Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Don Marti
mpawlo writes "I just picked Don Marti's brain in a short interview published by Greplaw. Don Marti is the editor of LinuxJournal and the mastermind behind the Burnallgifs campaign. He has strong views on free software, software patentability and the freedom of the Internet. Marti should personally be featured in any encyclopedia under 'geektivism' and the brief interview may be of interest to Slashdotters not yet familiar with Mr Marti."
Version 1.0 by Anonymous Pancake
As an assistant member of the security team of a large fortune 500 company, I have discovered a new form of terrorism stemming from the deepest underground of the Internet. A site catering to hackers, communists and anti-Americans called Slashdot.org has created a new type of denial-of-service attack known as 'the Slashdot effect'. This attack has been used against what are seen as the enemies of the 'Open source movement' which include many large American companies such as Microsoft as well as many American media companies such as Time-Warner-AOL. The Slashdot Effect could have a potentially crippling effect on the American computer industry and I feel it is justified to offer my own advice on this problem.
What is the Slashdot Effect?
The Slashdot Effect (also known as Slashdotting) is a new form of denial-of-service attack stemming from the site Slashdot.org. Once they find a 'target' (whether it be a large media company or small personal homepage) the URL of the site is posted on the front page of Slashdot.org. Members of this site attempt as quickly as they can to follow these links and overload the target server. This causes the 'target' website to slow to a grinding halt before going offline. It can sometimes take days or even weeks for the site to recover from such a surge of traffic, and often the servers can be damaged beyond repair (that is, they cannot be fixed with a simple defrag!).
Who is normally the target of the Slashdot Effect and how is it done?
Many American companies have already been attacked by the Slashdot Effect. Targets often include news sites such as the New York Times as well as well as large American companies such as Intel. Sites that criticize the open-source movement are a prime target. For example, lets say an American media website such as the London Times does a review of a little known operating system known as Linux. Linux is an operating system developed by a hacker from communist Finland, which is based on code stolen from an American operating system known as Unix. It was created in cooperation with a communist group known as g.n.u. (Which stands for Glorified Novelty Unix) and is generally unusable by non-hackers. Obviously since it is such an archaic and unstable operating system compared to those made by American companies such as Microsoft it would get a bad review on the London Times. Once a Slashdot member discovers this honest review the URL would be posted on the front page of Slashdot.org. A flood of users would follow the link to the site and bring the server to a grinding halt. Since most of these users are terrorists they would probably have ads disabled using European hacking software. This would mean a potential loss of thousands of dollars worth of ad revenue. To top it off, members of Slashdot.org often plagiarize the articles and post it on illegal mirrors, furthering the loss of ad revenue. Members of Slashdot are rewarded for plagiarizing in the form of 'Karma', a form of hacker currency, on Slashdot.org.
What can I do to avoid the Slashdot Effect and how would I deal with it if it happened?
The easiest way to avoid the Slashdot effect is to refrain from posting anything about any open-source software, especially Linux. Focus your website on fine American companies such as Microsoft. You can also set up your server to reject any links from Slashdot.org, something many people have done. If you think your site is being attacked by the Slashdot Effect, contact the authorities immediately and report this act of terrorism. The penalties against hacker/terrorists are stiff and you can feel confident that the perpetrators of this terror will be punished in the harshest possible means.
Good luck and God bless America!
Click here!
He has strong views on free software, software patentability and the freedom of the Internet.
So do Bill Gates and the RIAA. Point? Opinions are just like assholes. Everyone's got one, and they're all full of shit.
mogorific carpentry experiments
and a fanatic, not to mention a gay commie but that comes with membership in the open sores community. Open sores from all the buttsex that is.
"The intention and spirit of the references to the LIMITED monopoly over ideas in the constitution is clear enough for any of us who are bound to follow it to understand."
I'm sorry, but apparently you aren't one of those who are "bound to follow and understand" it. If you knew anthing about the topic, which clearly you don't, you would know that the strict "Jeffersonian" interpretation of the law is that "inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." While what I have quoted doesn't explicitly state it, Jefferson felt that _IDEAS_, not their implementation mind you, should not be "owned." Thus, as you have said, there is a "limited monopoly over ideas" since we shouldn't be able to own them. However, Jefferson, and the other men who originally devised these laws, said NOTHING of their implementation. So, as you yourself has stated, there is no such monopoly there.
So, in response to your pedantic post, yes, I would be overly concerned with "making sure people who spend a lot of many make a profit." They spent a good deal of money expanding on an idea that someone (presumably not themselves) envisioned, and made it a reality. If these said people made a lot of money, and patented their specific implementation of an idea, then GOOD FOR THEM. Find your own fucking implementation and patent it. Otherwise don't disgrace Jefferson by misrepresenting his views on the issue.
-Matt
Duke '05