With the glut of "Linux distributions" in the marketplace, why should I pick NOW as my distro? What makes NOW so special that RedHat or SuSe can't do? How is NOW going to survive?
This seems to be pretty interesting. With web (https) clients and the ability to make a change global across a homogenous bank of machines, this could be a admin's dream.
Are there any real advantages over Linuxconf. Unless there is a REAL significant advantage over linuxconf, I don't see this beinga good thing. Sure the cryptographic channels are cool but that could be added to Linuxconf. This seems like just more fragmentation of the Linux market (like having GNOME and KDE). Granted, both have pushed the other to be better, but it seems like some serious duplication of efforts. What do you all think? Any thoughts?
Have you ever seen the tools to open and old mac? In the words of one person, "it looks like you're about to perform open heart surgery." The insides of old macs are dangerous places. I know a bearded unix guru (tm) who was blown across a room by the picture tube in one. I recently broke the seal on my mac classic picture tube during a routine hard disk removal. Bummer. The point is that no programmers want a computer that they can't tinker with. The os is the same as the hardware.
"Because the MacOS was so well designed by Apple, [genuflects to Steve Jobs] it doesn't need any more software! YAY" Some of my mac using friends sound like this.
Nullsoft understood that AOL would do this eventually when they released GNUtella under the GPL. Too bad they never did the same for Winamp -- it would force AOL to release the modified source to Winamp (assuming the GPL is upheld) which would have allowed us to remove whatever crap they inserted. (This really needs its own story). With all the buzz about GUIDs and now this... software REALLY starts to violate privacy.
In the early 1990's, Geoworks invented a unique process for designing generic user interfaces for application programs, enabling the same application to run on a broad range of platforms. User interface technology provides the screen environment in many electronic devices such as mobile phones and PDA's. Today you see this technology in the market in such devices as the Nokia Communicator family of smart phones. The Geoworks process was described and patented in U.S. Patent No. 5,327,529, which issued on July 5, 1994. The patent provides Geoworks with rights and legal protection in the United States and Japan through July 5, 2011. A portion of the technology described in the Geoworks patent, which is referred to as the "Flex UI Patent," has been realized in the implementation of the Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) and the corresponding Wireless Markup Language (WML). The Wireless Application Protocol is the de facto worldwide standard for the presentation and delivery of wireless information and telephony services on mobile phones and other wireless terminals. In May of 1999, in accordance with the charter documents governing WAP Forum members, Geoworks was the first member to notify the WAP Forum that its patented technology rights represented "Essential Intellectual Property Rights" (Essential IPR) realized in the implementation of the WAP Specification. Accordingly, the WAP Forum published the Geoworks declaration of Essential IPR for worldwide circulation in the member's section of its website at www.wapforum.com. Other member companies have similarly notified the WAP Forum of their Essential IPR. The commercial implications of a WAP Forum member company declaring Essential IPR were anticipated during the formation of the WAP Forum and resulted in a recommended protocol whereby the declaring member company would license its technology to other members on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory commercial terms.
They rent rackspace from Exodus (who according to messages (index of week's messages) on INCIDENTS). Exodus is doing nothing it seems and condones their activities. They don't seem to be doing anything more than getting some REALLY paranoid sysadmins underwear in a knit, but I really don't like being batch scanned for no real reason. So here's my info I've scoped on them. whois -h whois.networksolutions.com quova.net...
Registrant: David Naffziger (QUOVA2-DOM) 333 W Evelyn Mountain View, CA 94043 US
Domain Name: QUOVA.NET
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: hostmaster (HO8675-ORG) hostmaster@QUOVA.COM Quova, Inc. 333 W. Evelyn Ave. Mountain View , CA 94043 US (650) 962-2933 Fax- (650) 962-2025 Billing Contact: billing (BI4691-ORG) billing@QUOVA.COM Quova, Inc. 333 W. Evelyn Ave. Mountain View , CA 94043 US (650) 962-2933 Fax- (650) 962-2025
Record last updated on 23-May-2000. Record expires on 16-Nov-2001. Record created on 16-Nov-1999. Database last updated on 6-Jul-2000 18:55:18 EDT. Domain servers in listed order:
www.quova.net is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) PHP/4.0.0 FrontPage/4.0.4.3 on Solaris netcraft AND SINCE THEY shouldn't mind!!!
cherrycoke:~$ sudo nmap -sX -vv -O www.quova.net Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA1 by fyodor@insecure.org ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) Host (205.177.226.233) appears to be up... good. Initiating FIN,NULL, UDP, or Xmas stealth scan against (205.177.226.233) The UDP or stealth FIN/NULL/XMAS scan took 69 seconds to scan 1525 ports. For OSScan assuming that port 23 is open and port 1 is closed and neither are firewalled Interesting ports on (205.177.226.233): (The 1520 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed) Port State Service 23/tcp open telnet 80/tcp open http 111/tcp open sunrpc 514/tcp open shell 2049/tcp open nfs
Sequence numbers: 6A1BA7D9 6A255F59 6A2A5515 6A2F4624 6A37B2F6 6A3CE0D6 Remote OS guesses: Solaris 2.6 - 2.7, Solaris 7 OS Fingerprint: TSeq(Class=RI%gcd=1%SI=2064A) T1(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=2297%ACK=S++%Flags=AS%Ops=NNTNWME ) T2(Resp=N) T3(Resp=N) T4(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=O%Flags=R%Ops=) T5(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=S++%Flags=AR%Ops=) T6(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=O%Flags=R%Ops=) T7(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=S%Flags=AR%Ops=) PU(Resp=N)
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 83 seconds
Some "security company," with all those notoriously insecure services running on their webserver (NFS, telnet, shell, RPC). Oh well. It looks like their webserver is colocated with some company. cherrycoke:~$ traceroute www.quova.net traceroute to www.quova.net (205.177.226.233), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 orangecrush (192.168.0.1) 2.638 ms 2.239 ms 2.238 ms 2 quincy-asx-2.ziplink.net (206.15.185.18) 509.732 ms 203.12 ms 219.374 ms 3 206.15.185.17 (206.15.185.17) 209.86 ms 215.767 ms 199.762 ms 4 * zl-qnz-cisco2bcn.ziplink.net (206.15.158.150) 205.427 ms 214.611 ms 5 zl-pru-h20-1z172h209.ziplink.net (206.15.172.209) 219.845 ms 214.564 ms 219.459 ms 6 206.15.185.217 (206.15.185.217) 219.572 ms 216.462 ms 199.567 ms 7 bay4-322.quincy.ziplink.net (208.196.109.82) 279.498 ms 274.794 ms 259.6 ms 8 zl-sf-e20-2sf7k.ziplink.net (206.15.172.6) 279.477 ms 265.691 ms 279.473 ms 9 pacbell-1.globalcenter.net (198.32.128.32) 279.597 ms 272.632 ms 279.56 ms 10 pos4-2-155M.cr1.SNV.gblx.net (206.132.150.25) 269.622 ms 272.892 ms 299.483 ms 11 pos2-0-622M.cr1.IAD3.gblx.net (206.132.113.102) 337.01 ms 333.853 ms 339.512 ms 12 pos0-0-0-155M.br2.IAD3.gblx.net (206.132.253.26) 339.529 ms 343.903 ms 349.513 ms 13 digiweb.s2-1-1.br2.IAD.gblx.net (204.152.166.190) 349.878 ms 273.863 ms 299.393 ms 14 209.143.145.194 (209.143.145.194) 309.769 ms 277.821 ms 299.558 ms 15 ucla.digiweb.com (206.161.225.11) 299.497 ms 292.234 ms *
The three month difference in the testing was to allow Alan Cox and Linus to get the number of virgin sacrifices / gallons of goat blood needed for K&R to get SMP networking code working.
Slashdot Mirror
people are catching on....
With the glut of "Linux distributions" in the marketplace, why should I pick NOW as my distro? What makes NOW so special that RedHat or SuSe can't do? How is NOW going to survive?
localhost.net has address 127.0.0.1 heh
good point
This seems to be pretty interesting. With web (https) clients and the ability to make a change global across a homogenous bank of machines, this could be a admin's dream.
Are there any real advantages over Linuxconf. Unless there is a REAL significant advantage over linuxconf, I don't see this beinga good thing. Sure the cryptographic channels are cool but that could be added to Linuxconf. This seems like just more fragmentation of the Linux market (like having GNOME and KDE). Granted, both have pushed the other to be better, but it seems like some serious duplication of efforts. What do you all think?
Any thoughts?
this happens to me quite frequently
thanks
heh
Actually I was commenting on the hardware....
well duh! i opened mine! :)
Have you ever seen the tools to open and old mac? In the words of one person, "it looks like you're about to perform open heart surgery." The insides of old macs are dangerous places. I know a bearded unix guru (tm) who was blown across a room by the picture tube in one. I recently broke the seal on my mac classic picture tube during a routine hard disk removal. Bummer. The point is that no programmers want a computer that they can't tinker with. The os is the same as the hardware.
"Because the MacOS was so well designed by Apple, [genuflects to Steve Jobs] it doesn't need any more software! YAY"
Some of my mac using friends sound like this.
perhaps we should submit this comment to f2k and then they will make the SOMAD?
good point. That's a GPL hole.
Nullsoft understood that AOL would do this eventually when they released GNUtella under the GPL. Too bad they never did the same for Winamp -- it would force AOL to release the modified source to Winamp (assuming the GPL is upheld) which would have allowed us to remove whatever crap they inserted. (This really needs its own story). With all the buzz about GUIDs and now this... software REALLY starts to violate privacy.
Indeed. Did you know Peterb is on the head of the internet2 security division?
Your tragic misspelling of "please" has tainted the Matrix. Your question is therefore REJECTED!
they're pissing off sysadmins to draw sysadmins (looking for a place to complain) to their webstie which will be a sysadmin portal....
They rent rackspace from Exodus (who according to messages (index of week's messages) on INCIDENTS). Exodus is doing nothing it seems and condones their activities. They don't seem to be doing anything more than getting some REALLY paranoid sysadmins underwear in a knit, but I really don't like being batch scanned for no real reason. So here's my info I've scoped on them. ...
... good.
E )
whois -h whois.networksolutions.com quova.net
Registrant:
David Naffziger (QUOVA2-DOM)
333 W Evelyn
Mountain View, CA 94043
US
Domain Name: QUOVA.NET
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
hostmaster (HO8675-ORG) hostmaster@QUOVA.COM
Quova, Inc.
333 W. Evelyn Ave.
Mountain View , CA 94043
US
(650) 962-2933
Fax- (650) 962-2025
Billing Contact:
billing (BI4691-ORG) billing@QUOVA.COM
Quova, Inc.
333 W. Evelyn Ave.
Mountain View , CA 94043
US
(650) 962-2933
Fax- (650) 962-2025
Record last updated on 23-May-2000.
Record expires on 16-Nov-2001.
Record created on 16-Nov-1999.
Database last updated on 6-Jul-2000 18:55:18 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.QUOVA.COM 208.37.145.35
AUTH50.NS.UU.NET 198.6.1.161
www.quova.net is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) PHP/4.0.0 FrontPage/4.0.4.3 on Solaris netcraft
AND SINCE THEY shouldn't mind!!!
cherrycoke:~$ sudo nmap -sX -vv -O www.quova.net
Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA1 by fyodor@insecure.org ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
Host (205.177.226.233) appears to be up
Initiating FIN,NULL, UDP, or Xmas stealth scan against (205.177.226.233)
The UDP or stealth FIN/NULL/XMAS scan took 69 seconds to scan 1525 ports.
For OSScan assuming that port 23 is open and port 1 is closed and neither are firewalled
Interesting ports on (205.177.226.233):
(The 1520 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
Port State Service
23/tcp open telnet
80/tcp open http
111/tcp open sunrpc
514/tcp open shell
2049/tcp open nfs
TCP Sequence Prediction: Class=random positive increments
Difficulty=132682 (Good luck!)
Sequence numbers: 6A1BA7D9 6A255F59 6A2A5515 6A2F4624 6A37B2F6 6A3CE0D6
Remote OS guesses: Solaris 2.6 - 2.7, Solaris 7
OS Fingerprint:
TSeq(Class=RI%gcd=1%SI=2064A)
T1(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=2297%ACK=S++%Flags=AS%Ops=NNTNWM
T2(Resp=N)
T3(Resp=N)
T4(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=O%Flags=R%Ops=)
T5(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=S++%Flags=AR%Ops=)
T6(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=O%Flags=R%Ops=)
T7(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=S%Flags=AR%Ops=)
PU(Resp=N)
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 83 seconds
Some "security company," with all those notoriously insecure services running on their webserver (NFS, telnet, shell, RPC). Oh well. It looks like their webserver is colocated with some company.
cherrycoke:~$ traceroute www.quova.net
traceroute to www.quova.net (205.177.226.233), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 orangecrush (192.168.0.1) 2.638 ms 2.239 ms 2.238 ms
2 quincy-asx-2.ziplink.net (206.15.185.18) 509.732 ms 203.12 ms 219.374 ms
3 206.15.185.17 (206.15.185.17) 209.86 ms 215.767 ms 199.762 ms
4 * zl-qnz-cisco2bcn.ziplink.net (206.15.158.150) 205.427 ms 214.611 ms
5 zl-pru-h20-1z172h209.ziplink.net (206.15.172.209) 219.845 ms 214.564 ms 219.459 ms
6 206.15.185.217 (206.15.185.217) 219.572 ms 216.462 ms 199.567 ms
7 bay4-322.quincy.ziplink.net (208.196.109.82) 279.498 ms 274.794 ms 259.6 ms
8 zl-sf-e20-2sf7k.ziplink.net (206.15.172.6) 279.477 ms 265.691 ms 279.473 ms
9 pacbell-1.globalcenter.net (198.32.128.32) 279.597 ms 272.632 ms 279.56 ms
10 pos4-2-155M.cr1.SNV.gblx.net (206.132.150.25) 269.622 ms 272.892 ms 299.483 ms
11 pos2-0-622M.cr1.IAD3.gblx.net (206.132.113.102) 337.01 ms 333.853 ms 339.512 ms
12 pos0-0-0-155M.br2.IAD3.gblx.net (206.132.253.26) 339.529 ms 343.903 ms 349.513 ms
13 digiweb.s2-1-1.br2.IAD.gblx.net (204.152.166.190) 349.878 ms 273.863 ms 299.393 ms
14 209.143.145.194 (209.143.145.194) 309.769 ms 277.821 ms 299.558 ms
15 ucla.digiweb.com (206.161.225.11) 299.497 ms 292.234 ms *
old /. article on DIVX "fans"
The three month difference in the testing was to allow Alan Cox and Linus to get the number of virgin sacrifices / gallons of goat blood needed for K&R to get SMP networking code working.
Have it around the time school starts. Lots of college kids with new computers dying to try linux
I recently attended a lecture on this by Dr. Bruce Banner! Anyone have a link to his page?