Slashdot Mirror

Sorry, that just doesn't fly. Don't you think the military would be insured their right to vote? How could we expect to keep soldiers fighting for us if they couldn't vote? The Pentagon would never let that happen. Besides, name a *major* ISP in Iraq.

The *only* group that would be affected by this (besides the hackers, of course) would be the U.S. citizens outside the country for personal rather than national reasons. Survey says... mostly Democrat.

Even if the block did affect the military, and assume the military is Republican while all other overseas citizens are Democrat, it's still a big win for the Republicans...
~(military overseas:citizens overseas::1:20)

They're overtly worried about defacement or hijacking of the website. It's not like they're running something assuredly insecure for the server (they're not using IIS). Why would they be so worried?

Furthermore, if this were the way to stop overseas votes this would be it. If there were a website that overseas citizens actually voted on and it was blocked... well, no one would get away with that. Instead they institute a block that merely prevents finding information on casting an overseas vote. This is much safer.

As scared as I am of John Kerry, this really just pisses me off. Those people have a right to vote, and they should probably know how. If this gets picked up by the big media I hope to see a few third parties get propped up (go Badnarik!).

"The goal is to make it more difficult for hackers to deface and/or hijack the website," said Lieutenant Colonel Ellen Krenke.

"In the meantime, overseas voters can contact their embassy or consulate, use the FVAP toll-free number or contact their local election official or secretary of state via telephone or the internet for more information on obtaining an absentee ballot," said Lieutenant Colonel Krenke.

"A lot of people say FreeBSD is better because "its more stable" or "it has a more mature kernel" I've seen little evidence to substantiate these common claims."

uptimes

You'll see a Solaris there. Occasionally. I don't think I've ever seen a Linux. It's exclusively BSD/OS and FreeBSD most of the time.

"Apart from the cool things like the ports system and userland differences, licensing differences aside- At the core level of the kernel what makes a new FreeBSD kernel better than a new linux kernel?"

Focusing on the kernel differences misses the point. The only stuff you'll notice is that Linux supports more filesystems, and FreeBSD has PF imported from OpenBSD.

The key advantage of FreeBSD is a very well tested base system. The ports give you a convenient way to add to the base system, and they tend to be quite well tested as well, but I've not seen the same level of quality on any Linux, least of all Gentoo (which basically doesn't do any regression testing and therefore breaks a lot).

Oh yeah. And the documentation. Linux docs are pretty bad. BSD man pages are famous for quality.

is that this is purely about money. And yet it is IIS and MSIE that are targeted, not Apache and *nix. I guess that must be becuase IIS has the vast majority of the market and therefor the money folks go for the larger number of machines.

It is running on their favourite OS : http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=http%3A%2 F%2Fwww.caldera.com%2Fibmlawsuit

I was really disappointed to discover that my favorite service at O'Reilly, the Safari Bookshelf, is run on M$FT products. How might that color their editorial policy regards FOSS vs. proprietary software?

http://www.apache.org/foundation/docs/sender-id-po sition.html http://lwn.net/Articles/100873/ http://lwn.net/Articles/100659/ http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20040902-4153.ht ml http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/09/02/apach e_rejects_sender_id_proposal.html

Netcraft confirms: FreeBeer is dying.

> all the major software revolutions have
> been spawned by capitalist endeavors.

This isn't true. As proponents such as ESR have been pointing out for years, the Open Souce community built the web, and the internet that it depends upon, and the UNIX operating system, which was decades ahead of its time, and now is stronger than it's ever been. It created the Apache webserver, that serves three times more websites than the closest 'captialist' competitor, and has maintained that lead for years.

What other software has had such a profound effect on the world, and has lasted for decades without being usurped.

Seems that was the way that Miguel used to see Avalon, and the almost-defunct WinFS (check out ReiserFS4 metadata, btw), but now, surprise, is not!

Check this out:

"They are all fine points of view, but what makes Longhorn dangerous for the viability of Linux on the desktop is that the combination of Microsoft deployment power, XAML, Avalon and .NET is killer. It is what Java wanted to do with the Web, but with the channel to deploy it and the lessons learned from Java mistakes."
http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel/archive/2004/Ap r-24.html

"Avalon will be a lot easier to write than the previous ActiveX; it's a lot prettier, so when organizations are using Longhorn-based machines, which I assume will be sold everywhere by 2008, it's going to be increasingly hard for the rest of us to get there unless we have an implementation of an equivalent technology."
http://www.theserverside.net/common/printthread.ts s?thread_id=27453

"Longhorn has kind of a scary technology called Avalon, which when compounded with another technology called XAML, it's fairly dangerous. And the reason is that they've made it so it's basically an HTML replacement. The advantage is it's probably as easy as writing HTML, so that means that anybody can produce this content with a text editor."
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/04/28/inter view_with_miguel_de_icaza_cofounder_of_gnome_ximia n_and_mono.html

So, what was all that crap that he told us "fear Microsoft, you morons, we need something like they have to have more 'competition' there" about?

A big FUD? A way to try to implement and waste time with, all we know, some probabily vapourware or with a product that does not work well? Think about WinFS. He also used to say that it will be the doom for all the Linux users don't have a stuff like that, but even the Microsoft users will not have a stuff like that, at least the way all the utopic dudes wants to!

Now that the technology owner is in trouble with it, he says that it's a lot of shit? Oh, come on.

The big point here is that, with some effort, you don't need Microsoft programs anymore to do what your company needs to run your computers. And we don't need people trying to convince us that WE NEED THEM if we really don't need. Gimme a break.

If you check the stats you may be surprised.

I had to check netcraft on this one (linuxsucks.org) and guess what? http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=linuxsuc ks.org Been up for ~200 days too. Not bad.

Your comment was moderated down into oblivion, which is a shame because everything you said is accurate. Take a look at Linuxworld.com, even they are running on a CFML Server

You guys just don't know.

What percentage of Apache servers and IIS servers are attacked (successfully or not)? I don't know... most defacements go unreported. But there are more Apache servers (see Netcraft, and Apache servers *are* frequently attacked and compromised by skript kiddies.

There are 56 Million domain names in existence (22 million of them active). 70% of these domain names are hosted with Opensource software and hence use Opensource mailservers (for the most part).

MS needs buy-in from the Opensource community or their market share will continue to slip.

Damnit... preview preview preview... Netcrafts own explanation You can see some details of the akamai servers here

Damnit... preview preview preview... Netcrafts own explanation You can see some details of the akamai servers here

Netcraft suggests the percentages of servers is very much Linux biased (or at least Apache-biased), perhaps 3:1 versus Windows.

As to the number of updates to the Linux kernel, I'll have to take your experience on that one. But I suspect the number of kernel changes between say 1.0 and 2.0 was significant, and I'm sure there continue to be many changes (ratio of enhancements to bug fixes I don't know) between each dot release. And this doesn't even touch upon what changes to the open-source kernel that Red Hat, et alia make before pressing it to CD. I read in one of the posts here, that the update download for the most recent version of Red Hat was over 150MB (and that's just due to point releases in the kernel and whatever apps they ship along). The entire update for Windows XP, incorporating all bug fixes known-to-date, was about 75MB (for typical desktop user). Of course neither Linux nor Windows has seen their last update.

Regarding IT personnel, I don't know how many are security "experts" or simply know how to insert CD's to install software. I hope the industry is somewhat savvy about the folks it places "in charge" of their computing resources. When I was a member of an IT team (back in my VAX/VMS days and the orange books and all that, early to mid-80's) my partner and I regularly gave talks regarding security at the national user's group meeting, DECUS... sort of a passion of ours.

They don't *think* it's dying. Everybody knows FreeBSD is alive & *very* well (1 2 3 4 ...). They just want to find somebody who takes them seriously, and that gets pissed of at them.

Dude... I don't know if you're a real FreeBSD user, but there's really nothing to be pissed off about...
Linux trolls are infesting /.BSD ? Well, just make fun of their lameness, or just ignore them. Or, better, just post in reply a series of links (like that guy did in some posts above) showing how "dying" BSD is. :-D

They don't *think* it's dying. Everybody knows FreeBSD is alive & *very* well (1 2 3 4 ...). They just want to find somebody who takes them seriously, and that gets pissed of at them.

Dude... I don't know if you're a real FreeBSD user, but there's really nothing to be pissed off about...
Linux trolls are infesting /.BSD ? Well, just make fun of their lameness, or just ignore them. Or, better, just post in reply a series of links (like that guy did in some posts above) showing how "dying" BSD is. :-D

What do you expect from Little Johnny Coward? his son uses windows anyway.

here

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.ne th arbour.com.au

The Labor Party (US trans Democrats) isn't much better either. The only people with good software policies are the Greens (who are moving to linux on desktops as well as servers) and the Democrats (US trans libertarians? of a sort - their motto is "keep the bastards honest").

Anyway in the shit-storm that is this election my vote goes to the Greens - as they had the balls to stand up against the war. Hell, millions of people marched around the world against the war (before the war) because they knew the evidence was dodgy. Why didn't that spark a review of evidence? What a load of steaming shit our democracies have become.

hmrph

And besides, if they claim Linux doesn't exist, then how can they run their own main webserver on it? Netcraft looks at certain details of the TCP/IP implementation, so:

It can't be their LKP, as that only performs system call translation.

The TCP/IP stack of Linux and SCO are different according to netcraft, so probably they aren't stolen from eachother.

That makes the only possibility that in public, they try to destroy Linux, while "behind" the scenes they trust it more than their own product. And in that light, it is quite weird that they sue one of the developers of it.

I've never heard of it until it was reported on National Public Radio two days ago on All Things Considered

(cool! They're running Apache/PHP on Linux)

I thought this was a troll on *BSD, seeing how the webside was /.'d from the *BSD section...

...but it turns out that they're running Linux!

Granted,
Apache is a volunteer based project written by weekend hackers in
their spare time while Microsft's IIS has an actual professional full
fledged development team devoted to it.

I guess we'd better call Google and let them know. Linux can't hack it. While we're at it lets call Amazon.com and let them know. For a product that is not professional it continues to be far and away the most popular Web server on the net. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but Microsoft has lost the web server war. It will continue to be popular with VB programmers and system admins since it's so easy. Good luck and thanks for the FUD.

Apache is a volunteer based project written by weekend hackers in their spare time while Microsft's IIS has an actual professional full fledged development team devoted to it.
Uh huh. That's why a majority of the world's web servers run Apache. here These developers are hardly "weekend hackers", but devoted people. Read this

As things stand now, I can understand using Linux in academia to compile simple "Hello World" style programs and learn C programming, but I'm afraid that for anything more than a hobby OS, Windows 98/NT/2K are your only choices.
So that's why Google and Amazon, for example, run Linux? [netcraft.com]

Care to list those sites? I'm getting, as the most requested sites by Netcraft, these sites running Windows/IIS:

• https://www.microsoft.com
• http://www.swlstg-tr.nhs.uk
• http://www.linuxworldexpo.com

All of the rest in the top 10 are running Linux, FreeBSD, or in the case of Google, something custom.

I only gave you one statistic and this is the 50%. That is per Netcraft but unfortunately they only sell those numbers. The last free one they had is 3 years old but not much has changed since then. Since Apache's share has not increased significantly in that time it is safe to say the Linux's hasn't either. That is unless you figured out how to run IIS on Linux (and if you did what the hell possessed you to do that).

And of course, they're running Linux.

In Soviet London, the gap minds you, apparently.

It shouldn't take too much traffic to do the job.

It shouldn't take too much traffic to do the job.

Abomination: netcraft about the official Olympic site
And since we are at it... let's /. the site to see how well does that combination holds. (maybe we can make the news.... again) :o)
www.athens2004.com

It looks like they are ( have been? ) quite big fans of MySQL in the past. Netcraft shows that a couple of years ago ( 4th Aug 2002 ) that their webserver was running with Mod Auth MySQL.
Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) PHP/4.1.2 mod_ssl/2.8.10 OpenSSL/0.9.6e AuthMySQL/2.20

Netcraft confirms it.

Currently running IIS and an average uptime of about three days. See here.

check this out. FreeBSD, up over 1700 days. Kinda makes your 854 days look puny =\. But seriously, no system should be up that long without reboots. Security flaws come and go, and kernels need to be patched and recompiled. Any real sysadmin knows that effective uptime (that is, is the system up when it needs to be up?) is far more important than actual uptime. Long stretches of uptime just means you have an old, vulnerable box sitting there, waiting to be cracked, wormed, or expoited. Plus...if your linux box has been up for over 800 days you're missing out on a LOT of neat new technology. Er...unless you're a debian user.

Bah... that was "insightful"? Check out Netcraft's FAQ. It states that the uptime of "HP-UX, Linux, NetApp NetCache, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD cycle back to zero after 497 days ... Thus it is not possible to see a HP-UX, Linux or Solaris system with an uptime measurement above 497 days". That's why the list is dominated by FreeBSD (by necessity old versions, as their uptimes are 3-5 years) and BSD/OS.

Really, why do Slashdot story submitters have to have such completely and deliberately inaccurate stories? It *sucks*. I'd happily add a day or whatever on to the time until a story comes out if the eds would just read the linked to article on each story that they actually pass.

I already posted an admission (P.S. why was that moderated funny?) that my original link for "recent mass migration away from MSIE" should have referenced a different article (although that one has a typo). I goofed; I'm sorry!

I don't like IE either, but come on. There is no "recent mass migration."

I think the tiny grain of truth somewhere was that the current version of IE actually saw a market share decrease last month instead of an increase.

And by "mass", I wasn't implying "majority". I agree that the market share decrease was small; however, the absolute number of switchers was very large compared with Mozilla.org's historical conversion rate. Hence, the adjective, "mass".

So there's a mass migration away from IE.
From the stats gathering we do on our site, I have yet to see that. Oh sure there's a slight rise but that's not enough to convince marketing etc. Mind you, the 3rd party we use is crap for browser analysis but we're stuck using it because everyone in the industry does.

Are there some reliable browser metrics out there? Your own site stats don't count...

Oh shit... I'm laughing so hard I think I'm going to pass out!

What a fucking dickhead you are. Nothing related to Linux gets posted before you find a way to run a fucking stake through it. What the fuck is your problem?

Oh, I know. It is the wonderful uptime of your webserver.

How did you keep it running through all 13 days? That's fucking amazing!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

Well guess what, what they didn't take into account was that when you're trying to sell enterprise products, it's quality, not quanity that counts. All those websites running Apache were for the most part ma and pa/joe nerd websites. Pretty much everyone running Netscape was a Fortune 500 company. Gee, guess who's gonna spend >$10K for an enterprise web solution, the 1000 guys who downloaded Apache to run their blogs and Natalie Portman tribute sites, or Bank of America?

If Apache can handle Amazon's traffic they can handle anything you or anyone else can throw at it. Don't blame Apache because your management was too cheap to purchase a decent enterprise solution. Apache is used in both ma and pop web sites as well as in the enterprise... Suggesting otherwise is pure fantasy.

Outside of background infrastructure there are Linux deployment stories on nearly a daily basis in IT press. Open your eyes - I don't think OSS is remotely "marginal". Still some way from "widespread", never mind "commonplace" or "ubiquitous", but hardly "marginal". Unless you have some new and interesting definition of that term?

Your no-risk analysis of CA's move is correct, I think - it probably also applies to IBM+Cloudscape to a degree. But painting FOSS as only existing in "marginal projects here and there" is clearly bollocks.

Critical mass, to my mind, will come when vendors start offering Linux versions of their software by default. I've seen a steady trend away from "oh, you have to use Windows/IE/Exchange" in product announcements (I cover security products - so there's a server slant to what I see), but it's not yet commonplace to have Linux support. Growing, though, and I don't think Microsoft is ignorant of that.

realworldlinux

linuxworldexpo

realworldlinux

linuxworldexpo

a lot of attacks against Linux right now

a lot of attacks against Linux right now

Netcraft has so graciously given, for all those 503 errors, please use one of the following:

• http://3dwww.slashdot.org/
• http://fwww.slashdot.org/
• http://www.www.slashdot.org/
• http://wwww.slashdot.org/

Also: please copy and paste this post to every other person that has whined about slashdot, and has not donated money or clicked on ads!

I know I am offtopic, but mod me as you wish! Mod up if you want ppl to know these other sites (and possibly slashdot the slashdot), or mod me down if you do not want this information to get out!

Also: I have no information on why the site has been going 503. All I know is from Netcraft

Netcraft has so graciously given, for all those 503 errors, please use one of the following:

• http://3dwww.slashdot.org/
• http://fwww.slashdot.org/
• http://www.www.slashdot.org/
• http://wwww.slashdot.org/

Also: please copy and paste this post to every other person that has whined about slashdot, and has not donated money or clicked on ads!

I know I am offtopic, but mod me as you wish! Mod up if you want ppl to know these other sites (and possibly slashdot the slashdot), or mod me down if you do not want this information to get out!

Also: I have no information on why the site has been going 503. All I know is from Netcraft

Netcraft has so graciously given, for all those 503 errors, please use one of the following:

• http://3dwww.slashdot.org/
• http://fwww.slashdot.org/
• http://www.www.slashdot.org/
• http://wwww.slashdot.org/

Also: please copy and paste this post to every other person that has whined about slashdot, and has not donated money or clicked on ads!

I know I am offtopic, but mod me as you wish! Mod up if you want ppl to know these other sites (and possibly slashdot the slashdot), or mod me down if you do not want this information to get out!