquared porting flash lite to run on an upcoming dell
> netbook.

Yes, I'm familiar with Bsquared. They're porting the Adobe v10 to
embedded platforms, basically getting rid of Flash Lite, which has
always been somewhat limited. I've talked to several company's also
talking to Bsquared.

> ...This seems like a perfect opportunity to get some
> funding for gnash, since it is already designed to run on so many
> platforms. If a big company like Dell is willing to pay to get flash
> well-supported on their netbook, why could that player not be gnash?

We'd need a contact at a sufficiently high level. Of the companies I
know using BSquared's promised flashplayer for ARM, MIPS, etc... have
decided they'd rather spend hundreds of thousands of $$$ for the
Bsquared solution, than give much smaller amounts to Gnash, which
already runs on the ARM and Android. Big companies that prefer
proprietary software seems to prefer to give business to each other,
regardless pf the much higher price tag. Of the few machines I've played
with the Bsquared plugin on, it usually hung the browser in seconds, and
many other stability problems. But I guess they'll get it right
eventually...

I also talked to Google about Gnash for Android several times, but
they don't appear to be interested in the slightest. Unfortunately, the
only people willing to support Gnash with any funding are people that
believe strongly in free software solutions already. To those people, I
can't thank you enough!

                - rob -

Free Software can be a great benefit to the hardware folks like ARM, and can be great for a mobile platform like Android, but it's sad that these groups don't seem to take any interest in what the Free Software community is offering. That's why it's so important for people to donate time, code, and/or money to projects like Gnash. Software Freedom isn't going to just happen without people like you and me stepping up and getting stuff done.

Wrong. OpenLDAP is the number one top performing directory software in the world, and has been since 2003. None of the other directory vendors have been refreshing their technology in recent years, and OpenLDAP is generally 2-3x faster than everyone else. 5x faster than AD typically. If you want performance, eDirectory is pathetic in comparison, and even Novell's engineers have admitted they can't get anywhere close to OpenLDAP's performance.

To the folks saying "ActiveDirectory is best of breed" - yeah right. The AD server is crap; what you guys are seeing as "nice" are the GUI admin tools. Which by the way also work with Samba4/OpenLDAP...

AD design flaws: http://www.mail-archive.com/ldap@umich.edu/msg01464.html

I can't dispute that M$ makes slick GUIs (sometimes). But to call AD best at anything is a far stretch. And no pretty GUI on top is worth anything when the underlying technology is broken.

re: commercial support for OpenLDAP - Symas has customers with production deployments of billions of entries (several hundred million identities plus ancillary objects). OpenLDAP has been run successfully with over 5 billion entries in a single database; no other directory software in the world can make that claim. Oracle OID comes close but again at over an order of magnitude slower performance.

Telcos, cable companies, large financial institutions, petrochemical/energy companies, and governments all around the world are switching to OpenLDAP because it's the only solution that works reliably and performs so well at such large scales. Nothing else touches it.

Some of us have submitted programs in APL, or its younger sibling J, to the shootout (see http://www.mail-archive.com/general@jsoftware.com/msg02859.html). However, since the rules of the shootout specify the algorithm you have to use, you end up writing C programs in APL or J which is no way to take advantage of the power and expressiveness of these languages.

It's like taking part in a poetry contest where you're only allowed baby-talk.

Since you're only providing another anecdotal point of view, I fail to see how you can judge his comment to be false.

Because it doesn't sound like the mailing list at all. They do in fact spend the time to explain these things. Here's one of my first patches, where I would get almost everything wrong.

http://www.mail-archive.com/wine-devel@winehq.org/msg50828.html

Phorm wants to have a nice big data pipe between the gateway of every ISP and the rest of the Internet. Having access to this stream of data will allow Phorm to identify what every web page user is reading, commenting on, and downloading. From all of this information, Phorm claims that will be able to build up a profile of what each Internet user may be currently interested in buying. From this profile, Phorm will then be able to add customized adverts in the banner space of each webpage that the user views, rather than just give a random advert. Phorm also claim that they will be able to keep the identify of the user/IP address separate from the data.

If this was the real reason, that it would be easier to put some keywords in the link to the banner adverts related to the web page currently being viewed.

However, once Phorm have access to this data stream, they have the potential to build up a complete profile about everyone from Emails, login pages to banks and any billing service, to comments posted on discussion groups and forums.
The danger is that this information may be taken out of context (remember the fuss made when TiVo attempted to identify what type of programs viewers would be interested in from the programs they
have already recorded.

Because the home office is involved, there is a suspicion that this "profiled advertising" is nothing more than a cover story for full internet surveillance.

Yea, it runs on top of Debian, Mac OS X, Solaris and, no joke, Windows. ;)

Also, Britain has roughly 8 times the "hot burglary" rate of the US, .

Interesting thread you link to. But if you look at the immediate reply to the source you quote, you find a scientific study which concludes:

"Rather, our analysis concludes that residential burglary rates tend to increase with community gun prevalence."

PHILIP J. COOK
Duke University - Sanford Institute of Public Policy; National Bureau of Economic
Research (NBER)
JENS LUDWIG
The Brookings Institution - Economic Studies Program

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=310473

Also, Britain has roughly 8 times the "hot burglary" rate of the US

Thats an interesting stat.

I wonder if it has anything to do with gun control in the UK.

Not to get too off topic...

Also, Britain has roughly 8 times the "hot burglary" rate of the US, meaning that in the UK, criminals enter your home without bothering to see if you're there first. In the US, they purposely enter when you're not home so they won't get hurt.

The problem here is no call exist to force writes to disk to be "ordered"

Right. Atomic rename is a special case of ordered write, really. Atomic-but-asynchronous-rename is great, but something more powerful would be nice too.

What we really need is a user-level fbarrier. I'm not the first person to think of this syscall.

Also,

ZFS guarantees the write(2) are ordered by the
fact that either they show up in the order supplied or they
don't at all.

When you think about it, that's a very powerful guarantee. (Personally, though, I'd rather have fbarrier.)

Hmm... the link didn't work.

http://www.mail-archive.com/dbi-users%40perl.org/msg29840.html

Must be because of the "at" symbol in the original URL. I've replaced it with the hex value.

I signed on with Netflix when their business first opened its doors. As a military member assigned overseas, I was completely satisfied with their service, and would probably still be a member today, $900 later, if it weren't for...

SPAM.

Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam!

This was right around the time spam was becoming a real problem (2002-ish), and I found myself receiving multiple "offers" from Netflix on a daily basis, despite being a current customer. Blame it on "affiliates", but the company itself had to have, at a minimum, turned a blind eye... I bet they knowingly hired spammers. So I dropped my subscription (sending them an email explaining why), and bought a subscription to Easynews instead. (Later research would confirm my suspicions)

It's funny... I was actually considering re-subscribing after all this time, to check out the online-streaming option. Looks like that won't be happening any time soon!

There is a new shell option: `globstar'. When enabled, the globbing code treats `**' specially -- it matches all directories (and files within them, when appropriate) recursively.

which would imply the buildings and cars go too. See also: http://www.bash-hackers.org/wiki/doku.php/bash4

POSIX got this horribly wrong, making your perfectly logical argument incorrect. Wikipedia has a good illustration of what actually happens: Unix time hiccups and loops back on itself for that second.

TAI time is a count since an epoch, but Unix time is aligned with UTC, not TAI.

Even worse: According to POSIX, 2100 is a leap year.

Sorry, UNIX time is exactly 86400 seconds per day.

If you read this history of POSIX time it becomes apparent that POSIX time is a mashup of UTC and GMT that is different to either.

The standard does not require your system clock to be accurate. When a leap second occurs, unless your POSIX system makes the effort to adjust its clock (say via the adjtimex(2) call), your POSIX system's clock will ignore the leap second.

To make matters worse, people are now syncing their systems to a UTC or TIA time source, or perhaps even GPS time which are all defined on different foundations.

You can not assume that POSIX time actually means anything better than the time on your watch does, unless you are fully aware the whole chain.

I thought that Mac OS X and MS Window were just BSD distos? I really wish that they would just merge. It would make things simpler.

There's one glibc.

Funny, I was just reading this today: Glibc hell

No, it's the plain truth. The AD database design is inherently flawed, and AD is the least scalable directory server in the world.

http://www.mail-archive.com/ldap@umich.edu/msg01464.html

Claiming that such a scenario would be "trivial" for a government or anyone else is just nonsense.
The government does not own DNS, nor does it own the ISP pipes. If they want to go to such lengths as to fake a CA they can just as well rubberhose a privately owned CA into doing it for them today - and it would probably be much cheaper on a per-case basis than permanently maintaining the required infrastructure themselves.

Furthermore, what interest does the government have in snooping on our online banking and online shopping sessions on a broad scale?
If you take your tinfoil hat off for a second you'll probably realize: None, zero. They can get all the information contained in these transactions for much cheaper after the fact, if they feel so inclined.

Oh, and the real terrorists and organized criminals are probably smart enough to not rely on an american CA either way... This whole discussion is just way beyond the point.

Let's take a look at reality, January 2009:
The very real problem that we have today is that the privately owned CAs are happily handing out certs to anyone who transfers a few dollars to them - no questions asked. The reason for this is simple: They must sell as many certs as possible - or they go out of business. In order to achieve that goal they have to "streamline" the process of obtaining a cert as much as possible, up to the point of compromising trust because no meaningful checks are performed.

A government CA on the other hand would not suffer from this conflict of interest. In fact, the opposite is true: Governments have a vested interest in providing a secure eCommerce infrastructure to their citizens because that translates to more money spent on the internet and more tax dollars to collect. When you lose money to the Russian Business Network in a phishing attack then the government loses money, too. A private CA doesn't care about phishing attacks because by the time that happens they have already sold two certs; one to you and one to the phisher.

And please don't sing the fairy tale of CAs going out of business when they issue certs to phishers.
VeriSign has issued a spoof cert for microsoft.com and last time I checked they were still in business. Spoofed certs for lower profile targets (i.e. your friendly online shop) can be had with little effort as the CA standards are sinking constantly.

Here's a working link to the diff that fixed the bug, with description.

OSS projects could distrubte a ready-made build environment in a virtual box image or something ...

You mean like:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Prepared_Build_Images
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@de.openoffice.org/msg24326.html (german)

It's a bit depressing how nobody takes the security implications of the internet seriously, and acts surprised when they're reminded of them.

Email is not secure. Using SSL for your POP/SMTP/IMAP connections secures your login to the server, but the mail itself is still transmitted in the clear. And people act surprised when you tell them that people can and likely do scan their email?

Then again, given that our financial institutions actively train their users to ignore security indicators (a very exploitable situation), we shouldn't be surprised at that sort of nonsense.

I noticed the following in the article:

It got worse. Most Internet commerce transactions are encrypted. The encryption is provided by companies like VeriSign. Online vendors visit the VeriSign site and buy the encryption; customers can then be confident that their transactions are secure.

But not anymore. Kaminsky's exploit would allow an attacker to redirect VeriSign's Web traffic to an exact functioning replica of the VeriSign site.

I was going to write about how clearly the built-in CA certs in the user's browser would throw up a flag and note that the cert wasn't actually signed by the folks at Verisign or whatever... but then I realized that, hey, given the abysmal state of security compliance, it's probable that nobody would even notice.

And an article on cache poisoning that doesn't even mention that Dan Bernstein had foreseen and fixed the lack of source-port randomization while pointing out that it's still only a stopgap seven years earlier is an article that should have been edited a bit more thoroughly. Kaminsky made the attack much more dangerous, but the possibility should never have existed in the first place.

In a more ideal world, we'd all exchange encrypted and signed email and access any site that involved a login using valid SSL certificates and secure-only cookies. But we're not there.

A large one might dent your car in the extremely improbable case that one should hit it.

TFA says the largest piece could be about 40 pounds and hit at 100 mph. That wouldn't dent your car, it would totally destroy it.

Totally destroy yes, but it might also increase it's value.

Performance wise, XMPP bills itself as high performance messaging, but the developers are focused on the WAN. AMQP comparatively is ultra-high performance messaging with optimisations for the LAN.

This is confusing as for many projects there is limited need for ultra-high performance data rates. Numbers of the range 100,000 messages per second with latency under one millisecond. At this rate special engineering methods are required, XML, SSL, compression are too slow, focus is upon zero-copy processing, i.e. accessing and updating data in place, because the memory-bus is too slow to perform copies.

There is a discussion between one AMQP and one XMPP developer that sums this up:

>> So AFAIU, XMPP is not a serious candidate for high-volume messaging, right?

No, wrong, as with anything it will all depend on the capacity of your servers and the bandwidth you have available at your disposal, there is nothing stopping high-volume messaging over XMPP if you control the infrastructure.

http://www.mail-archive.com/jdev@jabber.org/msg19403.html

Another major advantage for AMQP is message routing. You can define which messages are routed to different sites by their content. Again this is an unusual requirement for many projects as they do not exist on such a scale for this to normally be an issue. The closest equivalent is SMTP routing by domain, you can find more discussion on this InfoQ article:

http://www.infoq.com/news/2008/08/amqp-progress

The main focus on AMQP is to appear a qualified messaging protocol for certified or guaranteed messaging with the necessary tools and support from vendors to promote its usage. XMPP can do a lot of the AMQP functionality already, but most of it is optional functionality rather than a primary design goal. If AMQP support appears in the Visual Studio Development System together with MMC modules for monitoring and administration, for example, its adoption could rapidly grow.

... some time ago for a usable time-machine substitute for linux, but failed miserably on the gnome integration.

Unfortunately when we tried we were informed by the kind folk of the nautilus mailing list that it would be pretty difficult, as it's not feasible by using the python nautilus-extensions, and we would have to rewrite a lot of code. Gvfs was not ready yet (and mostly undocumented) so our code would be instantly deprecated, and many of the supposed options of a quick google were hopeleslly outdated / broken / unsupported / deprecated -such as the bonobo views, which I couldn't get to work at all.

Finally my personal struggles with autotools (devilish tool!) ended up burying the idea. Pity, but I'm glad that the opensolaris folk were able to do it. Their GUI rocks a lot IMHO (I tried to congratulate them on their blog but the post got lost somehow ;).

Perhaps if one of us gets enough free time in RL we'll port their patches (should be GPL I guess) to our linux implementation, in a cleaner nautilus C plugin.

BTW feel free to try the application, it should be functional (as in "won't break your hard drive down nor delete anything it should, though it might take some space in ~/.hdlorean"), though not as polished as we would have liked. We even managed to build a debian package ;), but it's python anyway. Right now the project is somewhat unmantained though, by the mentioned lack of time and some tiredness from the project.

KlaymenDK is better known as Jan Gundtofte-Bruun , and is an IT Specialist at IBM Denmark A/S since 1998. This a photo of him.

He is about to build a new PC, and plans to use FreeBSD, mainly as a quad-core, dual-headed, desktop workstation, but would very much like to be able to play the occasional BZFlag (call him oldschool).

You can also peruse his Amazon profile, etc. What strikes me is that he was apparently involved in the sound department of Festen, a great Danish movie.

The issue is neutrality and censorship

While I don't necessarily doubt that ISPs are salivating at the pay-per-byte thing, the whole truthout.org thing is a figment of your feverish imagination, fueled mostly by your insane hatred of Microsoft. At the very least you should research your claims before using them in any sort of cuasi-authoritative way.

Go ahead and read through these and then come back and tell me that "M$" or Google or Yahoo or any ISPs are blocking *anything* related to truthout.org at all. And please don't reply to me with your name trolls or sockpuppets.

http://directmag.com/disciplines/email/truthout_blocked_censorship/

Online political group Truthout.org is crying foul over Hotmail and AOL blocking its e-mail from reaching subscribers.

But rather than conducting an internal assessment of its e-mail program to find out why it's having delivery troubles at two of the largest providers of e-mail inboxes, the organization's executive director, Marc Ash, is calling on subscribers to pressure the ISPs into delivering their mail.

http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@isoc-ny.org/msg00354.html

1. If two large ISPs independently begin blocking mail from
a given domain/IP address/network block/etc., then it's usually
a pretty good sign that there is an issue with the mail source.

http://mainsleazespam.com/collateral/truthout_org.html

truthout.org email server at IP 38.114.2.39 has been caught up in a widening list of IP space at cogentco.com blocked by spews.org, a widely used blocklist to protect against abuse from spam supporting ISPs. ...
So, while truthout.org is in no way listed itself as a spammer, the email coming from this IP appears at the moment to be caught up in a widening blocklist of cogentco.com IP space due to their inaction to stop abuse from their network by others.

http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/archives/001260.html

I saw this story earlier today. While I do go to truthout, I was not a subscriber. So I set up a Hotmail account, subscribed to truthout's newsletter, and immediately received the confirmation email from truthout. No blockage whatsoever.

In reading the comments from readers, there were claims that even emails that had the phrase "truthout.com" somewhere in the mail -- for example, I send you a mail and say "please read this article from truthout.org" -- were also being blocked. I tested this as well several times from several email accounts, both sending to and receiving from the new Hotmail account. It worked perfectly fine every time.

I even clicked on the "email this story link" in a truthout story and sent it to the hotmail account. This, of course, worked fine as well.

Truthout's credibility took a serious hit last year with Jason Leopold's reporting on Karl Rove. It seems they are about to take another. As someone who has seen the Microsoft legal team from the inside, I'd hate to think what they'll do to Marc Ash and truthout.org if these claims aren't removed and an apology issued.

Is there anybody left who will put up with your special brand of crazy?

That would still require effort on their part.

Que?

Whoever wrote the BIOS put out a great deal of effort, as their BIOS apparently goes beyond accepting the identifier given by the OS (At least as of January, Linux identifies as "Microsoft Windows NT" after a brief bout of identifying as "Linux" and breaking a lot of BIOSes that flipped out when they couldn't recognize the OS) to some other nonstandard method that is capable of identifying Linux even if Linux identifies itself to the BIOS as Windows.

That's not lazy. Nor is it incompetent.

This thread on Debian-Legal seems to suggest that Debian does not think the licensing issue has been resolved.

And this thread on Debian-Legal which the Liberation Fonts page itself links to, also has Francesco Poli describing very clearly that he thinks Debian doesn't have the right to redistribute the fonts with the current license.

So.. where are the messages showing the Debian people actually accepting the licensing terms and deciding to add the font package to Debian?

This thread on Debian-Legal seems to suggest that Debian does not think the licensing issue has been resolved.

And this thread on Debian-Legal which the Liberation Fonts page itself links to, also has Francesco Poli describing very clearly that he thinks Debian doesn't have the right to redistribute the fonts with the current license.

So.. where are the messages showing the Debian people actually accepting the licensing terms and deciding to add the font package to Debian?

Found this post at openssl-dev list by Kurt Roeckx ( AFAIK the Debian OpenSSL Team member that made this RNG-clean patch )

http://www.mail-archive.com/openssl-dev@openssl.org/msg21156.html

Extract:

"What I currently see as best option is to actually comment out those 2 lines of code. But I have no idea what effect this really has on the RNG. The only effect I see is that the pool might receive less entropy. But on the other hand, I'm not even sure how much entropy some unitialised data has.

What do you people think about removing those 2 lines of code?

Kurt

"

BTW, i thought that Debian had some kind of policies about testing each package before committing changes in testing/stable branches. Also, the following paper, contributed by another poster, says interesting things about touching cryptographic code, we have to learn from this experience and have tighter policies !

" In a narrow sense, the security flaw we found in the Netscape browser serves merely as an anecdote to emphasize the difficulty of generating cryptographically strong random numbers. But there's a broader moral to the story. The security community has painfully learned that small bugs in a security-critical module of a software system can have serious consequences, and that such errors are easy to commit. The only way to catch these mistakes is to expose the source code to scrutiny by security experts.

Peer review is essential to the development of any secure software. Netscape did not encourage outside auditing or peer review of its software-and that goes against everything the security industry has learned from past mistakes. By extension, without peer review and intense outside scrutiny of Netscape's software at the source-code level, there is simply no way consumers can know where there will be future security problems with Netscape's products. "

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/papers/ddj-netscape.html"

For christ's sake, when did feeding people become something "evil"?

When the chemicals that you're using to increase crop yield become incorporated into the food grown, to subsequently be released into the bodies of those that consume it.

That is the true "harvest of fear" we can thank Monsanto for.

Is it possible for GM crops to cross-polinate/infect non-GM varieties?

Yes cross pollination can happen, and does. Actually because it happens superweeds are being created.

If I control ALL your traffic, I can operate as a full proxy for any of it. Your client will see a certificate that it sees as valid, because I can spoof ALL the lookups. The only way around this is using PFS. Don't take my word for it, Google, and learn. EG: http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/sf/ids/2007-q1/0081.html http://www.mail-archive.com/wireshark-dev@wireshark.org/msg08722.html

Python source is generally compatible (go another level deeper and you'll find that the .py files are mostly symlinks to a single copy, at least on Debian-type systems).

However, the compiled .pyc files need to be regenerated for each version, which explains the separate directories. The symlinks are a messy hack, resulting from the fact that Python requires the .pyc files to go in the same directory as the corresponding .py files, even though you need multiple .pyc files for each .py file. If Python could cache the .pyc files somewhere else, the mess could go away.

The main problem with Python compatibility is with the C ABI, which varies across different packages, making it impractical to use Python to add scripting to a C program, for example:

http://www.mail-archive.com/python-3000@python.org/msg09051.html

What is wrong? That the LGPL isn't non-free according to RMS and the FSF? A post by RMS from last month suggests otherwise:

Quoting you:

Releasing a library under the LGPL can help preserve people's freedom, if it means that substantially more software vendors/providers will use that library instead of a proprietary alternative. Quoting the FSF:

There are reasons that can make it better to use the Lesser GPL in certain cases. The most common case is when a free library's features are readily available for proprietary software through other alternative libraries. In that case, the library cannot give free software any particular advantage, so it is better to use the Lesser GPL for that library.

This is why we used the Lesser GPL for the GNU C library. After all, there are plenty of other C libraries; using the GPL for ours would have driven proprietary software developers to use another--no problem for them, only for us.

Totally agree. Where in Behdad Esfahbod's response to Stallman does it say that GNOME is actively supporting OOXML standardization? All Behdad says is that the Gnome Foundation will be implementing OOXML, he doesn't say anything about Gnome actively backing OOXML in the standards process. So, from where I sit, you're 100% correct.

Finally, as for Stallman throwing his weight behind KDE, do I need to remind anybody that Gnome is officially a GNU project?

I see no reason why disabling sleep on the disk is somehow superior to telling linux to be more graceful when communicating with it. The reason why I use cron is that the disk is not permanently attached to the computer, and as I hinted, using dbus/hald/hotplug is probably preferable than using cron. I'm just too lazy to find out how that works.

Besides, looks like this is not an issue anymore. Check this posting and the followups:

http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg19677.html

Apparently you don't need to worry about this with new kernels.

I'm feeling lucky.

And there's a better description here.

Having done some quick googling...

Gimp runs on the N800, tho it's quite short of ram:
http://net9.blogspot.com/2007/04/gimp-running-on-n800.html

I couldnt find openoffice for it, tho there is aparrently a non maemo specific version for linux/arm available in debian repositories.. There is a version of abiword for the n800 tho, as well as gnumeric.
gnumeric -> http://www.mail-archive.com/maemo-users@maemo.org/msg04128.html
abiword -> http://www.internettablettalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5423

Don't think anyone has ported VLC, but there is a port of mplayer which pretty much uses the same codecs. I always used mplayer on linux anyway.

I ported a few of my own programs (mostly console based) very easily, so i can't imagine other apps would be especially hard. The only real problem is the hardware resources available.

The newer OS2008 from nokia apparently uses a firefox based browser too.

What other desktop linux apps are you after?
Some apps are too heavy for the hardware, that's not linux's fault but rather the individual apps and the hardware. A program designed for a supercomputer with a terabyte of ram won't work very well on even a high end gaming pc.

      "We have the opportunity of joining ECMA as a non-profit
      member. Jody has expressed an interest in being a representative
      for GNOME, and suggested it would also be good to get someone
      there from Abiword.

      ACTION: Behdad to contact Jody about the ECMA membership application
                      and find a good candidate from Abiword to attend. Behdad to
                      work on getting a press release for our membership".

Source: http://www.mail-archive.com/foundation-list%40gnome.org/msg01874.html

Did you read TFA?

It has happened before. I saw the famous Bush coffin sex pictures, mentioned below, but they seem to have been done away with rather efficiently. http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg95880.html

The pictures weren't that special, but with such resolution as to be clear they were not forgeries. And you can't find them anymore on the internet.

There's some truth to this story about FBI and NSA being ordered to get them.

That's only true because the W3C and the browser people aren't interested in helping make things more secure.

I've been proposing the following for _years_:
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Tag+to+disable+unwanted+features%22

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2002May/0021.html

http://www.mail-archive.com/mozilla-security@mozilla.org/msg01448.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2007Aug/0008.html

It will help. But I'm no longer going to bother explaining in detail how anymore (read the links if you're interested). Since:
0) I already tried many times
1) Nobody who can do anything about it really cares or is listening
2) On the bright side, it means more money in the IT security business. $$$ :).

I'm just saying a) yes, something can actually be done to make things better. And it isn't just Google's fault or a Mozilla or IE problem, and b) "I told you so" ;).

People who say we only need good server side filtering are stupid and/or ignorant. In the real world the web browsers don't parse everything the same way. So how is your server side filtering going to cover all the cases? The attacker just needs one exploitable "discrepancy" and they're in.

Of course my proposal won't fix everything, but just because brakes don't prevent all car crashes doesn't mean we don't need brakes and we should just tell drivers to drive better and avoid crashes (or just raise "security exceptions" if stuff happens ;) ).

I've seen the infamous thread in question. I think your real problem is that you should have tried some other place to answer your question.

It's a GRUB error so you should start with the folks who make GRUB.
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel

Google turns up some useful links as well:

http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-grub@gnu.org/msg10 991.html
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread .php?t=112412
http://forums.scotsnewsletter.com/index.php?showto pic=12845
http://www.webservertalk.com/archive291-2006-7-157 9685.html

I know the Ubuntu board should have helped with the problem, but the people who participate in that board are likely to be just as new to Ubuntu as you are. In these so called easy to use distros, you'll see this problem a lot. I have a similar problem with fedoraforum.org. Most of my questions go unanswered, get answered wrongly, or it feels like I'm talking to a Comcast customer support script reader. This is because most of the users are not Linux gurus, but inexperienced people. There's nothing you can do about this except look for help else where and if you find the solution post it back to help educated them.

In other words, from the adversary's point of view:

Any insuficiently-documented bug is indistinguishable from a feature.

The second-order problem is that Intel itself is now providing "remote system management (read: exploits) even for powered-off machines" misfeatures into the motherboard's LAN controller.