Red hat used to provide a vibrant linux distro that was good for use on servers - enterprise level servers used to use RedHat 7.3 and the like.
They still do. Maybe not enterprise servers, but that doesn't have much, if anything, to do with the "goodness" of the distro.
It was a good distro; anything you needed you could find on redhat's site or on rpmfind.net, and it was ubiquitious as "the" linux distro. If there was a binary package release for a linux version of some software, it was released for redhat, as an RPM.
And it still is a good distro. Fedora may not be "the" distro any more, but binary packages are just as ubiquitous as ever, if anything, things are much better on that front - no more hunting down those RPM's and their dependencies by hand, yum and high quality repositories like Extras and freshrpms do it all for you.
And it was free, or at least not expensive, as a boxed set. The life cycle was usually 12-15 months between versions (in 2 years, we went from 7.0 - 7.3).
Free, check. Boxed set? No. Life cycle? Perhaps not quite that long, but about 1½ years with Fedora Legacy. Not to mention, updating three times within 2 years is almost as often as Core default six month life cycle, so doesn't look like a problem to you...
Now, they've ditched that.
No, they have't.
Fedora is a piece of crap
No it isn't.
and gets upgraded every 2 months.
No it doesn't. 2 != 6. But hey, can't expect someone who never graduated from elementary school to understand the difference.
Patches aren't released with any regularity or any expected quickness.
Yes they are. Hardly a day goes between patches, and upstream fixes get quickly released.
Incompatabilities between software packages on the same release are never addressed.
Care to point out any examples?
If you want help, go screw yourself.
Community seems quite willing to help. Now, if you want enterprise level help, that's different, but then again, nobody sane would except it to be free anyyway.
But Fedora is their beta testing for their enterprise linux.
Fedora is RHL.
Now, couple that with the fact that RED HAT DIDN'T WRITE 95% OF THEIR DISTRO.
Maybe they didn't, but they did wrote and fund lot of what makes it tick. GNOME wouldn't be nearly as far as it is were it not for RedHat. Nor glibc. Nor gcc. Nor kernel.
They're selling software that someone else wrote, and they've put together a desktop and a couple of apps for server administration and updating packages.
If funding the development of the aforementioned packages and giving their top hackers safe job doing something they enjoy is "writing a few administration packages", you're even more delusional than you sound.
Based on that rant, you're the kind of person that has never used Fedora and thinks that makes him all the more knowledgeable about it.
Fuck redhat.
You, sir are an idiot, and I've only one thing left to say, to you, and the twids who mod this kind of drivel up. FUCK YOU. GO Red Hat, keep up the good work.
Asa mentioned something about server problems and activating the update for 1.0.1 later, and indeed it did show up today. Granted, it's a week since the release and that's a long time for security update... And windows-only apparently, though Linux users probably update trough their native package systems anyway.
Well, considering this decision to ignore the restart request was made by the new Commission, it would seem pretty certain that they indeed do view it the same way.
if Redhat would have supported Rasterman and built a team THREE years ago, Linux would have this stuff now, instead they insulted him.
By giving him a job and funding his work? Oh, some insults, those. I'm sure there were some personal problems there, but by his own words, they were with "certain people".
But in the end, goals of E and GNOME just did not, and still do not, match. Raster left because his vision wasn't the same than that of RH and he DID NOT want to work on the kind of integration you're suggesting, but E, and E alone. You can't "build a team" if the main member of the team is playing a different game than the rest.
wxGTK is still buggy as hell with GTK2 and unicode, GTK1 version may "look like native", but it's horribly ugly native from ten years ago. Not to mention, wxWidgets API is modeled after the horror called MFC.
I much rather use pygtk directly, even if it's at the expense of "feeling" bit less native on Windows.
The key difference here is that you can scroll in two dimensions--ie: you can scroll left-right as easily as you can scroll up-down.
Err, "down" side works as left/right and right side as up/down, been implemented for quite a while by synaptics drivers for example. So yes, I can scroll in two dimensions, nothing new here. Just a different way to do the same.
Just try it on a table to see how it feels. Just keep your fingers right next to each other, no need to spread them out.
Table? I don't have a touchpad size of a table, those things tend to be quite small, multiple fingers are clumsy there.
Feels pretty natural to me, much more natural than "scroll zone" stuff (which I loathe).
IMHO neither of these ways has much anything at all whatsoever to do with "natural", nor is both are 100% learned behaviour. You don't scroll text by dragging your fingers in nature, but if you do take it that far, grabbing the edges of paper and moving it is closer to scroll zones than two-finger drag.
However, when you take software into account and try to make them closer to something already learned, scrollbars are always right & bottom, so from a GUI viewpoint it makes perfect sense to make the same sides "physical scrollbars" on controller as well.
Nothing beats the trusty old wheel mouse, though. But to each his own...
I wouldn't be so sure about that, I think "scroll zone" "hacks" make much more sense than trying to cram in more functions based on different pressure points or amount of area covered.
Of course it's impossible to say for certain without trying, but aside from lack of support in some apps (openoffice), scroll zones are very nice to work with and work very well.
I wonder how tightly this is tied to the Basic implementation, and if it would be possible to switch the underlying language to something decent - say, python - without basically rewriting the whole mess?
Then by that logic. Stop breathing. No, seriously. You are poluting this world with the greenhouse gas Carbon Dioxide. So stop breathing and stop poluting.
BZZT!
You're only increasing CO2 amount in atmosphere if you're somehow breathing without having to EAT.
Plants you and animals eat take in the carbon you're breathing out, give it back to you in solid form, and you exhale it again. Balanced loop, no net increase of atmospheric CO2.
It's not going to happen, but just for the heck of it, let's dismiss the new observations for a while.
Now that you've seen what kind of damage bad Tsunami can do, do you still think ground impact would be better?
Mind you, earthquake 9.0 on richter scale is "only" about 32 gigatons, the asteroid impact would release 60 times more energy, and cause a megatsunami.
Also, tsunamis don't often happen on Atlantic so coastal areas would be much less prepared for catastrophe than those on Pacific or Indian ocean.
Despite yanks constant raping of the English language, the two words making up a composite word "football" are still rather well defined, don't you think? It is a game where you primarily use your feet, it also features a ball.
Considering US "football" does not do either, I'm not entirely sure what it should be called, but football it ain't.
Yes, there are quite a few people who understand gravity. You're apparently not one of them...
There is no way that you could hope to fly an object as massive as an asteroid into earth orbit without severe environmental impact.
Either that, or you don't have any comprehension how massive "as massive as an asteroid" really is.
Most likely both. All the asteroids in solar system combined weight less than Moon! If someone would drag Ceres (largest asteroid, about 3% moon mass) to orbit, it might have some _barely_ noticeable effects, but that's about it, no other single rock is large enough to play any significant part in the "tug of war".
Satellite orbits might be altered if big enough asteroid would be parked to orbit, but if someone would actually be able to do that, replacing few satellites ought to be easy in comparison.
And stop blabbering about "being on phone", if you skimmed over it while yabbering with some other moron, read it again, really this time, and STOP WHINING.
Why do I have this ominous feeling of dread when I think of some overzealous people trying to prove they can do something as destructive as messing with an asteroid.
Partly because you're being stupid in this matter, partly because you didn't read the articles, and partly because the submitter made this stuff up.
It's also very small, and would burn up in atmosphere, hardly destructive even whole, much less in pieces. Probably great looking piece of fireworks, would anyone happen to see, though.
I am sorry, but I like that asteroid nice and FAR from us.
I am sorry to say, but the asteroid in question, as mentioned in TFA, just passed Earth _UNDER THE ORBIT OF SATELLITES_, if that's "nice and FAR", you've got some pretty weird ideas about the FAR part.
In addition, B612 foundation is not interested in bringing any asteroids to Earth orbit - that's one of things the submitter made up - but rather demonstrating that one can be moved at all. Also, when they actually will choose one, care will be taken to pick out a rock that is far enough that it has no change to end up in collision course after the slight orbit alterations.
Blowing things up has a habit of spreading pieces in a chaotic fashion
Again, if you'd read the TFA, you would know that nobody is intending to blow up anything. Blowing up something is not just dangerous, but extremely inefficient, hollywood might like it, but any real asteroid deflection will apply very slight trust over long periods of time using, for example, ion engines. In a specific direction, no pieces to worry about.
I hope there is a more practical application - like say if one day an asteroid is going to hit us they will use these techniques to divert Earth from mass devastation
If you discount submitters lies, that's what it is all about, also mentioned in TFA, practising and proving the technology required for declecting an actual impact on something harmless.
Anyone considering the implications of removing a stellar object from the cosmos?
You can't remove objects from cosmos. Just because the rock is in form of sand or small boulders scattered around Earth doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it's just in different place and different form.
I know this one is small, but what is it possible that there is some sort of junction of asteroids/comets/etc., and they all exert some sort of gravitation pull that keeps them on their current courses? How do we know that just by removing this little one, some far-off solar system doesn't just collapse?
All stellar bodies certainly exert gravitational attraction, but on rock this small is very small to begin with, and it weakens to square of distance, so VERY soon becomes practically zero.
In addition, our solar system, when looked "some far-off solar system" is so small it's a just a point, as long as the mass is there, different objects making up it's total gravity don't matter, if you gather all the rocks and planets and dump them into same clump, it's still same mass and still exerts same amount of gravitational pull.
Besides, if solar system somewhere would collapse each time a space rock manages to hit a planet (they do that a plenty on their own, you know, no people required), far-off solar systems would have became extinct long ago.
For that matter, given a couple whacks the Earth has received, there may be Earth meteorites on the Moon and Mars, and they may have carried Earth life to both places.
Earth's gravity well is much deeper than either of Moon or Mars, so there's less stuff originating from us floating around, and in addition any "whack" or vulcanic eruption big enough to boost rocks to escape velocity from here would've probably killed any possible hitchhikers as well.
What? Parent didn't state WHERE those nukes would hit... Exploding nuke on or slightly under surface would do a very small nudge, exploding nuke in space near it, almost nothing.
Space is mostly vacuum right?
Right.
Doesn't a nuke work by atoms spliting and hitting other atoms? True some would hit the asteroid, but doesn't much of force come from atoms in atmosphere being split?
Nuke works either by splitting or fusing atoms, depending on whether we're talking about hydrogen bombs (which would probably be used here, since they're more powerful) or old-fashioned primitive nukes. However, no atoms in atmosphere are split, only fissionable material (uranium, plutonium..) within the bomb! Atmosphere does contribute to destruction not by adding any more fissionable material, but by being heated which causes it to expand _FAST_, and cause tremendous pressure wave of hot gas (eg. "normal" explosion).
How do we know how much force a nuke would create by going off say a mile from an object in space?
Without a medium for pressure wave to propagate in, almost nothing, huge amount of energy released in nuclear explosion is heat, in space that would be totally wasted, leaving only radiation pressure.
Wouldn't hitting object directly produce much more of a splitting action akin to how a jewler hits a diamond with a chisel?
Hitting object directly (or better yet, blowing the bomb a bit under the surface) would cause parts of it to vaporise, and fly to space and thus (very slightly) pushing object towards opposite direction of edge hit. And since there's nothing to stop it in space, it would continue moving in that direction forever, perhaps - if done long enough before the impact - changing the orbit so it'd miss.
have ever happened to innocent till proven guilty?
Nothing of course. Nobody has been proven guilty. Nobody has even been arrested. Heck, anyone hasn't even been charged to court, yet! All that took place was searching evidence for a possible crime.
Why don't you come back and bitch _IF_ they will be convicted?
Because as it appears from that article, they provided a means, that is not commiting a crime.
Well, actually yes it can mean that, under most laws, accessory to a crime is a crime in itself. You think it should be legal to sell a gun to a person who tells you he's going to use it to murder someone?
What's important here is that they charged money for providing the means, police wouldn't have gotten search warrant without that significant fact, and really, if someone is stupid enough to do that, I don't feel sorry for them in the slightest. It's just begging for it.
It'd be different if they started raiding people for sharing a latest britney spears song.
Since IE isn't sold alone, people switching to other browsers isn't hurting their income.
Yes it does. IE creates demand for their server side solutions, and establishes OS lock-in.
Nobody is going to use uberkewl longhorn XAMLServer edition for web apps (which would conveniently require Windows, of course) if they've been using a XUL equivalent for years in Firefox.
PPTP support relies on compiling the unsupported MPPE into your kernel
Well, only if the other end insists on using MPPE, nothing in PPTP support itself requires it.
and until recently, either using scripts or a GTK1 gui written in PHP.
Perhaps, but the config file "scripts" or php gui create are rather simple, making more modern gui that doesn't require phpgtk probably wouldn't be all that hard if there was sufficient demand for such. Apparently xandros believes there is.
You didn't even try, did you? Just drew a conclusion that hey! javascript, it can't work in Lynx!
Well, here's a newsflash, it does work rather well in both Lynx and Links, probably better than in browsers that do support javascript, but not to full extent Google is using.
Slashdot Mirror
Red hat used to provide a vibrant linux distro that was good for use on servers - enterprise level servers used to use RedHat 7.3 and the like.
They still do. Maybe not enterprise servers, but that doesn't have much, if anything, to do with the "goodness" of the distro.
It was a good distro; anything you needed you could find on redhat's site or on rpmfind.net, and it was ubiquitious as "the" linux distro. If there was a binary package release for a linux version of some software, it was released for redhat, as an RPM.
And it still is a good distro. Fedora may not be "the" distro any more, but binary packages are just as ubiquitous as ever, if anything, things are much better on that front - no more hunting down those RPM's and their dependencies by hand, yum and high quality repositories like Extras and freshrpms do it all for you.
And it was free, or at least not expensive, as a boxed set. The life cycle was usually 12-15 months between versions (in 2 years, we went from 7.0 - 7.3).
Free, check. Boxed set? No. Life cycle? Perhaps not quite that long, but about 1½ years with Fedora Legacy. Not to mention, updating three times within 2 years is almost as often as Core default six month life cycle, so doesn't look like a problem to you...
Now, they've ditched that.
No, they have't.
Fedora is a piece of crap
No it isn't.
and gets upgraded every 2 months.
No it doesn't. 2 != 6. But hey, can't expect someone who never graduated from elementary school to understand the difference.
Patches aren't released with any regularity or any expected quickness.
Yes they are. Hardly a day goes between patches, and upstream fixes get quickly released.
Incompatabilities between software packages on the same release are never addressed.
Care to point out any examples?
If you want help, go screw yourself.
Community seems quite willing to help. Now, if you want enterprise level help, that's different, but then again, nobody sane would except it to be free anyyway.
But Fedora is their beta testing for their enterprise linux.
Fedora is RHL.
Now, couple that with the fact that RED HAT DIDN'T WRITE 95% OF THEIR DISTRO.
Maybe they didn't, but they did wrote and fund lot of what makes it tick. GNOME wouldn't be nearly as far as it is were it not for RedHat. Nor glibc. Nor gcc. Nor kernel.
They're selling software that someone else wrote, and they've put together a desktop and a couple of apps for server administration and updating packages.
If funding the development of the aforementioned packages and giving their top hackers safe job doing something they enjoy is "writing a few administration packages", you're even more delusional than you sound.
Based on that rant, you're the kind of person that has never used Fedora and thinks that makes him all the more knowledgeable about it.
Fuck redhat.
You, sir are an idiot, and I've only one thing left to say, to you, and the twids who mod this kind of drivel up. FUCK YOU. GO Red Hat, keep up the good work.
There is.
Asa mentioned something about server problems and activating the update for 1.0.1 later, and indeed it did show up today. Granted, it's a week since the release and that's a long time for security update... And windows-only apparently, though Linux users probably update trough their native package systems anyway.
His blog has more.
Well, considering this decision to ignore the restart request was made by the new Commission, it would seem pretty certain that they indeed do view it the same way.
Enough money does that.
if Redhat would have supported Rasterman and built a team THREE years ago, Linux would have this stuff now, instead they insulted him.
By giving him a job and funding his work? Oh, some insults, those. I'm sure there were some personal problems there, but by his own words, they were with "certain people".
But in the end, goals of E and GNOME just did not, and still do not, match. Raster left because his vision wasn't the same than that of RH and he DID NOT want to work on the kind of integration you're suggesting, but E, and E alone. You can't "build a team" if the main member of the team is playing a different game than the rest.
X has NEVER brought windows to the front when they are clicked in until Havoc.
Absolute and 100% pure BULLSHIT. _Many_ WM's have done raise&focus on click before Metacity.
wxGTK is still buggy as hell with GTK2 and unicode, GTK1 version may "look like native", but it's horribly ugly native from ten years ago. Not to mention, wxWidgets API is modeled after the horror called MFC.
I much rather use pygtk directly, even if it's at the expense of "feeling" bit less native on Windows.
The key difference here is that you can scroll in two dimensions--ie: you can scroll left-right as easily as you can scroll up-down.
Err, "down" side works as left/right and right side as up/down, been implemented for quite a while by synaptics drivers for example. So yes, I can scroll in two dimensions, nothing new here. Just a different way to do the same.
Just try it on a table to see how it feels. Just keep your fingers right next to each other, no need to spread them out.
Table? I don't have a touchpad size of a table, those things tend to be quite small, multiple fingers are clumsy there.
Feels pretty natural to me, much more natural than "scroll zone" stuff (which I loathe).
IMHO neither of these ways has much anything at all whatsoever to do with "natural", nor is both are 100% learned behaviour. You don't scroll text by dragging your fingers in nature, but if you do take it that far, grabbing the edges of paper and moving it is closer to scroll zones than two-finger drag.
However, when you take software into account and try to make them closer to something already learned, scrollbars are always right & bottom, so from a GUI viewpoint it makes perfect sense to make the same sides "physical scrollbars" on controller as well.
Nothing beats the trusty old wheel mouse, though. But to each his own...
I wouldn't be so sure about that, I think "scroll zone" "hacks" make much more sense than trying to cram in more functions based on different pressure points or amount of area covered.
Of course it's impossible to say for certain without trying, but aside from lack of support in some apps (openoffice), scroll zones are very nice to work with and work very well.
No, it's not ok.
I wonder how tightly this is tied to the Basic implementation, and if it would be possible to switch the underlying language to something decent - say, python - without basically rewriting the whole mess?
Then by that logic. Stop breathing. No, seriously. You are poluting this world with the greenhouse gas Carbon Dioxide. So stop breathing and stop poluting.
BZZT!
You're only increasing CO2 amount in atmosphere if you're somehow breathing without having to EAT.
Plants you and animals eat take in the carbon you're breathing out, give it back to you in solid form, and you exhale it again. Balanced loop, no net increase of atmospheric CO2.
Doh, feel free to dismiss that, point error, it's only 2 gigatons, not 2000.
It's not going to happen, but just for the heck of it, let's dismiss the new observations for a while.
Now that you've seen what kind of damage bad Tsunami can do, do you still think ground impact would be better?
Mind you, earthquake 9.0 on richter scale is "only" about 32 gigatons, the asteroid impact would release 60 times more energy, and cause a megatsunami.
Also, tsunamis don't often happen on Atlantic so coastal areas would be much less prepared for catastrophe than those on Pacific or Indian ocean.
No, he means football.
Despite yanks constant raping of the English language, the two words making up a composite word "football" are still rather well defined, don't you think? It is a game where you primarily use your feet, it also features a ball.
Considering US "football" does not do either, I'm not entirely sure what it should be called, but football it ain't.
Gravity anyone?
Yes, there are quite a few people who understand gravity. You're apparently not one of them...
There is no way that you could hope to fly an object as massive as an asteroid into earth orbit without severe environmental impact.
Either that, or you don't have any comprehension how massive "as massive as an asteroid" really is.
Most likely both. All the asteroids in solar system combined weight less than Moon! If someone would drag Ceres (largest asteroid, about 3% moon mass) to orbit, it might have some _barely_ noticeable effects, but that's about it, no other single rock is large enough to play any significant part in the "tug of war".
Satellite orbits might be altered if big enough asteroid would be parked to orbit, but if someone would actually be able to do that, replacing few satellites ought to be easy in comparison.
And stop blabbering about "being on phone", if you skimmed over it while yabbering with some other moron, read it again, really this time, and STOP WHINING.
Why do I have this ominous feeling of dread when I think of some overzealous people trying to prove they can do something as destructive as messing with an asteroid.
Partly because you're being stupid in this matter, partly because you didn't read the articles, and partly because the submitter made this stuff up.
It's also very small, and would burn up in atmosphere, hardly destructive even whole, much less in pieces. Probably great looking piece of fireworks, would anyone happen to see, though.
I am sorry, but I like that asteroid nice and FAR from us.
I am sorry to say, but the asteroid in question, as mentioned in TFA, just passed Earth _UNDER THE ORBIT OF SATELLITES_, if that's "nice and FAR", you've got some pretty weird ideas about the FAR part.
In addition, B612 foundation is not interested in bringing any asteroids to Earth orbit - that's one of things the submitter made up - but rather demonstrating that one can be moved at all. Also, when they actually will choose one, care will be taken to pick out a rock that is far enough that it has no change to end up in collision course after the slight orbit alterations.
Blowing things up has a habit of spreading pieces in a chaotic fashion
Again, if you'd read the TFA, you would know that nobody is intending to blow up anything. Blowing up something is not just dangerous, but extremely inefficient, hollywood might like it, but any real asteroid deflection will apply very slight trust over long periods of time using, for example, ion engines. In a specific direction, no pieces to worry about.
I hope there is a more practical application - like say if one day an asteroid is going to hit us they will use these techniques to divert Earth from mass devastation
If you discount submitters lies, that's what it is all about, also mentioned in TFA, practising and proving the technology required for declecting an actual impact on something harmless.
Anyone considering the implications of removing a stellar object from the cosmos?
You can't remove objects from cosmos. Just because the rock is in form of sand or small boulders scattered around Earth doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it's just in different place and different form.
I know this one is small, but what is it possible that there is some sort of junction of asteroids/comets/etc., and they all exert some sort of gravitation pull that keeps them on their current courses? How do we know that just by removing this little one, some far-off solar system doesn't just collapse?
All stellar bodies certainly exert gravitational attraction, but on rock this small is very small to begin with, and it weakens to square of distance, so VERY soon becomes practically zero.
In addition, our solar system, when looked "some far-off solar system" is so small it's a just a point, as long as the mass is there, different objects making up it's total gravity don't matter, if you gather all the rocks and planets and dump them into same clump, it's still same mass and still exerts same amount of gravitational pull.
Besides, if solar system somewhere would collapse each time a space rock manages to hit a planet (they do that a plenty on their own, you know, no people required), far-off solar systems would have became extinct long ago.
For that matter, given a couple whacks the Earth has received, there may be Earth meteorites on the Moon and Mars, and they may have carried Earth life to both places.
Earth's gravity well is much deeper than either of Moon or Mars, so there's less stuff originating from us floating around, and in addition any "whack" or vulcanic eruption big enough to boost rocks to escape velocity from here would've probably killed any possible hitchhikers as well.
Just curious, but would that work?
What? Parent didn't state WHERE those nukes would hit... Exploding nuke on or slightly under surface would do a very small nudge, exploding nuke in space near it, almost nothing.
Space is mostly vacuum right?
Right.
Doesn't a nuke work by atoms spliting and hitting other atoms? True some would hit the asteroid, but doesn't much of force come from atoms in atmosphere being split?
Nuke works either by splitting or fusing atoms, depending on whether we're talking about hydrogen bombs (which would probably be used here, since they're more powerful) or old-fashioned primitive nukes. However, no atoms in atmosphere are split, only fissionable material (uranium, plutonium..) within the bomb! Atmosphere does contribute to destruction not by adding any more fissionable material, but by being heated which causes it to expand _FAST_, and cause tremendous pressure wave of hot gas (eg. "normal" explosion).
How do we know how much force a nuke would create by going off say a mile from an object in space?
Without a medium for pressure wave to propagate in, almost nothing, huge amount of energy released in nuclear explosion is heat, in space that would be totally wasted, leaving only radiation pressure.
Wouldn't hitting object directly produce much more of a splitting action akin to how a jewler hits a diamond with a chisel?
Hitting object directly (or better yet, blowing the bomb a bit under the surface) would cause parts of it to vaporise, and fly to space and thus (very slightly) pushing object towards opposite direction of edge hit. And since there's nothing to stop it in space, it would continue moving in that direction forever, perhaps - if done long enough before the impact - changing the orbit so it'd miss.
have ever happened to innocent till proven guilty?
Nothing of course. Nobody has been proven guilty. Nobody has even been arrested. Heck, anyone
hasn't even been charged to court, yet! All that took place was searching evidence for a possible crime.
Why don't you come back and bitch _IF_ they will be convicted?
Because as it appears from that article, they provided a means, that is not commiting a crime.
Well, actually yes it can mean that, under most laws, accessory to a crime is a crime in itself. You think it should be legal to sell a gun to a person who tells you he's going to use it to murder someone?
What's important here is that they charged money for providing the means, police wouldn't have gotten search warrant without that significant fact, and really, if someone is stupid enough to do that, I don't feel sorry for them in the slightest. It's just begging for it.
It'd be different if they started raiding people for sharing a latest britney spears song.
Since IE isn't sold alone, people switching to other browsers isn't hurting their income.
Yes it does. IE creates demand for their server side solutions, and establishes OS lock-in.
Nobody is going to use uberkewl longhorn XAMLServer edition for web apps (which would conveniently require Windows, of course) if they've been using a XUL equivalent for years in Firefox.
Theo's got his share of mod points, eh?
Before you metamoderate: read the thread at the mailing lists. Thanks.
PPTP support relies on compiling the unsupported MPPE into your kernel
Well, only if the other end insists on using MPPE, nothing in PPTP support itself requires it.
and until recently, either using scripts or a GTK1 gui written in PHP.
Perhaps, but the config file "scripts" or php gui create are rather simple, making more modern gui that doesn't require phpgtk probably wouldn't be all that hard if there was sufficient demand for such. Apparently xandros believes there is.
mk 1? hardly, it's been trough uncountable number of iterations and redevelopment.
Wow. That's sad.
I wasn't previously aware that Theo de Raadt was an idiot. Or five years old. Or both.
My faith in OpenSSH/BSD developers, and subsequently, the projects, just took a big blow.
How come people obviously so talented in some things can be so stupid on others that they end up looking totally retarded?
You didn't even try, did you? Just drew a conclusion that hey! javascript, it can't work in Lynx!
Well, here's a newsflash, it does work rather well in both Lynx and Links, probably better than in browsers that do support javascript, but not to full extent Google is using.