If Napster provided the songs to download, that'd be one thing. Relying on the selflessness of others, however, is not a winning service.
Spartan and well put, but subject to misinterpretation.
Are they still planning to rent out their Luser's hard drives? That would be as lame as can be, pay someone to use your equipment without even letting people post what they want. Sorry, no sale. I can't imagine the once flourishing community of enthusiastic volunteers bending to this kind of deal. They will get around this.
All good cons depend on the greed of their victims. Volunteers don't care one way or another. You can tell the difference by the strings attatched.
My first choice would be for a live NPR [npr.org] feed though PRI [pri.org] and of course CBC[www.cbc.ca] would be welcome.
While the link to howstuff works is nice, it's hard to belive you live in Montreal and prefer NPR to the Canadian version. Hell, I only visit Montreal and Quebec City and I prefer Canadian. CBC, if that's what they call themselves, are so much less full of themselves. They are direct, far more in depth and intelligent and less fluffy. They do not play anoying segway music, like those awful horns, at inaproprate times, like reporting plauges, wars and the death of thousands.
For that six hour ride, which is wonderful with or without canned music, you would be better off with ogg and mp3's than this play for pay scam. Check out ABCDE to take control of your media again. Then get yourself a nice little portable player with a random button. The hours will fly by with music YOU really want to hear.
Why is it that the airwaves are not more like the internet? There are plenty of enthusiastic volunteers ready for free broadcasts on all that empty spectrum, and I thought that educational institutions were free to broadcast whatever they wanted without royalty concerns. The people in control of the airwaves are NOT serving the public interest, that's for sure. Let's push back.
OK, I said it before and I'm going to say it again. The primary weapon was not crypto, it was an airplane. It's just as stupid to blame the airplane and it's inventors as it is to blame crypto and it's inventors.
Crypto has many legitmate uses, comercial, governmental and individual. Banks use it for transactions. Governemnts and individuals can use it to keep things to themselves. Why do people think this is so evil? Do people hate envelopes? Curtians, walls and Clothes?
I'd suggest running it on Debian. As you say, Go there, subscribe to the mailinglists on security and other useful things. Read the how-to's, walkthroughs and useful documents about administring. Well, the mailinglist is optional as setting up a cron job (type man at) to apt-get updgrade and apt-get update will do better.
Debian boxes can be remote administered through a secure shell (ssh), without loosing the connection. Try running dselect through one some time, it's really cool. Did that to install and then uninstall proftp.
With M$ spending $1,000,000 to promote XP, has Gartner done itself out of anything? Even if it's just M$ recomending another consulting firm in it's literature.
What's needed to really explore Linux as an embedded operating system is a well-documented, inexpensive and readily available hardware platform that isn't based on an Intel x86-compatible microprocessor.
I'm not sure why you would want to exclude x86 stuff. There's tons of older do-it-all mother boards lying around for next to nothing. Some of them have low enough power requirments, but all of them use hardware that you already own. While it's nice to see so much work going on outside x86, I'd never ignore x86.
I'm waiting for systems like Agenda to get cheaper and less NDA burdened.
Yes, I'd get a real kick out of seeing some script kiddies get hauled off. I hate all of the port scans I get, especially considering the reason is generally to set up a warez site. Distributing MS trash or "Planet of the Apes" by compromised computer is a double crime! You can throw in all those pesky syadmins from @Home while you are at it. Oh, if only we could spank the folks who write cracker tools. I'd like to consider my little subnet a collection of "protected computers" and see my government smash the folks that would abuse it.
I doubt this bill would give me that and I'm not willing to pay the price asked even if it would. Uncle Sam will make his own definition of "protected computer" and it aint me. Enforceability? What a joke. Why should I trade non existent protection for further erosion of the security of my property, papers and personal effects from unreasonable search and seizure?
Anger and vengence are poor advisors and they make bad laws. This set of laws are hyserical.
The difference is that apache *requires* the installer to do some manual work to get it working properly. Perhaps the point and click admin would learn something during this process of learning.
There is no reason for those point and click admins to remain ignorant, except all that MS BS about "new mindsets" and "completely different" aproaches to programing. I can only imagine how knowledgable and valuable some of my frinds would be if they had not wasted a good portion of the last ten years chasing ever changing MS interfaces, specs and patches. Rise! and free yourselves.
Remember, it's not your ability to manipulate a product that makes you worth something. It's your ability to poduce results from given resources.
Does truth count? I've consistenly pronounced that word, "Ath-a-lon", but I have bought one. Oh well, at least I know it's "new-clear" not "nuk-u-lar".
I also know that AMD K6/2s at 500MHz run Debian well, and a 650MHz Athlon clasic is pleasantly fast. Knowing that Tiger direct will dump an 800 MHz clasic and mobo for $90 has me sorely tempted to upgrade a 130MHz pentium toy box.
So there you have it. Someone who's pronunciation is just awful with too many boxes around, unable to restrain his spending. Thank you for fixing one small pronunciation problem.
from the nwfusion article, evidence of ignorance making our life miserable:
Few, if any, business desktop machines are shared these days - so this "feature" will simply get in the way.
But the scariest thing I heard was that XP allows users to, in essence, set up their own virtual private network (VPN) between any two XP users anywhere in the world. According to IDG News Service reporter Ashlee Vance, the user "can permit a friend to see his screen via a chat-type protocol and even run programs from the original user's machine." Microsoft will publish a way, and provide the tools, for one PC to run software from another - and take over control of another machine.
Until people like this are taught the reasons for and security implications of user accounts, the world will be rife with viruses and worms. For those who may not know better, unprivalidged user accounts are made so that processes started by them can not alter or remove system files. Malicious programs, intitated by accident, are contained and can be eliminated. Nothing is fool proof but systems that ignore such basic concepts are naked. The "user experience" can be significantly enhanced by truely portable settings, but the primary reason for such stuff is security. The only reason the author is afraid is beacuse of M$'s record of poor implimentation.
M$'s record is giving the rest of us a bad name too. It's amazing that M$ does not impliment real user accounts. It's negligence. Their users are becoming increasingly distrustful and will never learn better. Just listen to that poor idiot demanding inferior software! The reach out starts with you and me.
That the parent post has recieved a +5 insightful score, is very good evidence that the trolls rule Slashdot. I've got the time to take a bite out of Ms. Information.
Under the psycho marketroid bable there are some interesting ideas, but all of them have mature and functional counterparts in the Linux/Unix world. DEC had many of the work sharing concepts built into their clusters back in the late 80s. X and Kerberos have all of the app sharing and security goodies without all of the privacy invasion. Any boob could have picked all of the interesting promises from these projects and put together that strange article.
Instead of trying to build a Windows clone, we should build up a system that addresses computing in a way that MS system's dont. I'm sorry, that's already been done. MS dont do much more than prommise to deliver what others already do and then treat their users like mushrooms.
MS will never be able to deliver on these ideas using their current market model. The "assimilation" of new machines would be a nightmare. Imagine not being able to tell the BSA thugs what computers had the new OS, or relying on their print out to know. "Got a cert for that copy of Solitare? Oh, I'm sorry, but your global network is now in default."
Someone complained that the article was old. They obviously overlooked the copyright 2001 notice at the bottom of the article. I wonder if MS considers linking a violation of their IP.
Well, why not? Crypto, like TNT, has done more good than harm.
Hiding tools from honest people only assures us that honest people suffer without benifit. Priciples of operation will always get out and the bad guys will always use those tools as they see fit. You can't hide crypto and we should all be using it to protect our privacy.
Here are some more people you can hate, if you still want to point a finger at Zimmerman:
The Wright brothers, for giving the terrorist a weapon.
Whittle, for developing the engines that powered that weapon.
Eifel, for giving the terrorist a target.
Diesel, for working out the use of heavier oil fuels that all jet aircraft use.
Oh yeah, don't forget that hideous man who invented the knife.
So go on and ban aviation, skyscrapers and knives as well as deadly crypto. The world will not be a better place!
I avoid using MS wherever possible, and I dislike them in general.
Why would you ever run MS stuff? You must be aware that they continue to ignore basic security requirments such as unprivalidged user accounts, and all of the reprocusions. Surely you would never run a browser that automatically executed code as root? How do you secure such a beast and why would you go to all that effort?
You like Google because it sucks less and works better. Fewer adverts, faster and more accurate results, so far unadultered by adverts indisguise.
Business Week likes it, in part, because they think it's deceptive!
Google has seen online ad sales rise in recent quarters. The reason? The ads on Google's site are delivered as a text listing above the search results--making them appear more a part of the page's content. "It works so well since users seem to be under the impression that all ads are graphical in nature and written-word ad placements are still editorial," says ad buyer Jonathan Adams, senior partner at Ogilvy Interactive.
I'm torn! Do I tell that looser what drives people to visit the place and give him a clue, or do I keep my mouth shut and let him keep buying ads?
Nah, I'll keep my mouth shut. One day after the IPO, some greedhead is going to screw my favorite search engine. It will be replaced in about five days by an honest site. Why can't those fools just enjoy their profits and leave excellent alone?
You know, the author did consider that. win3.1 is not win3.11 is not win 95 is not win 98 is not win ME is not win 2k is not win XP. The interfaces to the programs that run within these vastly different OSs are just as poorly documented as the OS, but even less consistent. Productivity is lost with every "upgrade". Even more is lost to broken Word macros and mindless formating issues where I work. The author implicityly considers Linux as an escape from all that.
He's right. That GNOME or KDE are any more difficult for the average user to work has got to be the #1 troll of the year. If anything, the interfaces to GNOME and KDE or any other window manager are easier because they do not suffer needless market droid type changes. Also, user customizations are much easier to save out and move from machine to machine. MS will never catch up.
In fact, broken printing is what really ended my reliance on MS. Win98 let me down several times in school and Network printing here at work is just a freaking mess. I quit using MS alltogether at home about a year ago when printing became unreliable. Machines that die stay that way. Those that refuse to boot, get Debinated. Things have been much easier that way.
Red Hat 7.1's good printing was a pleasant supprise. I gave it a try after the MS printing died on my wife's K6-2. Configuration was easy, and the output was just as good as MS ever was. Images from GIMP, documents from KDE are outstanding. Considering that the legacy alternative does not work at all, the ouput is infinitely better.
"but it works." If you look through the article, you'll find that phrase quite a bit.
If only NT would work at all! "But it works" is the sloppy catch phrase that MS folks used to throw out as they smashed down their crappy software on cluefull users. I work for a large company, with many databases THAT WILL NEVER TALK TO EACH OTHER, mail that gets stored in a propriatory format, and documents that never print the same twice. All of this is because of propriatory "standards" that never stand still. I'd love something that acutally worked around here freaking ever.
But my question would be, should it?
Of course companies should put Linux on the desktop and soon. Just reverse the question and see how obvious it is. Imagine your company was using FREE software and data formats. Try asking your boss, "Should we move to propriatory software that we have less control of, costs us more, is less secure, and does not work as well?"
What you're saying is that I should be able to completely clog up the network of my entire city, making it impossible for other resident to access the network?
No, I don't think you should "clog up" any network, private or public. What do you have in mind, pray tell? It's very difficult to clog things up with original content shared with friends.
What I want is for people to co-operate and build networks. FREE networks that you can do what you want with to compete with the current crop of TOS gimped cable companies and DHCP dial ups. Bleh! Sure, it will cost money but public utilities are almost always cheaper than unregulated monopoly franchises like we have now.
alot of the boxen that are being infected are doing so because they are running default installs with no patches. if you told me you were running a default redhat install i would laugh my ass off.
I'm not that informed, but two simple Debian lines are not too much to ask of anyone. First, remove the little # marks from/etc/apt/sources.list, then:>
apt-get upgrade
apt-get update
Bango, you've got upgrades and "patches".
Red Hat has a more mousey web based upgrade system that will work on one machine without fee. Just go visit their web site and look for support. With a little effort, you can learn how to use RPM and gnoRPM (?). Try "info rpm" or "man rpm" at a bash prompt, that tv with a foot on it called gnome terminal.
There you go. That's nicer than being laughed at, isn't it?
mindstrm, it's been a while. I thought you had suffered a Slashdot death penalty or something.
Win2k is not hard to secure; neither is any other MS system.
OK, I agree all you have to do is remove the modem, network card and keyboard. That is easy, cheap too!
Otherwise, MSJVM, VB and other trash that has full access to your file system as root will trash you. Duh. M$ designed their OS around marketing, so they can shove whatever software they want onto and extract whatever info they want from their users. This is not going to change, ever, and M$ will always be impossible to secure.
Excellent! I'm supprised by all the negative posts here by people who seem to want to criple themselves without reason. BASJE, for intstance, wrote, "Of course, there will be people whining they cannot run servers off that, or other other limitations. Those people should realize, that, as with all public services there'll be a certain service level for a certain price. If you want/need anything other, you'll have to pay for it yourself.", as if there's a real technical reason to limit bandwith uplinks and as if people can't chose to pay for good bandwith through a municipality. These arguments sound chillingly similar to the old comercial software trolls, "you only get what you pay for and giving me all your money is the best of all worlds." The net was designed as a collection of equal peers and changes weaken it. The web will only be a viable media for publication if it remains free and accesible. Do not surrender your rights to publish on this new media for the sake of a few companies profits!
But pretty sucky for the administrators who have to have configs available for everything from Win98 to VMS to OS2 to BeOS.
Well, what's the problem? Set up a standard for connections that's stable and works. If M$ wants to make things hard for their users, too bad. The post office does not teach you how to pack letters, do they? They simply have guidlines for size and weight. At some point some users have to do something for themselves, and it's no different from the inhomogenious world that admins have to deal with right now.
Slashdot Mirror
Spartan and well put, but subject to misinterpretation.
Are they still planning to rent out their Luser's hard drives? That would be as lame as can be, pay someone to use your equipment without even letting people post what they want. Sorry, no sale. I can't imagine the once flourishing community of enthusiastic volunteers bending to this kind of deal. They will get around this.
All good cons depend on the greed of their victims. Volunteers don't care one way or another. You can tell the difference by the strings attatched.
While the link to howstuff works is nice, it's hard to belive you live in Montreal and prefer NPR to the Canadian version. Hell, I only visit Montreal and Quebec City and I prefer Canadian. CBC, if that's what they call themselves, are so much less full of themselves. They are direct, far more in depth and intelligent and less fluffy. They do not play anoying segway music, like those awful horns, at inaproprate times, like reporting plauges, wars and the death of thousands.
For that six hour ride, which is wonderful with or without canned music, you would be better off with ogg and mp3's than this play for pay scam. Check out ABCDE to take control of your media again. Then get yourself a nice little portable player with a random button. The hours will fly by with music YOU really want to hear.
1970 VW van has two turn tables and a microphone.
Why is it that the airwaves are not more like the internet? There are plenty of enthusiastic volunteers ready for free broadcasts on all that empty spectrum, and I thought that educational institutions were free to broadcast whatever they wanted without royalty concerns. The people in control of the airwaves are NOT serving the public interest, that's for sure. Let's push back.
Crypto has many legitmate uses, comercial, governmental and individual. Banks use it for transactions. Governemnts and individuals can use it to keep things to themselves. Why do people think this is so evil? Do people hate envelopes? Curtians, walls and Clothes?
I'd suggest running it on Debian. As you say, Go there, subscribe to the mailinglists on security and other useful things. Read the how-to's, walkthroughs and useful documents about administring. Well, the mailinglist is optional as setting up a cron job (type man at) to apt-get updgrade and apt-get update will do better.
Debian boxes can be remote administered through a secure shell (ssh), without loosing the connection. Try running dselect through one some time, it's really cool. Did that to install and then uninstall proftp.
The damb has split wide open?
I'm not sure why you would want to exclude x86 stuff. There's tons of older do-it-all mother boards lying around for next to nothing. Some of them have low enough power requirments, but all of them use hardware that you already own. While it's nice to see so much work going on outside x86, I'd never ignore x86.
I'm waiting for systems like Agenda to get cheaper and less NDA burdened.
I doubt this bill would give me that and I'm not willing to pay the price asked even if it would. Uncle Sam will make his own definition of "protected computer" and it aint me. Enforceability? What a joke. Why should I trade non existent protection for further erosion of the security of my property, papers and personal effects from unreasonable search and seizure?
Anger and vengence are poor advisors and they make bad laws. This set of laws are hyserical.
There is no reason for those point and click admins to remain ignorant, except all that MS BS about "new mindsets" and "completely different" aproaches to programing. I can only imagine how knowledgable and valuable some of my frinds would be if they had not wasted a good portion of the last ten years chasing ever changing MS interfaces, specs and patches. Rise! and free yourselves.
Remember, it's not your ability to manipulate a product that makes you worth something. It's your ability to poduce results from given resources.
I also know that AMD K6/2s at 500MHz run Debian well, and a 650MHz Athlon clasic is pleasantly fast. Knowing that Tiger direct will dump an 800 MHz clasic and mobo for $90 has me sorely tempted to upgrade a 130MHz pentium toy box.
So there you have it. Someone who's pronunciation is just awful with too many boxes around, unable to restrain his spending. Thank you for fixing one small pronunciation problem.
Few, if any, business desktop machines are shared these days - so this "feature" will simply get in the way.
But the scariest thing I heard was that XP allows users to, in essence, set up their own virtual private network (VPN) between any two XP users anywhere in the world. According to IDG News Service reporter Ashlee Vance, the user "can permit a friend to see his screen via a chat-type protocol and even run programs from the original user's machine." Microsoft will publish a way, and provide the tools, for one PC to run software from another - and take over control of another machine.
Until people like this are taught the reasons for and security implications of user accounts, the world will be rife with viruses and worms. For those who may not know better, unprivalidged user accounts are made so that processes started by them can not alter or remove system files. Malicious programs, intitated by accident, are contained and can be eliminated. Nothing is fool proof but systems that ignore such basic concepts are naked. The "user experience" can be significantly enhanced by truely portable settings, but the primary reason for such stuff is security. The only reason the author is afraid is beacuse of M$'s record of poor implimentation.
M$'s record is giving the rest of us a bad name too. It's amazing that M$ does not impliment real user accounts. It's negligence. Their users are becoming increasingly distrustful and will never learn better. Just listen to that poor idiot demanding inferior software! The reach out starts with you and me.
The above is a joke. Don't point at people unless you intend to kill them.
Agreed! I'm sure that the Wright brothers, Diesel, Sir Whittle, and others feel no guilt for the actions of criminals.
Under the psycho marketroid bable there are some interesting ideas, but all of them have mature and functional counterparts in the Linux/Unix world. DEC had many of the work sharing concepts built into their clusters back in the late 80s. X and Kerberos have all of the app sharing and security goodies without all of the privacy invasion. Any boob could have picked all of the interesting promises from these projects and put together that strange article.
Instead of trying to build a Windows clone, we should build up a system that addresses computing in a way that MS system's dont. I'm sorry, that's already been done. MS dont do much more than prommise to deliver what others already do and then treat their users like mushrooms.
MS will never be able to deliver on these ideas using their current market model. The "assimilation" of new machines would be a nightmare. Imagine not being able to tell the BSA thugs what computers had the new OS, or relying on their print out to know. "Got a cert for that copy of Solitare? Oh, I'm sorry, but your global network is now in default."
Someone complained that the article was old. They obviously overlooked the copyright 2001 notice at the bottom of the article. I wonder if MS considers linking a violation of their IP.
Hiding tools from honest people only assures us that honest people suffer without benifit. Priciples of operation will always get out and the bad guys will always use those tools as they see fit. You can't hide crypto and we should all be using it to protect our privacy.
Here are some more people you can hate, if you still want to point a finger at Zimmerman:
The Wright brothers, for giving the terrorist a weapon.
Whittle, for developing the engines that powered that weapon.
Eifel, for giving the terrorist a target.
Diesel, for working out the use of heavier oil fuels that all jet aircraft use.
Oh yeah, don't forget that hideous man who invented the knife.
So go on and ban aviation, skyscrapers and knives as well as deadly crypto. The world will not be a better place!
That must be because of this:
I avoid using MS wherever possible, and I dislike them in general.
Why would you ever run MS stuff? You must be aware that they continue to ignore basic security requirments such as unprivalidged user accounts, and all of the reprocusions. Surely you would never run a browser that automatically executed code as root? How do you secure such a beast and why would you go to all that effort?
Business Week likes it, in part, because they think it's deceptive!
Google has seen online ad sales rise in recent quarters. The reason? The ads on Google's site are delivered as a text listing above the search results--making them appear more a part of the page's content. "It works so well since users seem to be under the impression that all ads are graphical in nature and written-word ad placements are still editorial," says ad buyer Jonathan Adams, senior partner at Ogilvy Interactive.
I'm torn! Do I tell that looser what drives people to visit the place and give him a clue, or do I keep my mouth shut and let him keep buying ads?
Nah, I'll keep my mouth shut. One day after the IPO, some greedhead is going to screw my favorite search engine. It will be replaced in about five days by an honest site. Why can't those fools just enjoy their profits and leave excellent alone?
He's right. That GNOME or KDE are any more difficult for the average user to work has got to be the #1 troll of the year. If anything, the interfaces to GNOME and KDE or any other window manager are easier because they do not suffer needless market droid type changes. Also, user customizations are much easier to save out and move from machine to machine. MS will never catch up.
Red Hat 7.1's good printing was a pleasant supprise. I gave it a try after the MS printing died on my wife's K6-2. Configuration was easy, and the output was just as good as MS ever was. Images from GIMP, documents from KDE are outstanding. Considering that the legacy alternative does not work at all, the ouput is infinitely better.
If only NT would work at all! "But it works" is the sloppy catch phrase that MS folks used to throw out as they smashed down their crappy software on cluefull users. I work for a large company, with many databases THAT WILL NEVER TALK TO EACH OTHER, mail that gets stored in a propriatory format, and documents that never print the same twice. All of this is because of propriatory "standards" that never stand still. I'd love something that acutally worked around here freaking ever.
But my question would be, should it?
Of course companies should put Linux on the desktop and soon. Just reverse the question and see how obvious it is. Imagine your company was using FREE software and data formats. Try asking your boss, "Should we move to propriatory software that we have less control of, costs us more, is less secure, and does not work as well?"
No, I don't think you should "clog up" any network, private or public. What do you have in mind, pray tell? It's very difficult to clog things up with original content shared with friends.
What I want is for people to co-operate and build networks. FREE networks that you can do what you want with to compete with the current crop of TOS gimped cable companies and DHCP dial ups. Bleh! Sure, it will cost money but public utilities are almost always cheaper than unregulated monopoly franchises like we have now.
I'm not that informed, but two simple Debian lines are not too much to ask of anyone. First, remove the little # marks from /etc/apt/sources.list, then :>
apt-get upgrade
apt-get update
Bango, you've got upgrades and "patches".
Red Hat has a more mousey web based upgrade system that will work on one machine without fee. Just go visit their web site and look for support. With a little effort, you can learn how to use RPM and gnoRPM (?). Try "info rpm" or "man rpm" at a bash prompt, that tv with a foot on it called gnome terminal.
There you go. That's nicer than being laughed at, isn't it?
Tune into MSNBC for more exciting details and developments. Dumb, Da-Dumb-Dumb, Dumb-Da-Dumb-Dumb, Dumb.
Win2k is not hard to secure; neither is any other MS system.
OK, I agree all you have to do is remove the modem, network card and keyboard. That is easy, cheap too!
Otherwise, MSJVM, VB and other trash that has full access to your file system as root will trash you. Duh. M$ designed their OS around marketing, so they can shove whatever software they want onto and extract whatever info they want from their users. This is not going to change, ever, and M$ will always be impossible to secure.
Excellent! I'm supprised by all the negative posts here by people who seem to want to criple themselves without reason. BASJE, for intstance, wrote, "Of course, there will be people whining they cannot run servers off that, or other other limitations. Those people should realize, that, as with all public services there'll be a certain service level for a certain price. If you want/need anything other, you'll have to pay for it yourself.", as if there's a real technical reason to limit bandwith uplinks and as if people can't chose to pay for good bandwith through a municipality. These arguments sound chillingly similar to the old comercial software trolls, "you only get what you pay for and giving me all your money is the best of all worlds." The net was designed as a collection of equal peers and changes weaken it. The web will only be a viable media for publication if it remains free and accesible. Do not surrender your rights to publish on this new media for the sake of a few companies profits!
But pretty sucky for the administrators who have to have configs available for everything from Win98 to VMS to OS2 to BeOS.
Well, what's the problem? Set up a standard for connections that's stable and works. If M$ wants to make things hard for their users, too bad. The post office does not teach you how to pack letters, do they? They simply have guidlines for size and weight. At some point some users have to do something for themselves, and it's no different from the inhomogenious world that admins have to deal with right now.