If you want to stop spam, make laws that go after the people who employ the spammers. When the people who employ the spammers get hit with hefty fines, they will quit employing spammers. When they quit, the spammers no longer make money. When the spammers no longer make money, they will quit also.
There is no possible way to stop the seven percent of the people who receive spam from buying the product; nor can we ever reduce that percentage.
The only way to stop spam is to cut off the hand that feeds it.
All it takes to find the real source is to track down the people willing to sell products via spam. Obviously, seven percent of spam recipients can find this source; why can't the feds?
I agree. NAT's were just a 'band-aid' because there is limited IPv4 address space. As is supernetting. As is DHCP (to some degree, where IPv4 addresses can be reused). NONE of the above is in IPv6.
The reason why Linux has no place in the server room is because Linux doesn't have SMP capabilities (yet). For those applications that still need SMP capable servers, Linux will just not do. Solaris has been doing that (at 64 bit; not at puny 32 bit) for several years now.
Give Linux a few more years of maturing, and it will be where Solaris is now. But some companies can't wait.
----- Oh yeah. Hardwarewise, I'd rather have a solid SUN box than a PC anyday. Even if it does cost more. Reliability is ALWAYS a winner.
On my phone (An older Samsung palmpilot/cellphone combo) whenever I get a phonecall from someone in my address book, I see the caller's name. If all I see is an incoming number, I just let them talk to my voicemail, which I retrieve later when the minutes are cheap (or free).
So, get something like a Treo that will do that. Besides, it's a palmpilot, too.
When the competition is hot, Microsoft is at it's best. Once they put their massive resources behind a project, that project will dominate the market (even if it takes several revisions). Basicly, users are beta-testers for the first few revisions. Example -- Pocket PC software.
Then, once the competition is crushed out of existance, Microsoft more or less drops interest, and the product stagnates. Example-- Internet Explorer.
The trouble for Microsoft is that the marketplace also changes; often rapidly. Microsoft will try to get a foothold if that market looks interesting and profitable, but sometimes big corporations move too slowly (even if they are 'compartmentalized'). Microsoft, in the future, won't have the luxury of using two revisions to get something right.
-----
There are alternatives to Microsoft, of course. The competition is fierce, as usual, and Microsoft will take any advantage it can (ethical or not, IMHO). That perception (whether correct or not) definately clouds Microsoft's image. Besides, after the federal anti-trust suit fiasco, it smells like Microsoft bought off each state, one by one. And it seems that Microsoft is thumbing their nose at the Federal government anyway. -----
There is also the matter of cheering for the underdog. Microsoft was the underdog to IBM in it's beginning; now Linux is the underdog.
------
My money is on something like Sun's Java Desktop. It is well integrated, and it will be supported by a major player, SUN, unlike most of the other Linux distros. Say what you will about SUN, they are still standing and making a stand against Microsoft. Once that Desktop comes out, I think the corporate world will take a long hard look at it. Prepare for massive discounts from Microsoft in it's defense.
Besides, I like what the Sun spokesperson said about the Java Desktop: "We are trying to make a 30 billion dollar a year business (i.e. Microsoft) into a 5 billion dollar a year business."
Here's to the underdog! I'm going to take a look at it, for sure.
When Isabel blew through Southeastern Virginia, we were without power for 6 days. Did the lack of power to my freezer, fridge, tv, or phone bother me? No.....
First: It is going to be very difficult for each retailer to keep track of the different tax rate for each state the sale was made INTO. It would be FAR EASIER to tax the sale based on which state the sale was made FROM. If a state has lots of Internet sellers, they should reap the benefit.
Second: With the sorry state of the current economy, I don't see burdening the public with MORE taxes being something popular. Besides, that will only throw cold water on a warming economy.
The current moritorium on Internet taxes is a GOOD THING. Let it run until the economy heats up again.
You have to look a bit deeper. Sun Solaris is a *great* product. The kernel has excellent multiuser, multithreading, and multiprocessor support. Linux is a bit lacking in the multiprocessor area, which is what the SERVER market wants.
Granted, given time, Linux will have good, maybe great, multiprocessor support. But Linux is bred on the desktops of single processor machines. There is not enough critical mass of 'free' multiprocessor machines to bring Linux up to the server level of Solaris. Now, I am not talking about 2 or 4 or even 16 processors in one box; I'm talking about dozens of processors. Solaris handles this with such ease; and yet is looks the same on single processor machines.
So what if Solaris is a bit tough to install, especially on Intel boxes? If you can't figure it out, perhaps you aren't ready to be a Unix administrator anyway.
Linux makes a good 'intermediate' system when you want to upgrade from Microsoft. But if you have applications that need a LOT of power, you have two choices; you can buy dozens and dozens of simple Intel boxes and split you application across all of them; or do it on a few big server boxes. Some applications work well one way, while others work better the single, multiprocessor server way. Make the wrong choice suffer. And remember, applications at the big server level are all mostly customized; not off the shelf. We are not talking about everyday apps like spreadsheets and word processors.
Don't get me wrong-- I love Linux. It is getting more and more mature every day. But it does NOT approach the sophistication on Solaris. That sophistication does have a price; there is more overhead. But it is well worth it, because Solaris scales so well.
You can take this from an instructor who has taught the Solaris line for over 10 years, and has used Linux for that same period of time.
So in your view, Linux sucks. In most of the rest of the world's view, MicroSoft sucks.
Methinks you are obviously just another MicroSoft plant, sowing FUD. Imagine-- the 'x' in Linux makes it communistic. I suppose the same goes for Unix, and maybe even Mac OS X?
Heck. There seems to be no new ideas in interfaces anymore. There are GNOME/CDE window managers that look like Windows. And now Windows is starting to look like GNOME/CDE/MacOSX/BeOS/ad nauseum. To the USER, they are all going to look the same, eventually.
So what's to differentiate the underlying product to the unwashed consumer when that happens?
The guy that thought up the idea of a central state location hub for overnight delivery didn't get a very good grade on his paper either. He just went on and started FedEx.
Don't get discouraged by narrow-minded instructors.
Somewhere, somehow, Microsoft must be behind SCO. Idealisticly for sure. Financially? Maybe. After all, you have to have some PRETTY DEEP POCKETS to butt heads with the IBM legal team. And that costs MONEY. Does SCO have it? I doubt it. But Microsoft has money out the wahzoo.
The best thing that could happen for Microsoft is if SCO wins. But I am thinking that they would settle for a long, protracted battle (measured in years) so that they could (continue to) spread FUD. Perhaps they can even get an injunction against the GPL until a ruling is made (again, years later).
The worst that could happen to Microsoft is if the judge squishes SCO like a bug because they filed a frivolous lawsuit. But that is not likely to happen.
Remember, Microsoft isn't just an 800 lb financial gorilla, getting what it wants; it also has a solid litigation team. Bill Gate's dad was an attorney, and I am sure he taught Bill a few lessons there.
So, overall, I smell Microsoft in this picture somewhere. A conspiracy, perhaps?
Instead of going after the spammers, why don't we get wise and go after the people who hire the spammers?
After all, behind every spammer is someone trying to hire them.
Make it against the law to employ a spammer!
Get an undercover 'hit squad' to buy some of these products, which will eventually lead them to the people hiring the spammers, and then fine the hell out of them.
After a few rounds of this, once word gets out, nobody will hire a spammer again. Spamming, as a business, eventually dies.
Yeah, our beloved TIVO is a culprit also. In our household we bought 3 new TIVOs, and carefully filled out the forms and submitted EXACTLY what they required. A few weeks later we got a post card (for each TIVO) saying something was missing. If I hadn't photocopied everything, I might have given them the benefit of the doubt.
Other than this rebate scam, I love my TIVO.
I'll bet there are others out there that experienced the same thing.
The whole reason I LIKE my tivo(s) is because I have freedom of choice. I watch what *I* like to watch, when I want to watch it. I don't need a 'MAX HEADROOM' network executive dictating to me when I can watch anything-- including those repetitious commercials!!
You have to remember a thing like an OS is evolving all of the time. New devices to diddle with; new data structures to deal with, etc. etc.
And old things go away, albeit slowly.
If Microsoft didn't EOL some of it's earlier products, we would still have support for cassette-tape based backups.
The key is not to force the customer into buying new stuff every release. Backdate the support for a few releases, but that is as far as it goes. People still running servers on 486's need to move on!
I understand your concerns. But without authority there will be chaos.
The latest Windows machines have a user named 'admin'. UNIX boxes have a user named 'root'. These are (supposedly) trusted individuals who are in authority. Why not something like that on the Internet? As SUN microsystems used to say, "The network is the computer".
As I stated, if we ever came up with an "Internet sheriff" it would have to be someone (somebody) that EVERYONE could implicitly trust. Given the special interest groups that abound at this point in time, I do not see that happening soon. But I think the idea will have to be addressed. After all, we humans (like it or not) respond well to hierarchy and leadership well.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to stop spam, make laws that go after the people who employ the spammers. When the people who employ the spammers get hit with hefty fines, they will quit employing spammers. When they quit, the spammers no longer make money. When the spammers no longer make money, they will quit also.
There is no possible way to stop the seven percent of the people who receive spam from buying the product; nor can we ever reduce that percentage.
The only way to stop spam is to cut off the hand that feeds it.
All it takes to find the real source is to track down the people willing to sell products via spam. Obviously, seven percent of spam recipients can find this source; why can't the feds?
I agree. NAT's were just a 'band-aid' because there is limited IPv4 address space. As is supernetting. As is DHCP (to some degree, where IPv4 addresses can be reused). NONE of the above is in IPv6.
Hmmm.... With all of these IP addresses, if I get one, it will be a LOT longer for the black hats to scan for my IP address....
On the downside, it will be a lot easier for the blackhat to hide in all the weeds....
Finally!! Someone who makes sense!!
The reason why Linux has no place in the server room is because Linux doesn't have SMP capabilities (yet). For those applications that still need SMP capable servers, Linux will just not do. Solaris has been doing that (at 64 bit; not at puny 32 bit) for several years now.
Give Linux a few more years of maturing, and it will be where Solaris is now. But some companies can't wait.
-----
Oh yeah. Hardwarewise, I'd rather have a solid SUN box than a PC anyday. Even if it does cost more. Reliability is ALWAYS a winner.
On my phone (An older Samsung palmpilot/cellphone combo) whenever I get a phonecall from someone in my address book, I see the caller's name. If all I see is an incoming number, I just let them talk to my voicemail, which I retrieve later when the minutes are cheap (or free).
So, get something like a Treo that will do that. Besides, it's a palmpilot, too.
When the competition is hot, Microsoft is at it's best. Once they put their massive resources behind a project, that project will dominate the market (even if it takes several revisions). Basicly, users are beta-testers for the first few revisions. Example -- Pocket PC software.
Then, once the competition is crushed out of existance, Microsoft more or less drops interest, and the product stagnates. Example-- Internet Explorer.
The trouble for Microsoft is that the marketplace also changes; often rapidly. Microsoft will try to get a foothold if that market looks interesting and profitable, but sometimes big corporations move too slowly (even if they are 'compartmentalized'). Microsoft, in the future, won't have the luxury of using two revisions to get something right.
-----
There are alternatives to Microsoft, of course. The competition is fierce, as usual, and Microsoft will take any advantage it can (ethical or not, IMHO). That perception (whether correct or not) definately clouds Microsoft's image. Besides, after the federal anti-trust suit fiasco, it smells like Microsoft bought off each state, one by one. And it seems that Microsoft is thumbing their nose at the Federal government anyway.
-----
There is also the matter of cheering for the underdog. Microsoft was the underdog to IBM in it's beginning; now Linux is the underdog.
------
My money is on something like Sun's Java Desktop. It is well integrated, and it will be supported by a major player, SUN, unlike most of the other Linux distros. Say what you will about SUN, they are still standing and making a stand against Microsoft. Once that Desktop comes out, I think the corporate world will take a long hard look at it. Prepare for massive discounts from Microsoft in it's defense.
Besides, I like what the Sun spokesperson said about the Java Desktop: "We are trying to make a 30 billion dollar a year business (i.e. Microsoft) into a 5 billion dollar a year business."
Here's to the underdog! I'm going to take a look at it, for sure.
I am of the firm belief that many of automobiles in the city I live in are driven by people who learned to drive from the Internet.
When Isabel blew through Southeastern Virginia, we were without power for 6 days. Did the lack of power to my freezer, fridge, tv, or phone bother me? No.....
But I was **DYING** for an Internet fix.
I almost went to the airport to pay 25 cents/min.
Almost....
First: It is going to be very difficult for each retailer to keep track of the different tax rate for each state the sale was made INTO. It would be FAR EASIER to tax the sale based on which state the sale was made FROM. If a state has lots of Internet sellers, they should reap the benefit.
Second: With the sorry state of the current economy, I don't see burdening the public with MORE taxes being something popular. Besides, that will only throw cold water on a warming economy.
The current moritorium on Internet taxes is a GOOD THING. Let it run until the economy heats up again.
Just my humble opinion.
You have to look a bit deeper. Sun Solaris is a *great* product. The kernel has excellent multiuser, multithreading, and multiprocessor support. Linux is a bit lacking in the multiprocessor area, which is what the SERVER market wants.
Granted, given time, Linux will have good, maybe great, multiprocessor support. But Linux is bred on the desktops of single processor machines. There is not enough critical mass of 'free' multiprocessor machines to bring Linux up to the server level of Solaris. Now, I am not talking about 2 or 4 or even 16 processors in one box; I'm talking about dozens of processors. Solaris handles this with such ease; and yet is looks the same on single processor machines.
So what if Solaris is a bit tough to install, especially on Intel boxes? If you can't figure it out, perhaps you aren't ready to be a Unix administrator anyway.
Linux makes a good 'intermediate' system when you want to upgrade from Microsoft. But if you have applications that need a LOT of power, you have two choices; you can buy dozens and dozens of simple Intel boxes and split you application across all of them; or do it on a few big server boxes. Some applications work well one way, while others work better the single, multiprocessor server way. Make the wrong choice suffer. And remember, applications at the big server level are all mostly customized; not off the shelf. We are not talking about everyday apps like spreadsheets and word processors.
Don't get me wrong-- I love Linux. It is getting more and more mature every day. But it does NOT approach the sophistication on Solaris. That sophistication does have a price; there is more overhead. But it is well worth it, because Solaris scales so well.
You can take this from an instructor who has taught the Solaris line for over 10 years, and has used Linux for that same period of time.
People, you have to look a bit deeper.
So in your view, Linux sucks. In most of the rest of the world's view, MicroSoft sucks.
Methinks you are obviously just another MicroSoft plant, sowing FUD. Imagine-- the 'x' in Linux makes it communistic. I suppose the same goes for Unix, and maybe even Mac OS X?
Jeesh!
Heck. There seems to be no new ideas in interfaces anymore. There are GNOME/CDE window managers that look like Windows. And now Windows is starting to look like GNOME/CDE/MacOSX/BeOS/ad nauseum. To the USER, they are all going to look the same, eventually.
So what's to differentiate the underlying product to the unwashed consumer when that happens?
Eh?
SCO won't show the code, but they claim it was copies.
Perhaps they don't want to show it because THEY are the ones that copied it!!
If I were a smart enough and technically savvy enemy, I would grab one of those things, and rig it with a virus that would work to my advantage.
I wonder if the military has thought of THAT??
The guy that thought up the idea of a central state location hub for overnight delivery didn't get a very good grade on his paper either. He just went on and started FedEx.
Don't get discouraged by narrow-minded instructors.
...when lawyers are making the judgements, and not the courts.
Somewhere, somehow, Microsoft must be behind SCO. Idealisticly for sure. Financially? Maybe. After all, you have to have some PRETTY DEEP POCKETS to butt heads with the IBM legal team. And that costs MONEY. Does SCO have it? I doubt it. But Microsoft has money out the wahzoo.
The best thing that could happen for Microsoft is if SCO wins. But I am thinking that they would settle for a long, protracted battle (measured in years) so that they could (continue to) spread FUD. Perhaps they can even get an injunction against the GPL until a ruling is made (again, years later).
The worst that could happen to Microsoft is if the judge squishes SCO like a bug because they filed a frivolous lawsuit. But that is not likely to happen.
Remember, Microsoft isn't just an 800 lb financial gorilla, getting what it wants; it also has a solid litigation team. Bill Gate's dad was an attorney, and I am sure he taught Bill a few lessons there.
So, overall, I smell Microsoft in this picture somewhere. A conspiracy, perhaps?
Instead of going after the spammers, why don't we get wise and go after the people who hire the spammers?
After all, behind every spammer is someone trying to hire them.
Make it against the law to employ a spammer!
Get an undercover 'hit squad' to buy some of these products, which will eventually lead them to the people hiring the spammers, and then fine the hell out of them.
After a few rounds of this, once word gets out, nobody will hire a spammer again. Spamming, as a business, eventually dies.
What do you all think about that? Too simplistic?
...rate as scum-sucking bottom feeders in the food chain of life.
Of course, they rate right ABOVE the lawyers who defend them....
Yeah, our beloved TIVO is a culprit also. In our household we bought 3 new TIVOs, and carefully filled out the forms and submitted EXACTLY what they required. A few weeks later we got a post card (for each TIVO) saying something was missing. If I hadn't photocopied everything, I might have given them the benefit of the doubt.
Other than this rebate scam, I love my TIVO.
I'll bet there are others out there that experienced the same thing.
I think not.
The whole reason I LIKE my tivo(s) is because I have freedom of choice. I watch what *I* like to watch, when I want to watch it. I don't need a 'MAX HEADROOM' network executive dictating to me when I can watch anything-- including those repetitious commercials!!
Yeah. It was an eye-opener, this early in the morning.
You have to remember a thing like an OS is evolving all of the time. New devices to diddle with; new data structures to deal with, etc. etc.
And old things go away, albeit slowly.
If Microsoft didn't EOL some of it's earlier products, we would still have support for cassette-tape based backups.
The key is not to force the customer into buying new stuff every release. Backdate the support for a few releases, but that is as far as it goes. People still running servers on 486's need to move on!
I understand your concerns. But without authority there will be chaos.
The latest Windows machines have a user named 'admin'. UNIX boxes have a user named 'root'. These are (supposedly) trusted individuals who are in authority. Why not something like that on the Internet? As SUN microsystems used to say, "The network is the computer".
As I stated, if we ever came up with an "Internet sheriff" it would have to be someone (somebody) that EVERYONE could implicitly trust. Given the special interest groups that abound at this point in time, I do not see that happening soon. But I think the idea will have to be addressed. After all, we humans (like it or not) respond well to hierarchy and leadership well.