I bought one of these from mwave several months ago. Added a 60G HD, a gig of RAM, and a Celeron 900, and was out the door for less than $600. Scavenged a CD-ROM and a second NIC, installed RH 7.2, and off I went. It makes a dandy mini-server, and I've had no heat or noise complaints.
I've had Covad/Speakeasy.net service for over a year now.
It took two months from when I ordered until it was working, but that was the fault of GTE - they did everything they could to screw me over. But I prevailed.
I've got 608/128, 2 statics, (no PPPoE krep), a flock of POP accounts (which I never use), web space (ditto), a dialup account I can use if my DSL ever goes out, and a good Usenet feed.
The article doesn't have much meat to it. Boiled down, it says "The Council of Ministers think unsolicited email and SMS messages should be legislated against. Two weeks ago, European Parliament voted against a ban on spam".
Or, more briefly:
Council: Spam bad. Anti-spam laws good.
Parliament: We disagree.
I wish something had been said about how the Council plans to enforce anti-spam laws. I live in Washington (US), where the state government passed anti-spam laws several years ago.
I still get spam. Anti-spam legislation is well and good, but it doesn't seem to work.
If you outlaw mass-mailers, only outlaws will mass-mail. Or something like that.
Program Linking allows a server to run on one machine, and a client to connect to that server. The client application is running on your Mac, the server application is running on the other Mac, and they talk.
There is no MacOS equivalent to the "Run on one machine, but display on another" model that the X Window System uses.
My suspicion is that they're not trying to patent the concept of a banner ad, but rather the nefarious method they use to deliver them.
They distribute ads to hundreds of sites, and they set a persisent browser cookie, thus (sort of) bypassing the fact that cookies can only be returned to the server that issued them.
Since the cgi that delivers the image and sets the cookie is on a doubleclick server, they can track someone through any or all of the client sites. That's how they develop "user profiles". Their cookie mechanism is pretty much the equivalent of a browser history file. It's just a history file that only includes sites that use the doubleclick system.
But you're missing out. I love the MacOS as much as anybody, and I think that as a USER's OS, it beats the pants off 'most any other. With the possible exception of BeOS, which (alas!) I can't run on my 8600/300. Linux is a hacker's OS. Learn. Make your brain more crinkly. Expand your mind.
Given that the kernel supports the Blue & White (or, as I like to call it, the Smurf Tower), and all Smurf Towers include the RAGE 128 card, I'd say you're safe.
In my experience, when Microsoft ports a product to a non-Windows OS, the result is a complex, windows-esque monstrosity. If they'd deliver the functionality of a good MS app (stipulating the existence of one) without forcing the windows look and feel down the user's throats, they'd be doing the computing world a favor.
Well, yeah, I guess...But since the slowing occurs in a lab environment, and probably inside some rather spooky equipment, I don't think it's gonna help much.
A bomb on the lab is still going to vaporize the whole shebang.
How did we get on this topic, again? I can't believe I'm talking about bombing a danish phyics lab.
David Brin explored this concept somewhat in the novel "Earth". One aspect of the society he presented there was a group of senior citizens who wore "True-Vue" goggles - sunglasses with integrated fiber-optic cameras - who simply watched everything and everyone that passed their field of vision, and constantly uploaded the data streams to the 'net.
Spooky thought, but I have to agree with his central statement - if everybody sees everything, then it all evens out. The problem would indeed be to make sure that privacy (or the lack thereof) was extended to all strata of society.
Hacking: Exploring an information system for the sake of knowledge.
Cracking: Exploring an information system for the sake of personal gain (be it monetary (stealing passwords, credit card numbers, etc.), ego-boosting (as this was) or whatever)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that's pretty stupid.
It's a bitch to get SMTP to work over 23, too.
I bought one of these from mwave several months ago. Added a 60G HD, a gig of RAM, and a Celeron 900, and was out the door for less than $600. Scavenged a CD-ROM and a second NIC, installed RH 7.2, and off I went. It makes a dandy mini-server, and I've had no heat or noise complaints.
Good on them.
I've had Covad/Speakeasy.net service for over a year now.
It took two months from when I ordered until it was working, but that was the fault of GTE - they did everything they could to screw me over. But I prevailed.
I've got 608/128, 2 statics, (no PPPoE krep), a flock of POP accounts (which I never use), web space (ditto), a dialup account I can use if my DSL ever goes out, and a good Usenet feed.
And I've had *no* outages. EVER.
I pay my 60 bucks a month happily.
The article doesn't have much meat to it. Boiled down, it says "The Council of Ministers think unsolicited email and SMS messages should be legislated against. Two weeks ago, European Parliament voted against a ban on spam".
Or, more briefly:
Council: Spam bad. Anti-spam laws good.
Parliament: We disagree.
I wish something had been said about how the Council plans to enforce anti-spam laws. I live in Washington (US), where the state government passed anti-spam laws several years ago.
I still get spam. Anti-spam legislation is well and good, but it doesn't seem to work.
If you outlaw mass-mailers, only outlaws will mass-mail. Or something like that.
Program Linking allows a server to run on one machine, and a client to connect to that server. The client application is running on your Mac, the server application is running on the other Mac, and they talk.
There is no MacOS equivalent to the "Run on one machine, but display on another" model that the X Window System uses.
Let's pick up the pace - despite all of our efforts, the RIAA is still firmly in the black.
It's not uncommon for a cracker to:
1. Compromise a machine.
2. Install an IRC server and bot.
3. Use the bot to distribute warez, mp3s, or whatever.
That's why Dave is down on them.
My suspicion is that they're not trying to patent the concept of a banner ad, but rather the nefarious method they use to deliver them.
They distribute ads to hundreds of sites, and they set a persisent browser cookie, thus (sort of) bypassing the fact that cookies can only be returned to the server that issued them.
Since the cgi that delivers the image and sets the cookie is on a doubleclick server, they can track someone through any or all of the client sites. That's how they develop "user profiles". Their cookie mechanism is pretty much the equivalent of a browser history file. It's just a history file that only includes sites that use the doubleclick system.
I ordered R4, back when it was "buy R4 and we'll ship you R5 for free when it comes out."
I had the R4 disc within a week, and I got my copy of R5 (LinuxPPC 1999) a few days after they announced it.
So don't run Linux.
But you're missing out. I love the MacOS as much as anybody, and I think that as a USER's OS, it beats the pants off 'most any other. With the possible exception of BeOS, which (alas!) I can't run on my 8600/300. Linux is a hacker's OS. Learn. Make your brain more crinkly. Expand your mind.
Or don't. Smarter Mac users are up to YOU.
What to do? Go to the mailbox and see if my CD is here, or read more /.? Such a difficult choice.
I sure hope they supported the Adaptec SCSI cards in the kernel this time - I don't want to yank the card out to boot it this time around.
Given that the kernel supports the Blue & White (or, as I like to call it, the Smurf Tower), and all Smurf Towers include the RAGE 128 card, I'd say you're safe.
Given that the Palm is far better at displaying text than graphics, I'd say Perl would be a natural for it.
Except that writing code with Graffiti would sort of suck.
In my experience, when Microsoft ports a product to a non-Windows OS, the result is a complex, windows-esque monstrosity. If they'd deliver the functionality of a good MS app (stipulating the existence of one) without forcing the windows look and feel down the user's throats, they'd be doing the computing world a favor.
But they won't.
...goes well with coffee, a geek staple.
Well, yeah, I guess...But since the slowing occurs in a lab environment, and probably inside some rather spooky equipment, I don't think it's gonna help much.
A bomb on the lab is still going to vaporize the whole shebang.
How did we get on this topic, again? I can't believe I'm talking about bombing a danish phyics lab.
David Brin explored this concept somewhat in the novel "Earth". One aspect of the society he presented there was a group of senior citizens who wore "True-Vue" goggles - sunglasses with integrated fiber-optic cameras - who simply watched everything and everyone that passed their field of vision, and constantly uploaded the data streams to the 'net.
Spooky thought, but I have to agree with his central statement - if everybody sees everything, then it all evens out. The problem would indeed be to make sure that privacy (or the lack thereof) was extended to all strata of society.
Anybody have the image cached?
You've got all wrong.
1. Be is not Microsoft
2. Therefore, it doesn't suck.
Hacking: Exploring an information system for the sake of knowledge.
Cracking: Exploring an information system for the sake of personal gain (be it monetary (stealing passwords, credit card numbers, etc.), ego-boosting (as this was) or whatever)
Excuse the nested parentheses.