He never actucally said he invented the Internet, he was a strong player in Washington pushing and advocating the Internet and he made claims of his work in this area helped (in some way) the Internet to grow.
He never claimed the entire thing, but a small part (especailly in schools)that he had some part of this (more than most suits in Washington) and this is what he claimed. Some people took the way he "worded" it wrong and over time it morphed into this urban legend of sorts where he said he invented it (not true).
Like if some suit in Washington says "I enjoy my backpain medicine, it helps me sleep at night" over time it would be morph by hear say to "Senator so-so dopes up on morph, he got addicted in WW II when he broken his spinal colum"
The American public hears what they want to hear, and when there is nothing intersting to hear they change it a little to make it more intersting...
Al Gore never claimed that, but it has be like a urban legend going around America (almost like a joke). The above statement I was making in the earlier post wasn't serious, it was a joke, it was intented as a humorous comment.
Al Gore Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) secured_by_Raven/1.4.2 PHP/4.0b3 Linux
Al is the only one using Linux and Apache (SSL/PHP EVEN!)
Also he (or more likely one of this web designers hide some stuff in the html source, now that is just fun for everyone.
Al Gore also invented the Internet, making all this possiable, as for me I am putting my vote on the Gore man. Geek vote counts, vote Al Gore because Al Gore voted Linux (in his choice of web server).
"Gates emphasized that Microsoft's "closed" code makes Windows more reliable."
I am sure glad they don't open source it, if it is this reliable closed source, it won't even boot under an Open Source model. Thank God they are keeping it closed. Thanks you Mr. Gates for putting code correctness and reliablity before poltics, marketing hype and the pursuit of money.
You got to love that Gates, putting reliablity, stablity, security, design, code corretness before they give into market and govement presure to release under a model that has be prove to destory reliablity. I am surpise they can even get that Linux or FreeBSD junk to even compile, being open source and unreliablity and all! Do you know that the Linux OS doesn't even have a linux.exe? It is called something like vmlinuz, how weird is that?
(If you haven't firgured it out by now this is a joke and not meant to be taken serious)
It is not only the amount of time most tech workers work, but also the quality of the work most tech workers do.
When I worked at McDonalds (when I was in high school), there where managers and employee's standing around, talking, taking smoke break, eating and drink (stolen) food and drink. When I worked there, it was only for 7 1/2 hours, but for about 5 of those hours it was nothing but slack off, doing nothing, chilling in the break room smoking. Only have to make food when the customer order it, if they aren't ordering, there is no need to do extra work. Even the managers slacked off majorly.
After awhile I got a job doing tech support for an ISP, out of an 8 hour work day, proably 1 hour total was spent towards giving tech support, everything else was playing with their linux and unix system, surfing the web and doing personal email.
When I hit system admin though after 2 years, everything hit the fan. Sure I put in 10-11 hours on an average work day, but the thing I have noticed, is not the time, but how it is spent. In those other jobs, the majority of the job was "Hurry up and wait", system admin though, all 10-11 hours and spent doing system admin and that is it. Seriously, I take 5 minutes when I first get here (ussually an hour early) to check slash (techinally this is before the work day starts, but I do it from work, so I count it). Take a 5 minute lunch (enough for a pepsi and cig), 5 minutes to post to slash dot.
The company policy is 3 breaks of 15 minutes each for every 6 hours worked, 1 30-1 hour lunch break.
Doing personal stuff (like eating, relaxing, taking a break) I probably spent 15 minutes per day, all my co workers eat 15 minutes per break.
I don't mind it, if I took and hour lunch and more breaks I would be leaving work when it is dark out. (Not that I mind the dark, I just have other things to do at night)
I personally feel that the quality and amount of work that gets done in the tech feel is more compressed and compact. I haven't meet or worked with an Unix admin yet that takes lunch. When I first starting as a Jr. Admin, the Sr. admin told me "Make sure you take lunch, even if you don't want to"
"Sure, you want to go grab something in a bit"
"Nah, I got to get this web server re-configureed"
"Yea your right, what you using, apache"
Also, no matter when I leave and no matter how much work I do, I also get the feel that the job "still" isn't done. I could work here 24-7 for a year staight and when I left for sleep, I would probably feel like there is still more to do and that I shouldn't be heading home so soon, anyone else feel this way?
Well my 5 minutes for posting on slashdot is up, actucally more like ten, I'll probably skip the pop and cig today to make up for it : )
Jesus Christ, I really hope someone can port Linux to one of these things!! : )
For $1000 (The price of the average PC) you could buy a crap load of these things and do a cluster from hell!
Re-render the Matrix at home, raise you seti units by ten fold in the first day, compute dynamic fluids in seconds, re-create the JFK murder and crack any/etc/shadow file in 2 minutes! Microsoft X-box Linux distro. (joking)
The thing about the console games, is (for the most part) high code quality. If "Metal Gear Solid" has a bug in it, they can't release a patch fix, so (most) companies make sure the game is solid, and have as many bugs kicked out BEFORE the game goes to market.
Microsoft does have a good game market, I hope the standard of the rest of the consoles "code correctness" carries over. I would hate to get a call at 2:00 in the morning from a freind
"Hey I flash my "BIOS" with the lastest MS service pack and now all of the games made by West Wood studios don't work, could you come over and take a look at it"
This is John H. Cracker, I am the one how released all the DOS attacks on ebay.com, buy.com, etc. I am sure you have heard about it. There was been some confusion on why I released my DOS attck program for *nix platforms only. The choice came down to developing, testing and deploying my tools on *nix boxes for simple reasons. I have reviewed WindowsXX products thoughly, and yes tools where developed and tested on Microsofts platforms, but I found stablilty and uptime a major issuse. This was an extremely intensive attack again huge site with a huge about of bandwidth. Staight up Microsofts current offerings did not give what was need in this attack, stablilty under massive amounts of work loads.
I took bids from serval differant *nix-s and Sun offered a very nice platform and also Linux had a very competive price range and was able to funcation properly for the task needed. We are looking to support Windows in the furture, and are working close with MS officals to get the product up to specs.
(Note this is a joke. I did not and have never used computers for illegal purpose. don't take this serious.)
People who hit 'easy install' are responsible for their woes? Why? Because they dont have the same technical expertise as most people here? Is that an excuse for allowing AOL to ream people?
Sometimes I walk into a Software store, had the guy at the counter both of my Credit Cards and tell him that I need some software now, and don't want to pay attenation to any of the details, that I don't want to know what software titles or how many he has picked out for me. I tell him, I want it easy and tell him to hurry up and charge whatever software to my cards.
Sometimes I get really reamed when my Credit Card bill comes in, but hey I am a dumbass and don't know about software, people should just do it for me without screwing me over.
I want to get a AI monkey and that dam iBO dog robot thing. You know the one, Sony makes it, looks like a dog, everyone and their mom is pimping these dogs out on their web site in contests.
Anyways, get these 2 robot creatures and put them in a free for all death match live though web cam on the Internet. Progess in the AI robtics field is only good if other AI robots can take them on in a death match, a fight to the finish.
Plus I am just getting so sick of getting spam for signing up for all these contests to win a dam little robotic dog that doesn't even come standard with a flame thrower. A buzz saw would not be hard to retro-fit on it though...
Opps, I just though of something, do you guys think you will be sued by Guns & Roses?
GPL none the less, this makes me feel awhole lot more comfortable with the code than the "other" license Rob put on it. Sorry Rob but that first license just sounded alittle to "if-y", but putting it under GPL was a really good thing.
I am not claiming to be a elite code hacker, the most programming I do is in the bourne shell or Perl. I won't know what to do with a peice of C code if it bite me.
The point is, I am not an elite kernel hacker, just a system admin without decent coding skills, but I still can apply source code patches. Most of the time, they just release a new sub version, like if 1.1 had a security hole, 1.2 is exactly the same with the bug fix. Normal I can find software on ftp sites and patch the system up with a
tar zxvf program_without_bug.tar.gz cd program_without_bug ./configure; make; su ******** make install exit; cd.. rm -rf program_without_bug*
The point is, even though I don't have mad coding skills, the bug is ussually fixed before Red Hat puts it in a nice little package for me, sure it takes a couple more commands to get it installed, but it isn't something any other (unix) sys admin couldn't do.
Even if they don't make a nice configure and Makefile they are going to have atleast a README file or a blurb on their web page of how to install it.
(one of) the good things about GNU code junkies is that they do honestly try and work with the people installing and using their programs. They aren't just going to throw some x86 ASM in an unknown compressed format on their ftp without explaining why it is there or how to use it. They will try and atleast create a short README explain what the.tar.gz file does (and any bugs it fixes) and the general direction to go when installing it.
I will admit I am not a "ruthless code hackers of Kung Fu level", but me (like any other unix system admin) knows what to do when no.rpm file is avaiable.
First, let me say this isn't a flame, troll bait non any disrespect to the open source community or Red Hat software, just my opinion.
No offensive, but I don't think Red Hat is a fair repersentive of Open Source software, at least in this test here. The test is going to be on open source verus closed source in terms of "turn around" on bug fixes.
Linux/GNU which is what Red Hat is pushing, is not coded by Red Hat. It is made by out side developers and Red Hat only puts the product out. When Red Hat learns about a patch fix, they check it, package it and then up load it.
Case goes like this, a bug is found in Linux/GNU and people are informed for it. Some guru fixes the bug, posts it to ftp site. After awhile Red Hat finds the fix, reviews it, packages it, documents it, puts it on it's ftp then releases it, the announces the fix is avaiable.
The extra step of Red Hat doing this, is going to cost allot of time for the open source community. It should not count when the bug is found to when RH announces the fix, it should count from when the bug is found to when their is a working fix or work around anywhere in any form (even if it is source) on any ftp site.
Red Hat can only work with what the community gives them, say this
Day 1 - bug that opens a hole in program found in OSS
Day 2 - nothing Day 3 - Maintainer and head programmer of XYZ announces a fix and uploads the source to ftp.
The problem is fixed, patch is avaiable to close the hole and fix the nasty bug is XYZ software.
Day 4 - nothing Day 5 - Red Hat reviews the code Day 6 - Red Hat tests the code Day 7 - Red Hat packages the code Day 8 - Red Hat documents the code and uploads it to ftp Day 9 - Red Hat announces there is a fix avaiable for Red Hat users that are using XYZ software.
Now, yes, I know this is REALLY dramatic, but I am trying to make a point. (BTW, I got some REALLY good fishing stories). Anyway, I haven't seen a bug in a RH last more than 3-4 days at the very most (then again I don't use RH), but time of fix, to time of RH announces a fix, can be, and is drawen out. This could impact the study some what.
Neither a-less I still know Red Hat is going to kick MS ass at bug fix turn arounds, but the point it, raw OSS could do it faster and better than RH ever could. But the packages are allot nicer with RH:)
Again this is not a flame and I don't mean any disrespect to anyone.
Yet, I fail to see where the massive inconvenience is. Are a few scan packets every week going to be that painful? Must be some sensitive systems! Should something that sensitive be on the internet?
I got the impression from the letter from @Home that their (my freinds) news access would be terminated if they where caught running a proxy server. Once these customers are identified, we are suspending their news service immediately.
I doubt @Home with be able to tell that they are proxing with these machines, but if they can't, why are they even trying with this type of method?
Are a few scan packets every week going to be that painful
I won't use the word painful, but scanning someone else system/network/home is just plain creepy. I don't have anything to hide in my apartment, everything in their I would feel comfortable show or sharing with the entire world, but having some guy look though one of my windows at night just creeps me out. What about some one looking though your ports/packets/file systems. I am sure they don't have any sensitive top secert information on there workstation, but just the fact of doing it could freak a normal (yet very paranoid) person out.
As of today, we are stepping up our involvement and taking more aggressive action by performing frequent network wide scans of our customer base to target proxy servers. Once these customers are identified, we are suspending their news service immediately.
WTF is this? You know how many people I know that setup @home service with an old Linux box to proxy off the cable connection to the rest of the house? I know about 4 people that this is seriously going to piss off. They don't spam and their systems are very secure, but it looks like they are going to be @Home's sacrificial lamb to the UDP.
Is @Home stupid or what? Put username/password on their NNTP server and be done with it for christ sake. That is a hell of allot easier then doing broad network scans for proxies running on their clients machines...
They are a bunch of fsck twits, I say the go though with the UDP just because @Home is so fscking stupid and trying to push this PR/Marketing BS off for actucally doing some type of security on their own network.
I think this is a very good thing. Over the past years spam and abuse have been on the rise, but the UDP has been on a decline. Back when it first started I would here every week about some network that couldn't control it's users would get a UDP slapped on em, now this is probably the first one I have heard in about 2 years!
I think this is a really good thing, if they can not behave or control their network in a productive manner, they should be "banned" from using (abusing) other servers on the Internet.
I also think it should carrry over more, have a RBL thing that not only blocks news feeds from abusive networks, but also email, web, irc, everything. Just choke out their whole dam 'X' class from moving data over/ANY/ router. A RBL running on millions of routers to choke out and isolate an entire network from the rest of the Internet, that would be a good thing.
Then again, their would have to be an honest commitee that thoughly investigates and decides how and who doesn't go into the List...
If they can't control their network in a reasonable way, they should have that privlage taken away. I would also like to see a M(ail)DP put on American Online, have you notice the spam coming from their dial up lines? Look at the next spam you get, 9/10 it will come from one of the AOL dial up lines, those fscking bastards.
On a side offtopic note. AOL has had these spammers (in their words) "hacking" into users dial up accounts and sendout out massive amounts of spam with our domain name in the "From:" header. Needless to say, we have been getting hunderds of spam reports thinking this email came from our site. I contacted AOL many times via email and phone, and one of their postmasters told me "We can not stop this users, they are breaking into user accounts and sending their email from those hacked accounts. You calling up here doesn't help any, send all complaints to abuse@aol.com and we will take it from there. Please don't call back, there is nothing we can do and calling up here only wastes both our times"
It has been over 2-3 months we have been getting spam reports because our domain name is forged in the headers and AOL can NOT do basic spam control on it's own network... sigh
Anyone have any suggestions, I have no money for a lawyer and no legal skills what so ever. Any way to slove this problem on the techinal field?
Ah, it's nice to see an example of the proverbial Slashdot reader who has been behind a keyboard for so long he literally doesn't recognize a female when he sees one,
They are cheap toys and a bad picture. At first (and second) glance it wasn't clear what exactly ANY of them exactly where, let along know what their gender they where
let alone knows what to do with her if found.
Uh, what are YOU doing with the female MCP action firgure? I know exactly what to do with a human real life female, and I sure as hell hope you aren't doing that with a toy that resembles a female. Please let the class know what exactly you do with female action firgure once you find them.
I had thought this stereotype was an urban legend.
UH, I though your kind was an urban legend.
For your information, Kim, the short action figure in the middle featuring a somewhat bulgy chest and noticable hips, is female.
Ok, so how to you define "Nate", the short action figure on the left featuring a somewhat bulgy chest and noticable hips?
This isn't a flame, just keeping you on your toe good buddy. : )
Lets think about this for a second. Let me say for disclaimer that I do not know Mr. CmdTaco personally, and most of the stuff below, I am either assuming, making up, or making a educated guess.
They claim to get over 300 stories submitted per day, Mr. CmdTaco has admitly posted over 4000 stories on slashdot. Second, everyone that has any little problem with slashdot is firing a flame over to his mail box, weather it be about someone giving bad moderation for a first post, someone asking for the slash code or even people asking to have a "bin" of rejected and retarted stories. Mr. CmdTaco is also does the major part of the slash code, with this he is probably signed up to 2-5 mail lists. Ever see how many modules slash depends on? There is no books or docs on some of them, he would have to learn them out of the mail list. I assume that Mr. CmdTaco with story submissions, mail lists, slashdot mail, personal mail and general spam receives about 400-750 emails per day.
Each one has to be carefully sorted though, how much time does this take? If 20 of these are the exact same question, would you get a little ticked from answering them? What if you took the time to come with a well verused general answer, put it in the FAQ, and everyone still keeps asking the same dam question without looking in the FAQ?
Think back to your tech support days in colllege. Was Tech Support REALLY that fun when you think about it?
Mr. CmdTaco is a busy man, he has to do everything from tech support, to sysadmin, to program to advertisment junkie to CEO.
Out of all the jobs Mr. CmdTaco has, which one probably sucks the most? Tech support, he tries to avoid it by making a FAQ so he doesn't have to answer a bunch of stupid question, but sometimes he is kicked out of cool-village where he is the head program down to tech support weenie. That would piss me off.
(No offense to anyone working tech support, I hated it when I worked their, maybe I'm not a people person)
1. Apple uploads source code to everything to an FTP site.
2. Someone downloads source code.
3. Apple is sued by stockholders.
4. Apple goes out of business (for real).
Say what you will, but Apple isn't lying to anyone about their intentions and stipulations. Read the license, and it will all be clear.
Why are they claiming to be open source like the popular Linux OS? Read the GPL then read Apple's license, how like are these 2 documents? They are so differant their is no way anyone should get one confused with the other. One is black the other is white, they are like night and day. Why is Apple trying to blur the line between the two of them?
Why is Apple cheating? Nobody. Don't like the license? Don't contribute. It's all there on their site.
I can't believe people hold it _against_ a company simply because they won't give away millions of dollars worth of R&D and development time.
I don't hold it against them for not giving away millions of dollars worth of R&D and development time If they don't want to, they don't have to, I will not hold that against them. But if they claim that they are, and don't, it gets me pissed. I don't like half-truths or marketing bullshit.
What is Apple going to do, sell support? Seems like a conflict of interest, as they're going to 'ease of use'.
They can do what ever they want. They make a decent system for people that just want to use the Internet and not worry about all the techno-crap underneath. They have a decent system and are doing a good job with it. They should keep doing what they are doing, and if they claim something they should make good on that claim. If they know they can't make good on anything they say, they should't say it.
Bitch about them not using the more restrictive GPL if you like, but it makes no difference. Unless you can figure out a way for them to stay in business (and - gasp! - prosper) under the GPL model, there's no way in hell they or anyone else is going to listen you.
I am not their CEO, I don't make their bussiness plan up. They can do whatever they want to do, but they should make good on anything they decide to do. If they say they are going to starting selling XYZ then they should start selling XYZ, the problem comes is when the start selling CBA and passing it off for XYZ, it just isn't right.
Code doesn't deserve to be free. It's a nice gesture, and potentially rewarding for everyone if done right, but it's not a right in the same way people have a right to live outside of slavery.
It is not a right. If they want to close it up, that is cool, I have no problems with that. I have no problems with Microsoft or IBM and their closed source models. They are companies and they have to make money, that is the way the world works. But if they say and suggest they are going to do something XYZ and do it ABC way, I see that as a flat out lie.
- Jeff A. Campbell - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
I am not saying they have to be an Open Source company, I am not saying they have to be a closed source company, but they have to choose which one to be. Once they choose they need to stand behind what they choice.
If they closed ALL source they have right now, that is fine, if the open all source right now that is fine, but when they do it in some half assed way that is what gets me ticked off.
If you go anywhere, anyone and everyone on wall street is saying, "open source SURE", "look at VA research's opening climb, look at Red Hat's stock, open source makes money". Then along comes Apple "Yea, uh yea, we are part of the Open Source movement to, see, see, invest in us, we have an Open Source model like those other companies that are making millions, yea, come on invest in us."
I have nothing against %100 pure closed source companies, it is their code, and they can do anything they want to with it. Companies have to make money or they are no long companies, that is the way to world works.
If they want to be closed source, that is cool with me. If they want to be open source, that is really cool with me. But if they are a closed source company and feed these little tidbits source and then claim to be open source, (in their words) 'like the popular Linux operating system.' that really pisses me off. They do not have an Open Source model anything like the Linux operating system. The only reason they are doing it is because they like getting off their invester with thoughts of Apple stocks being like Red Hat or VA Researches stock, that is ALL they are doing.
If Apple wants an Operating system that is Open Source 'like the popular Linux operating system.' they need to release it under the GPL. If they don't want to release it under the GPL (which is fine) they shouldn't claim that it will be like Linux. If it was REALLY'like the popular Linux operating system.' I could download the source, change anything I want to and resell it on a distro CD, but for some reason, I doubt I will be able to do that.
GCC is 'like the popular Linux operating system.' actucally Linux is probably more like GCC, either way I am free is do what ever the fuck I want to with it. Can I say that about Apple? HELL NO. So why are they claiming that?
If they don't want to release under the GPL, that is fine, I have no problem with that. But if they suggest for marketing purpose that they are, and then they don't or can't follow though, they are just plain bastards that can't keep their word. If they don't want to release under the GPL (which if fine) they shouldn't even suggest in any way that they are. Their idea of Open Source is SO FAR away from the Linux and GPL ideal of Open Source that they shouldn't even suggest in any way to their customers/investors/publicly that they are like Linux's or the FSF's ideal of an Open Source community. They should say what it is and in no way suggest that it is something that it is not.
The question is how much of the OS will be released. under an open source license.
The second question, is what type of open source license?
Just because they release it under an open source "model" 'like the popular Linux operating system.' doesn't guarnette that it will be Free (as in speech).
Open Source does NOT mean freedom. Open Source in this case probably means the 'marketing' people at Apple are doing a 'fine Job'
Second what is the deal with all these companies claiming that they are part of the Open Source movement, etc, blah blah. Serously, if Apple really wanted to go Open Source all they could do it right now, right here. All Apple has to do to become an Open Source company is upload all it's source to one of it's many public FTP sites, slap a copy of the gpl.txt in the.messages file and post a notice to slashdot. BANG Apple is Open Source. No marketing bullshit, no fake PR in everyones face, no half truths. Just do it Apple don't act like a little fucking tease, do it, get it done with, it's over. Then claim your frame to the Open Source world.
A company or person has a right to release any program, in any way they see fit. If this is a binrary only release, source code release, source release under the GPL, over even no public or private release at all. In which ever way this company or person releases their program, I will respect that (even though I may not use it).
But for a company or person say they are going to release it in XYZ manner then be a little piss ant about it, doing it part XYZ and the other half ABC way, I can not respect that. Stick by your gun and do what you say, don't be fucking stupid about it either. If Apple truthly wanted to be an Open Source company, they could do it right now, right here, but they don't. They are going to stroke their investors off with thoughts of Linux and VA Research's opening climb, piss around for a couple months, then do some pathic and very restrictive release. By that time their investors will have already got off and Apple will fine some new BS way to feel up the investors in just the right way
Actions not only speak louder than words, actions are the ONLY way to speak. Hello Apple? I can't hear you, you will have to Speak up.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone know how much these go for on the street? Where to buy em?
It would be possiable to stick 4-8 of these in a RAID cage ah?
He never actucally said he invented the Internet, he was a strong player in Washington pushing and advocating the Internet and he made claims of his work in this area helped (in some way) the Internet to grow.
He never claimed the entire thing, but a small part (especailly in schools)that he had some part of this (more than most suits in Washington) and this is what he claimed. Some people took the way he "worded" it wrong and over time it morphed into this urban legend of sorts where he said he invented it (not true).
Like if some suit in Washington says "I enjoy my backpain medicine, it helps me sleep at night" over time it would be morph by hear say to "Senator so-so dopes up on morph, he got addicted in WW II when he broken his spinal colum"
The American public hears what they want to hear, and when there is nothing intersting to hear they change it a little to make it more intersting...
Al Gore never claimed that, but it has be like a urban legend going around America (almost like a joke). The above statement I was making in the earlier post wasn't serious, it was a joke, it was intented as a humorous comment.
Al Gore Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) secured_by_Raven/1.4.2 PHP/4.0b3 Linux
Al is the only one using Linux and Apache (SSL/PHP EVEN!)
Also he (or more likely one of this web designers hide some stuff in the html source, now that is just fun for everyone.
Al Gore also invented the Internet, making all this possiable, as for me I am putting my vote on the Gore man. Geek vote counts, vote Al Gore because Al Gore voted Linux (in his choice of web server).
"Gates emphasized that Microsoft's "closed" code makes Windows more reliable."
I am sure glad they don't open source it, if it is this reliable closed source, it won't even boot under an Open Source model. Thank God they are keeping it closed. Thanks you Mr. Gates for putting code correctness and reliablity before poltics, marketing hype and the pursuit of money.
You got to love that Gates, putting reliablity, stablity, security, design, code corretness before they give into market and govement presure to release under a model that has be prove to destory reliablity. I am surpise they can even get that Linux or FreeBSD junk to even compile, being open source and unreliablity and all! Do you know that the Linux OS doesn't even have a linux.exe? It is called something like vmlinuz, how weird is that?
(If you haven't firgured it out by now this is a joke and not meant to be taken serious)
It is not only the amount of time most tech workers work, but also the quality of the work most tech workers do.
When I worked at McDonalds (when I was in high school), there where managers and employee's standing around, talking, taking smoke break, eating and drink (stolen) food and drink. When I worked there, it was only for 7 1/2 hours, but for about 5 of those hours it was nothing but slack off, doing nothing, chilling in the break room smoking. Only have to make food when the customer order it, if they aren't ordering, there is no need to do extra work. Even the managers slacked off majorly.
After awhile I got a job doing tech support for an ISP, out of an 8 hour work day, proably 1 hour total was spent towards giving tech support, everything else was playing with their linux and unix system, surfing the web and doing personal email.
When I hit system admin though after 2 years, everything hit the fan. Sure I put in 10-11 hours on an average work day, but the thing I have noticed, is not the time, but how it is spent. In those other jobs, the majority of the job was "Hurry up and wait", system admin though, all 10-11 hours and spent doing system admin and that is it. Seriously, I take 5 minutes when I first get here (ussually an hour early) to check slash (techinally this is before the work day starts, but I do it from work, so I count it). Take a 5 minute lunch (enough for a pepsi and cig), 5 minutes to post to slash dot.
The company policy is 3 breaks of 15 minutes each for every 6 hours worked, 1 30-1 hour lunch break.
Doing personal stuff (like eating, relaxing, taking a break) I probably spent 15 minutes per day, all my co workers eat 15 minutes per break.
I don't mind it, if I took and hour lunch and more breaks I would be leaving work when it is dark out. (Not that I mind the dark, I just have other things to do at night)
I personally feel that the quality and amount of work that gets done in the tech feel is more compressed and compact. I haven't meet or worked with an Unix admin yet that takes lunch. When I first starting as a Jr. Admin, the Sr. admin told me "Make sure you take lunch, even if you don't want to"
"Sure, you want to go grab something in a bit"
"Nah, I got to get this web server re-configureed"
"Yea your right, what you using, apache"
Also, no matter when I leave and no matter how much work I do, I also get the feel that the job "still" isn't done. I could work here 24-7 for a year staight and when I left for sleep, I would probably feel like there is still more to do and that I shouldn't be heading home so soon, anyone else feel this way?
Well my 5 minutes for posting on slashdot is up, actucally more like ten, I'll probably skip the pop and cig today to make up for it : )
1Ghz CPU!!
/etc/shadow file in 2 minutes! Microsoft X-box Linux distro. (joking)
Jesus Christ, I really hope someone can port Linux to one of these things!! : )
For $1000 (The price of the average PC) you could buy a crap load of these things and do a cluster from hell!
Re-render the Matrix at home, raise you seti units by ten fold in the first day, compute dynamic fluids in seconds, re-create the JFK murder and crack any
The thing about the console games, is (for the most part) high code quality. If "Metal Gear Solid" has a bug in it, they can't release a patch fix, so (most) companies make sure the game is solid, and have as many bugs kicked out BEFORE the game goes to market.
Microsoft does have a good game market, I hope the standard of the rest of the consoles "code correctness" carries over. I would hate to get a call at 2:00 in the morning from a freind
"Hey I flash my "BIOS" with the lastest MS service pack and now all of the games made by West Wood studios don't work, could you come over and take a look at it"
barnesandnoble.com is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4 or Windows 98
/anyone/ would run a half way professinal site off Windows 98? NT is another story.
Do you REALLY think
This is John H. Cracker, I am the one how released all the DOS attacks on ebay.com, buy.com, etc. I am sure you have heard about it. There was been some confusion on why I released my DOS attck program for *nix platforms only. The choice came down to developing, testing and deploying my tools on *nix boxes for simple reasons. I have reviewed WindowsXX products thoughly, and yes tools where developed and tested on Microsofts platforms, but I found stablilty and uptime a major issuse. This was an extremely intensive attack again huge site with a huge about of bandwidth. Staight up Microsofts current offerings did not give what was need in this attack, stablilty under massive amounts of work loads.
I took bids from serval differant *nix-s and Sun offered a very nice platform and also Linux had a very competive price range and was able to funcation properly for the task needed. We are looking to support Windows in the furture, and are working close with MS officals to get the product up to specs.
(Note this is a joke. I did not and have never used computers for illegal purpose. don't take this serious.)
In a world of hype, wouldn't it be nice to get a refreshing dose of reality?
Yes Please
The truth is out there.
Really? Mr. Microsoft I want to buy your reality, I want to purchase your truth.
On a side note, Mr. Microsoft aren't your afaid of being sued for using the X Files only catch line?
I hope Sun re-acts by ripping off quotes from the Matrix, that had some good lines.
People who hit 'easy install' are responsible for their woes? Why? Because they dont have the same technical expertise as most people here? Is that an excuse for allowing AOL to ream people?
Sometimes I walk into a Software store, had the guy at the counter both of my Credit Cards and tell him that I need some software now, and don't want to pay attenation to any of the details, that I don't want to know what software titles or how many he has picked out for me. I tell him, I want it easy and tell him to hurry up and charge whatever software to my cards.
Sometimes I get really reamed when my Credit Card bill comes in, but hey I am a dumbass and don't know about software, people should just do it for me without screwing me over.
I want to get a AI monkey and that dam iBO dog robot thing. You know the one, Sony makes it, looks like a dog, everyone and their mom is pimping these dogs out on their web site in contests.
Anyways, get these 2 robot creatures and put them in a free for all death match live though web cam on the Internet. Progess in the AI robtics field is only good if other AI robots can take them on in a death match, a fight to the finish.
Plus I am just getting so sick of getting spam for signing up for all these contests to win a dam little robotic dog that doesn't even come standard with a flame thrower. A buzz saw would not be hard to retro-fit on it though...
Nothing but slash.
Thank You Slash Dot . Org Crew!
Slash Rules
Opps, I just though of something, do you guys think you will be sued by Guns & Roses?
GPL none the less, this makes me feel awhole lot more comfortable with the code than the "other" license Rob put on it. Sorry Rob but that first license just sounded alittle to "if-y", but putting it under GPL was a really good thing.
Thanks SLASH
Good point.
..
.tar.gz file does (and any bugs it fixes) and the general direction to go when installing it.
.rpm file is avaiable.
I am not claiming to be a elite code hacker, the most programming I do is in the bourne shell or Perl. I won't know what to do with a peice of C code if it bite me.
The point is, I am not an elite kernel hacker, just a system admin without decent coding skills, but I still can apply source code patches. Most of the time, they just release a new sub version, like if 1.1 had a security hole, 1.2 is exactly the same with the bug fix. Normal I can find software on ftp sites and patch the system up with a
tar zxvf program_without_bug.tar.gz
cd program_without_bug
./configure; make; su
********
make install
exit; cd
rm -rf program_without_bug*
The point is, even though I don't have mad coding skills, the bug is ussually fixed before Red Hat puts it in a nice little package for me, sure it takes a couple more commands to get it installed, but it isn't something any other (unix) sys admin couldn't do.
Even if they don't make a nice configure and Makefile they are going to have atleast a README file or a blurb on their web page of how to install it.
(one of) the good things about GNU code junkies is that they do honestly try and work with the people installing and using their programs. They aren't just going to throw some x86 ASM in an unknown compressed format on their ftp without explaining why it is there or how to use it. They will try and atleast create a short README explain what the
I will admit I am not a "ruthless code hackers of Kung Fu level", but me (like any other unix system admin) knows what to do when no
First, let me say this isn't a flame, troll bait non any disrespect to the open source community or Red Hat software, just my opinion.
:)
No offensive, but I don't think Red Hat is a fair repersentive of Open Source software, at least in this test here. The test is going to be on open source verus closed source in terms of "turn around" on bug fixes.
Linux/GNU which is what Red Hat is pushing, is not coded by Red Hat. It is made by out side developers and Red Hat only puts the product out. When Red Hat learns about a patch fix, they check it, package it and then up load it.
Case goes like this, a bug is found in Linux/GNU and people are informed for it. Some guru fixes the bug, posts it to ftp site. After awhile Red Hat finds the fix, reviews it, packages it, documents it, puts it on it's ftp then releases it, the announces the fix is avaiable.
The extra step of Red Hat doing this, is going to cost allot of time for the open source community. It should not count when the bug is found to when RH announces the fix, it should count from when the bug is found to when their is a working fix or work around anywhere in any form (even if it is source) on any ftp site.
Red Hat can only work with what the community gives them, say this
Day 1 - bug that opens a hole in program found in OSS
Day 2 - nothing
Day 3 - Maintainer and head programmer of XYZ announces a fix and uploads the source to ftp.
The problem is fixed, patch is avaiable to close the hole and fix the nasty bug is XYZ software.
Day 4 - nothing
Day 5 - Red Hat reviews the code
Day 6 - Red Hat tests the code
Day 7 - Red Hat packages the code
Day 8 - Red Hat documents the code and uploads it to ftp
Day 9 - Red Hat announces there is a fix avaiable for Red Hat users that are using XYZ software.
Now, yes, I know this is REALLY dramatic, but I am trying to make a point. (BTW, I got some REALLY good fishing stories). Anyway, I haven't seen a bug in a RH last more than 3-4 days at the very most (then again I don't use RH), but time of fix, to time of RH announces a fix, can be, and is drawen out. This could impact the study some what.
Neither a-less I still know Red Hat is going to kick MS ass at bug fix turn arounds, but the point it, raw OSS could do it faster and better than RH ever could. But the packages are allot nicer with RH
Again this is not a flame and I don't mean any disrespect to anyone.
Yet, I fail to see where the massive inconvenience is. Are a few scan packets every week going to be that painful? Must be some sensitive systems! Should something that sensitive be on the internet?
I got the impression from the letter from @Home that their (my freinds) news access would be terminated if they where caught running a proxy server.
Once these customers are identified, we are suspending their news service immediately.
I doubt @Home with be able to tell that they are proxing with these machines, but if they can't, why are they even trying with this type of method?
Are a few scan packets every week going to be that painful
I won't use the word painful, but scanning someone else system/network/home is just plain creepy. I don't have anything to hide in my apartment, everything in their I would feel comfortable show or sharing with the entire world, but having some guy look though one of my windows at night just creeps me out. What about some one looking though your ports/packets/file systems. I am sure they don't have any sensitive top secert information on there workstation, but just the fact of doing it could freak a normal (yet very paranoid) person out.
ERR, that is supose to be FRY 'EM
my bad.
As of today, we are stepping up our involvement and taking more aggressive action by performing frequent network wide scans of our customer base to target proxy servers. Once these customers are identified, we are suspending their news service immediately.
WTF is this? You know how many people I know that setup @home service with an old Linux box to proxy off the cable connection to the rest of the house? I know about 4 people that this is seriously going to piss off. They don't spam and their systems are very secure, but it looks like they are going to be @Home's sacrificial lamb to the UDP.
Is @Home stupid or what? Put username/password on their NNTP server and be done with it for christ sake. That is a hell of allot easier then doing broad network scans for proxies running on their clients machines...
They are a bunch of fsck twits, I say the go though with the UDP just because @Home is so fscking stupid and trying to push this PR/Marketing BS off for actucally doing some type of security on their own network.
My vote: Fire Em
I think this is a very good thing. Over the past years spam and abuse have been on the rise, but the UDP has been on a decline. Back when it first started I would here every week about some network that couldn't control it's users would get a UDP slapped on em, now this is probably the first one I have heard in about 2 years!
I think this is a really good thing, if they can not behave or control their network in a productive manner, they should be "banned" from using (abusing) other servers on the Internet.
I also think it should carrry over more, have a RBL thing that not only blocks news feeds from abusive networks, but also email, web, irc, everything. Just choke out their whole dam 'X' class from moving data over
Then again, their would have to be an honest commitee that thoughly investigates and decides how and who doesn't go into the List...
If they can't control their network in a reasonable way, they should have that privlage taken away. I would also like to see a M(ail)DP put on American Online, have you notice the spam coming from their dial up lines? Look at the next spam you get, 9/10 it will come from one of the AOL dial up lines, those fscking bastards.
On a side offtopic note. AOL has had these spammers (in their words) "hacking" into users dial up accounts and sendout out massive amounts of spam with our domain name in the "From:" header. Needless to say, we have been getting hunderds of spam reports thinking this email came from our site. I contacted AOL many times via email and phone, and one of their postmasters told me "We can not stop this users, they are breaking into user accounts and sending their email from those hacked accounts. You calling up here doesn't help any, send all complaints to abuse@aol.com and we will take it from there. Please don't call back, there is nothing we can do and calling up here only wastes both our times"
It has been over 2-3 months we have been getting spam reports because our domain name is forged in the headers and AOL can NOT do basic spam control on it's own network... sigh
Anyone have any suggestions, I have no money for a lawyer and no legal skills what so ever. Any way to slove this problem on the techinal field?
I don't feel comfortable with this Linuz guy working on the Internals of my kernel. You know he doesn't even have a "Grade 9 Kernel Hacking" cert?
btw, this is a joke.
Ah, it's nice to see an example of the proverbial Slashdot reader who has been behind a keyboard for so long he literally doesn't recognize a female when he sees one,
They are cheap toys and a bad picture. At first (and second) glance it wasn't clear what exactly ANY of them exactly where, let along know what their gender they where
let alone knows what to do with her if found.
Uh, what are YOU doing with the female MCP action firgure? I know exactly what to do with a human real life female, and I sure as hell hope you aren't doing that with a toy that resembles a female. Please let the class know what exactly you do with female action firgure once you find them.
I had thought this stereotype was an urban legend.
UH, I though your kind was an urban legend.
For your information, Kim, the short action figure in the middle featuring a somewhat bulgy chest and noticable hips, is female.
Ok, so how to you define "Nate", the short action figure on the left featuring a somewhat bulgy chest and noticable hips?
This isn't a flame, just keeping you on your toe good buddy. : )
Lets think about this for a second. Let me say for disclaimer that I do not know Mr. CmdTaco personally, and most of the stuff below, I am either assuming, making up, or making a educated guess.
They claim to get over 300 stories submitted per day, Mr. CmdTaco has admitly posted over 4000 stories on slashdot. Second, everyone that has any little problem with slashdot is firing a flame over to his mail box, weather it be about someone giving bad moderation for a first post, someone asking for the slash code or even people asking to have a "bin" of rejected and retarted stories. Mr. CmdTaco is also does the major part of the slash code, with this he is probably signed up to 2-5 mail lists. Ever see how many modules slash depends on? There is no books or docs on some of them, he would have to learn them out of the mail list. I assume that Mr. CmdTaco with story submissions, mail lists, slashdot mail, personal mail and general spam receives about 400-750 emails per day.
Each one has to be carefully sorted though, how much time does this take? If 20 of these are the exact same question, would you get a little ticked from answering them? What if you took the time to come with a well verused general answer, put it in the FAQ, and everyone still keeps asking the same dam question without looking in the FAQ?
Think back to your tech support days in colllege. Was Tech Support REALLY that fun when you think about it?
Mr. CmdTaco is a busy man, he has to do everything from tech support, to sysadmin, to program to advertisment junkie to CEO.
Out of all the jobs Mr. CmdTaco has, which one probably sucks the most? Tech support, he tries to avoid it by making a FAQ so he doesn't have to answer a bunch of stupid question, but sometimes he is kicked out of cool-village where he is the head program down to tech support weenie. That would piss me off.
(No offense to anyone working tech support, I hated it when I worked their, maybe I'm not a people person)
1. Apple uploads source code to everything to an FTP site.
2. Someone downloads source code.
3. Apple is sued by stockholders.
4. Apple goes out of business (for real).
Say what you will, but Apple isn't lying to anyone about their intentions and stipulations. Read the license, and it will all be clear.
Why are they claiming to be open source like the popular Linux OS? Read the GPL then read Apple's license, how like are these 2 documents? They are so differant their is no way anyone should get one confused with the other. One is black the other is white, they are like night and day. Why is Apple trying to blur the line between the two of them?
Why is Apple cheating? Nobody. Don't like the license? Don't contribute. It's all there on their site.
I can't believe people hold it _against_ a company simply because they won't give away millions of dollars worth of R&D and development time.
I don't hold it against them for not giving away millions of dollars worth of R&D and development time If they don't want to, they don't have to, I will not hold that against them. But if they claim that they are, and don't, it gets me pissed. I don't like half-truths or marketing bullshit.
What is Apple going to do, sell support? Seems like a conflict of interest, as they're going to 'ease of use'.
They can do what ever they want. They make a decent system for people that just want to use the Internet and not worry about all the techno-crap underneath. They have a decent system and are doing a good job with it. They should keep doing what they are doing, and if they claim something they should make good on that claim. If they know they can't make good on anything they say, they should't say it.
Bitch about them not using the more restrictive GPL if you like, but it makes no difference. Unless you can figure out a way for them to stay in business (and - gasp! - prosper) under the GPL model, there's no way in hell they or anyone else is going to listen you.
I am not their CEO, I don't make their bussiness plan up. They can do whatever they want to do, but they should make good on anything they decide to do. If they say they are going to starting selling XYZ then they should start selling XYZ, the problem comes is when the start selling CBA and passing it off for XYZ, it just isn't right.
Code doesn't deserve to be free. It's a nice gesture, and potentially rewarding for everyone if done right, but it's not a right in the same way people have a right to live outside of slavery.
It is not a right. If they want to close it up, that is cool, I have no problems with that. I have no problems with Microsoft or IBM and their closed source models. They are companies and they have to make money, that is the way the world works. But if they say and suggest they are going to do something XYZ and do it ABC way, I see that as a flat out lie.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)
Jack
I am not saying they have to be an Open Source company, I am not saying they have to be a closed source company, but they have to choose which one to be. Once they choose they need to stand behind what they choice.
If they closed ALL source they have right now, that is fine, if the open all source right now that is fine, but when they do it in some half assed way that is what gets me ticked off.
If you go anywhere, anyone and everyone on wall street is saying, "open source SURE", "look at VA research's opening climb, look at Red Hat's stock, open source makes money". Then along comes Apple "Yea, uh yea, we are part of the Open Source movement to, see, see, invest in us, we have an Open Source model like those other companies that are making millions, yea, come on invest in us."
I have nothing against %100 pure closed source companies, it is their code, and they can do anything they want to with it. Companies have to make money or they are no long companies, that is the way to world works.
If they want to be closed source, that is cool with me. If they want to be open source, that is really cool with me. But if they are a closed source company and feed these little tidbits source and then claim to be open source, (in their words) 'like the popular Linux operating system.' that really pisses me off. They do not have an Open Source model anything like the Linux operating system. The only reason they are doing it is because they like getting off their invester with thoughts of Apple stocks being like Red Hat or VA Researches stock, that is ALL they are doing.
If Apple wants an Operating system that is Open Source 'like the popular Linux operating system.' they need to release it under the GPL. If they don't want to release it under the GPL (which is fine) they shouldn't claim that it will be like Linux. If it was REALLY 'like the popular Linux operating system.' I could download the source, change anything I want to and resell it on a distro CD, but for some reason, I doubt I will be able to do that.
GCC is 'like the popular Linux operating system.' actucally Linux is probably more like GCC, either way I am free is do what ever the fuck I want to with it. Can I say that about Apple? HELL NO. So why are they claiming that?
If they don't want to release under the GPL, that is fine, I have no problem with that. But if they suggest for marketing purpose that they are, and then they don't or can't follow though, they are just plain bastards that can't keep their word. If they don't want to release under the GPL (which if fine) they shouldn't even suggest in any way that they are. Their idea of Open Source is SO FAR away from the Linux and GPL ideal of Open Source that they shouldn't even suggest in any way to their customers/investors/publicly that they are like Linux's or the FSF's ideal of an Open Source community. They should say what it is and in no way suggest that it is something that it is not.
The question is how much of the OS will be released. under an open source license.
The second question, is what type of open source license?
Just because they release it under an open source "model" 'like the popular Linux operating system.' doesn't guarnette that it will be Free (as in speech).
Open Source does NOT mean freedom. Open Source in this case probably means the 'marketing' people at Apple are doing a 'fine Job'
Second what is the deal with all these companies claiming that they are part of the Open Source movement, etc, blah blah. Serously, if Apple really wanted to go Open Source all they could do it right now, right here. All Apple has to do to become an Open Source company is upload all it's source to one of it's many public FTP sites, slap a copy of the gpl.txt in the
A company or person has a right to release any program, in any way they see fit. If this is a binrary only release, source code release, source release under the GPL, over even no public or private release at all. In which ever way this company or person releases their program, I will respect that (even though I may not use it).
But for a company or person say they are going to release it in XYZ manner then be a little piss ant about it, doing it part XYZ and the other half ABC way, I can not respect that. Stick by your gun and do what you say, don't be fucking stupid about it either. If Apple truthly wanted to be an Open Source company, they could do it right now, right here, but they don't. They are going to stroke their investors off with thoughts of Linux and VA Research's opening climb, piss around for a couple months, then do some pathic and very restrictive release. By that time their investors will have already got off and Apple will fine some new BS way to feel up the investors in just the right way
Actions not only speak louder than words, actions are the ONLY way to speak. Hello Apple? I can't hear you, you will have to Speak up.
Thrid that. I vote (if I get a vote) to get Mr. Larry Wall over on slashdot for an interview.