A classic example of idiot moderation. I just took two karma away from two idiots.
This isn't a troll, and it isn't flamebait; you may disagree with it, but it's a legitimate technical opinion.
It's arguable (I don't think Slashdot is anywhere near the slowest site on the net), but it does crash frequently, and MySQL is probably a contributing factor in this.
It's got abrasively-presented technical opinions in it (Apache garbage? That's a bit extreme) but they're all defensible positions.
They say they have "software" that detects intrusions. That doesn't seem to imply much about tracking you down to the square foot.
OTOH, I don't recall ever seeing a laptop, so you'll stick out like a sore thumb unless you're in the bathroom with a PDA.
They do search bags currently. ALL bags, even diaper bags.
Also, there's an active Linux community among their IT people. There are definitely pockets of clue there, and it's likely that would extend to their IT security people as well.
That's assuming they can go elsewhere. Remember in a lot of areas there is only 1 high speed access provider for home users.
Part of the reason @Home is going under is because a lot of people, believe it or not, are going back to dial-up.
Remember, if you're reading this message, you are by definition not normal. Normal people can live without broadband, they'd just prefer not to, all things being equal. When all things stop being equal, some normal people would rather pay $20 (or $9) a month for 56K that works than pay $40 a month for 128K or 512K or etc. that doesn't.
Whether that's because of better technical support or whatever reason, it's happening. I think it was even mentioned recently on/.
Now people are recognising some of the benefits of available source code, they're not seeing the important difference between open source and free software (in GNU terms).
You are assuming that the fact that they are not adopting the GPL is proof that they don't understand the difference between Free Software and Open Source.
I suggest that the fact that companies have begun exploring other licenses is proof that they DO finally understand that difference.
They're trying to find a balance between the anti-capitalist FSF position, and the flaming they'd take for using a BSD-style license.
Right, then they should charge you for the amount of bandwidth you actually use, regardless of how many different machines are connected.
Then a large percentage of their users would go elsewhere.
Same thing happened with dialup ISPs; even AOL had to offer flat-rate plans to compete.
Most people in the US don't want metered charges, they want flat rates. They don't want to have to think about their usage patterns.
Cell phones are an exception, but metered charges there are the reason they took off faster in Europe than the US; people in Europe are used to metered phone charges.
O'Reilley supports the rule of copyright law over software. This is not libertarianism.
What? Most Libertarians quite firmly believe that it is appropriate to exercise property rights over one's intellectual output, and that people are free to contract their rights away to others in any way they choose, which necessarily (assuming the precept that intellectual property is property) includes things like software licensing.
If you don't think Libertarians believe in IP rights, you need to spend a little more time reading about the things they believe.
You'll note that everything on the web page is copyrighted, not copylefted.
The Libertarian Party doesn't have an official position on the GPL, but I can assure you that if they did, it wouldn't be in favor of mandating it's use.
For most people, all that this will do is cause them a flood of email about minutiae for which they have no context.
I would rate Kernel Traffic much higher on the "best way to keep up with what's happening in the kernel" scale for anybody who's not actually contributing code to the kernel. Even experienced C coders, if they aren't ass-deep in the kernel for other reasons.
Just like Wil tried to vote off Robert, the brightest of the bunch.
Have you met Robert? He's an asshole, I'd have voted him off too.
I wonder if Roxann Dawson was really pissed off, or if she too was playing a bit that fell flat there at the end when she complained about Wil hitting on her. It could be either, because Wil did come off a bit too strong on that "little bit in love" comment.
voila, wget now thinks it's observing robots.txt, but robots.txt is a zero-length file, and it can't overwrite it because only root can write to that file...
In all of this, RMS has been a constant - he promotes Free Software.
While that's probably nice if you support Free Software, it may come as a shock to you that not everybody does. The Open Source movement is rather large and rather well known, and is NOT the same thing, as RMS himself will tell you at length if you ask him.
IMHO, RMS deserves a place on that board solely because of his constancy and vision.
This is like saying that the NAACP should have David Duke on their board. Not that I'm comparing Stallman's position with Duke's, but clearly extreme positions should not always automatically qualify one for board positions. There's a very big difference between listening to what someone has to say (and I think we should listen to Stallman, for very much the same reasons I read Marx) without putting him into a position of leadership on a project that directly touches so many businesses that he dislikes (for much the same reasons I wouldn't vote for Monica Moorehead for President. Or Congress. Or School Board. Or Dog Catcher.)
I can admire Stallman's purity of purpose without agreeing that his goal is admirable. I can value his input as an extreme stance without wishing to have decisions that affect me made according to it.
If I were a devotee of the Free Software movement I might very well feel differently. But I'm pro-Open Source, thankyouverymuch, and wouldn't vote for Stallman for any office of which I can presently think.
What happened to choosing the best software that does the task that I require it to do?
Stallman has always been opposed to that. That's not news.
If you stop attempting to reconcile Stallman's views with Capitalist society, you'll be a lot closer to understanding him.
Ultimately, what is best for the users is what the users want.
Amen. And for some users, that's going to be Free Software. For some, it's going to be Open Source. For some, it's going to be Proprietary Software.
In a world where Stallman isn't in charge, we get to choose between these three and many others.
Unless McAfee has drastically changed the operating model of their software since I last used it (which would be 8 days ago, since I'm on vacation), you are completely wrong about what they do or do not detect.
It's still based on signatures, not operating patterns.
Perhaps in your situation, but there are likely users for whom that is NOT the case.
Think large enterprises which have huge databases.
Right, like us. These databases are multi-terabyte. There are only a hundred and change larger businesses than us in the world. We've got more IT employees than many large telecommunications firms, and more airplanes than all but one of the largest airlines in the world.
I'm talking about FedEx, and the DBAs in question work on the largest projects in the company, including the one that does all the billing for FedEx Express.
They're quite adamant about the performance of the latest Oracle on cooked vs. raw.
Is everybody forgetting that part of Wolfe's task on DS9 was to make it more action-oriented, and easier to "follow" for the masses?
Like it or not, it's a fact that if the masses don't like it, it doesn't make much money, and if it doesn't make enough money to justify airing it instead of something more marketable, we don't get to see it at all.
Action-oriented? Little continuity of plot? Sounds like the original Star Trek to me...
raw access to block devices (oracle was hot on this i think)
Our DBAs tell me that under the latest versions of Oracle, there is no performance increase on raw versus cooked partitions, and that it's therefore not worth the trouble anymore.
Re:By your silly definition, Mr. Editor,
on
Freedom or Power?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I think what Stallman really means is who has the power? You as teh developer or the user.
In other words, the guy who did the work, or somebody else with whom he chose to share?
Stallman's logic is that the world would be better if we didn't get paid for our work. Like all Communists, he thinks the economy is a zero sum game, in which the current level of wealth could be distributed equally to all and all would be comfortable.
It doesn't occur to him that if it weren't for proprietary licenses, computing would still be in the "Altair box I built in my basement" level for the masses, I.E., the masses ain't got it.
His kind of freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose; nothing of any value, anyway.
The PC hardware which is his primary platform, and which allowed the growth of the low-cost market that is the primary user of his software, wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for Microsoft. They suck, and I don't chose to use their software, but nevertheless I wouldn't have this Linux laptop on which I type this if IBM hadn't had a market to sell it to in sufficent quantity to justify making it and charging a price I could afford, and THAT market chooses Windows every day.
Fortunately the people of the US aren't nuts enough to elect legislators that would enact Stallman's ridiculous agenda. The intelligent stance in computing is to use the right tool for the job, whether that's a processor, a compiler, and OS, or a license.
Hopefully, the folks who kneejerk respond to stories about similar abuses in the US with "hah hah, the US sucks, come live in a real country" will keep this and similar problems (such as the French encryption policies and Yahoo lawsuit) in mind.
The Internet is shaking up the status quo globally, and the assaults on our freedom of speech to stop it are similarly global. If the US removes it's citizens' freedom, it affects you, whether you're in Georgia the state or Georgia the country.
This shows why it's imperative that the US promote free trade with China and every other nation not actively inimicable to us, and why it's completely unnecessary that we establish a pro-US government in Afghanistan; we merely need to remove the anti-US government and back off. Repeat as necessary.
If they aren't attacking our people, back off and leave 'em alone. If they are, destroy them, and let their people sort out the relacement themselves.
The best defense is a lack of enemies. That means don't create enemies, and once you have them, eliminate them.
It's not surprising that you think this. It's a common naive misconception in the Free Software community.
Understand, people; programmers work on Open Source either because they're paid to by a company that can benefit from it, or because they're scratching an itch. You don't have time to scratch an itch if there's not food on the table, and most programmers (and I mean the vast, vast majority, probably in excess of 90%) put food on the table by writing CLOSED SOFTWARE internally for corporations.
When reality doesn't agree with your preconceived notions, the smart thing to do isn't attempt to deny the reality; the smart thing to do is examine your preconceptions.
Trying to type an email on my nokia is impossible, unless these people come up with a better way to input text it really doesn't make since on a cellphone.
I do it every day. With my thumb. Without looking. In traffic.
Yeah, that's a great idea; every time I purchase something from someone who is also in the US, but happens to communicate with me via Internet links owned by US corporations instead of by telephone or snailmail, part of my money should be confiscated under force of arms and given to other countries' governmental officials, including those in military dictatorships such as Pakistan.
While you're at it, let's make the mouse give you a little shock every time you buy something, to discourage use of the Internet for commercial sales even more.
Slashdot Mirror
A classic example of idiot moderation. I just took two karma away from two idiots.
This isn't a troll, and it isn't flamebait; you may disagree with it, but it's a legitimate technical opinion.
It's arguable (I don't think Slashdot is anywhere near the slowest site on the net), but it does crash frequently, and MySQL is probably a contributing factor in this.
It's got abrasively-presented technical opinions in it (Apache garbage? That's a bit extreme) but they're all defensible positions.
Learn to moderate, or stop doing it, children.
They say they have "software" that detects intrusions. That doesn't seem to imply much about tracking you down to the square foot.
OTOH, I don't recall ever seeing a laptop, so you'll stick out like a sore thumb unless you're in the bathroom with a PDA.
They do search bags currently. ALL bags, even diaper bags.
Also, there's an active Linux community among their IT people. There are definitely pockets of clue there, and it's likely that would extend to their IT security people as well.
That's assuming they can go elsewhere. Remember in a lot of areas there is only 1 high speed access provider for home users.
/.
Part of the reason @Home is going under is because a lot of people, believe it or not, are going back to dial-up.
Remember, if you're reading this message, you are by definition not normal. Normal people can live without broadband, they'd just prefer not to, all things being equal. When all things stop being equal, some normal people would rather pay $20 (or $9) a month for 56K that works than pay $40 a month for 128K or 512K or etc. that doesn't.
Whether that's because of better technical support or whatever reason, it's happening. I think it was even mentioned recently on
Now people are recognising some of the benefits of available source code, they're not seeing the important difference between open source and free software (in GNU terms).
You are assuming that the fact that they are not adopting the GPL is proof that they don't understand the difference between Free Software and Open Source.
I suggest that the fact that companies have begun exploring other licenses is proof that they DO finally understand that difference.
They're trying to find a balance between the anti-capitalist FSF position, and the flaming they'd take for using a BSD-style license.
People should just get over their flat-rate obsession. It's not realistic.
People should get over lots of their obsessions. Expecting them to do so is not realistic.
Right, then they should charge you for the amount of bandwidth you actually use, regardless of how many different machines are connected.
Then a large percentage of their users would go elsewhere.
Same thing happened with dialup ISPs; even AOL had to offer flat-rate plans to compete.
Most people in the US don't want metered charges, they want flat rates. They don't want to have to think about their usage patterns.
Cell phones are an exception, but metered charges there are the reason they took off faster in Europe than the US; people in Europe are used to metered phone charges.
O'Reilley supports the rule of copyright law over software. This is not libertarianism.
What? Most Libertarians quite firmly believe that it is appropriate to exercise property rights over one's intellectual output, and that people are free to contract their rights away to others in any way they choose, which necessarily (assuming the precept that intellectual property is property) includes things like software licensing.
If you don't think Libertarians believe in IP rights, you need to spend a little more time reading about the things they believe.
You'll note that everything on the web page is copyrighted, not copylefted.
The Libertarian Party doesn't have an official position on the GPL, but I can assure you that if they did, it wouldn't be in favor of mandating it's use.
"Best" is an awfully loaded term.
For most people, all that this will do is cause them a flood of email about minutiae for which they have no context.
I would rate Kernel Traffic much higher on the "best way to keep up with what's happening in the kernel" scale for anybody who's not actually contributing code to the kernel. Even experienced C coders, if they aren't ass-deep in the kernel for other reasons.
True, but my example is more extendible to the general case of ANY crawler that observes robots.txt.
Just like Wil tried to vote off Robert, the brightest of the bunch.
Have you met Robert? He's an asshole, I'd have voted him off too.
I wonder if Roxann Dawson was really pissed off, or if she too was playing a bit that fell flat there at the end when she complained about Wil hitting on her. It could be either, because Wil did come off a bit too strong on that "little bit in love" comment.
Other crawlers that do listen to robots.txt can be duped into effectively ignoring it.
/dev/null >robots.txt
For example, try this with wget sometime:
wget -r somesitethathasrobots.txt
su -
chown root:root robots.txt
cat
chmod 0000 robots.txt
exit
wget -r somesitethathasrobots.txt
voila, wget now thinks it's observing robots.txt, but robots.txt is a zero-length file, and it can't overwrite it because only root can write to that file...
In all of this, RMS has been a constant - he promotes Free Software.
While that's probably nice if you support Free Software, it may come as a shock to you that not everybody does. The Open Source movement is rather large and rather well known, and is NOT the same thing, as RMS himself will tell you at length if you ask him.
IMHO, RMS deserves a place on that board solely because of his constancy and vision.
This is like saying that the NAACP should have David Duke on their board. Not that I'm comparing Stallman's position with Duke's, but clearly extreme positions should not always automatically qualify one for board positions. There's a very big difference between listening to what someone has to say (and I think we should listen to Stallman, for very much the same reasons I read Marx) without putting him into a position of leadership on a project that directly touches so many businesses that he dislikes (for much the same reasons I wouldn't vote for Monica Moorehead for President. Or Congress. Or School Board. Or Dog Catcher.)
I can admire Stallman's purity of purpose without agreeing that his goal is admirable. I can value his input as an extreme stance without wishing to have decisions that affect me made according to it.
If I were a devotee of the Free Software movement I might very well feel differently. But I'm pro-Open Source, thankyouverymuch, and wouldn't vote for Stallman for any office of which I can presently think.
What happened to choosing the best software that does the task that I require it to do?
Stallman has always been opposed to that. That's not news.
If you stop attempting to reconcile Stallman's views with Capitalist society, you'll be a lot closer to understanding him.
Ultimately, what is best for the users is what the users want.
Amen. And for some users, that's going to be Free Software. For some, it's going to be Open Source. For some, it's going to be Proprietary Software.
In a world where Stallman isn't in charge, we get to choose between these three and many others.
Wow. This was really big news, a month ago when I submitted it.
Now it's just a press release. Press Releases for Nerds, Stuff That Mattered Last Month.
Cheyenne Inoculate/IT was awesome. It has been discontinued and replaced with an inferior, expensive product.
McAfee has a long history of bogging machines down, and the latest cutting-edge versions are no different.
Unless McAfee has drastically changed the operating model of their software since I last used it (which would be 8 days ago, since I'm on vacation), you are completely wrong about what they do or do not detect.
It's still based on signatures, not operating patterns.
Perhaps in your situation, but there are likely users for whom that is NOT the case.
Think large enterprises which have huge databases.
Right, like us. These databases are multi-terabyte. There are only a hundred and change larger businesses than us in the world. We've got more IT employees than many large telecommunications firms, and more airplanes than all but one of the largest airlines in the world.
I'm talking about FedEx, and the DBAs in question work on the largest projects in the company, including the one that does all the billing for FedEx Express.
They're quite adamant about the performance of the latest Oracle on cooked vs. raw.
Is everybody forgetting that part of Wolfe's task on DS9 was to make it more action-oriented, and easier to "follow" for the masses?
Like it or not, it's a fact that if the masses don't like it, it doesn't make much money, and if it doesn't make enough money to justify airing it instead of something more marketable, we don't get to see it at all.
Action-oriented? Little continuity of plot? Sounds like the original Star Trek to me...
raw access to block devices (oracle was hot on this i think)
Our DBAs tell me that under the latest versions of Oracle, there is no performance increase on raw versus cooked partitions, and that it's therefore not worth the trouble anymore.
I think what Stallman really means is who has the power? You as teh developer or the user.
In other words, the guy who did the work, or somebody else with whom he chose to share?
Stallman's logic is that the world would be better if we didn't get paid for our work. Like all Communists, he thinks the economy is a zero sum game, in which the current level of wealth could be distributed equally to all and all would be comfortable.
It doesn't occur to him that if it weren't for proprietary licenses, computing would still be in the "Altair box I built in my basement" level for the masses, I.E., the masses ain't got it.
His kind of freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose; nothing of any value, anyway.
The PC hardware which is his primary platform, and which allowed the growth of the low-cost market that is the primary user of his software, wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for Microsoft. They suck, and I don't chose to use their software, but nevertheless I wouldn't have this Linux laptop on which I type this if IBM hadn't had a market to sell it to in sufficent quantity to justify making it and charging a price I could afford, and THAT market chooses Windows every day.
Fortunately the people of the US aren't nuts enough to elect legislators that would enact Stallman's ridiculous agenda. The intelligent stance in computing is to use the right tool for the job, whether that's a processor, a compiler, and OS, or a license.
Communist raisin, I rebuke thee.
Hopefully, the folks who kneejerk respond to stories about similar abuses in the US with "hah hah, the US sucks, come live in a real country" will keep this and similar problems (such as the French encryption policies and Yahoo lawsuit) in mind.
The Internet is shaking up the status quo globally, and the assaults on our freedom of speech to stop it are similarly global. If the US removes it's citizens' freedom, it affects you, whether you're in Georgia the state or Georgia the country.
This shows why it's imperative that the US promote free trade with China and every other nation not actively inimicable to us, and why it's completely unnecessary that we establish a pro-US government in Afghanistan; we merely need to remove the anti-US government and back off. Repeat as necessary.
If they aren't attacking our people, back off and leave 'em alone. If they are, destroy them, and let their people sort out the relacement themselves.
The best defense is a lack of enemies. That means don't create enemies, and once you have them, eliminate them.
It's not surprising that you think this. It's a common naive misconception in the Free Software community.
Understand, people; programmers work on Open Source either because they're paid to by a company that can benefit from it, or because they're scratching an itch. You don't have time to scratch an itch if there's not food on the table, and most programmers (and I mean the vast, vast majority, probably in excess of 90%) put food on the table by writing CLOSED SOFTWARE internally for corporations.
When reality doesn't agree with your preconceived notions, the smart thing to do isn't attempt to deny the reality; the smart thing to do is examine your preconceptions.
Trying to type an email on my nokia is impossible, unless these people come up with a better way to input text it really doesn't make since on a cellphone.
I do it every day. With my thumb. Without looking. In traffic.
It just takes more practice and less whining.
Yeah, that's a great idea; every time I purchase something from someone who is also in the US, but happens to communicate with me via Internet links owned by US corporations instead of by telephone or snailmail, part of my money should be confiscated under force of arms and given to other countries' governmental officials, including those in military dictatorships such as Pakistan.
While you're at it, let's make the mouse give you a little shock every time you buy something, to discourage use of the Internet for commercial sales even more.