Which is essentially what I did. I think we announced the new features at the bottom of the e-mail, but it was a technically focused e-mail, not a salesy one.
Sometimes you actually need to get announcements out. We were running an early version of a client's website, and we had a problem with the client massively changing the system. We had to scrap the old user accounts, so we e-mailled everybody.
Under this kind of judgement, we'd have been considered spamming.
What should I have done?
Sometimes you need to send out announcements. It wasn't like Kozmo was sending you a weekly newsletter, they needed to send an e-mail.
I agree with the posts that this wasn't real scummy spamming.
I don't know why Kozmo did this, but I think that you blew one e-mail WAY out of proportion.
The Open Source proponents of depliticizing the movement and making it open to business is failling. Everyone is coming off as a hippie communist looking to take stuff from others.
This is beyond bizarre. AOL runs a group of expensive servers and has told you to use their client. You CAN'T even claim interoperability, there IS a Linux client, and there IS a Java Express Client, and the tickle client floating around.
They have made every effort to have a compatible client available for you.
The fact that you would prefer your own doesn't give you a right to their services.
However, by showing that we won't respect the law nor attempts at technical limitations, you discredit all of us. For those of us trying to win adoption for Open Source tools and platforms, stuff like this is a huge step back.
We're not sure if this is legal, but we think we might have finally found a loophole.
Congratulations, you have violated ehd spirit of the law but not the letter. That doesn't make you a moral person.
And immoral behavior is not acceptable because the victim is a corporation.
My point is, while they attract advertisers, the rates are lower and the quality of the advertisements is lower.
My concern is that one of the few extremely affordable forms of entertainment may get hurt significantly. Even if it remains, the quality will be a fraction of what it is now.
I don't believe that it is anywhere close to 85% of the population getting their TV from cable/DBS. Last I heard/read, about 50%-60% of the country was capable of getting cable. I have no idea what the adoption rate is among people that CAN get it. You forget how much of this country isn't in urban/suburban areas.
The proportion of viewership going to the networks has been on the decline, but that is a consequence of more channels. Initially, the cable (and non-affiliated TV channels) were just knock-offs of networks and relatively useless, however the expansion of cable has resulted in a lot of specialized channels.
This has resulted in a bunch of specialized cable channels with poorer "quality" programming, while better for the viewers because it is what they want. Take the Sci-Fi channel, the shows are great fun, but the acting and effects are horrendous, because of the smaller budgets.
The death of local television would be a tradgedy. Admittedly, syndication has mostly killed independents already (they all show the same old shows), but at least local news remains. The death of the local community is a very dangerous things for the United States, socially and politically. The more homogenized the country gets, the more the political institutions will collapse.
What do I mean? The American system is designed to be stable, not representative. There are HUGE seat bonuses. For example, if one party were to get 51% of EACH congressional race, they would have 100% control of Congress. The seat bonus (disproportionate power/voter supporting you based on smaller margins) becomes a bigger and bigger problem as the country loses regional differences.
Additionally, there is something to be said for diversity. I rather like the fact that visiting my family in Ft. Lauderdale, taking a trip to New Orleans, hanging out in Boston, or driving down to New York City gives me a wide range of experience. Further destroying boundaries helps undo this.
Besides, to improve we need a constant influx of new ideas. If we didn't have California doing screwy things all the time, there'd be nobody challenging the status quo.
I agree that this is happening regardless, but there are REAL social impacts of what is going on that Slashdot whiners screaming about their rights won't help.
The man makes a few good points, even if he doesn't realize it. There is a real problem with TiVo/ReplayTV devices.
Before y'all go off on your high horse about your right to everything, realize that there actually IS more to this world than your rights.
I used to study Philosophy. One of Kant's concepts (the Categorical Imperative, I believe was an undefined universal truth that he couldn't define, but he knew some criteria, such as this one) was some universality.
For an event to be moral, it must be able to be universally applied. In otherwords, if everyone did it, things would be okay. From this arguement, suicide is immoral, because universal suicide means no humans. I won't dispute your "right" to use these devices. It's a stupid arguement. Anyone citing Betamax is EXTREMELY foolish. Your RIGHTS aren't determined by Supreme Court rulings, they are endowed by the Creator, the SCOTUS just bitch-slaps the President and Congress when they overstep their bounds and figures out whose side the law favors when Congress and the White House actually behaved. If you have a "right" to do this, it is because you are exercizing your Rights to Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness without harming the rights of another, NOT because of Betamax.
However, there is a more important question. What happens if everyone who currently owns a VCR (95% of homes with televisions I believe) gets one of these devices. While a VCR CAN record the programs and skip commercials, most people don't do this. I program computers for a living and find setting up my VCR to record a show automatically a REAL pain in the ass. I'll hit the record button, but dealing with the VCR is rarely worth it.
However, what happens if everyone adopts these. Right now, most programming is paid for entirely from advertising revenue. With these devices, advertising revenue WILL drop (lett people watching, etc.). This will lessen the quantity of quality programming provided by the networks.
Of course the advertising companies and television studios will need to adapt to stay in business. Y'all haven't impressed us as business experts by stating that companies need to figure out how to make money to be in business.
The point is, the networks have a product that in the status quo provides entertainment at a very low price point. As someone who went a few months without cable when finances were tight, I appreciated the fact that I could get a few decent shows from the networks.
Keep in mind that these devices will always be tilted towards the well-to-do. You guys with $3000 gaming computers, digital cable/satellite systems, every gaming console, a DVD player and surround sound system, etc., may have millions of options for entertainment.
However, for a working class family of four surviving on $40,000/yr (slightly OVER the median income), a $30 night out to see a movie with a family isn't always an option, and buying hundreds of channels may not be.
Either television as we know it will die from these devices or what's left will be much lower quality because of less revenue. Now television may have near zero artisitic value, be corrupting the movie studios, and allowing parents to neglect their children, but it is also an affordable form of entertainment. For the blue-collar worker that is now priced out of going to see his home-town football team, he can still see the game. The low price point of television means that even the poorest Americans can afford a set.
What, you say, then television will remain for them? Don't be so sure. Pull the big money people out of watching ads with Tivo, and Lexus and Mercedes STOP running ads. This lowers the demand for advertising. As you move down the income brackets and allow them to avoid commercials with Tivo, there are fewer companies desiring ads. Keep in mind, there isn't a desire to reach the poorest individuals with ads, they are looking for middle-to-upper income individuals.
Don't believe me? Watch your favorite high-brow show (Frasier?) and look at the advertisements.
Then watch the XFL or Wrestling, look at the advertisements.
Which show gets a more expensive product advertising? Which one likely gets more for it's ad space. As a result, which one gets the expensive to produce ads.
There are social consequences to your actions. Screaming and yelling about your right to do anything you want doesn't change that. Yes, fundamentally, you should have a right to take any signal delivered to you and do what you want (cable descramblers, satellite "piracy", etc.). However, there is a social cost. Yes, the technically proficient and the dedicated can still get descramblers with no problem. But without the laws against them, EVERYONE would have gotten them and premier cable would have either died or required VERY expensive technical solutions.
Yes, a few people skimming off the pot (taking television without commericials, premieum cable without paying, etc.) doesn't make a difference, but large scale would.
Yes, I want a Tivo, but I also acknowledge that while I'm within my rights, there ARE social consequences.
In reality, people should have a fundamental right to do whatever they want with their signal. However, you have to realize, that there is more at stake than this.
Why?
Your fair use rights are meaningless without content.
Take away the revenue stream, and you won't get ANY content that you can "fairly use."
Copyright is a compromise.
While people might create artistic works without compensation, television production is expensive, and can't be done without a revenue source.
Oh well, I guess NBC will have to expect to provide programming without any revenue from it directly and try to sell T-shirts.
Yeah, winbind was the "needed feature" for SAMBA. Hopefully this makes SAMBA a real solution instead of a quick Hack. I liked SAMBA as a way to access my Unix boxes, but I hated trying to use it as a real File/Print Server. Now it may be a solution to the never ending need for more NT servers.
You probably want to consider a firewall solution and your NOSes as well. Despite this being Slashdot, I would assume that all of these environments will have a Windows machine and some will have a Macintosh. Keep this in mind for the design. You will likely want to be able to use a system where you can log in from anywhere, get your e-mail, etc. This means that you want a server centric approach.
If you have the budget, consider a real machine for your central server. (By real machine I mean a server with RAID array, not a HP-UX box) I'd spend the extra for a Compaq Proliant, they'll make your life easier, but you can certainly build your own. If you run Windows machines for gaming, etc., then plop NT on there... I prefer NT4, but Win2K will work as well. Setting up the basic system will be easy. If you are more of a geek, you can of course do this with Linux/BSD/Solaris.
Essentially, you want a unified logon system, at least for the primary machines. Also, consider buying licenses of Virtual CD. It will let you put your games CDs on the central server and therefore available to everyone. Setting up an NT4 Domain is trivial, and if the machines are all Windows and Linux, you're golden, just mount the share points, and go.
Make sure you get the RAID 5 system. This way, you store all your data on the server and back it up to tape. Most people don't really backup their machines because it is a pain. If all you need to do is swap a tape once a week, you can do it easily, and you won't need to worry about data loss.
If you do the LAN party thing, pick a room that is setup for it. If you got a big house in the burbs, you should have an adequate Den. Consider wiring up little stations. If you want to be fancy, pick up a bunch of 17" monitors from someone liquidating them. Then you have the stations setup and wired, and your friends just plug in.
Firewall. Don't mess with a 486 and two NICs, you'll go nuts. But one of the prebuilt boxes that will route for you. Most of those will also handle your DHCP needs. However, you could also run DHCP off your server.
You need a mail server. If you're loaded or "borrow" a copy from the Office, Exchange is nice Overkill. Reasonably, you just want an IMAP system. Although, if price is no object, you could go nuts here. With the Exchange Server, you can log in from any computer and yours tasks, calendar, etc., are there waitting for you. Although, if you already a nice work e-mail and don't want to mess with local, this is unnecessary.
Routing: do you VPN in to the office? Does your Spouse/Roommate?
You could make life easy (if insecure) and setup a machine as a router. Make this machine the default gateway, and have it maintain your VPN sessions. As long as the offices and your internal IP scheme don't match, you can have LOTS of fun here. If you use Linux, I don't know how to help, but NT/W2K has a registry hack to not shut down dial-ups when you log out. You could have this box route for your offices. And if the IT boys will be helpful, you could have your WINS information pulled from the office computer. In this regard, your home network is on all of your office networks.
Now obviously this is a security risk, but a fun idea regardless...
Wireless... Obviously you need wireless. If you have a laptop, you want it. If any friends do, you want it. The 100MB connection is great for moving large files around, but to just get your Internet access and load files, 11MB is fine. Get enough access points if your house is large.
Now, there is a question as to the usefulness of their security. If you are worried, place the Wireless outside the firewall. Then, put a VPN server in. Use the VPN software on the laptop to have another layer of encryption. This is actually important if you are routing for your VPN networks.
Internet access: DSL or Cable, or if you're snazzy, both. You'd create more of a routing headache, but you eliminate the risk of the network being down. You have those SOHO routers for each connection, then your internal router/proxy divide the load.
My boxes are all running SAMBA bound to an internal NIC, which lets me manage them from my Windows workstations. Whether I'm logged in at the office or VPN'ing in, I can reach my OpenBSD boxes and update websites, develop, etc.
I have the SAMBA servers as part of the domain, but it is a hacky solution. I map everyone's NT Domain name to a UNIX name, and they can access the appropriate files.
NT Domain integration was always a little strange. With SAMBA 2.2, the issues should be much cleaner. ACcording to the release, I don't need to create Unix AND NT users, I can just grant access to my NT Domains. This was theoretically possible before with pam_smb (or smb_pam) but was always a confusing mess.
Also, even if I need to create accounts for the users that log in, not having to create accounts for the users that ONLY access via SMB will be a blessing. Not having a bunch of accounts with shell false just to support SAMBA will make life easier.
Adding an NT File Server is a joke, I plug it in, join the domain, create local groups (if I want) and share files with the permissions. Easy as pie.
Doing the same on SAMBA was a pain because I needed to give each user a UNIX account. This meant that a server for 5-10 people was fine, but trying to give an arbitrary group access to the machine was a nightmare.
This will be a tremendous release, and I look forward to putting it on test servers soon and deploying it in production in the next few months.
Yeah, groupware is hidden and hasn't been updated since 1998, the last time a new "beta" game out. It doesn't do what it should. It has a special groupware client that is a stripped down version of their client from '98, and it isn't clear if you can run the real client and connect to it.
It seems kind of awkward in it's handling of things. We were playing with it for corporate use, mostly so people could swap messages/URLs and startup Netmeeting conversations.
Unfortunately, the system was never polished. I couldn't figure out a way to strip down the listed helper apps for installation, and doing that at each desk would suck. It became a backburner project before I could do anything useful with it.
ICQ had plans to be a business. AOL gobbled them up, and AOL has never had much interest in moving out of the consumer space.
I tried Exchange 5.5 Chat Server, it blew hard core.
I tried Win2K Server, it blew hard core, I rolled back to NT4.
Thanks for the tip, but I haven't been impressed with the Exchange Group's Mac support, and I'm sure that their Linux and MacOS X support is non-existant. I do actually have a heterogenous environment, so I don't know if it works as well.
Grin I don't. A friend of mine used to work in their outsourced Presario group, I wouldn't dare trust THAT support group. Good friend, but a screwball. They have a group in S. Florida of random kids that know computers and have drug problems.
However, I have called Compaq twice in the middle of the night with technical problems, and I was quite happy with the service I received. We were having problems getting rackmounting kits for our NON-Compaq servers, and they shipped out, overnight, kits for their machines that helped our problems.
Their support has made me a loyal customer, and I am happy to say so. Dell on the otherhand, has shown itself to be worthless to me. We had their paid next-day service, and it took me 5 days of 2hr+ hold times to get someone to actually come out, and he screwed it up anyways.
I'll never buy another Dell product, and I'll always get my NT servers from Compaq.
I'm not supporting the view. I am however supporting Yahoo's decision to not alienate a core product. Yahoo should not be marketing and selling pornography and trying to market itself as the friendly face of the Internet.
They should redirect all the traffic they want and do it under another name. The Yahoo brand has value.
Anecdotal evidence: My girlfriend is reasonably intelligent, pretty savvy Internet user. She was looking for some specific hair gel or whatever online, and saw one of them was a Yahoo store. She figured that it seemed reputable because of Yahoo's name. I laughed and explained what Yahoo store was.
However, she made a purchase because Yahoo being in the name lent it credibility. They shouldn't try to leverage the name in the pornography business.
America is a very religious, Christian country. I myself are neither extremely religious, nor a Christian. However, I understand and respect that a large portion of this country is in this group.
Doing something that would tarnish your name to this crew is silly.
My other point, I hit Yahoo maybe 2-3 times a week, it is occaisionally useful for finding corporate sites quicker than google. I bet that I hit Yahoo a LOT more often then most Slashdot users.
This is NOT the core demographic. This group will never use Yahoo, and certainly won't buy porn there (I guarantee that most users that traffic in porn here find free stuff via IRC or use hacked password lists). Yahoo pleasing this crowd is silly, as it is extremely unlikely to put its money where it's mouth is. Indeed, even companies that FULLY support Linux (VMWare) feel the wrath of the open source community that wants to rewrite their product and give it away. There is no way to extract money from this crowd. Even hardware is a tough sell, as they are convinced they can pricewatch it cheaper.
IM compatibility is nice, and necessary, but isn't the secret to Jabber.
Jabber needs real clients (i.e. Win32 and Mac) that don't suck, and people are comfortable with. It needs the power of ICQ with the simplicity of AIM. It also needs moron proof servers.
This is the key point. The majority of computers are still in the corporate sector. We all use ICQ and AIM for communication, and nobody is happy about it. Some companies have tried to block AIM as a security risk (you can send corporate information out without any log of it), but found that it became key to the company's communication.
A real system where I could communicate externally but have a special internal system would be helpful.
Now, the real solution, IMO, is a Open Source/Corporate combo. In that scenario, there is a freely available public product that is really good. However, there should be a commercial (but inexpensive, IT budgets have gotten tighter) product that works with an internal server that is easy to install. Additionally, include an Admin kit so companies can configure what is allowed.
For example, if I could only allow people to send URLs and text externally, but files internally, that would be a useful collaborative tool. That let's them communicate/goof off/whatever, while not exposing my company except internally. This would also take the load off my e-mail servers.
Additionally, the corporate version should allow the corporate server to communicate on behalf of the clients. That way, I can block ICQ/AIM at my firewall, but allow the corporately supported client through.
Do that, and Jabber takes a REAL foothold. Make the corporate version license access to AIM/ICQ servers (cobranded perhaps) so there isn't a risk of it breaking.
Corporate America is NOT happy with AIM/ICQ. ICQ Groupware dying was a shame. There needs to be a real solution, and there is money to be made in this space. AOL with it's FCC agreement would likely jump at this, they could get revenue to cover costs. The Open Source community gets Jabber to NOT be harassed, and corporate America gets a real communicative tool.
You have zero right to go to Yahoo and purchase pornography. Nobody had ANY right to post OT III, a copyrighted document, to Slashdot's site.
These are not rights.
Yes, this was astroturf, and they should know better.
BTW: for those who aren't political junkies, a layman's def. of astroturf. Well, when people act, it is grass-roots, right? So grass-roots lobbying involves inflaming people to get them involved and cause fear. You generate a genuine interest, perhaps enough to shift opinion polls 5-10 points. This terrifies politicians, because that is a margin of victory. Astroturf = fake grass roots. Nobody actually cares, but a handful of people make a lot of noise and TRY to pretend to have grassroots support. They make no change in the numbers or the poll results, but they generate a lot of letters/emails.
However, I think that we should support the AFA's right to freedom of expression. The AFA is entitled to its opinion, as are the members of it (actual people, not conceptual people, they just don't share your views).
Yahoo realized (correctly, IMO), that porn sales through Yahoo may or may not make a lot of money. However, tarnishing their brand would not be worth it. Yahoo is seen as the nice way to reach the Internet. If this group and others like it boycott Yahoo, etc., then Yahoo is in trouble.
Quick show of hands, of all you libertarian, "open-minded", anti-religion Slashdotters, how many of you go to Yahoo?
In middle America, G-d-fearing country, these are Yahoo's users. Offending their target market to please people that won't use their products? Not a good plan.
Now, I would argue that Yahoo gets a LOT of searches for sex from the unknowing, and they need to profit off that. However, tarnishing their brand is wrong. While the same people might protest the sex site and use it, you don't offend those people by attaching your brand to sex.
You must have missed the memo, this violates Slashdot orthodoxy.
Yes, freedom is preached here. However, this isn't what Slashdot means by freedom.
Freedom = freedom from responsibility (there should be no consequences to your actions, harming others is okay if it is for exploration, disregard of the law if you find it inconvenient, and you shouldn't be held responsible for your affects on society if it is to make you happy)
Freedom to source code. This is the single most important thing. Free Speech is only useful because it provide an analogy for Free Software.
Freedom to server their interests. Nobody else matters. The DMCA is the single most pressing issue in America. Taxation, size of government, world hunger, these are not important, ALL that matters is fair use.
Oh, and Freedom only applies to poor people. Wealthy individuals/corporations have an obligation to do what Slashdot wants.
I hope that in your next post, you will remember that.
For violating Slashdot orthodoxy and providing a contrary opinion, I sentance you to -1, troll. I'll go look for someone who followed the rules and posts the same thing as everyone else, I need to save my points to mod those up as insightful... Plus 2 points in reserve to mark as funny inane comments that make fun of Microsoft.
I have had nothing but good experiences with Compaq, but I don't touch their personal line. The iPaq desktops at the office, proliant servers, deskpro systems, they've all been terrific. Also, their support is top notch. I can call up at 3 AM, get a useful person on the phone, and if I need a part, they FedEx it out quickly. They've been tremendously helpful for all my systems.
Guys, if you want the R&D Tax Credit, you have to develop something new. Seeing what gets announced each day, the bulk of what goes on in "open source" land is the redevelopment of commercial products.
That isn't R&D anyway. The R&D credit is to encourage businesses to advance what the US can produce (I believe it stems from the economic crisis of the 70s, but it might be a bit earlier), not to write software designed to take away the revenue stream of a company in the economy.
I truly doubt that most stuff that comes out open source would qualify anyway. However, this makes sense, the truly novel and interesting stuff is often sold under a commercial license, even by people that mostly deal in Open Source.
Until recently, I could never afford anything close to a recent machine. And when I replaced my computer's guys recently, I only sprung for the Athlon 750 to save a few hundred bucks.
I never got to play Doom, Quake, etc., because my computer was always far from state of the art. When the Pentiums started shipping, we finally got a 486 (had a 286 when the 386 launched, a 386 when the 486 launched, etc). As a result, I couldn't play the recent games and always craved new hardware.
Now, I could play most of my games on my K6-3 450 that I finally replaced and the main reason for the new system is Office 2000, and even that ran reasonably.
At my office, we have the iPaq computers from Compaq with Celeron 466 processors, and everyone is happy with them.
There isn't anything pulling us to faster machines. I don't mean bloated code, like the author, there is no exciting new applications. IE 5.5 will run on a 486 w/ Win95, it doesn't tax anything near current.
Part of this is Intel's fault. By making the PII/PIII simply rehashed Pentium Pros, we're still sitting on what, 6 year old technology (ignoring the P4-currently useless system). The difference in performance from a P3-1Ghz and a PPro-200 is less than the 5 fold the system would indicate, it's maybe 2.5-3 times faster. But with the fast video cards, we can push some envelopes.
However, I guess if the current tech is good enough, why risk lowered sales. Besides, there what the author forgets is some of the economics behind this.
When the games for the 386 were running great on 486s, developers were paying a BIG price premium for 486s to develop for the consumer 386. Now we all use the same system and there isn't a BIG premium on CPUs...
Until 3 weeks ago, there was no large shipping operating system supporting OpenSTEP like APIs. Well, that started to change on March 24. If a handful of programmers realize the power of the Cocoa environment, we'll see the sucker improving. However, with NeXT basically dead, OpenSTEP marginalized, and then it completely disappearing while Apply worked on OS X, there was no incentive other than porting old NeXTSTEP code.
Now there is.
There needs to be a common API for writing applications for the UNIX workstation market. Within 6 months, the market leader in that space will be Apple.
Either get Trolltech to port QT to Quartz (and then the KDR extentions), or port GTK+ to Quartz, or port Cocoa (via GnuSTEP) to X-Windows.
Either way, Linux/FreeBSD/MacOS X are a natural alliance. The combined desktop marketshare is much more worthwhile to port to than any of them individually.
Mostly first-person shooters (which I don't like). But when we did a 1 weeks party for Baldur's Gate, that was cool. (I was home on Winter Break, and we set up a room in my house for the LAN party. We had four computers going round the clock, and people would come and go, create a character, and join the mayhem. People would even NPC their chars to take a nap.
I also like wargame LAN parties, but those are harder to come by.
Slashdot Mirror
It was a technical announcement.
You must to this, we apologize, your accounts now work with features X and Y...
There was a more salesy one that went out to the people that were interested.
I'm glad for this article, I understand California's laws better. I wish I still had the original e-mail, I'd post it to get feedback on it.
Alex
Which is essentially what I did. I think we announced the new features at the bottom of the e-mail, but it was a technically focused e-mail, not a salesy one.
Sometimes you actually need to get announcements out. We were running an early version of a client's website, and we had a problem with the client massively changing the system. We had to scrap the old user accounts, so we e-mailled everybody.
Under this kind of judgement, we'd have been considered spamming.
What should I have done?
Sometimes you need to send out announcements. It wasn't like Kozmo was sending you a weekly newsletter, they needed to send an e-mail.
I agree with the posts that this wasn't real scummy spamming.
I don't know why Kozmo did this, but I think that you blew one e-mail WAY out of proportion.
Alex
The Open Source proponents of depliticizing the movement and making it open to business is failling. Everyone is coming off as a hippie communist looking to take stuff from others.
This is beyond bizarre. AOL runs a group of expensive servers and has told you to use their client. You CAN'T even claim interoperability, there IS a Linux client, and there IS a Java Express Client, and the tickle client floating around.
They have made every effort to have a compatible client available for you.
The fact that you would prefer your own doesn't give you a right to their services.
However, by showing that we won't respect the law nor attempts at technical limitations, you discredit all of us. For those of us trying to win adoption for Open Source tools and platforms, stuff like this is a huge step back.
We're not sure if this is legal, but we think we might have finally found a loophole.
Congratulations, you have violated ehd spirit of the law but not the letter. That doesn't make you a moral person.
And immoral behavior is not acceptable because the victim is a corporation.
My point is, while they attract advertisers, the rates are lower and the quality of the advertisements is lower.
My concern is that one of the few extremely affordable forms of entertainment may get hurt significantly. Even if it remains, the quality will be a fraction of what it is now.
Alex
I'm also an MCSE, it's nice to have a variety. :)
:)
Exchange is fine, it just doesn't scale all that well. If you're running a single box for 5-25 people or so, it works nicely.
Again, it's easy to set up, and that counts for something.
I'm not a sysadmin. I can do some basic sysadmining on a Unix box, but I mostly do development. However, I can setup a reasonably MS network.
For a home network, I want easy to do, not needing a full-time job to run.
Besides, I like playing with Exchange. I find it's unintuitive stuff "interesting".
Alex
I don't believe that it is anywhere close to 85% of the population getting their TV from cable/DBS. Last I heard/read, about 50%-60% of the country was capable of getting cable. I have no idea what the adoption rate is among people that CAN get it. You forget how much of this country isn't in urban/suburban areas.
The proportion of viewership going to the networks has been on the decline, but that is a consequence of more channels. Initially, the cable (and non-affiliated TV channels) were just knock-offs of networks and relatively useless, however the expansion of cable has resulted in a lot of specialized channels.
This has resulted in a bunch of specialized cable channels with poorer "quality" programming, while better for the viewers because it is what they want. Take the Sci-Fi channel, the shows are great fun, but the acting and effects are horrendous, because of the smaller budgets.
The death of local television would be a tradgedy. Admittedly, syndication has mostly killed independents already (they all show the same old shows), but at least local news remains. The death of the local community is a very dangerous things for the United States, socially and politically. The more homogenized the country gets, the more the political institutions will collapse.
What do I mean? The American system is designed to be stable, not representative. There are HUGE seat bonuses. For example, if one party were to get 51% of EACH congressional race, they would have 100% control of Congress. The seat bonus (disproportionate power/voter supporting you based on smaller margins) becomes a bigger and bigger problem as the country loses regional differences.
Additionally, there is something to be said for diversity. I rather like the fact that visiting my family in Ft. Lauderdale, taking a trip to New Orleans, hanging out in Boston, or driving down to New York City gives me a wide range of experience. Further destroying boundaries helps undo this.
Besides, to improve we need a constant influx of new ideas. If we didn't have California doing screwy things all the time, there'd be nobody challenging the status quo.
I agree that this is happening regardless, but there are REAL social impacts of what is going on that Slashdot whiners screaming about their rights won't help.
Alex
The man makes a few good points, even if he doesn't realize it. There is a real problem with TiVo/ReplayTV devices.
Before y'all go off on your high horse about your right to everything, realize that there actually IS more to this world than your rights.
I used to study Philosophy. One of Kant's concepts (the Categorical Imperative, I believe was an undefined universal truth that he couldn't define, but he knew some criteria, such as this one) was some universality.
For an event to be moral, it must be able to be universally applied. In otherwords, if everyone did it, things would be okay. From this arguement, suicide is immoral, because universal suicide means no humans. I won't dispute your "right" to use these devices. It's a stupid arguement. Anyone citing Betamax is EXTREMELY foolish. Your RIGHTS aren't determined by Supreme Court rulings, they are endowed by the Creator, the SCOTUS just bitch-slaps the President and Congress when they overstep their bounds and figures out whose side the law favors when Congress and the White House actually behaved. If you have a "right" to do this, it is because you are exercizing your Rights to Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness without harming the rights of another, NOT because of Betamax.
However, there is a more important question. What happens if everyone who currently owns a VCR (95% of homes with televisions I believe) gets one of these devices. While a VCR CAN record the programs and skip commercials, most people don't do this. I program computers for a living and find setting up my VCR to record a show automatically a REAL pain in the ass. I'll hit the record button, but dealing with the VCR is rarely worth it.
However, what happens if everyone adopts these. Right now, most programming is paid for entirely from advertising revenue. With these devices, advertising revenue WILL drop (lett people watching, etc.). This will lessen the quantity of quality programming provided by the networks.
Of course the advertising companies and television studios will need to adapt to stay in business. Y'all haven't impressed us as business experts by stating that companies need to figure out how to make money to be in business.
The point is, the networks have a product that in the status quo provides entertainment at a very low price point. As someone who went a few months without cable when finances were tight, I appreciated the fact that I could get a few decent shows from the networks.
Keep in mind that these devices will always be tilted towards the well-to-do. You guys with $3000 gaming computers, digital cable/satellite systems, every gaming console, a DVD player and surround sound system, etc., may have millions of options for entertainment.
However, for a working class family of four surviving on $40,000/yr (slightly OVER the median income), a $30 night out to see a movie with a family isn't always an option, and buying hundreds of channels may not be.
Either television as we know it will die from these devices or what's left will be much lower quality because of less revenue. Now television may have near zero artisitic value, be corrupting the movie studios, and allowing parents to neglect their children, but it is also an affordable form of entertainment. For the blue-collar worker that is now priced out of going to see his home-town football team, he can still see the game. The low price point of television means that even the poorest Americans can afford a set.
What, you say, then television will remain for them? Don't be so sure. Pull the big money people out of watching ads with Tivo, and Lexus and Mercedes STOP running ads. This lowers the demand for advertising. As you move down the income brackets and allow them to avoid commercials with Tivo, there are fewer companies desiring ads. Keep in mind, there isn't a desire to reach the poorest individuals with ads, they are looking for middle-to-upper income individuals.
Don't believe me? Watch your favorite high-brow show (Frasier?) and look at the advertisements.
Then watch the XFL or Wrestling, look at the advertisements.
Which show gets a more expensive product advertising? Which one likely gets more for it's ad space. As a result, which one gets the expensive to produce ads.
There are social consequences to your actions. Screaming and yelling about your right to do anything you want doesn't change that. Yes, fundamentally, you should have a right to take any signal delivered to you and do what you want (cable descramblers, satellite "piracy", etc.). However, there is a social cost. Yes, the technically proficient and the dedicated can still get descramblers with no problem. But without the laws against them, EVERYONE would have gotten them and premier cable would have either died or required VERY expensive technical solutions.
Yes, a few people skimming off the pot (taking television without commericials, premieum cable without paying, etc.) doesn't make a difference, but large scale would.
Yes, I want a Tivo, but I also acknowledge that while I'm within my rights, there ARE social consequences.
In reality, people should have a fundamental right to do whatever they want with their signal. However, you have to realize, that there is more at stake than this.
Why?
Your fair use rights are meaningless without content.
Take away the revenue stream, and you won't get ANY content that you can "fairly use."
Copyright is a compromise.
While people might create artistic works without compensation, television production is expensive, and can't be done without a revenue source.
Oh well, I guess NBC will have to expect to provide programming without any revenue from it directly and try to sell T-shirts.
Alex
Yeah, winbind was the "needed feature" for SAMBA. Hopefully this makes SAMBA a real solution instead of a quick Hack. I liked SAMBA as a way to access my Unix boxes, but I hated trying to use it as a real File/Print Server. Now it may be a solution to the never ending need for more NT servers.
Alex
You probably want to consider a firewall solution and your NOSes as well. Despite this being Slashdot, I would assume that all of these environments will have a Windows machine and some will have a Macintosh. Keep this in mind for the design. You will likely want to be able to use a system where you can log in from anywhere, get your e-mail, etc. This means that you want a server centric approach.
If you have the budget, consider a real machine for your central server. (By real machine I mean a server with RAID array, not a HP-UX box) I'd spend the extra for a Compaq Proliant, they'll make your life easier, but you can certainly build your own. If you run Windows machines for gaming, etc., then plop NT on there... I prefer NT4, but Win2K will work as well. Setting up the basic system will be easy. If you are more of a geek, you can of course do this with Linux/BSD/Solaris.
Essentially, you want a unified logon system, at least for the primary machines. Also, consider buying licenses of Virtual CD. It will let you put your games CDs on the central server and therefore available to everyone. Setting up an NT4 Domain is trivial, and if the machines are all Windows and Linux, you're golden, just mount the share points, and go.
Make sure you get the RAID 5 system. This way, you store all your data on the server and back it up to tape. Most people don't really backup their machines because it is a pain. If all you need to do is swap a tape once a week, you can do it easily, and you won't need to worry about data loss.
If you do the LAN party thing, pick a room that is setup for it. If you got a big house in the burbs, you should have an adequate Den. Consider wiring up little stations. If you want to be fancy, pick up a bunch of 17" monitors from someone liquidating them. Then you have the stations setup and wired, and your friends just plug in.
Firewall. Don't mess with a 486 and two NICs, you'll go nuts. But one of the prebuilt boxes that will route for you. Most of those will also handle your DHCP needs. However, you could also run DHCP off your server.
You need a mail server. If you're loaded or "borrow" a copy from the Office, Exchange is nice Overkill. Reasonably, you just want an IMAP system. Although, if price is no object, you could go nuts here. With the Exchange Server, you can log in from any computer and yours tasks, calendar, etc., are there waitting for you. Although, if you already a nice work e-mail and don't want to mess with local, this is unnecessary.
Routing: do you VPN in to the office? Does your Spouse/Roommate?
You could make life easy (if insecure) and setup a machine as a router. Make this machine the default gateway, and have it maintain your VPN sessions. As long as the offices and your internal IP scheme don't match, you can have LOTS of fun here. If you use Linux, I don't know how to help, but NT/W2K has a registry hack to not shut down dial-ups when you log out. You could have this box route for your offices. And if the IT boys will be helpful, you could have your WINS information pulled from the office computer. In this regard, your home network is on all of your office networks.
Now obviously this is a security risk, but a fun idea regardless...
Wireless... Obviously you need wireless. If you have a laptop, you want it. If any friends do, you want it. The 100MB connection is great for moving large files around, but to just get your Internet access and load files, 11MB is fine. Get enough access points if your house is large.
Now, there is a question as to the usefulness of their security. If you are worried, place the Wireless outside the firewall. Then, put a VPN server in. Use the VPN software on the laptop to have another layer of encryption. This is actually important if you are routing for your VPN networks.
Internet access: DSL or Cable, or if you're snazzy, both. You'd create more of a routing headache, but you eliminate the risk of the network being down. You have those SOHO routers for each connection, then your internal router/proxy divide the load.
Ok, back to earning a paycheck.
Alex
My boxes are all running SAMBA bound to an internal NIC, which lets me manage them from my Windows workstations. Whether I'm logged in at the office or VPN'ing in, I can reach my OpenBSD boxes and update websites, develop, etc.
I have the SAMBA servers as part of the domain, but it is a hacky solution. I map everyone's NT Domain name to a UNIX name, and they can access the appropriate files.
NT Domain integration was always a little strange. With SAMBA 2.2, the issues should be much cleaner. ACcording to the release, I don't need to create Unix AND NT users, I can just grant access to my NT Domains. This was theoretically possible before with pam_smb (or smb_pam) but was always a confusing mess.
Also, even if I need to create accounts for the users that log in, not having to create accounts for the users that ONLY access via SMB will be a blessing. Not having a bunch of accounts with shell false just to support SAMBA will make life easier.
Adding an NT File Server is a joke, I plug it in, join the domain, create local groups (if I want) and share files with the permissions. Easy as pie.
Doing the same on SAMBA was a pain because I needed to give each user a UNIX account. This meant that a server for 5-10 people was fine, but trying to give an arbitrary group access to the machine was a nightmare.
This will be a tremendous release, and I look forward to putting it on test servers soon and deploying it in production in the next few months.
Alex
Why do you attack you fans? Why do you embarass us? Why do you make all of us that defend you feel stupid? Why?
Who cares about lousy Themes? Why must you guys always come across as jerks?
Put someone in charge of the legal department from PR, ask not if you can win the case, but ask if this action helps Apple.
Why?
Yeah, groupware is hidden and hasn't been updated since 1998, the last time a new "beta" game out. It doesn't do what it should. It has a special groupware client that is a stripped down version of their client from '98, and it isn't clear if you can run the real client and connect to it.
It seems kind of awkward in it's handling of things. We were playing with it for corporate use, mostly so people could swap messages/URLs and startup Netmeeting conversations.
Unfortunately, the system was never polished. I couldn't figure out a way to strip down the listed helper apps for installation, and doing that at each desk would suck. It became a backburner project before I could do anything useful with it.
ICQ had plans to be a business. AOL gobbled them up, and AOL has never had much interest in moving out of the consumer space.
I tried Exchange 5.5 Chat Server, it blew hard core.
I tried Win2K Server, it blew hard core, I rolled back to NT4.
Thanks for the tip, but I haven't been impressed with the Exchange Group's Mac support, and I'm sure that their Linux and MacOS X support is non-existant. I do actually have a heterogenous environment, so I don't know if it works as well.
Alex
Grin I don't. A friend of mine used to work in their outsourced Presario group, I wouldn't dare trust THAT support group. Good friend, but a screwball. They have a group in S. Florida of random kids that know computers and have drug problems.
However, I have called Compaq twice in the middle of the night with technical problems, and I was quite happy with the service I received. We were having problems getting rackmounting kits for our NON-Compaq servers, and they shipped out, overnight, kits for their machines that helped our problems.
Their support has made me a loyal customer, and I am happy to say so. Dell on the otherhand, has shown itself to be worthless to me. We had their paid next-day service, and it took me 5 days of 2hr+ hold times to get someone to actually come out, and he screwed it up anyways.
I'll never buy another Dell product, and I'll always get my NT servers from Compaq.
Alex
I'm not supporting the view. I am however supporting Yahoo's decision to not alienate a core product. Yahoo should not be marketing and selling pornography and trying to market itself as the friendly face of the Internet.
They should redirect all the traffic they want and do it under another name. The Yahoo brand has value.
Anecdotal evidence: My girlfriend is reasonably intelligent, pretty savvy Internet user. She was looking for some specific hair gel or whatever online, and saw one of them was a Yahoo store. She figured that it seemed reputable because of Yahoo's name. I laughed and explained what Yahoo store was.
However, she made a purchase because Yahoo being in the name lent it credibility. They shouldn't try to leverage the name in the pornography business.
America is a very religious, Christian country. I myself are neither extremely religious, nor a Christian. However, I understand and respect that a large portion of this country is in this group.
Doing something that would tarnish your name to this crew is silly.
My other point, I hit Yahoo maybe 2-3 times a week, it is occaisionally useful for finding corporate sites quicker than google. I bet that I hit Yahoo a LOT more often then most Slashdot users.
This is NOT the core demographic. This group will never use Yahoo, and certainly won't buy porn there (I guarantee that most users that traffic in porn here find free stuff via IRC or use hacked password lists). Yahoo pleasing this crowd is silly, as it is extremely unlikely to put its money where it's mouth is. Indeed, even companies that FULLY support Linux (VMWare) feel the wrath of the open source community that wants to rewrite their product and give it away. There is no way to extract money from this crowd. Even hardware is a tough sell, as they are convinced they can pricewatch it cheaper.
I think that Yahoo made the right decision.
This wasn't a troll. I thought it was funny. I liked her comment, thought it was on the money and the most useful comment that I had read in a while.
I posted in with my name on it, my company name, etc., hardly trolling. However, have no fear, the moderaters took it as such and knocked it down.
However, I was amused in writing it, even if my typos and grammatical errors made it a bit gross.
I don't really want to discuss the merits of trolling, but I thought that I'd comment on my take of the Slashdot viewpoint as of late.
Alex
IM compatibility is nice, and necessary, but isn't the secret to Jabber.
Jabber needs real clients (i.e. Win32 and Mac) that don't suck, and people are comfortable with. It needs the power of ICQ with the simplicity of AIM. It also needs moron proof servers.
This is the key point. The majority of computers are still in the corporate sector. We all use ICQ and AIM for communication, and nobody is happy about it. Some companies have tried to block AIM as a security risk (you can send corporate information out without any log of it), but found that it became key to the company's communication.
A real system where I could communicate externally but have a special internal system would be helpful.
Now, the real solution, IMO, is a Open Source/Corporate combo. In that scenario, there is a freely available public product that is really good. However, there should be a commercial (but inexpensive, IT budgets have gotten tighter) product that works with an internal server that is easy to install. Additionally, include an Admin kit so companies can configure what is allowed.
For example, if I could only allow people to send URLs and text externally, but files internally, that would be a useful collaborative tool. That let's them communicate/goof off/whatever, while not exposing my company except internally. This would also take the load off my e-mail servers.
Additionally, the corporate version should allow the corporate server to communicate on behalf of the clients. That way, I can block ICQ/AIM at my firewall, but allow the corporately supported client through.
Do that, and Jabber takes a REAL foothold. Make the corporate version license access to AIM/ICQ servers (cobranded perhaps) so there isn't a risk of it breaking.
Corporate America is NOT happy with AIM/ICQ. ICQ Groupware dying was a shame. There needs to be a real solution, and there is money to be made in this space. AOL with it's FCC agreement would likely jump at this, they could get revenue to cover costs. The Open Source community gets Jabber to NOT be harassed, and corporate America gets a real communicative tool.
Alex
You have zero right to go to Yahoo and purchase pornography. Nobody had ANY right to post OT III, a copyrighted document, to Slashdot's site.
These are not rights.
Yes, this was astroturf, and they should know better.
BTW: for those who aren't political junkies, a layman's def. of astroturf. Well, when people act, it is grass-roots, right? So grass-roots lobbying involves inflaming people to get them involved and cause fear. You generate a genuine interest, perhaps enough to shift opinion polls 5-10 points. This terrifies politicians, because that is a margin of victory. Astroturf = fake grass roots. Nobody actually cares, but a handful of people make a lot of noise and TRY to pretend to have grassroots support. They make no change in the numbers or the poll results, but they generate a lot of letters/emails.
However, I think that we should support the AFA's right to freedom of expression. The AFA is entitled to its opinion, as are the members of it (actual people, not conceptual people, they just don't share your views).
Yahoo realized (correctly, IMO), that porn sales through Yahoo may or may not make a lot of money. However, tarnishing their brand would not be worth it. Yahoo is seen as the nice way to reach the Internet. If this group and others like it boycott Yahoo, etc., then Yahoo is in trouble.
Quick show of hands, of all you libertarian, "open-minded", anti-religion Slashdotters, how many of you go to Yahoo?
In middle America, G-d-fearing country, these are Yahoo's users. Offending their target market to please people that won't use their products? Not a good plan.
Now, I would argue that Yahoo gets a LOT of searches for sex from the unknowing, and they need to profit off that. However, tarnishing their brand is wrong. While the same people might protest the sex site and use it, you don't offend those people by attaching your brand to sex.
Keep it separate.
You must have missed the memo, this violates Slashdot orthodoxy.
Yes, freedom is preached here. However, this isn't what Slashdot means by freedom.
Freedom = freedom from responsibility (there should be no consequences to your actions, harming others is okay if it is for exploration, disregard of the law if you find it inconvenient, and you shouldn't be held responsible for your affects on society if it is to make you happy)
Freedom to source code. This is the single most important thing. Free Speech is only useful because it provide an analogy for Free Software.
Freedom to server their interests. Nobody else matters. The DMCA is the single most pressing issue in America. Taxation, size of government, world hunger, these are not important, ALL that matters is fair use.
Oh, and Freedom only applies to poor people. Wealthy individuals/corporations have an obligation to do what Slashdot wants.
I hope that in your next post, you will remember that.
For violating Slashdot orthodoxy and providing a contrary opinion, I sentance you to -1, troll. I'll go look for someone who followed the rules and posts the same thing as everyone else, I need to save my points to mod those up as insightful... Plus 2 points in reserve to mark as funny inane comments that make fun of Microsoft.
I have had nothing but good experiences with Compaq, but I don't touch their personal line. The iPaq desktops at the office, proliant servers, deskpro systems, they've all been terrific. Also, their support is top notch. I can call up at 3 AM, get a useful person on the phone, and if I need a part, they FedEx it out quickly. They've been tremendously helpful for all my systems.
Alex
Guys, if you want the R&D Tax Credit, you have to develop something new. Seeing what gets announced each day, the bulk of what goes on in "open source" land is the redevelopment of commercial products.
That isn't R&D anyway. The R&D credit is to encourage businesses to advance what the US can produce (I believe it stems from the economic crisis of the 70s, but it might be a bit earlier), not to write software designed to take away the revenue stream of a company in the economy.
I truly doubt that most stuff that comes out open source would qualify anyway. However, this makes sense, the truly novel and interesting stuff is often sold under a commercial license, even by people that mostly deal in Open Source.
Alex
Until recently, I could never afford anything close to a recent machine. And when I replaced my computer's guys recently, I only sprung for the Athlon 750 to save a few hundred bucks.
I never got to play Doom, Quake, etc., because my computer was always far from state of the art. When the Pentiums started shipping, we finally got a 486 (had a 286 when the 386 launched, a 386 when the 486 launched, etc). As a result, I couldn't play the recent games and always craved new hardware.
Now, I could play most of my games on my K6-3 450 that I finally replaced and the main reason for the new system is Office 2000, and even that ran reasonably.
At my office, we have the iPaq computers from Compaq with Celeron 466 processors, and everyone is happy with them.
There isn't anything pulling us to faster machines. I don't mean bloated code, like the author, there is no exciting new applications. IE 5.5 will run on a 486 w/ Win95, it doesn't tax anything near current.
Part of this is Intel's fault. By making the PII/PIII simply rehashed Pentium Pros, we're still sitting on what, 6 year old technology (ignoring the P4-currently useless system). The difference in performance from a P3-1Ghz and a PPro-200 is less than the 5 fold the system would indicate, it's maybe 2.5-3 times faster. But with the fast video cards, we can push some envelopes.
However, I guess if the current tech is good enough, why risk lowered sales. Besides, there what the author forgets is some of the economics behind this.
When the games for the 386 were running great on 486s, developers were paying a BIG price premium for 486s to develop for the consumer 386. Now we all use the same system and there isn't a BIG premium on CPUs...
Until 3 weeks ago, there was no large shipping operating system supporting OpenSTEP like APIs. Well, that started to change on March 24. If a handful of programmers realize the power of the Cocoa environment, we'll see the sucker improving. However, with NeXT basically dead, OpenSTEP marginalized, and then it completely disappearing while Apply worked on OS X, there was no incentive other than porting old NeXTSTEP code.
Now there is.
There needs to be a common API for writing applications for the UNIX workstation market. Within 6 months, the market leader in that space will be Apple.
Either get Trolltech to port QT to Quartz (and then the KDR extentions), or port GTK+ to Quartz, or port Cocoa (via GnuSTEP) to X-Windows.
Either way, Linux/FreeBSD/MacOS X are a natural alliance. The combined desktop marketshare is much more worthwhile to port to than any of them individually.
Alex
Mostly first-person shooters (which I don't like). But when we did a 1 weeks party for Baldur's Gate, that was cool. (I was home on Winter Break, and we set up a room in my house for the LAN party. We had four computers going round the clock, and people would come and go, create a character, and join the mayhem. People would even NPC their chars to take a nap.
I also like wargame LAN parties, but those are harder to come by.
I have seen girls at them... but it's rare.
Alex