"I have used 'available' WiFi before and don't consider myself a thief"
Regardless of the severity (i.e. how much you used and how frequent you connected) you are telling me you could look into the eyes of a jury and say you were not stealing your neighbors bandwidth? Seriously?
Look, when I move I usually pad the two-day gap between my DSL connection with some schmucks internet. I always try to lay easy on it (just check email, do some shellage via SSH). If I was to get caught, I'd smile and say "yeah, you caught me... sorry". If they hauled me in for criminal charges, I'd hope the punishment would fit the crime (I'd damn well bring in the work order from quest to prove this isn't something I always do), but I wouldn't dare say that I wasn't stealing.
Shit, I'd even offer to pay the guy for using his access point. I feel *guilty* about connecting to people who either don't know how to secure their access point, or don't understand the risks they take when they leave it open. That is why I don't... unless I move:-)
Worst case the guy might get arrested for connecting to "UseThisWiFi" but no prosecutor on earth would try the case. Good luck taking him to civil court for damages either "Your honor, the guy connected to my access point named 'UseThisWiFi' and downloaded 1GB of warez".
If he got hauled for connected to "smiths" they'd probably decide to push charges based on if it was a one-time thing or if he was on it every day for a month. You'd probably have a civil case if it was worth it.... A more interesting case would be if the guy used 'UseThisWiFi' and over the course of a month saturated your bandwidth 50% of the time and downloaded 12TB of warez. Assuming you could find him, I bet you could haul him into civil court..
Warning: US law ahead. UK readers can translate into UK-style justice.
Kinda. Your homeowners insurance will surely call you an idiot and refuse to cut you a check for any damage or stolen property. Odds are good "forgetting to lock the door" was in your contract somewhere. You can still probably try to sue the guy who broke in for damages but the outcome would depend a lot on the circumstance.
The police, however, will still arrest the person who broke in for trespass. The guy is a criminal regardless of you forgetting to lock the door.
Now lets make it interesting: 1) Guy connects to your unsecured access point named "joefamily". Guy just browses slashdot. Guy only does this once. Is he committing a crime? If so, what would be the sentence? 2) Guy connects to your connects access point named "freewifi". Guy just browses slashdot. Is he committing a crime? 3) Guy connects to your unsecured access point named "joefamily". You discover he has been using your access point for over a month. Could he reasonably be found guilty of criminal trespass? If so, what would be the sentence? Would this sentence be different than #1 or #2?
Add a twist: - If your ISP explicitly disallowed resale and they knee-jerk terminated your service, could you take them to civil court and restore your service? Would your outcome be the same for all cases? Could you sue the person who connected for damage? - The guy copies a word document on your computer that was confidential to your employer and was than leaked to the press. You are fired. Could you sue your employer? Could you sue the person who leaked the document for damage? - The guy used your connection to download copyright music from a torrent. The RIAA hauls you into court. For each case, does the fact that the access point was insecure make you liable for his doing?
Double time: - "You" are not a computer person who lives in an assisted living facility. You bought the access point from Target and plugged it into the wall. Assuming the guy using your access point is on trial for criminal charges does this fact change her case? Assuming you try to sue the guy for civil damages, will it make your lawyers harder or easier?
- "You" are a professional network engineer. You should know better than to leave your access point open. Assuming the guy using your access point is on trial for criminal charges, will it change how the prosecutor handles her case? Assuming you try to sue the guy for civil damages, will it make your lawyers case harder or easier?
I hope this makes it abundantly clear that the world of justice is not black and white like some here seem to treat it.
You walk by an automatic door at 2am and it opens for you. The lights are off inside and the open sign isn't on. Do you go inside? The door seems to think you should. If you go inside, will the jury let you off the hook because the door was looking for infrared and you walked in it's path*?
You sit next to the window in your apartment. You open your laptop and there are 12 access points available to you and 2 are unsecured. One says "prince" and the other says "98102". You connect to "prince" and the server gives you an IP address. You proceed to go about your internet business. Assuming you get caught (and that is really the difficult part), will the jury let you off the hook because the wireless router for "prince" gave you an IP address?
You sit next to the window in your apartment. This time there is an unsecured access point named "freewifi". You connect and it gives you an IP. Will the jury let you off the hook this time?
I'm with AT&T (formerly Cingular) and I've never, ever paid for an incoming message. Ever. The lady uses Verizon and she too never, ever has paid for an incoming text message.
Not one item from the list looks like from outer space - all are concepts which any monkey can bring into a browser. - Just like any monkey should know to diversify their stock portfolio. (Sharpe, 1964)
- Just like any monkey could put a steering wheel on a car (Circa 1898)
"The more original a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterwards."
- Arthur Koestler
I wanted to add I'm not really slamming svn. I can't be the only one confused about branching in subversion and svnmerge fixes the confusion. It's a shame it isn't hyped more by the subversion guys - the only way I found it was that it was in the contrib directory of the source tarball.
I read that part in the book over and over (btw, SVN has great documentation) and I just get more confused. Once I did svnmerge, I never needed to learn:-)
I set up a small (two line) shell script so I wouldn't have to manually do the -rx:x+1 each time You had me staring at that for a minute until I realized you weren't talking about file permissions (ala chmod) and instead talking about command line switches!:-) In truth, it isn't the command line stuff that is hard, it is just svn's merging is very conceptually hard to understand. Instead of the task-based "I want the changes from this version to merge with that version" using native svn forces you to think "I want to merge the difference between two versions in time into this other point in time". The "difference between two points in time" thing is really hard to wrap your head around...
The trick is to get svnmerge. It handles almost all of the nitty gritty details so you can actually do what you realy want to do, which is "take the changes from branch A and put them into branch B". Say you want to take the junk in changeset 1,2,5 and all the junk between 30 and 35 and merge it into your working copy:
> svnmerge merge -r 1,2,5,30-35
First, it remembers where you want to pulls stuff in from - you set that when you initialize a branch by telling it "link the branch in this working copy to branch svn://somewhere/else/". Every time you run it, it looks at what hasn't been merge into your working copy. You can get a list of junk it hasn't merged with:
> svnmerge avail
Once you do the "svnmerge merge" it will pull in all the changes and automatically keep track of what it just merged it. You then do a regular commit on the changes and off you go. I usually do this:
That command pulls in the revisions to your working copy and creates a commit log "commit.txt". It then commits your crap and removes the log.
The whole thing is a hackjob for sure, for starters TortiseSVN doesn't know about it and I'd love to do the whole process in some GUI thing. But it does show you that SVN itself is more than capable of handling merges in a "proper" way. Subversion just needs to get this hi-level stuff into it's own codebase so it knows what is up. I know they are working on it, I just hope that I can migrate from svnmerge to whatever native stuff they cook up in an elegant fashion.
"Unix Philosophy" should also mean "tiny programs working together" which is hard to do with SVN's metadata scheme. I cannot use "tiny other programs" that modify any SVN blessed working directory while keeping the metadata intact. For example, I cannot run FreeBSD's portsnap inside a working directory because portsnap will delete any depreciated port from my portstree. It is almost impossible to elegantly manage the portstree with SVN. And if you think my use case isn't worth considering, think about any other vendor tree you want to version and you'll have the same problem - it is very hard to sync with subversion.
Even if putting the metadata outside the working copy bends the "unix philosophy" (svn also runs on windows too you know) who cares? Polluting the working copy with crap that has nothing to do with my source code really makes certian things like my example a in in the ass. In fact, besides that it might be easier to code and CVS did something like it, I cannot think of a single good reason to pollute my working copy.
Why not keep the metadata in my homedir outside of the working directory? Just take the metadata and shove it in a place I specify in an environment variable. Perforce does this. I'm sure other systems do this. Why can't subversion?
I'm another person who really digs Vista. I find it easier to admin (that performance thingy in the control panel is realy cool), the networking is much better at the user level, you can have different security profiles based on access points, it is forward thinking with it's support for high-color, high-dpi monitors, and it is just much nicer to look at.
I've had *zero* problems finding 64-bit drivers. Every hardware device I have offers both 32-bit & 64-bit.
It isn't perfect. There is still a very annoying TCP/IP bug that hangs the media extender (SageTV + MediaMVP) in the bedroom) and for some reason Windows Explorer likes to randomly crash, though I really think this is a bug in TortiseSVN.
So yes, I love Vista. I'd stand behind any claim saying it is the most innovative operating system Microsoft has released.
Reading people rag on it always makes me wonder who the real paid shills are working for...
I dont think people care about *how* branching is done, even if it is very elegant under the hood. It is just that without third party tools (svnmerge) subversion's technicaly-elegant branching system is rendered useless.
If you think it is great, try merging "version" (really changeset is a better word) #4,15,67,93-102,105 and 106 from your development branch to your production branch. That is a very common use case that is very hard to do in subversion.
Svnmerge + svn = good enough. Svn alone isn't very useful for a good hunk development process.
Dont get me wrong, subversion is a very nice system. It has the best cross platform support out there, it doesn't treat directories like second class citizens, it is mostly stable, and it has tortise svn. But all said and done, Linus is right, subversion is merely good enough.
I thought the internet was going to collapse 11 years ago?
Almost all of the many predictions now being made about 1996 hinge on the Internet's continuing exponential growth. But I predict the Internet, which only just recently got this section here in InfoWorld, will soon go spectacularly supernova and in 1996 catastrophically collapse. Here's why there soon will be only World Wide Web ghost pages
- Not mess up my working directory with a bunch of.svn hidden directory junk. - As somebody else said, proper branching & tagging - Related to the.svn directory stuff, it is *way* to easy to ruin a working copy. Why related? You ever try to version a 3rd party tree (say, the ports tree)? It is virtually impossible because when you update the ports tree, it will mess with the filesystem enough to de-sync the.svn directory and ruin the entire working copy. - While getting better, it isn't very fast dealing with large working copies (say, 200+ megs)
It is. Spam harms far more people than manslaughter but with far less pain to each victim. However, in aggregate, the "pain points" from spam add up to far more pain than some dude getting shanked.
Would you say what the Enron guys did is worse than manslaughter?
If you ignore things like bandwidth, hardware and IT costs, you leave out a lot of the true damage these people cost. For example consider this scenario:
- Consider your server paging you at 2am because some jackass decided to flood it with spam from a bagillion random IP addresses. That is a high cost cause you have to get up at 2am and fix it.
- Consider that those bagillion random IP addresses are most likely botnets.
- Consider each of those infected boxes will have to be repaired at some point.
Even going down that one vector alone will yeild a significant amount of damage.
Sorry, this dude needs to be locked up for a long, long time. When you consider the staggering amount of damages these jerks cause even 11 years isn't enough. Consider:
- Employee overtime including late night pages from servers being flooded with crap at 2am. - Software Development time spent writing, tuning and updating spam filters - IT overhead creating spam policies - Hardware overhead to handle the spam - Lost productivity filtering out spam - Everything else I'm forgetting... botnets anyone?
Take that dollar value and multiply it by every organization and person connected to the internet. I'd wager you are looking into the billions of dollars of damages!
Spammers commit fraud on the highest of levels. They just do it in a way that distributes the damage in a way that makes each individual's share relatively low. you just have to add it all up to see that fuckers like the guy in this article are committing fraud on almost on the same level as your average Enron executive.
Damn! Does that thing store the contact lists server-side yet? I remember the first time I used AIM (or MSN) and the server automagically kept my contact list.
I've got a 6 digit ICQ number that sits around in Trillian with exactly one contact on it who also has an AIM account as well. What is funny is that while we both use Trillian, sometimes the AIM link will drop yet his ICQ will stay online.
> In contrast, the windows vulnerabilities always seem to be someone sending you a malicious email that masquerades as a cursor file or wallpaper...
You mean, local exploits? Local exploits like "For the bad inode one, you have to ALREADY BE LOGGED INTO THE MACHINE before you can attack it. If I'm logged into a windows machine, there is nothing further I need to do to attack it"?
> Sorry to hear you're still working on it old chum. I got DVD burning on install with by clicking on a little tab that said "mytharchive". Bam. It worked.
It should be that easy for me as well, but the guy who writes the DVD plugin hasn't updated his stuff to work against the guy who writes the latest version of the "skin" I use (SageMC).
> Oh and BTW. there are about 8 UI's for Mythtv, and you can customize it if you dont like it.
Yup, same with SageTV. SageMC is my favorite.
> You should try Ubuntu's Mythtv package. You really should.
1) If it ain't broke, dont fix it! I treat that computer as I would any of the real production systems I work on all day. I even have to schedule downtime with the lady when I tinker! 2) MythTV vs. Girlfriend (not to mention my sanity)... 3) Why? I'm quite happy with SageTV and even if I wanted, how would I migrate?
I'll see you all that though and raise you this: Do you still need to do that fucking survey with Zap2It? If so... haha!
How long it take to get the system into a working state with even a 95% uptime? The thing is, I tried the MythTV around 2005 using that "MythTV distro" who's name I forget... she *hated* it, found it to clunky and cumbersome and I hated it because my Creative Live card was always giving me shit. I almost lost the PVR war over that fiasco.
There is a *huge* aftermarket of stuff for SageTV; I've got ShowAnalyzer for the commercials, I've got IMDB, I've got on-the-fly transcoding so we can watch recorded shows while out of town within the native SageTV UI, I've got a web front end, I'm working on getting DVD burnage to work; all the stuff that MythTV claims to do, only it is much easier to get working. Shelling out 79 bucks for a PVR that worked out of the box was the smartest thing I ever did... The WAF for a homebrew PVR went from zero to 100%:-)
Slashdot Mirror
"I have used 'available' WiFi before and don't consider myself a thief"
:-)
Regardless of the severity (i.e. how much you used and how frequent you connected) you are telling me you could look into the eyes of a jury and say you were not stealing your neighbors bandwidth? Seriously?
Look, when I move I usually pad the two-day gap between my DSL connection with some schmucks internet. I always try to lay easy on it (just check email, do some shellage via SSH). If I was to get caught, I'd smile and say "yeah, you caught me... sorry". If they hauled me in for criminal charges, I'd hope the punishment would fit the crime (I'd damn well bring in the work order from quest to prove this isn't something I always do), but I wouldn't dare say that I wasn't stealing.
Shit, I'd even offer to pay the guy for using his access point. I feel *guilty* about connecting to people who either don't know how to secure their access point, or don't understand the risks they take when they leave it open. That is why I don't... unless I move
Worst case the guy might get arrested for connecting to "UseThisWiFi" but no prosecutor on earth would try the case. Good luck taking him to civil court for damages either "Your honor, the guy connected to my access point named 'UseThisWiFi' and downloaded 1GB of warez".
... A more interesting case would be if the guy used 'UseThisWiFi' and over the course of a month saturated your bandwidth 50% of the time and downloaded 12TB of warez. Assuming you could find him, I bet you could haul him into civil court..
If he got hauled for connected to "smiths" they'd probably decide to push charges based on if it was a one-time thing or if he was on it every day for a month. You'd probably have a civil case if it was worth it.
"Assuming the guy using your access point is on trial for criminal charges does this fact change the prosecuting attorney's case"...
"then I take the liability myself"
Warning: US law ahead. UK readers can translate into UK-style justice.
Kinda. Your homeowners insurance will surely call you an idiot and refuse to cut you a check for any damage or stolen property. Odds are good "forgetting to lock the door" was in your contract somewhere. You can still probably try to sue the guy who broke in for damages but the outcome would depend a lot on the circumstance.
The police, however, will still arrest the person who broke in for trespass. The guy is a criminal regardless of you forgetting to lock the door.
Now lets make it interesting:
1) Guy connects to your unsecured access point named "joefamily". Guy just browses slashdot. Guy only does this once. Is he committing a crime? If so, what would be the sentence?
2) Guy connects to your connects access point named "freewifi". Guy just browses slashdot. Is he committing a crime?
3) Guy connects to your unsecured access point named "joefamily". You discover he has been using your access point for over a month. Could he reasonably be found guilty of criminal trespass? If so, what would be the sentence? Would this sentence be different than #1 or #2?
Add a twist:
- If your ISP explicitly disallowed resale and they knee-jerk terminated your service, could you take them to civil court and restore your service? Would your outcome be the same for all cases? Could you sue the person who connected for damage?
- The guy copies a word document on your computer that was confidential to your employer and was than leaked to the press. You are fired. Could you sue your employer? Could you sue the person who leaked the document for damage?
- The guy used your connection to download copyright music from a torrent. The RIAA hauls you into court. For each case, does the fact that the access point was insecure make you liable for his doing?
Double time:
- "You" are not a computer person who lives in an assisted living facility. You bought the access point from Target and plugged it into the wall. Assuming the guy using your access point is on trial for criminal charges does this fact change her case? Assuming you try to sue the guy for civil damages, will it make your lawyers harder or easier?
- "You" are a professional network engineer. You should know better than to leave your access point open. Assuming the guy using your access point is on trial for criminal charges, will it change how the prosecutor handles her case? Assuming you try to sue the guy for civil damages, will it make your lawyers case harder or easier?
I hope this makes it abundantly clear that the world of justice is not black and white like some here seem to treat it.
You walk by an automatic door at 2am and it opens for you. The lights are off inside and the open sign isn't on. Do you go inside? The door seems to think you should. If you go inside, will the jury let you off the hook because the door was looking for infrared and you walked in it's path*?
You sit next to the window in your apartment. You open your laptop and there are 12 access points available to you and 2 are unsecured. One says "prince" and the other says "98102". You connect to "prince" and the server gives you an IP address. You proceed to go about your internet business. Assuming you get caught (and that is really the difficult part), will the jury let you off the hook because the wireless router for "prince" gave you an IP address?
You sit next to the window in your apartment. This time there is an unsecured access point named "freewifi". You connect and it gives you an IP. Will the jury let you off the hook this time?
Something like $10 for 500 outbound "anythings" (im, txt, pic, etc).
I'm with AT&T (formerly Cingular) and I've never, ever paid for an incoming message. Ever. The lady uses Verizon and she too never, ever has paid for an incoming text message.
Really? What carrier does this?
- Just like any monkey could put a steering wheel on a car (Circa 1898)
"The more original a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterwards."
- Arthur Koestler
someday slashdot will let me edit my comments...
I wanted to add I'm not really slamming svn. I can't be the only one confused about branching in subversion and svnmerge fixes the confusion. It's a shame it isn't hyped more by the subversion guys - the only way I found it was that it was in the contrib directory of the source tarball.
Huh? I never said I was merging multiple branches into a trunk. I was cherry-picking versions from the trunk and moving them into the release branch.
I read that part in the book over and over (btw, SVN has great documentation) and I just get more confused. Once I did svnmerge, I never needed to learn :-)
And by the way, to anybody going "why the fuck would anybody want to piecementally pull in 1,4,7,34-56"...
Once you start using svnmerge and are blessed with the ability to do piecemental commits you stop doing:
> cd ; svn commit -R -m 'all my work today' *
And you start going:
1> cd ; svn commit -m 'fixed this bug' bug1.c bug1_2.c bug1_3.c
2> svn commit -m 'added some feature' feature1.c feature2.c
3> svn commit -m 'some other bug fix...' bug3.c
now you've got three versions: 1,2,3. Guess what... you can push your changes to production by going:
> cd ; svnmerge merge -r 1,3
Congrads, you've just pushed out the two bug fixes you made without pushing out the new feature! Cool huh?
That very simple example is very, very hard to do using only subversion.
The trick is to get svnmerge. It handles almost all of the nitty gritty details so you can actually do what you realy want to do, which is "take the changes from branch A and put them into branch B". Say you want to take the junk in changeset 1,2,5 and all the junk between 30 and 35 and merge it into your working copy:
> svnmerge merge -r 1,2,5,30-35
First, it remembers where you want to pulls stuff in from - you set that when you initialize a branch by telling it "link the branch in this working copy to branch svn://somewhere/else/". Every time you run it, it looks at what hasn't been merge into your working copy. You can get a list of junk it hasn't merged with:
> svnmerge avail
Once you do the "svnmerge merge" it will pull in all the changes and automatically keep track of what it just merged it. You then do a regular commit on the changes and off you go. I usually do this:
> svnmerge merge -r 4,5,6 -f commit.txt || svn commit -F commit.txt || rm commit.txt
That command pulls in the revisions to your working copy and creates a commit log "commit.txt". It then commits your crap and removes the log.
The whole thing is a hackjob for sure, for starters TortiseSVN doesn't know about it and I'd love to do the whole process in some GUI thing. But it does show you that SVN itself is more than capable of handling merges in a "proper" way. Subversion just needs to get this hi-level stuff into it's own codebase so it knows what is up. I know they are working on it, I just hope that I can migrate from svnmerge to whatever native stuff they cook up in an elegant fashion.
"Unix Philosophy" should also mean "tiny programs working together" which is hard to do with SVN's metadata scheme. I cannot use "tiny other programs" that modify any SVN blessed working directory while keeping the metadata intact. For example, I cannot run FreeBSD's portsnap inside a working directory because portsnap will delete any depreciated port from my portstree. It is almost impossible to elegantly manage the portstree with SVN. And if you think my use case isn't worth considering, think about any other vendor tree you want to version and you'll have the same problem - it is very hard to sync with subversion.
Even if putting the metadata outside the working copy bends the "unix philosophy" (svn also runs on windows too you know) who cares? Polluting the working copy with crap that has nothing to do with my source code really makes certian things like my example a in in the ass. In fact, besides that it might be easier to code and CVS did something like it, I cannot think of a single good reason to pollute my working copy.
Why not keep the metadata in my homedir outside of the working directory? Just take the metadata and shove it in a place I specify in an environment variable. Perforce does this. I'm sure other systems do this. Why can't subversion?
Hello,
I'm another person who really digs Vista. I find it easier to admin (that performance thingy in the control panel is realy cool), the networking is much better at the user level, you can have different security profiles based on access points, it is forward thinking with it's support for high-color, high-dpi monitors, and it is just much nicer to look at.
I've had *zero* problems finding 64-bit drivers. Every hardware device I have offers both 32-bit & 64-bit.
It isn't perfect. There is still a very annoying TCP/IP bug that hangs the media extender (SageTV + MediaMVP) in the bedroom) and for some reason Windows Explorer likes to randomly crash, though I really think this is a bug in TortiseSVN.
So yes, I love Vista. I'd stand behind any claim saying it is the most innovative operating system Microsoft has released.
Reading people rag on it always makes me wonder who the real paid shills are working for...
I dont think people care about *how* branching is done, even if it is very elegant under the hood. It is just that without third party tools (svnmerge) subversion's technicaly-elegant branching system is rendered useless.
If you think it is great, try merging "version" (really changeset is a better word) #4,15,67,93-102,105 and 106 from your development branch to your production branch. That is a very common use case that is very hard to do in subversion.
Svnmerge + svn = good enough. Svn alone isn't very useful for a good hunk development process.
Dont get me wrong, subversion is a very nice system. It has the best cross platform support out there, it doesn't treat directories like second class citizens, it is mostly stable, and it has tortise svn. But all said and done, Linus is right, subversion is merely good enough.
easy
.svn hidden directory junk. .svn directory stuff, it is *way* to easy to ruin a working copy. Why related? You ever try to version a 3rd party tree (say, the ports tree)? It is virtually impossible because when you update the ports tree, it will mess with the filesystem enough to de-sync the .svn directory and ruin the entire working copy.
- Not mess up my working directory with a bunch of
- As somebody else said, proper branching & tagging
- Related to the
- While getting better, it isn't very fast dealing with large working copies (say, 200+ megs)
It is. Spam harms far more people than manslaughter but with far less pain to each victim. However, in aggregate, the "pain points" from spam add up to far more pain than some dude getting shanked.
Would you say what the Enron guys did is worse than manslaughter?
If you ignore things like bandwidth, hardware and IT costs, you leave out a lot of the true damage these people cost. For example consider this scenario:
- Consider your server paging you at 2am because some jackass decided to flood it with spam from a bagillion random IP addresses. That is a high cost cause you have to get up at 2am and fix it.
- Consider that those bagillion random IP addresses are most likely botnets.
- Consider each of those infected boxes will have to be repaired at some point.
Even going down that one vector alone will yeild a significant amount of damage.
Sorry, this dude needs to be locked up for a long, long time. When you consider the staggering amount of damages these jerks cause even 11 years isn't enough. Consider:
- Employee overtime including late night pages from servers being flooded with crap at 2am.
- Software Development time spent writing, tuning and updating spam filters
- IT overhead creating spam policies
- Hardware overhead to handle the spam
- Lost productivity filtering out spam
- Everything else I'm forgetting... botnets anyone?
Take that dollar value and multiply it by every organization and person connected to the internet. I'd wager you are looking into the billions of dollars of damages!
Spammers commit fraud on the highest of levels. They just do it in a way that distributes the damage in a way that makes each individual's share relatively low. you just have to add it all up to see that fuckers like the guy in this article are committing fraud on almost on the same level as your average Enron executive.
Damn! Does that thing store the contact lists server-side yet? I remember the first time I used AIM (or MSN) and the server automagically kept my contact list.
I've got a 6 digit ICQ number that sits around in Trillian with exactly one contact on it who also has an AIM account as well. What is funny is that while we both use Trillian, sometimes the AIM link will drop yet his ICQ will stay online.
> In contrast, the windows vulnerabilities always seem to be someone sending you a malicious email that masquerades as a cursor file or wallpaper...
You mean, local exploits? Local exploits like "For the bad inode one, you have to ALREADY BE LOGGED INTO THE MACHINE before you can attack it. If I'm logged into a windows machine, there is nothing further I need to do to attack it"?
> That, sir, is your problem right there.
> Sorry to hear you're still working on it old chum. I got DVD burning on install with by clicking on a little tab that said "mytharchive". Bam. It worked.
It should be that easy for me as well, but the guy who writes the DVD plugin hasn't updated his stuff to work against the guy who writes the latest version of the "skin" I use (SageMC).
> Oh and BTW. there are about 8 UI's for Mythtv, and you can customize it if you dont like it.
Yup, same with SageTV. SageMC is my favorite.
> You should try Ubuntu's Mythtv package. You really should.
1) If it ain't broke, dont fix it! I treat that computer as I would any of the real production systems I work on all day. I even have to schedule downtime with the lady when I tinker!
2) MythTV vs. Girlfriend (not to mention my sanity)...
3) Why? I'm quite happy with SageTV and even if I wanted, how would I migrate?
I'll see you all that though and raise you this: Do you still need to do that fucking survey with Zap2It? If so... haha!
How long it take to get the system into a working state with even a 95% uptime? The thing is, I tried the MythTV around 2005 using that "MythTV distro" who's name I forget... she *hated* it, found it to clunky and cumbersome and I hated it because my Creative Live card was always giving me shit. I almost lost the PVR war over that fiasco.
:-)
There is a *huge* aftermarket of stuff for SageTV; I've got ShowAnalyzer for the commercials, I've got IMDB, I've got on-the-fly transcoding so we can watch recorded shows while out of town within the native SageTV UI, I've got a web front end, I'm working on getting DVD burnage to work; all the stuff that MythTV claims to do, only it is much easier to get working. Shelling out 79 bucks for a PVR that worked out of the box was the smartest thing I ever did... The WAF for a homebrew PVR went from zero to 100%