Slashdot Mirror
Debian Project Servers Compromised
Sean was one of many to pass along
the bad news
from the debian-announce mailing list: "Some Debian Project machines have been compromised. This is a very unfortunate incident to report about. Some Debian servers were found to have been compromised in the last 24 hours. The archive is not affected by this compromise! In particular the following machines have been affected: 'master' (Bug Tracking System), 'murphy' (mailing lists), 'gluck' (web, cvs), 'klecker' (security, non-us, web search, www-master). Some of these services are currently not available as the machines undergo close inspection. Some services have been moved to other machines (www.debian.org for example). The security archive will be verified from trusted sources before it
will become available again." They were going to announce 3.0r2 this morning; they've checked it and it's unaffected but obviously they're still postponing that release.
I must say I'm quite impressed that so much conversation has been generated from a sig. Or is that cig? Anyway, hey, I used to smoke but quit. I'm not one of those fanatical ex-smokers or non-smokers. If you smoke, cool. I hope you excersize or something to counteract the negative effects. I chose to quit because when I get older I'll have a better chance at survival. Granted, I'll die anyway but hey, you gotta cut the odds. If you smoke, enjoy! If you're smokin' weed, you already do enjoy. Either way, good luck!
Ignore this sig...
This shows how utterly naive the "Open Source" community is in regards to how "Commercial" software is developed.
Within Microsoft:
Weekly code reviews by peers & Management.
Weekly bug bashes (going over current, unresolved bugs)
Reviews with Program Managers
Code check-in & check-out that is *significantly* more advanced than the kluge known as CVS.
Total Ownership & Responsibility of your portion of code - including your screw-ups.
Note: This is all firsthand information. If you want info on how I know this, go visit my URL and learn a little about my background.
ScottKin
I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
Nope I'm not. I have a lower ID than you.
:-)
I don't mean to be pedantic, but I'm user 1359 and you're user 556006
You guys just can't see what's really going on, and only believe that the Linux community is full of zealots because you *want* to believe that.
You assume that Slashdot is representative of Linux as a whole. The Linux community might not be full of zealots, but Slashdot certainly is.
I was using Linux professionally in '96, so I do know what I'm talking about...
Then how do you explain that each and every time, the "I know I will get modded down for this" Linux criticising posts get modded up to +5 Insightful?
People have been saying that Slashdot is full of zealots for years, yet every time they say that they get modded up? That completely contradicts their claims. If Slashdot is truly full of zealots they would have been modded down, not up.
So how else am i supposed to smoke the ganga? Cooking with it just tastes nasty, and those nice 18" water pipes have some beautiful artwork.
I understand your dilemma. Except for the part about it tastes nasty. The cookies I bake taste just like regular cookies, you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference. Though, I'll admit, if you just take weed butter and put it on some toast, it can taste a little weird.
Here's what I do to make the cookies:
1. Break weed up into small pieces (like you're rolling a joint)
2. Simmer in butter and water for 2 hours. The water is used to prevent the butter from burning. Add just a little water, if it evaporates, add more.
3. After 2 hours, kick up the heat slowly. Eventually, let the water boil away so that you're basically sauteeing the weed in the butter. You don't have to do this for too long.
(An optional step here is to strain out the weed. I don't do this, as I feel you lose some of the goods by doing this. It might be a good idea if you're worried about getting caught with these though, as little specks of weed in your cookies will give you away.)
4. Let butter cool, since you don't want to put hot butter in cookie dough.
5. Make your cookies (or whatever recipe) like you normally would.
6. Eat
7. ???
8. Profit
Also note that the best time to eat it is with a meal. I usually eat one before a meal. The idea is when you eat a full meal, your body is digesting faster than it normally would, so the cookie gets digested faster as well. When I do this, it comes on a little quicker. Though eating it as a snack without eating a meal can be good too, though you may not feel it until later (sometimes 2 hours later). It just really depends on how digestive system handles it. They are great for movies. Your typical stoner will have sobered up by the end of a 2 hour movie. By eating these things, you can stay high through an entire movie (and even afterwords), even a 3 hour movie like Lord of the Rings.
Enjoy!
Zoot!
And to be honest, your post so too lacking in any substantive thought to be worth much of a response
And, appropriately, you didn't provide much of one. Still, even if you are effectively a troll you are at least putting some work into your posts, so let's do this...
Slashdot, being somewhat overrun by liberals and left-leaning "thinkers" are often champions of diversity
Hm... not sure I buy that (especially the last part), but whatever...
-- so long as the diversity goes along with what the crowd wants. Quite often it's posted that we should accept the racial, sexual, and national diversity without question, but when it comes to ideological differences, no diversity is to be tolerated. Toe the line. Say the right things. Nod like everyone else. Linux good, Microsoft Bad. Open source good, anything else bad. Naysayers are trolls who pollute the purity of our collective brilliance. What a bunch of hypocritical hogwash, and I'm not the only one who notices it here.
Here's where you really blow the suspension of disbelief. I understand that you have seen Fight Club and feel that your eyes have been opened about how the pathetic sheeple need to be shaken up and all, but why do you talk about the /. environment as if it is something unique? Surely you realize that any collection of one or more humans also features "hypocrisy". You mention noticing it here as if that act of perception is a sign of insight but, to me, the fact that you think noticing it in any one place is special is a sign of inexperience and immaturity. That you feel the need to also point out that you are "not the only one who notices it here" is not only pathetic on a personal level, it also indicates that you knew your posts on the subject were redundant before you made them.
What really makes it lame, however, is that you aren't even noticing a good case of it. You don't understand that people aren't asking you to "Toe the line. Say the right things. Nod like everyone else."... they are telling you to "Go 'way, kid. Hit the road. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out."
I'm sure that is a distinction that will, at least initially, be meaningless to you since you will simply consider my tendency to be bored with your pointless, redundant, and cliched posturing to be "intolerance" and, therefore, "hypocrisy". There is, in fact, a huge distinction. In the case you present, an effort is being made to force an individual to conform to a group. In /.'s case, OTOH, intellectual diversity is being championed. Let many flowers bloom on the Internet! If you don't like the kind of chat that goes on here, there may be some other site better suited to your style and level of discourse. If there isn't, go ahead and start one!
That would be consistant with the other sorts of diversity that you seem to think that /. is championing. Tolerating "sexual diversity", for example, doesn't mean that I have to be "challenged" by being forced to watch sex acts in my living room that I would personally consider perverse. It just means that I shouldn't try to force other people to conform to my opinions on perversion, and that I shouldn't try to interfere with them doing their thing elsewhere, out of my living room. If I support that notion, it isn't because I am an inherently tolerant person, it is because I believe that it is only though tolerating other people's choices that I can have a reasonable expectation that I have done my part to ensure that my choices will likewise be tolerated by others.
So, even though I don't care for Madonna, I don't have a problem with people having a site that features discussions that are pro-Madonna. I also wouldn't have a problem with them telling you to take a hike if you decided to hang out there to enlighten and challenge them with repeated fluffy posts (in your self-important teen-angsty style, of course) revealing to them that you have seen through them and discove
Yes, this is strange. Maybe your previous message was moderated down because it was a bit more provocative than mine. Or maybe some moderator thought that there was no reason to post anonymously and gave a -1 because of this.
I do not understand why mine was moderated up to +5, though. Something like +3 or +4 would have been more appropriate. But then someone gave it a -1 Flamebait, which I cannot understand either. I would have understood -1 Overrated (or maybe even Redundant, compared with the previous message that I had not seen), but -1 Flamebait is strange because I did not intend to be offensive.
Anyway, it is sometimes very difficult to understand why some messages are moderated up or down. Sometimes, the meta-moderation helps and reduces the influence of some unfair moderators, but we all know that the Slashdot moderation system is not perfect.
Oh, and moderating this comment as off-topic would be appropriate, by the way...
-Raphaël