Re:Clue impaired mac-people
on
Rack An iMac
·
· Score: 2
You obviously shouldn't be allowed near mission-critical data either.
For the price he's paying, he could be getting a lot more robust hardware.
The OS is secondary here; we're talking about robustness and reliability, and it's the hardware that is primary determinant there.
You're the only person who mentioned NT. If you think Mac and NT are the only two choices, that speaks volumes for your technical knowledge.
Leave the mission-critical data center hardware choices to those of us who make our living making those choices; you obviously don't have the training or knowledge to speak intelligently on the subject.
This is why it's important to get involved in your local Senatorial races, and why I have no sympathy for any geek who "makes a political statement" by being a lazy bastard and not getting involved.
I know of one US Senator who had no position whatsoever on exportation of encryption, and adopted our position shortly after I cornered him in a small-town airport and brought it up. Never underestimate the power of talking to your Senator or Senatorial candidate.
After all, one man who doesn't vote makes no difference.
One man who votes makes one vote worth of difference.
One man who convinces five people to vote his way makes five votes worth of difference.
And:
Every revolution is begun because one guy was pissed off enough to do something about it.
Or, if you want a concrete example:
We have 20-year patents because one man signed a treaty and between 67 and 100 other men agreed to it. That's between 68 and 101 voices, affecting a change for the entire country. Imagine what could have happened if the entire geek community had talked to those 101 men before they walked that path.
As communication technology increases, it's increasingly important for everybody to speak the same language, because it's IMPOSSIBLE for everybody to speak every language.
English-speakers invented or perfected most of the communications technology.
Therefore, no other language makes sense as the universal language.
How many languages you speak is unimportant. The only important question is:
Do you speak English?
If not, you're crippled technologically.
It's not popular, it's not "politically correct", but it's an irrefutable fact, despite the best efforts of France to refute it.
Now, will this change in the future? Sure, it might. The universal language used to be French, back when the best communication technology was sending messages by boat and France was conveniently located smack in the middle of "civilization". However, it'll take some major upheavals to change things.
I don't think anybody currently has any way of accurately predicting what will happen with language. Some say China will change things, but I don't see everybody switching to a language that requires so many gyrations and triple-size keyboards, even if the Chinese could settle on one language.
There seems to be little reason why English won't continue to be the universal language, at least until technology advances to the point where we can all learn a new language quickly and painlessly.
If the entire industry agrees to a reduced duration for sotfware patents, then shouldn't the patent office allow this?
They can't.
We're bound by a treaty, and according to Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S Constitution, treaties are "the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
The treaty itself says that for any change in the time limits, the signees must agree UNANIMOUSLY.
The only thing we could do unilaterally is denounce the entire treaty, which (fortunatly) is allowed by the treaty itself. If that clause wasn't in there, we couldn't abrogate the treaty legally without agreeing to a new one with all the signees!
If we did denounce it, no signee nation would be required to observe our patents at all anymore!
It's a much bigger fight than just convincing your Congressman. He doesn't even have a say in it.
If you buy an iOpener and don't use their service, *THEY LOSE MONEY*.
It's not in their best interest to do that, period.
You're not "generating lots of sales", and they wouldn't "make a buck".
It was not stupid for them to lock this down, it was absolutely the smartest thing for them to do.
It sucks for us, because we can't get this $300 worth of hardware for $99 anymore, but we were robbing them blind when we did it so we have no right to bitch.
Re:Clue impaired mac-people
on
Rack An iMac
·
· Score: 2
I think it's pretty clear that this guy is horribly misguided, and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near mission-critical data.
It's a nice hack, but it's the wrong solution to a poorly-thought-out problem.
The guy doesn't even blink an eye over the fact that he's paying for monitors and disposing of them. With that kind of waste in his business model, he has to be either:
1) Not making any money.
or...
2) Overcharging his customers.
Either way, purchasing service from him is irrefutable evidence of schizophrenia.
But, as I said, it's a nice hack. Kudos for that part.
This is idiotic on their part. Someone comes out with something which I'm willing to bet at boosted their sales by an order of magnitude, and they cut that revenue source off? That's just stupid.
Yeah, how stupid. So what if they were losing money on every one they sold? They'd make it up in volume!
I believe the fact that you have to resort to personal insults is an indicator of how many facts you have to support your argument, but on the odd chance that there are a few people still reading this thread after your little tantrum I'll respond further.
I'll assume that by Webster's, you mean the Merriam-Webster dictionary, since Mr. Webster's work predates the toy in question.
You are correct that the Merriam-Webster dictionary doesn't list "legos" as a plural of anything, toy or otherwise.
However, this same dictionary lists "prel-yood" as the preferred pronunciation of "prelude", despite the fact that the VAST majority people in the country whose pronunciation it covers don't pronounce it that way.
This same dictionary refused to recognize "ain't" as a word for decades.
Language is defined by usage, not by dictionaries.
Language is not defined by Trademark. Trademarks are defined by Trademark, nothing else.
If you think I'm wrong, go do a search on your favorite search engine for "lego" and see how many pages use it as a plural without an S, compared to how many use it as a plural with an S.
If you're so convinced you have the facts, put your browser where your mouth is.
I'm so confident that I'm right, I won't even bother to stoop to personal insults and directed cursing.
More people are looking at the sendmail source for bugs than any other MTA.
More people are running it in production environments than any other MTA.
In fact, most sites that run something else are *ALSO* running sendmail.
sendmail's bugs tend to get found very quickly, publicized immediately, and fixed very quickly.
Compare to, say, Exchange or Domino. Especially with the recent renewed attention to the old revelations that Lotus cripples their encryption to make it easier for the NSA to break messages.
How do they handle this; do you have to take the CPU offline first, or does it survive a CPU crash?
In other words, is it like Sun's servers where a CPU crash means a reboot, or like Reliant's servers where a CPU crash means a delay of a couple of milliseconds and a service call?
I would think there would have to be hardware involved, not just software, for the latter.
Have you ever worked in a data center environment?
What you should be envisioning here is not "a seperate serial terminal for each server".
You should be envisioning "a terminal server hooked to a bunch of servers, and you telnet into it".
That's one of the tools we use in data center environments, and it's been tried and tested and proven as a good solution for decades.
Even for small environments, if you have never worn out a video port or a keyboard port then you haven't done enough of your proposed solution to really comprehend the problems inherent.
I'd far rather buy a cheap multiport serial card for my main workstation at home and hook my other boxes up to it than futz around with KVM switches or moving cables around.
PC connectors aren't built to be used that much. It's a fact. That's why enterprise hardware doesn't use those connectors.
That's funny, when I dealt with IBM it was more like:
Our emulator works best, but it's free with the mainframe so no problem. If you need a couple extra CDs for it, we'll give you those free too. We'll even pay for the shipping.
They'll work on any PC.
If they don't work on a specific kind of PC, call us and we'll figure out how to make it work.
You should upgrade some of your PCs. The emulator won't give you good results on something that slow.
Buying new PCs from us? You have to specifically request monitors, we don't sell PCs with the monitor included, it's *ALWAYS* a seperate item, except on the PS/1.
Are you sure that was IBM you were dealing with? Your assertions run completely contrary to all my dealings with them.
Of course, perhaps your dealings were in a market size I'm not used to. I've only dealt with IBM in companies ranging from half a dozen employees to the Fortune 50 corp I work for now.
I'm not sure where you guys are drawing your experience from. Mine is totally contrary.
Most people who would only use a Palm for "the basics" don't buy a Palm at all, in my experience.
Remember what we're talking about here; a gadget that fits in your hand, but is essentially a Mac SE without a floppy drive.
I only know one person who bought a Palm and didn't use it for anything except the basics.
She sold it to me before long.
Half the people in my office have them, and they all use downloaded apps. 90% of the system administration teams have them, and they all use downloaded apps.
It bothers me that it doesn't support SSL, which is a show-stopper as far as complete browser replacement for me, but here's one thing that really seems odd to me about M13:
On Windows, it supports an Intellimouse wheel, but you can't use your page-up/page-down keys.
That's pretty effed up right there, dude.
And the cut-and-paste from the menu doesn't work, although keystrokes do.
Little things like that need to be fixed. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't meet the dogfood test as long as it doesn't support SSL, but I know they're working on that and it won't be long.
The one I read said nothing of either of the sorts you assert.
In particular, the one I read said merely that since he's had a bunch of books and articles REVIEWED, with no complaints about his grammar, his grammar must be good enough to do the job asked of it.
I find Jon's conclusions often to be unwarranted, and I'd certainly never hire him as a system administrator (nor would he apply for the job), but I don't think either of your complaints actually apply to the man in any way.
At least, they don't apply to the article to which you posted them.
The only problem with this is then Ford thugs will descend upon you and have a right (based on the ruling in the recent Northwest Airlines incident) to take THEIR computer back and go through it to see what you've been doing.
And let's not fall into the trap of thinking encryption will save us; Ford could easily respond to the presence of any encrypted data with "give us the key, or you're fired, per paragraph 13, section D, subsection 4 of your agreement".
I cannot wait to see what Kryotech is going to do with this bad boy.
If their past patterns hold true, we should see anything from 1.5Ghz to 2Ghz.
Of course, lights will go off all down your street when you fire it up, and you'll be able to go get pizza and Jolt while you're waiting for it come up when you turn it on...
I'm just curious, did you ever inform the LinuxOne sales drone that you were recording that conversation? If not, you could get into some serious, serious trouble. Remember President Nixon?
Nixon was in a place where that's true. In the majority of states, only one person in the conversation has to give permission to record it.
The law regarding a person from one state recording a conversation with a person in another is shaky, but generally it's believed that the law in the state where the recording was made would prevail.
/. is not now what is was and it never will be again, just as Linux is not now what it was. The main thing here is that that doesnt matter. That that they have grown into is also interesting, although less so to me.
What's important is this:
If they grow in a positive way, we'll all stay here and hang out.
If they grow to suck, we'll bail. We'll make another one just like it.
A bad change in editorial policy would be seen as censorship, and as we all know, the Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
Slashdot Mirror
You obviously shouldn't be allowed near mission-critical data either.
For the price he's paying, he could be getting a lot more robust hardware.
The OS is secondary here; we're talking about robustness and reliability, and it's the hardware that is primary determinant there.
You're the only person who mentioned NT. If you think Mac and NT are the only two choices, that speaks volumes for your technical knowledge.
Leave the mission-critical data center hardware choices to those of us who make our living making those choices; you obviously don't have the training or knowledge to speak intelligently on the subject.
This is why it's important to get involved in your local Senatorial races, and why I have no sympathy for any geek who "makes a political statement" by being a lazy bastard and not getting involved.
I know of one US Senator who had no position whatsoever on exportation of encryption, and adopted our position shortly after I cornered him in a small-town airport and brought it up. Never underestimate the power of talking to your Senator or Senatorial candidate.
After all, one man who doesn't vote makes no difference.
One man who votes makes one vote worth of difference.
One man who convinces five people to vote his way makes five votes worth of difference.
And:
Every revolution is begun because one guy was pissed off enough to do something about it.
Or, if you want a concrete example:
We have 20-year patents because one man signed a treaty and between 67 and 100 other men agreed to it. That's between 68 and 101 voices, affecting a change for the entire country. Imagine what could have happened if the entire geek community had talked to those 101 men before they walked that path.
It's that way for one very simple reason:
As communication technology increases, it's increasingly important for everybody to speak the same language, because it's IMPOSSIBLE for everybody to speak every language.
English-speakers invented or perfected most of the communications technology.
Therefore, no other language makes sense as the universal language.
How many languages you speak is unimportant. The only important question is:
Do you speak English?
If not, you're crippled technologically.
It's not popular, it's not "politically correct", but it's an irrefutable fact, despite the best efforts of France to refute it.
Now, will this change in the future? Sure, it might. The universal language used to be French, back when the best communication technology was sending messages by boat and France was conveniently located smack in the middle of "civilization". However, it'll take some major upheavals to change things.
I don't think anybody currently has any way of accurately predicting what will happen with language. Some say China will change things, but I don't see everybody switching to a language that requires so many gyrations and triple-size keyboards, even if the Chinese could settle on one language.
There seems to be little reason why English won't continue to be the universal language, at least until technology advances to the point where we can all learn a new language quickly and painlessly.
If the entire industry agrees to a reduced duration for sotfware patents, then shouldn't the patent office allow this?
They can't.
We're bound by a treaty, and according to Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S Constitution, treaties are "the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
The treaty itself says that for any change in the time limits, the signees must agree UNANIMOUSLY.
The only thing we could do unilaterally is denounce the entire treaty, which (fortunatly) is allowed by the treaty itself. If that clause wasn't in there, we couldn't abrogate the treaty legally without agreeing to a new one with all the signees!
If we did denounce it, no signee nation would be required to observe our patents at all anymore!
It's a much bigger fight than just convincing your Congressman. He doesn't even have a say in it.
No, you're still not catching it, dude.
If you buy an iOpener and don't use their service, *THEY LOSE MONEY*.
It's not in their best interest to do that, period.
You're not "generating lots of sales", and they wouldn't "make a buck".
It was not stupid for them to lock this down, it was absolutely the smartest thing for them to do.
It sucks for us, because we can't get this $300 worth of hardware for $99 anymore, but we were robbing them blind when we did it so we have no right to bitch.
I think it's pretty clear that this guy is horribly misguided, and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near mission-critical data.
It's a nice hack, but it's the wrong solution to a poorly-thought-out problem.
The guy doesn't even blink an eye over the fact that he's paying for monitors and disposing of them. With that kind of waste in his business model, he has to be either:
1) Not making any money.
or...
2) Overcharging his customers.
Either way, purchasing service from him is irrefutable evidence of schizophrenia.
But, as I said, it's a nice hack. Kudos for that part.
This is idiotic on their part. Someone comes out with something which I'm willing to bet at boosted their sales by an order of magnitude, and
they cut that revenue source off? That's just stupid.
Yeah, how stupid. So what if they were losing money on every one they sold? They'd make it up in volume!
I believe the fact that you have to resort to personal insults is an indicator of how many facts you have to support your argument, but on the odd chance that there are a few people still reading this thread after your little tantrum I'll respond further.
I'll assume that by Webster's, you mean the Merriam-Webster dictionary, since Mr. Webster's work predates the toy in question.
You are correct that the Merriam-Webster dictionary doesn't list "legos" as a plural of anything, toy or otherwise.
However, this same dictionary lists "prel-yood" as the preferred pronunciation of "prelude", despite the fact that the VAST majority people in the country whose pronunciation it covers don't pronounce it that way.
This same dictionary refused to recognize "ain't" as a word for decades.
Language is defined by usage, not by dictionaries.
Language is not defined by Trademark. Trademarks are defined by Trademark, nothing else.
If you think I'm wrong, go do a search on your favorite search engine for "lego" and see how many pages use it as a plural without an S, compared to how many use it as a plural with an S.
If you're so convinced you have the facts, put your browser where your mouth is.
I'm so confident that I'm right, I won't even bother to stoop to personal insults and directed cursing.
SCREW the FAQ.
And it's "Hemos".
Language is defined by usage, not fiat.
You and the other three people on this planet who think the plural of "LEGO" is "LEGO" are wrong.
Live with it.
More people are looking at the sendmail source for bugs than any other MTA.
More people are running it in production environments than any other MTA.
In fact, most sites that run something else are *ALSO* running sendmail.
sendmail's bugs tend to get found very quickly, publicized immediately, and fixed very quickly.
Compare to, say, Exchange or Domino. Especially with the recent renewed attention to the old revelations that Lotus cripples their encryption to make it easier for the NSA to break messages.
How do they handle this; do you have to take the CPU offline first, or does it survive a CPU crash?
In other words, is it like Sun's servers where a CPU crash means a reboot, or like Reliant's servers where a CPU crash means a delay of a couple of milliseconds and a service call?
I would think there would have to be hardware involved, not just software, for the latter.
As far as I know, the modern versions still require client licences -- they're not free.
IIRC, you're required to have client licenses for the number of users, whether they're using IBM's program or anything else.
Those Linux 3270 or 5250 users are supposed to be licensed to.
Have you ever worked in a data center environment?
What you should be envisioning here is not "a seperate serial terminal for each server".
You should be envisioning "a terminal server hooked to a bunch of servers, and you telnet into it".
That's one of the tools we use in data center environments, and it's been tried and tested and proven as a good solution for decades.
Even for small environments, if you have never worn out a video port or a keyboard port then you haven't done enough of your proposed solution to really comprehend the problems inherent.
I'd far rather buy a cheap multiport serial card for my main workstation at home and hook my other boxes up to it than futz around with KVM switches or moving cables around.
PC connectors aren't built to be used that much. It's a fact. That's why enterprise hardware doesn't use those connectors.
That's funny, when I dealt with IBM it was more like:
Our emulator works best, but it's free with the mainframe so no problem. If you need a couple extra CDs for it, we'll give you those free too. We'll even pay for the shipping.
They'll work on any PC.
If they don't work on a specific kind of PC, call us and we'll figure out how to make it work.
You should upgrade some of your PCs. The emulator won't give you good results on something that slow.
Buying new PCs from us? You have to specifically request monitors, we don't sell PCs with the monitor included, it's *ALWAYS* a seperate item, except on the PS/1.
Are you sure that was IBM you were dealing with? Your assertions run completely contrary to all my dealings with them.
Of course, perhaps your dealings were in a market size I'm not used to. I've only dealt with IBM in companies ranging from half a dozen employees to the Fortune 50 corp I work for now.
Palm suceeded because it *DIDN'T* have those things.
Newton failed because it did.
If you want a full-function computer, buy a full-function computer.
I'm not sure where you guys are drawing your experience from. Mine is totally contrary.
Most people who would only use a Palm for "the basics" don't buy a Palm at all, in my experience.
Remember what we're talking about here; a gadget that fits in your hand, but is essentially a Mac SE without a floppy drive.
I only know one person who bought a Palm and didn't use it for anything except the basics.
She sold it to me before long.
Half the people in my office have them, and they all use downloaded apps. 90% of the system administration teams have them, and they all use downloaded apps.
My favorite piece of fallout from the Secret Service raid is this:
By confiscating the Illuminati Online server, they effectively launched it from being an obscure BBS into being a nicely profitable Internet provider.
Steve should send them a thank-you card every year on this date.
It bothers me that it doesn't support SSL, which is a show-stopper as far as complete browser replacement for me, but here's one thing that really seems odd to me about M13:
On Windows, it supports an Intellimouse wheel, but you can't use your page-up/page-down keys.
That's pretty effed up right there, dude.
And the cut-and-paste from the menu doesn't work, although keystrokes do.
Little things like that need to be fixed. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't meet the dogfood test as long as it doesn't support SSL, but I know they're working on that and it won't be long.
Looks to me like you skipped about three paragraphs.
In particular, the fact that you say it "didn't mention anything about source code" is telling.
Try doing a Find on it for "source code", then read that paragraph and the ones before and after it.
Did you read the same Jon Katz interview I did?
The one I read said nothing of either of the sorts you assert.
In particular, the one I read said merely that since he's had a bunch of books and articles REVIEWED, with no complaints about his grammar, his grammar must be good enough to do the job asked of it.
I find Jon's conclusions often to be unwarranted, and I'd certainly never hire him as a system administrator (nor would he apply for the job), but I don't think either of your complaints actually apply to the man in any way.
At least, they don't apply to the article to which you posted them.
Email them at NIPC@fbi.gov.
The only problem with this is then Ford thugs will descend upon you and have a right (based on the ruling in the recent Northwest Airlines incident) to take THEIR computer back and go through it to see what you've been doing.
And let's not fall into the trap of thinking encryption will save us; Ford could easily respond to the presence of any encrypted data with "give us the key, or you're fired, per paragraph 13, section D, subsection 4 of your agreement".
I cannot wait to see what Kryotech is going to do with this bad boy.
If their past patterns hold true, we should see anything from 1.5Ghz to 2Ghz.
Of course, lights will go off all down your street when you fire it up, and you'll be able to go get pizza and Jolt while you're waiting for it come up when you turn it on...
I'm just curious, did you ever inform the LinuxOne sales drone that you were recording that conversation? If not, you could get into some serious, serious trouble. Remember President Nixon?
Nixon was in a place where that's true. In the majority of states, only one person in the conversation has to give permission to record it.
The law regarding a person from one state recording a conversation with a person in another is shaky, but generally it's believed that the law in the state where the recording was made would prevail.
/. is not now what is was and it never will be again, just as Linux is not now what it was. The main thing here is that that doesnt matter. That that they have grown into is also interesting, although less so to me.
What's important is this:
If they grow in a positive way, we'll all stay here and hang out.
If they grow to suck, we'll bail. We'll make another one just like it.
A bad change in editorial policy would be seen as censorship, and as we all know, the Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.