My station says that Prairie Home Companion is the most expensive show.
Having taken my wife to a performance (did you know they did Friday nights as well?) for $70 a ticket for medium range seating, I'm not sure how to take that news. The best seating was $130 a ticket, with four on-stage seats going for over $1000 (a NPR fundraising auction).
Believe me, with kid we get to know Disney well, over and over. Disney still has talent, but my wife and I agree it really shows only when they aren't being "Disney".
Take Filmore, and Recess for instance. Filmore is a middle-school cartoon noir. A hard boiled detective story in a middle school where children are given plenty of resources and are trying to achieve (for good or evil).
Recess is a prison camp in Elementary school setting. Its great. Not only are these premises good, but the messages are palatable and nourishing, the plots interesting and the humor often cutting.
For New Years Eve we raided our friends very extensive movie collection, and of all the movies "Kim Possible: The Secret Files" was by far the most entertaining. Ron Stoppable is one of my favorite characters to watch on any cartoon (except maybe Peach and Bruce in Nemo).
Even Penny Proud is pretty funny. Not the main characters though, the real gems are the supporting cast.
But none of these would make you think "Disney" if it weren't for the name in the credits. Same with Pixar I would say also. Perhaps Disney suffers, if any company could suffer, from over-branding.
Your right! This does happen, and your correct the VW Bug is very popular for this kind of thing. Other cars that have modded/evolved are the Fiat something (the US even wound up importing one of these as the Yugo) and Deux Cheveux.
Cars are pretty open source as it is though. You can deconstruct a car, or even just look at it and decipher pretty much what it is or how to do one yourself. The problems in distribution come in the assembly lines, and how sophisicated a piece it can cheaply produce. Not to mention the ghastly amount of regulation in the industry (not neccisarily a bad thing).
Bush fails to come to grips with the fact that the US has done more than passively accept dictatorships it has actively worked to destroy democracies.
What was that I said about strawmen again? Oh yeah, hack away at your pleasure.
the phrase 'those who are not with us are against us' is actually due to Lenin
Oh its been around much longer than that. I'm always amused at the catastrophic (yet short sighted) simularities people place Bush to Hitler, Stalin, and Lenin.
US politicians have always clothed themselves in the mantle of liberty and justice even when they were arming the very dictators you refer to.
As has Europe. Why look at what Chirac is doing in the Le Cote D'Ivoire right now. He's bullying reporters and anyone who is offering opposition to the current government. Putin put a man in jail for opposing him. All in the name of Justice, and as you mentioned, Checnya.
But the difference is that while I'm sure the UN and EU would be just as happy if a new dictator restored order to Iraq (you can't tell me they wouldn't), Bush is sticking it out with his "democracy or bust" endeavor. After all the EU was Saddam's main supporter all along. The EU is Arafat's main supporter (refer again to link about Arafat keeping all the money to himself).
Iraq is also becoming a reflecting pool of the world at large. Millions are slowly learning how different the United States is from its critics in Europe. France will threaten the awful regime in Libya but only about matters of monetary recompense, in the same manner that money led both it and Germany to trade with Saddam Hussein after 1991 and haggle over oil concessions for the next half century. Neither state would remove a dictator, much less pledge lives and nearly $90 billion to create a democracy in the Middle East. All that is too concrete, too absolute, too unsophisticated for the philosophes, who would always prefer slurring a democracy to castigating some third-world bloody ideologue. The Europeans, remember, are now grandstanding about the need for American "transparency" in the distribution of their paltry few millions in Iraq in a manner that they never demanded of their billions once dumped onto a corrupt Palestinian Authority.
There are bombings regularly in Spain; over 10,000 died in France due to either a defect in its socialist government or indeed in its very national character; and Russia obliterated Grosny. But a single death or bomb in Baghdad alone seems to merit condemnation from the Europeans, whose leaders seem incapable of using the words "victory" and "freedom," much less "sacrifice" and "liberation." They may lavish awards and money on a Jimmy Carter or Susan Sontag, who criticize their own country's efforts in the midst of a deadly war; but the true moralists are those who risk taking on tyrants, not those who carp from the sidelines that such courageous efforts are sometimes messy. It seems to be a rite of old age for American progressives these days to travel to Europe and trash their alma mater as they troll for the applause of a smug, cynical audience, the more boldly when they are not answered and confronted by independent thinkers abroad. But such showboating is going to be increasingly difficult once a liberal and humane society emerges in Iraq.
These Europeans like multilateral solutions not out of principle so much as because the tortuous process of implementing them creates the illusion that, in the meantime, nothing must be done. Hence, by the time the U.N. acts, most Bosnians or Rwandans or Kuwaitis are long gone, a sort of "talk, talk/die, die policy." Had a Chirac or Schroeder said something like, "With confidence in our values and with right, as we see, it on our side, we shall fight alongside our democratic ally, the United States, and together remove this Dark Age governmen
The reason that there is no democracy in the Middle East is because the CIA organized a coup to depose the only elected government there in 1953. The Iranian government was understandably outraged that the Anglo-Persian oil company refused to pay a fair price for the oil they extracted or even audit the books so they could make sure they were paid the amount they were owed.
Instead of facing the past the Israelis scream ANTI-SEMITE at anyone who raises it while the US screams ANTI-AMERICAN.
The US insists that any criticism of its past covert activities is unpatriotic, illegitimate.
Bush said just about the same thing, and no one called him anti-american for it.
"Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe, because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty."
Its fun to point out that the Middle East policy of GWB has been influence heavily by (drum roll...) Noam Chomsky. Rumsfeld came from the Chomskian left, and its easy to see his influence in their policies.
No longer, if Bush has his way, will the US set up dictatorships and arm them even to genocide. The US will do its own dirty work. Well maybe not the conclusion that Chomsky wanted, its most definately an outcropping of his detailed deconstruction of the US's foriegn modus-operandi for the past half century.
While Noam wants frigid US isolationism and white-guilt driven capitulation, Rumsfeld and Bush saw the need to continue to be a player the world, if nothing but to clean up the messes made previously. And now we have a US that takes a bloody nose but still tries to help build Iraq even after the Red Cross and UN filter away their aides in the country.
Parting Shot: You can attempt to understand the present or you can make a straw man and chop it up all you want.
Also, ever wonder why Israel who is seemingly the enemy of the multi-billion dollar Arab oil cartel is doing so much more culturally, scientifically, and humanitary than all of them combined? I mean, the amount of money Israel get from the US is pennies compared to the US dollars pouring into these oil rich Arab nations in aid and oil trade. But Israel has world class Universities, research institutes, and a more diverse economy.
Disclaimer: Bruce says some smart things, and some ill informed arrogant things. I've found that anything where he suggests "everyone should" always winds up in the latter category.
Now what I was going to say, which is entirely on your topic and off the topic of Bruce "gnu/material girl" Perens.
I'm fortunate in my work to deal with Gentoo and Redhat. And here's the interesting thing, the high-end engineering software we use runs just fine on Gentoo. I know, my workstation is Gentoo.
I've just installed the Intel Storage Console and DMI (IPMI) on two Gentoo servers, and they work fine. Well, in full disclosure StorCon doesn't work on the latest Gentoo or RedHat 9 for that matter.
I walked in to work today however thinking that it was time to tell my boss that we should evaluate Debian instead of Fedora *if* we choose not to go the RHEWS rout. Gentoo is powerful for servers, but way too high maintenance for the desktop*. But I do trust Debian more than Red Hat, and more than Fedora, and more than my own gentoo-skillz.
But sadly, in the end even though I'm sure Debian would run our engineering apps just fine (if it runs on Gentoo its got to run on some kind of Debian), we will probably just do what the engineering app supports.
So to bring this to a point, it looks like the standards work is working. And I agree that standards are the way to go. I sincerly hope it improves over time and that more people recognize it.
* I do have wild dreams of a self-replicating Gentoo, with a reference computer and allow other computers to sync off it. But it ends with my boss handing me my walking papers when a bad mod infects every computer bringing the company to an irreperable halt.
"Vent radioactive gas?" [types] Y E S. "Sound alertness horn?" Y E S. [it sounds in the distance] "Decalcify calcium ducts?" Well, give me a Y, give me a...Hey! All I have to type is Y. [to Marge] Hey, Miss Doesn't-find-me-attractive-sexually-anymore: I just tripled my productivity!
The security system should be stronger integrated into the kernel. Yes there is PAM these days, but a real secure system will have authentification and verification added at kernel level to make it trust-worthy and tamper-proof.
Security should be enforced in the kernel but should not be put in the kernel. Here's what I mean, I do not want a kernel that performs authentication, but when authenticated it should stick it to it. I believe that is how the kernel works, and its much better than putting "PAM", SASL or Kerberos or Login into the kernel. I don't even think SELinux even tries to do authentication in the kernel.
Grid access. Given the exciting new development of grid computing,
Grid computing has been around since the 60's. I actually don't see where the kernel can use grid computing (meanwhile you can do what we do and use openMosix to get many of the same benefits). All you really need to impliment grid computing is SSH, RSH or even telnet and none of those things are really kernel worthy either.
Given to above grid access all journaled file system should be made grid aware and supporting distributed storaging.
Check out NFS, then AFS, then CODA and finally intermezzo depending on the level of local caching you wish for your grid.
More modular kernel design. While device drivers can be loaded at run-time, a fully modular kernel design is still missing. Yes, the micro-kernel is quite dead, but a decent modular design can be quite powerful as well-used system like Windows NT and successors show.
You mean, reboot every IP change NT? How about reboot every program install XP? The modularity in NT is not very good at all. XP is much better, but still not the keen level that Linux achieved back in 1996.
That depends on how secure we'd like to think Linux is. Its fast becoming my pet peeve of the internet that after ripping someone up on premise, faulty logic, and everything else someone should base an arguement on they turn around and say "yeah but your not perfect".
While I clearly admit to not being perfect, the discussion is really not ever about my level of perfection. This story is about the same thing. While previously the security of Windows was discussed very well in the article "Windows insecure by design", this posting amounts to be a simple "yeah but Linux isn't perfect" as if to deflect the majority of technical problems people have with Windows?
So if you think Linux is perfect, then perhaps this article is for you. But if your main concern is whether or not Linux is inherently more secure than Windows this article (although pretending to answer that question) does not do a very good job of discussing that point.
On the web site you'll see an ad stating that over 50% of the web defacements they've categorized have been Windows, while closer to 25% web defacements are Linux. That inspite that the last 24hours figure puts Linux at 61%. But no matter which is out front, the answer can only be that they are both not perfect and has no merits in discussing which is more or less secure.
And to me its the "more secure" and why that is important.
As a personal note, this is my 1000th post. I've been around since Rob Malda was known for WindowMaker themes and was just starting out programming a blog. I suppose that means I'm not a very active poster, I'm sure that there have been people who've posted more in less time. But its still rather a milestone...
I was watching the post-production DVD stuff and have figured out Signs to a "T".
Its completely and unadulteratedly an allegory (said so by the director/producer). Unfortunately allegories are incredibly imprecise if not provided with guides.
The preacher regaining "faith" is not so much a pay-off moment as a reconsiliation moment in my opinion. The open question is his wife dying, and the demons spawned from that difficulty first occupy the netherreaches and are ignored. Then as their reality becomes to much to ingore the reaction is to run away from, then actively fought only to find they are easily defeated. In that victory the man returns, questions quelled and faith affirmed.
That it was water is highly important to the allegory as I see it, as it is in Dune.
That that director does such cerebral movies in such a popular context is to be applauded, even when it comes out *very* strange and with physical inconsistencies.
Kind of the opposite of what Ingrid Third tells the book-club president in Fillmore, "Judy Blume has no subtext but she is really good". This director puts in a subtext without completely destroying the movie.
Actually the article is very good at pointing out that the problem is not so much the fanciful and incorrect science. They mention Spider Man and the Incredible Shrinking Man as examples of movie making gone right.
The difference? When movie makers try too hard to explain their movie scientifically, wind up detracting from the mystery of the movie and doing a horrible disservice to science. Their prime example of that is Star Wars' midi-chlorians.
Thats easy to explain. In the star wars universe, space has an atmosphere. Just look at when Han Solo and Luke are shooting at Tie Fighters in space through open windows!
I don't think "can" has been the question as much as its so plain annoying. I'm sure plenty of people could provide commentary on the issues of portability of code in browsers vs OS's and computers.
Language portability happens in C all the time, and is managed through a number of very difficult tools. In Javascript, it does it in runtime, figuring out its environment and adjusting which routines will run dynamically. In Java the environment provides the portability.
Portability is a worth-while goal in that it provides freedom. But is it too much to ask for a Javascript's portability to be pushed from run-time to handled by the environment? It shouldn't be a question of diversity of environments and a willingness to stop trying to screw each other over. Thats all.
Not to rant on your comment, you just brought up a pet peeve of mine.
Fist of all nobody in Guantanamo bay is granted POW status.
I won't go over this again. You are wrong in your assertion that you'll be locked up for being swarthy but for being Al Quaida. Ann Coulter wasn't asking for swarthy people to be locked up, and not even the Talibal are being "detained" without due rights and privedges. Which is not the same courtesy they showed. Why didn't you protest and complain against them? I see, because your obsessed with hating Republicans (and now me becuase although I am not a republican I don't follow in your call for hatred).
Your wrong, completely wrong.
you were providing a URL to a completely different person? [yada]
You said I claimed not to know who David Horowitz is. You lied. The URL goes to "David Horowitz". The link was framed in a question, as in you tell me if its that one or not. Nothing there is a claim that I didn't know who he is. You directly said I claimed it. Your wrong and lying.
when a person says given a choice between being in prison and putting people in prison I choose the latter they don't mean that they want to put people in prison.
It does when they include that in a context of "Look, their going to put me in prison". Especially when the charges are as trumped up as yours have washed out to be. Read the context, eh?
Your adolescent attempt to constantly compare me to Hitler is getting tiresome... Hitler = Kill 6 million jews Malcontent = Post On Slashdot
You complained about me missing context? I'm not comparing you to Hitler, I'm comparing your trumped up paranoid rhetoric to the rhetoric Hitler, Charles Taylor, Franco, and Lennin. They all rose to power by trumping up a fear of the government with subtle preparing of their audience to "jail", "hammer", and otherwise oppress those they trumped up accusations of oppression over.
And to me if you continue on this path, there may soon be very little difference between you and Hitler.
you don't know how to read.
Another trumped up charge of ignorance. Your a one note piano here.
Your obviously a little dazed from your over-running paranoia. Lets retrack this...
Me: I don't see why Ann Coulter or the conservatives want to put you in a concentration camp, unless your Al Queida that is.
Me: the Taliban have been granted POW status
Malcontent: Fist of all nobody in Guantanamo bay is granted POW status.
Chicago Tribune: U.S. grants POW status to Taliban, not Al Qaeda
The only inconsistency there, my friend is yourself. Again, if you are Al Quieda then you have something to worry about. Even if you are a Taliban, you don't need to worry about detention (well except that they detain people for doing things like singing and dancing and making rugs). You tried to make it sound like it was something against "swarthy" people. That simply has not panned out, not in this example or the others.
Also, the UN and Congressional inspectors at Guantanamo all say they have it better here than in Afghanistan.
Once again read the URLs I posted to. You really need to read these things before replying to them.
No need to get snippy here. I read the URL's posted, which is where I got my information from. Once again it seems that I just missed my queue to say "right on brutha" more than missed some information.
But reading what you want into things is pretty evident.
Malcontent: You said you didn't know who [David Horowitz] was
Again I ask where was that? The quote you provide is from me on the topic is..
The host of Fight Back!? He's right up there with Ralph Nader as my favorite anti-corporate watchdog.
What about that quote makes you think I don't know who David Horowitz is? Nothing that I can tell. And you have the unmitigated gaul to say about that quote, "You know you are going to get caught up in your own lies."
I am not calling for a revolution. I am practising self defence. How many times do I have to say that.
The self defence of making the government tremble at your words while you put them in jail is most definately revolution my friend. Lie to us if you must, but this take head and do to thine own self be true!
You think that there is no difference between me and somebody who killed six million jews? really is that what you think?
The Jews were just the conservative and established economic power of the day, deeply rooted in religious principles. Your description of your great white elephant is markedly simular. And you have said you wish to detain them and be the hammer. I don't know you well enough, but by your rhetoric the simularities are chilling.
Before you go on putting more words in my mouth I never called for violence. Just self defense.
Again, to thine own self be true. Your not talking about defending values, in fact you've said almost nothing about your values except that you identify yourself as liberal. What I read is someone actively wishing to opress people that he/she feels threatened by.
I said given a choice between going to jail and jailing other people I choose the latter. Got it?
Oh yes, and it is so very simular to the rational that made the concentration camps both in the US and Germany. Hitler proposed the Jews were going to take over Germany and enslave the Aryan race and they needed to rise up against it. In fact there is a quote of his that is almost a directly what you said, but thats just from memory. I'll look it up.
You are totally unaware of the many speeches [David Horowitz] has given.
Odd you should say that after I showed how you were almost directly quoting him from a speach. A speach you claimed to not be aware of. Again, you really seem to have a problem with accepting that people can be well versed *and* disagree with you. Your immediate reaction to my disagreement has consistently been
Slashdot Mirror
My station says that Prairie Home Companion is the most expensive show.
Having taken my wife to a performance (did you know they did Friday nights as well?) for $70 a ticket for medium range seating, I'm not sure how to take that news. The best seating was $130 a ticket, with four on-stage seats going for over $1000 (a NPR fundraising auction).
Believe me, with kid we get to know Disney well, over and over. Disney still has talent, but my wife and I agree it really shows only when they aren't being "Disney".
Take Filmore, and Recess for instance. Filmore is a middle-school cartoon noir. A hard boiled detective story in a middle school where children are given plenty of resources and are trying to achieve (for good or evil).
Recess is a prison camp in Elementary school setting. Its great. Not only are these premises good, but the messages are palatable and nourishing, the plots interesting and the humor often cutting.
For New Years Eve we raided our friends very extensive movie collection, and of all the movies "Kim Possible: The Secret Files" was by far the most entertaining. Ron Stoppable is one of my favorite characters to watch on any cartoon (except maybe Peach and Bruce in Nemo).
Even Penny Proud is pretty funny. Not the main characters though, the real gems are the supporting cast.
But none of these would make you think "Disney" if it weren't for the name in the credits. Same with Pixar I would say also. Perhaps Disney suffers, if any company could suffer, from over-branding.
So in short,
Technologist is to technology what Waitress is to acting?
Your right! This does happen, and your correct the VW Bug is very popular for this kind of thing. Other cars that have modded/evolved are the Fiat something (the US even wound up importing one of these as the Yugo) and Deux Cheveux.
Cars are pretty open source as it is though. You can deconstruct a car, or even just look at it and decipher pretty much what it is or how to do one yourself. The problems in distribution come in the assembly lines, and how sophisicated a piece it can cheaply produce. Not to mention the ghastly amount of regulation in the industry (not neccisarily a bad thing).
I think it is also. Its odd that a song that has such martial overtones (it was used by the German Army even) is to us, circus music.
"Entry of the Gladiators" by Julius Fucik (1872-1916)
What was that I said about strawmen again? Oh yeah, hack away at your pleasure.
the phrase 'those who are not with us are against us' is actually due to Lenin
Oh its been around much longer than that. I'm always amused at the catastrophic (yet short sighted) simularities people place Bush to Hitler, Stalin, and Lenin.
US politicians have always clothed themselves in the mantle of liberty and justice even when they were arming the very dictators you refer to.
As has Europe. Why look at what Chirac is doing in the Le Cote D'Ivoire right now. He's bullying reporters and anyone who is offering opposition to the current government. Putin put a man in jail for opposing him. All in the name of Justice, and as you mentioned, Checnya.
But the difference is that while I'm sure the UN and EU would be just as happy if a new dictator restored order to Iraq (you can't tell me they wouldn't), Bush is sticking it out with his "democracy or bust" endeavor. After all the EU was Saddam's main supporter all along. The EU is Arafat's main supporter (refer again to link about Arafat keeping all the money to himself).
From "The Event of the Age"...
Instead of facing the past the Israelis scream ANTI-SEMITE at anyone who raises it while the US screams ANTI-AMERICAN.
The US insists that any criticism of its past covert activities is unpatriotic, illegitimate.
Bush said just about the same thing, and no one called him anti-american for it.
Its fun to point out that the Middle East policy of GWB has been influence heavily by (drum roll...) Noam Chomsky. Rumsfeld came from the Chomskian left, and its easy to see his influence in their policies.
No longer, if Bush has his way, will the US set up dictatorships and arm them even to genocide. The US will do its own dirty work. Well maybe not the conclusion that Chomsky wanted, its most definately an outcropping of his detailed deconstruction of the US's foriegn modus-operandi for the past half century.
While Noam wants frigid US isolationism and white-guilt driven capitulation, Rumsfeld and Bush saw the need to continue to be a player the world, if nothing but to clean up the messes made previously. And now we have a US that takes a bloody nose but still tries to help build Iraq even after the Red Cross and UN filter away their aides in the country.
Parting Shot: You can attempt to understand the present or you can make a straw man and chop it up all you want.
It seems Arafat is more dependant on foreign aid than most Palestinians...
Also, ever wonder why Israel who is seemingly the enemy of the multi-billion dollar Arab oil cartel is doing so much more culturally, scientifically, and humanitary than all of them combined? I mean, the amount of money Israel get from the US is pennies compared to the US dollars pouring into these oil rich Arab nations in aid and oil trade. But Israel has world class Universities, research institutes, and a more diverse economy.
But those Arab dictatorships will stay in power as long as they can convince people that Israel and the US are the reasons for their problems.
Disclaimer: Bruce says some smart things, and some ill informed arrogant things. I've found that anything where he suggests "everyone should" always winds up in the latter category.
Now what I was going to say, which is entirely on your topic and off the topic of Bruce "gnu/material girl" Perens.
I'm fortunate in my work to deal with Gentoo and Redhat. And here's the interesting thing, the high-end engineering software we use runs just fine on Gentoo. I know, my workstation is Gentoo.
I've just installed the Intel Storage Console and DMI (IPMI) on two Gentoo servers, and they work fine. Well, in full disclosure StorCon doesn't work on the latest Gentoo or RedHat 9 for that matter.
I walked in to work today however thinking that it was time to tell my boss that we should evaluate Debian instead of Fedora *if* we choose not to go the RHEWS rout. Gentoo is powerful for servers, but way too high maintenance for the desktop*. But I do trust Debian more than Red Hat, and more than Fedora, and more than my own gentoo-skillz.
But sadly, in the end even though I'm sure Debian would run our engineering apps just fine (if it runs on Gentoo its got to run on some kind of Debian), we will probably just do what the engineering app supports.
So to bring this to a point, it looks like the standards work is working. And I agree that standards are the way to go. I sincerly hope it improves over time and that more people recognize it.
* I do have wild dreams of a self-replicating Gentoo, with a reference computer and allow other computers to sync off it. But it ends with my boss handing me my walking papers when a bad mod infects every computer bringing the company to an irreperable halt.
School paper photographer? My local city councilman did our wedding photography for $750 (true story). And we got to keep the negatives.
We also did the disposable cameras at everones table, but didn't get anything good from them.
The creative process is funny, they probably thought they were doing the exact same things they did to make the first movie so good.
Yeah I remember going to a monument in a park more than a mile away where the anchor landed. A tanker full of sodium nitrate if I remember right?
maybe we should try to create a new productivity suite that is totally different. Create new things.
Texmacs, SIAG, etc...
What troubles me is how they could tell a carving of a bronze ax as opposed to say a steel or bone ax.
"The carvings of bronze axe heads are between four and six inches long."
"Vent radioactive gas?" [types] Y E S.
"Sound alertness horn?" Y E S. [it sounds in the distance]
"Decalcify calcium ducts?" Well, give me a Y, give me a...Hey! All I have to type is Y. [to Marge] Hey, Miss Doesn't-find-me-attractive-sexually-anymore: I just tripled my productivity!
Apologies to /.ers under the age of 5000 who dont know the song..
Mmmmyess, I thought your translation from Babylonian was quite aprapoe.
The security system should be stronger integrated into the kernel. Yes there is PAM these days, but a real secure system will have authentification and verification added at kernel level to make it trust-worthy and tamper-proof.
Security should be enforced in the kernel but should not be put in the kernel. Here's what I mean, I do not want a kernel that performs authentication, but when authenticated it should stick it to it. I believe that is how the kernel works, and its much better than putting "PAM", SASL or Kerberos or Login into the kernel. I don't even think SELinux even tries to do authentication in the kernel.
Grid access. Given the exciting new development of grid computing,
Grid computing has been around since the 60's. I actually don't see where the kernel can use grid computing (meanwhile you can do what we do and use openMosix to get many of the same benefits). All you really need to impliment grid computing is SSH, RSH or even telnet and none of those things are really kernel worthy either.
Given to above grid access all journaled file system should be made grid aware and supporting distributed storaging.
Check out NFS, then AFS, then CODA and finally intermezzo depending on the level of local caching you wish for your grid.
More modular kernel design. While device drivers can be loaded at run-time, a fully modular kernel design is still missing. Yes, the micro-kernel is quite dead, but a decent modular design can be quite powerful as well-used system like Windows NT and successors show.
You mean, reboot every IP change NT? How about reboot every program install XP? The modularity in NT is not very good at all. XP is much better, but still not the keen level that Linux achieved back in 1996.
Is Linux as Secure as We'd Like to Think?
That depends on how secure we'd like to think Linux is. Its fast becoming my pet peeve of the internet that after ripping someone up on premise, faulty logic, and everything else someone should base an arguement on they turn around and say "yeah but your not perfect".
While I clearly admit to not being perfect, the discussion is really not ever about my level of perfection. This story is about the same thing. While previously the security of Windows was discussed very well in the article "Windows insecure by design", this posting amounts to be a simple "yeah but Linux isn't perfect" as if to deflect the majority of technical problems people have with Windows?
So if you think Linux is perfect, then perhaps this article is for you. But if your main concern is whether or not Linux is inherently more secure than Windows this article (although pretending to answer that question) does not do a very good job of discussing that point.
On the web site you'll see an ad stating that over 50% of the web defacements they've categorized have been Windows, while closer to 25% web defacements are Linux. That inspite that the last 24hours figure puts Linux at 61%. But no matter which is out front, the answer can only be that they are both not perfect and has no merits in discussing which is more or less secure.
And to me its the "more secure" and why that is important.
As a personal note, this is my 1000th post. I've been around since Rob Malda was known for WindowMaker themes and was just starting out programming a blog. I suppose that means I'm not a very active poster, I'm sure that there have been people who've posted more in less time. But its still rather a milestone...
I was watching the post-production DVD stuff and have figured out Signs to a "T".
Its completely and unadulteratedly an allegory (said so by the director/producer). Unfortunately allegories are incredibly imprecise if not provided with guides.
The preacher regaining "faith" is not so much a pay-off moment as a reconsiliation moment in my opinion. The open question is his wife dying, and the demons spawned from that difficulty first occupy the netherreaches and are ignored. Then as their reality becomes to much to ingore the reaction is to run away from, then actively fought only to find they are easily defeated. In that victory the man returns, questions quelled and faith affirmed.
That it was water is highly important to the allegory as I see it, as it is in Dune.
That that director does such cerebral movies in such a popular context is to be applauded, even when it comes out *very* strange and with physical inconsistencies.
Kind of the opposite of what Ingrid Third tells the book-club president in Fillmore, "Judy Blume has no subtext but she is really good". This director puts in a subtext without completely destroying the movie.
Actually the article is very good at pointing out that the problem is not so much the fanciful and incorrect science. They mention Spider Man and the Incredible Shrinking Man as examples of movie making gone right.
The difference? When movie makers try too hard to explain their movie scientifically, wind up detracting from the mystery of the movie and doing a horrible disservice to science. Their prime example of that is Star Wars' midi-chlorians.
Thats easy to explain. In the star wars universe, space has an atmosphere. Just look at when Han Solo and Luke are shooting at Tie Fighters in space through open windows!
I don't think "can" has been the question as much as its so plain annoying. I'm sure plenty of people could provide commentary on the issues of portability of code in browsers vs OS's and computers.
Language portability happens in C all the time, and is managed through a number of very difficult tools. In Javascript, it does it in runtime, figuring out its environment and adjusting which routines will run dynamically. In Java the environment provides the portability.
Portability is a worth-while goal in that it provides freedom. But is it too much to ask for a Javascript's portability to be pushed from run-time to handled by the environment? It shouldn't be a question of diversity of environments and a willingness to stop trying to screw each other over. Thats all.
Not to rant on your comment, you just brought up a pet peeve of mine.
Fist of all nobody in Guantanamo bay is granted POW status.
I won't go over this again. You are wrong in your assertion that you'll be locked up for being swarthy but for being Al Quaida. Ann Coulter wasn't asking for swarthy people to be locked up, and not even the Talibal are being "detained" without due rights and privedges. Which is not the same courtesy they showed. Why didn't you protest and complain against them? I see, because your obsessed with hating Republicans (and now me becuase although I am not a republican I don't follow in your call for hatred).
Your wrong, completely wrong.
you were providing a URL to a completely different person? [yada]
You said I claimed not to know who David Horowitz is. You lied. The URL goes to "David Horowitz". The link was framed in a question, as in you tell me if its that one or not. Nothing there is a claim that I didn't know who he is. You directly said I claimed it. Your wrong and lying.
when a person says given a choice between being in prison and putting people in prison I choose the latter they don't mean that they want to put people in prison.
It does when they include that in a context of "Look, their going to put me in prison". Especially when the charges are as trumped up as yours have washed out to be. Read the context, eh?
Your adolescent attempt to constantly compare me to Hitler is getting tiresome...
Hitler = Kill 6 million jews
Malcontent = Post On Slashdot
You complained about me missing context? I'm not comparing you to Hitler, I'm comparing your trumped up paranoid rhetoric to the rhetoric Hitler, Charles Taylor, Franco, and Lennin. They all rose to power by trumping up a fear of the government with subtle preparing of their audience to "jail", "hammer", and otherwise oppress those they trumped up accusations of oppression over.
And to me if you continue on this path, there may soon be very little difference between you and Hitler.
you don't know how to read.
Another trumped up charge of ignorance. Your a one note piano here.
Your obviously a little dazed from your over-running paranoia. Lets retrack this...
Me: I don't see why Ann Coulter or the conservatives want to put you in a concentration camp, unless your Al Queida that is.
Me: the Taliban have been granted POW status
Malcontent: Fist of all nobody in Guantanamo bay is granted POW status.
Chicago Tribune: U.S. grants POW status to Taliban, not Al Qaeda
The only inconsistency there, my friend is yourself. Again, if you are Al Quieda then you have something to worry about. Even if you are a Taliban, you don't need to worry about detention (well except that they detain people for doing things like singing and dancing and making rugs). You tried to make it sound like it was something against "swarthy" people. That simply has not panned out, not in this example or the others.
Also, the UN and Congressional inspectors at Guantanamo all say they have it better here than in Afghanistan.
Once again read the URLs I posted to. You really need to read these things before replying to them.
No need to get snippy here. I read the URL's posted, which is where I got my information from. Once again it seems that I just missed my queue to say "right on brutha" more than missed some information.
But reading what you want into things is pretty evident.
Malcontent: You said you didn't know who [David Horowitz] was
Again I ask where was that? The quote you provide is from me on the topic is
What about that quote makes you think I don't know who David Horowitz is? Nothing that I can tell. And you have the unmitigated gaul to say about that quote, "You know you are going to get caught up in your own lies."
I am not calling for a revolution. I am practising self defence. How many times do I have to say that.
The self defence of making the government tremble at your words while you put them in jail is most definately revolution my friend. Lie to us if you must, but this take head and do to thine own self be true!
You think that there is no difference between me and somebody who killed six million jews? really is that what you think?
The Jews were just the conservative and established economic power of the day, deeply rooted in religious principles. Your description of your great white elephant is markedly simular. And you have said you wish to detain them and be the hammer. I don't know you well enough, but by your rhetoric the simularities are chilling.
Before you go on putting more words in my mouth I never called for violence. Just self defense.
Again, to thine own self be true. Your not talking about defending values, in fact you've said almost nothing about your values except that you identify yourself as liberal. What I read is someone actively wishing to opress people that he/she feels threatened by.
I said given a choice between going to jail and jailing other people I choose the latter. Got it?
Oh yes, and it is so very simular to the rational that made the concentration camps both in the US and Germany. Hitler proposed the Jews were going to take over Germany and enslave the Aryan race and they needed to rise up against it. In fact there is a quote of his that is almost a directly what you said, but thats just from memory. I'll look it up.
You are totally unaware of the many speeches [David Horowitz] has given.
Odd you should say that after I showed how you were almost directly quoting him from a speach. A speach you claimed to not be aware of. Again, you really seem to have a problem with accepting that people can be well versed *and* disagree with you. Your immediate reaction to my disagreement has consistently been